It's not surprising that the Washington Post endorsed Kathy Smith over John Guevara, but the complete and utter meltdown that Che is having over the endorsement is pretty hilarious.

He's claiming the Post "attacked his family" and that his parents weren't illegals, even though the moron admitted it himself when he was blogging on a tea party website.

http://www.bluevirginia.us/2015/10/tea-partier-john-guevara-loses-it-rips.html

If he was a Democrat the Post would have endorsed him.

Who would vote for this clown?

Faux outrage. WP was never going to endorse Geuvara and everyone knows it. But it makes for a good fundraising email.

But let us face up to the facts:

The comments by the Washington Post and the bluevirginia blog are blatant anti-Hispanic racism and if produced by anyone else would result in instant ostracism. But as always libs get the free pass.

John Guevara = Douchenozzle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who would vote for this clown?

^^^^^^
Thoughts from the current top mind of Democrat Party.

imsobluehoohoohoo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The comments by the Washington Post and the
> bluevirginia blog are blatant anti-Hispanic racism

How so?

Fact: John Guevara is the son of undocumented workers.

Fact: John Guevara has ranted against advocates who would put illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship (like his parents).

Fact: John Guevara has suggested that the federal government regards conservatives as terrorists.

Fact: John Guevara has stated desire to arrest day laborers.

Fact: John Guevara has insisted that some public school programs are wasteful — though which ones he cannot say.

What's racist about these facts?

Libs would vote for Stalin if he had a "D" beside his name. Most libs are braindead zombies.

imsobluehoohoohoo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John Guevara = Douchenozzle Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Who would vote for this clown?
>
> ^^^^^^
> Thoughts from the current top mind of Democrat
> Party.

So the conservatives don't even know why anyone should vote for John Guevara.

I cannot say that I"m surprised.

Diehard Lib Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Libs would vote for Stalin if he had a "D" beside
> his name. Most libs are braindead zombies.

Conservatives would vote for John Guevara because

Freedom!

Liberty!

Guns!

God!

lulz.

Look, this guy has all the major endorsements NOVA BizPac, League of Conservation Voters, incumbent supervisor Michael R. Frey, and Carlos Castro, a Latinos con McAullife member. Looks like he's got the endorsement of all the major organizations and people. Kathy Smith mainly has endorsements from Democratic Party Members, not outside organizations.

He's also got the Virginia Police Benevolent Association to endorse him.

Oh yeah. Oh yeah. Uh huh. Uh huh.

Diehard Lib Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Libs would vote for Stalin if he had a "D" beside
> his name. Most libs are braindead zombies.


You like D don't you....

What was racist? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> imsobluehoohoohoo Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The comments by the Washington Post and the
> > bluevirginia blog are blatant anti-Hispanic
> racism
>
> How so?

Perpetuating the term "illegal immigrant."

“The term ‘illegal immigrant’ [is] incendiary and tend[s to incite fear and hatred,” said Mekahlo Medina, president of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists. “And as a journalist, it’s completely inaccurate to identify somebody as an illegal immigrant because you’re categorizing a person and not the actual act.”

It is unusual but yes, the Washington Post and their Democrat accomplices are quite happy to use this normally vilified term for political purposes. Case closed.

If Mr. Guevara considers the term "illegal immigrant" to be a slur, perhaps he should refrain from using it:

"Unlike a VAST majority of Hispanics who are here illegally today, my parents were productive, law-abiding, and tax-paying residents. These were provisions clearly stated in the law that needed to be met in order to be considered for such amnesty. Additionally, my parents NEVER took one red cent from the welfare system, despite being overwhelmingly qualified.

But that isn’t the message we’re giving today to those who are here illegally..."

http://fairfaxfreecitizen.com/2014/09/12/8451/

PS - It is in the Free Citizen screed quoted above that Juan Guevara admits that his parents were undocumented immigrants when they arrive in the US. Case closed.

they should throw his fuckin ass right out of the country

he doesn't belong here

Hypocrite Guevara's Own Words Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If Mr. Guevara considers the term "illegal
> immigrant" to be a slur, perhaps he should refrain
> from using it:
>
> "Unlike a VAST majority of Hispanics who are
> here illegally today, my parents were
> productive, law-abiding, and tax-paying residents.
> These were provisions clearly stated in the law
> that needed to be met in order to be considered
> for such amnesty. Additionally, my parents NEVER
> took one red cent from the welfare system, despite
> being overwhelmingly qualified.
>
> But that isn’t the message we’re giving today
> to those who are here
> illegally..."
>
> http://fairfaxfreecitizen.com/2014/09/12/8451/
>
> PS - It is in the Free Citizen screed quoted above
> that Juan Guevara admits that his parents were
> undocumented immigrants when they arrive in the
> US. Case closed.

