The King's Marquee

Election Day is finally here! Let's get out there an seal the deal for Trump and the American people! And don't forget to support the CTGOP under-ticket!

Sunday, December 16, 2012

Pray for Newtown

There will be plenty of time for talk of politics and policy positions later.  For now let us grieve peacefully with the families and friends of the 20 Children and 6 Adults who were taken from us on Friday morning.  Parents: Please spend special time with your children; hold them tight, and let them know they are loved.  Those who don't have children: Please find a way to become productively engaged in your local community through support of a group or initiative to help ease the pain and suffering of those in need.

Please pray for the repose of the souls of these beautiful children, and the heroic teachers who are with God in Heaven on this somber, reflective day. And pray for their families who are struggling with grief and pain in the aftermath of such a heart-wrenching tragedy.



Saturday, December 8, 2012

I Know You Missed Me...

It's good to take a break from things once in a while.  Everyone needs a chance to recharge their batteries, reexamine things, and determine what's next.

I'll be completely honest with you - after the complete shellacking the Republican Party took on Election Night, I wasn't much in the mood to discuss politics, let alone write about the results of the election; and I certainly didn't want to get into a squabble about the direction of the Connecticut Republican Party which seems to predominate the majority of Facebook Pages these days.  My prediction piece from earlier this year turned out mostly accurate with two major exceptions - Mitt Romney didn't win, and neither did Andrew Roraback.

With regard to Romney's loss, I'm still very surprised at the outcome.  It's hard to believe that America rewarded a failed politician who maintained a full-term of near double-digit unemployment, a stagnant economy, ran a inept foreign policy, and who had no plan on how to get us up and running again.  My guess is that the reason Obama won was that things are so bad that people were afraid to give up what they were clinging to in order to survive: aid, support, unemployment checks, and what-have-you. (The perception being that Mitt Romney would have taken all the safety nets away).  In short, for the first time that I can remember, we've become a nation that fears the future which is hardly the mindset for creative thinking, or finding solutions to our deepest problems.  Thirty days post-election, people around me are still in the mindset that if we just close our eyes - eventually our troubles will just go away.

As for the Republican National Committee, well - they certainly have their work cut out for them to regain respectability - at least in this writer's eyes.  Mitt Romney wasn't a terrible candidate, per se.  But the strategy to focus solely on key swing states was a big mistake in my humble opinion, and it had devastating consequences for our election chances beyond just the Presidential Race.  Abandoning loyal Republicans in states like Connecticut sent the wrong message to millions of voters; and in doing so severely damaged the Republican Party's brand nationally.  Mitt Romney was quick to come to Fairfield County and pick up millions in donations, but as a reward for our generosity -  he told our State Chairman to go purchase his own Romney signs and bumper stickers, if they wanted any Romney visibility around the state.  They didn't even bother to fake a presence here; not even so much as a closet space to give the pretend to give the impression that we mattered one iota.  I propose that anyone receiving a GOP donation card aught to scribble the words:  "F*CK YOU! CAMPAIGN HERE NEXT TIME ASSHOLES!" and mail it back to RNC, postage due.

A National Party that abandons it's constituents is not worthy of support.  Sorry. I don't want to hear any excuses that outline strategy and tactics, or hedging bets; you can tell all the overpaid, career campaign hacks that results count more than political theories - and so far our so-called experts have done us in, brilliantly.  You know, it wouldn't have taken that much to make a reasonable effort; and it could have helped the under ticket to some extent.  If Republican Nutmeggers feel abandoned, well - they should.

I don't have to tell you that in Connecticut our issues run much deeper. We have double the trouble. Here we have a crazy Governor, and a Legislature that spends far more than it collects, and has made the private sector the enemy of the State.  And Republicans aren't even on the radar except for the few media-whores who show up up on John Rowland's show to have a knee-slapping good time preaching to the small choir that commutes home from our dwindling Capitol.  Lately, the best part of that show is traffic and weather, for the rest is about as boring and uncreative as ever.

As far as the Connecticut GOP is concerned, things pretty much turned out as expected.  Linda McMahon torpedoed the ticket from top to bottom; her selfish last minute tactic to garnish her appeal by hooking her train to Barack Obama did wonders for poor Andrew Roraback in Connecticut's 5th District.  You'd have to be ignorant not to see how McMahon's strategy polarized the CTGOP in the final weeks of the campaign, leaving many to stay home or skip the Senate line all-together.  Andrew Roraback deserved better, but the rest of the GOP-field pretty much got what it deserved.  Many of our campaigns were manned by novice campaign staff and volunteers.  Serious campaigns require serious experience at the helm; and the State GOP did a huge disservice to many of our first time Congressional Candidates who put their lives on hold to try and make a difference by ignoring their requests for help and direction.

One high ranking CTGOP Official told me: "Every minute I spend in the First, Second or Third District, is a waste of my valuable time."  Boy, that aught to make our future candidate recruitment pool feel confident.

Notwithstanding, McMahon's army of well-paid, experience, career-favor collectors ran both her prospects and ours into the ground. This started with buying convention delegates and RTCs which is old hat by now.  Linda McMahon was and always will be a bad candidate - and GOP insiders decided long-ago that it was more important to cash-in and take from her treasure trove then it was to win the U.S. Senate Seat.  What a lost opportunity.  What a shame!

The saddest part of the whole thing is that there are still CTGOP State Central Members out there defending the choice.  Really?  You have to be kidding, us?  It's hard to look at some of these people with a straight face when they spew such nonsense. It's people like this who make me believe that the disease within our CTGOP Party leadership is both terminal and incurable.  And although there are a few bright spots where new seats may have been captured, they don't offset those that were lost.

So the big argument that's engulfed the CTGOP is whether or not we are too conservative, too liberal, or too idiotic (I happen to think its the third option). I've looked at all the arguments on both sides of the equation and actually took the time to compare it against the election results map.  On one side you have Peter Wolfgang claiming that all the right-wing candidates the FIC endorsed won handily - that's of course, if you discount people like Len Suzio or Bill Wadsworth, and other conservatives who lost.  On the other side of the equation you have the left of center crowd crowing that moderate Republicans picked up seats because of the popularity of social liberalism.  But this argument too is nonsense; where Democrats were involved in 3-way races, or faced a challenger from the independent line more closely aligned with their ideology, they lost. The results also show that this contrived argument that moderate positions are more appealing to Connecticut residents is equally as fallible as those made by my friends on the right.

Do you want to know what wins elections?

It's getting off your ass every-day, taking nothing for granted and knocking on doors, talking to voters, attending important events, distributing signs and palm cards and having a support team in place to help you get your message out.  There is no magic bullet wrapped in some ideological position which makes one more or less attractive to voters (that's just posturing and power-playing by certain political cliques and interest groups vying for control).  It's all about elbow-grease.  If you took your constituents for granted and campaigned half-assed, then you got the result you deserved.  If you went out everyday and worked like it mattered then you likely won.  I admit that demographics play a role in certain locations - I understand that.  And Republicans aren't likely to take Hartford anytime soon, but lighting does strike - if you're willing to put in the time and make it happen.

There's a lot on the horizon.  There is a massive effort underway to determine who the next leader of the CTGOP will be. Our current State Chairman is finally showing a bit of life after a disastrous election, and is now out campaigning for his survivability (which I'm not so convinced he deserves).  So we have our internal wars, listening tours, and feedback sessions - which are largely pointless bitch and gripe sessions - which are least productive in helping us rebuild our Party.  Then you have your early jockeying for the next big thing - the upcoming Governor's Race which at this point seems like it will be made up of the usual suspects which Democrats eager to run against based on CTGOP candidate appeal and perceived electability.

Still our problems persist.  And in the end we'll have to decide whether competency and electability will trump pay-offs and the favor-patronage system.  Honestly, I'm not that hopeful.  But there's always a glimmer of hope that the public will become fed-up enough of the status quo and replace the entrenched, self-serving saboteurs among us with those who will put constituents and the public interest first.



This original blog entry can be found at

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date.  All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment.  This article does not imply endorsement of any candidate, nor has it been solicited for publication by any political candidate, party, campaign, or PAC.

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

2012 CTGOP Election Summary

We're going to take a few days to analyze the campaign results before publishing our thoughts on Campaign 2012.  Obviously, there's a lot of work to be done to repair our brand.  It's The King's view that it's going to take some new faces and a new skill-set to bring about the degree of change required to make the Connecticut Republican Party mildly competitive once again.

