Eric Holder knows whats best for your community

[DaveinElma]

http://www.jsonline.com/news/waukesha/124440464.html

 

Federal authorities sued New Berlin on Thursday, claiming racial discrimination drove the city's decisions to block a low-income housing development, in violation of the Fair Housing Act.

 

A 13-page complaint spells out the lengths to which city leaders and staff purportedly went to stymie MSP Real Estate Inc.'s plans, even so far as revising the city's 2020 comprehensive plan.

 

"The defendant's actions as described herein were taken because of race and because of community opposition that city officials understood to be based on the race and on racial stereotypes of the prospective tenants of affordable housing," the complaint states.

 

And if you don't like it you're going to be smeared as racist with trumped up innuendo. No matter how hard you can't move away from the social engineering of liberalism.

[3rdnlng]

http://www.jsonline.com/news/waukesha/124440464.html

 

 

 

And if you don't like it you're going to be smeared as racist with trumped up innuendo. No matter how hard you can't move away from the social engineering of liberalism.

 

You know you're a racist if............................you comment on anything that might seem well, you know, not pc? Here you go Booster, the target is 5' away and bigger than the average house.

[Booster4324]

You know you're a racist if............................you comment on anything that might seem well, you know, not pc? Here you go Booster, the target is 5' away and bigger than the average house.

 

From his own article:

 

From the start, some objectors expressed concern that prospective tenants would be African-Americans or other minorities and used racially derogatory terms to refer to them, or implied racial bias as the reason for objecting to the development, according to the complaint.

 

The complaint cites correspondence that mentioned "white flight," crime, drugs, slums, gangs, families with 10 or 15 kids, needing "to get a gun," not wanting New Berlin to turn into Milwaukee, moving to New Berlin "to get away from the poor people," not wanting to provide housing to people "who work but do not live here." Some writers also used racially derogatory terms for African-Americans.

 

New Berlin, a city of about 39,000, is 95% white, according to the lawsuit.

 

Chiovatero and his family suffered extensive harassment. A sign that read "n----- lover" was placed in his yard, "Bigot" was spray-painted on his driveway and "Leave or _ _ _" was written on his fence, according to the complaint. The mayor got threatening phone calls, project opponents approached his children, and someone slashed his car's tires and shot out the windows, the complaint states.

 

The pressures prompted Chiovatero to email a friend.

 

"Our city is filled with prejudiced and bigoted people who with very few facts are making this project into something evil and degrading," he wrote. "Unfortunately, I will be doing everything in my power to end this project, it will result in lawsuits and making New Berlin a community of bigots."

 

Look who you are allying yourself with. Or you may roll like that, who knows?

 

Edit - On a side note, interesting this is a Wisconsin newspaper.

Edited June 25, 2011 by Booster4324

[DaveinElma]

From his own article:

 

 

 

Look who you are allying yourself with. Or you may roll like that, who knows?

 

Edit - On a side note, interesting this is a Wisconsin newspaper.

 

I'm sure all those allegations are on the level.

 

Would you want federally subsidized housing in your neighborhood? Wouldn't you resent it if you felt it was being forced on you by Washington without consulting with the local taxpayers first? How will this effect their taxes? Their schools? Crime? It's an undeniable fact that crime rates always rise where low-income housing developments pop up. The racial issue is a red herring and completely predictable that the feds would play that card.

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/american-murder-mystery/6872/

 

About six months ago, they decided to put a hunch to the test. Janikowski merged his computer map of crime patterns with Betts’s map of Section8 rentals. Where Janikowski saw a bunny rabbit, Betts saw a sideways horseshoe (“He has a better imagination,” she said). Otherwise, the match was near-perfect. On the merged map, dense violent-crime areas are shaded dark blue, and Section8 addresses are represented by little red dots. All of the dark-blue areas are covered in little red dots, like bursts of gunfire. The rest of the city has almost no dots.

 

Betts remembers her discomfort as she looked at the map. The couple had been musing about the connection for months, but they were amazed—and deflated—to see how perfectly the two data sets fit together. She knew right away that this would be a “hard thing to say or write.” Nobody in the antipoverty community and nobody in city leadership was going to welcome the news that the noble experiment that they’d been engaged in for the past decade had been bringing the city down, in ways they’d never expected. But the connection was too obvious to ignore, and Betts and Janikowski figured that the same thing must be happening all around the country.

[Booster4324]

I'm sure all those allegations are on the level.

 

Would you want federally subsidized housing in your neighborhood? Wouldn't you resent it if you felt it was being forced on you by Washington without consulting with the local taxpayers first? How will this effect their taxes? Their schools? Crime? It's an undeniable fact that crime rates always rise where low-income housing developments pop up. The racial issue is a red herring and completely predictable that the feds would play that card.

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/american-murder-mystery/6872/

 

If it is simply a smokescreen why did you post that article? Also why did so many feel the need to interject race in it? Finally, aren't you WBF?

[DaveinElma]

If it is simply a smokescreen why did you post that article? Also why did so many feel the need to interject race in it? Finally, aren't you WBF?

 

You interjected race on my behalf-again. I don't care who lives in low income housing-I only care about the unavoidable increase in crime that always accompanies it.

 

The feds interjected race to deflect the real issue from the federal government socially engineering a small town to the towns backwards hick residents. In reality this isn't about race at all.

 

Let me ask you again-would you accept low income housing into your community?

