Tom Foley: Slinking Away from Debates?

Is Tom Foley slinking away
like a Coward?

Most politicians realize that coming in first place at the onset of a race in a single, arbitrary Quinnipiac Poll over your inter-party rivals doesn't necessarily make you a front runner in anything. This is particularly the case when the alleged-leading candidate is Tom Foley; a man who has been anything but active on the Connecticut political scene since facing defeat at the hands of Dannel Malloy in 2010.

Aside from a few social appearances here and there, Tom Foley hasn't done much of anything to support his Party over the last four years.  He hasn't served as a de facto opposition leader -voicing dissent against poor policy decisions thrusted upon the public by Governor Malloy, or even bothered to show up at the Legislative Office Building to offer his leadership, or uttered a word of support for his Republican colleagues locked in battle (if you can call it that) against Democrats on social and economic issues. Of course, he did once serve as Joe Markley's lackey, and made the claim that both parties are unethical - a comment not very well received by Republican legislators who shook their heads and privately told him to "go away". Heck, who knew that only months later, the FBI would be strolling into town trying to nail Republicans to the wall over a 2008 election scandal. Well, Tom Foley's timing has always been a bit off. (insider's joke - sorry!)

Yet, despite his self-imposed exile from politics, we now hear - far and wide - how Billionaire Tom Foley is the anointed one - all but guaranteed his unearned place as the Republican gubernatorial nominee for all to bow down to and serve - especially certain handsomely paid delegates.  This is typical arrogance of elitist man who sits in his mansion drinking Macallan 64 and dining on five-course meals while his minions shakedown RTCs for delegate votes; Foley has so little in common with the average guy - a disconnect so widely felt that even some of his biggest supporters feel a sense of frustration with his snobbish contempt for "the little people".  A contempt clearly reflected in the same aforementioned Q-Poll which shows him barely neck-and-neck with one of the most unpopular Governors in the history of Connecticut

Now this isn't a discussion on the corrupt and twisted Connecticut Republican Convention process (we will get into that on another day), but rather to call attention to the disgraceful reluctance of an alleged Republican front-runner who outright refuses to exchange ideas and debate with his fellow competitors in a televised venue scheduled by The Hartford Courant-Fox 61 on April 11th (rebroadcast on April 13).  There can be no more sign of disrespect of our American tradition then for Tom Foley to slink away, and thumb his nose at a process that has been in existence since the early 1800s.  (Besides, if you recall the 2010 Foley v Malloy debates, you know darn well that Foley could use the practice - because he wasn't ready then, and he's not ready now).

Hold on there! You didn't say this was going to be Televised!

On their own merits, we thank John McKinney, Mark Boughton, Mark Lauretti, Joe Visconti and even CTGOP Party looney-toon - Martha Dean for their willingness to take tough questions and engage in live public discourse.  Foley's approach makes him look weak and cowardly to the general public, and the media (we remember how well that worked out for Linda McMahon).  And it shows Republican delegates that he lacks confidence by refusing to engage fellow Republicans in front of a Republican friendly-audience.

If Tom Foley isn't willing to debate members of his own Party to win support, then how will he win support from Republicans in the Primary? Or possibly later from Democrats and Independents in the General Election? The prevailing thought is that if he goes off and hides under the bar until after the State Convention that his rivals won't bring him down a notch by forcing him to defend his questionable, and ambiguous positions on Minimum Wage Increase, Pension Reform, Municipal Taxes, Public Unions, and even Second Amendment Rights. But one would think both he and the public have more to lose by him playing it safe. Much like ObamaCare where Congressmen said they had to pass the Bill before knowing what's in it, Connecticut Republicans are being expected to nominate Tom Foley without knowing where he stands. This has been a reoccurring theme by some of our CTGOP nominees over the last few election cycles (and it hasn't boded well for us).

Four years have passed since Tom Foley ran for Governor and lost. Unfortunately, Tom Foley's sole focus has been on how to locate the 6,000 votes from 2010 election which he presumes, if found, will catapult him to victory in 2014. But by trying to rerun the 2010 election, and repackaging himself as the same stale candidate, he wrongly assumes that the landscape hasn't changed, and that he doesn't have to re-earn the support of his own Party, and those who voted for him during he last gubernatorial cycle - a strategy that may prove deadly to his gubernatorial ambitions.

Just because RTC Chairmen and his campaign staff (with the help of Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr.) may jury-rig and deliver Tom Foley the State GOP Convention, doesn't guarantee that Foley will have the same showing that he had during the 2010 primary.  Given the strong field of candidates who are more than willing to engage the public on issues of the day, and earn the public vote, Foley may find himself trailing behind shortly after he receives the usual temporary State Convention boost.

Connecticut Republicans want to elect a candidate who is unafraid to stand on principle. Not a politician like Tom Foley who would rather lead from the rear and play "the strategy game." He may not know it, and he may not believe it - but Tom Foley is losing respect of Republicans all over the State who are already lukewarm about his nomination to begin with.

Maybe Tom Foley might change his mind. Perhaps he'll show the courage of his convictions and take the stage with his colleagues on April 11th, and just maybe he might earn the respect of the Party faithful and the delegates (many he has already bought) by outlining his vision for Connecticut's future.  But if he's not, then it signals that Connecticut Republicans are ready to nominate a new gubernatorial candidate; someone unafraid to serve as the standard bearer on behalf of voters who have for so long been under-represented. 

I AM 

THE KING

Martha Dean: A Fool's Errand

Even Conservatives Fear the Conspiracy Candidate

Long time readers of The King's View would imagine The King would be excited about the prospect of Martha Dean entering the Connecticut Gubernatorial Race, but if you understood the agenda of one of the CTGOP's loudest, opportunistic, bomb-throwers then you may have second thoughts too.  Dean's run is bad for both the Connecticut Republican Party, and for herself, and her family.

The issue is not one of qualification per se (although God knows we have way too many ambulance chasers holding public office these days mucking up our personal lives through an overreaching political system) but one of conviction and more importantly - of purpose.  Martha Dean's goal is to engage in a stratagem of self-promotion to improve her prestige with the gun lobby, enlarge her client base, and to damage the political aspirations of her Republican political enemies - most who happen to be less extreme than herself, and have a legitimate chance of actually winning the Governorship.  