From what we are hearing, the search to sacrifice a a few scapegoats to pay for the crimes of the many is in full swing.  The truth is that the entire CTGOP apparatus is culpable for where we are today - which is nowhere, sucking wind, and peering out from a long dark tunnel.



Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Election Day! (Thank God!)

Hooray! Election Day is finally here!

For my own part, The King is glad that after two years of making hundreds of phone calls, conducting literature drops, and helping with generally campaigning across multiple districts that we will finally see, race-by-race, either the pay-off for hard work, or punishment for a comedy of errors.

I think we've said all we've needed to say about our political races in Connecticut.  We all know this is a pretty drab place to live if you're a loyal, red-blooded Republican.  But to underscore the point, I would urge readers to go out and vote for Republicans in all districts and races who you believe have conducted themselves with honor and dignity during this cycle.   

The King also urges voters to "Leave the Line Blank" in the Connecticut Senate Race.  Linda McMahon has lost The King's vote, and the vote of so many of the Party faithful for her betrayal of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan by supporting Barack Obama in her campaign commercials and literature.  Moreover, she has intentionally hurt several federal and local candidates by pushing the Independent line which has been detrimental for both federal and state Republicans.  Let's pray this is the last campaign that we will ever have to see Linda McMahon a part of in The Nutmeg State. 

Again, please don't sit out the election - go to the polls and vote for state and federal Republican candidates, but don't vote for Chris Murphy (obviously), and PLEASE go out of your way to NOT VOTE FOR Linda McMahon.  Leave the Line Blank.  Make this a teachable moment for Linda McMahon, and our spineless CTGOP Chairman Jerry Labriola.

And if old friend - Andrew Roraback takes the win tonight (as expected), everyone should recognize that he and his staff, and his army of tireless volunteers won the campaign the hard way - with hard work, elbow grease, and dedication.  Yes, there was a last minute infusion of cash from a strange source in New York, but the truth is that Andrew and his team have been changing hearts and minds since he won the State Convention earlier this year.  And we should all be grateful that Andrew stayed above the noise, ran a positive campaign, and that he didn't allow State Party incompetence damages his campaign.   Although a little presumptuous at this point on Election Day, let me offer congratulations to Andrew Roraback and his team for a job well done!

Above all else, this is the race that counts!
Now that we've got that off our chest, let's look at the race which is the single most important  contest this evening.

Here is what to watch regarding the Romney-Obama Race:

Virginia:  This is the first state to watch with 13 electoral votes up for grabs here.  This state will be an early indicator of what we might expect during the night.  If Mitt loses Virginia it doesn't mean it's game over, but there would need to be some serious surprises elsewhere to make up ground.

North Carolina:  This state used to be a lock for Republicans, but Obama managed to win it in 2008.  Sadly, the demographic changes have made this state more of a swing state which will remain in play for decades to come.  North Carolina boasts 15 electoral votes.  As of the last poll sample taken this week, Romney leads here.  If Mitt loses here, it will indicate that polling samples are nearly useless.

Florida:  The Gator State is a critical key piece of the puzzle with 29 delegates - the largest number of swing state delegates on the electoral map.  Romney has won seven polls, Obama has won four, and there was one tie.  This state leans Romney.

New Hampshire:  New England's last and only remaining red state (turned blue in 2008) will be interesting to watch, not because of its four electoral votes, but because the Presidential contest is in a dead heat.  If Mitt Romney wins in New Hampshire, it could mean a big night for the Romney camp.  Obama is expected to win New Hampshire given the demographic changes from the influx of MassHoles to the Granite State which has watered down Republicanism over the past 12 years.

Ohio: If you haven't noticed, the entire political universe has been rotating around Ohio over the last three weeks.  With 18 electoral votes in a state dubbed Main Street America,  pollsters claim that this state is a must win for candidates - unless neighboring Wisconsin (10 electoral votes) partially counter-balances an outcome in Ohio.    

Iowa: This state has 6 electoral votes.  Again, this state is not a deal breaker for either candidate, but certainly will help frame the night in terms of trending.

Nevada: This state is considered a swing state by the media, but The King sees this state as under control by Democrats - given the combination of the Latino community, the culinary community, and the gambling lobby.  The majority of these groups are reported to have already voted during the early voting process, so I'm not expecting a win for Mitt here, but a close voting percentage will be interesting for discussions on trending.

Pennsylvania: This state could be an interesting battleground state with 20 electoral votes - which I've always assumed would go to Obama since I don't believe Mitt Romney has won a single poll based on all results posted a  What makes this state "in-play" is that the race has moved within the margin of error for the last few weeks.  A Mitt Romney win here would be an incredible upset, and would likely signal a landslide win for Romney-Ryan.

The King's Prediction:  Romney by a larger than expected margin.  The national media will be eating humble pie for months to come while our local media will likely gloat.

Realistically, you have to expect plenty of shenanigans along the way  - so be prepared to sit long in your seats, it could be a long night!



This original blog entry can be found at

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment. This article does not imply endorsement of the candidate mentioned above, nor has this article been solicited for publication by any political candidate, campaign, or PAC.

Monday, November 5, 2012

Linda McMahon's Door Hangers Spark Anger

Most political junkies have already seen the door hanger (to the left) being distributed all over Connecticut by McMahon's  ground forces. As you can see Linda McMahon is continuing to push her selfish agenda to get herself and Barack Obama elected.  The Romney Camp can't be happy with this traitorous act - no matter how they try to package it.

See this article from the Hartford Courant for details.  

It's too bad our CTGOP Chairman Jerry Labriola has become an all-to-willing lap-dog for the McMahon Campaign.  Does Chairman Labriola actually think that Linda McMahon's support for Barack Obama will help the ground game for Republicans running in Congressional Races since she's promoting the Independent line?  I can't see how that will help candidates like John Decker in CT-01?  Maybe he aught to get out of the plastic bubble he's created for himself and take in some oxygen.  

Two weeks ago, when asked about the McMahon-Obama commercial Labriola told the Press, "no comment".  Yesterday he followed the carefully prepared script given to him by the McMahon Campaign, which will allow him to get back in Linda's good graces (for the next 24 hours) and drink warm beer at her pity party on Tuesday night. 

Poor Labriola - he's really lost the plot - which of course is supposed to be getting ALL REPUBLICANS elected regardless of positioning on the ballot - not cutting everyone off at the knees for an unlikable Senate Candidate who's 9-points down, and killing the rest of the GOP field.  Labriola has become an utter disgrace!  Hey Jerry - Linda McMahon left the Party long ago, the band can stop playing now.

As a friend of mine who's a prominent national Republican pollster told me yesterday over the phone, "You people really have your problems in Connecticut.  Your Chairman and your Candidate are both a joke."

He has no idea.



This original blog entry can be found at

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment. This article does not imply endorsement of the candidate mentioned above, nor has this article been solicited for publication by any political candidate, campaign, or PAC.

Friday, November 2, 2012

Catapulting Andrew Roraback to Victory

There are not many bright spots for the beleaguered Connecticut Republican Party this election cycle, but alas - there is at least one race where Republicans will likely make a gain.  The 5th Congressional District - perhaps where the last visible bastion of Connecticut Yankee Republicanism can be found - is on track to elect State Senator Andrew Roraback to the U.S. Congress on Tuesday.  And all things being equal, this will be a great outcome for what has been a rough year for the State GOP.

While Andrew isn't exactly the choice of the social conservative wing of the CTGOP, he is a decent family man with a strong record of representing his constituents with honor and decency.  A case in point is that despite his own personal convictions on the issue, he switched positions to cast a vote against Repeal of the Death Penalty which won him points with those of us sympathetic to the Petit Family, and all victims of homicide crime. Even if his vote was somewhat political, as claimed by his rival Lisa Wilson-Foley, he cast the right vote for the right reasons, and on behalf of is entire constituency. (Note that his opponent Elizabeth Esty, who has a long record of being soft on crime, voted to coddle murderers and criminals and relieve them from facing absolute justice).  With Andrew, you can say that it's one thing to say he stands for certain principles, but its quite another to be able to deep dive into his extensive record and see that he's never wavered during his multi-year term.