[Booster4324]

You interjected race on my behalf-again. I don't care who lives in low income housing-I only care about the unavoidable increase in crime that always accompanies it.

 

The feds interjected race to deflect the real issue from the federal government socially engineering a small town to the towns backwards hick residents. In reality this isn't about race at all.

 

Let me ask you again-would you accept low income housing into your community?

 

If the low income housing was needed, yes. Now answer my question, are you Wisconsinbillsfan?

[DaveinElma]

If the low income housing was needed, yes.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Berlin,_Wisconsin#Demographics

 

I don't think New Berlin need a federally subsidized housing complex with a population of only 39,000 and a median income of 67,000. The residents will be from out of town which by definition is social engineering.

 

Now answer my question, are you Wisconsinbillsfan?

 

I was wondering what WBF stood for. No I am not.

[Booster4324]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Berlin,_Wisconsin#Demographics

 

I don't think New Berlin need a federally subsidized housing complex with a population of only 39,000 and a median income of 67,000. The residents will be from out of town which by definition is social engineering.

 

 

 

I was wondering what WBF stood for. No I am not.

 

Well then, I would argue it on that merit without the use of the term !@#$. I also wouldn't attack the kids of the mayor. That is just me though. Are you comfortable with those tactics?

[DaveinElma]

Well then, I would argue it on that merit without the use of the term !@#$. I also wouldn't attack the kids of the mayor. That is just me though. Are you comfortable with those tactics?

 

If true yes, but it smacks Nixonian "rat-effing" to me like planting Hitler signs at Tea partys. And say if 30,000 residents are against the project with pure motivations and 100 are just plain racists does it make the project any less of a bad idea.

[3rdnlng]

From his own article:

 

 

 

Look who you are allying yourself with. Or you may roll like that, who knows?

 

Edit - On a side note, interesting this is a Wisconsin newspaper.

 

Booster, you are truly an ass. I wasn't allying myself with anyone. In fact I didn't even read the article. All I basically said was if the article had anything to do with race then Dave would again be branded as a racist by PPP's own Al Sharpton (going by the screen name of Booster).

[Booster4324]

Booster, you are truly an ass. I wasn't allying myself with anyone. In fact I didn't even read the article. All I basically said was if the article had anything to do with race then Dave would again be branded as a racist by PPP's own Al Sharpton (going by the screen name of Booster).

 

If the thread is by Dave, it is about race.

[....lybob]

If true yes, but it smacks Nixonian "rat-effing" to me like planting Hitler signs at Tea partys. And say if 30,000 residents are against the project with pure motivations and 100 are just plain racists does it make the project any less of a bad idea.

Would you support the tactics used if it was poor people against gentrification? or how about a community fighting against a factory, or Wallmart?, and what about eminent domain projects ?- answer those questions and I'll be able to tell if you have a principle you believe in or if you are just racist or at least a class bigot.

[GG]

Fine & dandy, except that the project was killed based on racial grounds. If the prior developers in New Berlin got the original project built in 2006, it wouldn't be an issue apparently. But because that died, another developer wanted to restart it. According to the story, there was nothing in his plan that said that the new condominiums would go to blacks. But the opponents picked up the racial angle to kill the deal. Certainly looks like a violation of US law.

[OCinBuffalo]

This is just a set of questions, and hypothetical ones at that:

 

Does anybody consider the concept of inserting a small set of otherwise urban people into a small community of 39k as one liberals would pursue intentionally? I mean, as a tactic? If my agenda was to disperse smaller groups of people who vote Democrat, in what amounts to pre-packaged "communities", into the vast suburban world, wouldn't this fit?

 

Before Peace says anything ironic and therefore unintentionally funny: I am not saying any such agenda exists. But, think about why it would exist:

1. Democrats know that demographically they are going to lose more and more elections going forward. This about both population shifts as well as gerrymandering. The way the electoral maps are shaping up, their voters are far too concentrated. This is fact.

 

2. They only way to combat this problem is by dispersing their voters, but that creates a logistical challenge: their voters don't have the money or motivation to move, and nowhere to land if they move. Therefore, the only solution to the logistical problem is via the courts and Federally funded housing projects.

 

3. The image that confronts the Democrats-->The Result of Democratic Control of our Cities....is a bad one. The problem is, the current urban political leadership is stuck with the "hand-out class" they created. Understand, I am not talking only about the poor...I am also talking about the rich people who live off city contracts, middle class city employees, etc. There's no way to turn this around with more $, especially when the State and Federal spigot is being slowed and/or cut off altogether. Therefore the image will only get worse if nothing is done.

 

4. The fact is that for almost all historically Democratic cities, the liabilities far outweigh the assets. With no capital forthcoming...the only way forward is to cut your liabilities. You aren't going to get rid of the people who give you campaign $ = the people who will back another Democrat in a primary if you don't pay them off, or anybody else that is wholly dependent on you that does something you can claim to be beneficial-->those are your assets.

 

Rather, if you can move the non-contributing poor to the suburbs, isn't that a hell of a way to cut your liabilities(thus solving local Democrat image problems), while at the same time disperse your voters(thus solving the national Democrat electoral map problems)?

I'm not saying that Democrats are this smart in general, but do you think some of them are?.

Do you think some of them would be able to see this the only way to protect the "liberal brand" that is circling the drain?

Do you think some of them are capable of being this pragmatic?

 

EDIT: I have a name for this..."reverse gentrification"

Edited June 26, 2011 by OCinBuffalo