Sunday, August 13, 2006

"Red Ned"

Never say bad things about Waterbury:
As The New York Times reported Aug. 3: "Mr. Lamont prefers not to talk about his background. 'I've been blessed,' he will say, but beyond that he can turn testy." Ordinarily, such cantankerousness would raise suspicions among inquisitive reporters -- "What's he hiding?" But liberal journalists adore him because they share his world view on abortion, homosexual marriage, universal health care, racial quotas, loopy environmentalism and especially the war against Islamic terrorism.

They are blood brothers, or more accurately, fellow travelers. Just as journalism has become a hornet's nest of socialism (communism not yet perfected), if you shake Mr. Lamont's family tree, a lot of Red apples will fall.
Ned Lamont, in turn, has surrounded himself with people who may be characterized fairly as dedicated socialists and borderline communists.
Corliss Lamont was the only Lamont unashamed to declare his communist sympathies and beliefs publicly, but that doesn't make Thomas, Ted and Ned any less Marxist. Red Ned may label himself a progressive, but when he espouses goals shared by Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Castro, et al., he gives away his true color. ("Ned")

Multi-millionaire business owners for the society-wide redistribution of wealth? I guess so.

The lesson here is that one's campaign manager should always say that Waterbury is a very, very nice city, indeed.

Hat tip to an anonymous poster in this thread


"Ned Lamont's true colors." Waterbury Republican-American 13 August, 2006.


Anonymous said...

Dont mess with Waterbury Because Waterbury hits back.

I think Tom Swan has learned a lesson in what not to say. But I still think he needs to resign Because this will be a Black eye to Ned Lamont's Campaign and quite frankly the People of Waterbury have great memories and never forget someone who badmouths them or their city.

Do the right thing Swanny and resign before this gets worse for your candidate.

ctknows said...

Stunning editorial! How many people reading this today would have reconsidered their vote had they known some of this.

Anonymous said...

The Waterbury Fascist American's lunacy has nothing to do with comments of anyone from the Lamont campaign. They have the most deranged, hateful editorial board in New England. Their editorial page is mostly useful for its (black) comic value.

Genghis Conn said...

The editorial is misleading in several ways. Corliss Lamont was not actually a communist. He was sympathetic to Stalin's Soviet Union, but many people (including a young George Orwell) were at that time. Lamont later repudiated some of his beliefs and published a pamphlet entitled "Why I am Not a Communist."

He was drawn into conflict with that most un-American of bodies, the House Committee on Un-American Activities, in the 1940s. He successfully sued the U.S. Postal Service for opening his mail, a landmark victory for privacy rights.

The article also dramatically overstates the connection between the other Lamonts and communism.

ken krayeske said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ken krayeske said...

Looks like they let the monkey at the typewriter again in the Brass City. In the hallowed halls of the Waterbury train station, tucked in the second floor, under the towering shadow of the clock tower, the caged primates who write the editorials for the Republican enjoy a window view of the John Rowland courthouse and the Waterbury Green.

I think it serves to reinforce those values of God, family, and blind obedience. It is no mistake that Lieberman won spots where this paper holds monopoly distribution.

And one of the more famous apes from the late 1980s earned a promotion to become John Rowland's budget director, Mr. Callousness himself, Marc Ryan. More recently, within the past month or so, I loved the baseless editorial claiming that global warming was a hoax.

Waterbury doesn't take insults well, yet I suggest taking this well-reported slam with a cup of borscht, coming from the newspaper whose same editorial monkeys praised Rowland, Santopietro, and Giordano right into office. And we're still waiting for an apology on that Giordano for Senate endorsement.

Whiel Swanny deserves credit for wounding Goliath, Swanny's trumpet needs a mute, and his management has chased away good people from Lamont's campaign for less (ask me, I know). I think Rowland called it the arrogance of power, and perhaps we are beginning to see it grow here.

Look for more such fabulous foibles in the future from Ned's Demo-commies, who won despite their machismo and mismanagement.

Anonymous said...

Ned is not ready for prime time.... time will prove that...

And SWannie will prove - post-primary - damaging to Ned.

CTKnows said...

