Connecticut Politics and Elections: Coverage, Analysis, Maps and Commentary
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Open Forum
What's happening?
(I turned off comments in the last post. It was getting too heated for a thread supposedly about overcoming hatred for one another. Maybe it'll be better after November 7th. I hope it will be.)
I would like to have a complete and open discussion concerning the column by Kevin Rennie concerning Caliguiri. I live in the East End of Waterbury and I'm sick and tired of our City producing these vile politicians. I apologize if the allegations aren't true, but I'm fed up and want an explnation.
Kevin Rennie is well on his way to being the Geraldo Rivera of CT politics. We don't need to have every candidate "swift-sheeted" over the exact marital status of bedmates from over a decade ago.
By the way, has Rennie apologized yet for his factual errors in the CT Supreme Court story?
Look all Republicans I have run into are mean spirited individuals who care only about power. For the most part they are not people to like. To see what the stand for watch the State of the Union some time. You really see what the parties stand for then. I would never stand up and applaud any partisan thing Bush has to say. What a joke man.
I also had a hard time finding the Rennie column. I did find this article from the Waterbury paper:
http://www.rep-am.com/story.php?id=12471
Sam seems to provide a pretty good explanation. If he was from any other town (waterbury) and we were not in the wake of an exteremly corrupt governor (Rowland), this story would not have been even brought up.
Neither party seems to have done anything wrong, especially Caligiuri. If anything he brought it up and she said, it did not matter.
I think this is why people dislike politics. This story was over a decade ago, it has nothing to do with politics, even the Courant's headline (skates on ethics, or something like that) is misleading. The Rennie story was baseless, sourceless and then just dropped in a sentence that Sam is against Gay marriage. He might as well have titled it "I don't like Caligiuri". I love the comment comparing Rennie to Geraldo Rivera.
Anonymous at 7:55: I am a Republican that is not mean spirited and I do not care about power. Hopefully I run into you sometime to change your mind.
ACR: Your comments are a hatchet job and offensive. Are you giving this guy a pass just because he was "20 and young"? Some actions just can’t be forgiven because they show blatant disregard for right and wrong. More important, this woman was STILL married and for a guy that was going to run on "main stream values," I can't seem to make sense of his explanations. She cheated and he was an enabler. She lost her job and he left JGR's nest to be appointed to the BOA in Waterbury.
Rennie indicated his reasons for writing the column and I thank him for letting me know exactly who Sam is.
The point is nothing Rennie wrote about here remotely impacts Caligiuri's qualifications to hold office.
I suspect Rennie thought he was destined for the big time a decade or so ago and now he is languishing out in South Windsor defending drunks and doing closings. So, let's lash out at those making progress. I expect maybe Mark Nielsen, Mitt Romney's Chief of Staff will be the latest fast tracker Rennie will draw a bead on. I heard from an anomymous source he never returned some books he borrowed in the 1970's to the Southwick library...
From what I've heard, they've hired, and driven out useful assets in positions due to certain differences within the upper echelon of the campaign staff. This is troubling.
How can they afford to do this when it's crunch time for campaigns??? Being pompous and condescending doesn't win you elections. And as we all know, a candidate is only as good as the people he hired in his name.
The Lamont people better change things or else it will get dicey as the election closes in.
I think all the Republicans should just sit back and watch the Lamont-Lieberman fight play out. It seems to be sopping up a lot of dollars, and a lot of anger from the Democrats.
I'd say that about 75% of this money would have found its way to other Democrats, although Lieberman is getting donations from some Republican donors.
I don't think Lieberman, if he wins (which I believe he will) will join the Republican party. He's not conservative at all. Lincoln Chafee votes the Conservative line about a third of the time; Lieberman almost never.
Lieberman did vote for the Iraq war, and he's a supporter of it. Lamont isn't going to stop it. Even a Democratic president wouldn't just pul out. Lieberman also voted to end a judicial filibuster, which had he not voted that way would have been broken through the "nuclear option."
But in any event, I really hope that the Democrats keep duking it out on this election! Meanwhile, Santorum is closing in on Casey. Kean may win NJ (although Republicans often seem to be ahead in polls there but then flounder in the general). Lincoln Chafee has a decent shot of holding the RI seat.
I don't see Republicans winning in Michigan, and sadly, Minnesota also looks like it's trending more Dem. Montana looks to go Dem. Missouri is looking more solid for the Republicans; Tennessee will remain in Republican hands it looks like. So I see the Republicans losing 2 seats overall, maybe 3.
The typical psychobabble from the right has clouded the real issue with Caliguiri and that is his total disregard for ethical standards. He, as a member of the bar, knows when the line is crossed, or he should know. You have an affair with someone who passes judgement over you in an investigation, and you don't tell anyone? Does the term preferencial treatment mean anything to you? Another Rowland disciple gone wrong.