The facts are clear. Dean has privately told several Republican insiders that she has no intention of campaigning beyond the State Convention (her intention also captured in the CT Mirror piece here) which tells anyone with half a brain that she's already quit before she's started. Since Dean is well aware that the CTGOP Convention process is rigged in favor of the establishment candidate, and she has a snowball's chance in hell of winning then why - pray-tell would she even bother jumping in at this late hour?

"Martha Dean's goal is to engage in a stratagem of self-promotion to improve her prestige with the gun lobby, enlarge her client base, and to damage the political aspirations of her Republican political enemies - most who happen to be less extreme than herself, and have a legitimate chance of actually winning the Governorship. " - THE KING

The reason has much to do with her well-paid role as legal representative of several gun rights groups which may possibly include the Connecticut Citizens Defense League (CCDL), National Rifle Association (NRA) and others - which for disclosure - The King also supports. And given our State Government's antagonistic behavior toward those believing in our Constitutional right to bear arms - then what's a better platform for Dean to expand her client-base than using the CTGOP gubernatorial stage to offer her billable services? It's The King's View that it's a bit disingenuous for her to take up one second of podium time at any Republican Town Committee when she's already announced that she doesn't plan to go the distance!  I would think twice before donating a penny to Martha Dean because she has no intention of being a serious candidate for Governor.

If Tom Foley, Chairman Jerry Labriola, John McKinney, and even Mark Boughton are paying attention (Joe Visconti is already actively engaged in Second Amendment advocacy), then not one of them should be happy to see Martha Dean turn the CT GOP Governor's Nomination process into a single-issue, Second Amendment media shot-storm! You think the media is celebrating now - just wait until the debates take place, and all the remaining candidates take collateral damage defending themselves against Dean's maniacal crusade!

The big problem for Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr is that Dean's unhinged rhetoric will bring nothing but public scrutiny and humiliation upon the CTGOP. How does the head of Connecticut's Republican Party feel about a seeing one of his candidates for Governor make claims that the Sandy Hook Massacre might have been little more than a Government Conspiracy to erode Second Amendment Rights?  Dean aired her half-cocked conspiracy on both John Rowland's show and on Face the State with Dennis House.  The idiocy is unprecedented! The King can personally introduce Ms. Dean to a close friend of his who lost relatives on that horrific day.  To politicize this matter this way is personally hurtful to all of those who honor both the Second Amendment, and the victims and families of the Sandy Hook nightmare.

Martha Dean fancies herself to be cut from the same cloth as the late, great British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. But the difference between the two is stark; for unlike Martha Dean, the principled Lady Thatcher - never ran from a fight.  For example, back in 2010, Dean secretly met with a handful of Connecticut Republicans to discuss the clear and blatant corruption within Connecticut Republican Party Convention process.  At the urging of others, she penned a set of revised Convention Rules, but when it came time to present them - like a coward, she ran away from the issue, asked that her name be taken off as the author of the recommended rules, and refused in any way, shape, or form to stand with her allies and fight for CTGOP ethics reform.  Martha Dean is well known for saber rattling, but once the artillery starts firing, she's the first person to run away from a fight, and abandon her friends on the battlefield.

Another concern Republicans have about Martha Dean is that her convictions aren't genuine.  Much like this gubernatorial run, she watches quietly from the sidelines, carefully calculating the moves of allies and enemies, and only after determining the coast to be clear - enters the field of battle. Her never-ending, Johnny-Come-Lately waltzing in on the scene is what has frustrates her own friends in GOP-land; many screaming that she's often done nothing tangible (and non-paid) on her own to contribute to the cause, but she'll be the first person to demand an opportunity to address a revved crowd. As everyone knows -  there's never been a microphone that Martha Dean didn't like.  Evidence of Dean's lack of political activism even lead to her being voted down from formal membership on the Avon Republican Town Committee. One RTC Member told The King, "Martha refuses help anyone but herself. She won't lift a finger locally. She doesn't want to get her hands dirty, and thinks campaigning on the local level is for the little people.  Besides, none of what we do [in Avon] fills her coffers."  If it's not for profit, it's not for Martha Dean.

To add insult to injury - in 2010, Dean publicly criticized then-candidate Jeff Wright of Newington  for taking Citizens Election Funding for his State Treasurer campaign calling it UNCONSTITUTIONAL. She also criticized others. Now, only a few years later, Dean is taking what she once referred to as Taxpayer Welfare to run her own temporary spoiler bid for Governor. This shows Dean's lack of consistency, and exposes the hypocrisy of her feigned principle. When challenged about this by Jeff Wright, Dean said, "You can't win without it." Hasn't she earned enough off of the the gun lobby to finance five campaigns?

Wright is Right.  The whole Connecticut political establishment finds
it interesting.  You have to wonder how much longer, Good Ol' Tom will be smiling
once Martha Dean gets rolling!

Another question everyone is asking is since Dean's run isn't going beyond the State Convention, will she return every unused penny back to donors?  Or will she turn the money over to a charity which will then in turn hire her to represent their interests thereby creating a back door money-making scheme?

Lastly, unlike other blogs on the web, we avoid getting into candidates personal lives. But I have to say that given what has been published by media sources during her last campaign, and with what she's initiated as of late, I'm gravely concerned that the current personal controversy being widely-discussed in political circles will have a long term negative impact on both her and her family. Sympathetic Martyrdom is not achieved through self-inflicted wounds. Her conscious decision to nail herself upon the cross for all to see (for a profit) - as she twists and turns in the wind - is hardly worth the pain and anguish she and her family will suffer at the hands of a hostile press. With Dan Malloy on the ropes for his incompetency, Dean has become the Democrats' "great white hope" for survival in 2014.  Let's face it - she's a lightening Rod for GOP negativity which radiates from her out to the entire brand. Dean's claim that her announcement to run is "perfect timing" shows a real lack of judgement considering that the whole gambit is at stake.

