Hartford Courant's anti-Greek rant is a Disgrace

If The Hartford Courant actually

did its homework, it might be surprised
to learn that historically the Greek
Community and Alumni have made
many positive contributions
to the University of Connecticut

This morning I read this outrageous article propagated on Twitter by Hartford Courant columnist Carolyn Lumsden (I'm not sure if she actually wrote the article because it's not attributed to any one specific author). It's no surprise that The Hartford Courant is among those leading the charge to dissolve ties between the Greek Community and the University of Connecticut.  For according to the unholy scripture set forth in the loony land of liberal theology, organizations like 'the Greeks' have no place in our 21st century PC society. This is mostly because Greek organizations maintain the right to discriminate (i.e define or deny membership) based on subjective reasons, or other reasons which include and aren't limited to classifications like gender, age and even race. (To be clear, when I mention 'race' I'm referring specifically to the charter of some black cultural fraternities and sororities which by design grant admission elusively to African-American students; a standard - which by the way - I support given their unique role, ritual, and cultural history; one that they should certainly be proud of).  I'm also willing to guess that anyone who contributed to this editorial was probably never part of a Greek organization or else they wouldn't have written such a lopsided story which draws the unreasonable conclusion that UConn should take steps to sever ties with Greek life based on a few recent acts of student buffoonery.

I find that most of the people who who are critical of Greek fraternities and sororities have never been a member of a Greek fraternity or sorority, but these so-called experts seem to be quite vocal in expressing their negative opinions about our members, or how our organizations work; they characterize our members - especially the men - as chauvinist, elitist, segregationists, rich, or worse - hate-mongering racists who conspire together for the sole purpose of arranging large keg parties in order to perform widespread campus mischief and mayhem, and of course - plot to trap and intoxicate innocent women and engage in date rape, or other morally disgraceful acts. And what they say about Sorority members is even worse from a stereotypical point of view which I find particularly odd coming out of the mouths of many feminists - who, although they deny it, are elitists in their own right. Of course, all of this mis-characterization of Greek members and organizations is pure nonsense and farthest from the truth.

I'm in good company with Rosa Parks,
Pope John Paul II, and Michael Jordan

While socializing and making new friends on a typically large, and sometimes intimidating college campus is probably the main reason one would want to seek Greek membership, there are plenty of other reasons why one joins a social fraternity - sports, hobbies, charity work, leadership training, alumni networking, and making general connections which last far beyond the typical four or five year college stint.  Most students don't go to college with the intention of joining a fraternity.  Indeed, in my own example, I started hanging around with a group of guys around campus, and after a semester received a bid to join.  Figuring that the guys were good natured, and it expanded my social networking (this predates the age of Facebook and Twitter), and that I should probably start kicking in for some of the beer I was drinking at 'the house', I joined. And to this day, we still keep in touch, and remain very close buddies with a few guys who's friendships I value immensely.

One of the reasons I'm particularly outraged by this article is that it paints an inaccurate depiction of the role that the Greek Community plays on campus, particularly at UConn.  Unbeknownst to most people, individual fraternity and sorority members (as well as each Greek chapter, cumulatively) are required to maintain a suitable grade point average (often 2.3) to remain active on campus.  Furthermore, each chapter is mandated by their National chapter to perform works of public service on campus as well as in the local community and report back results to their National chapter.  During my four years, my Greek Chapter solicited gifts from toy stores and orchestrated a 60-70 child Christmas Party in a community center in Willimantic. Trust me, the feeling of seeing Santa Claus pass out gifts while whispering "Feliz Navidad" to each smiling child was worth far more to us than an overflowing red cup of keg-poured Schlitz beer on a Thursday night.  We made a difference in our community.  And it mattered!

Not bad stats!

The Hartford Courant, which - silly as it seems - claims to be fair in its reporting should take the time to reach out to the UConn Office of Greek and Sorority Life and ask the current Greek Advisor about the kinds of contributions which Fraternities and Sororities make on Campus before merely casting us out with the devil for what seems to be purely ideological reasons.  Moreover, UConn is well supported by Greek Alumni Organizations which contribute both time and dollars to University projects, and programs.  Based upon the reasons, I listed earlier - I'm sure The Hartford Courant would like to see UConn flourish without the benefit of fraternal organizations.  But for the time being, it does, and the truth is and whether the media likes it or not - UConn is better off for it.