From a fiscal standpoint, Roraback has been responsible with taxpayers money during his twelve year tenure, and being raised on wishy-washy Episcopalianism, one would expect him to continue to strike a balance between social responsibility and fiscal restraint.  This is certainly a stark contrast to his opponent Elizabeth Esty who is publicly on record saying that she is willing to send the elderly and those on hardship who can't afford tax increases packing beyond the Cheshire Town Line.  It's hard to find a candidate with less compassion for people than Elizabeth Esty.  And if you've ever had a chance to talk with her in person, like I have, you know that she comes across too direct, and very mean. 

Queen Elizabeth Esty: "All of you old fools can move out of 
Cheshire, and Connecticut if you can't afford it!"
It's sort of remarkable if you think about it.  Normally, Republicans get a bad rap for being so tight with the penny that Democrats almost always twist our candidates' records so to play the class warfare card to their advantage during every race, but with Esty's voting record of cutting the elderly off at the knees at every turn during her two year stint in Hartford, she's removed any credibility she has on social welfare.  Democrats are probably furious about not having a stronger candidate like Chris Donovan on the ballot, but scandals can seem to egulf both parties from time to time.

The Roraback folks are looking for some help in the final days of the campaign to ensure victory.  If you haven't already volunteered your time, this is a great opportunity to become part of the winning team.  The Campaign is in need of people to make calls from their phone bank, go door-to-door to conduct literature drops and help get out the vote, and work the polls on Election Day.   If you'd like to help, please call the Roraback Campaign at 860-626-7244.  And tell them The King sent you. Let's catapult Andrew to victory.

Final Note

Lastly, with a concerted effort with all hands on deck, Andrew should sail comfortably to a solid win on Tuesday. However, there is one real note of concern that's generating plenty of angst amongst Roraback Campaign staffers.  Having watched the Republican base backlash from Linda McMahon's tie-in political ad supporting Barack Obama, there is another ad being broadcast on television by American Unity Pac that is causing alarm.

Dissatisfied with trying to ruin just Mitt Romney's chances in
Connecticut, Linda McMahon is setting her sights on
killing Andrew Roraback's campaign

There is real reason for concern.  At one point, Linda McMahon boasted more than a 10-point lead over Chris Murphy in CT-5.  After her pro-Obama commercial aired, polls showed her trailing by 6-points in the District.  The last thing Andrew Roraback needs is for Linda McMahon to anchor herself to his surge and sink his ship before he crosses the finish line.  The concern is so real that one Roraback person told The King, "Every time that commercial airs, Andrew runs to the bathroom and vomits ... if we lose this thing [race] by a few points, it will attributed to this stupid commercial ... she'll climb over, on-top of everyone to get her face out there.  And everyone is suffering because of it."

We pray that this doesn't turn out to be the case.  Andrew should look in his rear view mirror like Jeff Goldblum did in Jurassic Park and run like hell to avoid Linda "T-Rex" McMahon from taking a bite out of his forward momentum.

Good Luck, Andrew.  And remember, "Faster, Faster!"



This original blog entry can be found at

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment. This article does not imply endorsement of the candidate mentioned above, nor has this article been solicited for publication by any political candidate, campaign, or PAC.

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Unable to Justify Support, Visconti and Others Bail on Linda McMahon

Even The King and the members of his Court must recognize moral courage and conviction when we see it.  Below you'll  find a scathing email which we were requested to publish on October 29th.  Admittedly, we stalled on the request because we wanted to make certain that the author, Joe Visconti, was serious about his decision.  As readers know, The King's View hasn't directly called for Connecticut Republicans to withdraw support for Linda McMahon.  But that doesn't mean that not supporting her on Election Day isn't the right thing to do given how she and her campaign have conducted themselves during this season.

Here is the email in it's entirety:

Linda McMahon Lost My Vote- I'm Joe Visconti and I Approved This Message.

Just this morning I texted Justin Clark and asked him if the Obama Linda ads were still being aired, Justin texted back to me that they were down. Well I was just watching Channel 3 Eyewitness News with Denise and Dennis and almost fell off the damn couch as an “I’m voting for Barack Obama and Linda McMahon” ad came on.

Last Monday I went on the John Rowland show and asked Linda to take the ads down or I would not vote for her. Last Tuesday I went on Fox 61 with Laurie Perez (4, 10 & 11pm News) while keeping it cool to shield Linda and explained that folks cannot vote for Linda if the ads continue and again I asked for the ads to be taken down. Well today I’m not asking anymore, I’m telling Linda, you lost my vote as a Republican.

I will not vote for Linda McMahon and I will “ENCOURAGE” every Republican I know not to vote for her. Leave the line empty or write in the name “Benedict Arnold” it doesn’t matter to me, but do not vote for Linda McMahon or Chris Murphy (For those who think I would ever suggest voting for him).

Why not vote for Linda many will ask? For many reasons and the first one is our CTGOP Headquarters has fielded countless calls of outrage from Party Loyalists because of these ads and the damage is presently irreparable for which I concur.

Our Chairman is under siege for not calling out Linda while many of his foes stoke the fire of revenge fired by envy of his success for which I feel very sad about. Jerry and his staff have been put in a terrible position and I encourage him to demand the ads be pulled for the sake of the Party Faithful who are sick to their stomachs as I write this.

Also to the State Central Members who Justin Clark promised the ads would be pulled down by last Thursday I feel your pain as you have to continue receiving berating calls from those you represent.
Lastly I spent considerable personal time (as a volunteer) with other volunteers I recruited at the Bristol Victory Headquarters calling every Republican Town Committee Chair in the State (169 total) asking for financial support in the name of Chairman Jerry Labriola so that we (the CTGOP) could purchase thousands of Romney/Ryan lawn signs which were in high demand after the debates.
The response from the RTC Chairs was overwhelming and we raised thousands upon thousands of dollars in that effort. And for what, so that Connecticut Republican voters can be proud to display the Romney/Ryan signs on their lawns just to get laughed at by their registered Unaffiliated and Democrat neighbors who saw Linda join forces with Obama?

Never mind the Linda sellout of DOMA or during her ridiculous debates stating that she would not help her Party (The GOP supposedly) to overturn any Women’s Issues (referring to Roe) but now this financial support for an Obama Get out the Vote Effort?

To sit by and watch as Linda systematically and deliberately sells out the CTGOP for the hopes of gaining African American Votes would be unconscionable.

Does anyone with half a damn brain actually believe Connecticut African Americans by any margin will vote Independent and not vote the Democrat line in Connecticut?

Guess what Linda et al, this next week will be a teachable moment for you, and do you know why? Because your actions have caused the Party Loyalists to think, wait a minute, Mitt Romney is so good and can work across Party lines to get things done when he is President that we don’t need to win a US Senate seat, especially at the price of selling out our Party and what we stand for. And you know what? Many are starting to think America may just be better off and just might heal the divisive damage done by Obama if Democrats retain control of the US Senate. That’s right. This idea is now on all of the minds and tongues of the Party Faithful.

In the end Linda McMahon forgot who brought her to the dance and she also forgot that 30,000 Christopher Shays Primary Voters and I will never forget her betrayals come Election Day.

Vote for Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and the entire Republican Under ticket except Linda McMahon.

Joe Visconti

The fact is that we're less than a week out from Election Day and most people have already decided how they intend to vote.  Those few who haven't yet decided will likely follow their inclinations based on what they've seen and heard via TV ads, debates, or what's being said around the water cooler.  Since neither Chris Murphy or Linda McMahon distinguished themselves on the issues, or gave the public any valid or overriding reason to disqualify support for their opponent, it's more than likely that Connecticut political demographics won't be upset, and Chris Murphy will wind up the victor.

It's The King's view that where Linda lost the election was not through her corrupt purchase of party delegates, lying about her mortgage/personal history, her phony war against the media to attempt to generate sympathy from independents, or even her betrayal of Mitt Romney in her most recent ad, but she killed her electability because of the totality of her candidacy, and the shallowness of her person - simply unfit for the job.  Her performance in the debates gave Connecticut residents all they needed to know about her lack of knowledge and comprehension of the issues - if you can't make basic ideological arguments by drawing from details after nearly four years of studying and campaigning, then you're just not electable.  How hard would it have been to do the work, and at least prepare for a series of debates and make coherent arguments in a thoughtful and convincing way?  Her performance reeked of laziness which we found more frustrating than anything else. 

And after all her time as CEO of WWE, the only mildly creative spark came last week in the form of an ad depicting multiple, black and white Chris Murphys surrounding a full color version of herself.  But beyond the short-lived giggle even that ad falls short of content. In truth, it's going to take only one Chris Murphy to defeat her on Tuesday. 

Funny, but pointless.

Through social media outlets, Linda's surrogates are doing everything they can to deflect her decision to move not to the middle, but to the left.  Most Republicans realize that Linda must secure the registered 420,000 GOP voters, and a large portion of the 950,000 registered unaffilated voters to win, so the McMahon campaign's intentional decision to abandon its base to reach out to Democrats is a fool's errand.  Democrats aren't going to trade all of something for half of who knows what in Linda McMahon.  Of course, her last minute get out the vote effort for Barack Obama is as amusing as it is offensive.  And now Republicans watching her change positions are embittered, and asking exactly what kind of Republican would Linda be - even if she were elected.  The simple answer is not much of one, I'm afraid.

Perhaps fate will see Linda McMahon losing by a small margin which will be attributed to losing a portion of her base.  Notwithstanding, future Connecticut Republican Candidates should see this whole episode as a Cautionary Tale, or a Teachable Moment, if you will - being independent-minded, selling out your Party, and abandoning basic Republican principles earns you nothing but scorn and defeat.  Despite what they may say, voters elect only confident candidates to go to Washington and unapologetically fight for a set of carefully-articulated and professed principles, not hem and haw, or appear lost in the fog of some vague notion of mediocre compromise, and ambiguity.  

At the end of the day, we can only hope and pray that Linda McMahon's negatives don't drown the entire Republican ticket ... for the rest of our CTGOP Candidates, particularly Andrew Roraback and Steve Obsitnik who after running solid campaigns on the issues - deserve so much better than that.  



This original blog entry can be found at

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment. This article does not imply endorsement of the candidate mentioned above, nor has this article been solicited for publication by any political candidate, campaign, or PAC.

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

CTGOP Counsel Justin Clark Should Resign

As you'll recall, CTGOP Counsel Justin Clark addressed Republican State Central Members in Madison on last Tuesday on behalf of the Linda McMahon Campaign.

During his twenty five minute appearance he committed to two things:

1)  That the Linda McMahon ad known as "Independent" which indirectly endorses Barack Obama and Linda McMahon (and has the Republican base up in arms) would be pulled from the airwaves on Thursday. 


2)  State Central Members would receive written confirmation from the Romney Campaign that Mitt Romney is in support/or gave their blessing of the airing of the political commercial.

Since both the ad continues to run on television non-stop, and no one on State Central has received any written communication from the State Party or the Romney Campaign or from anyone else indicating that the Romney camp supports the Obama-McMahon Ad then we can only draw the conclusion that Justin Clark was sent to try and placate State Central members who are being left holding the bag with angry constituents.

Since such clear and intentional betrayal cannot go ignored, we call on Justin Clark to resign from his post as CTGOP Counsel.  We also call on CTGOP Officers and State Central Members to support his removal.

We remind everyone that the McMahon Ad has had a detrimental effect on both the Romney Campaign in Connecticut, and Congressional Campaigns all across the State.  It is a disgrace that both the ad continues to run, and no one from the Connecticut Republican Party has had the moral courage to challenge the McMahon Campaign in public, and demand removal of the Commercial.  Democrats are laughing at our CTGOP leaders lack of courage and fortitude, and the Connecticut Republican base feels entirely abandoned. 



Monday, October 29, 2012

Hartford Crime Fighter Rico Dence

Still think crime isn't rampant in Hartford? 

Then watch this video featuring Hartford Assembly District 4 GOP Candidate Rico Dence who discusses his most recent experience in Hartford's South End on Franklin Avenue.  Seems Rico was riding his bicycle home from a Breast Cancer Awareness event around 9pm on Thursday when he witnessed a man assaulting a woman; he stopped to help the lady, and the assailant and his friend's attacked him - giving him a shiner for his trouble. If that wasn't bad enough, the mugger's accomplice smashed his cell phone and then made off with Rico's bicycle.


And just to think - Hartford used to be called New England's Rising Star.  Now, you can't even get a slice of pizza in the Italian section without getting punched and robbed.  And city leaders wonder why suburbanites flee for their lives when the workday clock strikes five.

Thumbs up to Rico Dence for having the courage to stick up for the young woman.  We hope Hartford residents take a good look at this upstart Republican who cares deeply for the residents of Assembly District 4 (which includes all of Downtown Hartford), and puts other's safety ahead of his own.



This original blog entry can be found at

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment. This article does not imply endorsement of the candidate mentioned above, nor has this article been solicited for publication by any political candidate, campaign, or PAC.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

The Plot Thickens

Just a short update today on the Linda McMahon-Obama ad scandal. 

Connecticut Republican State Central Members gathered in Madison Connecticut last evening for their quasi-monthly State Central Committee Meeting.  Given the state of emergency sparked by the new Linda McMahon ad (a cross-endorsement of Linda McMahon and Barack Obama), Team Linda dispatched every one's favorite errand-boy, Justin Clark, to the scene to quell the screams of the angry hordes. 

You can always count on Justin Clark to
 be on the side of the bad guys

For twenty-five or so minutes, the embattled Clark attempted to explain away the the ad as nothing more than a good political strategy to attract independent voters.  Clark claimed that Mitt Romney is too far behind in Connecticut to win the State, and that Linda is specifically using the Obama cross-endorsement strategy to attract [urban] voters.  The crowd, incensed by his nonchalant attitude, met Clark's sales pitch with angry boos, and groans.

As the minutes wore on, the scene turned ugly.  Two rival groups emerged in the room bantering back and forth; on one side you had those loyal to the Republican Party and it's Presidential Nominee, these whom we shall refer to as The Friends of Mitt, and on the other side - you have those who are (and always have been) in blind allegiance to Linda McMahon; we will refer to these people as Linda's Paid Minions. 

In the front of the room sat Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr. who in typical fashion, sat wide-eyed, mouth-agape, observing the comedy with nothing to say.  He allowed Clark to ramble on incoherently as the crowd assailed him, and each other.  At a time when the Republican Party faithful is looking for answers and direction from it's State Chairman, Labriola seems aloof at the helm, preferring to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to the whole nauseating affair.  "This too shall pass" - yeah, like a kidney stone.

Then Clark said something which surprised even some of the most veteran Republicans in the room. He said that Mitt Romney was not only aware of Linda's strategy, but endorsed the ad for airing.  One state central member asked for some form of written confirmation from the Romney Campaign as evidence that Romney supports McMahon's ad strategy, and in response - Justin Clark told the crowd that they would have an email in their in-box by the next day (update: no such email has arrived as of this writing). 

And if such a communication does arrive, let's hope that Chairman Labriola will live by the doctrine of transparency which he has so publicly advocated for in the past, and make it available to all Connecticut Republicans across the Nutmeg State.  (After all, State Central is not a secret society, but a representative body of all Connecticut Republicans).

When upset State Central members demanded that the ads be pulled, Clark dismissed the requests and said that the ads would continue through Thursday. He also mentioned that robo-calls would then begin which will include Mitt Romney voicing support for Linda McMahon. Whether or not Clark was making things up on the fly to quiet the angry crowd is uncertain, but whatever the case may be, the night was ruined - and any sense of Republican unity that had been fostered in the late summer has certainly abated.

As an aside, staunch McMahon follower, and RNC Connecticut Committee Chairwoman Patricia Longo has posted the following comment on her Facebook page: "Have it from  the highest sources that McMahon ad everyone is complaining about was ok'd by SRCC, Mitch McConnell, and the Romney Campaign."

If such a claim turned out to be true, Connecticut Republicans who've purchased Romney signs, bumper stickers, made phone calls, or attended, or hosted fundraisers, or even donated their hard-earned cash would certainly have a right to feel betrayed by both the Republican National Committee, and the Republican Party.  And sadly this could lead to a large scale defection not just on November 6th, but well beyond this year's election. 

The King's advice to Chairman Labriola, the Romney Campaign, Mitch McConnell, and the RNC is to set the record straight, set Linda McMahon straight, and give Connecticut Republicans a respectable brand they can be proud of.



This original blog entry can be found at

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment. This article does not imply endorsement of the candidate mentioned above, nor has this article been solicited for publication by any political candidate, campaign, or PAC.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Linda McMahon's Connecticut Cluster?

Duke of Marlborough

There is a new development regarding the latest Linda McMahon ad "Independent" which I wrote about a day ago here.  Since what I'm about to impart is likely to add fuel to an already raging political fire - and cause additional inter-party stir, I would suggest readers proceed with caution before embarking on a witch-hunt of sorts for our court informant.  As with previous referenced material, I've agreed to protect this person's identity as a courtesy.  I can only offer that the information comes from the quaint town of Marlborough.

And before proceeding, this is a perfect opportunity to remind readers that this little crisis is not one of any particular group or individual Republican activist's making, The Tea Party's making, The King's making, or even Chairman Jerry Labriola's making (fact be told the McMahon camp has refused to acknowledge Labriola's existence since he tried to run an impartial State Convention earlier this year), but rather this nightmare is both owned and perpetrated by Linda McMahon and her desperate Campaign Team which unleashed a video that targets demographically-specific Obama supporters on her behalf while throwing Mitt Romney under the bus.

The King's View received an email which was distributed, and re-distributed widely to constituents - all over the state -  and even to a few select individuals in the media.  The pathetic action underscores the incredibly self-serving nature of the McMahon Campaign.  Moreover, it implies a possibly illegal cross-coordination of federal campaign activity which doesn't make a shred of sense because it assumes there would be no loses in her dwindling base support as a trade off for assumed independent voter gains. 

Here is the communication, as written (with errors), sans author's name:

Subject: Linda Mcmahon's Ad Courting Independent Voters

Hello all,

I have received several calls about Linda's latest ad regarding her spot on the Independent line and that she can "work with President Obama". I called the McMahon campaign headquarters and spoke to them about this. The response I got was that it was a stratigic move, coordinated with the Romney campaign, to court the urban vote. They claimed that the Romney campaign has written off Connecticut, which is probably true, and that this is an effort to pick up some urban voters who would be voting for Obama and may add Linda to their ballot with her being on the same independent line.

I can understand the strategy, but I will admit that this approach sticks in my craw! If you want to convey your thoughts to Linda's campaign headquarters please feel free to call her office in North Haven. 

McMahon Campaign Headquarters
556 Washington Ave.
North Haven, CT 06473
P: 203-691-8592

Again, is it a smart move? Maybe politically....but it is one that may turn off a number of Republican voters. Hopefully it will not turn off Republicans enough to vote for Chris Murphy, but perhaps enough to leave that column blank out of principle.

(End Communication)


First, it's The King's view is that it's highly unlikely that the Romney camp would ever agree to any strategy that would expose weakness of their candidate via any medium, let alone give approval for the distribution of a televised cross-endorsement of their opponent for the sake of electing a Senate candidate (particularly, the one in question). Second, and more important, it would be a violation of Federal Election Law to coordinate communication between two federal candidates unless specifically identified, and this includes the filing of required legal paperwork, and inclusion of appropriate disclaimers. The risk on both fronts wouldn't be worth the exposure.  It's more apt to be another fairy-tale from the McMahon Campaign. Or another expendable McMahon Staffer simply overreaching their perceived accountability (we all remember at least one loud Communication Director who became drunk and obnoxious in Hartford, and was subsequently removed weeks later).

It's widely understood that the Romney Campaign has been contacted regarding both the McMahon Television Ad and the email distributed above.   At this point, the Romney campaign is still working to determine an appropriate response to what has been referred to by some Washington Republican insiders as  "The Connecticut Cluster---k".  Oh, how charming! Thanks, Linda!

As to the author's reference to a "craw" and what that is... well, I don't know.  But to the question as to whether this is a smart move?  If the anger and outrage of the Connecticut Republican base is any indication, you would have to agree that so far, the McMahon-Obama strategy is a flop.  It's The King's only hope that Linda hasn't upset the party faithful to the point where other Federal and State Republican candidates suffer on Election Day because of her selfish motives.  




This original blog entry can be found at

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment. This article does not imply endorsement of the candidate mentioned above, nor has this article been solicited for publication by any political candidate, campaign, or PAC.

Monday, October 22, 2012

Linda McMahon: Unforgiveable

My friends, for the past four years under the policies of President Barack Obama, the United States has seen one of the worst economic periods in our nation's history:  skyrocketing unemployment as high as 8.9%, trillion dollar deficits, climbing gas and fuel prices, rising health care premiums (thanks to Obamacare), and businesses closing their doors in every city and town across this great land.  It's been painful to watch friends and neighbors suffer under this inept administration - particularly in Connecticut where the crisis is compounded by a Governor and Legislature hell-bent on driving businesses out of state.

Back in November 2008, we at The King's View understood the excitement and euphoria of a historical moment come true.  The rhetoric of hope, and allure of promise was more than enough to convince even some of our closest friends that a new day was upon us.  Knowing that Obama's ideology was nothing but a pipe-dream, Republicans accepted this loss as a unique, hopefully unrepeatable moment in history.  We shook our heads, folded our tents, but recognized the obvious sociological impact of the election which at the time outweighed sound reason, and substantive facts. 

As the dark clouds gathered our economy went from bad to worse, but there were high hopes that Connecticut's Old Yankee Spirit might be awakened by the steadily soured course upon which we were treading.  Early signs showed a re-energized Connecticut Republican Party which - although out of practice - might produce a slate of charismatic candidates who Party minions could work earnestly for and help catapult over the wall to victory. 

During the primary season, many Republican activists like Joe Visconti, et al fought long and hard to level the playing field, and elect their candidates of choice; the manner in which some candidates won was highly suspect (which as you know, has been long documented in this blog).  Notwithstanding, some of our picks won handily, while others went down in a fiery defeat. But let the record show that when all was said and done, in the races where our preferred candidates lost, we grumbled a bit, but quickly swallowed our pride and came together under the banner of a unified Republican Party - more than willing to compromise our personal convictions for the greater good of Party and Country.    

But there comes a point when you can be pushed too far.  It's the point when a candidate does or says something that is so incredibly contrary to the core of your political belief system that you can no longer support or stand with them. 

Before I go further,  please view this Campaign Ad by Linda McMahon which was televised during the New York Jets vs New England Patriots Football Game on Sunday entitled "Independent".  This ad is still airing and is paid for by Linda McMahon:

Independent or Insane?  Have you ever seen a Senate candidate throw
a Presidential Candidate from their own Party under the bus?
If you're like me, you aught to feel pretty gutted about now.  In the first place, certainly, no one in The King's circle signed-on to trade our real deal Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney for a lackluster, imitation Senate Republican candidate like Linda McMahon.  And second, and for God sakes, Barack Obama is more ideologically in opposition to Mitt Romney and the Republican platform than anyone else in our party's history.  If Linda McMahon is willing to hitch her cart to a President who has lost 23 million jobs, quadrupled the deficit, and raised the misery index to an unprecedented level - can you imagine how she would vote if she were ever elected?  She'd make Olympia Snowe look like a Snow White.

And you have to wonder how former First District Congressional Candidate Ann Brickley, seen in the last frame laughing and smiling in the background, feels about being used in the closing moments of the ad as a tool to help Linda McMahon throw Mitt Romney under the Bus? It begs the question as to whether or not Ms. Brickley gave permission to be used in an ad as contentiously divisive as this?  Certainly her father, John Miller, a well-respected and admired, former RNC delegate must be scratching his head at the notion of seeing his legacy tarnished by this blasphemy.

You also have to wonder if the popular Republican New Jersey Governor Chris Christie who is expending his political capital and reputation to campaign for Linda McMahon is aware of this act of extreme treachery?  After all, as the RNC Convention keynote speaker, chosen by Mitt Romney, Governor Christie has been stumping all over the country.

There should be no mistake about what we're seeing because it's what we've already known to be true.  Slowly but steadily, Linda McMahon has moved from a pretended centrist moderate to a pretentious liberal over the past few months. Linda McMahon's operatives with a wink and a nod, politely begged conservatives to ignore her political rhetoric on homosexual marriage (DOMA), on Reproductive Rights, and even changing her position on Obamacare from Repeal to Repeal and Replace.  Even Peter Wolfgang had to scrambled to diffuse his outraged donors - not once, but twice. And moreover, Linda has hurt our GOP brand to the extent where other statewide Republican candidates will suffer because she's elevated the Independent Party by seeking placement on their line which in turn has caused additional independent candidates to gain stature. 

For now, one can argue rather strongly that Linda McMahon has been the Connecticut Democratic Party's most productive weapon.  After all, she deserves credit for single-handily taking out Nancy Johnson (via funding Rahn Emmanuel and DCCC), Rob Simmons, Chris Shays, and indirectly killing Tom Foley's gubernatorial race, and sinking our Congressional ticket in 2010, and now -  she's teaming with Barack Obama in her ad to to guarantee that Mitt Romney loses in Connecticut.  Where are the Boughtons? Markelys? Labriolas? Caferos? McKinneys? and Foleys, now?  

So now you ask, King, what are we to do? 

There is no lesser of two evils in this race.  Linda's quest to sell herself as an independent by damaging the Republican brand is clearly over the top.  And the emails I've received from readers have reached a red fervor pitch.  Yet, Chris Murphy is for raising payroll taxes on the middle class to continue social security, and is in lockstep with President Obama on pursuing class warfare, Socialized Healthcare, and pushing the rest of the Democrat Party's counter-productive agenda.  

While loyal Republicans like Joe Visconti have pulled their endorsement of Linda McMahon, The King does not feel comfortable telling Republicans to support either Linda McMahon or Chris Murphy, or any other U.S. Senatorial candidate.  Both candidates are equal, and neither is worse than the other.  And at this point, you can say that at least Chris Murphy isn't running any cross-endorsement ads featuring himself with Barack Obama. 

My friends, when it comes to casting your vote in this particular race, I'm afraid you're on your own.  After this week, no Republican hack would dare hold your decision against you.   

Part of me says that losing the U.S. Senate seat in Connecticut wouldn't be the most detrimental (or unexpected) outcome in this election.  It's far more important that we elect Mitt Romney to the White House to serve as our Chief Executive in order to restore a sound economy, and a credible foreign policy.  If it's Linda McMahon's decision to abandon the platform then I suppose that's one thing, but to abandon our Presidential nominee for her own self-serving interests is quite another.  And that is something, if true, is unforgivable.  Remember, Mitt has a track record of working across party lines to get things done, and we expect that after this election, it will be no different.

As an aside: we think there may be a Federal Election Commission rule that requires that if you mention another federal candidate in your ad that you must insert a disclaimer that there is no coordination with any candidate or candidate committee, etc.  The media can check this fact for federal election compliance. 



This original blog entry can be found at

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment. This article does not imply endorsement of the candidate mentioned above, nor has this article been solicited for publication by any political candidate, campaign, or PAC.

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

The King's View: Review of the first CT Senate Debate

It can't get any worse than this. Can it?
I realize that this post is considered old news by now, but the piece I published yesterday regarding John Larson’s unwillingness to debate his GOP challenger John Henry Decker was a far more interesting story to communicate, so I opted to delay my review of the first Connecticut Senate Debate by a day or so.

As usual I haven’t read other authors’ opinions of the debate before drafting my own.. And it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if my conclusions fly 180 degrees in the face of conventional wisdom or the thinking of the usual talking heads who lurk out in CTGOP-land. Readers know that just like a Salmon, I run upstream, and against the roaring current. I’m sure this post won’t disappoint in that regard. After all, I’m in the business of changing opinions, not selling the same-old, insulting crud dished out by Party insiders to its gullible thongs.

I tuned-in to the debate with no ill-conceived notions of what to expect. I knew going in that after a stellar performance earlier in the week by Mitt Romney that the only place for the GOP to go was down. Mitt Romney did much better than even I expected - articulating his points with great enthusiasm, and in great detail in what one television personality deemed, “an economist’s dream”. Of course, President Obama helped out by acting as though he didn’t want to be there, or that he didn’t want the job. Having watched Linda McMahon for two years, I anticipated that she would conduct herself in the same manner we’ve all witnessed over the course of the previous election and primary cycle - emotion-less, scripted, and a flat. This isn’t a dig on Linda - it’s simply her personality and presentation style. I had no illusions that she would suddenly launch into song and dance and capture the audience’s imagination with her “charismatic personality“. So, my only hope was for Chris Murphy to bomb. And in my opinion he sort of did just that.

The format for the debate was good. Dennis House is about as fair a political reporter as you can find. As usual, he picked a good group of panelists to ask the tough questions - the ones that he generally avoids. Connecticut politicians are fortunate that Dennis House moderates Face The State. It’s said that if you can’t get your talking points across on Face The State, then you can’t get them out anywhere. Thus, his show is geared to providing the public with useful, unfiltered information as opposed to the “gotcha style” found on other networks. It’s just as well because I’m not sure trying to embarrass or scream over guests before they finish a thought has ever served the public interest very well.

So the panelists were Mark Pazniokas of the The CTMirror, Angela Dias of WTIC, and Fran Schneidau of CBS Radio. Fair enough.

The opening statements set the tone for what was an empty, and bitterly personal debate. McMahon started off well shaping the scope of the problems causing the lack of job creation, and pushing her usual boxed qualifications, and asked if voters were better off electing someone who’s created “millions” of jobs or someone who’s pushed the economy off a cliff. Ouch! Murphy retorted by trying to make himself the champion of the middle class, and ending his statement by claiming that Linda stands up for herself and her profits at the expense of the people who work for her and at the expense of the State of Connecticut. I’m not sure how she’s taken advantage of the State of Connecticut, but fine, I’m moving on. After the opening statements, it was pretty much all downhill from there.

Besides a hum-drum performance by both candidates, the only bursts of excitement came as a result of assorted personal attacks that each candidate continued to level against the other. Aside from this, I didn’t learn anything new about either candidate. I watched the debate twice - my first impression was rather negative of the entire affair, my second impression was much like the first although I tried to parse the points made to see if anyone truly came out the winner. I was disappointed in the lack of detail of plan specifics, and the pettiness of the candidates. I was particularly disappointed in Chris Murphy, who never seemed to get on message or his plan for the future - at times he blurted out several unconnected thoughts as if to try to ram through talking points while avoiding the question posed by the moderator. If Linda was scripted and stoic, Murphy was disorganized and antagonistic. In such a close contest where there was no knock-out punch (it was more like a cat-fight between two women) I fully expected Partisans from each Party to declare victory.

Still, whether fair or not, a young, arrogant Chris Murphy didn’t come off well attacking an older, more reserved Linda McMahon. As Chris Shays learned, its very hard to come out with both barrels attacking Linda McMahon and not be perceived as a bully. it’s particularly difficult when Linda just sort of stares back at you with her eyes and mouth wide open, playing the role of assaulted victim - “shame on you“ seems to work. Murphy’s performance was opposite that of Richard Blumenthal who respectfully managed the situation quite well in the last election cycle by coming across matter-of-factly, and never sinking to the crass level that Chris Murphy did on Tuesday. I’m not sure how the polls will resonate but Murphy’s performance couldn’t have played any better than Chris Shays’ did only a few months back.

Angela Dias asked a fair question about why Connecticut residents should put their trust in either candidates as it seemed that both has had problems putting their own financial houses in order (bankruptcy, late payments, what-have-you). Murphy ignored the question and used the opportunity to slam Linda McMahon for having not paid back $1 million dollars in debts owed from 36 years ago. It’s ironic that Murphy repeatedly said he wanted to make the campaign about issues, but on nearly every occasion he sunk the level of the debate by raising personal attacks against McMahon.

Congressman Murphy missed
87% of his meetings. That's
nothing a good Rolex couldn't fix

McMahon retorted by defecting the question by seemingly referring to her problem as an occasional financial slip (at least that was the perception), she then open fired on Murphy’s poor attendance record. This point remains a slight mystery to those in the cheap seats, either he has a 97% attendance record as he claims, or has missed 87% of the votes as she claims. It can’t be both, and it’s not likely to be either. But what is believable is that Murphy’s attendance record is fair game if it turns out he’s been AWOL instead of representing his constituents.

If there is one area where Linda McMahon has the upper hand, it’s where she claims that Chris Murphy doesn’t have a plan. You can tell there is obvious truth to the point, since everyone knows that he doesn’t have a plan published or available, and Murphy counters about the specifics of her plan because he can’t cite detail from his own (because it doesn’t exist). This hurts Murphy for two reasons. First, for a guy that is serving in Congress at the moment, he should be extremely familiar with the day to day affairs, problems, and potential solutions that should drive a plan that he should already have in place and trying to implement while serving. It’s more than a little awkward, and should be alarming to his constituents that he has talking points, and no plan.
Read my Lips, Linda! I don't have an &*#ing Plan, Ok?
Now let's get back to talking about yours!
Murphy looked rather foolish trying to claim that portions of McMahon’s plan were plagiarized or copied from Republican Party talking points. A petty point to make during a Senatorial Debate. Fact is that since this is largely an ideological debate anyway, one would expect both candidates to have large portions of their plans tailored toward one’s Party’s platform. Ironically, if there is a candidate who's more likely to have difference between their plan and the national platform its likely to be Linda McMahon and not Chris Murphy - who for all intents and purposes is 100% in-step with his Party’s very liberal agenda. By his own admission, he made it clear he is unwilling to entertain the Ryan Plan, and he is adamant in his desire to raise payroll taxes to keep social security afloat, and he also made the omission that he would not repeal even unpopular, anti-business sections of ObamaCare. From this debate we learned that Murphy supports the Democratic platform - hook, line and sinker, and his election to office would not provide an Independent voice, but rather the perfect choir member for the Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda. If there is one thing that truly surprised me out of this debate - it’s the unconditional loyalty that Murphy has for the Democratic Agenda.. Murphy’s ads in which he’s claims to be an independent thinker is a work of fiction. And the accusation that Linda’s 20-page full color plan is a plagiarized one likely won’t resonate with the public.

Mark Pazniokas asked about both candidates lack of transparency. Both candidates seemed to imply that Pazniokas was from another planet and they grant plenty of access. While I don’t know much about Murphy’s level of transparency or publishing of schedule, and availability to the press, I do know that this has been an ongoing public relations nightmare for Linda McMahon. Her war against the press is coming back to hurt her - thankfully, the Murphy camp has a similar lack of transparency problem which slightly offsets her perception problem. I think the question that people are asking is why? And what will this mean for either the Press or Public when either Senator McMahon or Senator Murphy are in office. They are quite of the opposite of Senator Blumenthal who (whether you agree with or not) will come right up to you and stand there and talk your head off about any issue you might raise. Trust me. I’ve been there. Paz’s look of “what the hell are you talking about” when Linda said that he and her have had a good time spending time on the trail together was priceless. The look of disgust on his face spoke volumes, and was downright comical.

Fran Schneidau asked a very basic question which should have been a homerun for both candidates had they done their homework and been familiar with the material being discussed; she asked about discretionary spending, and particularly referenced a $1.9 million dollar water taxi expenditure. Given this specific, and outrageous example of gross negligence, it was unfortunate that neither candidate jumped on the provision or offered to revoke funding for this initiative, if elected. Further, precise examples weren’t offered by either candidate for what they would reduce, and worse - Chris Murphy called eliminating loop holes for oil companies a discretionary cut. Huh? This is evidence that he either spews traditional Democratic talking points (ex. Republicans give tax breaks to the wealthy, hate the elderly and children) or he doesn’t understand what a discretionary cut is. Again, not to be understated, Congressman Murphy is actively serving in Congress, he should be able to rattle off dozens of specific bills that he could eliminate, if he’s even slightly paying attention to what’s going on around him while Congress is in session (of course that pre-supposes that he’s actually in attendance).

The sniping between the two candidates continued during the remainder of the questioning. When Angela Dias asked about how Linda McMahon would keep social security solvent for future generations, she talked in generalities about wanting to be a member of a bipartisan committee to solve the problem (my guess is that she is hoping that someone else on that committee has the answer because it was clear to anyone watching that she didn‘t). When it came time for Chris Murphy to respond, he took liberty to demean Linda by saying, “that was a minute and thirty seconds of I’m not going to tell you what I’m going to do if I get elected.” That response was both crass and rude, and his answer - a commitment to raise payroll taxes on everyone probably didn’t win him much support. And it all but guaranteed that his response will probably end up in one of Linda McMahon’s commercials in the near future (much like her misstep on the famed Watertown Meeting where she mentioned having a sunset provision for social security which Murphy is airing via commercial every 20 minutes).

For the Democrat side, the big win of the night came as a result of Mark Pazniokas question regarding Roe v Wade and the selection of a Supreme Court Justice. And I will get to why that mattered in a minute. Now as a practical matter, both Linda McMahon and Chris Murphy are pro-choice candidates, and neither is more pro-choice than the other per se - either you are or you’re not pro-choice. Period. The difference is that Linda McMahon said she wouldn’t vote in favor of a Supreme Court Nominee on the basis of a single issue, but the plurality of the positions for which the Justice adheres to. Chris Murphy on the other hand, clearly stated that he does support a Litmus test for a Supreme Court Justice and would never support a Pro-Life nominee what-so-ever. So much for thoughtful, individual thinking - seems more like another lock-step allegiance to the Democrats very liberal agenda. Murphy’s mind is made up based on ideology rather than an examination of the whole picture, and all the facts.

As for the Blunt Amendment, the issue here deals with the protection of religious institutions from being forced to provide coverage of certain medical procedures and birth control mechanisms which go against the grain of the religious organization’s root faith. For example, why on Earth would Congressman Murphy demand the Catholic Church accept and fund abortion coverage if it goes against Church teaching? It seems that if someone wanted that kind of coverage they would need to go elsewhere to find it - and not demand it from a faith-based organization. That’s an example where a little common sense might be in order, and a little less overzealous liberalism should be abandoned by Mr. so-called Independent thinker, no?

Hear that sound, Jerry?  It's the rumble of
an angry group of  Conservatives feeling
like they've been sold out. You might want
to look into it, and help quell the brewing storm - before its too late!
The reason I mentioned that the Roe v Wade question was a big win for the Democrats was not based on the exchange, or Linda McMahon’s confusion about an assumed national law protecting gay marriage (which Congressman Murphy smugly reminded everyone, doesn’t exist) but because of the post-debate fail-out that the issue has caused within the Republican Party which includes some groups now vowing to not support Linda because of her position on DOMA. In fact, the damage is so bad that the Family Institute of Connecticut’s Peter Wolfgang was forced to retract his endorsement of McMahon the following day as her post-debate comments exacerbated the problem for conservative Republicans. Reports were that his phone was “ringing off the wall”. Whether this issue is enough to sink Linda with the Conservatives in the Party to the point where they will walk away from her is still yet to be determined. I will deal with the matter in more detail in a future post. Whatever one thinks of who won the debate, the devastating blow was not dealt by Pazniokas or by Murphy’s response, but via a self-inflicted wound caused by Linda. Given that the CTGOP alliance is already being held together by masking tape, this situation has deepened the divisions which already exist. From that standpoint, the Democrats couldn’t have asked for more.

Although I believe that most of the questions asked from the panelist were quite fair, I felt that Fran Schneidau sort of got a away with a biased question which was meant to put Linda McMahon on the spot. Schniedau referenced 9.1% unemployment, and a few other negative economic statements and then asked rather coyly, “How has this recession affected you, Mrs. McMahon.” It’s fair to say that Linda was caught flat-footed. Now there were plenty of options for her had she been quick on her feet… such as talking about rising gasoline prices, food prices, insurance premiums, and a host of other impacts to her personal expenses. She could have even pulled out her trump card and talked about the rising expenses on her family business - in fact, she could have dominated the discussion for a good five minutes, going on and on about the negative implications of this recession on WWE. Instead she ignored the question and gave a brief explanation of how business works. Lucky for her, Chris Murphy ignored the question too. Although he gave some ridiculous statement that his family had to go without Healthcare. Are you kidding? Sitting members of Congress have the BEST healthcare benefits for exceeding what any regular citizen’s plan entails. Linda let him get away with that insane answer, and I’m sure she wished he could have that one back.
Fran Schneidau meant to ask: "Mrs. McMahon
isn't it true that since you have a billion-zillion dollars
that you aren't really suffering in this recession?"

The next softball question came from Mark Paziniokas who asked about inequity and poverty - an area that generally tends to favor Democrats. Linda McMahon was first up and again she missed an easy spot to talk at length about her and her company’s rather generous contributions to the less fortunate over the years. I would gather that Linda McMahon has probably contributed millions to charity in comparison to what Chris Murphy has contributed. Lucky for Linda, Chris Murphy also flubbed the question. He gave a rather awkward response about building more low income housing which “brought veterans out of the woods in Waterbury, and out from under the bridge in Stamford.” A sort of bizarre visual that both the panelists and Linda McMahon let slide.

When it came to Angela Dias’ question on each candidate’s position on ObamaCare (or the Healthcare Affordability Act), Linda announced that she was for “Repeal and Replace” which is stark contrast to Chris Murphy’s whole-hearted support for ObamaCare. Personally, I’m disappointed in the “replace” concept because it goes against the grain of our Republican agenda which states that we do not support any form of National Healthcare scheme. We support the 10th Amendment and believe that its up to individual States to decide how to manage Healthcare law. By choosing the language of “Repeal and Replace” it supposes that Linda might support some other National Healthcare provision which could equally as detrimental to taxpayers. And once you go down the road of Replace, you open a Pandora’s Box by being required out explain the “replace with what” question. Good luck.

Linda further went on to bless portions of Obama’s plan and specifically pointing her support for allowing young adults to remain on their parents plan until age 26 (a ludicrous position), and not excluding coverage for pre-existing conditions. Murphy seized the moment by saying that Linda wants to keep the some of the provisions she favors while throwing out the ones she doesn’t, and he added that it doesn’t work that way.
Linda McMahon is against Death Panels
Chris Murphy voted for them, and must support them since
he never submitted legislation to remove them from the bill
Regarding the concept of “Death Panels“, Linda made a strong argument that decision of this nature aught to be between the physician and patient/family and not left to an inserted Government mandated third party panel. Chris Murphy on the other hand didn’t reject the notion of these panels but only offered that family members should be consulted. This is an issue worth following up on in a future debate, for certainly - as a sitting Congressman, Chris Murphy has not proposed or co-sponsored any legislation removing the Death Panel concept from the Law. Perhaps Linda would do well to remind the voters of this important matter next time around.

The most absurd comment of the night came from Chris Murphy. Interestingly enough the media nor Linda McMahon jumped on it either during or after the debate. Chris Murphy went on a tirade not once but twice in the same segment accusing Linda McMahon of producing “personal attacks against me, my wife, and my family.” Now, several of us went back to try and identify what Congressman Murphy is referring to and to be honest none of us where able to come up with anything substantial where the Congressman’s wife or family fell pray to serious criticism.

What is problematic about the exchange is the way that Linda McMahon failed to address such a blatant lie. Unless the accusation was true, she should have IMMEDIATELY fired back that the accusation is flatly untrue. As I thought about it, the fact that she allowed the Congressman to repeat the accusation and failed to respond to it, gave me the impression that perhaps Linda did in some way attack his family and wife. If I felt this way, then neutral viewers must have also assumed that Linda had made such personal attacks. If the McMahon campaign is in their right mind, they won’t allow this to go unresponded to for the perception left of Linda is quite negative based on her lack of outrage, or a counter-statement.


OK, I’ve written quite a bit here. Granted it’s a tough read. For the most part, the debate was a draw since neither candidate made a big enough splash to knock the other one out. The Democrats will claim victory on the basis that this is a blue state, and given that reason, the onus is on Linda to give Independents and some Democrats a reason to move right to support a Republican. On the other hand, Chris Murphy didn’t exactly come across Senatorial by any means. His disorganization, lack of details, lack of plan, and general rude demeanor made him appear unfit for the Senate.

Given the overall impressions left by this debate, I believe Linda McMahon came out slightly ahead. She wasn’t dynamic or articulate, but she seemed more prepared and organized in her responses. She also came across more moderate than Chris Murphy who is clearly liberal and not independent in his thinking. The only question left to figure out is the impact of Linda’s DOMA gaff. One thing appears true… Democrat moderates appear to be able to support Liberal Democrat politicians, while on the other side of the fence Conservative Republicans can’t seem to suffer Republican Moderates very well. If that is the key to the race, then Linda McMahon could be doomed before the first vote is cast.

One thing is for sure, the next two debates aught to be very interesting.

Here are a few side points that need to be driven home regarding the debate:

1. The debate was downright ugly and disappointing. All things being equal, the participants didn’t conduct themselves with the respect and dignity which the office truly requires. The candidates must show that they have more to offer than what the Constitution minimally requires of a Senator Candidate - years of attainment, and residency. Americans expect much more of a candidate for an office of this importance.

2. The candidates both appear to have a superficial understanding of economics, provisions, laws, and government process. In some cases, not being able to properly cite the laws of the land, executive orders, or in Murphy’s situation be able to quote the specific legislation that he’s either passed or voted against. This is more a disappointment of Congressman Murphy who is actively serving in Congress. He couldn’t provide a list of planned discretionary cuts he supports, or even produce a plan for economic recovery after serving during President Obama’s Presidential term. Nor could he suggest specific places were spending cuts could be made. For an active Congressman, he’s comes across very disengaged.

3. Linda McMahon would do well to move from applying general, superficial responses to questions and begin to provide pointed, and specific, or detailed answers. This beating around the bush for a minute and half is unnerving for her supporters. Given the wealth of technology, tools, and manpower at her disposal, she should be able to comb through Congressman Murphy’s extensive 6-year voting record and provide specific examples where the Congressman has cast votes that have let his constituents down.  By this point, she should be able to outline the dozens of votes that Congressman Murphy has made to increase taxes on the Middle Class, or created regulatory burdens for business. It’s no longer enough to just claim that he has increased taxes on the middle class -- its time to start saying where… and using bill numbers.

There is no foul in going after some one's voting record (although at one point it was curious that Chris Murphy said he wanted to discuss Linda's???).  If Murphy's record is so bad Linda should be able to be able to figuratively grab him by the hair and throw him from turnbuckle to turnbuckle without anyone being able to cry foul.  Six years is plenty of time to get a handle on voting trends on taxes, foreign policy, and whatever else there is. Time to get cracking and raise specific grievances!

Hint: Go back and watch the first Romney v Obama debate and notice how articulate and prepared Mitt Romney was on every issue. He presented facts, figures, and details. This is a sign of showing respect for his audience, and the position he wishes to earn. Connecticut is one of the most educated states in the union, please afford our residents with the proper respect they deserve by living up to the standard, and rising to the occasion. I’ve seen fourth graders debate with more accuracy and detail than the two candidates we saw on Tuesday.

4. The candidates must stop going tit for tat over meaningless dribble. Bankruptcy, late payments, attendance records, and endless personal attacks only muddy the waters and do little to educate voters on where they stand or would vote on the issues. Despite their personal flaws and failures, either one or the other is going to wind up in the Senate (so much for Connecticut’s brightest and best). The commercials you are airing (even post-debate) are annoying. How about a few commercials telling people what you are going to do, not what your opponent has or will do. Shame on both of you!

5. Both candidates should make themselves available to the press, conduct press conference, openly field questions, and give the transparency that the office should and will require. Hiding behind an impenetrable wall of paid political insiders reeks of misplaced celebrity self-adulation. Look to Senator Blumenthal for a good example of how to conduct oneself in the public light, and on the campaign trail.

6. Linda McMahon should stop claiming she’s in this race for her Grandchildren. Her Grandchildren will want for nothing, and the continued claim that they might one day be at a financial disadvantage because of Democratic policies is insulting to the audience. (Of course, if she continues to spend $80 million dollars per campaign, I guess their inheritance could be at risk)

7. The candidates should answer the questions being posed. There is a reason there is a panel and moderator at the debate - let them do their jobs. Too many times, both candidates wanted to disregard the valuable questions being asked by the panel in order to get the last word on a previous insult exchange between each other. Wouldn’t it be nice if our candidates just answered the questions being posed instead of going off on a tangent or providing an answer to a question that wasn’t asked? Or dragging the debate down a never-ending rat hole of petty personal attacks?

8. Linda McMahon must figure out her next step regarding how to handle social issues, and try to patch up the new problem within fragile CTGOP alliance. God knows that the media is dying to ask a new round of social issue questions knowing all to well that conservatives are already on the fringe just waiting to jump off the bandwagon. The idea that you can win without the right wing of the party in a close race like this is a fool’s suggestion. Patch it up now before its too late.



This original blog entry can be found at

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment. This article does not imply endorsement of the candidate mentioned above, nor has this article been solicited for publication by any political candidate, campaign, or PAC.