Who cares what Guevara thinks or what he said? That's not what this is about. This is about the Washington Post and the Democrat Party using racial slurs and racial politics against a racial minority. If you have no problem with that then you are no different than a redneck racist.

hLCt9 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who cares what Guevara thinks or what he said?

The voters of Sully District. Duh.

> That's not what this is about.

Of course it is. People who use certain language and then turn around and accuse others of racism for using it as well are called hypocrites. Mr. Guevara is a hypocrite.

Kathy Smith who manipulated her school boundaries for political purposes: namely bring in the low income kids when you need them to get All day K--then, when all schools get All day K-whether they have low income kids or not--she kicked them out and sent them to another school. That's real liberal!

When her pal on the School Board (Stu Gibson) needed to take kids from Oakton, she helped him by ponying up some of "her" district to get on the bus. No matter that it wasn't needed. Of course, her own neighborhood was not involved.

When parents at GBW begged for relief of overcrowding, she finally agreed to phase in some of the AAP kids to her neighborhood school. But, she had to go getting some kids from another school in order to justify it--because, heaven forbid, she send those kids elsewhere. Of course, most of GBW is not in Sully, she was only concerned about keeping Sully voters happy.

She has pulled political stunts for years.

Anyone who remembers Reagan's Amnesty knows Guevara is lying. Look it up. Yiu had to be illegal to benefit. FCRC Chairman Matt Anes should be disbarred for promoting such lies.

...
Attachments:

It's True Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...

Stop picking on the Guevara family. His wife is the best cleaning lady we ever had! This family needs the extra income and jobs! Elect Pinnochio -ahem John Guevara!

Guevara is a liar. What is sad is the idiot Republicans ( especially FCRC Chairman and lawyer Matt Ames) repeating Guevara's lies when all it takes is a google search to see the law his parents benefitted from only applied to those unlawfully in the country. They had to be in unlawful status to be eligible:

8 U.S. Code § 1255a - Adjustment of status of certain entrants before January 1, 1982, to that of person admitted for lawful residence

(a) Temporary resident status: The Attorney General shall adjust the status of an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence if the alien meets the following requirements:
...
(2) Continuous unlawful residence since 1982

(A) In general
The alien must establish that he entered the United States before January 1, 1982, and that he has resided continuously in the United States in an unlawful status since such date and through the date the application is filed under this subsection.

"is a liar, the code read ..."

aha!

but the totality of law, enforcement, and radio broadcasts by authorities matters

in the 80's there were few mexicans (not including a few rich ones and from spain - certainly not many), they were lazy (slow workers). the status was more open arms or turn a blind eye "long as things work out".

in the very early 90's the radio be advertise employers who hired illegals would be charged with felony. employment forms made the person sign they were not illegals. MANY democrats in the area completely usurped the law and later found ways to legitimize they were residents by (changing history? having hispanics work in fx co courthouse shifting records?)

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

that was the policy and doings in many areas in Virginia (a state without debt or no comparable debt, at the time)

the policy of California at the time - absolutely different and i don't know

but the totality of law, enforcement, and radio broadcasts by authorities matters

the laws of equity from roman times (University Law) are clear that un-enforced laws do not count for much in a courtroom. certainly the 80's fit that cleanly.

in the 80's few privately owned company workers - many union workers in fairfax actaully, cared much. they all had jobs and slow mexicans worked the grunt work.

it wasn't until bill clinton and the 90's - where union workers of private companies were being shed off like dog hair and "big gov" began making laws of "spending anything on schools", that area workers began to protest

80's not a problem: there was no enforcement because there was no good worker complaining

bill clinton policy of killing off USA's private industry, golden parachutes allowed, and etc. that's when supposedly the rules got tighter (but some illegal haven cities, in MD, didn't heed any laws - furthermore fairfax followed that but only after the overflow from MD sifted over here)

teee9 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> in the 80's few privately owned company workers -
> many union workers in fairfax actaully, cared
> much. they all had jobs and slow mexicans worked
> the grunt work.
>
> it wasn't until bill clinton and the 90's - where
> union workers of private companies were being shed
> off like dog hair and "big gov" began making laws
> of "spending anything on schools", that area
> workers began to protest
>
> 80's not a problem: there was no enforcement
> because there was no good worker complaining
>
> bill clinton policy of killing off USA's private
> industry, golden parachutes allowed, and etc.
> that's when supposedly the rules got tighter (but
> some illegal haven cities, in MD, didn't heed any
> laws - furthermore fairfax followed that but only
> after the overflow from MD sifted over here)


Sorry Ronnie and his crew where the union ( middle class america) killers