“I am a Communist, but I am a Truth Communist.” Corliss Lamont to Max Eastman

Dear Corliss

Sounds like hair splitting to me

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the link ctknows. Just what other twists and turns is this race going to take?

Anonymous said...

And here's where the liberals, deaniacs and their union brethen fail to understand American politics.

Unlike the Democrat primary, the general election will not be about universal healthcare, gay marriage and anti-war posturing. It will be a race to the center. And those kind of issues don't define the center (this is where liberals launch into their "people are stupid" routine).

Having run so far left to obtain the primary win, old Ned has a long footrace back. And Joe will look mighty moderate to ordinary voters when compared to Red Ned and a Hard Right Candidate like Schlesinger.

This, of course, is not unlike how the Democrats won back the White House under Clinton. During those years the Republican had to run so far right, that he just plain lost the footrace to the middle. The "New Democrats" understood that and nominated a perceived moderate--Bill Clinton.

I don't know about or frankly care who's to blame for the bad editorial, my point is that it's a part of a larger problem that any candidate who has won a primary like Ned has will have in a general election.

It's funny, do you really think "mainstream" voters warm to pictures of Jesse and Al in the backdrop?

Enjoy the ride...when the dust settles on this one, the only guy you'll call Senator will be Joe Lieberman.

Genghis Conn said...

The Lamont campaign will argue that opposition to the Iraq War and the desire to improve American health care (two of Lamont's big issues) are, in fact, pretty mainstream.

But I agree, Al Sharpton probably won't help.

Bobby McGee said...

Man builds his own company = communist?

I hope Lieberman takes this road; it's a losing argument on every level.

Bobby McGee said...

Healthcare and pensions should be very capitalist issues. Both put an undo burden on companies, making it harder for them to change and adapt to stay competitive.

BRubenstein said...

As if every commie goes to yale business school....builds a business...lives in Greenwich and joins a country club for a time...the Waterbury editorial smells too much for me to even wrap my fish in it.

Anonymous said...

In truth, the editorial writers of the Waterbury Republican-American hate Waterbury more than Tom Swan ever could. As far as I know, they've never written a constructive or hopeful word regarding the city or its operation and they've played no role in trying to improve conditions here. Their negative, mocking, hateful voice is a source of intense embarrassment and shame to those of us who are trying to make a better future for the city and its inhabitants.

BRubenstein said...

The Waterbury-Republican editorial might as well be in National Lampoon or Mad Magizine..

This is laughable..." Lamont has surrounded himself and campaign with socialists and borderline communists..." One of the Lamont inner circle ran for Governor in 2002 and bowed out to Curry, and while I was in the Curry inner circle we were complaining about this opponent as way way to friendly with the Republicans,Rowland and part of a " Vichy Government".... some radical he is..i cant believe how stupid the editorial is.

Basically, Lamont's folks are social liberals and fiscal moderates...just like he is...and ive known and worked with them all on various campaigns for 30 years or so.

Ive talked with Lamont maybe 4 times...3 in depth..he is what he appears to be...liberal on social issues and moderate fiscally and certainly not a radical.I found him refreshingly open and very genuine and with an ernestness and eagerness to serve the public.

There is some awfully bad stuff being smoked by the Waterbury Republican Editors..

Anonymous said...

Damn. Whatever you do, don't Google Waterbury+slime+evil.

I managed to get through all the ugliness about Santopietro and Rowland, but the stuff that's out there on Giordano is just incredible. And to think, that Waterbury dirt-bag was once the Republican candidate for United States Senate.


"This case is the worst I have ever seen," said U.S. District Judge Alan Nevas in passing sentence. "Your conduct is the worst I have ever seen. I've seen drug dealers, murderers. What you did is indescribable."

Nevas said Giordano had been "preying on two small, innocent children."

"They knew nothing. You, sir, are a sexual predator."

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

BRubenstein said... "
As if every commie goes to yale ....


What do you mean Bruce?

They don't?

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

First of all, Bruce, to correct you again. Yale did not have a "business school" in 1980 when Ned went there. It had a School of Organization and Management- largely derided as a weak link of the University until Jeff Garten took it over in the 1990s and turned it into a real business school.

