Republicans Give McMahon Fake Fairytale Ending

How many disasters can we create in a month?

Last week Republican insiders were angered to read the headline that federal agents were swarming the capitol city, interrogating members for evidence that CTGOP officials directed candidates to hire a Clearwater, Florida direct mail and printing firm to the tune of nearly $2 million dollars with an alleged kickback scheme.  As if that wasn't bad enough, we heard the news that the Feds are working with Brian "The Rat" Foley (chief conspirator of the Lisa-Wilson Foley-Rowland-Healy gang) to help return ex-Governor John G. Rowland to The Big House.  The timing of these scandals couldn't be worse - as they come on the heels of Republican Candidate Tom Foley launching his gubernatorial bid by leveling ethics charges at Governor Dan Malloy's administration.  Now that strategy looks to be a hard-sell with the CTGOP mired in it's own mega-controversy.

All of this negative press is very frustrating given that Republican gubernatorial candidates had just finally begun to get their message out to eager constituents.  Well, at least there was some good news - as it turned out - neither John Rowland nor Lisa Wilson-Foley were going to be roasted recipients of this year's Prescott Bush Award.  For that would have almost been worth paying the outrageous $250 a head ticket to attend that media circus.

Knowing full well that two of the CTGOPs biggest stars were about to go Super-Nova, Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr. and his near-sighted group of politicos decided to chose Connecticut's least-effective candidate - Linda McMahon to receive the Connecticut Republican Party's highest honor.  When announced, Republicans statewide shook their collective heads in unison, screaming: "Do we ever learn from our mistakes?"

The CTGOP has become a lot like Disney's Dumbo Ride:
It goes round and round and never manages to get anywhere

With many of the Party faithful calling for his head - Chairman Labriola, Jr. was quick to defend his selection.  In a rare statement to the press, he wrote:

"Linda McMahon has shown tremendous leadership, both as a candidate herself and as a tireless advocate for Republicans at all levels of local, state and federal government,” Labriola said. “Her experience creating, building and running a business has helped shine a light on the need for government to help, not hinder, the creation of jobs in order to help our state and our economy prosper.” 

Leave it to Jerry Labriola, Jr. and CTGOP to completely rewrite the historical fact.  The truth is that Linda McMahon only advocated for Republican Candidates and Town Committees which endorsed her candidacy over both Rob Simmons, and Christopher Shays.  Anyone else who was found supporting her opposition, or playing neutral, was isolated, ridiculed and harshly, and personally attacked from the word "go".  The only thing "tireless" about Linda McMahon was her campaign for self-promotion, and desire for adulation from her supporters who were all too unwilling to see both campaigns for what they were - pure political calamity; void of content, ideology, or ideas.  Her inability to communicate specific solutions on any issue during her many interviews and debates was enough to expose her candidacy for what it was - shallow theatre.

Moreover, it's very hard for us lifelong Republicans to watch our Chairman (who was punished by McMahon and her minions for quietly, but openly supporting her primary opponents) crawl on all fours, beg her forgiveness, and reward her after she's had a history of donating to Democrats, and spent millions of dollars on door hangers, mailers, and television commercials encouraging voter turnout for Barack Obama.  How humiliating for Labriola!  How humiliating for  Connecticut Republicans! Only the seal-clapping elite at CTGOP Headquarters would both excuse wholesale betrayal of our Republican Presidential Candidate, and then kiss her arse after the fact.  Has the Connecticut Republican Party lost all it's self-respect?

As for Labriola's comments regarding her business - Republicans have long established that the wrestling business it's not the kind of pro-family, pro-traditional values organization which our own GOP brand claims to champion.  It was tough seeing some activists at the Family Institute of Connecticut endorse a candidate who made her millions promoting a raunchy, anything goes mentality which the FIC purports to fight against. Based on the past two campaign cycles, its hard to determine if it was - as Labriola suggests - a shining light that Linda was waving, or a lit fuse of dynamite which twice annihilated our GOP Senate hopes, and destroyed the Party under-ticket.  If there's something the CTGOP does very well - it's that it has a habit of repeatedly rewarding failure.

It will take a cast of characters to explain how McMahon earned this award

Party insiders agree that handing the Prescott Bush Award to McMahon is pay-off for Linda's personal contribution of thousands, and thousands, and thousands of dollars to rescue CTGOP coffers from complete bankruptcy.  It's long been established that RTCs, delegates, state central members, convention votes, and now even awards can be indirectly purchased by those with the deepest pockets (Tom Foley's Convention is likely next). And sadly, now the effects of behind-the-curtain party corruption has been brought to public light; exposing that the CTGOPs internal battle with ethics is more than just a matter of 'inside baseball'.   

Handing the Prescott Bush Award to Linda McMahon is wrong, but its just another chapter in the CTGOPs endless identity crisis. The King supposes that this crime may seem minor when compared with FBI agents turning over Republican desks, or ex-cons acting as head of Party from the WTIC broadcast booth while our Chairman goes AWOL. At the end of the day, the problem for the Connecticut Republican Party is that neither principle, integrity or elections can be bought.  Until that lesson is learned, and we clean up our own house - it's very unlikely that the public will see Republicans as a viable option now or in the near future.

I AM 

THE KING

Q-Poll Reality Check

The King's Message: What goes up must come down.

Not to burst anyone's bubble, but Linda McMahon's surrogates have been out and about spreading their propaganda all over the web trying to sell today's Quinnipiac Poll as some Earth-shaking achievement worth getting all hyped-up about.  Well, the truth is that it's not all that.  Really.  I mean to start - you have to admit that you get what you pay for. And Linda McMahon has laid-out a bundle of cash to just about anyone who can cash a check to improve her standing - at least against Christopher Shays, that is.

The King never liked the idea that Christopher Shays put so much stock in the March 22 Q-Poll, and made it the centerpiece of his campaign.  I strongly believed that no matter what happened - crisis, crime, or calamity that the poll would shift away from where it once stood as it always does.  Don't forget that just a few days before the November 2010 U.S. Senate election that similar polls had Linda McMahon down by only two points to Richard Blumenthal, yet the results of the real poll - the election - had Richard Blumenthal defeating Linda by 12 points.  Similar polls also had Republicans winning in Congressional Districts 4 and 5, and we all know how that turned out.

I'm not taking issue with the science of the polls, or authenticity of the results, I'm just saying that these polls are nothing more than a snapshot in time, and mean little else.  Campaigns should be based on issues, and of course - scandals, but not polls. Heck, it's human nature to want to see  a hypocritical public official or candidate slow roast on a spindle over the media's raging fire pit.  It's what we all live for.  So, if you live by the sword, you tend to die by the sword, and at least today - Chris Shays is having a heaping helping of humble pie.  Perhaps now he can get back to serious campaigning and stop sending out emails containing cryptic messages involving hexagons and long arrows. None of which is at all inspiring.

If you're Linda's camp you have a few things to be cheerful about from the latest Q-Poll.  First, she's no longer losing to Susan Bysiewicz who we can all agree is pretty much done-done at this point (she's down against all opponents except perhaps our absolutely, unequivocally, unapologetically conservative American Peter the Lumaj).  The futility of her campaign is to the point where she is just taking up space in the parking lot feeding the pigeons.  

This is a stark contrast to Christopher Shays' campaign, since he can at least claim to have split the Connecticut Political Establishment and garnered support of influential Republicans like State Sen. Minority Leader John McKinney and Republican House Minority Leader Larry Cafero to start, and has enough pull to have Republican establishment types like U.S. Senator John McCain, and Karl Rove fly in to fan the flames on his behalf.  These people seem to be doing more for him than he's doing for himself at this point.  So I hope he appreciates all the political capital being blown by people with a lot to lose to prop him up at this stage in the game.

The second thing that Linda can boast about is the kink in the armour of Shays' electability (careful now, re-read that line); he is no longer within the margin of error of defeating Chris Murphy.  Murphy's new lead 45 - 37 kills Shays' claim to be in hot pursuit and able to overcome the margin over time.  Whatever Shays had in March is gone, perhaps it was never there - who knows.

Now for the bad news.

Despite having spent millions on her campaign so far, Linda still loses to the Democrat front runner Chris Murphy.  Now, Joe Markley is running around telling everyone that the narrowing of the gap somehow eliminates the cause for alarm around Linda McMahon's electability - but you know Joe, trying to save face, and working as Linda's political hack, and perhaps he was on another planet in 2010 and his UFO just got back or something.  By now, everyone knows you can't take Joe Markley seriously as he sort of roams from issue to issue, and microphone to microphone so he can hear himself talk.  And of all the people in our ranks, he gets it all wrong about 99% of the time.  The one thing you can guarantee about Shoeless Joe is that if he's standing in line at the OTB window and is placing a bet on a horse, you're guaranteed that whatever horse Joe picks will come in dead last.  So just remember that if you have your racing form about you, and want to start your pick through the process of elimination.  See Joe. OK?

But the big issue for Linda McMahon that dooms her campaign is that the gender gap continues to show her getting crushed by women in a head-to-head match-up against Chris Murphy by a nasty margin of 47% to 38%.   If 38% of the woman in the state can't see you as their Senator despite all the Tupperware parties and naughty-nighty shows she's been throwing in homes across the state, then she doesn't have a prayer in the world.  Case in point aside from gender, Linda McMahon has a total unfavorable rating of 38% versus Chris Shays' 16%.  And to make matters worse, where she would need to bring over some votes from the Democratic side to win, she has a 61% unfavorable rating.  That's a hard number to overcome, and keep in mind that people tend to come out to vote against someone more so than for someone.  That's just the cynical nature of the human spirit, I suppose.  Even the Q-Poll doesn't give Linda a break and refers to her as "Former Wrestling Executive" - not businesswoman, not jobs creator, not stay-at-home mom -  but Wrestling Executive.  You almost can't go any lower than that.

So what does it all mean?

Well, clearly it means that if Christopher Shays ever hopes to make a real go of his campaign, he'd better get started tomorrow.  It's clear to everyone that unless he steps up his game and starts getting more name recognition beyond his little crevice in Connecticut, he doesn't stand a chance in Hades.   Now, if he doesn't have the money, or has no means of raising it, then he's pretty much on the road to Susan Bysiewicz-land from which there is no return.  

So if Vince Lombardi were still alive and he called a meeting of the Shays Campaign Team he might start by firing or making a few substitutions in a few key slots (I'm not going to get into particulars but people can figure out who's faking it for eight hours a day and who isn't).  Because whoever is calling the shots at Shays Headquarters is dropping the ball on the yard of scrimmage before it passes out of the center's hands. 

Christopher Shays is right to criticize Linda where it matters - on policy, and on experience.   The Pro-Wrestling attacks are left for people like me who think her whole operation aught to pack up it's act and move out to sea where it belongs.  The people who hate Linda for her filthy industry aren't going to hold their noses and vote for her in August or November - you can let that be.  She's lost those voters already, and they would eventually bring any campaign that she might continue post-August to an eventual losing position.

Meanwhile, Christopher Shays needs to get his own message out there.  Instead of reporting the news, its time that he start to make some.  Not through arrows and hexagons or emails, but through commercials and televised public appearances.  If he's not willing to do that, he can quit today and save himself the humiliation.  He can't focus on November if he hasn't a plan to get past August.  And the plan he has now - well, it sucks.  Hoping for the best is much different than getting out there and broadcasting your message to the voters.

How about television, television, television, and television.  And by the way, did I mention television?  Just think, even though Linda is annoying as hell with her phony life story (which we still can't tell what's what or how she managed to claim bankruptcy then turn around a few months later and a put a down payment on the Stoner Mansion backlot), she was able to improve her overall miserable rankings among voters.  If you can take a airhead like her devoid of positions, and experience - then anyone can boast their brand and marketing. 

One more tidbit from the Q-Poll, it seems somewhere in the neighborhood of 40% of the public statewide claims to not have enough information to form an opinion about Chris Shays and Chris Murphy.  This important piece of information tells you that when Murphy (who has plenty of money stashed) decides to hit the airwaves his numbers will eclipse the field in name recognition (remember, Linda already has a 95% name recognition rating so there is nowhere for her to really go), and Chris Shays would benefit exponentially if he were to get his act together and begin a public relations campaign to let Republicans know Linda McMahon even has an opponent. 

Newsflash, Mr. Shays:  You're better off saving your money by firing your staff, hooking up an answering machine, and running quality commercials on Fox News syndication up though August 14th.  You'd see a huge jump in the next poll, and become a factor in the race.

Like most of the advice that has been offered, I'm sure it will all fall on deaf ears and blind eyes.  But there is always hope at least from this poor taxpayer that the die isn't already cast and we will have a nominee worth supporting come November.  It's that or while America cheers the removal of Barack Obama around the Country, Connecticut Republicans will be left to sulk in shame based on mistakes that could have easily been avoided.

I AM

THE KING

This original blog entry can be found at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com/

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

WWE Employee Violence Problem revisited

While Linda McMahon tries to distance herself from the so-called industry that finances her U.S. Senate runs; it's worth taking a look at how she and Vince McMahon have authorized their employees to behave in public (and on camera) when confronted with controversial questions about - steroid use, wrestling as a rehearsed violent drama, or anything else that Vince and Linda McMahon doesn't like.  It's very clear that defending their empire from the truth is their number one goal.

I write this out of fear for Journal Inquirer reporter Chris Powell who took Linda McMahon's WWE to task for it's violent nature, borderline pornographic imagery, and sexual innuendo.  Linda McMahon via the WWE public relations team responded inappropriately by threatening to sue the Journal Inquirer for exercising it's First Amendment rights.  This should raise alarm bells with all of you Tea Party Activists and Constitutionalists out there who no longer need to wonder exactly how much value Linda McMahon really places on Liberty and The Bill of Rights.  Answer: Not much!

While her surrogates try to rebrand the WWE is as simply family entertainment -  the biggest joke going in political history - the polls show that her product is probably not going to make the Family Institute of Connecticut's top shows for family hour viewing.  Family entertainment? Really?  Girls wrestling near naked, wrestlers cutting themselves with razors to give the visual effect of bloody brawls, screaming and yelling and punching each other is what Linda McMahon sees as "family entertainment"?  This may be so for thugs, and criminals, but not for normal, everyday families who don't want their children watching this garbage on their television sets.

I'm sure most of you recall the famous 20/20 interview which took place in December 1984 where McMahon employee David Schulz wacked ABC's John Stossel around for asking questions that could have hurt the McMahon franchise; the video below is just the thing to spark your memory.  I know this seems like old news, but there is solid evidence that this kind of behavior by WWE employees is ongoing and it continues to be discussed openly in multiple Pro-Wrestling forums that you can easily find around the Internet. It's curious that Connecticut Republicans don't seem to see anything disconcerting about the WWE and Connecticut Republican Party brand being mixed together (if not hijacked); while Linda's Team uses the same bullying tactics on competing campaigns or activists.  "If you don't vote for Linda, you'll never amount to anything in Connecticut Politics" is not just inside political baseball, it's a page from the WWE blackball playbook.  (At least the sexual harassment component hasn't reared its ugly head.)