Now I'm sure there are Republicans who love Martha Dean. She has some followers who are so out of their minds that they wouldn't care if she tried to pull a coup d'etat with a borrowed pistol (note to all: our pretended second amendment poster child doesn't even own a gun, let alone a pistol permit). And I'm sure her handful of brownshirts mean well when they blast her name everywhere.  But they aught to know that legitimate candidates don't announce a run for big time public office only weeks before the Nominating Convention takes place.  Martha Dean may have well gone to acting school, but she should have gone to scripting school - because there is no way in hell for her to have a happy ending.  A Fool's Errand?  It's already begun.

If Martha Dean loves her state, loves her country, loves her party, and loves her family, then she will not embark on a mission that will undoubtedly yield disastrous results for everyone involved, especially Republicans.

I AM

THE KING

The King's War: Why Principle Matters

The only thing that will change the Connecticut Republican Party
is to wage a full scale political assault on the traitorous ideologues in control

Did you ever wonder why The King's View publishes what it does?  Did you ever wonder why The King puts more pressure on Republicans than Democrats?  Or sound alarm bells when Republicans sell out their constituency to appear popular or to avoid media criticism?

For years, critics have dismissed this space as the ramblings of a Democrat insider disguised as a Republican.  Of course, that line of bull comes from a few members of the GOP State Party establishment who're quite comfortable with their position in the world - and who don't really care whether we win or lose. From their perspective, they only care that we put on good show so those few Republicans left in corners here and there can go back to their districts and tell everyone how we gave it "the good ole college try" and then ask for more donations so they can keep up appearances, and support an all-but-guaranteed second place finish.

If you haven't noticed, most of the people who have stolen the reigns of the Connecticut Republican Party are not Republicans in the traditional sense; I argue that this is by design and not by accident. The consistent bill of goods being sold by our CTGOP profiteers is that we need to liberalize our politics because Connecticut Republicans are somehow - more moderate, more sophisticated, or more intellectually gifted than those in the remaining 49 other states. Of course, this pure nonsense, but that doesn't stop them from saying it. See, there is nothing magical here, nor are there mind-altering spores floating in the air (except at The Hartford Courant) which when inhaled somehow make Nutmeggers any more educated, complex, or superior then - say people in Texas, or North Carolina, or even in neighboring Massachusetts - where a U.S. Senate seat can actually be won by a Republican (if even only temporarily).  And when it comes to election results - we lose!  And why do Connecticut Republicans lose?  Is it because our people are genetically different as our leaders suggest? No! It's because we peddle a watered-down, gutless version of real Republicanism!

Now, I know this upsets many long time holders of power in the CTGOP - particularly those who won't even bother to get off their infinite asses to volunteer their precious time to help candidates go door to door, fold campaign lit, or even make voter calls, but instead will fight to maintain their personal election consulting profit margin - a stream which, incidentally, flows regardless of whether we win or lose.  And I'm sure that this also infuriates many of those, who - let's face it - wouldn't even be Republican at all if it weren't for a desire to trap a few more tax dollars from escaping their greedy pockets.

Fact is, Connecticut Republicans have abandoned their principles and surrendered in the name of compromise so often - that they've forgotten what it means to even be Republican.  What's worse is that we've become so conditioned to losing, that those running or elected are ready to go in and negotiate away whatever remaining crumbs Democrats have left on the table in order to avoid a public fight (or one that lasts more than a day or so).  It's more important to be viewed as popular, or to avoid being characterized as extreme by the Press (which hates and will always hate Republicans no matter what we say or do).  Our fake Republicans want to be seen seen as kind, warm, caring, and collaborative and part of the in-crowd regardless of the negative impact passed legislation has on Connecticut's economy or it's people.  Oh well, we can't win 'em all.  I'd be happy winning some, or even one or two at this point.

Not only does the Connecticut Republican Party lack a statewide strategy, it has no consistent message. Heck, even our Chairman doesn't want to stick his neck out and challenge the opposition - unless he really has to.  Take for example this week's visit by President Obama.  It's true, Jerry Labriola, Jr. did send out a press release - but the harsh reality of it is that - much like our Chairman himself - the message he conveyed was rather meaningless. President Obama came to Connecticut - not to listen to the concerns of our people, or to help address some of Connecticut's specific needs, but to pick up a few big donation checks, and use blue collar New Britain as a place to sell his minimum wage scheme. Do you think Labriola's press release even mentioned the words minimum wage or rebuffed the President by outlining how disastrous minimum wage increases are for businesses?  Hell No! Of course not!  Why? Because our leading party candidate - Billionaire Tom Foley thinks the minimum wage is wonderful - regardless of how many jobs are lost.  Foley undercut the rest of the GOP Field by declaring raising the minimum wage "an act of fairness".  So Foley is liberal on social issues, and now - on economic issues too?  And this is our Republican front runner?

So there you have it.  Not only do we have a watered-down press release, but a watered-down Chairman, and a watered-down Republican gubernatorial candidate too.  Why on Earth would anyone give a penny to an outfit that operates like this?

And we need not get too deeply into how Republican Mayor Erin Stewart made a sideshow of herself this week - cheerleading a President (who has killed our economy, and came to peddle more Government mandates on business),  tweeting shout-outs and selfies (tee-he, giggle, giggle), and ghetto language, and being curt with Dennis House - as if any of that mattered anyway.  For Godsakes, she doesn't get it - the President didn't even take a minute to shake her hand and greet her after she went out of her way to fall at his feet, and piss-off the GOP base by making a public spectacle of herself.  It will be a good day when this childish, one-term pretender is pushed out of office and relegated to a lead-encased, basement appointment where she can't do any further harm to our so-called brand.  Good grief!

Much of this is precisely why we haven't won a majority in the Legislature for nearly half a century.  Our CTGOP charlatan leaders spend all their money at the bar, and their time trying to convince the base that they are doing all of us a big favor running down the middle of the road.  But it's had the reverse effect of what's intended. Case in point, Senator John McKinney has been bouncing from RTC to RTC telling Republicans that his support of the Gun Confiscation Bill was a good deal because it could have been much worse.  The problem with this is kind of thinking is that Legislative Democrats, Gov. Dan Malloy, and Michael Lawlor (despite their theatrics of disappointment that the bill didn't go far enough) got exactly what they wanted; and are emboldened to start down the road to enact more laws eroding basic rights, and liberties.  Now, we have two problems - we have a gun law we don't want on the books, supported by a Republican who has rendered himself nearly unelectable by his own base (or the public based on the recent Q-Poll results) because of his cowardly stance.

