Tag Archives: Connecticut

The Secret Sandy Hook Secrecy Bill.


If it walks like a duck. Nuff Said.

———————————-  ~ Steve ~ ———————————–

http://lastresistance.com    posted on May 24, 2013 by

Been wondering what has happened with the Sandy Hook case? Want many of the weird questions settled? The legislature of Connecticut has been bypassing normal open procedures to craft a bill behind closed doors that would, if passed, keep basic evidence of the crime forever behind closed doors

From the Hartford Courant, “Bill Drafted In Secret Would Block Release Of Some Newtown Massacre Records”:

Adam Lanza

Adam Lanza

“The staffs of the state’s top prosecutor and the governor’s office have been working in secret with General Assembly leaders on legislation to withhold records related to the police investigation into the Dec. 14 Newtown elementary school massacre — including victims’ photos, tapes of 911 calls, and possibly more. The behind-the-scenes legislative effort came to light Tuesday when The Courant obtained a copy of an email by a top assistant to Chief State’s Attorney Kevin Kane, Timothy J. Sugrue. Sugrue, an assistant state’s attorney, discussed options considered so far, including blocking release of statements ‘made by a minor.’”

You have got to be kidding.

The bereaved Sandy Hook parents are going through hell, I’m sure, and will be doing so for years to come. But they are no more special than the bereaved parents of children who were murdered in Columbine High SchoolAs I wrote back when Michael Moore said he wanted the pictures released,

“If you use Google image search for words like crime scene columbine or Cleboldand Harris, you will find some pretty gruesome pictures. Why is Sandy Hook being treated so differently?”

This entire investigation has been shrouded in secrecy, as evidenced by repeated protests by local editorials (here and here). All this secrecy has been kept simply by the raw will of the police and whoever is overseeing them. What will happen if this becomes enshrined in law? Will it only be the bodies that are kept from view, or will we never get to see any more pictures of the bullet-ridden cars in the parking lot? Or will we be forbidden from seeing photographs of Adam Lanza’s Honda Civic with all four doors open and black sweatshirts strewn on the pavement around it? What about spent shells and the bullet holes in the interior walls? The official story makes Adam Lanza a lone gunman who managed to shoot 155 bullets in under five minutes and hit multiple targets multiple times.

Other than some professional local Connecticut Journalists, the major media has investigated nothing at all related to Sandy Hook, but rather considered it an opportunity to play Oprah Winfrey and to lobby for gun control. Many (Most? All?) of the Sandy Hook parents whose delicate privacy the Connecticut legislators are so concerned about have been aggressively lobbying in the news and in legislatures using their pain as a license to attack the second amendment. Showing the damage would further their cause, just likeMichael Moore said.

I’ve never in my life heard of the side of law and order wanting to suppress evidence. It is always the defense who wants the pictures concealed because of the fear that the jury will become enflamed with a sense of justice against the perpetrator.

What the Connecticut legislature is trying to do just seems backwards. The fact that they have tried to hide what they are doing makes it seem even more sinister.


FOTM has many investigative pieces on this incident. For the links to those posts, please go to our “Sandy Hook Massacre” page. Click here!

Fla. Gov. Scott vetoes sheriff’s $1 million ‘snitch on your neighbor’ program

 DOESN’T this program kinda remind you of how the gestapo might have been started?




http://www.bizpacreview.com       May 20, 2013 by 

Gov. Rick Scott on Monday vetoed almost $368 million in state spending before signing the budget for next year, including $1 million for a violence prevention and mental health initiative sought by the Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw.

Bradshaw’s program would have established a hotline for residents to call when they suspected an individual might be planning a violent act.

If a call were deemed cause for concern, that person might be visited by deputies trained to deal with mental health issues.

In interviews, he cited such incidents as the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut and a movie theater in Auroroa, Colo., as instances where a watchful eye and trained help might have prevented tragedy.

But the proposal drew fire from conservatives when a widespread quote from a Palm Beach Post  story fueled fears of government taking action against people because of how they think, not how they’ve acted.

“We want people to call us if the guy down the street says he hates the government, hates the mayor and he’s gonna shoot him,” Bradshaw said in the article.

“What does it hurt to have somebody knock on a door and ask, ‘Hey, is everything OK?’”

Scott also turned down a 3 percent tuition increase for state college and university students.

Rest HERE!!!!