Still, you have to wonder about the audacity of a 300 pound men slapping, threatening, and hurting television reporters and hosts while the camera is rolling.  As Pro Wrestling insiders will tell you - these guys don't do anything without permission from the McMahons.  If you thought the last two Republican State Conventions were fixed and dirty - wait until you take a look at how WWE employees are directed to behave toward dissenters or naysayers:

(See Schulz piece toward the end of the video
Caution: some foul language at the start of the video )

So while Connecticut's politicians publicly cheer on Linda McMahon quietly taking over the CTGOP, you have to wonder what impact her candidacy will have on the entire ticket.  At this point, we aren't hearing much from Christopher Shays who seem quite content to send out a few boring press releases, visit town greens, and march in a few parades close to home all the while - Linda blasts the airwaves with high tech TV and radio commercials.  All that's remaining on this road to oblivion is a singular commercial in the first week of August featuring Shays pointing to oversize ballot behind him with his thumb and uttering the words, "Hey, I'm still on the ballot."  The whole campaign reeks of Simmons II.

At this rate, it's going to be a long summer, and an even longer November.  And at the end of the day, the Connecticut Republican Party and it's weak-kneed leadership will only have itself to blame for allowing Linda McMahon to single-handedly turn over two U.S. Senate seats to Democrats for the next 30 years.

Note to Chris Powell: I wouldn't recommend conducting any face-to-face interviews at WWE shows without wearing a helmut and a good suit of armor.

I AM

THE KING

This original blog entry can be found at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com/

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

Quick comments on the CTGOP Convention

Later in the week, I'll publish a longer commentary on the CTGOP Convention.  I can see from the hit counter that many of you came here today looking for something so I'll take five minutes to give a few quick thoughts on the night.  Plus, I need a chance to sort through all of the emails I've received over the last day to determine whether some of the comments I'm seeing amount to sour grapes or legitimate issues worth investigating.

First, you have to give Kudos to Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr. and his team of State Central Members for putting on an outstanding State Convention.  Even if you didn't like the outcome of certain races, it was clear throughout the evening that the manner in which business was conducted was fair and transparent - all the voting, tallying, and delegate activity was conducted real-time, methodically, and with fairness and dignity for all candidates.  The entire evening was a stark contrast to the corrupt convention run by the Healy-Marx Syndicate in 2010. You could also sense that the level of anxiety in the Hall was much reduced from two years ago - which in part was because campaign heads were warned to be on their best behavior given the heightened sense of scrutiny caused by Pre-Convention Party in-fighting over the last four months.

The cost of the evening was remarkably less expensive then previous Conventions which is because the guy running the show this time around used to be Party Treasurer and knew how to cut out frivolous expenditure.  Statewide Republicans can be glad to know their money isn't going to support somebody's drinking habit or lofty lifestyle ambitions.

Our Chairman came off eloquent and well-spoken from the podium.  And I don't mean this is in a negative way but he sort of surprised me.  I've seen him address smaller crowds and do a great job, but last night he really hit all the high notes perfectly - looking less nervous than usual, and incredibly confident.  Jerry Labriola rose to the occasion.  And you'd have to have a personal bias against him not to agree.

Quick thoughts on each District Race:

CT01: John Henry Decker did a great job to earn nomination to represent Republicans in one of the most hellish races any Republican in the Country could ask for.  His win came down to personal appeal and rolling up his own sleeves to do the hard work required to get the nod.   There was no trickery, or posturing, or twisting of arms - it's just that John is the real deal 24/7 365 days a year.  He secured the nomination with over 65% of the vote and was humble and gracious to candidate Mike McDonald.  You can't ask for more in a candidate than what you get from John Decker.   And his speech to the convention was outstanding.  Let's hope that folks in CT01 give John their support, time, and money.  He's going to need all hands on deck to put a dent in union-financed John Larson. 

CT02:  Last week Paul Formica was making real fillet-o-fish sandwiches, and serving hot buttered lobster rolls to his customers in Niantic, and today he's positioned to face Joe Courtney in what could be one of the most evenly matched battles in Connecticut politics.  It's a huge commentary on his viability and energy as a candidate that he was able to secure the necessary number of delegates to win on the first ballot in only five days. 

But I'd be remiss not to say a word about Doug Dubitsky.   It's been relayed to The King that the Dubitsky, who is also Chairman of the Grassroots East Organization, gave a great speech during nominations and suggested before voting commenced that regardless of the outcome that he would not primary and smartly suggested that doing so only served Joe Courtney's best interest.  You have to hand it to Doug; he could have banged his fist on the table, and pressed and demanded that it be his turn after being slighted by Chris Healy's interference in the CT02 race in 2010.  But he didn't.  He put Party before ambition, swallowed his pride, and released his delegates.  If you see Doug Dubitsky walking around - shake his hand, look him in the eyes, and tell him you appreciate that he's a stand-up guy!

Daria Novak on the other hand has already published comments on the local Patch Wall stating that she intends to Primary.  Novak won't win, but she will surely run a very negative campaign against Formica which will boost Courtney's prospects in the District.  Rumors to The King are that she has already started making derogatory claims about Mr. Formica to Party delegates and public voters.   Since Novak started off on a bad foot, she's likely to end on a bad foot.  And she's doesn't care who she takes down with her.

CT03:  Thank God Almighty for Wayne Winsley!  I hope that someone caught Mr. Winsley's Convention Speech on video because it was one of the few moments of the night when Delegates literally jumped out of their seats screaming and cheering their heads off.  Uncontested, for the most part, Mr. Winsley has won the difficult task of taking on Rosa DeLauro in November.  The good news is that Winsley doesn't have to face a Primary opponent, the bad news is that he has a lot of work to do in the fundraising department to amass enough cash to run commercials and get his message out.

If positioned correctly, this brilliant conservative could bring life to the CT03 Election.  And if its true that Mr. Winsley is a private investigator, he might want to trade in his spy kit for a minister's robe - because if Mr. Winsley is preaching - you don't want to be late for Church on that day!  Much like John Decker's task in CT01, Mr. Winsley might be thinking at times he's the one that drew the short straw given the voting demographics of the district.  But on the other side of the coin, you have to admire anyone who's willing to not allow Democrats a free ride and an uncontested seat in Congress.  So in short - when you're thinking of handing out a few bucks in soft donation - keep Mr. Winlsey in mind; he could use a few greenbacks thrown his way.

CT04:  Not much to report here from the Convention other than Steve Obsitnik, former Navy and Annapolis Graduate, and teacher will be representing the Forth Congressional District.  This guy is the total package; and has the look and sound of a great Republican winner in November.  This is another district where Republicans are more than just in play in 2012.  If you could had to predict where we could guarantee picking up only one seat in all of our Connecticut contests, Steve Obsitnik could be the guy to deliver it. 

The only problem that could hinder his performance is if Linda McMahon ever won the Primary.  Her negatives would likely bring Mr. Obsitnik down much like she did to Tom Foley and the entire ticket in 2010.  And don't laugh off this concern, go look at the numbers and you can see the results for yourself.  If I were Mr. Obsitnik, I would stay away from any other federal candidates and focus on himself:  That means no joint appearances, no photo-ops, just stay away from everyone else trying to grease themselves with your charm and charisma.  Focus on you!  And win!

CT05:  Again, I will go into more detail later in the week but here are few thoughts.  Andrew Roraback had a stellar win that you could almost get excited about if you're a member of the anti-Lisa Wilson-Foley-Rowland-Healy movement.  The beauty of the moment came when Mike Clark made a selfless (but calculated) move to release his delegates; many who then joined Andrew Roraback to give him the win.  Yes, Wilson-Foley, Justin Bernier, and Mark Greenberg will all primary to defeat Andrew Roraback.  So if you've enjoyed the last three months of controversy and Republicans punching each others lights out, then you're in for a treat because it looks like it's going to be a long summer in CT05 - and we're going to hit record temperatures!  

I also want to give a big shout out to Farmington RTC!  I love you guys (and gals)!  Mr. Philip Dunn's last minute effort to get Wilson-Foley-Rowland-Healy to step up and respond to a few basic questions was a fair move on behalf of transparency.  We can clearly see that Delegates had some concerns that to this day still have not been addressed.