The fact remains that the strategy "Something is better than Nothing." has never worked out.  And on the Second Amendment issue - it's killed us.

Think that's bad?  How about Dan Debicella down in CT-5?  Despite what everyone has heard about how detrimental ObamaCare has been on patients, providers, and enrollees - this clown Debicella, alleged to be a Republican candidate, has vowed to keep it in place, and went out his way in a televised interview to condemn anyone who criticized it.  A Republican who vows to support ObamaCare? Debicella must have been one of those morons working on Linda McMahon's campaign who spent his evenings putting pro-Obama door hangers on city dwellings. Debicella: pro-ObamaCare, pro-gay, and anti-gun.  Why in God's name is this guy even running on our ticket?

The sad thing is that despite this, Connecticut's Conservative Republicans almost always inevitably campaign for, and vote for liberal or moderate Republicans.  In contrast, liberal Republicans won't lift a finger to support Conservative Republicans who win primaries in their districts.  Case in point, Conservative activist Joe Visconti helped Christopher Shays in his Senate run despite stark differences between the two on gay rights, abortion, and gun laws. Very few moderate or liberal Republicans can make the same claim - always leaving traditional Republicans to "go it alone."  How many so-called moderate Republicans came down to the LOB to voice outrage over the Transgender Bathroom Bill?  Not many. Not one.  

Some people will claim that it's important to be the Party which is comprised of lots of different ideas, and perspectives. But what happens when you have so many ideas and perspectives running in complete contradiction with each other - so much so - that the public cannot make heads or tails about what you stand for?  The answer is simple - and the evidence is clear - the public shuns the overall brand for something that appears more consistent, easily understood, or perhaps even more organized, and sometimes that comes in the form of a third party - which is becoming an ever-present danger for the CTGOP given so many close races.

And what of Tom Foley?  Is he going to take the Linda McMahon route, mumble incoherent babble,  bob and weave, and keep his views close to his vest and leave it all as one great big surprise for us to uncover on his first day of work?  Or is he, or for that matter - Mark Boughton, Mark Lauretti, and John McKinney going to stand tall on principle and take the lead of the only genuine Republican in the race - Joe Visconti - and stop apologizing for the RNC platform and tell voters why voting Republican is the BEST option for Connecticut?

Take a look around you.  Ask yourself how many U.S. House and U.S. Senate seats Connecticut Republicans own.  Then ask yourself how we stack up in the Legislative Office Building, or in the Governor's Mansion.  Happy?  They say insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.  McMahon, Foley, Debicella, Labriola, Roraback?  Liberal Republicans void of principle giving the public little option but to reject Connecticut Republican for what it is - wishy-washy dribble.

The record for the Connecticut Republican Party is poor.  And it's poor because we don't stand for anything, and voters know it.  Until such time when Connecticut Republican Leaders can stop trying to find a backdoor to victory which doesn't exist, and clean up its own act - then The King's View will keep on going.  This is a war for the heart and soul of the CTGOP.  This is The King's War and it's a war worth fighting.

So go ahead, Labriola - keep abandoning the battlefield for a keyboard in a smoky bar.  Go ahead elitists - go on and push RINOs in favor of incremental tax increases, anti-business legislation, maintaining the income tax, gun confiscation. And keep promoting pro-gay and perverse candidates who erode our social values.  Keep nominating candidates who embrace ObamaCare, or want to increase the minimum wage, or seem to have no coherent position on anything at all.   Keep nominating billionaires void of experience or ideas who have plenty of money to burn and who run commercials to destroy the political careers of real Republicans who might make a real difference on behalf of Connecticut. And lastly, keep praising our opposition, welcoming them with open arms, and treating them as if their ideology is equal to our own, all while they seek to destroy everything generations of Americans have worked, and died for.  You see, we don't need too look far to realize that the bigger enemy is within.

Go ahead... for THE KING and his ARMY OF THE PRINCIPLED are waiting to repel you!

I AM

THE KING

The Hartford Courant Misfires at Republican Candidate Joe Visconti

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I AM

THE KING

Visconti to appear on Face the State

Clean cut, and ready to give
it his all

If you haven't heard the news - our old friend former West Hartford Town Councilman and former-Congressional Candidate Joe Visconti is running for Connecticut Governor on the Republican ticket.  Deemed a "firebrand" by The Hartford Courant, Joltin' Joe is ready to take center stage this Sunday on Dennis House's Face The State program.

For many, this will be a first time opportunity for the public to see Visconti field questions on key social and economic issues facing Connecticut on a state-wide televised Sunday Morning program.  Several Connecticut Republican insiders aren't happy to see Visconti getting the high-profile lime-light because they're aware that he's articulate and knowledgeable, and brings an energetic charisma to the debate - a stark contrast to the low-brow, stale rhetoric of Tom Foley; a person who doesn't resonate with the average Joe.  The Foley people recognize that they'll have a long road ahead because unfortunately for them, Visconti exemplifies precisely what Tom Foley isn't - likeable. For those CTGOPers who think - so what, this isn't a popularity contest - well, you've been drinking the establishment cool-aid too long.  Keep your stats, and corporate PowerPoint presentations to yourself, they won't do you any good in this race.  Not against Visconti anyway, or for that matter - even against Malloy.  As we've seen with Barack Obama's re-election, even a dismal performance can be rewarded at the polls.

As far as The King is concerned, the Visconti candidacy is a good thing for the CTGOP, and its not surprising to see him ahead in the unscientific, but well-respected Hartfordite Blog Poll. With a 40% take of all candidates in the race (including hapless Dannel Malloy) rockstar-activist Visconti is the man to beat. And so you know, despite our criticisms of him, we were sad to see House Minority Leader Larry Cafero drop out of the race this week.  Larry would have brought an insiders view of the legislative engine which has plagued Connecticut's economic recovery over the past 28 years.  Arguments can be made either way about Cafero's leadership effectiveness, but he'll likely remain a side factor for the duration of the race. He'll bide his time before throwing support in either direct - the sign of a savvy politico.