Yale SOM used to be a training ground for people running non-profits more than a real business school. Its admission rates were actually pretty high then. I think Ned got into college on his name, probably got mediocre grades- because when he was applying to B-School, Yale was not a top 20 school in that area. Today, it's a different story.

There are lots of things you can tout about Ned- his Yale degree ain't so special.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

[Corliss] Lamont later repudiated some of his beliefs and published a pamphlet entitled "Why I am Not a Communist."

I'm waiting for Ned Lamont to publish his pamphlet declaring the same.

Interesting that on Meet the Press that Dean was talking about the middle class (even changing the subject to do so)- rather than national security. It was all Mehlman talked about.

Mehlman also refused to back Schlesinger when pressed. He also declined to back Joe. (Following the state leaders' directions on this...)

Chris MC said...

Quoth Brucie boy:
[...] he is what he appears to be...[...] moderate fiscally [...]

Yet Lamont described himself as "conservative" today in his interview with Fox News:

WALLACE: Is there any issue that you can identify right now where you break with liberal democrats?

LAMONT: I'm a strong fiscal conservative. I think we've got to live within our bounds. I don't know whether that breaks with liberal Democrats or not [...]

I think you are misrepresenting Lamont. You have a word for what you are doing, Bruce. I believe you term it "spin".

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

On Waterbury...

While this editorial is obviously beyond the pale, it does go to support my prediction that Joe will retain a significant percentage of his primary votes in the general.

Take the Naugatuck Valley alone...

BRube, you do have to admit that associating oneself with Maxine Waters and Al Sharpton is either stupid or brave- and while they may not be radicals, they are certainly "different." Did you have anyone with you in Curry's inner-circle who believed the CIA invented and introduced crack to the inner cities? (And don't respond by saying they introduced crack to the editorial staff at the Rep-Am.)

Chris MC said...


You'd best not quibble with Brucie boy over shades of Red. Brucie is a proud Leftist of the .

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Ned is in trouble-

Rasmussen just released new numbers on

Summary: Joe 46% Ned 41% Alan 6%

Pre-primary, you may recall, Rasmussen had the candidates tied at 40% each.

Significantly, Alan's support totally collapsed in half from 13% to 6%.

57% see Joe as moderate while 51% see Ned as liberal.

55% trust Joe over Ned on terror. 31% trust Ned over Joe.

Joe's Very Fav Rating: 31%
Joe's Very Unfave: 18%

Ned: Very Fav: 19%
Ned: Very Unfav: 23%

Joe is viewed at least somewhat favorably by 65% of unaffiliated voters compared to 49% for Ned

Interpretation: Like Dean a week before Iowa in 2004, the progressive candidate peaked. The moderates are going Joe. After people began paying attention, the numbers moved to Joe. Even after Ned's assault on Joe, the whole of the electorate does not buy the national security attack. Also, Ned has managed to develop higher negatives than Joe- in 6 months on the scene, compared with Joe's 18 years.

The polls are moving in the wrong direction for Ned. Does he move off-message to get to the center and turn-off the base?

It's just one poll, but it's the only one we've got.

With all the publicity and hoopla, the Reps are breaking Joe, Joe is retaining over a third of Dems and is enjoying good unaffil support.

But have fear not, Ned guys. The best way to beat this is to outspend Joe. Corzine him.

dumbruss said...

This editorial is more a show of how ridiculous the Waterbury REPUBLICAN-American is then an indictment of Ned Lamont. Doesn't the word Republican here tell you everything you need to know about where their point of view.

I thought the slime and evil comment applied only to politicians from Waterbury (and very aptly too). Apparenlty it also applies to its newspaper's editorial board.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

One more fact-

Ann Lamont in the last 3 cycles donated $10K to the National Venture Capital Association... which donated 64% of its funds to Republican candidates.

I wonder if the NVCA will back a horse in this race. It would be awkward to use Ann's dough against Ann's hubby, I guess.

Anonymous said...

Whether you like them or not, Al Sharpton & Jesse Jackson will lead the CT Democrats to a big victory!