The only part of this whole CT05 thing that I don't understand is why Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton jumped onboard the Wilson-Foley ship just before it started to take on water. His reputation is taking a bit of a beating.  First, by joining Linda McMahon and her cronies, and then - jumping on the Wilson-Foley bandwagon?  It doesn't look like Mark Boughton wants to be Governor after all.  What a shame.  He had such a promising political career.  Lucky for him though, people have short memories.

One also wonders if Justin Bernier will follow his own recommendation from months back, and drop out and endorse the nominee. It may seem a little hyprocritical if he doesn't.  I'm surprised this question hasn't already been raised.... ah, give it a day or so.

Stay tuned ... at least for the moment, the Curse of Chris Healy is alive and well.  But with so many candidates planning to primary - anything could happen.  Ultimately, the public will decide whether Andrew Roraback is their cup of tea, or merely a lucky guy who was able to patch together enough votes to win over establishment delegates.


U.S. Senate Race

Here is a quick overview with more to follow later in the week.  Although part of this piece may come off like Shays Campaign spin, its not. Try to follow as I set the stage...

Chris Shays pretty much started this campaign very, very late in the game.  In contrast,  Linda McMahon has been running for Senate nonstop since late 2009.  Yes, she subbed in a few new players to campaign team but essentially the core machine within the RTCs,  Party heiarchy, and State Central Committee that supported her last time has pretty much remained in-tact. Many of the donations and pay-offs to RTC Members, RTCs, and delegates are all well documented, and were made long before the Convention began. If was even reported to The King that Linda McMahon was offering cash bonuses for her people who could turn delegates for Linda on the Convention Floor.  And the fun didn't stop there, a few Shays campaign staff members were solicited to switch to Linda's team in the Marriott Parking Lot garage in the late hours of the night on Saturday morning.  The buying and selling really never ends, but after last night - for the most part - it's all over with.

I have nothing negative to say about the overall situation on the Convention Floor, so if you were looking for me to fill this entry with 101 concocted excuses for Shays' loss, then you've come to the wrong place.  The McMahon people had done their homework ahead of time, and deserve credit for their 2:1 winning margin.  This isn't to say that the Shays Camp did a poor job - the goal is always to win, but the underlying point was to achieve the necessary 15% in order to primary.  This number was doubled, so when you start with nothing and double your required margin - you still have to feel somewhat good about meeting the critical objective - the right to continue.  And I'll remind you - three out of five candidates (Kie Westby, Brian K. Hill, and Peter Lumaj) will need to collect a boatload of signatures to continue forward.  Whether they do or not, remains to be seen.

I only have two big criticisms of the Shays camp.  First, the decision to include footage of Dick Morris and Peter Schiff's electability comment footage was a bonehead move.  You could hear the groaning and booing echoing in the Hall.  All the other candidates took the high road and told their story, and put a happy, positive spin on their candidacy.  What everyone recalls about the Shays video were the negative comments which darkened the room, and dampened Chris Shays' appeal to a few on the fence.  I don't understand the rationale for this negative tactic.  My view is it might have created a false perception of Chris Shays as a negative campaigner - when the reality is that Mr. Shays is really an optimistic person on the whole. 

Second, there should have been a more concerted effort to keep Linda McMahon below 60%.  I'm not saying that it was absolutely possible, but had the Shays campaign been able to do so, the numbers would have been more favorable to make a counter-argument that just about half of the Delegates rejected Linda. Instead, adding all of the candidates together, they still fell below the threshold to make a legitimate claim.  The campaign almost seemed to shut down at a point near the end of first round voting.  I'm not saying that people didn't try, it just wasn't as strong a stand as could have been taken, to prevent the extra bleeding of the switches from Hill and others to McMahon.  

As a subnote, while the Convention was not as hostile as it was in 2010, the votes were also not as close.  In 2010, Rob Simmons was within only 20 votes, and on Friday, Chris Shays was down by hundreds.  The closer the margin, the more confrontational the vote switching phase becomes.  McMahon had the victory early, so there was no use in pushing and shoving over trying to turn a handful of people when it didn't impact the overall tally; they already had a huge margin over Shays. And Hill, Westby, and Lumaj had siphoned off around 10%.

So, the headlines on Saturday weren't exactly wonderful.  But Shays supporters should take heart - it's only a snap-shot in time, and it's a long ball-game.  Thankfully, the insider game is done and over with and now its time to reset the game board because the next goal is to win the Primary; to win public support.

It will be interesting to see if Hill, Lumaj, and Westby drop out or if they continue on the road to self-humilation.  The King has always appreciated their right to participate in the Nomination process and contribute to the debate - Brian Hill probably did the most to help elevate the discussion with his polite and issue-focused contributions over the last few months.  But whether the Party would be served well by either or the three continuing on a pointless crusade against the two remaining giants, isn't exactly clear.  It would more likely help Chris Murphy who should eventually win his nomination in August.

Much more to follow. 

I AM

THE KING

This original blog entry can be found at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com/

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

Tom Scott assails State Central Member on behalf of McMahon Camp

Ordinarily, I wouldn't get involved in petty squabbles between State Central Members and Political Campaigns.  It's expected that during our short Convention Season that arguments  will persist and tempers will flair between waring factions as each team works to secure their share of delegate votes.  It's expected that opposition camps will engage in policy interpretation, innuendo, and even name calling to a certain extent - some of it true, some a blatant lie, and the majority of it - a mix of fact and fiction melded together to cast their adversary in a negative political light.  Of course, most of rhetoric is aimed at either the candidates themselves or paid campaign staff - all fair game by the rules of political warfare. 

The drama that leads up to, and at the Convention is all inside baseball - of interest to delegates, party leaders, political hacks (like me), and media people who seek to gather any tasty morsel that may fall from the table of the feasting political hordes; the general public hardly takes notice of the proceedings, and they really don't care.  Fact is, most people look down on the whole convention process as a kind of sport for the well-connected, or well-to-do, and an unnecessary prelude to both the Primary, and General Election which is when real people get to participate.

Being a sounding board for the irate, betrayed, and maligned, my inbox is full of all kinds of complaints about the behavior about this campaign or that campaign.  Most of the stories are interesting, but I just don't have the time to research and publish stories outlining every wild CTGOP story that blips across my radar.  And there are also stories about Democrats that I hear about too - but these are much harder to verify because Democrats are more tight lipped (except at the bar) than Republicans. Republicans are far more willing to stab each other in the back out-loud probably because they have no fear of retribution by a union boss, or Party leader hiding in the shadows and monitoring their every word.

It probably doesn't surprise you that the majority of complaints I receive are about the antics of Linda McMahon's campaign team.  They are without a doubt, some of the dirtiest people ever assembled in Connecticut politics.  Every single day they seem to find a new false rumor to propagate, or find some innocent bystander to character assassinate - the poor sap's only crime being that they have a different opinion of the McMahon Campaign, or are merely supporting another Senatorial Candidate.  It's really amazing that the same people who - day in and day out - cry or send self-righteous emails demanding that Republicans must maintain civility or call for party unity are the same ones who participate in endless assaults against their Republican colleagues.  State Senator Joe Markley is the perfect example of this kind of hypocrisy.

Which leads me to the point of this post... tangible evidence that dirty politics are being perpetrated by McMahon, Inc.   (And at last I have permission to share an example publicly). This is just the tip of the iceberg of what is going on widespread by lovable Linda across our wonderful Blue State of Connecticut.

I can say that I've met Manchester RTC Chairman Matthew Galligan a handful of times in passing at political events.  He is a remarkable young man, full of pep, and energy who is always focused on trying to do the right thing.  I consider him a GOP-loyalist; committed to the classic list of positions that we all take a blood oath to defend.  He does a good job over in Manchester where races can be toughly contested, and Republicans will forever be (according to Demographics) a minority party.

