Freedom of press and journalistic integrity
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
Gregg A. Reynolds
Published: May 8, 2008
I disagree with Mr. Jerome C. Burchard’s opinion piece published in the April 26 edition of this paper.
The fact that this paper would publish his piece demonstrates great regard for freedom of the press and differing views. I have also had opinion pieces published and gladly read his piece although I totally disagree with him. This is my idea of freedom of the press at its best.
He opens his piece with uncomplimentary remarks about this paper and in the end I am left with the idea that unless this paper exactly expresses his views on the immigration issue, they are guilty of demagoguery.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
The Potomac News challenged me and others like me to stand up and address the broader issues and now we are.
His remarks do demonstrate a serious problem with the way we have chosen to address the legitimate problems of overcrowding and trashed properties, underfunded education, underfunded transportation, inadequate health care and tax policies and generally how we match the needs of our community with the resources needed to meet those needs.
His remarks are understandable considering that the resolution was originally drafted by a Mr. Michael Heathman, who worked as a staff attorney at the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) for many years and that FAIR is a hate group according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Sadly, the resolution was designed to provoke remarks like those offered by Mr. Burchard rather than have an intelligent discussion that could handle these problems in a much better way.
All this information is readily available in the excellent 9500Liberty video located at the following Web site:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBbjrk0QWqw.
I also recommend that interested readers go to a second Web site for a more in depth understanding of the Prince William County immigration experience: http://youtube.com/9500Liberty.
The many excellent documentaries contain a wealth of information.
GREGG A. REYNOLDS
Woodbridge
Post a Comment
Please Log In
Comment posting requires free registration with InsideNova.com.
Already have an account? Please log in.
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( zcxnissan ) on May 14, 2008 at 2:20 am
Remember Phdee “Christ is a Liberal” as you posted here. Trapped in your own intolerance again. How is HSM a hate group? If anything they are preventing discrimination towards legal immigrants and making the enforcement of law much easier and our communities safer. We are the anti-illegal immigration crowd not the anti-immigration crowd as you portray in your deliberately deceptive comments. Chris Cummings
Posted by ( phdee ) on May 13, 2008 at 11:33 am
ZCX: how illogical you are. How do YOU (and the other anti bigots) know I and other posters are liberals? As for Christ, if there was such a person, he had to be a liberal (by today’s definition) because of his compassion, love, etc., not the hate, bigotry, racism, etc you and others advocate.—You statement on my religion intolerance is just a bald-faced lie. I don’t even advocate my views for anyone, and I have done so on this website. A person’s religious beliefs are personal, in my opinion. Where do you get all these lies? If you hae the courage, strength, and fortitude, please cite where I have been religiously intolerand on this website.—If we forget about hate groups, we have to include HSM, Letiecq, the anti0immigration crowd, et al - which wouldn;t leave much to talk about, but it would close the anti’s mouths.
Posted by ( zcxnissan ) on May 13, 2008 at 4:30 am
Phdee how do you know Christ was a Liberal? Were you alive then? Do you even believe in religion? You have been religiously intolerant in previous posts why should we believe you now? Ray Williams you are correct in assuming that Border Enforcement is key, knowing that the Feds won’t enforce that makes your 1st choice kind of farcical. But being the compassionate man that i am deportation and the arrest of employers that hire illegals is the next best thing to border enforcement. If you live in fear of the law because you are breaking the law then that is a positive effect that will have a positive outcome. Lets just forget about all the hate groups like SPLC and the KKK for the moment and worry about enforcing the laws on the books. Chris Cummings
Posted by ( raywilliams ) on May 09, 2008 at 7:01 pm
I personally don’t have a problem with immigrants, illegal or not but I have publicly supported cobra’s position on Issue 3 that it is frustrating to live next to someone with different social standards than yourself. Whether parking, maintaining the lawn, loud music or whatever the issue, we like our neighbors to keep their homes as we keep ours. But to me, this issue is separate from the Rule of Law and should be addressed by PWC in a different way. How? I’d be blasting Mexicans w/o Borders to step up and teach the importance of social skills to their people to blend with ours. I’d challenge MwoB to offer free legal counseling to start their people on the legal documentation track rather than hold marches about how their feelings are hurt. We can solve these problems if we focus on the bad and not the rhetoric between us.
Posted by ( raywilliams ) on May 09, 2008 at 6:54 pm
They say the best debators can argue the other sides platform as well as their own. I could come out and write pages of why illegal immigration is bad for PWC and America. It would be interesting to see phdee and cobra take a day and argue the other side’s point of view for a change to see if common ground could be found somewhere.
Posted by ( raywilliams ) on May 09, 2008 at 6:51 pm
There are three problems with illegal immigration. First is the Rule of Law that illegal is illegal. Second is that workers that are not fully documented may not make full contributions to offset the social burdens they use. Third is their standards of living are different than ours. As a discussion group, we should be trying to find solutions to each of these three areas instead of focusing on one and hoping the other two go away. Yes, IF you stop all illegal immigration and deport those here, then 2 and 3 go away. BUT, until 1 is done, 2 & 3 exist in our communities and must be addressed. We can address 2 & 3 separately or put all of our eggs in the Rule of Law basket. The Resolutionist support the Rule of Law basket process and others of us support a focus on 2 & 3 while 1 is worked out by the Federal government. Folks, this is about problem solving, not us becoming the Hatfields & McCoys.
Posted by ( willow703 ) on May 09, 2008 at 9:21 am
phdee,
Christianity, and all other religions should be taken with a grain of salt.
Remember, nowhere in the Bible will you find God’s commandment: Thou shalt not enslave another, nor force him to labor for
less than you would require for the same task.
Posted by ( willow703 ) on May 08, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Cobra,
There you go again, throwing that word “traitor” around as if you knew what it really means.
There are some who don’t the laws, any laws, enforced, but most of us want the laws enforced & we want them enforced correctly, i.e., according to the law.
Let’s secure the borders, North & South & deal justly with all illegal aliens. A repeat of the World War II internment camps for Japanese-Americans is not what this country needs.
Posted by ( phdee ) on May 08, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Jim, so the Bush admin and conservative Republican party is a “conservative” organization with warped leanings, and should therefore be taken with a grain of salt. right??? remember: Christ was a liberal!!!
Posted by ( Jim ) on May 08, 2008 at 10:50 am
The Southern Poverty Law Center has been described as a “a controversial, liberal organization” and not exatly an unbiased organization. So anthing they have to say needs to be taken with a grain of salt. The 9500Liberty video is also pro illegal immigration and not an unbiased source as well.