Homosexual marriage and universal health care will be the two biggest issues and a Democratic majority will make that happen.

Connecticut is a progressive state and it's time we act like it!

Anonymous said...

Nice to see that the Rep-Am was able to exhume Roy Cohn to pitch in on the Editorial Board. As far as Lieberman trying to make Lamont look like a Commie, has Joe ever drawn a check from anywhere but the public dole in his entre life?

GMR said...

Damn. Whatever you do, don't Google Waterbury+slime+evil.

How come no one says the same thing about Bridgeport? In that city, you have the ex-Mayor in prison, and the current one admitting he used cocaine while in office.

Maybe not quite as messed up as Waterbury, but it isn't pretty either.

Anonymous said...

A lot of people have been comparing the Lamont-Lieberman race to the Lieberman-Weicker race of 1988, with Lamont playing the role today that Lieberman played in 1988.

However, given the support that the Rep-Am is giving to Joe, perhaps this race will be more like the 2000 contest between Lieberman and Giordano , with Lieberman playing the role that Giordano played in 2000.

GMR said...

So this WRA editorial seems a bit over the top. It almost seems like one of those internet sites that tries to claim that the Bush family has a long history of fascism and close ties with the Nazi party and so on.

Lamont's definitely taken a hard left turn, mainly because that's where his support lies. It seems that no one really knows for sure if he's fiscal moderate, liberal or conservative; but I'm betting that since he's getting his strongest support from people far to the left, that's where his positions will lie on most issues. But I think that by calling them all communists, you run the risk of sounding like, well, crazy.

Tell me if This link sounds any crazier than that editorial. This link ties the Bush family to the Nazis, with Brown Brothers Harriman, Averill Harriman, and so on. (See the Anti Defamation League's take on the same facts.

Chris MC said...

That's of the .
Blogger is doing wierd stuff:
Old School.

Eddie said...

I'd like to congratulate FatGuy for the first usage I've seen of "Corzine" as a verb. (Hey, some of us like stuff like that!)

When more people get to see Lamont, it'll be harder to tar him as a raving radical. When he first started running, my impression was that he was a dilettante without much substance. But the more I learned, the more I decided that he's an intelligent, accomplished guy. When primary day rolled around, I didn't vote against Joe Lieberman, I voted for Ned Lamont. Betcha I'm not the last Nutmegger who will make that switch.

And yes, a couple of courtesy calls to Waterbury are in order.

BRubenstein said...

Chris....i still call Ned a moderate in economic matters...he calls himself a conservative...time will tell wont it.

BRubenstein said...

fatguy..we had no one who believed the CIA was doing that...

Fatguy...we saw the Sharpton,Jackson,Waters " blowback" in the significant poll shift...and im afraid we will see more of it.I wouldnt have suggested bringing them in...when you are up 13 points it would have been better to bring in "softer" folks...but ah well...they must do what they must..

BRubenstein said...

Chris...ya i am...

Anonymous said...

Did someone post that Chris MC, Pat Rice and Turfgrrl have joined lieberman's party? Im not surprised at all...chris seems to be a lousy predictor...he predicted dean ( lost)...malloy ( lost) lieberman( lost)..almost as bad as Roy O in the win/lost column.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Good to hear, BRube. Bill Curry seems like the kind of guy who would roll his eyes around Maxine Waters rather than give a "shout out" to her to kick off a general election.

The problem now is that he has to dance with the ones who brung him. Watch out, Ned.

That poll is worth its weight in gold to Joe. He can convince people to give him dough- that he's a worthwhile investment, more than viable.

Additionally, it may keep some people away from Ned, particularly Senators. The World's Greatest Deliberative Body would afford for a guy like Joe to engage in some quiet equitable remediation, if re-elected. Oh, they'll talk like they're for Ned. But will they campaign AGAINST Joe? Not with these numbers...

Anonymous said...

tom swan = joe trippi

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Some more fat guy math- which I think only Chris MC may appreciate-

Rasmussen says 35% of Dems are going Joe right now.

If we take Joe's primary vote of 48% and assume that the above 35% is from that, it means:

Joe is currently retaining 70% of his vote from the primary.

