On honor of the Tom "Big(o)T" Bennett taking his tail between his fat ass and saying good-bye to his hate-fest cable access show, The Fairfield Weekly gives him a swift kick in the pants while offering the lying goon some advice regarding a new gig that up his alley.
Rudy Giuliani has a battalion of state senators and representatives. Mitt Romney has the active support of one current and one former chief exec of two sizable Connecticut cities. And John McCain has the help of an ex-state GOP chair and the endorsement of Joe Lieberman, a Washington man who happens to be Connecticut's junior senator. But none of the other Republican candidates has a Connecticut campaign chair. So as a service, we've matched some of remaining Republican contenders with someone who could speak for them locally.
[...]
Tom Tancredo
Tom "Big T" Bennett has quit his public-access show after Comcast moved it to a pre-recorded, late-night format due to his threats of violence against undocumented immigrants and a sexually explicit chit-chat with a 15-year-old girl. Greater Danbury's racist loon should use his new spare time to represent Greater Denver's xenophobic nutbag, Tom Tancredo. Bennett has experience in broadcasting and his weekly 60 Minutes Hate were just lengthy, under-produced versions of Tancredo's deplorable TV ads. Given the Colorado congressman's stuttering, blink-and-you'll-miss-it presence at the debates, we honestly think his cause would be helped if his mouthpiece was an overweight, gap-toothed wedding DJ who awkwardly breaks into conversations about gay oral sex.
Ouch. The funny part is that Bennett is so mentally challenged that he might take the Weekly's remarks as a complement.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.