Reason Number 6,237 To Homeschool Your Kids.

2 Rolls Of Duct Tape Please.

From Fox News    By Todd Starnes       4/09/2013

School: Americans Don’t Have Right to Bear Arms.

The father of a Connecticut child is furious after discovering that his son’s school is teaching students that Americans don’t have a Second Amendment right to bear arms

“I am appalled,” said Steven Boibeaux, of Bristol. “It sounds to me like they are trying to indoctrinate our kids.”
Boibeaux’s son is an eighth grader at Northeast Middle School. On Monday his social studies teacher gave students a worksheet titled, ‘The Second Amendment Today.’

“The courts have consistently determined that the Second Amendment does not ensure each individual the right to bear arms,” the worksheet states. “The courts have never found a law regulating the private ownership of weapons unconstitutional.



The worksheet, published by Instructional Fair, goes on to say that the Second Amendment is not incorporated against the states.
“This means that the rights of this amendment are not extended to the individual citizens of the states,” the worksheet reads. “So a person has no right to complain about a Second Amendment violation by state laws.”
According to the document, the Second Amendment “only provides the right of a state to keep an armed National Guard.”
Boibeaux said he discovered the worksheet as he was going over his son’s homework assignments.
“I’m more than a little upset about this,” he told Fox News. “It’s not up to the teacher to determine what the Constitution means.”
Mat Staver, the founder and chairman of the Liberty Counsel, called the lesson propaganda – that is “absolutely false.”
“In fact, the US Supreme Court has affirmed that the Second Amendment ensures the individual the right to bear arms,” Staver told Fox News. “The progressive interpretation of the Second Amendment is that it doesn’t give you the right to bear arms – that it’s a corporate right of the government – but that has been rejected by the Courts.”
Boibeaux’s son’s teacher also told the students that the Constitution is a “living document.”
As noted in the worksheet provided to students – that means “the interpretation changes to meet the needs of the times.”
“The judges and courts of each generation provide the interpretation of the document,” the worksheet states.
Boibeaux called that concept mind-boggling.
It’s not up to the teacher to determine what the Constitution means,” he said. “If you want to learn about the Constitution, recite it word for word.”
Staver said the idea that the Constitution is a living document is another progressive tactic.
“This idea that this school is propagating that the Constitution can simply be changed at the whim of someone – or that the Second Amendment does not protect the individual right to bear arms is absolute propaganda and absolutely false,” Staver said.
Boibeaux said he’s demanding meetings with the principal as well as the board of education.
“I just don’t appreciate this as a parent,” he said. “I expect teachers to teach my kids and tell the truth – not what they think their point of view is.”
Ellen Solek, the superintendent of the school district, told Fox News they have now decided to pull the assignment from the classroom.
“It is no longer an assignment in that particular school,” she said, noting that it was an “administration decision in the best interest of the district.”
She refused to answer any questions about the content of the lesson, how it became a part of the curriculum or how many students were assigned the lesson. She also refused to acknowledge whether the school will apologize to students and parents.
“No comment, thank you,” she said.


New face of poverty in America: suburban and white

The face of poverty in America is no longer just urban and black/brown.

The new face of poverty in America is suburban and white.

A study by the Brookings Institution finds that the rate of growth of poverty in America’s suburbs is more than double the growth rate in urban areas.

Single mom Tara Simons (l) and her daughter Alexis, in their kitchen in West Hartford, Conn., are among America’s new suburban poor. (David Friedman / NBC News)

Allison Linn reports for NBC News, March 22, 2013, that according to a Brookings Institution analysis of 95 of the nation’s largest metropolitan areas, the number of suburban residents living in poverty rose by nearly 64% between 2000 and 2011, to about 16.4 million people. That’s more than double the rate of growth for urban poverty in those areas.

“I think we have an outdated perception of where poverty is and who it is affecting,” said Elizabeth Kneebone, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-author of the research. “We tend to think of it as a very urban and a very rural phenomenon, but it is increasingly suburban.”

Among America’s new suburban poor is single mother Tara Simons, who moved to suburban West Hartford because she wanted her daughter to grow up in a nice, safe place with good schools. Simons had a bout of unemployment and couldn’t find a new job that paid as well.

Simons’ situation is complicated by the fact she’s a single mom. Poverty and financial insecurity among single moms is far higher than for households headed by single dads or two parents.