I believe that this is consistent with my conservative assumption that Joe would retain 2/3 of his primary votes. Chris M, thanks for having faith in my numerology.

This math is very bad for Ned. A Dem can't win with 65% of the Dem vote, with Joe getting 70% of the Rep vote and running with higher popularity than Ned with indies.

This race will require extreme deftness on the part of Lamont. Mixed with extreme amounts of money. The undecideds are low (7%) for a race this tricky- some of them may be swung by external events.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

So, who will win the 2008 Shays-Lamont race in the 4th?

disgruntled_republican said...

Fat guy-

He will have to beat the sh#t slinger herself, Diane Farrell in a primary first....

Chris MC said...

Fat Guy -
I see what you're saying there, but consult the astrological charts and see what bearing that has on Lamont's chances. If he is a Pisces, then I would be more optimistic than if he were, say, a Sagitarian.

Now, I know this is waaaay out on the edge, but given the increasing prominence of China in the economic arena, the fact that this is the year of the dog may weigh heavily coming into October.

We still need to look at the moon phase in late October, but that is a whole thread unto itself.

Another key factor is the dates of Ramadan, but again, there is just so much one can attempt in these analyses.

John said...

I started a diary on dailykos about this tonight, perhaps you'd like to take a look?

Some very good comments, and I've posted an LTE I plan to send to the Rep-Am.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Chris, LOL. Hard.

I'm headed out to go buy some tarot cards. Need any?

Rethinking Dem said...

Is next years Jefferson-Jackson banquet being renamed to Sharpton-Jackson?

Ned's victory speech surrounded by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, two of the most divisive people in this country has been firmly implanted on everyone’s brain.

Ned was able to find the only 2 people in American that are hated more than George Bush. This will play out far worse than the George Bush kissing Joe video. A huge gift to Republican’s who have been claiming that the Democratic Party has been moving in the wrong direction…what an opportunity to paint the party with a negative brush.

What a dumb,dumb,dumb move...Ned! Was he so desperate that he could not see beyond the primary?

Is Ned really the guy that Chris Dodd, Nancy Dinardo, John Larson and others want to be united with?

Thanks to poor judgment, Joe wins in November and if the Democrats keep selling “unity” behind Ned…Republican’s in Connecticut win the General assembly majority and all Republican incumbents are sent back to congress. All of Ned's Grand Daddy's money can't fix this screw up.

Don Pesci said...

Here's the solution to the problem arising from the Red skeletons in Ned's ancestral closet: Denounce Daddy. Brubenstein will tell you that 60's leftovers use to do that all the time: Abbie Hoffman made a career out of it. DO NOT defend the indefensible (see MYLeftNutmeg on the propriety of defending GB's Iraqi incursion). At around the time Corliss was playing nursemaid to Stalin, the "Breaker of Nations" was starving Ukraine, and it really is tough to sweep 10,000,000 corpses under the rug. So -- denounce Daddy, and Grand Daddy, and Mommie, etc. Should'nt be a problem. Then remind Lieberman that the sins of the father should not be visited upon the heads of the sons. The whole thing should blow over in a week.

Don Pesci said...

Here's the solution to the problem arising from the Red skeletons in Ned's ancestral closet: Denounce Daddy. Brubenstein will tell you that 60's leftovers use to do that all the time: Abbie Hoffman made a career out of it. DO NOT defend the indefensible (see MYLeftNutmeg on the propriety of defending GB's Iraqi incursion). At around the time Corliss was playing nursemaid to Stalin, the "Breaker of Nations" was starving Ukraine, and it really is tough to sweep 10,000,000 corpses under the rug. So -- denounce Daddy, and Grand Daddy, and Mommie, etc. Should'nt be a problem. Then remind Lieberman that the sins of the father should not be visited upon the heads of the sons. The whole thing should blow over in a week.

BRubenstein said...

Don Pesci..sorry but Ned doesnt have "red skeletons" in his closet..see GC's posting on this where he says there were numerous best as i can determine..after speaking with him is that he is a liberal on social issues and a moderate on economics..

Eddie said...