Clearly distressed about the behavior of McMahon Employee Tom Scott, Mr. Galligan wrote the following letter (addresses and signatures scrubbed) to  infamous McMahon Campaign Manager Corry Bliss:

Also included in the attached memo, Mr. Galligan writes:

"The McMahon Campaign has called me no less than 10 times in the immediate days following my withdrawal - to include calls from Linda herself and Corry Bliss. To me, that smacks of a serious sense of alarm. To have such a formerly solid Linda supporter become so disillusioned with her campaign certainly must have sent them a message. I have no desire to speak with the McMahon Campaign after my interactions with Tom Scott. I've been told by my family for years that "you are judged by the company you keep." In my mind, that judgement is in and Linda McMahon will not have my vote at the GOP Senate Convention on 5/18."

Hmm? Inside baseball or bullying and intimidation by Mr. Scott and Team McMahon?  You  be the judge.  This must be the civility and party unity that some are so eager to demand.  And my friends, this is only a mild sample of what's REALLY going on. 

I AM

THE KING

This original blog entry can be found at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com/

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

Clear and Articulate Reason to Support Chris Shays; Convention Shenanigans

If you haven't already watched this video, please take a few minutes to listen to Peter Schiff make the single best case so far for supporting Christopher Shays at the upcoming Republican State Convention scheduled for later this month, and the Connecticut Republican Primary scheduled for August:

Most people out in the political peanut gallery are aware of what's at stake - it's not just a simple six year term that we're fighting for, but rather a lock of 24 to 36 years of Connecticut Senate Seat occupation should Chris Murphy see election to the U.S. Senate in November.  

The Politicos working for Linda McMahon hate to hear the Electability argument.  Every time that word in mentioned they shutter because deep down they know that everyone knows that Linda is so unpopular a candidate statewide that she can't possibly win.  Many RTCs and delegates who haven already taken payments and promises for favors in trade for support will tell you off the record that they feel trapped in their commitment.  Many are fearful about reneging on their obligation to Linda because of the threat of exposure of their own part in the pay-to-play scandal; and these folks are bright - they even admit that Linda's nomination would mean cascading doom for the entire Connecticut Republican ticket in 2012 (and even hurt Mitt Romney's chance of winning the State).  You see, it's so much easier to close your eyes, look away, and hope it all passes quickly -  instead of standing up and doing the right thing.

You'll notice that when you pose the electability question to those who've endorsed Linda, they very quickly launch into a drama-filled tirade, or try to change the subject and try to poke holes in Christopher Shays' 30 years in Government Service.  Very rarely will they offer you an issue-based counter-argument for supporting Linda over Chris Shays.  The reason for this is that many of them do not even know where Linda stands on basic issues; she's made sport out of masking her positions, and deflecting questions when posed to her. 

State Convention Shenanigans

It's pretty clear that things are not all peachy-keen in McMahon-land.  The more delegates think about it, the more willing they are to recognize the hazard of following their RTC leadership's fatal course in rubber-stamping Linda McMahon as the CTGOP's nominee.  In fact, its clearly come to the point where delegates are calling CTGOP headquarters and sending in emails about how some delegates are being intimidated within their own RTCs by McMahon's political henchmen.

For example, The King received a scanned document on Connecticut Republican Party letterhead which was sent to all state delegates as a part of their State Convention package that reads:

To:  Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr.
From: Robert H. Lutts, State Republican Party Administrator
Date: May 1, 2012
Re: Delegate Block Voting

Many questions have been asked regarding RTC delegate block voting.  I want to take this opportunity to address this issue.

Once delegates have been certified to the Town Clerk, the Republican Town Committee has no authority to direct a delegate's vote a the convention.  In other words, no delegate can be found or obligated to vote for any candidate pursuant to a RTC endorsement or otherwise, and said delegate shall be free to vote for the candidate of his or her choice.

Delegates also have the exclusive authority to chose their own alternative.

It's pretty clear to anyone who can read between the lines that there is a pretty big war going on inside the CTGOP regarding how this entire Convention is going to be conducted.  Block voting would have allowed RTC Chairman to undermine their own delegate's individual support for the candidate of their choice.  Can you imagine?  The very concept of trying to override a delegates personal choice goes against the very nature of our adhered to democratic principles! 

The King has also learned that the McMahon Campaign took issue with how roll-call votes are going to be recorded on the Convention Floor.  McMahon's team argued against recording individual delegate's first and last names, and for whom they were supporting during Convention voting.  Gee, you'd think you'd be loud and proud to stand up and scream your name and who you support for all too hear as a bold statement of conviction! No?  Well, perhaps if you have something to hide - like being on the take, or embroiled in some dirty scandal - then in that instance I guess you might want to keep your name and vote out of the limelight - if even for an instant.  (And don't bother denying it Corry, it's a damn shame!)

The bottom line is that since delegates are ELECTED OFFICIALS they should have some obligation to have their vote attached to their name as a matter of process transparency.

It's beginning to feel like 2010 all over again.

Big Story Coming Soon

Alas, there is still hope for the CTGOP Party faithful.  While Tom Scott and Linda's surrogates burn up the phone lines to keep antsy delegates from jumping from her sinking ship, The King is aware of a very big story about Linda McMahon that is finally close to breaking in the Connecticut Press.  It's believed that once published, it will reshape the political landscape and provide cover for delegates looking for legitimate cover to abandon Linda's suicide campaign run. Once exposed, several Party big whigs will also announce support for Chris Shays, too.  And we may seen a new alignment which may include some individuals previously tied to Linda.

Speaking of Tom Scott, rumor has it that he may have found an out in all of this silliness - post-State Convention, of course.  Scott is rumored to be considering another run for  State Senate.  Whether his association with Linda will be hurtful or helpful is still a big question, but with a few favors owed by his close friends - Suzio, Markley and others, he should be able to make a good run since he can count on their support.

Much more to come folks... stay tuned.

I AM

THE KING

This original blog entry can be found at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com

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.

Thoughts on CTGOP Senate Debate 2

I realize this piece is less than timely, but I thought I’d put something out at least for posterity’s sake, and if not for any other reason – for the fun of it.

General Thoughts on Debate Number 2

To begin with, I have to be honest that I’m not a big fan of the format used by WFSB-TV Channel 3 to host this second Senate debate. The 30 second sound-byte question and answer format might make for good television, but it’s hardly useful for those of us sitting at home trying to really learn a thing or two about the candidates in order to make an informed decision about who to vote for. If WFSB were serious about providing a public service – they would’ve hosted a 90 minute or 2-hour debate and allowed the candidates more time to explain their positions more thoroughly, and permitted follow-up questions by journalists that were of interest to viewers.

Most of us are less concerned about who the candidates think is their favorite Senator from Connecticut history, what the candidates think the price of milk is, when they last pumped gas, or what kind of car they drive. Anyone making decisions on who they’ll support based on frivolous questions like these should be banned from voting altogether.  That part of the show was full of play it safe or unoriginal answers anyway - once you hear the best answer, all you have to do is repeat it - it wasn't a surprise that 3 out of 5 Republicans chose Prescott Bush as favorite Senator with the annual Prescott Bush Dinner being held less than a day and half away! Duh!  Questions like those wasted both the candidates’ time, and viewers’ time. At least the two guest journalists weren’t left to embarrass themselves by being asked to pose such foolish questions.

For the most part, The Wall Street Journal’s Shelley Banjo, and the Connecticut Mirror’s Mark Pazniokas did a good job trying to squeeze the candidates for details, but moderator Dennis House seemed to push along the debate too quickly almost before the candidates could do any damage to each other, or to themselves. Don't get me wrong - the questions were good, but lacked the pointedness which led to fireworks that sparked in the debate moderated by Ray Hackett last week - so to that end, I was a little disappointed.  Ray Hackett set a high standard in the first Senate Debate and the Face the State version fell well below that mark.

I like Dennis House, but rarely if ever does he really challenge people with tough questions.  If you can't make it through a Face The State interview, you aught to quit politics.  It doesn't get any easier than FTS. It's like watching guests play an easy game of badminton with Dennis each Sunday.  Occasionally, he does have Bad-Ass Brian Lockhart on to ask a tough question or two, but Dennis always seems to pull on his leash so as not to allow for any of his guest to have a serious mental breakdown.  But I guess it works for WFSB, and no-one will ever accuse House of being a gotcha-journalist.  I still propose Shoot Out with Brian Lockhart as a viable option on a competing network: cowboy hats, six guns, and all - it would be a real hit! Think of the possibilities of seeing your favorite Connecticut politicians limping off the stage each week, figuratively bleeding and wounded at the hands of Sheriff Lockhart.  Oh man! We can still dream can't we?

Overall Performance Ranking

Last time out, I thought that Brian K. Hill led the pack with his stellar performance - original and refreshing, followed by Linda McMahon, Chris Shays, and then Peter Lumaj and Kie Westby pulling up the rear. This time around my rankings are close but somewhat different.  

One of the reasons for the delay in this piece is that I wanted to go back and re-watch the debate to make sure that my initial reaction wasn't off base - and I believe my gut feeling (reported out on Twitter) was supported by a closer review of the hour long exchange.  I’d say for the most part all the Republican candidates did very well presenting their positions and representing the GOP as best they could getting their points across under such limited conditions.  Chris Shays did extremely well and came out on top because he seemed more relaxed and truer to his usual form.  Linda McMahon was the opposite, she came across very stale, and at times looked very foolish trying to trip up Chris Shays on trivial matters that he easily dismissed as in accurate or misleading.  More so this time, Linda seemed to really lack tangible facts beyond her early unloading of memorized statistics.  This is where her overconfidence hurt really hurt her - a mistake she's made for three years now.

Brian K. Hill was once again quite good.  The reason that Chris Shays shined better this time around is simply based upon Shays' detailed references to his past-experience in Congress, and overall depth of knowledge.  Hill's outsider approach works well for him, particularly last time when he played referee between Shays and McMahon (while the others just stood there like mannequins).  This time, he didn't get that same opportunity, but sold his R-R-R plan as a believable strategy for the public to absorb.

Peter Lumaj is a bright guy, but his overall presentation and style is abrupt, rude, and confrontational.  Anyone watching Lumaj doesn't even want him as a neighbor never mind seeing him represent them in the Senate, or anywhere else.  Imagine what it would be like sharing an adjoining property with Lumaj and having a dispute about where the property boundary really lies.  Some people have a knack for being bright, but also have the ability to darken a room the minute they enter it - Lumaj is exactly that.  You just don't want to see him coming.

Kie Westby is a nice and knowledgeable guy, but he just doesn't have an ounce of charisma.  He's a lot like a going into a Baskin-Robbins Ice Cream Shop, and ordering plain vanilla.  He's not wrong about what he says, it's just he's very dry and uncanny.  He reminds me of the guy who wants to talk about work when you go out for a drink after a long day's labor. After about twenty minutes you just want to slit your throat and jump out of the barroom window.  At this point, he's not really separating himself from the pack, and he's not even mildly amusing like annoying Lumaj.  He's a policy-wank who would be better off in the State Senate or elsewhere.  Again, Kie is a great guy, but this Senate deal is just not his gig.

Individuals Performance (Best to Worst)

Chris Shays



I'm back! Was there ever a doubt?

 Congressman Christopher Shays acquitted himself much better than he did during last week’s debate where he looked sort of off-balance, and disorganized.  I actually wondered if we were watching Shays' stunt double up on the stage in Norwich. His opening statement “My name is Christopher Shays, and I’m running for U.S. Senate because I want my Country back.” The comment was as direct an opening you can get, abandoning all the cutsie window dressing heard from others. He came across strong on issues, and looked the part of a statesman, and once he took command, her never looked back.

I was glad to see Chris Shays raise the electability question early during the debate since it’s  the only question that REALLY matters. It’s important to point out the objections that  many Republicans have to allowing Mrs. McMahon to repeat history and take another trouncing on Election Day. Pushing her through to November is what every Democrat is hoping for given her resoundingly high negatives with the public.  And today's debate performance sort of underscored the many reasons why people don't want to see Linda as their nominee in the Fall.

The winning strategy for Shays is the benefit of his Congressional experience: in-depth grasp of the issues, co-sponsoring legislation, being a key sponsor of the Contract with America, and underscoring the many areas in which he was part of the solution.  Those calling him part of the problem haven't spent a minute researching his background.  When it comes to spending at the Federal level, aside from cloture votes, Mr. Shays was pretty thrifty with our tax dollars.  This is a point that he and his surrogates can do a better job reminding folks of.

I do love Shays’ statement: “Linda McMahon isn’t a fiscal conservative because she wouldn’t spend $50 million dollars so recklessly, and she’s not a social conservative because she wouldn’t run the business she’s in. You really have to question what kind of Republican would donate thousands of dollars in ’06 to elect Nancy Pelosi Speaker [of the House], and then give thousands of dollars to keep her in as Speaker [of the House] in ’08. I’m not sure that’s the kind of Republican people want to send to Washington.”

Bravo. And by the way – Linda McMahon has never provided Connecticut Republicans for a rationale for her donations to Democrats over the years, but it seems pretty shady to simply ignore the fact when it’s raised. I like Shays’ comment about removing ObamaCare (not repairing it as others have suggested). Shays said, “And by the way, Obamacare won't get repealed if you don’t elect [someone] who can get elected.”

Shays was quite strong on domestic policy issues such as health care, reducing taxes on businesses, and tax reduction across the board, bringing back American manufacturing, and eliminating our dependency on foreign oil, dealing with Medicare, and Medicaid issues, etc.  When you look a Shays speaking on these issues, you cleary see that he's qualified to talk about them -  you simply don't get the same feeling when you listen to the other four candidates.  This is where experience counts over wishful thinking and funny cliches.

Shays would also deal with the matter of who are here illegally by having them carry a Blue Card. That seems to be a way in which they could work, but not vote, and certainly not be deported. I think I’d have to hear more about how this Blue Card would work before I would buy into this strange idea. Seems like lots of details would need to be worked out before the Government starts printing out Blue Bards to illegal aliens.

"The most important thing that we can do is focus on economic growth and provide opportunities for more American, and that’s called the American Dream"… reducing taxes. Home run!

Brian K. Hill

Sharp as a tack, Hill brings value
and common sense to the race

Once again Brian Hill’s performance was well above average. His masterful command of the issues and straight-forward answers makes him a breath of fresh air in-between a group of very predictable individuals. Hill used many of the same themes which he invoked during Debate One which made him both appealing and interesting. It might because he reused many of the same lines from last week so he didn't come off as fresh and original as he did the first time around. But it was still a great performance.

Hill’s statement that “We need new leadership in Washington” is an age-old theme usually spoken by politicians who’ve been around the block but just in a lesser role (this includes Linda McMahon whose 'newness' has long worn off). But the fact that it’s coming from someone who actually is new to the scene gives him some credibility on the matter.

As he mentioned last time out, Hill said, “We don’t need any more career politicians, and we don’t need any more self-funded candidates. Those are the type of people who are destroying this country.” Even though it makes for a great theatrical sound-byte, this is sort of a double-edged sword for Brian K. Hill who has the least amount of experience of anyone running on the GOP side. Having experience is valuable – whether it’s consistently practicing law for many years, or serving in Congress for 34 years – and to be frank - not everyone in Congress who’s been up there for many years has been a disaster. It really boils down to who they are,  or what their voting record shows - that truly matters.  The counter-argument to going with a novice might be the pitiful results of the last three years of the Obama Presidency - since his lack of experience has been a disaster of sorts.