The rate of poverty among single mothers actually improved dramatically through the 1990s, thanks to a strong economy, more favorable tax breaks and the success of so-called welfare-to-work programs. But two recessions and years of high unemployment erased many of those gains.

Simons had a good job with a rug retailer, but about a year ago she quit after disputes with one of the two owners. She had never had trouble finding a new job and was unprepared for how hard it would be. “I know that part of it is my fault and I absolutely take responsibility for that, but I never in a million years thought that I would (be in this position),” she said.

Simons went without work or unemployment benefits for five months before she got her current job about six months ago. The position, as a customer service representative for a local health products company, pays $14 an hour. That leaves her with take-home pay of about $460 to $480 a week, plus about $127 a week in child support. Simons has full custody of her daughter. She went on Medicaid after being unable to afford health insurance.

Like many working poor people, she has fallen into a debt spiral. She is behind on her electric and gas bills and owes nearly $400 to her daughter’s club lacrosse team. She took out an $800 payday loan, and she estimates that it will end up costing her $1,600 to pay it back. She also has several hundred dollars in credit card debt and has worked to pay off hundreds of dollars in bank overdraft fees. She’s sold jewelry for cash.

She and Alexis had to leave the house they were renting after she lost her job and a roommate. She got one-time aid from the city’s crisis fund to help with the down payment for her new, cheaper apartment. Still, the $1125 rent eats up more than half of her monthly take-home pay.

West Hartford is a picturesque suburb, with its well-kept homes, upscale town center, and a median household income of $80,061, more than double that of Hartford itself, which is $29,107 according to the Census Bureau.

And yet the number of people needing help has skyrocketed in recent years, said Susan Huleatt, the human services manager for West Hartford.


Conn. elementary school massacre: 26 dead, incl. 20 children

light in darkness

New York CBS News is reporting a slaughter of the innocents.

20 Children Among 26 Dead In Newtown Elementary School Massacre

Gunman Opens Fire Inside Sandy Hook Elementary School Early Friday

NEWTOWN, Conn. (CBSNewYork) –

Twenty children are among 27 people who were killed Friday morning after a gunman opened fire at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

State Police Lt. Paul Vance said 18 children and 6 adults were pronounced dead at that scene. Two other children later died at the hospital.

Among those dead is the gunman, identified as 24-year-old Ryan Lanza, 20-year-old Adam Lanza. He was found dead inside the building from an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound, sources told CBS 2.

The shooting has become the second-deadliest school shooting in the nation’s history, exceeded only by the 2007 massacre at Virginia Tech.

A 28th victim, an adult male, was found dead at a secondary crime scene, Lance said. He would not elaborate on the details.

Lance said the shooting occurred in two different classrooms in one section of the school.

One of the adult victims is Lanza’s mother who was a teacher at the school, sources told CBS 2. Some of the child victims were her students, sources said.

I can’t go on. Rest of tragedy HERE!!

Additional links here:





See an Update to this story: “The man responsible for killing 26 in Sandy Hook Elementary School


U.S. fed-state govts eliminating private pensions & retirement accounts

In a post nearly a year ago, I sounded this warning:

The governments of five European countries — Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Ireland and France – have taken over their citizens’ private pension money to make up deficits and budget shortfalls. Given the American Left’s oft-stated admiration for Europeans, who are further down the ruinous road of socialism than the United States, this should sound the alarm for all Americans who want to hang onto our private pensions and savings.

That was not paranoia speaking because a year before, in January 2010, Bloomberg’s Business Week had reported that the Obama administration wanted to convert all 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) into annuities or other steady payment streams.

Business Week also reported that the Treasury and Labor Departments was planning to solicit the public’s reaction, although a report by the Investment Company Institute had already found that Americans oppose any government initiatives that would force us to give up control over our 401(k) accounts. Seven in 10 U.S. households indicated they wanted to preserve their present retirement account features and flexibility, and objected to the idea of the government requiring retirees to convert part of their savings into annuities that supposedly guarantee a steady payment for life.

Now, it appears the Obama administration and state governments indeed are moving to get rid of private pensions and retirement plans.

Linda Stern reports for Reuters, Feb. 29, 2012, that baby boomers may be the last generation to retire with 401(k) plans. A week before, a hearing on the future of pensions and retirement was held in the U.S. Senate, attended by representatives of unions, employers, financial services providers, government agencies and consumer groups. The only thing they all seemed to agree on was that the 401(k) plan has been sort of a failure, which is a most curious consensus, given the fact that current and future retirees have successfully amassed some $4.3 trillion in 401(k) and other defined contribution accounts.

Stern reports that “policymakers are now looking beyond the once-vaunted 401(k) because it has two significant shortcomings: (1) It’s not powerful enough to secure the retirements of low-income workers who can’t afford to stash away enough money; and (2) It leaves each accountholder alone to manage risks.” Without being able to pool risk, participants have to settle for lower returns and lower withdrawals. That, in turn, reduces the amount that they can spend in retirement, and reduces the likelihood that their money will last until they die.

Blah, blah, blah.

In other words, there is a rising crescendo of voices calling for the conversion of privately-managed 401(k) and IRAs in favor of Government Retirement Accounts (GRAs) — government-managed retirement instruments like annuities that “promise” to “guarantee” retirees a “steady stream of retirement income” that’ll last until they die.

Sounds just like Social Security, doesn’t it? The government takes money out of our monthly paychecks and puts it into our separate Social Security accounts. In return, when we retire, we’ll get a Social Security check every month until we die.

And we all know how well that turns out.

Stern concludes her report for Reuters by warning that policy changes down the road could change the shape of our retirement savings significantly because “everything from a curtailing of 401(k) tax breaks to new state-run programs is under consideration somewhere, by somebody.”

A NewsMax report describes the latest move towards replacing private pensions and retirement plans with Government-run Retirement Accounts (GRAs):

The Latest move can be found in the Obama Administration`s, 256 page- FY 2013 Budget Proposal.  The revival of his 2008 presidential run, the “Automatic IRA” which has now “Evolved” into two proposals:

Secure Choice Pension & Government Retirement Accounts (GRA’s), both of which automatically “Mandate” 5%-6% contributions into Government Run Pension funds.

One feature of GRAs  is once a participant dies, the uncollected equity belongs to the government.  It’s no wonder the Retirement age for GRAs will be 67, and one proposal calls for 69 years of age.  They’re “off the hook” as soon as you’re dead.

Another change to the retirement account laws, the Tax Benefit.  The current Tax Deduction will be replaced with a “Credit”, which is only redeemable after retirement. To be Eligible for the Tax Credit, you will be given the “Option” to place Your Equity into Annuities composed of U.S Treasury Bonds, that will payout an estimated 3% annually.

Yes, you`ll be Investing/Buying what China No longer wants, U.S. Debt (Treasury-Bonds). [...]

No matter who wins [the 2012 presidential eleciton], our government is Neck-Deep in Debt. When faced with the Reality of a Complete government Collapse… a Politician will do, what a Politician, needs to do!   The $4.6 Trillion in IRA’s and the $4.3 Trillion in 401(k)s … are all too tempting!

Some legislators already have introduced bills toward transforming Americans’ private pensions and retirement accounts into Government Retirement Accounts (GRAs):

  • S. 1020: Saving Enhancement by Alleviating Leakage in 401k Savings Act of 2011A U.S. Senate bill introduced on May 18, 2011, by senators Herb Kohl (D-WI) and Mike Enzi (R-WY). If approved, S. 1020 would “amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the rules relating to loans made from a qualified employer plan, and for other purposes.” In other words, S. 1020 (or the federal government) would impose restrictions on how 401(k) owners can access the money accumulated in their accounts. You wouldn’t even be able to borrow from your own 401(k) account!
  • California state bill, SB 1234: Golden State Retirement Trust – A bill introduced on February 23, 2012, by California congressman Kevin De Leon, to replace private pensions and retirement accounts with GRAs. Here’s a quote from SB 1234: “Existing federal law provides for tax-qualified retirement plans and individual retirement accounts or individual retirement annuities by which private citizens may save money for retirement. This bill would establish the Golden State Retirement Savings Trust Act, which would create the Golden State Retirement Savings Trust that would be administered by the Golden State Retirement Savings Investment Board, which would also be established by the bill. The bill would require eligible employers, as defined, and would authorize other employers to enroll eligible employees, as defined, into an employer-sponsored retirement plan or pension plan, as specified, offered by the trust, or a personal pension in the case of a nonparticipating employer, as specified. The bill would require a specified percentage of the annual salary of an eligible employee participating in the retirement or pension plan to be deposited in the Golden State Retirement Savings Trust, which would be segregated into a program fund and an administrative fund, both of which would be continuously appropriated to the board for purposes of the act. The bill would limit expenditures from the administrative fund, as specified.”
  • Connecticut state bill HB 5337: An act “to create a task force to study the need for a public retirement plan,” introduced on May 6, 2012, by Lauren Schmitz, a research analyst at the Bernard L Schwartz Center for Economic Analysis, the very same institution that had originated the GRA concept.
  • Other states such as, Massachusetts, Florida and Ohio have made or are actively conducting moves such as GRAs.