(Don Pesci:)

Denounce Daddy. Brubenstein will tell you that 60's leftovers use to do that all the time: Abbie Hoffman made a career out of it.

If Ned Lamont reminded me at all of Abbie Hoffman, I wouldn't have supported him. If Ned Lamont reminds you of Abbie Hoffman, you might want to have your hearing checked.

Chris MC said...

Fat Guy. No, thanks. I rely on my ouija board and chicken bones.

Paul Vance said...

As someone who has been so embarassed by the unethical politicians in Waterbury, (Embarrassed to the point where I decided to do something about it)--I hated Tom Swan's comments about Waterbury and I told him so on the telephone.

I am very surprised that the Lamont campaign still has not apologized.

I do not accept being painted as somehow responsible for the corrupt acts of a few based on my hometown. How many times do we have to be lumped in with the people that have done wrong in this city? The apology should be to the people of Waterbury, who Tom offended when talking about two individuals.

As for the editorial, nice words about a Democrat (or trial lawyers) are few and far between in the Repub-American.

Genghis Conn said...


Tom did apologize.

Paul Vance said...


The article said that Swan would be sending an apology on Friday. As of today, nothing sent. In today's Waterbury Republican it was again noted. (There is no link, but I can put it in later on today)

I think Lamont's press person put it perfectly, "What Tom was talking about was not any current elected officials and certainly not the people of Waterbury." It would have been smart to have an immediate press release apology from the campaign before the issue got 'legs'. When I was at a party this weekend, someone there (former Waterbury person now living in West Hartford)noted that Lamont was quick to respond to Lieberman criticism, but really slow to apologize for the comment. He said to me, "It looks like Waterbury must not be too important to the campaign."

I think the statement really hit a nerve with people here, who are sick of being labled because of the Republican politicians who have let us down.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

Paul Vance said... because of the Republican politicians who have let us down.

Like Bergin and Sullivan right?

How about the tax collector you guys put in the 16th that couldn't even read at a 2nd grade level?
He was impressive.

Get it straight.
SantoPietro went to jail for cheating Ben Sisti out of $50,000 - he should've gotten a nice walnut and brass plaque for that instead.

Also note that the prosectution was all Irish and that when the Irish are in trouble those same prosecutors somehow "make mistakes" allowing the guilty a get out jail pass.

It's a bunch of bigoted BS worthy of the Sacco-Venzetti era.

Come on Paul, you're a bright guy and should have been the nominee for congress. At least that way while my party might lose, Connecticut wouldn't.

The bozo you've got running instead of yourself is a complete snake and every Dem I know (just had coffee with a TC member) loathes him.

You should have stayed in the race; and you should stop taking general pot shots at the other party where you will not find direct support later but won't find too many willing to work against you with any sort of religious zeal either.

Dumping Murphy is like a calling to a lot of people right now in both partys.

Paul Vance said...


It was not intended as a general potshot against the Republican Party, only trying to take Swan's knock on Rowland and Giordano at face value. I apologize and certainly acknowledge that political skeletons come in all political persuasions.

It would have been fun to run for congress and I think I would have done well with the U's and Republicans.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you, Murphy is a snake.

Genghis Conn said...

You'll have other chances, Paul.

Paul Vance said...

Until then, I need to scrape some $ together to buy Bruce some lunch.

BrassBoy said...

Paul, you can sell some advertising space on your noggin...

(not trying to be hurtful to Mr. Vance... he'll be the first to joke about the circumference of his head!)

Chris MC said...


on the Brucie situation.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

Genghis Conn said... "
You'll have other chances, Paul.

Ya never know.

The man has a sterling reputation and by all accounts more than a few functioning brain cells.

Either of those two qualities should be enough to disqualify him from my party and the fact that he suffers from both (gasp!) surely ruins his chances in his.

Mr X said...

Will the Real Ned Lamont please stand up?????? to quote the old tv show "To Tell The Truth" which Red Ned hasnt from day one.

justavoter said...

The Waterbury Republican is the last paper I would read for the news.

Waterbury has had in recent history corrupt people in local power.

So Waterbury Newspaper should be the last ones to talk .