A point that Brian Hill continues to make is the need for the CTGOP to expand its base, and by that he means – expanding gains by attracting minority voters; changing the hearts and minds of those folks who reside in our cities to whom Republicans do not appeal. The problem here is that this idea looks great on paper, but fact is that its not an easy nut to crack, and no-one including Brian Hill has a plan for making this happen (aside from him becoming the nominee and assuming that he'd siphon off a few votes with his minority presence). You'll remember that this tactic didn't exactly pay dividends for another popular African-American politician - Corey Brinson.  Although Corey is loved and admired, at the end of the day his minority status didn't exactly win him the election in Hartford. Corey Brinson was rejected by inner-city residents on the basis of his Republican principles, and their lack of appeal to Hartford residents.

I’m not sure that Brian’s attack on politicians residing in lower Fairfield County will win him a lot of support in the Southwest, but you have to admit his quip that “...nominating Linda or Chris is like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. It doesn’t matter what order you put them in the ship is going down. We need a candidate like myself who can navigate around that iceberg – Obama.”  is entertaining.  You've got to love his spunk and delivery.  But again, would being a new face help Connecticut in the Senate Chamber?  I'm not so sure.

But I should say this - of all the candidates, Hill’s R-R-R (Reduce, Reform, and Restructure) explained in simple terms as - Reduce spending, Reform entitlement programs, and Restructure the tax code to a flat tax. It seems pretty simple, and it is probably the most memorable and understandable plan of any of the five GOP candidates.

Brian K. Hill was also strong on the immigration issue. He said he would support a liberal guest worker program. Making the statement that he's wants accountability of people who are here, and to find a way to tax them for the services they are using. I agree with both of these ideas. He seemed to endorse Chris Shays’ Blue Card idea which is as he said a “fair compromise” to consider.

Hill also supports the Gold Standard. Which is a topic that always seems to come up now and then, but never seems to gain any real traction.

Again, great job.  It's The King's View that he's earned a spot on the ballot.

Linda McMahon

It's only $50 mil, just raise
ticket prices

Surprisingly, Linda McMahon came across very rehearsed and unnatural during Debate 2. She almost immediately blurted out numbers and statistics as a school boy does during a memory dump to jot down formulas on the inside of an blue book moments before the start of an exam. The phony presentation was clearly more visible this time, and by the end of the debate revealed itself in the form of the most remarkable answer to one particular question that you’d better believe that her handlers wish she could take back (and likely has her competition scurrying around to calculate their own statistics).

This Plan that Linda constantly touts is really not a plan at all, but a list of general ideas without any substance behind it. I read through it line by line, and although it has some good ideas - I'm not that impressed. A plan is supposed to outline how one gets from point A to point B; if you read Linda’s so-called plan you’ll see that there is no meat to it. Surely, it’s a nice color brochure, and great marketing, but it’s hardly a roadmap for “moving the ball down the field.”

One of the criticisms people have always had about Linda McMahon is her shallowness as a candidate. And with two additional years of preparation for this race, we haven’t seen any real improvement in the quality of her positions. I have trouble with a candidate who constantly hides their specific points of view from the public. She almost has to be put on the spot in a television interview - the few she grants - to find out where she stands.  Ask any of her surrogates what she thinks about this or that, and they can’t tell you. This debate did very little to help us know who the real Linda McMahon is. And that’s an unbelievable thing considering that she has the commitment of people who don’t seem to know, or care where she stands on the issues, either.  Everyone seems to only be interested in her money which as we've seen guarantees nothing.

One of the things that’s most surprising about this contest is the willingness of the other candidates to allow Linda McMahon to fool voters into believing that her her company is  some normal, run of the mill operation.  WWE is unique in its product and appeal and is not tied to the same economic indicators that most small or large business are - markets, exports, economic growth, etc.  WWE is tied to ticket sales which may do well based on the quality of the show she puts on, but have little or no realistic comparison to mainstream businesses.  And there is a big difference between making a lot of money off of the backs of entertainers, ticket sales, and -- forging and creating a legitimate business enterprise which consists of a product one can truly be proud of. P.T. Barnum made a bundle fooling people and committing numerous acts of a fraud in a business very similar to Linda’s. Yet the other candidates seem to shy away from questioning its legitimacy as a business, and the negative aspects of it – which go directly to her un-electabilty problem.  They even shy away from questioning the role she's really had in its creation, and success.  What a pity.

One of the lines that Linda often uses is to link Chris Shays to the famed Bridge to Nowhere, but the problem with this line of attack is that her attempts to inaccurately portray Chris Shays as a big spender is hardly his record in Washington. One thing about Chris Shays is that he was pretty tight with the penny. And to attempt to sell the Bridge to Nowhere as some stand-alone vote instead of what it was - part of an enormous package of domestic and foreign policy bills rolled into one ... is dishonest. Picking apart votes to serve your own interest is a long-time election tactic that is both disingenuous and misleading to the public.

Linda McMahon doesn’t like it when someone blames her for the death of her employee-wrestler Chris Benoit who murdered his wife and child, and then committed suicide while under her employ, but she will use the same kind of tactic – guilt by association – to try and make cheap points against Mr. Shays by tearing apart cloture votes. Not the brightest thing to do when there is so much filth, injury, and death in her profession which honestly begs the question – how much does she know about all the drugs, violence, and deaths? And as an industry owner, how much is she responsible for?  But she doesn’t like to talk much about her Professional Wrestling Empire for some reason - except to advance her job creation myth.  And the recent post-debate press release by the WWE is as ludicrous as it gets.

And Linda McMahon speaking forcefully on health care issues doesn’t make a shred of sense to me. As former Candidate Richard Blumenthal pointed out – her company, the WWE,  didn’t exactly cover her employees the way she pretends it did. For the most part, her employees were on their own when it came to health coverage. So how this makes her an expert in business-run health care costs, I’m not quite sure – and sadly, none of the other candidates took the opportunity to point out this clear irony. And it’s very true that McMahon donated quite a bit of money to national health care advocate Democrat Nancy Pelosi – and not just once, but twice. I’m just surprised at how quickly State Reps and State Republican Leaders are so quick to forgive such blatant treason, in the hopes that they too can peel off some of her cash for their own coffers.

Linda McMahon is also on the class warfare bandwagon. She inaccurately accused Chris Shays of being against a Middle Class tax cut when he had just got done saying he was for a tax cut across the board. Fact is that Shays was quite clear that he wants to lower the tax rate for everyone as he pointed out succinctly for a second time during his rebuttal. Once again, Linda McMahon’s attempts to take cheap shots at Mr. Shays seemed to backfire as he seemed more prepared to deal with her chicanery and twisting of facts. Even her accusation of that Chris Shays voted most of the time with Democrats is misleading when the records shows that he voted 75% of the time with Republicans (Chris Murphy voted 96% of the time with Democrats). Another example of how Linda is grasping at straws to try to earn cheap points.

When Mr. Pazinokas asked Linda McMahon is she could see any way for those who are here illegally to find a path to citizenship – she completely avoided the question, went straight to the memorized script, and spoke about preventing illegals from coming over the borders and uttered that she'd tell those who came here illegally to “get to the back of the line” – whatever that means. She wants to impose a penalty on those who don’t pay their taxes, which isn't outlined anywhere in any of her plans, but made for good rhetoric on stage.

On the immigration question, Linda further said that if someone commits a crime they should be deported. Personally, I think if they commit a crime they should be held, tried, and punished. And only if the punishment warrants less than jail time, perhaps then deport them. But unlike Linda, first and foremost, I would hold accountable any illegal person for a crime they committed, and if it means giving them due process, and such ending with them serving time in our jail cells - so be it. Linda’s idea advocates for illegals to commit crimes and get away with it. Very bizarre, indeed.