As of this writing, Senate Minority Leader John McKinney sits at 5% and Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton creeps in at 4%. This is a pretty disappointing showing for two men with long political careers, and plenty of name recognition.  If Tom Foley were the shoe-in preference of the public, he'd be doing a hellava lot better than 23%. Of course, it is quite early in the game.

With brains and beauty,
Connecticut might
just vote Penny for just
about anything

But The King has also noticed the Hartfordite Poll shows State Rep Penny Bacchiochi (Stafford Springs) coming in third at 10%.  Having announced her intention to run for Lt. Governor, this poll sticks her in the middle of the Governor's Race with a fair showing for someone not technically running for Governor (at least Republicans get points on the gender issue). Bacchiochi deserves credit for voting against the gun bill, and has a reputation for not backing down against the opposition in the Legislative Chamber.  People see her as polite, but firm - characteristics highly regarded in a nasty and confrontational environment.  This is a candidate worth getting to know.

As for Tom Foley, hey maybe - after all the delegates are bought-off, and all the insider favors paid as Chairman Jerry Labriola hides and plays dumb, he eventually becomes our nominee - but if he wants to win anything, he needs to loosen up a bit - perhaps get a massage or something, or take a Yoga Class to find his Zen.  Foley needs to shed the Armani suit, mess up his hair, go on Dancing with the Stars, and be seen wearing a pair of ripped jeans, and heard using a few curse words while crushing an Old Milwaukee beer can in his hand while standing around the fire-pit with a bunch of salt of the Earth folks.  In short, Tom Foley has to learn to converse with everyday people, drop the billionaire act, and most of all loosen the buttocks, and drop the dime.

Despite a high misery index in the Nutmeg State, if the election were held today, I can't imagine any outcome that wouldn't give Dannel Malloy a marginal re-election victory over Tom Foley.  Republicans have a lot of work to do.  If Tom Foley isn't up to it, maybe Republicans can find someone else.  In the meantime, let's check out what Joe Visconti has to say... he's worth a listen.

I AM,

THE KING

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.  

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.

Comments on the Linda McMahon Convention Buying article by NewsTimes

"Down 10 points to Susan Bysiewicz?
And destroyed in the Press because I'm buying Delegates?
Where's my Daniel Powter CD?... I had a bad day..."

Nine days ago, Linda McMahon and her campaign henchmen were smugly celebrating their well-orchestrated victory over advocates of the Convention Ethics Resolutions at the March 13th State Central Meeting.  Reports to The King were that McMahon campaign workers and surrogates were so insufferably pleased with themselves that they went out to a bar for drinks to celebrate; loudly mocking everyone who spoke in favor of CTGOP Convention Ethics and Transparency.  It's true, McMahon, with a wink and a nod from Chairman Labriola, won the day as The King reported last week.

It's a funny thing about politics though.  Some campaign strategies (like McMahon's assault on the Ethic Resolutions) might on the surface appear to be a great victory, but in reality has caused McMahon enormous collateral damage to her reputation as a candidate, and hindered her overall campaign strategy; clearly, not making it worth the effort.

It's clear to nearly everyone in the business that one of the things the McMahon campaign does best is ... miscalculate (underestimating their foes might be a close second).  Everything McMahon has done in 2010 or in this year's rebooted image of herself has been both a tactical and strategic failure. Everything from small-time Living Room visits to Delegate Buying has had the reverse, detrimental, impact intended - particularly if you consider the value for dollar spent. Linda's husband, Vince, was smart to insist on a spending cap for this year's one-way trip to nowhere.  Note to Linda: Grassroots campaigning, door to door doesn't work for multi-millionaires.  Tom Scott's advice was wrong. 

Just like the strategies above, this miscalculation is no different.  The McMahon people flanked by CTGOP insiders foolishly thought that once the troublemakers were beat back through personal malicious threats and attacks, and the Resolutions shot down by their paid surrogates that this would be the last of it, and the controversy would simply dissipate into thin air. Further, they thought The Press wouldn't take any interest in internal Party dispute over Convention Rules and Transparency, or the crazed connection between GOP Party Leaders, payoffs, and candidates.  Again, they were wrong.

While The Hartford Courant failed it's readership to be the Newspaper of Record and print the story that they were intimately familiar with, it occurred to CTGOP Party Reformists that there were other news outlets to choose from that had both the bandwidth and courage to report such a big story.  And if you can't see the relevance of delegate buys, intimidation, and corruption in Republican State Politics, and its effect on a U.S. Senate Race, then I can't help you.  I can't help The Hartford Courant's Editorial Board which seemingly values the promise of candidate print ads over delivering news to its customers.  And you wonder why Newspaper readership is down?

If you haven't seen it by now, NewsTimes columnist Neil Vigdor has done a great job capturing the main points of the story, fairly presented from all points of view.  His piece entitled, "CT GOP scuttles new disclosure rules for delegates" captures the essence of the matter - corruption, impropriety,  and the CTGOPs stubborn unwillingness to deal with it's problems.  Since Mr. Vigdor has limited space - unlike The King, I thought I would provide a bit more color to the story so that everyone can have a complete picture.  So you might want to grab a Snickers Bar to get you through the next several hours of reading - just kidding.

In the article, Chris Shays was quoted as saying, "McMahon is trying to buy votes and she's one of the reasons I got into this race." "Last election, I thought, what is my party thinking? She literally bought the convention. And she lost miserably in the general election and brought all the statewide candidates down with her, and she's back at it."
No one will wonder," Shays continued. "I'm not going to be silent about this stuff. The Republican Party I know and have always believed in cares about morals and ethics.
"I want the party that cares about morals and ethics."