As far as The Courant's far-fetched notion that Greek organizations have brought ambulances to campuses far too often is a tad bit outrageous to be made part of their sensationalized argument to ban Fraternities at UConn, isn't it?  And how many ambulances have gone to the hundreds of college campuses all over the country for sports-related activities, politically-sponsored clashes, race riots, random shooting sprees, or non-Greek related parties?  And how many people were sent to the hospital as a result of attending a UConn Greek-sponsored party last year?  Or the last twenty years? Or how many people have died resulting from a UConn Greek Party?  The answer might surprise you - it's zero!  A lot of things might happen.  Which is always the excuse to rationalize the argument to tighten the reigns around people, or cast out organizations you don't like - I mean, for the insane, that is.

And if you're out to blame alcohol for every crime that's committed - sure, then work to reduce the drinking age so it's not such a novelty for kids who've been taught alcohol is taboo by rules which exceed those found in most civilized democracies.  Then college wouldn't become the festival of drinking its become for ALL STUDENTS, whether they are members of fraternities or not.  If schools are deemed "party school", its not because of Greek organizations, it's because the University in question has a lax policy on policing underage drinking.

Whatever happened to journalistic integrity where you draw conclusions based on relevant facts?  How is "Let's do away with Greek organizations at UConn - because of what happened at Trinity or Bowdoin, or Middlebury" even be considered a rational argument?  But if I tell you that the state economy in Texas is growing because of reduced taxes and regulation, would the editors at The Courant rush out to push for that kind of pro-business policy here?  Of course not!  Because it's all about the perceived ideology, and social engineering, and not about relevant facts.

And if you want to go down the road and talk about exclusion and anachronisms, we can do that too.  And based on the editors definitions we should also look to ban the African American Cultural Center, the Indian Cultural Group, the Bisexual, Gay and Lesbian Group, the Latin-American Group, the Woman's Center or many of the other hyphenated groups which exist on Campus, and consume office space free of charge in the Student Union, or elsewhere which are all bastions of exclusion which the editors at The Hartford Courant are all to happy to hypocritically dismiss as merely a cultural organizations dedicated to promoting tolerance and cultural awareness under the banner of organized segregation.

And lastly, let's talk about money.  The Courant argues that it takes courage to ban fraternities and sororities because of the financial dependency Universities have come to have on their Greek-Alumni.  So in light of UConn screaming for more funding every legislative session, do you think it's sound fiscal policy to antagonize those who help to selflessly contribute to offset the bottom line?  Do the editors at The Hartford Courant live in houses with no windows?  Sometimes you have to really wonder.

At the end of the day, it's the same old liberal argument which seeks to control thought, association, and assembly.  These are the same people who fight viciously for individual rights for special interest groups, but can't tolerate a group of 19-year old men (or women) pooling their money to room, drink beer, and run a campus clean up operation.  It's high time that the editors at The Hartford Courant get over themselves.  And focus on more important things like why a one-Party system of Democrats has run Connecticut's economy into the ground.

Good Grief!

I AM,

THE KING

This article may be later amended to address typographical or grammatical errors, and content. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment.  This article does not imply endorsement of any candidate, if mentioned above, nor has this article been solicited for publication by any political candidate, campaign, or PAC. 

The Hartford Courant Misfires at Republican Candidate Joe Visconti

Republican Gubernatorial Candidate
Joe Visconti is the latest victim of
The Courant's anti-gun agenda

Have you seen it?  I'm referring to the half-cocked editorial Bravado Alone Won't Stop Gun Toll which served as a hit piece on Gubernatorial Candidate Joe Visconti published by The Hartford Courant's editorial team early last evening.  This entry responds to the the poorly contrived notion that somehow Connecticut's newest gun law - touted as "the toughest gun law in the land" is the panacea for curbing gun violence that both Governor Dannel P. Malloy and The Courant's staff writers claim.  The editorial, much like 2013 law, is an election year stunt contrived to exploit a horrific local tragedy for political gain and to paint Republicans in a bad light in order to deflect away from an incompetent Governor's exceedingly poor performance in Hartford.

The Courant's dismissive characterization of Joe Visconti's view that his armed presence would have made a difference at Sandy Hook (in similar contrast to NRA Executive Wayne LaPierre's viewpoint) is "too simple to be helpful" is an unfortunate attempt to fudge the issue. Whatever one's view of armed police presence at schools, it's irrational to conclude that an armed guard wouldn't have made a difference at Sandy Hook Elementary on that terrible day.  Then to use a singular example of an armed deputy missing his fired shot at Columbine as a justification for their position is simply poor argumentation; The King would urge The Courant to do their homework and research the dozens of stories where shopkeepers, would-be victims, and ordinary citizens have been saved (and saved others) in many situations because they were armed.  

It's a far stretch to assume that registering magazines and guns would've somehow prevented heinous crimes like those which occurred at Columbine, Aurora, the Navy Shipyard, Virginia Tech, or even Sandy Hook, and pure fantasy to assume that taking such action would prevent similar crimes in the future. Registries might be utilized as research tools after a crime has been committed, but it's highly unlikely that any of the villains of the aforementioned atrocities would have gone to their local municipality to fill out a pile of government-mandated paperwork, and even if they did - it's highly imaginative to insist that any of these atrocities would have been prevented.

"The editorial, much like 2013 law, is an election year stunt contrived to exploit a horrific local tragedy for political gain and to paint Republicans in a bad light in order to deflect away from an incompetent Governor's exceedingly poor performance in Hartford. " - The King

This mad line of thinking is further trumped by the insistence that somehow schools wouldn't be safer with armed security guards or any type of armed police or security presence - as is the case in several metropolitan cities and suburban towns.  Not only do children and families feel safe in these districts, they actually are safer as a result of taking such proactive, preventative measures.  Despite the prevailing utopian academic view, not all violent crimes can be magically prevented by the use of over-medication, psychology sessions, and community meetings.

While the editors make the unsourced claim that 32,000 gun deaths occur every year (and taking their word that they didn't make that statistic up), the Center for Disease Control and the NHS report that you're more likely to be killed in an auto-accident than in some random gun shooting.  In fact, according to the FBI, you're more likely to be killed with a club or hammer  or by someone's hand or foot than by a rifle of any type.  Since most union members own a hammer, we won't sit and wait for The Courant and Dan Malloy to seek an outright ban on this controversial weapon. (Mr. Visconti as former carpenter would likely make the short list).

"It was likely Mr. Green in the Conservatory with a Hammer"

And did it ever occur to the Rhodes Scholars at The Courant that it only takes one bullet to commit the act of suicide?  One would surmise this would rule out the use of large capacity magazines as the cause.  If The Courant is so hell-bent on banishing guns, then why not call for an all-out ban on the most utilized weapon by criminals - the handgun?  And isn't this what The Hartford Courant is really hoping for?  An outright ban on all guns? And by the way - while half of suicides are reported to be committed by firearm, the other half are committed by poisoning, suffocation (hanging), and other means.  There is nothing scientific to suggest that if a person intends to commit suicide that if they didn't have a gun that they wouldn't find another method to kill themselves. 

Missing from any argument by liberals are statistics showing gun ownership as a deterrent against crime.  Evidence suggests that due to the increase in gun purchases/ownership that crime is down.  And while mental disorders have played a role in violent crime (and suicides), there is little evidence to suggest that guns of any type are the root cause for these incidents.  

If liberals really want to find out the root cause for violent crime and suicides then they won't have to look very far to find the answer.  It lies in the increasing decay of economic and social conditions in inner cities, and in middle class neighborhoods - and a general ineptitude by parents refusing to properly raise their children.  With the rise in unemployment spurred by anti-business policies enacted by Governor Dannel Malloy, the Democratic Party, and President Barack Obama, coupled with the ongoing state-sponsored mockery of the traditional family unit, it's no wonder that Connecticut crime statistics are increasing to record highs.  It's unfortunate that after years of Democratic Control over both Connecticut Legislative Chambers that Connecticut's media is unwilling to make the clear connection.

Like most other liberal activists, The Courant's editorial team is notoriously anti-Second Amendment.  The past two days of editorials and a scan of their archives illuminates this fact.  Truly, the only time The Courant takes interest in either the Bill of Rights or The Constitution is when they believe their Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Press is being encroached.  Freedom of Religion, they believe, only extends to Muslims who are just trying to navigate their way in a world full of hostile Christian Fundamentalists. The remaining Constitutional provisions, they believe, are best left relegated to the Age of Sail - never to be invoked again.

Before The Courant opts to write a hit piece on behalf its Democratic allies, it would behove them to get their facts straight, source their work, and like a legitimate journalistic shop - recognize that there  very well might be more than one point of view of gun ownership aside from turning all gun owners into potential mass-murderers.  Until then, their editorial is just another self-inflicted wound on their dwindling credibility.

And other Republicans Candidates should heed The King's advice - cowering to progressive whims, or fearing to challenge the looney left's coordinated attack on basic Constitutional Rights (such as Second Amendment Rights) out of fear that they too will be singled out, brought up on stage, and "made an example of" by our local media radicals - will make you not only an enemy of The King, but also of Country.

The bottom line is - if the rest of the country followed Connecticut's lead, violent criminals - nationwide - who would be unaffected by these pointless laws, would have an extended Field Day.

I AM

THE KING

The Hartford Times - Redux? Well, perhaps - but with a Twist!

Local Connecticut Conservatives are at again. 

