Who "The King" is voting for, and my Predictions

U.S. Senate:

I'm voting for Rob Simmons, but it would be a miracle for him to win given that he re-entered the race way too late. Moreover, money-bags McMahon has been both visible and has spent a ton on commercials and mailers. In truth, Simmons didn’t need $16 million to beat McMahon - he just had to stay in the race and make his case. Simmons’ decision to bail out was a bad one. Now its too little, too late. Peter Schiff on the other hand, had ample time and resources to make his case, but instead he just campaigned in his home district, and in a few rich towns. He will get 15% maximum and that's all he really deserves. My advice to him is - next time, hire professional campaign staff, and keep your family out of it. Fact is that Peter's volunteers worked harder than he did.
Predicted Winner: Linda McMahon by a landslide.

Connecticut 2nd Congressional:

I'm voting for Daria Novak. She's worked like a madwoman, campaigning in every nook and cranny of the district. She never rested, stopped, or broke. Her campaign has been 90% positive. Most of campaigning came in the form of grassroots support and visibility at area events. But her campaign needs a major facelift to be successful in the general election, else she will be crushed by the Courtney machine. Doug Dubitsky is a nice guy but he lacks the team to bring him over the line. I think he will do ok but I expect Daria to win. Janet Peckinpaugh isn’t resonating with the public. Her best hope is that she slips in between Novak and Dubitsky. Peckinpaugh’s problem is that she’s Janet Peckinpaugh - a late entry, poor communicator, and comes across dimwitted in most public appearances. She is also a liberal media personality who has had controversial behavior at the television stations she’s worked for. Given the three choices, Republicans aught to pray that Peckinpaugh does not win the primary on August 10th, the results for the GOP in the general election would be embarrassing.
Predicted Winner: Daria Novak, but the race will be closer than expected.

Attorney General:

I’m voting for Martha Dean. She’s a consistent campaigner and solid on the issues. Republicans know her for her spunk and conservative principles. She’s sharp as a tack and knows the law better than anyone in the field past or present. Ross Garber has run a 100% negative campaign. He’s perceived as a clown in most circles and not worth five minutes of consideration.
Predicted Winner: Martha Dean by a landslide

Governor’s Race:

I’m voting for Michael Fedele. I can’t say that I’m excited about this race at all because we just don’t have folks with the “matter of fact” personality and delivery of Governor Jodi Rell. Rell was the perfect Connecticut candidate – no nonsense, and couldn’t be dragged down into scandal – no matter how hard the Hartford Courant tried to make her out to be John Rowland. On the downside, she didn’t battle Democrats and appeared to be a lot like a rubber stamp to their whims, and that is part of why we are in the trouble we are in. Initially, I was leaning toward Tom Foley. He seemed to have solid command for a period but didn’t come across well in the debates. At the end of the day, he’s just another millionaire from South West of Hartford. I met both candidates and talked with them – Foley was less energetic in person than Fedele. Fedele has more humble background and is far more appealing to voters. I think the Governor’s race is mess to start with, and it’s anyone’s game – a Foley win helps Democrats in a State that has been downsized to death by Corporations and CEOs (like Foley). In a good economy, Foley might have been a better choice. Oz Griebel wants tolls in Connecticut. Enough said – that’s the last thing Connecticut needs – which is why he’s down with Peter Schiff (US Sen Cand) at 15%. No resonation. No tolls, No Oz. At the end of the day, Foley kept a commanding lead; I am having a hard time seeing that totally disintegrate on August 10th.
Predicted Winner: Toss Up; Tom Foley by a hair

Lt. Governor’s Race:

I’m voting for Mark Boughton. I think a lot will have to do with Boughton’s last minute appeal and how well Mike Fedele does. I’m not a big fan of Lisa Wilson-Foley. And its not just because she uses a hyphenated name. Early she started endorsing and cross endorsing candidates which I found distasteful. Also, although her background is interesting, I just don’t see her qualified to run for Lt. Governor without more political experience and service. Boughton has been a successful mayor of Danbury, Connecticut, and has done a great job in a tough city. He would be a huge asset to either Foley or Fedele from a political point of view. Connecticut has shown that its not necessarily favorable to business candidates, so it will be interesting if Wilson-Foley’s feminine qualities resonate with Connecticut constituents at a higher octave then her business background. I met Mark Boughton and liked him.
Predicted Winner: Mark Boughton by a hair.

Thoughts on the Unopposed:

State Treasurer:

I’m glad that Jeff Wright got out of the Governor’s race and decided to run for State Treasurer. Jeff is capable and ready. God willing he will make a huge case against Denise Nappier and beat out one of the biggest spenders in Connecticut History.

Secretary of State

Jerry Farrell is running unopposed. He comes across as a bit odd, in person. But we'll see where it goes. I'll most likely vote for him unless he loses his mind at the podium.

Connecticut Congressional District 1:

If I lived in District 1, I’d vote for Anne Brickley .

I don’t have any opinion on candidates in Districts 4 and 5 at this time (I will update if I do). But they have their hands full with the incumbent’s seated on the Democrat side.

Vote Rob Simmons for U.S. Senate

I'm sure this essay won't make me popular with some of the tea party folks or the libertarian members of the Republican party, but the best I can do is explain why I am voting for Rob Simmons on August 10th.

As everyone who reads this column knows, I supported Rob Simmons before he suspended his campaign shortly after the circus of a Republican State Convention. For all the reasons, outlined in my previous essay, Rob Simmons, is simply the best qualified individual to represent Republicans and Connecticut constituents. Rob has the legislative background, military service, job creation expertise, and temperament to handle the job. No on the job training will be required. What some people deem as "Washington Insider" I believe is simply background and experience to navigate the complexities of the Halls of Congress and get the job done.

I've discussed a lot about how I'm no fan of Linda McMahon and the fact that she's not qualified for a role much bigger than state representative, let alone running any major agency. She is full of baggage and evidence shows that her bankruptcy and wrestling background is an automatic disqualifier in most minds. Linda is shark meat to the Democrat-Blumenthal machine which would chew her up and spit her out in record time. Linda is better off in the pro wrestling arena than in Washington. And we'd be all better off for her departure from the race to take the elements of stupidity and nonsense which would engulf any attempts at issue-based rationale discussion and debate.

As you also know, after Rob Simmons suspended his campaign, I opted to give Peter Schiff a good look. I felt that Peter was also a victim of some unethical antics by Chris Healy and his drones who worked tooth and nail to eliminate the possibility of Peter receiving a fair hearing by delegates. The baloney with not showing his video, cutting him off, and doing everything they could do to eliminate his voice was clear corruption that will be forever identified with the legacy of Connecticut Chairman Chris Healy. And face it, I was supporting Rob Simmons at the State Convention, so my view on the Schiff situation was obviously neutral. The fix was in and Linda was pushed to endorsement - chair leading and all from the Healy machine (well financed by the McMahon campaign).

After the convention, Peter Schiff never got going. He ran a very incompetent campaign - outright refusing to leave comfortable surroundings down in Southwest and Western Connecticut. His visits to the Connecticut Second Congressional Distinct were few and far between. Peter had weeks to get his act together and travel the state to get his message out, and had he done what any competent candidate would have done - he probably could have done well, and eliminated the need for Rob Simmons to get back in the race.

The feedback I heard at Town Committee meetings ranged from "Who is Peter Schiff" to "Why won't he come to the second district". Peter blew it. I'm convinced that Rob Simmons withdrawal from the race gave Peter the opportunity to come in and make his case to the anti-McMahon voters. So, instead of doing this, he did nothing. He put up a few videos on youtube and attended rallies close to home where the money is, and a few in Hartford County, but never traveled to the poorer districts of Connecticut to hear the pain of jobless residents in places where job creation is needed most. Moreover, he never even bothered to go to Norwich, a very large Tea Party town; he never took the opportunity to energize his own local base; these folks spent hours and days dedicated to his grassroots cause. In the end, Peter Schiff rewarded them with NOTHING.

Moreover, Peter Schiff owes an apology to all those folks who ran around collecting signatures and putting up signs (some bought at their own expense). His failure to act cost him. He will be lucky to get a third of the vote. Peter Schiff is the poster child for failure based on his own arrogance and ignorance. Either or both, it doesn't matter. As one voter said to me "if he can't even show up in our district during the campaign, how is he going to represent us once elected into office." Point taken. Point accepted.

I'm sure I sound a little bitter about Peter Schiff's lack of dedication to his own cause. But this happens in many campaigns. Campaigning is a full time gig, best left managed by experienced people who understand how to get the message out, and how to make even the most dismal of candidates appear engaged and accessible.

All this brings me back to Rob Simmons.

Simmons is getting flack for withdrawing and reappearing late in the game. But when you think about it, it's ridiculous to hear Linda McMahon complain about it when she has the capacity to spend $16 million dollars on TV, mailings and to buy Town Committees for their support. Be happy that Rob Simmons didn't go the dirty route and that we see our US Senate primary become like what you see in the the Malloy/Lamont or Fedele/Foley TV drama. None of this endless attack ad garbage is appealing to constituents. The result is we know even less about these four than we did before it became a mud slinging contest.

Rob Simmons isn't charismatic; He's capable. Its not a surprise to me that the Hartford Courant gave him their endorsement even with controversy of his early withdrawal. The endorsement was based on a holistic view of his past accomplishments and temperament. Obviously, Connecticut is best represented by Simmons' character, independence, experience and dedication. Rob Simmons cares about his constituents. Few people question his motives and ability to do the right thing even if its unpopular. There are a few cries of RINO, but that term is just an empty name-calling tactic used by opponents during campaigns to try to elevate their candidate to a higher position than they are capable of attaining on their own merit. Yes, Rob isn't right on everything, but who cares, he's electable, and he's right where it counts.

On August 10th, let's give Rob Simmons the nod. He's the best opportunity for an issue based debate without the circus or phony rhetoric. And based on every poll, he's the GOPs only realistic options for defeating Richard Blumenthal in November, and keeping Obama's government expansion in check.

Happy Father's Day!

Quick note to all you dads out there who do so much for your families, and in particular - your children - Happy Father's Day!

Most dads realize that the jobs they do don't get the high profile credit in the same way that mom gets for all the great things that she does - like cook great meals, and beautify the house, etc. Dads do the grunt physical work like mow lawns, move stone, build decks, clean the cat boxes, chop wood, and all the other labor jobs. And to be fair - dads also cook, clean, take out garbage, take kids to school (and pick them up), and heck - this dad even makes the kid's lunches every day!

Then there is the stuff that I do get credit for - playing games outside, or in the pool, fixing broken toys, reading bedtime stories, putting band-aids on skimmed knees, and giving hugs. So its not so bad when you really think about it.

Of course the most interesting thing about Father's Day is thinking about all the things my dad has done for me that I took for granted as just "what dads do" - which is simply so many great things that I couldn't really begin to list here in this essay. Probably, the biggest thing my dad did for me was play the role of dad - by working to ensure we all had a house over our heads, and three square meals a day. And making sure I went to school, church and understood basic values including the discipline required of being successful in a unforgiving, self-interested world.

So, I'm one of the lucky dads and lucky sons - and because I'm making it important to me - I'll get to spend the day with my dad, and my children and family, including my brother and his family! It doesn't get any better than that!

So today we will do a little grilling, spend some time by the pool, and enjoy watching our kids have fun.

Why REAL Conservatives love Soccer

When I read Glenn Beck's recent ridiculous tirade against soccer where he proclaimed, " ... we don't like the World Cup, we don't like Soccer...." I admit I was astonished by Beck's arrogant decision to misrepresent all of us, conservatives, with his narrow-minded proclamation. Wow. Glenn Beck has certainly struck a cord, but from comments I'm seeing around the web - clearly, the wrong one.

There are a lot of conservatives that seem to be wrapped up in hero-worship of Glenn Beck for his opinions on politics. I guess I've never fallen into that category so I haven't really lost much. But his soccer comments this week put a good size chink in his so-called in penetrable armor. What Mr. Beck may not realize is that most of American parents have children in soccer programs across the country. Hey Beck, ever heard of the term Soccer mom? or Soccer Dad? The fact is that most of America loves soccer, and enjoys cheering their sons and daughters in a game that is played in the rain, in the snow, in 90 degree weather, and in the frigid cold.

This whole inflammatory discussion actually came to me via a tweet from National Review. Jonah Goldberg via National Review's The Corner posted a soccer commentary discussion, which wasn't particularly favorable to soccer or the World Cup. But, in fairness his main reason for posting appears to oppose The Nation's article here which falsely makes the complaint that racism and nativism is the reason that the right-wing doesn't like the World Cup or soccer. At least Jon Miller goes on to defend soccer - although he does take a swipe at MLS.