And what will happen to all those Government Retirement Accounts? Why, like that mythic Social Security “trust fund,” the money in those GRAs will simply be dumped into the government’s ever-dwindling general funds to pay for the government’s ever-increasing expenses, of course!

Don’t believe me?

In May 2011, with little media publicity, the Obama administration began dipping “temporarily” into raiding the pensions of federal government employees to keep funding government operations. (Read more, here.)


No bunny for you!

It’s not just the federal government that’s encroaching on our freedom with legislation like NDAA and Obamacare, local and state governments are also becoming increasingly tyrannical. As examples, here are some instances of petty tyranny chronicled on FOTM:

Add to the above woeful list “No bunny rabbit for you”.

North Haven city government has ordered Kayden Lidsky to get rid of her pet bunny, Sandy.

Erin Cox reports for WTNH News8, August 8, 2012, that a 7-year-old girl was told she must get rid of her pet rabbit named Sandy, because North Haven, Connecticut, has an old ordinance forbidding residents to have rabbits or any livestock if their property is less than two acres.

Sandy is one big bunny — a Giant Flemish weighing over 20 pounds.

Kayden Lidsky considers her pet bunny of three years her best friend: “She lays with me in bed sometimes. I don’t want the bunny to go. Don’t make me give my bunny away because she is my best friend.”

The town conducted an inspection of the girl’s house, then sent the family a cease-and-desist order to get rid of the rabbit because North Haven’s zoning laws do not allow rabbits or any livestock on lots under two acres. The town also issued the family a citation for violating the blight ordinance because of an unfinished over hang and because of the bunny cage.

Kayden’s dad, Joshua Lidsky, says: “A bunny is not a violent animal. A bunny is not a violent dog or a violent cat or a rabid animal, it’s a caged creature that all it does is give love to our family. I would love to keep the bunny. I would love to keep my family happy and the town just let us live our life and pay our taxes.””

The family is appealing the decision. If they lose the appeal, it could trigger a Superior Court action enforcing removal of the animal.

Unbelievable! Are we living in the Soviet Union?

America, home of the free and the brave, has become Amerika, home of the unfree and the tyrannical apparatchik.


Bill O’Reilly is another Schmuck!!

I don’t know why no one even at Fox will touch this. Either they have been bought or threatened.     ~  Steve~        

H/T   Grouchy.                                                        —————————————————————————————————————

Responding to a viewer question about why he’s been silent on a just-completed six-month law enforcement investigation into Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility, top Fox News anchorman Bill O’Reilly replied on video, saying: 1) there’s no hard evidence Obama isn’t eligible; 2) Hawaii newspaper ads proved Obama was born there; and 3) he’s just too busy to look into it anyway.
The statements from O’Reilly came in a “Backstage Conversation” piece for premium members of his website posted on YouTube, producing a flood of venom directed at both O’Reilly and Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz.
Arpaio’s volunteer “Cold Case Posse” of attorneys and retired police worked on the investigation, concluding that Obama’s birth certificate image released by the White House very likely is a forgery.

NOTE: In case you missed the news conference of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s “Cold Case Posse,” Here it is.

O’Reilly had responded to a question from Erin, who asked, “Why did you ignore Sheriff Arpaio’s assertion that President Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery?”
Said O’Reilly, “Well, because Sheriff Arpaio has not presented any hard evidence to back up his assertion. Secondly, I am very busy. I looked into the birth certificate myself and found out there were two separate birth announcements made in Honolulu newspapers on the day Barack Obama was born. It would be impossible for that to happen unless somebody was conspiratorializing the birth of a little mixed race baby. If that were happening, then, I guess you could have birth announcements planted. But the odds of that , Erin, are about, 29 gazillion to one.”
It’s not the first time O’Reilly has address the birth certificate issue. It was about a year ago when he responded to a question about why Obama has a Social Security number that was assigned to someone with a Connecticut address when he never lived there.
O’Reilly said that likely was the result of his father having “lived in Connecticut.” But when that statement proved to be filled with holes, the network scrubbed the audio from the website.
“His father lived in Connecticut for several years,” O’Reilly had answered, adding that “babies sometimes get numbers based on addresses provided by their parents.”
But no evidence has been found to indicate Obama’s father ever lived in the state.
Rest of story HERE!!!