Well, Bravo Mr. Shays.  It has been a very, very long time since we've heard a Connecticut Republican Party Candidate or Connecticut Republican Politician stand-up and say something so accurate, articulate, and forthright about the state of things in our Party.  When The King's View went online in 1999 (starting as a column), it was for the purpose of advocating for Republican positions and candidates as a lowly conservative voice in the vast forest of Democratic giants.  But after a while, after witnessing a never-ending strategy of self-sabotage ,and continuous defeat due in part to a wave of crooked Party insiders trying to make a buck for themselves, it became abundantly clear that until the CTGOP could clean up its own act, that winning - on any real scale -  was an impossible task. Thus, like Congressman Shays, we start apart from many of our friends lost in the corruption, who'd rather coddle each other's egos (and wallets) rather than elect ethical Republicans to office.

Many of my allies have taken issue with me over my support of Mr. Shays because a few of his positions are more progressive then they like.  So be it!  I remind them that I'm not looking for a carbon copy candidate who can't think for himself, and takes orders from Washington Party hacks spewing the same old classic lines from the 80s Reagan's Doctrine.  Many people seem to have forgotten that while some principles do in fact remain the same (such as those expoused by Edmund Burke, and Adam Smith), the Earth spins on its axis 24/7 and thus positions, policies, and challenges are constantly changing to reflect a new reality.  Of all the candidates in this race, Mr. Shays has the intelligence to recognize the difference between ideology and pragmatism. 

Ethics is a key component to Mr. Shays' character which is why he can stand tall when discussing the issue of CTGOP Corruption, and pay-offs.  With Mr. Shays, I also needn't worry about opposing interests drudging up decades and decades of endless scandals about steroids, drugs, deaths and injuries in the workplace, sexual harassment charges, exporting violence to children, and 101 other real distractions from my Republican Candidate's position platform.  Mr. Shays is his own man, who stands alone and can handle the heat of policy differences.   On the other hand, Ms. McMahon won't even comment on the matter of her Convention Buying or RTC Donations simply because she can't. 

In fact, how many times has the Connecticut Media seen the same thing over and over when they ask the McMahon Camp for a comment?  Do they get a real live person who interacts with them on a professional level?  No. Instead they get hired-robot Erin Issac who reads a carefully prepared statement off a 3x5 index card which never addresses the question at hand, and instead deflects reporters to a website outlining a so-called plan which in all likelihood was prepared by another set of hired political consultants, far and away from the candidate herself.  The campaign could save itself a bundle, and replace Issac with an answering machine: "Press one for Linda's Website, Press two to disconnect. Good-Bye."

The whole thing illustrates exactly what the public and press would be up against if God-forbid, Linda McMahon ever became U.S. Senator.  Cold, bland, and machine-like. It would easier to be granted entry to the James Forrestal Nuclear Weapons Headquarters than it would to ever meet with Senator Linda McMahon.  Well, at least we won't see her making fun of President Obama using a teleprompter any time soon.   For someone who constantly makes fun of career politicians, Linda McMahon certainly has the act down pat

For the record, Mr. Shays is just the opposite. He looks you straight in the eye, and answers your question directly.  And he doesn't answer it the way you want to hear it answered, he gives you his honest position on the matter whether you agree with him or not.  It's called, thinking on your feet, and out the box, and it doesn't require carefully prepared scripts, or handlers whispering advice in his ear.  And its nice to have a conversation with someone like Mr. Shays who actually knows what he's talking about.  Imagine if Connecticut had a Senator like that?

ANALYSIS OF CHAIRMAN LABRIOLA'S COMMENTS

I try awfully hard to give Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr. the benefit of the doubt.  I get it that he's been handed a raided bank account, a poor hand to play, and has to deal with a State Central Committee that more closely resembles Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves (except in this case there are a hellava lot more than 40 thieves for him to contend with) - than people looking to pull up their sleeves and give him a hand. In politics, nothing moves unless its pushed.  At CT Republican State Central nothing moves unless it's lit on fire or tied to cash payout. 

It's true that Jerry allowed the Sub-Committee to form and take up the issue of correcting the obvious improprieties. He also selected a Sub-Committee of individuals who believed that changes were necessary (when he could have selected a group to drive it into the ground).  Former Chairman Chris Healy would have squashed any attempt to bring the Resolutions forward before they were even inked to paper.  So for that we should be somewhat grateful.  However, real leadership isn't sitting in a tower of neutrality and acting like a disinterested party while events unfold around you.  And it isn't being all things to all people in hopes of currying favor to segments of the crowd, or delegating away your authority to act.  Leadership is having the courage to stand out front, take the issue by the horns, and carry the mantle forward when called upon to do so.

When I read Jerry Labriola's quotes in the article, I was a little more than disappointed.  "The members have spoken and we will now turn to the important matters at hand, like raising money and recruiting great candidates."  As if this wasn't important. And as if suddenly everything is hunky-dory and we can just go back to doing whatever the hell we were doing before  - like taking payments for votes, allowing people to manipulate the process, and losing elections in grand fashion because of it.  And of course there is the money.  It's always about the money, never policy, integrity, or doing the right thing.  Nope.  Raising money.  I was truly pissed after reading our Chairman's comments in the article.  Well good luck raising money after May.  I'm sure people are always willing to drop a few grand on a hopeless cause.

Maybe, we should have
gone with this Jerry
instead. Although there
are a lot of similarities

If that quote didn't turn me red, the next line surely did:  Labriola said, "The delegates to our conventions must now put aside distractions and use their best judgment to nominate Republicans with the greatest chance of electability this fall." Translation: Bringing integrity to the process is just a distraction. Everyone must now suck it up and play their role, and take it (insert expletive phrase of your choice) like man.  Labriola must have been watching The Wizard of Oz when speaking to Mr. Vigdor, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain."  Jerry, for Godsakes, is that the best you have to offer while the McMahon Camp buys delegates and steals the Convention?  You want everyone else to simply forget about it? 

At the least, Chairman Labriola should have lamented the fact that the Rules didn't pass.  Such an expression would have at least secured his credibility with his supporters.

This Convention is YOUR legacy.  So what if the other four Candidates - Shays, Westby, Dumaj, and Hill - all who believed that you would really do something to end corruption -  decided to skip the rigged State Convention, and simply headed out to collect signatures.  Why should they just play their scripted parts in Linda's Pep Rally Show, and allow you, and Linda's paid delegates to humiliate them on the Convention Floor? Why should they wait until May 18th to watch the shananigans unfold when they can skip it and legally start collecting signatures on May 1.