Our kids (and I mean our true blue American kids) learn more from soccer than they do any other sport played in a group setting on a field. And unlike Little League where kids check out after the 6th inning after standing alone out in the middle of left field, soccer demands consistent athletic ability, stamina and team coordination. You sprint for the larger part of 90 plus minutes trying to outrun and out-maneuver your opponents. And you score not by hitting a ball over the fence with a bat and jogging around a set of bases, but from a fast moving position with nothing more than your own body as the tool of execution while eleven other players try to stop you. And rules - well there are many, and subjectivity of the referees calls are a lot like you see in the real world - imperfect and frequent.

In the advance soccer leagues, if you are even able to make the team, not everyone gets a trophy like they do in most American Sports. From a fitness standpoint, there are no long huddles, television timeout or breaks unless you have to remove an injured player from the field - and the referee then adds time on to the half to make sure that the game isn't shortened for intentional wasting of time. Stamina and fitness matter in soccer. There is no room for overweight kids to stand around and be an observer.

Complaints about soccer not being a high scoring game are equally short-sighted. Perhaps the problem lies with the lack of understanding that in a skilled strategic game that solid defensive play can be more rewarding than a contest of endless high scoring numbers through runs or touchdowns. Soccer operates on a point system, and an elimination system. Goal differential and goals not scored you actually count for something.

Beck sadly makes the mistake of making fun of the European version of soccer, and this too is a foolish position. European soccer fans - chat, yell, sing and engage themselves through out the game - as a near interactive collective during the game. Baseball fans sit silently gnawing on their hot dogs until something happens or they get caught up in a wave. Do you hear anything other than, "Defense, Defense" chant at an American Football football game? And never mind the dozens of opportunities given to get another snack from the fridge. Oh man, thank God for commercials, right?

At the Euro Professional League Level, you don't get situations like you do in Major League Baseball, where teams not headed into playoffs just go through the motions in August and September. In Soccer, you could face relegation, and in that - lose your salary and perhaps your job. Games count through the end. And your play impacts the fate of other teams, so no one limps through knowing careers are on the line through the last game of the season. In American Football, the season is just about over after six weeks, and you know your team can't be dropped from the league. But can you image the increase in the level of intensity if demotion were a real possibility in American Sports? Ha. American fans would get their money's worth.

So Beck, let's not antagonize our Middle American base. Let's not have you speak for us and scare away millions of soccer moms and dads from conservative candidates because you insist conservatives don't like soccer. In fact Beck why don't you just stick to politics, and shut it. Maybe over the next month you might tune into the World Cup and see what competition is really about.

Here are 10 basic reasons why Conservatives should be soccer fans:

1. Not everyone gets a trophy. Only those who win get trophies. The runner ups get a handshake,if they're lucky.

2. Soccer is sport where fitness and talent actually matter. This even applies to officials who are grosely obese in MLB - if you haven't noticed.

3. Passion is part of the game, on and off the field for players and fans alike. It doesn't die when you leave the venue. You carry it with you everywhere. It's like religion.

4. It's ok to hate your rivals, and its ok for your rivals to hate you. It's part of the game, and no one need make excuses for making opposing fans feel bad. American sports used to be more that way - this goes to fandom and passion.

5. In Soccer, teamwork is essential to winning. If one of eleven men doesn't do their job for 90 minutes, you'll probably lose

6. Fair weather fans aren't part of the equation; soccer is played in heat, cold, snow and rain. Pansies need not apply. There are no tarps, or rain delays, or postponements (after management feels they milked the fans for a few bucks while they wait for a planned decision)

7. No commericals disrupting every stinking play, inning, possession, or worse - creating an actual break in the game like you see in basketball. You only get them a half-time.

8. If you do drugs, you're done. There is no union group of players schemeing with their attorneys to find ways to cheat by making up lists of drugs that you can and can't be tested for. Or finding ways to get out of drug testing in the name of "privacy", or defending people like Barry Bonds, who care little for "fair play" and more about getting juiced so they can break records.

9. Full body commitment. Soccer players give 100%. They don't take one hops, or come out of the game because they have a hangnail, or don't "feel just right." They play the game like true athletes do - and don't spend all their time trying to take it easy to extend their million dollar contracts to milk the system over the next 10 years. Oh, and many of them return to regular jobs after they play, not try to sell your kids Nike shoes or sugar bars.

10. Merit counts in Soccer. Lack of effort means your team gets relegated, or eliminated. There is no mandate forced by a liberal union to keep the money flowing in for poor results.