Sleaze is sleaze. Some slick talking and shallow justifications don't cut it for me.
Whether or not she was married, he was in his 20's or whatever excuses ACR and Caligiuri want to put out is only a sidebar to the fact that a government employee had a personal relationship with another state employee who was supposed to be carrying out an ethical watchdog duty. Poeple often say that poltiicians need to be beyond reproach and steer clear of even the APPEARANCE of wrongdoing. That is clearly not the case here.
However, the affair with a married woman bothers me greatly. He says she was seperated - how convenient. Bottom line is she was still married! Seems the Courant was pointing out was that he didn't break any laws, but that he needs to get a big ladder to climb off of his high horse. YOU DO NOT HAVE AN AFFAIR WITH A MARRIED WOMAN! NO MATTER WHAT!
If he doesn't see that it was just plain wrong - then HE is just plain wrong!
And for those of you wondering, I am a Democrat who volunteered for Bill Clinton in '96, but was DISGUSTED with his actions with an intern. Though I didn't think is was an impeachable offence, that too was just plain wrong and I contacted my congressperson, two senators, and my state party to say something and resigned from my then town committee for their failure to write a letter condemning him.
Does anyone here actually take a moment a think about Rennie's motivation for writing this column? Why would he want to take a candidate down for having an affair a decade ago? Surely, there are plenty of other noted cads in politics in CT, including several high ranking officials in the D's state party offices. Yet, Rennie picks on Caliguri. Why? Well, did anyone else find his criticism of Sam's opposition to same-sex marriage out of place in the article? Why would Rennie make a point to mention that? Hmmmm. Put two and two together people and get back to me.
And for those of you wondering, I am a Democrat who volunteered for Bill Clinton in '96, but was DISGUSTED with his actions with an intern. Though I didn't think is was an impeachable offence, that too was just plain wrong
The Democrats were very good in framing the Monica Lewinsky affair as a matter of sex. However, the issue came up only because of the sexual harrassment lawsuit filed against Bill Clinton by Paula Jones. Had that lawsuit not been filed, even if the Monica affair had become public some other way, there would have been no impeachment or special prosecutor.
In a sexual harrassment case, you can be asked about consentual relationships with other employees. That's why Bill Clinton was asked about Monica.
For all of you gossip-mongers, can we please discuss important issues of the day, rather than stoop to Kevin Rennie's level.
For the record, I have never seen anything written where either of the two individuals discussed in Rennie's piece written for the National Enquirer ever acknowledge that there was an improper or even intimate relationship.
I have a feeling The Oil Companies are trying to help Bush and The Republicans by doing this feel good thing to take people's mind off other things.
The Bush administration doesn't control the price of oil. That's controlled by a worldwide market that consists of large multinational oil companies, governments, consumers, refiners, and distributors. Since the US imports most of its oil needs, there's not a huge amount the government can do.
Anon 10;17, so it's wrong for a kid lawyer to do something you deem "sleazy" long ago but it was just fine for someone in your own party who did somthing worse to hold the nation's highest office?
Based on your self-righteous hypocrisy I doubt the town committee really missed you
Huh? Where did I say what Bill Clinton did was alright? I said it was not an impeachable offense. Because of it I would not have VOTED for Clinton again.
And if you think being upset when a single man sleeps with a married woman is self-righteous, then you are morally bankrupt yourself.
36 comments:
We're turning the corner in Iraq?
GC,..its obvious alot of the comments come from very dysfunctional people...
I would like to have a complete and open discussion concerning the column by Kevin Rennie concerning Caliguiri. I live in the East End of Waterbury and I'm sick and tired of our City producing these vile politicians. I apologize if the allegations aren't true, but I'm fed up and want an explnation.
Kevin Rennie is well on his way to being the Geraldo Rivera of CT politics. We don't need to have every candidate "swift-sheeted" over the exact marital status of bedmates from over a decade ago.
By the way, has Rennie apologized yet for his factual errors in the CT Supreme Court story?
Frank S, given that yet ANOTHER New Haven politician allied with DeStefano has PLEADED GUILTY to theft, please spare Jodi the ethics lecture
Look all Republicans I have run into are mean spirited individuals
who care only about power. For the most part they are not people to
like. To see what the stand for watch the State of the Union some time.
You really see what the parties stand for then. I would never stand up
and applaud any partisan thing Bush has to say. What a joke man.
Does anyone have a link to the Rennie column about Caliguiri. I went to the Courant, but can't seem to find it. Thanks.
maybe the Courant moved the Rennie columm to the National Enquirer
Rennie column
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/columnists/hc-rennie0910.artsep10,0,3095551,print.column
I also had a hard time finding the Rennie column. I did find this article from the Waterbury paper:
http://www.rep-am.com/story.php?id=12471
Sam seems to provide a pretty good explanation. If he was from any other town (waterbury) and we were not in the wake of an exteremly corrupt governor (Rowland), this story would not have been even brought up.