Read the preliminary results of Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse investigation.

Federal Govt’s E-Verify Shows Obama’s Social Security No. is Fraudulent

You’ve read here about Obama having multiple Social Security (SS) numbers and that the one he’s currently using is a Connecticut-issued number (042-68-4425) — a state in which Obama had never lived and with which he has no association. Then it was discovered that the SS number 042-68-4425 belonged to a man who had died in 1981. Then another investigator found that the SS number isn’t even in the Social Security Administration’s files and is listed as “doesn’t exist.”

Now there’s more evidence that the President of the United States is using a fraudulent SS number.

A concerned U.S. citizen ran Skippy’s SS number through E-Verify — and it flunked.

E-Verify is an Internet-based, free program run by the federal government which verifies whether or not prospective employees have the required authorization to work legally in the United States. The electronic program compares information from an employee’s Employment Eligibility Verification Form I-9 to data from government records. If the information matches, that employee is eligible to work in the United States. If there’s a mismatch, E-Verify alerts the employer and the employee is allowed to work while he or she resolves the problem; they must contact the appropriate agency to resolve the mismatch within eight federal government work days from the referral date. The program is operated by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in partnership with Social Security Administration.

Jerome Corsi reports for WorldNetDaily (WND), Sept. 12, 2011, that WND has obtained a copy of an affidavit from Linda Jordan, a private citizen who entered Obama’s Social Security Number into the “Self Check” section of the E-Verify website, only to find out that Obama’s Social Security Number was flagged by E-Verify as likely being fraudulent.

Jordan is a wife, mother and homemaker. A self-described “an average citizen with reasonable research skills,” Jordan was frustrated by Congress not being willing to investigate issues concerning Obama’s identity, including whether or not he currently is using a fraudulent Social Security Number, and by federal law enforcement authorities also doing nothing.

She states in a signed affidavit:

“Between October 2008 and May 2011, I submitted several requests to agencies and people with the legal responsibility and authority to investigate the use of forged documents and election fraud, concerning Obama’s birth records and Social Security Number. To date no one with the legal responsibility and authority has responded to any of these requests.

I did my own research and I found allegations that Obama was using a fraudulent Social Security Number and that his birth certificate had been forged were more than credible. Then I saw many brave people putting their reputations on the line to get the truth concerning Obama, including military officers like Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, and I decided I could no longer just sit back and watch. I considered myself to be one of the employers of the president of the United States, so I decided to sign up for E-Verify and see if I could determine whether or not I could find out something about his true identity.”

After Jordan entered Obama’s Social Security Number into the E-Verify Self Check, the system indicated Obama’s Social Security Number produced a mismatch that warranted a visit to the Social Security Administration to investigate the discrepancy.

According to an audit report authored by the Office of the Inspector General,Social Security Administration, titled “Effectiveness of Special Indicator Codes on the Social Security Administrations Numident File,” dated August 2008, there are 9 special indicator codes as of November 2008:

  1. False Identity
  2. Noncitizen Not in Status
  3. Multiple SSNs with Different Identities
  4. Scrambled Earnings with New SSN Assigned
  5. SSN Obtained Using Fraudulent Documentation
  6. SSN Assignment Based on Harassment/Abuse/Life Endangerment
  7. Fictitious Identity
  8. Fraud – OIG Investigated
  9. Fraud SSN Misuse

8 of the Special Indicators have to do with fraud of some kind. WND’s phone call to the media office of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigrations Services of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security went unanswered.

A big h/t to beloved fellow Tina.In the meantime, there’s silence from the mainstream media, Congress, the courts, the Democratic and Republican Party leaders, law enforcement officials from across the United States — including that supposedly fearless Arizona’s Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio who has promised he’d look into the matter.