Her overall performance was mediocre to poor. But I think that Linda McMahon really did herself in by suggesting that Joseph Lieberman was Connecticut’s all-time best Senator. Does she understand that Lieberman voted with Democrats 85% of the time? Does she understand that on most domestic issues, Lieberman was always a hold out, but generally voted with his own Party against Republicans?  I hope this struck a cord with those who are curious about what to expect from a Senator McMahon who finds supporting Democrat position just fine with her.

Perhaps her support for Joe Lieberman is par for the course for Linda McMahon.  Her handlers did not prep her in advance for the question.  And as a result she went back to what she knew best, and what she believes in - which is probably why she donated to Democrats in the first place.

The one saving grace in all of this for Linda McMahon is that there are five candidates, and two of them performed far worse than she did.


Peter Lumaj

I will save America from Socialism!

There is no doubt that Peter Lumaj has a great refugee story to tell. His modern day Ellis Island tale is a fabulous one worth repeating, particularly - in this day and age when so many people who’ve been here much longer sit around complaining that opportunity is lost in America, and they need Big Government to save them from their penniless plight.  I have to admit that Lumaj is probably the most conservative guy in the race which would make him a shoe-in if he were running in Tennessee or someplace out in the Midwest.

Peter Lumaj’s problem is that he’s Peter Lumaj. He comes across as an arrogant S.O.B. On the question of compromise – and it seems pretty simple Lumaj is against it. His unreasonable approach to working with others would not endear him to anyone within his own Party never-mind the other side of the aisle. His overly negative approach to the last two debates underscores why he wouldn’t be a good choice for Republicans in August. As for his criticism of Chris Shays, he might want to go back and look at Shays’ record more closely – and note that Shays was well regarded as a fiscal conservative, and was a co-author of the Contract with America which brought about significant positive changes for our Country including wholesale Government reduction.  You'd also see that the Contract with America was well-principled and much of it supported by Bill Clinton in an act of compromise. The outlandish argument that Chris Shays is responsible for the poor state of the country today is totally unreasonable. This is the kind of thing that makes Peter Lumaj look foolish.  Lumaj seems to discount the work Shays just just completed to save taxpayers $60 million dollars within Government Military Contracting division.

Lumaj also ventured to call Linda McMahon an “empty suit who stands for nothing. Her policies are completely confusing. She doesn’t understand the role of a Senator. You’re not a State Senator.”  Wow! It’s not often that a male candidate makes such a nasty remark against a female opponent – sort of bold, and probably not well-received. Mr. Lumaj might be conservative, but I'm sure conservative champion Jack Kemp must be rolling over in his grave at the way he represents us.

Another point that makes Lumaj look outrageous is that he often invokes Ronald Reagan, but like many who do, he seems to have forgotten that Reagan was most successful because he compromised with Democrats on domestic issues (from taxation to spending) and managed to get things done through a give and take process. The revisionist history that portrays Reagan as some immortal God to whom Democrats cowered in fear is pure fiction. Lumaj should study his history before using Reagan as a campaign prop for his so-called absolute and unapologetic brand of conservatism.

We also learned that Peter Lumaj wants to eliminate the Department of Education, the Internal Revenue Service, and the Department of Energy. While there may be some merit to shrinking the size of these federal agencies, I’m not sure how selling the elimination of these three (and more) helps Republicans win the election. Moreover, every time I hear the words Federal Reserve, I immediately become terrified and have visions of Ron Paul waving his fists in the air. This kind of talk is frightful to Independents and even moderate Republicans – who Mr. Lumaj doesn’t think we need as part of our majority to win elections. Mr. Lumaj's one view of the world is counterproductive to our goal which is after all - winning.

Lumaj challenging Medicare as likely unconstitutional probably won’t win him any votes either.  The King predicts that if Peter Lumaj ran today, he'd be lucky to gather 5% of the vote with his divisive attitude.

The one chuckle I got from Peter Lumaj was when he said, that “Linda's tax plan was misplaced. And the guys, who wrote if for her, do not understand….” I love the fact that he went out of his way to point out that Linda’s well-paid marketing firm put together her plan. Bold point, but also comical because it’s likely true - and he had the audacity to say such a thing on television. It is true that nothing that Linda claims to be her own creation is actually hers – not even her business which was long established before she and Vince took it over from Vince’s father after his death in the late 1970s. All of her experience is built on a false premise that she even built a business from the ground up – again, none of which is true.

Lumaj was outright rude when asked about Immigration Policy. He was trying to be coy by saying that the immigration issue could be blamed on Mr. Shays who served us – or pretended to serve us – a very classless comment to make during a Senate Debate. Does Mr. Lumaj really mean to imply that Chris Shays wasn’t diligently serving his constituents when he was in office? Really? And then to look over at Chris Shays and say, “Please don’t call immigration on me.” Is Mr. Lumaj just a big Wise-Ass?  We think so. 

The one thing we learned about Peter Lumaj (as if we didn't know it already) is that he lacks any sense of respect for his opponents, or the process.

Kie Westby

This may not be the job for Kie
Westby

This format wasn’t good for Kie Westby whatsoever. And to make matters worse, right out of the box his focus was The Constitution. I’m not sure about others, but when I hear a politician talk about The Constitution as his primary concern my blood pressure goes up about 75 points. The most important problem we need solved is improving the economy and figuring out how to reverse the incredible backward slide we’ve been on over the last three years under President Obama. Following The Constitution is not in itself - a plan! It’s politics. It doesn’t create jobs, it doesn’t put food on the table, and it’s not a motivating factor for anyone with half a brain to want to leap up and vote for you. There aren’t too many people standing around in bread lines with their heads down muttering, “If we had only followed the Constitution.” Nuts!

One of the positions that Kie Westby discussed was his idea to rewrite ObamaCare. I’m not sure he got the GOP memo that we aren’t looking for a revised national socialized medicine scheme of our own making which -  reserves more power to the states as he said - or anything remotely close to that. We want the whole damn thing scraped and forgotten about since no one goes without health care in this country except those who refuse to seek it.  Westby's position on health care is not conservative.  Heck, it may not even be moderate.

And although he didn’t say it implicitly, Mr. Westby seemed to be the only candidate who would deport people who are here illegally. That might have been his strongest point in the debate.  Other than that most of what Westby contributed for the hour was not very exciting or original.  That isn't to say he isn't a thoughtful or bright man - he is. But this Senate run just isn't his gig.  Given what we've heard so far - I'm very suprised that he's in this race at all.  I'm not sure he's even convinced he should be running.  It's The King's view that after the Convention is over, he should probably drop out and endorse someone.  This would save him from back to back humilations when it's truly not necessary.

Conclusion:

Yeah, I know this is too long.  I hear this all the time.  But what can I say? 

This race will come down to several factors outside of the rigged Convention that's  planned for next month.  Based on what these candidates are all saying - the CTGOP State Convention is merely a prelude to a five-way battle that will begin at the end of next month.  It may come down to whether or not those who shouldn't really remain in the race siphon off enough votes to give the victor the win at the time of the August primary.  With all five candidates remaining on the primary ballot for August, this likely means that the Party could end up with a nominee that nobody wants at all. 

It will be interesting to see if forces with in the Party come to their senses and merge camps to allow for the most electable candidate to take his crack at a seat Republicans haven't held since the time of Lowell Weicker.  And if Brian K. Hill's ominous foreshadowing comes true again, and we will set ourselves up for defeat before the election even takes place.

But one thing is for sure.  If the Connecticut Republican Party nominates Linda McMahon, she will guarantee the Democrat Party a Senate seat.  And she will have set a new record - for being the only Connecticut Republican candidate to have knowingly delivered a U.S. Senate seat to Connecticut Democrats twice in the modern age.

I AM,

THE KING

This original blog entry can be found at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com



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.