Neither party seems to have done anything wrong, especially Caligiuri. If anything he brought it up and she said, it did not matter.
I think this is why people dislike politics. This story was over a decade ago, it has nothing to do with politics, even the Courant's headline (skates on ethics, or something like that) is misleading. The Rennie story was baseless, sourceless and then just dropped in a sentence that Sam is against Gay marriage. He might as well have titled it "I don't like Caligiuri". I love the comment comparing Rennie to Geraldo Rivera.
Anonymous at 7:55: I am a Republican that is not mean spirited and I do not care about power. Hopefully I run into you sometime to change your mind.
civility begins at home...
Anon 8:02, here your go:
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/columnists/hc-rennie0910.artsep10,0,7298952.column
ACR: Your comments are a hatchet job and offensive. Are you giving this guy a pass just because he was "20 and young"? Some actions just can’t be forgiven because they show blatant disregard for right and wrong. More important, this woman was STILL married and for a guy that was going to run on "main stream values," I can't seem to make sense of his explanations. She cheated and he was an enabler. She lost her job and he left JGR's nest to be appointed to the BOA in Waterbury.
Rennie indicated his reasons for writing the column and I thank him for letting me know exactly who Sam is.
While Rennie is certainly readable (unlike Bill Curry), a lot of his stuff seems to be about settling scores.
The point is nothing Rennie wrote about here remotely impacts Caligiuri's qualifications to hold office.
I suspect Rennie thought he was destined for the big time a decade or so ago and now he is languishing out in South Windsor defending drunks and doing closings. So, let's lash out at those making progress. I expect maybe Mark Nielsen, Mitt Romney's Chief of Staff will be the latest fast tracker Rennie will draw a bead on. I heard from an anomymous source he never returned some books he borrowed in the 1970's to the Southwick library...
Anon 10:03
"Some actions just can’t be forgiven because they show blatant disregard for right and wrong."
I'm confused. Since you are trashing Sam I presume you are a Democrat or a social liberal. So why wasn't Bubba run out of the White House by you folk?
I got it. There's no problem with our current faux pas because we can blame the other guys for decades old lapses.
Which of your two faces do you wash first?
Anonymous said...
ACR: Your comments are a hatchet job and offensive
I'm a mere amature on both counts, when compared to Mr. Rennie.
He's excellent and not half-bad author of fiction either!
Is there trouble in the Lamont Campaign??????
From what I've heard, they've hired, and driven out useful assets in positions due to certain differences within the upper echelon of the campaign staff. This is troubling.
How can they afford to do this when it's crunch time for campaigns???
Being pompous and condescending doesn't win you elections. And as we all know, a candidate is only as good as the people he hired in his name.
The Lamont people better change things or else it will get dicey as the election closes in.
Can't we all just get along?
I think all the Republicans should just sit back and watch the Lamont-Lieberman fight play out. It seems to be sopping up a lot of dollars, and a lot of anger from the Democrats.
I'd say that about 75% of this money would have found its way to other Democrats, although Lieberman is getting donations from some Republican donors.
I don't think Lieberman, if he wins (which I believe he will) will join the Republican party. He's not conservative at all. Lincoln Chafee votes the Conservative line about a third of the time; Lieberman almost never.
Lieberman did vote for the Iraq war, and he's a supporter of it. Lamont isn't going to stop it. Even a Democratic president wouldn't just pul out. Lieberman also voted to end a judicial filibuster, which had he not voted that way would have been broken through the "nuclear option."
But in any event, I really hope that the Democrats keep duking it out on this election! Meanwhile, Santorum is closing in on Casey. Kean may win NJ (although Republicans often seem to be ahead in polls there but then flounder in the general). Lincoln Chafee has a decent shot of holding the RI seat.
I don't see Republicans winning in Michigan, and sadly, Minnesota also looks like it's trending more Dem. Montana looks to go Dem. Missouri is looking more solid for the Republicans; Tennessee will remain in Republican hands it looks like. So I see the Republicans losing 2 seats overall, maybe 3.
Breaking news... Blumie campaigns on Acme Company's lies and distortions!
The typical psychobabble from the right has clouded the real issue with Caliguiri and that is his total disregard for ethical standards. He, as a member of the bar, knows when the line is crossed, or he should know. You have an affair with someone who passes judgement over you in an investigation, and you don't tell anyone? Does the term preferencial treatment mean anything to you?
Another Rowland disciple gone wrong.