This time the focus is the long overdue prospect of creating a viable option to Connecticut's main newspaper -  The Hartford Courant.  The brain child of this endeavor is none other than former West Hartford Town Council Member, and former First Congressional Republican Candidate Joseph Visconti.  Visconti, head of Visconti Media Group, is a popular activist who is well respected in Tea Party and main stream Republican circles.

Visconti's popularity stems from his willingness to stand up to Connecticut's tired Republican establishment.  He's been out front calling on current Chairman Chris Healy to step down after a disastrous trend of electoral failures under his leadership. Visconti will tell you openly: "this project is not about me. I'm just trying to create a forum so that Conservatives have a voice, and a chance to be heard in Connecticut."  A pretty accurate statement about a long time gap.


Irony and History 

The choice of the name of his new facebook group, called The Hartford Times, is as creative as it is ironic.  The Hartford Times (henceforth The Times) served as Hartford's afternoon newspaper operated between January 1, 1817 until its closure after purchase by its rival and new owner (The Hartford Courant) on October 20, 1976.  The irony is that The Times was a second headquarters for the Democrat Party propagating its positions and agenda for over a century. 



The Hartford Times Building
was the Democrat Party's base of
operations for over a century

The Times was created by wealthy Democrat Alfred E. Burr back in 1817 specifically for the purpose of advancing his Party's political agenda, largely pro-labor related issues. The first location was the Brownstone building at the intersection of Main and Grove Street. Alfred's son Willie Olcott Burr took over in 1899 continuing on with his father's vision until his death in 1921.  C. Everett Willson took over and owned the newspaper until he sold it to Gannett Publishing Company in 1928.  The newspaper was fairly successful until it was purchased by New Haven based, Register Publishing Company in 1973 which ultimately fast tracked its demise.  Former employees blame the newspaper's failure on rising costs, union demands, endless management turnover, and general staff incompetency. 

Notwithstanding the reasons cited above, my own view is that it's likely that successful circulation of an afternoon newspaper in the advent of popular televised evening news programs, both local and national, likely contributed to its doom.  By the time The Times published its stories, it was serving up old news to its readership better covered by moving images, and news anchors.  As demographics changed via the realities of changing culture, The Courant held its early morning readership, and The Times died on its dwindling vine. 

Regarding The Times long established tie to the Democrat Party - to be fair, while I don't have a complete list of Presidential endorsements The Times has made, the paper is rumored to have supported both Democrat and Republican candidates during its history.  Of course, given the well understood connection between the Democrat Party and The Times, its more than likely that Republican endorsements were far and few between - thus the Visconti initiative and his group's use of the name, The Hartford Times, is likely making Alfred Burr, et al turn over in their graves. In any case, the beautiful Hartford Times building, designed by architect Donn Barber in 1920, has been used as a backdrop for speeches by several U.S. Presidents including, Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, Lyndon Johnson, John Kennedy and Jimmy Carter. (These pictures can be found in the Hartford Library archives).  A side note: The columns on the building were originally attached to a Presbyterian Church at 1905 Madison Square in NYC.  As the Church was undergoing demolition, its likely Burr picked them up for free!

Vision's Purpose: Fighting Bias

It's worth discussing why Visconti and his friends would want to seek an alternative to The Hartford Courant.  You don't have to dig very deep into the The Courant's ink filed pages to see the clear alignment between its reporting and the Connecticut Democrat Party. To begin with  The Courant's endorsement of nearly every Democrat Presidential, Congressional, and Gubernatorial candidate, and state office seeker since the mid-1980s (with a few minor exceptions) outlines its bias.  The bias is particularly evident when it comes to its endorsement of people like Denise Nappier, who's investments have cost Connecticut taxpayer millions. And the Courant refused to acknowledge the result of her investments in Magic Johnson's shifty schemes as costly, and unrecoverable.  Most people in the private sector lose jobs for making such damaging investment decisions; they don't find themselves reappointed, and encouraged to make the same mistakes.

Further, news coverage and editorials have long casted Democrat positions in a positive light - for example, cheerleading the union labor movement, supporting higher taxation, running stories about business which paint executives and basic business decisions unfairly, and championing poor court decisions such as Sheff v O'Neill, and nearly all of former Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's counter-productive decade long litigation quests against businesses -  which have resulted in lost job.