Look, I do like Jerry on the whole (I don't care if the feeling is mutual or not).  But this wasn't his best performance as chief of the CTGOP.  And I guarantee that he will likely always remember the 42-10 vote forever because it could wind up plaguing him all the way to November 6th if the Quinnipiac Poll Numbers continue to show true.  To take a quote from those on the other side of the fence, Silence is Acceptance.  The failure to stand up, lead and act - spoke volumes.  Sometimes you have to stick your neck out and fight.  Now you can't even say, "I tried."  No!  You didn't sweep it under the rug on March 13, but you're trying to do that now.  And this is all very sad.  The Rules Committee is your last opportunity to summon the courage to stand for truth and integrity.

I know I seem to come off rather harsh on the Chairman. Trust me, we understand that Jerry does a lot of good for the Party.  We know he works his tail off to raise funds and support candidates at every level, and has sacrificed significant personal time away from his family.  But this episode was particularly disappointing and we are all left with the fallout.  He learned the hard way just how polluted his SSC truly is, he couldn't have predicted the 42-10 slaughter.  He will never be able to look at State Central the same way again.

I was also slightly disappointed in Mike Vitali who I've praised repeatedly for doing a remarkable job as Chairman of the Sub-Committee.  But Vitali's use of the word "perceived" when describing the problem of lack of integrity seemed to be a bit disingenuous.  Either there is a problem or their isn't one.  Either the 2010 Convention was a last minute fire-sale on delegate votes or it wasn't.  Well, it was. I saw if first hand. Is State Central in the business of setting up a Sub-Committee to address "perceived problems" or real ones?  Whether intended or not, people now think you where placed in this role to make it look like the Party gave it a good old college try, followed by a carefully scripted outcome.  And you wonder why there is so much distrust between the GOP Party Faithful and its so-called Representatives.  Perceived, my arse.  What are we to perceive now?  Mr. Vitali, you had the moral high ground, why surrender it?

Again, we need to give credit where it's due - the folks on the Sub-Committee worked their hearts out to make a positive difference. I want to be clear that these people deserve gold stars for their effort.  Republican voters should be happy that there are at least a few people who are willing to do the right thing on their behalf.

KIE WESTBY OMITTED

One point that was missed in Mr. Vigdor's story (and also missed by The King in my previous piece) was that U.S. Senate Candidate Kie Westby, who is also a State Central Member, cast a vote in favor of The Resolutions on March 13. We appreciate Mr. Westby's courageous act to stand with the Reformers to improve our Party's reputation by doing more than giving lip-service to the notion.

BACK TO THE ARTICLE; SOME ADDITIONAL POINTS

In typical fashion, the McMahon Campaign manufactured at least one major lie worth repeating to highlight the desperate state of their retreat.  According to the article, McMahon's Camp (unidentified) claimed that some Republicans who are now delegates sought employment with the McMahon Campaign are now on the payroll of Chris Shays.  The King calls your bluff. We would love to see a list of those names, and moreover - we want to know if McMahon's campaign will follow the act of transparency set by Chris Shays by requiring paid employees, delegates, and vendors to wear identification badges as the Convention Sub-Committee originally sought?  And don't forget to include all of the names of relatives of State Central members also on your payroll.

<----------------------->

What also didn't figure into the article is that on one hand Linda's campaign said that it was up to State Central Members to formulate its own rules and you weren't interested in interfering in that discussion, yet all the while - Tom Scott was calling and badgering everyone including CTGOP brass to put a stop to The Resolution vote.  The level of dishonesty coming out of the McMahon Campaign is at an all time high.  But perhaps this week's Quinnipiac Poll which showed Linda McMahon losing to Susan Bysiewicz by 10 points might have made them more cranky than usual.

Tom "Yosemite" Scott became down-right
ornery over the notion of having to wear badges 

<----------------------->

One the best lines in the articles comes from Joe Visconti who said, "Integrity was Sent to the Gallows."  Nothing could be truer than that.  What's important to realize is that Reformers like Visconti aren't responsible for this inter-party crisis, quite the contrary - people like Joe are working hard to avoid another election cycle of disaster.   This is shaping up to be 2010 all over again, and if we aren't careful, the results could be much worse than last time because the impact of McMahon's Dark Cloud could resonate all the way down to Republican State Races as well.   Democrats who I know are counting on just that.  They see a perfect storm in the making with McMahon atop of the ticket.  And with Good Ole Tom Foley waiting in the wings, Democrats couldn't ask for more.

<----------------------->

Reading the comments by Edward Dadakis, a State Central Member from Greenwich, was a good reminder of the kind of blinders that State Central Member wear during meetings.  I would love to hear how wearing a badge to signify your paid allegiance to a campaign, or having a campaign supply a list of delegates and vendors on their payroll is so unwieldy and difficult to enforce.  You got to be kidding, right?  Are we so unscrupulous and unwieldy that our own people won't follow the rules?  They seemed to be pretty good at throwing Rob Simmons staff members off the Convention Floor in 2010, or didn't you recollect that, Ed?

While Ed tunes up his memory on that point let's debunk another misconception of his.  If Dadakis really sees wearing a badge identifying that he's a paid delegate as a "scarlet letter" than that's unique problem.  Most of the people you talk with agree that its more absurd to not have paid delegate wear identification on the floor of the Convention, as you would if you were a Lobbyist wandering the State Capitol.  So, what's really a bigger issue?  Wearing a so-called scarlet letter, or being dishonest about your paid association to a candidate?  As for payoffs and scandals - oh, its fine by Dadakis - hell, let boys be boys - everyone wheels and deals [and lies and cheats] - it's just the way it is.  Well, some of us appeal to a higher standard.

<----------------------->

Senate Candidate Brian K. Hill, who this author is still suspect of, had the perfect point about the Resolutions: "If you don't have anything to hide, there's nothing wrong with transparency."  Spot on.  And that's the question - how do you get around the transparency, and the third party transaction from guys like Pat Sullivan who serve as Linda McMahon's ATM service? 