GMR -
Dems pick up:
Montana
PA
RI
TN
VA
Oddly enough, don't count out Carter in NV. I don't think he can pull it off, but its amazing that he is still in it running strong.
Also, GMR, what about Ohio?
And never, ever, trust polling in NJ!!!
In the Senate – Dems win 3 of these 5
Missouri
Montana
Ohio
Penn
Tenn
But they lose 1 of these 4
NJ
Maryland
Minn
Mich
Dems plus 2, GOP retains comfy majority.
Sleaze is sleaze. Some slick talking and shallow justifications don't cut it for me.
Whether or not she was married, he was in his 20's or whatever excuses ACR and Caligiuri want to put out is only a sidebar to the fact that a government employee had a personal relationship with another state employee who was supposed to be carrying out an ethical watchdog duty. Poeple often say that poltiicians need to be beyond reproach and steer clear of even the APPEARANCE of wrongdoing. That is clearly not the case here.
However, the affair with a married woman bothers me greatly. He says she was seperated - how convenient. Bottom line is she was still married! Seems the Courant was pointing out was that he didn't break any laws, but that he needs to get a big ladder to climb off of his high horse. YOU DO NOT HAVE AN AFFAIR WITH A MARRIED WOMAN! NO MATTER WHAT!
If he doesn't see that it was just plain wrong - then HE is just plain wrong!
And for those of you wondering, I am a Democrat who volunteered for Bill Clinton in '96, but was DISGUSTED with his actions with an intern. Though I didn't think is was an impeachable offence, that too was just plain wrong and I contacted my congressperson, two senators, and my state party to say something and resigned from my then town committee for their failure to write a letter condemning him.
Does anyone here actually take a moment a think about Rennie's motivation for writing this column? Why would he want to take a candidate down for having an affair a decade ago? Surely, there are plenty of other noted cads in politics in CT, including several high ranking officials in the D's state party offices. Yet, Rennie picks on Caliguri. Why? Well, did anyone else find his criticism of Sam's opposition to same-sex marriage out of place in the article? Why would Rennie make a point to mention that? Hmmmm. Put two and two together people and get back to me.
And for those of you wondering, I am a Democrat who volunteered for Bill Clinton in '96, but was DISGUSTED with his actions with an intern. Though I didn't think is was an impeachable offence, that too was just plain wrong
The Democrats were very good in framing the Monica Lewinsky affair as a matter of sex. However, the issue came up only because of the sexual harrassment lawsuit filed against Bill Clinton by Paula Jones. Had that lawsuit not been filed, even if the Monica affair had become public some other way, there would have been no impeachment or special prosecutor.
In a sexual harrassment case, you can be asked about consentual relationships with other employees. That's why Bill Clinton was asked about Monica.
Princeton Professor Hacks Electronic Voting Machine
For all of you gossip-mongers, can we please discuss important issues of the day, rather than stoop to Kevin Rennie's level.
For the record, I have never seen anything written where either of the two individuals discussed in Rennie's piece written for the National Enquirer ever acknowledge that there was an improper or even intimate relationship.
Please, let's move on.
Isnt it ironic that Gas Prices are coming down 50 plus days before Election Day Also I bet the first cold snap we have they will shoot back up.
I have a feeling The Oil Companies are trying to help Bush and The Republicans by doing this feel good thing to take people's mind off other things.
Just How stupid does Bush think we are???
I have a feeling The Oil Companies are trying to help Bush and The Republicans by doing this feel good thing to take people's mind off other things.
The Bush administration doesn't control the price of oil. That's controlled by a worldwide market that consists of large multinational oil companies, governments, consumers, refiners, and distributors. Since the US imports most of its oil needs, there's not a huge amount the government can do.
Anon 10;17, so it's wrong for a kid lawyer to do something you deem "sleazy" long ago but it was just fine for someone in your own party who did somthing worse to hold the nation's highest office?
Based on your self-righteous hypocrisy I doubt the town committee really missed you
Lieberman must personally feel good that Bush and Cheney support him.
When I look at Lieberman I see a true Bush Republican.
Anon 7:55-
Huh? Where did I say what Bill Clinton did was alright? I said it was not an impeachable offense. Because of it I would not have VOTED for Clinton again.
And if you think being upset when a single man sleeps with a married woman is self-righteous, then you are morally bankrupt yourself.
"let those without sin throw the first stone"
why I am now hearing breaking glass
Lamont Campaign on Life Support......Film at 11
Major news for Lamont and sad news for Lieberman read story on Hartford Courant Link below.
Major State Union Switches To Lamont Hartford Courant
http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-lamont0918.artsep18,0,7835676.story
In the end Lieberma will lose this Lamont switch and endorsement will hurt Lieberman alot on November 7th.
Can't wait to see what other Unions will switch to Lamont from the Lieberman camp.
Post a Comment