In stark contrast, Republican positions are painted in a dark, cynical light-everything from ignoring government mandated fees and regulation burdening business, to critical coverage of Tea Party rallies.  The Courant's editorial board has clearly become intentionally blind to the impacts of Gov. Dannel Malloy's budget proposals on the middle class, and attracting (or keeping) businesses in Connecticut.  Schemes like eliminating the middle class tax credit, instituting a 19% tax burden increase on struggling businesses, and increasing costs and fees on nearly everything is deemed as merely a shared sacrifice.  Can The Courant bring itself to explore the possible ramifications of these policies?  And yet when it comes to its investigative reporting on the urgent need to reduce spending, or assigning accountability for the budget crisis to Connecticut's Legislature - no words can be found; not even an inference. 

As for New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, the biased Courant reporting writes off the Christie's proposal to reduce public sector expenditures as a "popularity stunt".  Pretty shameful.  The Courant does a huge disservice to its readership by selling the Malloy budget as "necessary".

When the average working taxpayer picks up The Hartford Courant and sees it propagating the Democrat plan - if not outright selling their "only one way to handle this is through higher taxes" scheme, many people are opening their eyes for the first time and questioning why their hometown newspaper is championing the liberal cause to lead Connecticut further down the road to perdition through higher spending, and higher taxes. It makes you wonder why those at the editorial desk still wonder why The Courant is losing subscriptions at a record pace.  This cheifly explains why Connecticut needs an alternative publication, whether electronic or print, to combat the stale antics of the only game in town.

Grassroots Media Movement and Market

For the longest time, this author has preached high and low about the need for an alternative to The Hartford Courant.  The Connecticut Republican Party has always had monumental task  getting its talking points out in the open for fair hearing in a blue state dominated by a monopoly  of liberal media outlets well-positioned to directly and indirectly promote the Democrat agenda.  However, the use of social media such as Twitter and Facebook has allowed activists (on both sides) to only partially endgame these media giants. Social media allows everyone to be a reporter, columnist, or photographer.  But the subtle difference is that social media works best as a tool for activists;  it does little to impact the debate in the general public.  Social media addicts tend to already live in one camp or the other.  Unless you are seeking information on a topic or policy, you're less likely to want to read political tweets, or political Facebook posts. 

Newspapers and news sites are more effective in their ability to influence the general public on policy since most people are comfortable with the format, and generally do not recognize the clever skill of written manipulation used by professional media experts.  Thousands of newspapers are delivered daily to the front steps of Americans who digest what is provided as mere fact. While  the average person seems quite willing to be cynical of their Government, the general media gets a free pass; sadly deemed objective by the majority who do not consider themselves political.

It's clear that the cost involved in starting a large scale newspaper company is likely cost prohibitive.  It would require millions to secure a building, printing materials, reporters and staff, a distribution service, and all the equipment required to carry out the business.  This is likely why newspapers are going out of business, or consolidating, rather than popping up around the country.  It's more likely that a conglomeration would purchase The Courant before a rival newspaper would suddenly appear across town - particularly in a dow- turned economy like this one.

But its not all doom and gloom. 

Some of the options currently being explored are a good compromise between starting a media empire, and messaging each other on Facebook.  And as for a market, you can look at the desire for alternative national news programming with the success story of Fox News Channel overtaking CNN and other media outlets.  And before you're too quick to claim that the country is more conservative as a whole than liberal Connecticut (a point which I would concede), I would also argue that the Fox News Channel was not an instant success, but rather grew in popularity AFTER years of being offered as an alternative.  Thus it would be so with a Connecticut based, more conservative alternative.

A reasonable suggestion on the table is to build a fully operational electronic news organization.  This would still require significant capital to employ reporters, writers, network equipment, marketing and advertising, and so forth.  There are plenty of examples of webpage such as Realclearpolitics.com, NationalReview.com, and others which are either fully electronic, or semi-electronic/semi-periodical and have strong followings among readers.

Connecticut based political websites have been somewhat successful in the past, but have never reached their full potential because most have been created for a limited audience by a small group of volunteers, or an individual without a budget trying to be a voice in a vast sea of repetitive liberalism.  Taking this idea a step further through serious financing, organization, and determination could result in the goal that has long evaded Republicans and Conservatives - a place to be seen and heard, and an opportunity to be a valid alternative for those seeking different views on Connecticut issues.

I urge those at this new Hartford Times - Redux, to continue forward on their mission undeterred by those who fear loss of their centralized power base.  Get yourselves organized with trusted resources fully vetted for ideology and competence.  With unyielding commitment and determination, the sky is the limit.  And with an audience as hungry as Connecticut's for an alternative to what the Hartford rag is pushing out each day, you might find yourselves with more subscribers than you know what to do with.  Just keep it manageable.

Good luck!  Don't give up the dream!

The King credits the book Images of Hartford Vol 3 by Wilson H Faude for background information on The Hartford Times.

This original blog post can be viewed at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com/