<----------------------->

The biggest surprise in the article came from Justin Bernier, who as most people are aware, worked for Linda McMahon in 2010 after his unsuccessful Congressional Bid.  Quoting Hartford Legend Mark Twain, Bernier said, "Mark Twain said that it's impossible to convince a man of something if his paycheck depends on him believing the opposite,"  "Every Republican in Connecticut has a right to know which convention delegates are getting paychecks from which candidates. We need to be the party of truth and transparency -- not the party of payoffs."  

We need to be the Party of Truth and Transparency - not the party of payoffs.

Did you read that Chairman Labriola? Justin Bernier may not be The King's favorite subject these days, but he certainly has promise.  Justin's quote for some reason reminds me of Benjamin Franklin's quote: "When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."  Did Mr. Franklin ever imagine that the darkness of political corruption would seep down as low as Connecticut's Republican State Central?  Perhaps not, but the same principle applies.

LET'S NOT FORGET LISA WILSON-FOLEY

Sadly absent from Mr. Vigdor's article were comments about Lisa Wilson-Foley (phony) participation in the Pay-to-Play scandal.  Foley is equally as guilty as Linda McMahon in her quest to influence CT-05 delegate votes via RTC donations and other unmentioned rewards.  It's good that Kevin Rennie pointed out in his column that the majority of Foley's Healthcare business is subsidized by the Federal Government.  She skims from the Fed and in turn uses that money to pay RTCs for delegate votes in order to seek election.  Isn't Lisa's America a wonderful place or what?

As for Lou DeLuca and his $140,000 dollars worth of T-Shirt sales, well all I can say that its no wonder why he's listed on Linda McMahon's website as having endorsed her.  DeLuca's comment that his support for McMahon predated the T-Shirt deal - yeah, well its funny how that all worked out just right for ya' Lou, isn't it?  I mean for God-sakes, you've been caught red-handed with your hand in the cookie jar, and crumbs down the front of your (t)shirt. At least be a man about it and tell the truth.  Thank God for people like Sean Murphy who are at least willing to publicly stand up and challenge blatant corruption.

Taking a page from Mr. Dadakis above "every body's doing it", DeLuca tries to detract from his guilt by implying that Mr. Murphy has probably somehow and at sometime been bought by others  - a weak argument at best.  Anyone who knows Mr. Murphy knows that he might be as outspoken as The King, but would never stoop to the level of the DeLuca's of the world - who value personal profit over principle every time.  Oh, and DeLuca has appointed himself a delegate to the Convention, he'll be the one pushing a hotdog stand up and down the asiles selling t-shirts at $20 bucks a pop.

CONCLUSION

This week was a bad week for Linda McMahon and friends.  And perhaps an even worse week for the CT GOP as the headlines of corruption and delegate buying splashed across the front page of ctcapitolreport in 24 font for nearly 14 hours straight.  The image of our State Chairman with a cigar sticking out of his mouth and a brandy in his hand added a hint of arrogance to an already damaging story.

Democrats saw from the Quinnipiac Poll results, that our Republican Leaderships anointed candidate Linda McMahon trailed 15 points behind their likely candidate - Chris Murphy, and 10 points behind their lady-in-waiting Susan Bysiewicz, all the while and without having to lift a finger, Republican leaders were putting the screws to the GOPs only competitive option (Chris Shays) of winning the seat.  If someone really wanted to go hog wild, they could also make the case that Linda McMahon is a Democratic Operative, working behind the scenes to ensure an easy win for Democrats in November. 

But seriously - CTGOP RTCs and State Central Members are doing a huge injustice to the Republican Party.  On Election Day, Blue Connecticut will likely support President Obama by a fair margin, and if voters look at the next line and see Linda McMahon, they will quickly move to vote for Chris Murphy.  At least with Chris Shays on the line, there would be a moment of pause to reflect on the option, and many Independent voters, and some Democrats would certainly give Mr. Shays a chance.  With McMahon on the line, the rest of the Republican ticket will suffer immeasurably in a year where a candidate like Shays could lift the entire Republican ticket statewide.  Get this through heads - Linda McMahon can't win.

This weekend, we will see Chris Shays on Face the State with Dennis House.  It's a shame that all of this didn't come out before the Face The State taping which would have allowed for a few extra hours for the campaigns to absorb it all - because it would have made for some fantastic television to watch on Sunday morning. Athough I have to say that unlike Mr. Shays, The King wouldn't bet on him winning a rigged State Convention, but his numbers in the polls (versus Linda's) and sudden momentum certainly gives him the edge for a big-time upset win during the Primary.   I fully expect the McMahon campaign will most certainly need to stoop to the level that they did in 2010 when they unfairly Pearl Harbored Rob Simmons on his cloture votes on Cap and Trade and other random votes - there is a lot of concocted conclusions that the McMahon camp will try to manufacture from Mr. Shay's 20 years of public service.  The difference is (and no offense to Mr. Simmons) they'll be in a whole knew ballgame with Mr. Shays.

I personally can't wait to watch Linda McMahon gasping for air when she debates Mr. Shays on the issues given his depth of experience.  If she got beat around by Mr. Richard Blumenthal, who appeared to almost feel sorry for her, just wait until she watches a real statesman like Chris Shays take her apart.  It's going to be classic genius versus idiot match- up.   There's always hope that Linda could do the right thing and quit.  But with what she's invested so far, I just can't see that happening.

Oh, and one final note.  Rumors abound that Linda McMahon is forming a Superpac which is being bundled by some of her old Greenwich buddies - including one who thinks he's going to be our future Governor.  The big thing about the Superpac's power is its ability to hide its donors out of plain sight for a long period of time - permitting them to escape public scrutiny - while it fires its negative campaign attack ads at Chris Shays for a period of several months. Further rumors are that this weapon will be unleashed immediately after the State Convention allowing Linda to allocate her staff and campaign resources toward other, more pleasant campaign apperances.  If Linda McMahon is forming a Superpac, perhaps Chris Shays should form one to - just to keep things semi-equal, or at least interesting.

Linda is constructing a SuperPac
which will be ready just in time for June 1

Have a great weekend!

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.

"Hey Oswald. Another bourbon for me
and a lime-rickey for the lady!"