Here’s the contact info on Sheriff Arpaio:

100 West Washington
Suite 1900
Phoenix, AZ 85003

Arpaio’s phone no.: (602) 876-1801

I can’t find an e-mail address for Arpaio, but here’s the contact form for the Sheriff’s Office.

This is the message I sent the sheriff (feel free to use it as yours!):

Dear Sheriff Arpaio:

You have a reputation for being fearless and a righteous enforcer of the law. About a month ago, you promised a Tea Party delegation that you’d look into Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility to be on the state of Arizona’s ballot for the 2012 presidential election.

Due to the indifference and inaction of due authorities, a private citizen, Linda Jordan, took it upon herself to verify Obama’s current Social Security number — that curious number 042-68-4425 with a Connecticut 3-digit prefix — with the federal government’s E-Verify electronic system. The result is that when she entered Obama’s Social Security Number into the “Self Check” section of the E-Verify website, she found that Obama’s Social Security Number was flagged by E-Verify as likely being fraudulent.

Here’s the WND article on this: http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=344461#ixzz1XrKONaEl:

Mr. Arpaio, what more evidence do you need? You can double-check Ms. Jordan’s information for yourself by entering Obama’s SS number into the E-Verify system.

What are you afraid of?




Layoffs in State-Local Governments But Not Federal Employees

Towns, cities, and states across America are laying off employees because of budget cuts. As examples:

  • In Minnesota, even after 22,000 government workers were hit with layoff notices, the state government closed down because Democratic Governor Mark Dayton and Republican legislative leaders failed to reach agreement on a $5 billion budget deficit.
  • On July 5, 2011, St. Petersburg Times reports that Florida is laying off 1,300 state employees, many of whom earned less than $30,000 a year. Among them is Toni Gugliotta, a Florida Highway Patrol community service officer who directed traffic and investigated minor crashes.

Toni Gugliotta is consoled by Florida Highway Patrol Captain Michelle Venero

  • The state of Connecticut is looking at massive layoffs. On June 30, 2011, state legislators gave Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, a Democrat, dramatically expanded authority to make radical cuts to programs and employment. That could add another 1,000 job losses to the 6,500 already proposed by Malloy.
  • This morning, CBS News reports that the small East Texas town of Alto, population 1,200, has laid off its entire police force of 5 after the city council cut the police budget to zero to make up for a $185,000 budget deficit.

But none of this affects the federal government, including Michelle Obama’s 1.25 million dollars a year staff. (For a list of names and their salaries, see my post from last year, “Queen Michelle’s $1.25 Million Staff“.)

Not only are federal government employees paid better than their counterparts in the private sector (USA Today found that in 2009, federal civilian employees received an average salary of $81,258 and benefits worth $41,791, whereas private-sector workers got $50,462 in pay and $10,589 in benefits), the number of federal workers earning salaries of $150,000 or more has doubled under Obama.

Which is really odd because back in November 2010, Obama had proposed a two-year pay freeze for federal civilian employees! He grandly said at the time: “The hard truth is that getting this deficit under control is going to require some broad sacrifices, and that sacrifice must be shared by the employees of the federal government.”

After Congress gave its approval, Obama signed the pay freeze into law on December 22, 2010.

Then we found out that the “pay freeze” is a limited one. Obama’s proposal would stop across-the-board pay hikes set for January 2011 and January 2012, but many federal workers will receive other pay hikes — longevity increases (called steps), promotions in grade, bonuses, overtime and other cash payments.

Then we found out that employees of the legislative branch are exempt!

Instead of trimming the bloated federal bureaucracy, the number of federal government employees actually increased under Obama to 2.15 million at the end of 2010. Washington Post calls it “the largest federal work force in modern history.”

Worse yet, the number of limos owned by the federal government increased by 73% during the first two years of the Obama administration, according to an analysis of records by iWatch News. Most of the increase was recorded in Hillary Clinton’s State Department.

There’s a reason why they’re called “Limousine Liberals”!

UPDATE (7.7.11):

Surprise! Obama’s pay freeze proposal was just another one of his lies. The pay freeze didn’t affect the White House staff who, the last time I checked, are federal government employees.

Most staffers who were at the White House for more than a year got a salary bump: 75% from 2009 to 2010, and 54% (or 146 individuals) from 2010 to 2011. The average salary increase was 8%. If you look at only staffers who got raises, the average increase was twice that. [Source]