Its to bad Waterbury voters get crooks in office after they get elected at some point.

Just look at the past history .

Hopefully there are enough Progressive people in Waterbury like any other place in Connecticut to show Washington Waterbury voters will vote for real change in November and makesure Lierman is gone with the wind.

Waterbury Progressives get out the voter and put those Republican and Democratic Conservatives including the Republican American in there place.

Paul Vance said...


I get a little bit sensitive when someone points at Waterbury as the epicenter of lousy politicians. If you go through every city and town in the state, there are examples of 'leaders' who are self-serving, dishonest or simply corrupt. I don't need to point to other towns, but there are plenty of examples.

I get mad because the finger pointing or name calling (often from out of town) discourages good people from getting involved. I put my name on the ballot in response to the nonsense that went on in the prior administration. Most of the time I disagree with the Republican American's editorial board, they are hard core conservative republicans and I am a rock ribbed democrat (and a trial lawyer to boot). I did agree with the Republican American when they endorsed me for election and when the editor told me it was because I am "smart and a straight shooter".

Mr. Swan was wrong to slur the whole town because of the City's unfortunate history, especially when he speaks for someone who wants to be a part of the future solutions.

Paul Vance said...

I don't know which tag fits my politics. I thought of myself as a moderate or a centrist and then I took an online poll that said I was a liberal. Does that make me a progressive?

I would like to be hopeful and believe that most people, especially locally, vote based on the person.

John said...

I wrote an LTE and faxed it yesterday morning - I heard from Steve Macoy, the editor, yesterday afternoon. Wonder of wonders, he said he was going to publish my letter! Here's the text:

To the editor

Re: Ned Lamont's true colors, Sunday, August 14, 2006 Editorial

I find it odd that the paper would engage in red-baiting this far past the fall of the Soviet Union, but there you have it - Ned Lamont's relatives are tarred with the broad brush of Communism, and so is he, by association. Odder still that you chose to leave out the many unabashed capitalists that Ned is also related to - perhaps this is because they have the same level of relevance to the campaign, which is to say, zero?

The disingenuous use of the phrase "Congress once declared [Corliss Lamont]" reveals much about your motives - could we not say, more specifically, that Joseph McCarthy once referred to Corliss in that manner? Are you afraid to mention McCarthy’s name for some reason? Given the level of the smear you're attempting to perpetrate in this case, one can only conclude that you endorsed Dukakis, Gore and Kerry in their presidential bids, based on the strength of the (historically factual) Nazi-Prescott Bush associations. Did you?



I can't wait to see what gets published...

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

John said "....on the strength of the (historically factual) Nazi-Prescott Bush associations"

From: The Anti-Defamation League

"Rumors about the alleged Nazi "ties" of the late Prescott Bush, the grandfather of President George W. Bush, have circulated widely through the Internet in recent years. These charges are untenable and politically motivated. "

Interesting that your blog is called:
Had Enough Lies Yet?
yet you're in here posting that tripe.

John said...

Fact: Prescott Bush owned a piece of UBC, a bank that was seized by the federal government in the fall of 1942 for trading with the enemy. This is not in dispute.

Read more about it here:,12271,1312540,00.html

The ADL states that Prescott was neither a Nazi nor a Nazi sympathizer, which is certainly accurate - I did not make any such allegation in my letter. I did mention the strength of the historically factual associations between Prescott Bush and the Nazi regime. They are historically factual and well-documented, and I stand by my assertions in that letter.

Anonymous said...

Who built his own business? Lamont has taken his inherited wealth and run his business down. He once employed 200 he's down to 35. I guess he doesn't care about the working people of the state at all, or he'd treat them better.

John said...

My LTE (referenced above) was published today, along with a preface quoting the ADL's refutation of Prescott Bush being a Nazi. It turns out that the specific allegations being refuted by the ADL began their life as a right-wing smear against George H. W. Bush in 1980 - and the allegations I was referring to, where UBC was seized by the federal government for trading with the enemy, are documented correctly. I'm going to clarify this point with another letter, explaining precisely what I meant byn "Nazi-Prescott Bush associations".

See Presott Bush's Wikipedia entry here: