The King's View

OP-ED: Roraback: A Poor Choice For the Right

2012-03-09T14:54:00.001-05:00

Peter Wolfgang sets the Conservative
standard while others copituate and hide

The following Op-Ed written by Family Institute of Connecticut President Peter Wolfgang appeared in the March 5, 2012 edition of the Waterbury Republican-American. Since not everyone has access to the Rep-Am Website, I'm producing this perfectly written Op-Ed for all to enjoy:

The state's Republican Party has made great strides in reaching out to social conservatives since Tom Foley's narrow loss in the 2010 gubernatorial race — a loss I attributed at the time to the state GOP's social liberalism. But the party establishment is about to blow it again, and the reason is Sen. Andrew W. Roraback, R-Goshen.

Party bigwigs believe Roraback's "moderate" positions make him the most electable of the Republicans running in the 5th House District. But Roraback is not a moderate.

If the Republican Party nominates its most socially liberal legislator to run in what is arguably Connecticut's most socially conservative House district, it is going out of its way to lose a race that can be won.

Most Connecticut Republicans who are "pro-choice" on abortion will at least support common-sense laws like banning partial-birth abortion or requiring underage girls to notify their parents before obtaining an abortion. But not Andrew Roraback.

As late as 2008, NARAL, the pro-abortion lobbying organization, endorsed Roraback for re-election. NARAL says its "endorsement is given only to those candidates who have requested endorsement and who are deemed by the PAC to be 100 percent pro-choice." In other words, you cannot support any exceptions to abortion-on-demand.

Roraback not only shared NARAL's pro-abortion extremism, he wished to be identified with it and actually sought out the group's endorsement. Indeed, the connection between Roraback's family and the pro-abortion movement runs deep. Since 1980, NARAL Pro-Choice Connecticut has given out the Catherine Roraback Award, named after his cousin, to those who have made a contribution to the right to kill unborn human life.

Roraback also is the only Republican legislator in Connecticut ever to vote in favor of redefining marriage and imposing full same-sex "marriage" on our state.

Attempts to redefine marriage failed every year in the legislature, and same-sex "marriage" was only imposed on Connecticut in 2008 by judicial fiat. In 2009, the legislature, powerless to overturn the court, codified the ruling but added the strongest religious-liberty exemptions in the nation.

In 2005, the legislature passed a civil-union law with an amendment explicitly defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Roraback supported that amendment but flip-flopped in 2007, voting for full same-sex "marriage" in the Judiciary Committee. He was the only Connecticut Republican to vote in favor of full same-sex "marriage."

Connecticut's pro-family and pro-life voters have no illusions about our state's politics. At times, we will vote for candidates who are not 100 percent with us. A candidate who at least supports parental notification, the federal Defense of Marriage Act and other common sense laws can gain our support.

But in the case of Andrew Roraback, the Republican establishment is asking social conservatives to vote for a candidate who is 100 percent against us. We will not do it. And if the GOP thinks social conservatives will vote for Roraback in the general election because we have no choice, they have not learned the lesson of Tom Foley.

After the 2010 election, the Family Institute of Connecticut's PAC received emails from our members thanking us for not endorsing Foley. They vote pro-life and pro-family foremost, these members told us, but if both candidates are social liberals, they will vote for the candidate least likely to cut their job as a state worker or teacher.

Those are the Connecticut voters you never hear about. They are the urban, or union, yet socially conservative voters who can make the difference in a close race. Tom Foley lost the governor's race by ignoring them in 2010. Likewise, the Republican Party will lose the most winnable congressional seat in Connecticut in 2012 if its candidate is Andrew Roraback.

Peter Wolfgang is president of the Family Institute of Connecticut Action.

---------------------------------------

The King's Commentary:

Mr. Wolfgang gets the heart of the matter when he describes the CTGOP's intentional abandonment of Conservatism in favor of a watered-down liberal version of Republicanism rarely found across the Fifty States as - a self-defeating strategy which has doomed Connecticut Republican candidates for the past 20 years. The facts show that genuine Reagan-era Conservatism brought us many victories in past elections due in part to it's widespread appeal to not only those on the right, but in the middle, and in some traditionally-minded Democratic circles.

Sadly, there are fewer Connecticut Republican candidates who are willing to accept the fact that social and economic policy is inevitably linked at the core. This shortsighted perspective has led to landslide victory after victory for our Democratic opponents who chuckle at the me-too antics of their socially liberal Republican opponents.

Like it or not, Andrew Roraback is a even more dangerous version of a socially-absent Linda McMahon or a Tom Foley - both of which fell short in 2010 for running to the left on social issues; choosing instead to publicly worship the golden calf while Party insiders cheered them on. Connecticut families hunger for men (and women) of good character who are willing to stand up on their behalf against the far left's anti-traditional family agenda. We want to see conservative opposition on important social issues, such as - homosexual marriage, gay adoption, legalizing drugs, NARAL extremism, and even permitting transvestites into our public bathrooms. Going a step further, Roraback opposes the Death Penalty - he would see our worst criminals spared from the justice they have earned through their horrific deeds.

Nominating anyone but an authentic Republican to represent the CTGOP on our slate in the upcoming election invites another guaranteed Democratic slaughter. Andrew Roraback is a proven liberal who'd be crushed at the polls by a disgusted electorate.

Looking around, Republicans find a U.S. Senate Candidate who happily voted for Barack Obama, another who's entire career experience is based on Pro-Wrestling, and a bunch of others who have abandoned Republican principles for wishy-washy centralism. One day, we'll get it through our heads that our failed strategy of mediocrity and emulating our opponents isn't the winning ticket. I just don't have much faith that it will be today.

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.

Will the Real Brian K. Hill Please Stand Up?

2012-03-06T23:05:00.007-05:00

I've toyed on and off with how to write this piece without coming across offensive to Republican Senate Candidate Brian K. Hill, or his energetic supporters. I have to admit that at times I find Mr. Hill's comments on many issues quite engaging. When Mr. Hill attends a Town Committee Meeting, or addresses a small gathering, he speaks without hesitation on the issues of the day, and fearlessly takes tough questions from the audience, no matter how hostile. I don't agree with everything he says, but at least he has the courage to stand up and speak his mind; it's refreshing considering that so many others spew canned rhetoric prepared by their staffs.

Brian K. Hill's patriotic service to our Country is first rate, no doubt.
But he's too sharp a guy to claim he was "hoodwinked" into voting
for Barack Hussein Obama. If you believe that, then I have a bridge
in Healyville that I'd like to sell you at a reasonable price.

Also to his credit, Mr. Hill doesn't insult people's intelligence the way that Linda McMahon does when she repeats the same-old boring lies about being a "proven job creator" - fact is that she's made her money from an company, which she inherited, that neither manufactures products, or creates jobs readily available to the non-pro-wrestling public in Connecticut. (How many WWE wrestling jobs go out on Monster.com?)

And whether she realizes it or not, Linda McMahon's number one selling point about "not being an insider or career politician" is greatly diminished by the fact that she's worked long and hard to buy long-time veteran political insiders, career politicians, and State Central Members to add her list of endorsements. It's hard to be considered an outsider when you surround yourself with insiders. It's ironic that the mainstream media has ignored the trail of McMahon's donations to RTCs to the Endorsements she publishes on her website.

Only a fool would ignore the obvious connection.

Moreover, her political director, former Independent Candidate Tom Scott, has spent significant time on the phone whining to everyone who will listen about the Ethics Resolutions currently being considered by CT Republican State Central. The Resolutions, by the way, have been modified by the appointed Sub-Committee and are scheduled to be placed before State Central for a vote next week (pending their placement on the agenda by Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr.). And when it comes to the Resolutions, Linda McMahon has talked out of both sides of her mouth. On the one hand, she's said she would support any changes to the rules that State Central Members would make, but then on the other hand, her surrogates have worked around-the-clock to squash the Ethics Resolutions, or poo-poo them, and have said they will embarrass people over their support for them. It's believed that they have also gone so far as to coordinate activities between other candidate's campaigns who would be equally embarrassed by exposure of the extent of collusion and pay-offs associated with their campaigns.

If Linda McMahon were truly interested in fair play, she would support the Resolutions in a direct public statement, regardless of who might be exposed by her generosity.  After the evening of March 13, the CTGOP will be sharply divided into two camps - those who are honest, and care about transparency, and ethics, and those who are corrupt and have been bought, and/or threatened through McMahon's intimidation machine.

Or we can all live peacefully, pass the Resolutions, wear the badges, come what may, and fight for our respective candidates through the Primary. It's up to Linda (and also Lisa Wilson-Foley - who's Campaign Manager is apparently knee deep in everything these days).

Back to Mr. Hill...

So out of the gate, I'll state the fact... this is not a hit piece on Mr. Hill  In my view there is some unsettled business that, at present, would make me uncomfortable casting a vote for Mr. Hil in a Primary.

We can start by Brian Hill's admission that he voted for Barack Obama in 2008. This is a particularly troubling admission to behold.   When I read the Greenwich Time article I was stunned. And many conservatives and moderates wrote me wondering if this was a misprint or another false rumor started by a competing campaign. If I hadn't heard Mr. Hill confirm it with his own voice, I would have taken it as just more political fodder.

What's more troubling is that Mr. Hill was further quoted as saying that he is a "life-long Republican." I have to stop here. There aren't too many life-long Republicans that I know who voted for Barack Obama. And most of my friends who are serving or who have served were big advocates of Senator John McCain, for if nothing else - their steadfast loyalty to him as a fellow soldier, a heroic POW, and for his unwavering support for the Troops of this Nation, including his support of the Veterans Administration.

Moreover, being a life-long Republican would imply having a full comprehension of the issues - economic, geopolitical, domestic, judicial, and social. Which position of Barack Obama's other than his anti-war policy did Mr. Hill find so appealing to get him to pull the lever for liberal Barack Obama. Was Mr. Hill truly hoodwinked, as he claims? From where The King stands Mr. Obama's hundreds of televised interviews, speeches, and his own political literature, background, and even the friends he kept time with spoke honestly about who he was as a person, his left-wing policies, and his plan to put his socialistic agenda into action.

Now Mr. Hill did make a compelling argument about his perspective that Senator McCain might expand American involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq in order to win the war, but if one were to take the broad notion of expanding the U.S. Military's role into account outside of just the Middle East, you'd have to include all of the other non-military roles (nation building, humanitarian efforts, etc) that our military is engaged in across the world at the direction of Mr. Obama. I was dismayed at Mr. Hill's use of the images of injured soldiers in medical hospitals as his primary rationale for voting "against McCain". I thought that the use of these images was a rather shameful, and disingenuous; and it's a weak argument at best.

No one wants to see our fighting men or woman injured, maimed or killed. But no one wants to see their sacrifices marginalized by a candidate seeking political office either. Let's not forget the real reason that we are engaged in military action in the Middle East and elsewhere - to destroy the terrorists, to wipe-out or contain our enemies who would do us harm, and to proactively ensure that another 9-11 does not occur, and I'll grant you - for other elements of our National Interest. Of course, there are other geo-political strategies that are too complex to spell out here in this entry.

Mr. Hill knows it was not John McCain or George Bush who put our soldiers in hospital beds; it was Taliban fighters, al-Queda operatives, and others enemies of Democracy. I can understand that Mr. Hill may not have liked his tour under "Bush W" as he's referred him, but it is what Mr. Hill signed up for, and it's also what helped put him through Law School and to be the man that he is today. So, while I can recognize Mr. Hill for his outstanding service to our country, I really cannot forgive his vote for Barack Obama - particularly given where this country is today. Mr. Hill gets no mulligan from The King.

Mr. Hill purports to run against the man, and the very policies which he supported when he cast his vote in 2008. And just for the record - there is no such thing as voting against someone. When you walk into a voting booth, you vote for the individual shown, period. Or you obstain. Any other rationale for supporting Barack Obama in 2008 is smoke and mirrors.

Another concern that has been brought to The King's attention is that witnesses have claimed that Mr. Hill has on two separate occasions (Hartford Lincoln Dinner and Durham RTC) asked audiences to support whoever wins the State Convention. If this is true, then it implies two things - first, Mr. Hill is not a serious candidate for U.S. Senate because a serious candidate would be planning to collect signatures in order to fight to be placed on the Primary ballot. If Mr. Hill intends to endorse the winner of the State Convention, then we can be well-assured that he's already written a letter of Endorsement for Linda McMahon, and that a check is in the mail made out in his name.

Second, the implication would be that Mr. Hill was in the race for the sole purpose of serving as a rouse or distraction to bring down Christopher Shays, or any other Republican who would dare oppose the Establishment's chosen candidate - Linda McMahon. It's noteworthy that Mr. Hill's public criticism and damaging attacks have been directed at Mr. Shays and NOT Linda McMahon. And when he does mention Mrs. McMahon he is quite reserved in his comments. Trust me - I read every story that is printed from legitimate news sources. I'm still trying to find the one article where Mr. Hill takes Linda McMahon to task for anything tangible. Next time, he speaks to your RTC - squeeze him on McMahon.

Now, I know I've created a bit of a conspiracy theory here. And I will quickly point out that I'm open to the idea that Mr. Hill had a mere slip of tongue (even if twice), and didn't actually mean what he said. But you'd have to ask him whether he's in it to win it through the end, or if this is just another temporary campaign meant to clutter the field, nab a few delegates to offset the totals, and that he's banking on a big pay day at the end like a large number of other well-known politicos.

I don't expect a response from this. I never do. But I'd like Mr. Hill to take one lesson from Senator McCain, whom he seems to have despised enough to support liberal Barack Obama in '08, and that is - take a ride on the Straight-Talk Express. You'll find when it comes to this issue - it may do you some good. Because right now, people who considered supporting you are abandoning you like rats off a sinking ship.

Hey, does anyone know if Wayne Winsley voted for Obama in '08? Just wondering. I bet NOT!

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.

Legislative Alert: HB5389: Renamed: CT Democrats pro-marijuana crusade

2012-03-03T22:12:00.002-05:00

Governor Dan Malloy and his protege - "Puff" The Magic Dragon

Last year, liberal Connecticut Democrats with help from a few off-the-wall Republicans supported a bill to decriminalize marijuana which eventually found its way to Governor Malloy's desk which he gleefully signed into law. The Senate version received a lot of publicity in Committee. You might recall the controversy over S.B. 1015: An Act Concerning the Palliative Use of Marijuana - which by the way was another disgraceful "yea vote" by liberal Andrew Roraback. You'll recall my piece on the matter entitled: Malloy: The Marijuana Governor? And you can imagine all of the angry emails I received from washed out, angry 60's nutcase who likely grow mounds of pot in the backyard for large-scale tie-dye smoke-ins.

"Stoned and being a fan of John Denver is no way to go through life, son."

And no offense to the many Ron Paul Libertarians who stop by to visit this blog, now and then. I know you folks have a lot of passion, and are well-meaning, and you harbor extreme hatred for the Federal Reserve, but many of you are a little nutty when it comes to defining Liberty as the right to smoke a bowl where-ever, and whenever you please. Some of you have gone so far as to express the view that "smoking pot is good for you." Sorry, not for me. And not for our children. And let's face it, you'd have to be pretty baked to sell your crazy theories about a secret government 911 conspiracy, or to adhere to the idea that the lunatics within al-Qaeda are just a bunch of misunderstood folks who mean us no real harm (you guys have more in common with Obama than you do with the GOP). Love, Dope, Peace!

The pro-marijuana/drug users are back in full force with a new Bill in hand (as amended), and once again with Governor Malloy in their pocket:

HB 5389: AN ACT CONCERNING THE PALLIATIVE USE OF MARIJUANA

(please click the link above for the draft version)

This version is an extension of the original but with many additional components. Basically, you find a pro-marijuana doctor (Sect. 1, Sub 8) who can diagnosis you with an debilitating medical condition (as loosely defined under Sect. 1 Sub. 10), who then takes his nifty pad, and writes you a certified note (Sect. 1, Sub. 12) that you're marijuana-fit, and you're good to go!

It's also nice to see the medical lobby is well represented in this bill by it's army of attorneys - HB5389 carefully outlines all the protections afforded to Doctors and "caregivers"; making then free from prosecution (and accountability) for anything their patients do, or they may have done to promote marijuana use, and or the results of that act as long as they've covered their rears with the right checklist (Sect. 5 and Section 6):

"(Sect 5): A qualifying patient or a primary caregiver may assert the palliative use of marijuana as an affirmative defense to any prosecution involving marijuana, or paraphernalia relating to marijuana, under chapter 420b of the general statutes or any other provision of the general statutes, provided such qualifying patient or such primary caregiver has strictly complied with the requirements of sections 1 to 15, inclusive, of this act."

and...

(Sect. 6): . (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2012) "A physician shall not be subject to arrest or prosecution, penalized in any manner, including, but not limited to, being subject to any civil penalty, or denied any right or privilege, including, but not limited to, being subject to any disciplinary action by the Connecticut Medical Examining Board or other professional licensing board, for providing a written certification for the palliative use of marijuana..."

This bill is one that even Michael Jackson's Doctor would approve. If only Conrad Murray had Jackson under his care in Connecticut, right?; he'd probably be onto his 30th cadaver by now, and able to afford to live large on an big estate next to Tom Foley in Old Greenwich.

I was happy to read to read that there are a few positives in the bill, including some restrictions outlined in Sect. 2, Sub (a)2, its nice to know that potheads won't be permitted to smoke their way onto a transit bus, or ... god forbid, a school bus. Boy, these legislators think of everything, don't they? I'm beginning to feel safer already.

This bill is just another move in the direction to legalize all kinds of drugs, and activities (or at least decriminalize them). Democrats are carefully inching step-by-step toward a world where drugs of all kinds are perfectly acceptable so long as they are administered by the State; nothing is beyond reproach if the State can simply get its cut of the action.

The victims of these bills are the generations of children who will grow up watching their parents smoking their brains away, and worse - they themselves becoming addicted to even more deadly alternatives which will put their lives in peril. Democrats don't want to talk about the tie-in that drugs - even marijuana - has to serious crimes like larceny and even murder. Democrats will tell you that no-one dies over dime bag of weed, yet it seems that we read week after week about drug-related gang shootings across the Country.

Making access to drugs easier is not the brightest move by our Government. And making those who should be accountable for perscribing them, like doctors, less accountable makes even less sense. It makes the job of the policeman, drug councilor, addiction staff member, and even the teacher that much harder. When hearings are held on March 7, the fact that the drug enthusiasts will drag out cancer victims and use the testimony of AIDS victims to use as props to advance their agenda is both unfortunate and disgraceful - because it masks the real intentions of pro-marijuana advocates, and disgards the real consequences for the rest of society.

Buzz off, Copper! I've got a certification from Dr. Roraback!

And you wonder what this world is coming to? Take a look around you. It's pretty plain to see. I'm sure CT Democrats will find a way to make smoking crack legal next!

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.

Legislative Action Alert: HB 5024 : Renamed: Bill to Eliminate Connecticut Republican Victories

2012-02-29T22:05:00.004-05:00

It's all fun and games until somebody
loses an election - a Republican
somebody, of course

Well, my fellow Connecticut Republicans: So you think winning an election is hard work now in one of America's deepest, darkest, bluest states?

Were you amused in January by New Haven Mayor John DiStefano's bold idea to allow illegal aliens the right to vote?

Did you enjoy watching Connecticut Democrats carve up our towns into uneven, illogical and nearly unwinnable districts for Republicans in nearly every place they could? Did you get a laugh out of Professor Nathaniel Persily's feigned attempt at fairness during his court appointed redistricting special master charade?

Well if you loved all of THAT - then you're going to REALLY love THIS!

Currently awaiting approval in the Connecticut House of Representatives is:

HB 5024 - AN ACT CONCERNING VOTING RIGHTS

(please click the link above and read the fine print)

I strongly recommend that you commit the bill number to memory because you're going to be hearing plenty about it very soon. In summary, this bill would allow anyone to wander up to a polling place on Election Day and Register to Vote so they may participate in the election currently underway! Attached to the Bill is the the archaic plan to introduce an online voting system which would fall under the control of Connecticut's Secretary of States Office

Not suprisingly, the four activist Democrats sponsoring the Bill are:

REP. DONOVAN, 48th District

REP. SHARKEY, 88th District

SEN. WILLIAMS, 29th District

SEN. LOONEY, 11th District

The Governor's version of the Bill is located here.

Also of major concern to both voters and Town Registrars is the following language in the Bill:

"The bill requires Election Day registration applicants to declare under oath that they have not previously voted in the election and to provide the same information as people who apply for registration before this date. This means they must state under penalty of perjury (1) their name, bona fide street address, date of birth, and citizenship; (2) whether they are disenfranchised because of a criminal conviction; and (3) whether they were previously registered to vote in another town in this or any other state. They must present their birth certificate, driver’s license, or Social Security card to the admitting official for inspection.

If the applicant’s ID does not include proof of his or her residential address, he or she must submit a driver’s learner’s permit, utility bill due no later than 30 days after the election, or current college registration or fee statement that includes his or her name and current address. The bill allows college students to present their student photo ID in lieu of the identification required by law."

Not only does HB5024 permit people to vote on the same day, it also ensures that fraud can be committed without interference from pesky Town Registrars on Election Day. This act permits people to vote even if they don't have a license or voter ID card - all they have to do is provide proof of residency - 30 days AFTER the election. What? Yes, that's right - 30 days after the election? Are you kidding me?

Recently, Governor Dannel Malloy held a conference call with statewide Registrars of Voters, which included representatives from two states who's Democrat political leanings favor this shenanigans. Currently in the United States there are nine states have some form of same day voter registration: Idaho, Iowa, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Wyoming and Washington DC. But thirteen states have ended the practice citing widespread fraud, and expense.

And if you've wondered about the expense component; it is planned to shift cost associated with same day registration and online voting to each Connecticut town or city. Your Secretary of State Denise Merrill recently said that, "[Towns and Cities should take on more of the financial burden associated with elections.]" Right, as if the towns aren't struggling as it is to balance their own budgets.

It is reported that on principal members of the Registrar of Voters Association of Connecticut (ROVAC) stand against the idea of this same day voting scheme. But the organization has not taken an activist stance to prevent its passage as of yet. I would encourage you to contact both ROVAC and your own State Senator, and State Rep and express your disgust with this blatant attempt at fraud (which Democrats will try to sell as voter eligibility). If you think this idea is a good one, you must be a Democrat because you won't find one Republican supporting such a scandalous plan.

According to the schedule, a PUBLIC HEARING is SCHEDULED for this

Friday, March 2, 2012, at 11:00 A.M. in Legislative Office Building, Room 2A

(You must sign up by 9 am if you wish to speak).

Even though this issue will impact every eligible voter in Connecticut, the Committee has "generously" offered a mere HOUR for public debate on the matter, along with other Bills included on the schedule.

Interested in seeing how advocates of this liberal initiative see this legislation, then look here. And also at this New York Times article which favors passage written by Harvard Liberal Professor Marion Just.
One way to ensure that Republicans never see majority status in Connecticut ever again is to sit on your tail and do NOTHING to try to stop this bill. For if you do nothing, you'll see several close elections swing to the Democrats, and there won't be a snowballs chance in Hades of reversing the damage done given that those making the rules, and those who control the courts won't be in any rush to side with Republicans.

I'm hoping to see Chairman Jerry Labriola, Larry Cafero, and the rest of the gang all over this, and helping voters lead the charge against a clear case of STATE-MANDATED voter fraud.

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.

CTGOP Headquarters moving back to Hartford!!

2012-02-29T09:06:00.000-05:00

Jerry Labriola will need a hand
moving all the boxes of money
he's raised this quarter

For those who don't know, this week is the Big Move of Connecticut Republican Party Headquarters to it's brand new location at 31 Pratt Street - 4th Floor in Hartford.

This is great news for everyone! Not only will the CTGOP be re-located back to the capitol city where it belongs, the move will also save the Party a couple of hundred dollars a month on rent!

Jerry Labriola, Jr. and his team are to be congratulated for moving CTGOP Headquarters out of the bombed out, dirty, and embarrassing location in New Britain which former Chairman Chris Healy brought us to.

Several State Central Members received complaints from volunteers about not wanting to work out of the New Britain location citing personal safety concerns due to have to having to park in a poorly lit parking area. Some complained that the building was dirty and dingy. And many felt that it never made sense to leave Hartford in the first place given the desire to be in closer proximity to State Legislative Offices, and Hartford firms where all the action takes place.

The King says Kudos to Chairman Jerry! Moving CTGOP back to Hartford will give the Party new life and energy, and a positive boost that it so badly needs. It's also close to Vaughn's - a great water-hole for after hours socializing!

NOTE: Until a formal press release is sent out by the CTGOP, all communications, telephone operations, and party activities should continue as they do today. A formal announcement is expected soon!

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.

Tea Party Faithful join with Social Conservatives to Celebrate 3-Year Anniversary!!

2012-02-27T23:32:00.002-05:00


A great turnout by the Tea Party Faithful!

Last week, when The Hartford Courant, the official voice of the Democrat Party in Connecticut, all but declared Connecticut's Tea Party dead, organizers just smiled and continued their planning for what turned out to be a stellar three year anniversary celebration on the steps of CT's Supreme Court in Hartford.

Even The King was surprised at the solid turnout for a cloudy hum-drum Monday in Hartford - the crowd swelled to 185 people by the time the lunch hour rolled around; the event was a smashing success thanks to the CT Tea Party Patriots valiant efforts to organize the public event - particularly, the ladies of the movement who have done so much to build and maintain the organization over the last three years.

Of course not everyone was happy to see the ragtag group of so-called dissenters mount a successful public display of unity. As you know, critics of the Tea Party tend to come from two opposite corners of the political spectrum. First you have liberal democrats of the looney Michael Moore variety - who hate the Tea Party as much as they hate Liberty itself; these folks would rather adhere to the mindless dribble of the destructive Occupy Wall Street crowd embraced by the White House, and advocates of social anarchy.

And second, you have the establishment types within the Republican Party who see the Tea Party as a threat to the long standing order of things. Meaning, a few select GOP leaders dictate all with the expectation that the sheeple quietly follow - even if it means blindly walking off a 2000 foot cliff to their doom (like we did in 2008 in the Presidential Race, and 2010 in the CT US Senate Race). When the Tea Party's national movement began to front their own candidates ahead of pre-selected establishment types, the GOP leadership balked. The King's caveat on the issue of the Tea Party has always been that they run as Republicans and generally not against Republicans except to primary. Although I suppose there may be a few situations were doing so would be acceptable, even encouraged, but these are few and far between.

But Monday's event was more significant than just a reunion of old friends, it was the first time that we've seen a public alliance between Tea Party Patriots and Social Conservatives in Connecticut. While not an 100% perfect glove fit for each other, the two groups have much in common, at least in this Blue State:

1)  Social Conservatives and Tea Party members oppose big government controlling every aspect of our lives - whether social or fiscal;
2) both groups are ignored, shunned, and barely tolerated by Connecticut State Republican Leaders who don't do "Guns, Gays or God"';
3) both groups celebrate America's traditional Judeo-Christian values, and our Western Historic traditions including respecting our military, and supporting military action against foreign tyrants
4) both groups are seen as mere political obstacles to navigate, manipulate, court, or placate, instead of being treated respectfully by candidates as principled individuals who's values and ideals have merit, and are based upon reason.
5) Both groups are demonized and hated by the left-wing of this country, its media, and its politicians because both groups contain the activists that fuel Republican opposition and victories across the country (note to all: its not the rich moderate windbags who turn the tide, its the activists with pitchforks and rifles who make the difference!)
6) Unified, Social Conservatives and Tea Party Patriots could run the gamit and really begin to make in-roads, and impact races both local and statewide.

Detractors could probably provide a list of issues where both groups have differences, but at the end of the day - its far more important for these group sto put those aside and band together and work to dismantle the Democratic Machine that is choking Connecticut's Economy and turning this state into a safe haven for big spenders, social engineers, tax and spenders, violent criminals, illegal aliens, drug dealers, and cross-dressing pedophiles. Surely, Tea Party Members and Social Conservatives must see the direct correlation between moral/social decay and its impact on economic factors which are compounding Connecticut's problems. The two are not equally exclusive of each other.

As for the Rally itself, the group of speakers did a fantastic job without going overboard in their presentations. Co-organizer Joe Visconti rallied the crowd early with his trademark bullhorn.

State Rep Bill Semanski (62 District: Granby, East Granby, Barkhamsted) led the crowd in the Pledge of Allegiance, and U.S. Senate Candidates Peter Lumaj, and Brian K. Hill also spoke to the crowd. (Neither Linda McMahon or Christopher Shays were in attendance).

There were a number of other Connecticut politicians who attended but most came for the purpose of jostling for Tea Party support, and for an opportunity to take advantage of the media coverage to suit their own purposes - election. Among them was 5th Congressional Candidate Mark Greenberg, who was offered the opportunity to address the crowd by organizers but outright refused. It's not often that a Congressional Candidate fighting for a respectable position in the race refuses to take the microphone and say few words to potential supporters. Tea Party organizers found this behavior quite bizarre, particularly after watching him stalk media personal afterward to tell his own story.

Then there was Lisa Wilson-Foley who stood in the audience but appeared to be lost without her keeper - Campaign Manager Chris Healy. She looked like a fish out of water - dazed and confused. At one point she was seen standing down by the sidewalk as if waiting for the next Transit Bus to come by, and perhaps wondering if she had missed it. It's a shame, because of all the candidate who attended, Wilson-Foley would have been one of the more interesting people to listen to on the topic of social conservatism given her uniquely moderate views.

Although not a politician by trade, Peter Wolfgang, who heads the Family Institute Action of Connecticut gave an eloquent speech on the issue of President Obama's attempt to force Catholic Hospitals to provide contraception and birth control to patients which is in direct conflict with Church doctrine and teachings. While The King disagrees with Mr. Wolfgang on a dozens key issues, he finds Wolfgang's positions well-stated and consistent.

If Peter Wolfgang ever ran for office, voters, including The King could easily overlook some of his more stalwart positions in favor of putting a principled, dignified family man to represent the people's trust. Even when Peter Wolfgang disagrees with you - he does so in a respectful manner. Admittedly, he is a gem, and there are few among us like him. Which is why certain members of the Press stay awake at night trying to find a kink in his armor.

There is one important note here. Although Peter Wolfgang and a few FIC Staffers showed, it was very unfortunate that Leaders from the Catholic Church didn't participate or appear a the Rally entitled, "We are All Catholics Now." A brief visit by even a few Nuns or Priests would have gone a long way to build solidarity between the Catholic Faithful and the Church.   This was also the case during last year's battle at the LOB on the Bathroom Bill when the Church showed at the 11th hour. Maybe there is some work to be done there to engage them earlier and more frequently. At least Pastor Rick, a Baptist Minister spoke came to provide support from a Religious perspective.

Lastly, we would be remiss not to mention the single unfortunate episode that occurred shortly after the Rally concluded involving our favorite pretend newsman William Landers. As people witnessed, he engaged in a verbal confrontation with one of the organizers of the Tea Party Rally who out of respect for their hard work and dedication shall remain nameless. Landers, as everyone knows, can't seem to decide whether he is a make-believe reporter, or quasi-Republican activist, of sorts. The argument that ensued apparently had to do with him demanding an opportunity to address the Tea Party audience. To our knowledge, he was the only person wearing press credentials who demanded a turn at the microphone - neither WTNH's Mark Davis, or The Hartford Courant's Daniella Altimari asked for mic time.

As the Program concluded, Landers threw a full flown temper-tantrum, wagging his fingers, and becoming loud enough for people to stop their conversations and turn their heads in his direction. One person heard the organizer ask, "...are you threatening me?" The conversation ended abruptly with the organizer walking off annoyed, and leaving Landers alone to deal with his frenzied emotional state. Fact is, there wasn't anything to argue about, the Rally had ended, and the everyone was preparing for a group photo shot.

The people at The Capitol or where-ever press credentials are issued must dole them out like candy if someone like this can get one.   If the set standard for journalism is creating a webpage, and wandering around with a hidden tape recorder in your pocket, or setting people up like they are appearing in an episode of Candid Camera, then by all means - everyone including The King should be issued one, or perhaps two, or even three sets of credentials.

Between shaking people (and organizations) down for cash in exchange for publishing positive "news articles" -  and his Pearl Harbor-style Gotcha reporting, it's not surprising that anyone, anywhere runs for cover when he shows up on the scene. His website links to malicious articles about non-public people outlining the most intimate details, unfounded and untrue, about their family and personal financial state. Last month's episode alone should cause Tom Dudchik pause, and sever the link to Landers' fictional news site - Ameriborn News to CTCapitol Report 2012. Or maybe Tom Dudchik doesn't care about who Landers maligns on his webpage. It's interesting to note that Dudchik removed Authentic Connecticut Republican's link from CT Capitol Report 2011 for a much lesser violation (which I believe was use of colorful language in his minor criticism of Chris Depino's defense of Rosa DeLauro's absence during the fall flooding). How about a little consistency Mr. Dudchik?

Well, regardless what you think about Mr. Landers' behavior, candidates and politicos have been warned to avoid the male version of Connie Chung and his hidden tape recorder. "Just between me and you, right, Mrs. Gingrich?"

We don't want end this on a sour note. This Rally is just the beginning of the "street-activation" that's coming soon. The Tea Party has big plans for the future, much of it includes holding the Connecticut media accountable for their actions, biases, and serving as the communication vehicle for Connecticut Democrats.

Great Job, Tea Party! Keep up the pressure!

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.

Meet the CTGOP Candidates: March 3 in North Windham, CT!

2012-02-27T16:18:00.000-05:00

Passing along a great opportunity for those who reside in the Second Congressional District and beyond!!
The folks in District 29 have put together a all-star mega event so voters can up close and personal with our CTGOP Candidates!

The local Republican Town Committees of District 29 are hosting ALL GOP candidates for federal office seats this Saturday. This is a perfect opportunity to get to know these candidates; please take the time to come out and meet them for yourself:

CT GOP 29th Senatorial district Meet & Greet Event.

Sponsored by the Republican Town Committees of Thompson, Putnam, Killingly, Brooklyn, Canterbury, Scotland, Mansfield, and Windham.

Date: Saturday, March 3rd.

Time: Doors open at 5pm. Event starts at 5:30

Location: The University Club of Connecticut

184 Club Road North Windham, CT

(860) 456-4211

Cost: $10, Covers the cost of the facility and hors d'oeuvres
*Cash Bar*
Format: Brief presentations by candidates then 1 on 1 questions / answers.

Candidates:

House of Representatives

Second Congressional District Candidates:

Chris Coutu (Represented by Paul P Tetreault)

Daria Novak

U. S. Senate Candidates:

Linda McMahon

Brian K. Hill

Chris Shays

Peter Lumaj (TBD)

Kie Westby (TBD)

To RSVP please contact:
Putnam Republican Town Committee Chairman, Kimberly Gilbert
kim2412@sbcglobal.net / 860-928-4231

Due to the limited size of the facility, seats are expected to sell out.

Paid for by Connecticut Republicans, Gary Schaffrick, Treasurer.
321 Ellis Street | Building 17 Suite 501 | New Britain, CT 06051

Not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.

I AM

THE KING

This blog is for entertainment purposes only. We reserve the right to change or update any entries at a later date.

Sign the Petition: Stop the Repeal of the Death Penalty

2012-02-25T19:25:00.002-05:00

Gary "Coleman" Holder-Winfield is a
big supporter of Hayes and Komisarjesky
and people just like them

Connecticut Democrats led by the ever-arrogant, racially-motivated State Rep. Gary "Coleman" Holder-Winfield, and ultra-liberal Governor Dannel Malloy are working around the clock to disregard the will of the people of Connecticut and Repeal the Death Penalty. This is a critical time as the Democrat-controlled Legislature seeks to put a new bill on Governor Malloy's desk during this upcoming legislative session.

Last year, the Repeal of the Death Penalty measure was defeated by a slim majority in the State Senate, 19-17, due in part because two Democrats: Andrew Maynard of Stonington, and Edith Prague of Columbia broke ranks with their Party after meeting with Dr. William Petit, the sole survivor of the heinous slayings of his wife and two children during the 2007 Cheshire Home Invasion.

Andrew Maynard, now believing that the coast is clear, has committed to voting for the new repeal bill when the measure is reintroduced in 2012. The only reason he didn't support the Repeal Bill he claims was because the vote was "too close to the Komisarjevksy Trial". Republicans residing in the towns of Moosup to Groton and all parts in-between have a new challenge on their hands for the next election cycle - send this yellow coward packing. I mean this guy doesn't even have the conviction to vote his conscious. What kind of people would put this weak-minded fool in a leadership position? If old pal Rob Simmons is looking to be relevant again - then helping to replace Maynard would be good start.

Edith Prague has not yet committed to supporting the new Repeal measure but in private her friends say that she claims she would consider supporting the measure this time around in exchange for a few minor changes. This is sad if true; last year after voting against the Repeal, her own liberal allies in the Press came after her for saying what everyone in Connecticut was thinking about the murdering-pedophile Joshua Komisarjevsky. It would be a shame if an outspoken woman like this suddenly supported Repeal for a few lousy political favors. If Ms. Prague could see the reason to support the Death Penalty for these two SOBs, then what about the endless generations of the same type of evil-doers to come?

At the end of the day, if both Coward Andrew Maynard and Edith Prague cave to peer pressure and presents, the ballot would move to a 50-50 split allowing Lt. Governor Nancy Wyman the opportunity to cast the deciding vote in favor of murderers and rapists. Then Governor Malloy can in turn cite Catholicism for his decision to pen it into law (funny how he doesn't invoke Catholicism as his rational for his supporting votes on other liberal social policy positions).

Despite what liberal activists think, Connecticut trends higher in polls with 67% of residents in favor of the Death Penalty. Nationally, one Gallup Poll on the issue found that 64% of Americans are in favor of the Death Penalty in cases of murder. Other polls show a larger majority for support of the Death Penalty for similar and even lesser crimes.

Clever Democrats will try to distance themselves (and their votes) from the convicted Petit Murderers by claiming that that new Repeal Bill would be prospective - meaning that it would not apply to Joshua Komisarjevski and Steven Hayes, but only to future convicted murderer-rapists, et al. But every drooling anti-death activist, and half-way decent trial attorney knows that the very passage of a new Repeal Bill opens the door wide-open for a special circumstance appeal from which the wacky Jeremiah Donovans of the world will launch their bid to save Death Row inmates.

Only a fool would believe that the word "prospective" would stop the anti-death penalty hyenas from selling their souls to the devil to get Hayes and Komisarjevsky free from Death Row - a spot that they earned by their own actions, not through the decision of a Jury.

As this war heats up, there will be a lot of rhetoric flying around from so-called experts who will lie through their teeth about how the Death Penalty isn't a deterrent - trust me, there aren't too many Dead Murderers posing a threat to society these days. And making sure these two get the injection of death they deserve is a personal passion of mine - moreover, we owe to future generations to make sure that anyone who commits such or even a much lesser set of crimes faces the same lethal punishment.

Meanwhile join our cause, get involved, make calls to your legislator, and sign the petition:

I'll end this piece by quoting the sister-in-law of one of the victims of the 2007 home invasion, Jennifer-Hawke Petit, who wrote it best:

"The majority of Connecticut citizens are in favor of the death penalty. The death penalty as it stands now is broken and needs to be fixed. It is the only reasonable and just penalty for the most heinous murders. A vote for repeal is a vote for criminals and a vote against victims."
- Johanna Petit Chapman

Darn Right! So join us! Don't let twisted people like Gary Coleman Holder-Winfield tell you that you can't have justice, now or in the future.

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.

Connecticut Tea Party Plans 3rd Anniversary Rally

2012-02-22T21:45:00.006-05:00

Connecticut Democrats
have had a long history of
treading on Nutmeggers

Looks like The Hartford Courant's quasi-pronouncement that the Connecticut Tea Party is sort-of dead was a bit premature (yes, I know they didn't write that word-for-word, but they think it).   Well, the good news is that's nonsense - at least according to organizers who are planning a big 3rd Anniversary Rally on Monday, February 27 on the steps of the Connecticut Supreme Court in Hartford-town.

Personally, I'm not in complete alignment with The Tea Party, per se, but I respect and appreciate the positive impact they've had on a national level. In Connecticut, the impact has been minimal mostly due to what can be considered - organizational challenges between rival leaders of various factions. Grassroots organization can be very effective, that is - until someone or something attempts to hijack it for their own personal gain and advantage. Nonetheless, we are fortunate that many tea party newcomers have stuck around; many are active leaders on political campaigns, and several have battled the establishment-types to win seats on RTCs around the State. Congrats to all of you!

The aforementioned article refers to two people - Joe Markley and Len Suzio who were at one point considered darlings of the Connecticut Tea Party. Suzio was elected largely due to efforts of Tea Party members who made calls and walked the streets of Meriden to get the vote out on his behalf.  But unfortunately, given that both men have been recently bought and paid for by the Linda McMahon for Senate campaign - any positive feelings toward them by Tea Party members have long since abated.

The very thought of Joe Markley holding a Gadsden Flag is revolting to the core. He's a sell out.  The fact that he would fight to have a U.S. Senate seat decided by a group of paid-off delegates in a closed State Convention is a disgrace. Real Patriots don't work to eliminate voices from being heard, nor do they try to block respectable individuals from earning 15% of the vote so they can't automatically qualify for the primary. The very idea of helping to formulate backroom deals to disenfranchise voters is unpatriotic - to say the least.

What Markley and Suzio laugh-off as "just politics" with old chum and McMahon hitman Tom Scott, the rest of us see as corruption and patronage.   Deep down they know the truth about their actions which is why all of them are fighting tooth and nail against the notion that paid employees of candidates should wear identification at the Convention. Go figure! Their words and actions speak to their guilt.  Here's the kicker - if you ask either Markley or Suzio why Linda McMahon is allegedly more qualified than Shays, Westby, or Hill - they sputter incoherently. Or they read the carefully crafted bullet points off her tri-fold pamphlet - "proven jobs creator" and "not a career politician".  Good grief!  From the looks of it, the McMahon-Markley-Scott Syndicate doesn't really have a Plan A or a Plan B. It's the 2010 campaign all over again.

Maybe Markely and Suzio aught to find the Straight-Talk Express that U.S. Senator John McCain used to reference during his Presidential Bid; more time spent riding that Busway might be useful to get both men to clear their heads and their consciences - if they still have one, that is. And before Linda McMahon gets up on her soap box claiming she's going to clean up Washington, maybe she should first begin by cleaning up her own act starting with her campaign tactics. Frankly folks, there isn't enough detergent available to remove the dirt and scum from that operation.

The good news is that while many people have folded their tents and gone home, there is still a ragtag group of people who care about ethics, liberty, values, and less government. If you can try and break away from your busy lives for a few moments, please stop by and show solidarity with our Tea Party brethren. Demonized by the Press for their conviction, they are really some of the finest people we have in our ranks, and they would like to see a few extra smiling faces as they celebrate their third anniversary.

Here is the official press release:

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27 - CONNECTICUT TEA PARTY 3rd ANNIVERSARY RALLY

"WE'RE ALL CATHOLICS NOW!"

On February 27, 2009 approx. 125 patriots rallied for the first time in Connecticut in front of the State Capitol to voice our concerns over government spending and the loss of freedom. On that day the Connecticut Tea Party was born! And since that day we have never wavered from demanding that federal, state and local governments adhere to their constitutional foundations, be fiscally responsible, and support free markets.

Three years later, however, we find our government continuing to spend massive amounts of money, bankrupting us and our children, and also engaging in persistent and vicious attacks on our nation's first liberty - religious freedom. In light of the recent attacks on the Catholic Church, tea party patriots would agree with David French and Glenn Beck (see links below) when they say that "We're all Catholics now!"

Yes, we are all "Catholics" now, and the 2012 election will be the most important in our lifetime. We either return to the founding principles and values that define our great country, or we continue down this path of government infringement and loss of freedom in every area of our lives.

So please join us on Monday, February 27, for an "impromptu" rally in CELEBRATION of the Connecticut Tea Party and in SOLIDARITY with our Catholic brothers and sisters. Bring your family and friends, your flags, bells, signs and voices. Our 2012 season begins now!

Help us send a message that the Connecticut Tea Party is alive and well, that we remain vigilant watchdogs of our government, and that we will work tirelessly to defend our freedoms.

DAY: Monday, February 27
TIME: 11 AM to 1 PM

PLACE: Connecticut Supreme Court, front steps, 231 Capitol Avenue, Hartford (across from the State Capitol)
PARKING: http://www.enjoyhartford.com/pdfs/parkingmap.pdf

RADIO STATIONS TO CALL: WDRC 1360 AM (1-888-574-2723), WTIC 1080 AM (1-800-966-9842).

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.

A Twitter Pic is Worth a Thousand Words (or Laughs)

2012-02-19T23:03:00.002-05:00

Let's face it - we all know that most candidates and elected politicians DON'T run their own Twitter Accounts. Take Linda McMahon, for example - can you imagine Lucky Linda reaching into her Mouawad Diamond purse for her i-phone and then trying to figure out which button to press to bring up the Twitter app? The concept of Linda as a tweeter is simply Laugh Out Loud funny! Ehr? Duh? What do you press, again?

Linda's twitter bio claims that she's a proven jobs creator
That line is as tired, as it is untrue

I'm sure Yosemite (Tom) Scott will sit with her and force her try to send a tweet now, just so she can claim having had the real world experience (eyes roll). C'mon, get real - Linda probably doesn't even know how to work her own TV/DVR Remote never mind a bloody i-phone. And she likely has a full-time college flunky pulling in $20K a month to propagate her boring dribble throughout the Twitterverse. One might think she would have left the all-important tweeting task to her so-called Communications Director - but, of course, we all know that she's just an imported high-profile typist, who doesn't have the work experience to be anything more.

As for her twitter profile pic, it's the same old, same old. Blue is the perfect color for Linda - it symbolizes her highly anticipated legacy of ensuring, not one, but two U.S. Senate seats to Democrats. The blank stare goes with Linda as an empty vessel; big on rhertoric and general statements, but devoid of policy plans and specifics. Linda serves as the perfect CTGOP Placebo for Connecticut's terminal condition.

And look, we aren't stupid enough to think that Chris Shays, Joe Courtney, Chris Murphy or even Meddler Justin Bernier run their own Twitter accounts either. The only candidate-politician that we know who has the technological where-with-all is Christopher Coutu - and even he'll tell you - his smart phone never leaves his side. While the Legislature is in session, he has to find some way to tune out all that confusing, fancy-talk from the podium. So he brings along his phone and ear buds to help him focus on more important things like ESPN Scoreboard, the latest Lady-Ga-Ga downloads, and of course - beating his own high score at Angry Birds.

I love the fact that Coutu used the twitter profile pic file name:
"Coutu in Action". Be suspect of any policitian who thinks
talking at a microphone is - action
(who's the guy with the weary eye on him?)

Honestly, Coutu is a real trip. He gets high points from The King for being the only guy up at the LOB who who can still funnel a six-pack of Schlitz in under a minute! I mean that must be worth something to voters in Connecticut's beleaguered second district.

But seriously, I do bust Coutu's chops more than any other Republican in Connecticut, but that's only because unlike phony Linda McMillions, I actually like the guy. Coutu is a perfect target for The King's humor because we know for a fact that we get under his skin. If Republicans are to win back the Second Congressional District (the seat that American Hero Rob Simmons made famous), Coutu will win it in a last second three-point buzzer-beater. If there are any upsets in the making - don't count Coutu-Mojo out. He may be goofy, but he is an American Hero who serves his country with distinction and honor. And he'd be miles superior to Twinkle-toes Courtney; who's proven to be a sell-out to Obama-vision. Go get 'em Frat boy!

As I mentioned, politicians at nearly every level don't actually use the twitter medium to converse directly with constituents or supporters. Only a select few actually do, and that's a rarity indeed - Mayor Mark Boughton almost immediately comes to mind as someone who will chat a few lines back and forth with you if you can catch his attention. Brian K. Hill is another guy who'll tweet you back when he feels it's in his personal interest to respond. But by and large, politicians and candidates use twitter as a one-way PR transmitter. But it still amuses me to people try like heck to get the attention of an automated bot. :)

Hill's profile pic is very good. But the large picture of
him on his Twitter Home Page showing his jacket buttoned over his tie looks silly (fix it!)

What's interesting is that while some candidates spend hours in front of the mirror each morning - caking on that foundation, and using more brushes and color than Leonardo da Vinci ever did, or making sure they have the perfect silk power tie to wow an audience - what's clear to me is that most candidates don't seem to care one iota about what their profile picture looks like to the Twitterverse; even when tweeted 30 times a day (and 50 times more across a half dozen hash tags. Sometimes you have to ask - my God, do they know that they're using THAT pic?

I have to say that one of the more bizarre political profile pics on Twitter comes from Democrat Joe Courtney. His profile picture is about as weird as it gets. It sort of reminds me of a scene out the 80s B horror flick Motel Hell (shame on you if you've actually seen it).

What's the hell is going on here?

I mean this picture is a really weird. You have Joe in a dress shirt, wearing a baseball cap, looking off into space, standing in close proximity to a John Deere tractor, with the backdrop of a scary looking farm-shed - a likely spot where all the bodies are probably hidden or displayed on meat hooks (just kidding). Bottom line is there's just way to much going on here. You could ask twinkle-toes a hundred questions about this photo and still not figure out what old twink is trying to convey here.

It's the kind of photo you would expect Ann Nyberg to use as part of her weekly add a caption segment. Now there's a thought.

Next up is Rosa DeLauro's Twitter pic which is sort of scary - like Halloween scary. Not only is it only visible as the tiniest thumbnail possible, but the mega pixel quality is as shabby as it gets. And when you blow it up one size - you can't really tell if this is Rosa or Ronald.

I'm still not convinced that Rosa isn't a Ronald.

I'm guessing that this picture was taken when she was clamoring for support of Universal Diaper Service for America. Maybe it's more to her advantage that constituents can't make out what she looks like on Twitter. Hell, if she can abandon her consituents for Italy during floods, storms and a statewide disaster, then what's a nasty twitter profile pic between friends?

Next up is old pal Lisa Wilson-Foley. I'd say she looks like a million dollars in this photo but that would be an insult to a billionaire like her. Fact is that she doesn't actually do her own tweeting. But you can tell - when everything - press releases, quotes to the press, and even tweets have that same distinctive sound and stench of EX-CHAIRMAN Chris Healy's dry writing style. I have to emphasize EX-CHAIRMAN only because he seems to lose his wits and start to physically shake every time a reporter comes within 100 yards of him. It must be a big disadvantage for Mrs. Foley to have Campaign Manager who seems himself as being a much bigger superstar than she'll ever be. After all, Mrs. Foley is only as good as her deposit slip in Tutankhamen's bank account.

Pretty casual look; definitely a bad-hair day

Aside from the strawy scarecrow-like hair-do, this is a decent photo for someone hedging 60. But as many of us discussed, we thought she'd go for the more formal CEO look instead of the eHarmony.com head shot. Well, at least she won't have to change her pic after she loses. And even better news, it won't be the twitter pic which sank her.

As mentioned earlier, Mayor Boughton is a big tweeter, and actually a fun read. He uses his account to keep Danbury's voters informed on a number of activities going on, and emergency related stuff too. He's famous for keeping us informed of what his opinion is on television shows, music, etc. He's so creative that he makes up his own hash-tags! Whoo Hoo! As for his pic... well its not bad. But this shot makes him look like a grown-up version of the kid who wanted a BB-Gun from A Christmas Story.

When I see this pic of Mark Boughton, I hear
a small voice inside my head yell, "You're going
to shoot your eye out!"

All in all, I used to think Boughton might be a great candidate for Governor - a silver knight in shining armor - but after he fell head over heels in love with Linda McMahon and delivered his reputation and soul to her - the shine almost immediately turned to rust; he sort of killed himself. In this whole Linda McMahon catastophe, The King believes that when it's all said and done, and Linda goes back to Wrestlingville, it won't be Linda's reputation and future which will have suffered the most but Mark Boughton's. There is more to this story, but I've been asked (no, begged) not to discuss it in The King's View (at least for now). Meanwhile, tweet-away Mayor. You might as well, since you're living your best days in politics.

Which brings us to the guy who's most likely going to end up as Connecticut's next U.S. Senator - if polling data continues to remain accurate (and Linda McMahon doesn't order an angle to have her wrestlers to jump him in the parking lot). And that's none other than Democrat Chris Murphy. I like the fact that he gives us a good smile, but the damn head shot fills up the screen, for God sakes.

If I were facing such lackluster competition,
I'd probably wear a sh*t eating grin too.

There is definitely something sinister going on in this photo. I just can't seem to make it out yet. Give me a month or two, and I'll have put my finger on it.

Hot on his heels is his only opponent on the Democrat side of the equation - Susan Bysiewicz. I have to say that really dislike her twitter profile pic. There is something inherently dishonest about a politician who looks down and away from you when you talk with them. And you can't really tell whether or not she's smiling or wincing in pain in this shot. And the side profile deal isn't doing it for me at all.

This shot is almost as bad as Joe Courtney's,
but its missing the Tractor

I've seen better shots of Susan, why this one was selected, I'll never know (I mean really, I'll never actually know).

Next up is Republican Christopher Shays. His photo is a lot like Chris Murphy's - a big head shot, eyes straight into the camera, and a huge smile. I like a big smile in a candidate these days because it temporarily relieves the massive migraine I get when I think of the outrageous disaster that President Obama has compounded, and the fact that Democrats running for office won't dare challenge him in public - even when they tell their friends behind closed doors that he sucks as President. Of course, in crazy Connecticut, Democrats think he hasn't done enough damage yet, so they campaign on adding even more pain and suffering - to the sounds of thousands of union and state employee cheers.

If he doesn't get in, I'm sure Shays could do
Dentyne sugarless gum commercials

Anyways, Shay's twitter profile pic is one of the better political pics on Twitter. But something tells me that Shays is so adept at knowing how to play poker so that you'd never know whether or not he was smiling out of pure happiness or smiling because he's about to unload 2000 pounds of TNT on the enemy's home base. If I were Linda, and I saw Shays smiling like this and heading in her direction - well, you might want to take cover! But seriously, great shot, but would like to see them back up a step and include the Power Tie for added professional emphasis.

Without a doubt, the BEST Connecticut profile picture goes to Wayne Winsley. Winsley redefines the line from the ZZ Top smash hit Sharp Dressed Man. But seriously, if you haven't had the opportunity to hear Wayne Winsley speak, then you aught to check aught one of his radio shows. Wayne is one of the only true conservatives in Connecticut. I can't wait to watch him school Rosa Delauro during a live debate - that ticket will be worth a thousand bucks!

CT's BEST CONSERVATIVE is Wayne Winsley

It's unfortunate that Winsley is having a tough time cracking through the fundraising ceiling that seems to be a permanent fixture in CT-3 for Republicans. Rosa Delauro is not only embarrassing to Connecticut - she's a national menace. Republicans should be proud that we have Wayne Winsley in our ranks. He's not just another sacrificial white fuzzy bunny claiming to be a little bit of this, and a little bit of that; trying to tip-toe around the issues so as not to offend anyone. Nope. Winsley is the REAL deal.
So I'm ending this with the thought that this is another post, off the beaten path, which is sarcastic and about nothing. I know there are far more serious topics to discuss, but after awhile you have to let the professional press step up and do their jobs, while those of us in the peanut gallery shoot spitballs at them all along the way.

For those who I missed, don't feel bad. I might do part two in a week. And time willing, I'll extend some additional bits of humor on a few more unsuspecting victims of extreme vanity. So quick everyone - run out and update that twitter profile pic... before The King downloads it!!

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.

Justin Bernier's Trouble with the Truth

2012-02-17T21:13:00.004-05:00

Jim Carrey eat your heart out!
Justin Bernier would take your
Academy Award in a heartbeat!

As you'll recall, about two months ago, The King did a piece exposing Justin Bernier's tendency to exaggerate the truth to compensate for his lack of appeal and honest experience, and improve his standing among 5th District Republican voters. Bernier, you'll remember, circulated a fundraising letter where he claimed to have brokered an historic agreement with the Navy to keep the Groton Submarine base in Connecticut. LIAR LIAR!

It seems that the facts tell an entirely different story about his actual level of involvement in the deal which leaves us pause to wonder what other yarns Mr. Bernier is spinning on the campaign trail. Lucky for him after being exposed, he has lessened his claim as the Sub-base Savior.

But telling tall tales can be a difficult habit for some people to break. Three weeks ago, Bernier circulated another letter claiming to have raised more campaign funds than any other candidate in the 5th District, yet the data from fec.gov clearly shows that Lisa Wilson-Foley has nearly double the cash on-hand than Mr. Bernier. LIAR LIAR! Or maybe Mr. Bernier just simply has a math problem.

After trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes on his fundraising numbers, Bernier then set a scheme in motion to suggest that his fellow 5th District Republican rivals simply get behind the winner of the State Convention and drop out if they don't achieve 15% of the delegate count in order - he claims - to "give the Republicans the best chance of victory on Election Day." LIAR LIAR! He really meant that he wanted the opportunity to work over convention delegates using his inside operatives to rig the outcome so as to eliminate the competition and keep the damn ignorant voters from meddling in his chance to be APPOINTED as the 5th District's Republican Nominee. What a farce! No wonder he landed a job with Linda McMahon in 2010! They think so much alike! Even Simon Bar Sinister wasn't this crafty!

Trouble in Farmington

A few weeks ago, the Farmington RTC held it's monthly meeting and the group heard from Candidate Mark Greenberg who highlighted a pledge to voters which only he and former Farmington Town Council Chairman Mike Clark were bold enough to sign. The pledge read that if elected, the candidate-elect would : 1) Refuse to take a Congressional pension, 2) Agree to adhere to a Term Limit, and 3) Would be willing to champion the notion that any law passed by the U.S. Congress must also apply to members of Congress, without exception. Justin Bernier also attended the meeting, but said he was unwilling to sign the pledge mentioned by Mr. Greenberg. Also, for the record - one of Lisa Wilson-Foley's paid stooges hid in the back of the room taking notes. Wilson-Foley, it should be said, has also refused to sign on to the pledge.

When it was Justin Bernier’s turn to speak, a slow fire began to ignite in the stomachs of some in the Farmington crowd. Bernier, it seems, his some negative history with the Farmington RTC which members aren't about to forgive or forget.

As many people know, Justin is a Farmington native who now resides in Plainville; and he's been running for Congress since 2009. Although he is not a career politician, he is quickly becoming known as a career candidate. As the record shows, the Farmington RTC supported him at the State Convention in 2010, but most of their members switched allegiance to Sam Caligiuri after the State Convention ended, as members became extremely unhappy with Justin’s primary campaign. In 2011, Mike Clark announced that he would not seek another term as Farmington’s Town Council Chairman and announced his run for Congress.

Other Republican candidates running for the 5th District seat have also visited the Farmington RTC and, for the most part, have accepted the RTCs support for Mike - given the loyalties to him as a great friend and successful Town Council Chairman. It's only natural that others would come to jockey for secondary support should Mike ever drop out of the race. Fair enough on that front.

However, Justin ran afoul of the Farmington RTC last July when he worked covertly and overtly to support Jon Landry in his bid to force himself onto the ballot for a Town Council spot at the Town Caucus. The RTC had voted to support a slate that did not include Landry and then opened the Caucus Meeting by gavel (the Caucus is open to all registered Republicans). Jon Landry cleverly stacked the deck by coming to the Caucus with Registered Republicans, whom many had never seen before. Landry didn't violate Caucus rules, but his status as a member of the Executive Committee made his move shocking, and infuriated the RTC rank and file. Landry won the Caucus out from under the unsuspecting RTC endorsed candidate, C.J. Thomas. Mr. Thomas, with significant RTC support, engaged in a primary to win back the nomination.

During this primary campaign, Bernier penned a letter to all Republicans expressing his support for Jon Landry, and he directed his own campaign staff to make calls on behalf of Landry leading into the primary. The overwhelming majority of Farmington RTC Members were livid that Justin would interfere with a local election in this manner, and it was a clear affront to Mike Clark who supported C.J. Thomas and the RTC approved slate. Needless to say, Justin’s efforts failed, and he created some lasting ill-will in the Farmington RTC that will be very difficult to ever repair, and not likely to abate in this election cycle.

Moreover, when Bernier attended the Farmington RTC meeting just a few weeks ago, he was challenged about the whole affair of his meddling in the local election, and how he could have the balls to come before the RTC asking for support when the Farmington RTC didn’t get his support last July. Bernier’s apparent sputtering and incoherent response was most satisfying. RTC members also challenged him on his "paper thin" private sector experience and his claim that he worked at SAIC a Fortune 500 Company. He apparently worked there very briefly for a year or two (although he couldn’t recall the exact dates when asked) - "...just after grad school, perhaps 2000 or 2001--I’ll have to get back to you on that" was his reply. Now how many people can't really recall when they were employed at a Fortune 500 Company? LIAR LIAR!

It's funny, Bernier's revised bio found on his website fails to mention his most recent paid employment as a Linda McMahon campaign coordinator in the 5th District (a job he took in 2010 after losing the primary). Evidence shows that Bernier raked in $35K plus the cost of a Linda McMahon campaign jacket ($68) that everyone saw him sporting around West Hartford. It may be worth someone asking him if he recalls that experience, and why its not on his resume.

Even Jiminy Cricket can't keep Justin Bernier honest

Justin Bernier is an interesting candidate; that much is certain. But his infatuation with telling fibs, and making trouble everywhere he goes earns him the title of Pinocchio of Connecticut's 5th District. The good news is that after the Primary is over, his background as a exaggerator and his appeal as a used car salesman makes him a perfect fit for a second chance leadership role in Linda McMahon's dishonest campaign.

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.

A Special Valentine's Day Message from The King of Rock and Roll!

2012-02-14T18:05:00.002-05:00

We had to share this special Valentine's Day Cell Phone Performance from our own mega-superstar Joe Visconti. This song seems to perfectly underscore the life and times of West Hartford's most eligible bachelor! My God, you have to love Joltin' Joe's sense of humor and romance!

If you like this .... just wait until you seen what's coming!

Happy Valentine's Day to all the wonderful women in Connecticut and beyond!

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 video is published by permission of the great and talented Joesph Visconti and ViscontiFilms. All Rights Reserved.

Andrew Roraback: Man of Shame

2012-02-10T23:22:00.002-05:00

Put Andrew the Dunce back in
the corner where he belongs

Although some say he may be the odds on favorite to steal the nomination at the Connecticut Republican State Convention because of long-time Connecticut political family ties, there are a couple things that voters in the 5th Congressional District should know about State Senator Andrew Roraback before they bow down to this Replican Republican - a few things that may turn you from Republican Red to Crimson Red with anger.

As most long-time readers know, The King has written extensively about the heinous Cheshire murders and my desired push for the execution of two of the most disgusting creatures to ever breathe Connecticut air - Joshua Komisarjevsky and Steven Hayes. For those who can't recall, both of these filthy SOBs, tortured or raped, and burned alive three innocent victims back in 2007; among them were a loving wife, and two beautiful children, all robbed of their futures by these sick, twisted monsters. Over the last few years - with only a few liberal lunatics in dissent - the public has loyally supported the Petit-Hawke-Renn Family through thick and thin. While we couldn't fully comprehend Dr. Petit's personal anguish, we shared his sorrow, and pain. And we continue to share the sadness of his loss.

After two seemingly endless trials over the course of three years, and having shed many tears for the victims, separate juries finally convicted the assailants, and sentenced them both to death. While liberal zealots cried revenge, honest people shouted justice! Absolute Justice for the Petit women!

Yet in 2009, only two years after the gruesome Petit murders, State Senator Andrew Roraback broke ranks with the Public and The Republican Party and joined Democrats to support the Repeal of the Death Penalty. Luckily, the measure failed at the Governor's Desk. Roraback refers to his vote as a "matter of conscience." Roraback's conscience apparently includes allowing rapist-murders to live out their lives in prison watching television, playing ping-pong, lifting weights, and eating junk food at constituent expense. Roraback has pity for society's villains but not an ounce for murder victims, or their families. What kind of man purports to be a Republican but would work night and day through his Judiciary Committee to undercut the very punishment sought by prosecutors, and supported by 87% of Connecticut residents from even being considered for murderers like Hayes and Komisarjevsky. I'll tell you - an untrustworthy one!

And you have to find it a bit strange that both Senators Edith Prague and Andrew Roraback met privately with Dr. Petit prior to casting their votes. After doing so, Democrat Edith was moved by Dr. Petit's story, and courageously switched her vote against repeal, while Andrew Roraback acted like he didn't give a damn about Dr. Petit or his story. Andrew Roraback is a Man of Shame! How a feminne guy like him gets re-elected each term to the State Senate by people in Litchfield County, I'll never know.

I'm sure Andy won himself a moment of admiration with his liberal friends that day, as he has on a few previous occasions - like when he supported gay marriage, and whenever he gets the opportunity to champion liberal causes - like Greenways and tax breaks for phony Green Energy schemes and such.

Connecticut voters can do much better than to send a liberal like Andrew Roraback to Congress. And besides, the last thing the Republican Party needs is another Olympia Snowe in their ranks holding the GOP hostage every time there's a close vote on an issue of importance.

If Roraback wants to support murderers, and pimp for gay activists, then let him do so in the Connecticut Legislature with his buddy Larry Cafero. Let's leave the big Congressional job in Washington for someone who will go there, and act and vote like a real Republican, not some cheap, gutless imitation hellbent on supporting liberal causes, and crusading on behalf of murderers.

Just say "no" to Andrew Roraback - a liberal you can't trust. But if you like Roraback, you might just as well cross party lines and vote for Chris Donovan - because there's not much difference between the two on issues that really matter to conservatives.

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.

Review: Linda's Story Infomercial

2012-02-06T20:13:00.001-05:00

As promised, I'll be starting up our Connecticut Political Commercial/Infomercial Review series. I'm sure this regular segment is one that everyone is looking forward to. If not for any other reason, the very notion of The King tearing apart propaganda videos from our dear, wonderful, honest Connecticut politicians appeals to your darker side. It's the same reason that you rush to the gossip column in the newspaper, read The Star in the checkout line, and scan the obituaries to see who's been offed. HeHeHe! While other news outlets and blogs print and air all the the worthless pre-fab, canned garbage that candidates want you to see and hear, we keep it real! Look, I've said it before, and I'll say it again - all politicians are crud - even the nice ones. We're just here to keep things honest, and entertaining in a drab, blue, barely contestable Nutmeg Stadt.

I'm sure you'll be astonished that I'm going to start my series with a review of Linda McMahon's latest infomercial Linda's Story. As this series progresses, I may change the format and grading system, but for now, we'll stick with the basics and see how it goes.

First things first, check out the video yourself:

Linda's Story: Propaganda that warms the Heart

I'll start by saying that it's clear that the infomercial is an attempt to improve McMahon's exceedingly poor poll numbers with women voters. Odds are that the only way this could actually happen is if she had access to a time machine and went back and choose a different line of work. It's not jealousy of her fame and fortune that has her in that tank with Nutmeg moms and dads - it's her so-called business background and the impalpable product she exports into homes each week. Putting it nicely, scat wrapped up in a pretty box with a ribbon is still scat.

The video itself is somewhat disappointing. First, I'm not sure what the deal is with the annoying piano music blaring in the background but after about 30 seconds I felt like I was sitting in a smoke-filled hotel lounge waiting for my vodka tonic to arrive which I'm sure would have helped get me through the rest of the video. But seriously, the music is a huge distraction when you're trying to listen to her tell her story.

Second, given that her profession includes television, video and story-telling, I was very surprised at how poorly the video was assembled - instead of a clean, clear story, we saw dozens of spliced sentences put together within the mini segments. Sometimes the spliced sentences were used to convey a basic premise.  Because the splices were so clearly visible, they made Linda's Story appear phony, and concocted. We recognize this is an ad, but must appear to be so blatantly an ad? Where is the smooth Linda McMahon who sometimes visits Town Committees? She wasn't in this video.

Segment Summary:

:00- :54: Linda talks about her parents on the public payroll, and that she grew up in a modest setting. Explains that they taught her the value of hard work, etc.

:54 - 1:40: Talks about meeting future husband Vince at Church during their High School years. This segment is meant to give the appearance of a normal relationship between the two. Note the number of spliced clips strung together; it must have taken several takes to keep a straight/happy face to film this fairytale - and get it right. The story about scrounging around for lose change and keeping it in a box to accumulate enough coinage to see a movie is a bit weird, if not unbelievable. How many coins did it take for two people to see a movie?  It made me wonder whether  she was raised in a modest household (as mentioned in the first sequence), or in poverty which caused her to scrounge for and save coins. The sequence ends with her telling us she's been married 45 years. She certainly deserves credit for that given the statistics on divorce, and given the unfortunate death rate of wrestling superstars.

It's still a bit strange to see Vince used as a prop since he couldn't be bothered to take the time out of his schedule to do a bit of campaigning with her. Some claim he's not involved due to the negatives associated with pro wrestling, but there may be other personal reasons which we will not go into here - other than to say this campaign is more of an expensive annoyance for him.

1:42 - 2:36 Talks about going to college with Vince and learning she was expectantly pregnant with Shane the day before graduation while she held no health insurance. Not sure whether his or her parents helped them out - as its not mentioned, but Vince McMahon Sr. was not poor. She then makes a joke about taking a year and a half to pay Shane off - saying she was afraid they might reclaim him. Weird segment, plus she laughs at her own joke. A bit of a no-no. Sort of backpedals at bit and gives the hospital credit for setting up a payment plan. This section of the video was meant to help Linda appear to understand the issue regarding lack of healthcare coverage - which sort of makes me wonder where exactly she stands on this issue. Is she an advocate for National Healthcare? Or some form of it? This segment may have the unintended consequence of zeroing in on a position she hasn't clearly discussed, doesn't it? You do have to give her credit here for going out an getting a job six weeks after giving birth. Can't fault her for taking ownership.

2:37 -  3:11 Calls the WWE "a successful business venture". Funny to hear it referred to that way. She talks about going bankrupt, and was glad that happened early on. This particular disclosure has caused opponents and critics to inquire about who got stuck with the unpaid bills, and if they were ever made whole after she became rich and famous. Clearly she's rich enough to spend mega-millions on Senate Campaigns. Talks about feeling as though she was punched but not down and out - right, well that's because bankruptcy frees you from obligations from your creditors. Pretty nifty strategy.

3:12 - 4:13: Works to close the sale. She doesn't do this based on where she stands on specific issues, or by telling us what she'll do - but claims that Connecticut is looking for a different kind of representation - well, she's different, I'll give her that. Sells the female pitch: "I'm a mom, I've been a working mom, stay at home mom, grandmother."   She then says she has skills and attributes that others in the race don't have - but just like her position on policies, she never tells us what those special attributes are. With Linda, you have to guess. Oh wait - it's her business experience - which is unlike any business that any business-owner in Connecticut has ever seen. There aren't too many circus owners in Connecticut. Not sure how that translates for our industries here or even the small business owner.

She ends the segment by telling us, "Hopefully, I will be able to hear from the people of Connecticut - their stories, and understand how I can help them - when I'm in Washington." This ending left me a bit empty. And it goes back to voters primary complaint about Linda - she goes on listening tours, listens and smiles, however, everyone keeps asking the same questions: WHAT SHE WOULD DO TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE IF ELECTED.  WHAT POLICIES WOULD SHE ENACT? WHAT DOES SHE BELIEVE IN?

It's not about getting to Washington. It's about explaining to the People of Connecticut exactly what she would do if elected. That's a mystery to all of us, and even to her delegate count. And being "better than" Shays, Hill, Westby, Biesewicz, or Murphy is not an answer. It's not even a start.

SCORECARD:

Audio: The ridiculous piano playing is a distraction and is completely unnecessary. Grade: C-

Video: Clear and bright. Linda looks great in a blue blouse, but the clips all strung together made her story lack authenticity. Splicing bits and pieces together really stuck out at us and reminded us that this was nothing more than a political infomercial. Grade: C

Content: There wasn't really much there. I didn't come away stunned by a selling point that would make me want to jump up and vote for Linda. There were a couple of interesting points about making mistakes, and rising up from a poor or modest means, but there are thousands of stories out there like that. Even if true, it's not a reason to put Linda McMahon in the U.S. Senate.   The "if first you don't succeed, file bankruptcy " might create a mixed opinion of her particularly with creditors. The sales pitch about being a mom, grandmother, etc was much too direct. The closing line left me empty, and asking more questions about what she believes in - which is ever-absent in her interviews, campaign materials, and now - in her videos. She also came across as having low energy; a sort of shadow of her Pro Wrestling persona. Grade: D-

Summary: The video wasn't the worst political commercial/infomercial that I've ever seen, but it was pretty bad. Linda aught to use the creative touch she has from the Wrestling Biz and put some energy, imagination, and sparkle into a message that sells. She might as well use some of that glitz because that's all she's got absent a coherent set of policy positions (of course she does have money). And for this video if I were her, I'd ask for a refund. Overall Grade: C-.

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.

A couple of Linda McMahon Videos

2012-02-03T12:04:00.005-05:00

Just in case you've forgotten, CNN's Anderson Cooper aired this interesting piece on Linda McMillions back in 2010...

http://youtu.be/c36H6bHDbfg

Best line in the clip comes at the end... "proof perhaps that even the richest person in the world needs a message voters believe, not just a good act." So far, I think we can all agree that a message voters believe has been a huge gap in the McMahon strategy since she started running in 2009. Her recent video Linda's Story is more of the same; voters aren't a slight bit interested in hearing her talk about herself. They want to know what her plan is to get the economy turned around, and keep our enemies around the globe off our back.

The second video is from 1994 where Linda attended the College Democrat Convention (I'm not sure how often Republicans address Democrat forums, historically, or Democrats attend Republican forums, I guess its worth a study). The video is significant because it's a clear example of the the overall lack of conviction of ideology which Linda demonstrated in 1994, 2010, and continues to demonstrate on her road shows today. Everyone wants job growth - Republicans, Democrats, Socialists, Libertarians, Constitutionalists... everyone.

Linda only started adapting Republican views when it became necessary to possess them. If you haven't had the chance, listen to Linda respond to just about any hot-button question from a constituent and you'll notice that she acknowledges the person, but almost never demonstrates passion about the matter one way or another - except when talking about the jobs issue. If nothing else, she is clearly a one-dimensional candidate. And since most Republicans don't want the Federal Government creating jobs, she doesn't have much of an appeal to our base on that issue either. We don't send people to Congress to create jobs, that's supposed to be done in the private sector.

I don't know about you, but I get a sick stomach when I see a Republican candidate standing in front of a Democratic podium. This video lends credibility to the rumor that Linda initially approached the Democratic Party about running for office on their ticket, but only became a Republican after they turned her down. There is nothing wrong with switching from one Party to another - but I will never buy the story that Linda McMahon had some great epiphany like Ronald Reagan did in the 1960s.

RINO SCHMINO!

2012-02-02T21:44:00.009-05:00

According to God-like perfectionists, we are all RINOs.

Everyone has heard the term RINO which as you know is the acronym for the phrase "Republican in Name Only." Funny thing about this term is that it seems to apply to nearly everyone who falls short of the select high standard of pure Republicanism which is set forth by those who extol all the perfect virtues, values, positions, and noble attributes of one who is a true Republican. Remember, it only takes one unacceptable thought or viewpoint to be cast down by the righteous.

Of course, pure Republicanism is a very elite group indeed. So much so, that I can only think of two, maybe three select individuals who might qualify for this high honor of perfection. These most excellent individuals shall remain nameless here else they may seized upon by throngs of jealous naysayers who would seek to analyze their every utterance to find that one stance, that one weakness that would shatter their purity and reputation FOREVER. And we mean FOREVER - for there is no redemption, no grace, no absolution, and no way back, once you descend from the heralded God-like station.

Now, before you jump to any conclusions about how HIS MAJESTY THE KING falls into the two categories stated above, I must admit openly and readily that I too fall short:

I AM A RINO!!

But I don't go off and sit and weep in the corner, or wander the streets with my face forlorn. Nay! I wear my designation as a Badge of Courage because I know that I am in such good company with so many fine people - people like you who are equally damaged and imperfect.

Let's examine just a few of our comrades in arms who are members of the RINO ARMY. Here I'll present the individual and his or her crime(s).

Newt Gingrich: For supporting the Individual National Healthcare mandate, Global Warming, Cap and Trade, and for serving his ex-wife with divorce papers at her hospital bedside as she recovered from cancer treatments (real family values).

Mitt Romney: For being from Massachusetts, creating a socialized medicine scheme to cover 7% of the people in Massachusetts, and for not running illegal aliens out of Boston or burning down the homes of gay couples.

Rick Santorum: For his hundreds of votes supporting spending packages to expand the size of the Federal Government (all for a good cause, of course)

Ron Paul: For being Ron Paul who's not really a Republican anyway, but rather a full-fledged Libertarian-Isolationist who supports ignoring the drug cartels, al Queda, and moving us back to an 1850s foreign policy: "Don't know, Don't care". All schools will be issued globes with the United States as the only land-mass surrounded entirely by water.

Jodi Rell: Who is Connecticut's Queen of RINOism for having not called in the Connecticut National Guard even once to crush the Democrats' liberal onslaught of the State Budget and Economy. And for every position she's ever taken on any issue, ever and ever. Amen.

John Rowland: For going to Jail. Real Republicans don't go to jail, they build jails, and put Democrats in jail.

Lowell Weicker: For selling out Richard Nixon, and giving us the permanent income tax.

Tom Scott: For running on the Independence Party ticket against Republican John Rowland (and getting your arse kicked), and for selling out to Linda McMahon for the almighty dollar. And for no longer being able to have legitimacy in the claim that you stand on principle now that you work for McMahon.

Tom Foley: For being boring as hell. And for not beating Dannel Malloy. And for spending most of his life as a job-killer instead of a job creator. Real Republicans don't buy companies and lay people off, they create jobs, and hire people.

Chris Shays: For supporting Cap and Trade, gay rights, and not supporting the Second Amendment the way he is EXPECTED TO including the notion that ordinary citizens should be able to own tanks, warplanes, anti-aircraft batteries, their own naval armadas, and nuclear weapons. What the hell is wrong with you, Shays?

Linda McMahon: For giving money to Democrat candidates and the DNC, for buying RTCs, delegates, and anyone who will listen to her non-specific, empty dribble. And for not having any positions on anything at all. And for intentionally trying to be the nominee - to fill that empty space in your life, marriage, job et al, all the while, knowing you can't win - so as to ensure that a Democrat gets elected.

Brian Hill and Kie Westby: For taking up space on the game board when both of you will be lucky enough to get 5% of the delegate count, combined. Nice guys, but you both have to know that you are helping Linda McMahon achieve her goal of overcoming life inadequacy and helping Democrat Susan Murphy get elected to the U.S. Senate (see Linda McMahon above). And besides, neither of you could afford to purchase enough convention delegates if your lives depended on it.

Joe Markeley, Rob Simmons, Chris Coutu, Larry Cafero, and the entire Republican State House Caucus for signing a letter supporting Aniskovich for State Chairman and turning the State Party into a laughing stock, and for many of the same for going along with Linda McMahon's buying spree. And for the 85 other Republican Leaders including RTC Candidates who took bribes, donations or what-have-you and sold out to Linda McMahon before the process even started (See Linda McMahon above)

And for many of the same who supported Governor Malloy's Jobs Bill which will allow for patronage at the highest state government level. Brilliant!

5th District Candidates Justin Bernier, Lisa Wilson-Foley, and Andrew Roraback for sending out annoying press releases bragging about how much money you have, or how better financial positioned you are than your fellow Republicans to win election, and MOREOVER - for making this a race about MONEY instead of about ISSUES! All three of you should quit the race and go get jobs raising funds for the Jerry Lewis Telethon. Even the Democrats aren't this self-absorbed and egotistical. And stop running your campaigns against President Obama, you idiots! You have real Democratic opponents right here in Connecticut!

All Pro-Abortion Supporters: For supporting a woman's right to abortion; a cardinal sin according to St. Peter and the gang.

All Pro-Life Supporters: For seeking Government mandated control over women's reproductive rights. And for ignoring individual liberty.

All Union Members: True Republicans don't join Unions.

Bill O'Reilly: For his asinine stance AGAINST the Death Penalty.

Blah, Blah, Blah. I guess by this standard - EVERYONE IS A RINO!

Get my drift? Jack Kemp used to talk about this whole concept of the Big Tent where there's enough room for differing viewpoints on a variety of issues. With the exception of those committing corruption or fraud (including buying or selling of delegates and votes, or endorsing such behavior) there is plenty of room for opposing viewpoints within the Party. After we get done tearing each other to shreds, let's get on the same page and remember who we are really supposed to be fighting.

There is only one or two exceptions where Republicans don't have to grin and bare it, and get behind a bad candidate, but I'll leave that for now. Just remember when you are about to throw around that annoying term RINO - don't forget to think about your own imperfections. You might just want to move on, and find a better way to express yourself. Else you just may turn off a large block of Republican voters who could make a huge difference in November.

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.

Squeeze Play

2012-01-29T11:26:00.130-05:00

Even Monty Hall wouldn't be able
to top the prizes that Linda is offering
RTCs behind the curtain

It's been another big week of buzz; giving the CTGOP more excitement in the past month than it's seen in years. It's not all bad, usually Republicans are relegated to Page 20 in the newspaper in between articles about lost kittens and astrology, so as they say bad press is better than no press at all. Well, maybe that only applies when it's not all bad. :)

To begin with, this week our Republican State Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr. smartly persuaded Republican State Central Members to move the Ethics Resolutions to a sub-committee for study and possible amendment. While many wanted to see a straight vote on this come to pass, it was decided that it was best to avert a quick defeat on the measures which would have turned into nothing short of a full scale public relations disaster for the CTGOP. A no-vote would have signaled that the purchase of the State Convention was a done deal, and would have greatly diminished the integrity of both the State Party and it's Chairman. To those angry about not seeing a debate and straight-up vote, I understand your frustration, but consider the fact that while the fix may still be in, at least the Dean-Visconti Resolutions aren't dead.

A month ago, The King would've predicted that the Resolutions would die a quick death, but now with this approach - we anticipate at least a partial victory against the Wilson-Foley/McMahon anti-ethics lobbyists.

Many people have asked what the big deal is about wearing a badge, and why certain candidates are so hell-bent against it. Wearing a badge to identify that you're a paid campaign worker for a specific candidate seems to make perfect sense to anyone with a sense of fair play, although most people also think paid campaign staff should recuse themselves all-together from participation as a delegate. For those of you who attended the 2010 State Convention, you will distinctly recall that during the U.S. Senate voting (and vote switching) process, Linda McMahon had dozens and dozens of her unidentified staff working over delegates to get them to switch their vote. By convention rules, there is a limit of how many staffers are permitted to be on the floor playing games, but if you can't identify who is who then you can't enforce the rules - which was all part of the plan to rig the process. The fact that Healy's brownshirts were throwing only Rob Simmons' staffers off the convention floor is a whole different topic. But you can see just why requiring campaign employees, or independent contractors to wear badges helps bring integrity to the the Convention process, including helping those responsible for enforcing the rules to be able to enforce them.

RTC Members and would-be delegates
have plenty of loot to chose out of
Linda's Treasure Chest

As has been reported, Linda McMahon (and Lisa Wilson-Foley) have been opening up their treasure chests and handing out handsome rewards for both Republican Town Committee (RTC) and RTC Member (future convention delegate) endorsements. If you ask their camps about the pay-to-play strategy, they just *smile* and shrug their shoulders. To the most unethical among us, accepting payments and in-kind bribes is just an accepted part of our political process here in Connecticut. It's what some have had the audacity to refer to as "democracy". Which goes to show how deep the Party has become infected with a nearly incurable virus.

You probably wonder why the McMahon camp is handing out cold hard cash to RTCs? Well, if you though it was because Linda McMahon is just a caring, generous lady - well, you got it wrong. Dead wrong! Most candidates solicit donations, they don't make them. That should be the first indication that something is amiss.

Whether the Shays, Hill, or Westby camp understand it or not, the endgame is pretty simple. Linda McMahon's goal for the 2012 State Convention is the same goal that she had in 2010, which is to win the Convention by the largest margin possible, but more importantly - attempt to ensure that Shays, Hill, and Westby don't secure the necessary 15% of the delegate count required to automatically qualify them to appear on the primary ballot. If Shays, Hill or Westby don't receive the necessary 15% they'll have to make the decision to either collect about 8500 state-wide Republican petition signatures to qualify, or take the CTGOP to court for running a rigged Convention (and I'm sure no one wants the latter), or simply quit the race. And as a reminder, in 2010 Rob Simmons did meet the 15% threshold but opted not to primary because he believed he didn't have a large enough war-chest to complete with Linda McMillions.

All reports to The King's View are that the McMahon camp is burning up the wires. Tom Scott, McMahon's political director and former anti-Republican candidate, in particular has been working the circuit playing the role of set-up man while other minions are helping to dole out golden rewards from McMahon's bottomless Treasure Chest. While the intimidation has been mild so far, rumors are that that Scott has been telling would-be delegates that refusing to endorse McMahon would result in "consequences" including alienation and severe embarrassment because "Linda will win in the end". As we get closer to D-Day, you can expect more of this kind of thing, but with the rhetoric increasing. (Insider Republicans will recall similar antics during the Chairman's race on behalf of Mr. A).

The last few weeks have revealed exactly how heated the game is going to get. It also shows you just how far off their game the so-called CTGOP political gurus are. One political operative wrote The King, "They are making so many mistakes, that I've lost count." It's true, from staff members uttering slurs about other candidates to personal attacks - it's become embarrassing for the CTGOP Establishment. The only person who came out looking Senatorial this past week was Christopher Shays who made his formal announcement in front of a packed Hartford crowd.

These past two weeks have been a disaster for the Foes of Ethics. First, the McMahon-Wilson-Foley-Healy conglomerate using their surrogates waged a full scale personal attack on Mr. Visconti. The trio, referred humorously in Republican circles as the new Axis of Greed, was not only nasty in their attacks, they also sought to mislead the public by painting Joltin' Joe as a deadbeat dad. Had the idiots checked their facts, they would have realized that Mr. Visconti actually receives child-support from his ex-wife (we hate to have to address this here, but it's important to set the record straight as the false rumors about private family matters continue to be propagated). The accusations of failing to pay child support were slanderous, and the Axis of Greed should hang their heads low. Well-respected veteran Republicans not involved in the fray have expressed outrage over these tactics. Some names you just wouldn't believe! But thanks to you, you've given Joltin' Joe the green light to do as he sees fit. Good luck!

The fact remains that this personal attack was a direct warning to RTC members and future delegates that if they ever cross the McMahon Camp, or go back on their endorsement, surrogates will character-assassinate them in public. The evidence of this is already established, and as we will see later in this piece the McMahon campaign went out of their way to make sure they had someone on-board with a knack for this kind of behavior.

The second mistake of the week came from our old friend - shadow-Chairman Healy who recklessly fired off a missive from his blog which became an instant field day for the media. The big loser from Healy's attack on Chris Shays was not Shays nor Healy, but instead the candidate that he is supposed to be focused on - Lisa Wilson-Foley. The last thing Wilson-Foley needed was for her campaign manager to go off the reservation, half-cocked, and provide illumination into the direct connection between her campaign and Mrs. McMahon's. We guess the phone calls claiming innocence turned out to be nothing more than a farce - with Healy running the ranch she should have expected shoot from the hip controversy; this week the shots clearly ricocheted back at Wilson-Foley. And if you think about it, the pay-to-play strategy underway is precisely what was seen from the McMahon campaign in 2010. The result of which was not an elected Republican, but a badly fractured Republican Party. The Fifth Congressional District is in for a real treat.

The media, which hates Republicans anyway, was quick to pick up the diatribe from an obviously angry Healy. Probably the most interesting line in the whole thing was when Healy went out of his way to call McMahon's campaign staff "over-fed and self-dealing", and then back slapped them by indirectly calling them "incompetent". I'm sure all those people who worked their asses off for Linda really appreciated Healy's characterization of them. Her campaign manager, David Cappiello, who presumably had a say in hiring all these over-indulgent campaign-killers, apparently got a free pass and not a single mention - unless Healy was implying that Cappiello was one of the over-fed creeps who ruined Linda's Senate aspirations. And as Healy's wife served as Communication Director, she owns the result of the blitz of negative advertising against Rob Simmons which helped to damage McMahon's reputation in the Second District early. Boy, the air must be pretty thin at the top of Healy Mountain. Wilson-Foley peeps: make a note to self: when Wilson-Foley loses you'll be stamped as incompetent gluttons - something you can really look forward to when this whole thing is over.

By the way, Republicans around Connecticut are now asking, if the the Badge Resolution is passed - just how many badges will the former Chairman be forced to wear?

We'll assume that after getting a drumming from Wilson-Foley herself, Healy took down his post, which was almost worse because it's probably the first time in history that we can recall the shadow-Chairman publicly admitting a mistake. And Joe Lockhart pounded him in a second post which was just short of calling him a yellow-bellied coward. Who else wanted to be a fly on the wall when that call or calls came in?

And by the way, if her WWE past isn't a negative then why don't we ever seem to see her smiling, happy husband Vince McMahon ever walking the streets with Linda or attending her campaign functions? In a stark contrast, we saw the lovely wife of Chris Shays - Betsi Shays, formally introduce him to the Old State House audience this week. She also attends Republican functions and events at Mr. Shays' side. For some reason, I don't think we'll being seeing Vince showing his face - rumors are that he thinks Linda's whole Senate run is a tremendous waste of money. I guess if your spouse planned to invest $100 million dollars into a doomed scheme that the whole world knows has a 0% chance of a return, you'd be unhappy too.

Better come up with a few more Pay-Per-Views, Vincey.

Over the course of the last few weeks, I've had a rather insistent group of readers send me a load of documents, links and so forth about a specific topic that I will now broach. I want to be very clear to all readers that after review of the material as a whole, being public, and somewhat relevant, I'm going to provide the links in this piece. I want to be careful to make sure that all of you know that this isn't designed as some hit-piece on Linda McMahon or her staff - I'm only providing the facts. We Report, You Decide should be the understood mode here.

When Linda McMahon hired Corry Bliss as her Campaign Manager few people took notice. Bliss ran Lt. Governor Brian Dubie's unsuccessful Vermont Gubernatorial run in 2010. What is remarkable isn't that Dubie lost, but it's how the race was run is what is of grave concern to The King and to many Connecticut Republican Insiders in-the-know. Bliss ran more than just a hard-nosed campaign on the issues, it's apparent from all reports that Bliss mounted terrible personal attacks against Mr. David Blittersdorf. This article entitled, "Digger Tidbits: Into the Swirl of Septic; the dirt machine." is a good read.

Campaigns are often cinder boxes for political and sometimes personal attacks as we've witnessed during the GOP Presidential saga. But the attacks by Bliss were so upsetting that Blittersdorf brought a Defamation Lawsuit against Mr. Bliss and Mr. Dubie. The lawsuit was settled out of Court. Few of us can recall any other campaign where a lawsuit was brought in a similar fashion which caught national attention.

Apparently, as the press has reported, Bliss was forced to write a personal letter of apology to Bittersdorf for his actions (as was Mr. Dubie).

So why does this have people up in arms? Well, Mrs. McMahon isn't a stupid person and is well aware of the steps she needs to take to hire responsible people to keep her own Company safe and reputation intact. Yet, out of all of the hundreds of political campaign experts, consultants, and firms available who advertise in Campaigns and Elections, she opted for a clearly troubled Mr. Bliss to run her Senate campaign. Does this make sense? Sure, it does!

As The King ties all these pieces together, the world is left wondering - is the Axis of Greed merely a product of hyper-imagination fabricated to tell a tale of conspiracy? Or does all the clear evidence presented through newspaper articles, links, eye-witness reports and so forth show that the connections between yesterday's strategies by the same old Connecticut politicos are playing out in Groundhog Day fashion right before our very eyes? I guess that's up for you to decide.

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.

Linda McMahon's Wrestling World of Death

2012-01-25T08:15:00.000-05:00

Nancy & Chris Benoit; former Linda McMahon employees
who died in a horrific double murder, and suicide
RIP, victims of drugs and work-related pressure

On January 11, 2012, U.S. Senate Candidate Christopher Shays issued a press release which included comments regarding Linda McMahon's Pro Wrestling business, "Let’s think about it: She’s got over 41 people 50 years and younger who’ve died in her jobs. That’s quite a job record that she’s created." Of course, those in the McMahon camp do what they do best whenever questions are raised about McMahon's so-called business background - and that's to read from the script they've been provided, and change the subject.

What amazes The King and his Court, is that Linda McMahon is the first to repeat the same line over and over, "I've created 500 jobs" and then when you go to ask her specifics about her line of business - she runs like Hell, or has no comment. No comment?

Most voters in Connecticut don't understand the wrestling business. It seems to The King that the target audience of wrestling shows are meant to appeal to those who are ages 8 - 16 and collect action figures, and immature adults who thrive on yelling, violence, and sexual innuendo. If you think about Mrs. McMahon's industry as a product - it's not one that parents want to see on their shelves, or beaming into their living rooms every Monday night.

Sure, all television has components of violence, even the news - but Linda McMahon's product is violence. And unfortunately, her product is also Death.

As everyone knows, the McMahon's pockets run deep. There are a number of critics, who, over the years, have provided insight into what goes on behind the curtain - but many of them have been silenced by enforcement of legal contracts which forbid them to talk about what goes on behind the scenes. As a result, not many people are talking. And the fact remains that the industry is very small - everyone knows everyone, and no one wants to be blackballed in the industry.

When it comes to the horrific tales of wrestling performer deaths who've been under the employ of the McMahons - the numbers are staggering. One of the best sources for this information comes from the website: Concussion Inc. owned by Irvin Muchnick. Muchnick is the author of the best sellers Chris & Nancy: The True Story of the Benoit Murder-Suicide and Pro Wrestling’s Cocktail of Death, Wrestling Babylon: Piledriving Tales of Drugs, Sex, Death, and Scandal, and other written ventures. His expertise includes researching and reporting on concussion related injuries including those in the National Football League, and professional and amateur sports. To be clear, Irv Muchnick is NOT politically motivated nor is he a resident of Connecticut.

Included on Mr. Muchnick's site are some interesting stories, such as:

The auction of a chair used on an employee that may have contributed to their death and full text of comments he supplied a blogger.

Tweeter David Bixenspan of the Bleacher Report posted the following on Twitter yesterday:

Even if you stick to the wrestlers who died while working for the company, WWE is still being misleading.
Rick McGraw is missing since I guess he wasn't "under contract" in spite of wrestling for the company full time.
Eddy Guerrero's death certificate has steroids listed as a contributing cause to his heart disease
Similarly, Brian Pillman's death certificate has cocaine listed as a contributing cause to his heart disease.
The accident was of course Owen Hart, where they were pretty clearly negligent and settled a wrongful death case.
The issue is if WWE encourages or ignores certain habits while the wrestlers are in the company, not if they died working there.
WWE may like to pretend it's about to deaths while in the company, but it's not, and even then, they distort that # & what it means

In 2010, writers at The King's View were aware of some of the facts involving the WWE and wrestler deaths, and we noted that they never seemed to get a fair hearing by Connecticut's media. The Hartford Courant has done a huge disservice by Connecticut residents by failing to use journalistic resources to investigate, or even report on the serious allegations and claims about Professional Wrestling deaths of active and former employees of the WWE.

One section of Mr. Muchnick's site deals specifically with the 2010 death of Lance Cade. This death occurred during the same period as when Linda McMahon was last running for Senate. The lack of reporting on this matter implies a direct cover-up by our media who appear to have intentionally ignored or blacked out this story. To this day the Media still refuses to press McMahon on her business practices or on WWE employee-related death matters (with the exception of The Day which covered this story with input from Chris Benoit's father). They barely mention the steroid hearings which involved WWE and Linda's husband, Vince McMahon. Why? And why were there no questions about it during the debate between herself and Senator Blumenthal?

There are some that suggest a number of interesting conspiracy theories connected to the McMahon Media Black-Out. One rumor involves a prominent paid lobbyist firm which is coercing or paying The Courant not to report on various matters (perhaps more on that issue at a later date), and there is another theory that claims that secretly, liberal writers at The Hartford Courant and other media outlets are praying to God or Athena (or whatever) and manipulating the news so that Linda McMahon becomes the Republican Candidate - because they know she will get blown out again no matter who she runs against. While the former seems a tad far-fetched, the later is plausible given where she sits in the polls, and the absence of the mention of the other three Republican candidates (Brian K. Hill, Kie Westby and Christopher Shays) in last week's Sunday Courant cover story regarding certain candidates humble beginnings.

I want to be clear that I am not accusing the McMahons of intentionally causing harm or death of any of their employees - that would be a lie. But there is a lot information out there that suggests that something just isn't right. If the best you can do when asked about employee deaths is to argue about the number, well that suggests that something really is amiss. Facts show that the WWE didn't even establish a Health and Wellness program for their employees until February 2007 after the media caught wind of the drug abuse scandals. And the policy is still under scrutiny for allowing performers to work with injuries.

It's time for the Connecticut Media to stop seeking ad dollars from the McMahon camp and step up to the plate and let their reporters do their jobs. And I don't mean positioning a blogger as part of the "clipping service" to post and retweet other people's thoughts all day - but reinstate useful journalism in an unbiased fashion.

Connecticut's BEST JOURNALIST Ann Nyberg is clearly right about one thing - the state of journalism is in decline these days. The reporting on the 2010 and 2012 campaigns are a clear example.

Before ending, I have to ask why some of our most respected CTGOP Leaders would align themselves with a candidate who's made a living creating and distributing violent and pornographic trash. Many of the same people who purport to support traditional family values seem to have turned a blind eye to the impact of televised shows featuring near-naked girls rolling around on a wrestling mat (a form of "soft porn" as the former Congressman mentioned) and dozens of steroid injected men running around in tights? Does this industry make you really proud to stand next to Linda McMahon? As a Mayor of a big city, is it worth embarrassing yourself or killing your reputation for a promoter of such filth? Does it make sense that Connecticut would send a Pro Wrestling Promoter to Washington on its behalf? Really? Is she the best and brightest that Connecticut has to offer? We thing NOT!

And when you look at the staggering numbers of those who've passed away under her employ, Senator Markley and Mayor Moccia - what do you say? She was just unlucky? Perhaps the 500 jobs she's actually referring to in her ads include steroid runners, medical staff, hospital professionals, defense attornies, grave diggers, and funeral directors. Don't believe me, look at the list in the bottom of this article, and note the ages. Who should be held accountable?

As an aside - isn't it ironic that the same very people who are screaming and yelling about online gambling (just another vice) don't see anything wrong with Pro Wrestling as a product? Well, maybe its because they aren't getting a personal pay-off or a "donation" placed in their pocket to overlook the obvious. Hypocritical? You bet.

We can do better than Linda McMahon. And if our Convention Delegates are already bought and paid for - that's fine - the people of Connecticut, won't be!

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.

REPORT: Dean-Visconti Resolutions sent to Sub-Committee

2012-01-24T19:40:00.034-05:00

Here is a quick update for those who've been following the Dean-Visconti Ethics Resolutions saga --

It was decided that there would be neither a full-fledged debate or a call for an up-or-down vote this evening. Instead, the Resolutions will be sent to a sub-committee for study and/or possible modification. The Committee will either accept or amend the Resolutions and forward them with their recommendation to the entire body for approval or rejection.

The Sub-Committee will be chaired by State Central Member Michael Vitali (Wallingford). Given his reputation, Vitali is expected to be a fair and impartial arbiter.

The King would also like to recognize State Central Members Mr. Scott Veley and Mr. Mark Pappa for their courage and fortitude to present these Resolutions despite "pressure" not to do so. And we would be remiss to not state our appreciation to CT Republican State Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr., who stuck his neck out to make sure that the Resolutions would get a fair-hearing in Committee. We believe that Chairman Labriola has a vested interest in running an impartial State Convention for both members and voters of Connecticut.

It's The King's View that the individuals selected to serve on this Committee should be left to study and review the Resolutions in detail without undue pressure and criticism from outside forces. After weighing the pros and cons, we pray they will come to the logical conclusion that the Resolutions should be passed not just for the good of the Connecticut Republican Party but more importantly - to better our political process in Connecticut.

I AM,

THE KING

Comments on the Week's Activity

2012-01-21T17:22:00.007-05:00

This blog has been published under different owners, incantations, writers, and publishing services since 1996. During those years, there have been a lot of battles won and lost - and being Republican - I'd have to say mostly lost. You can always tell when you're winning because when your positions have merit and it's impacting the outcome of the game - the opposition almost always turns from the subject at hand to attack the opinion writers. This week we saw one of the most disgraceful attacks on a political activist in recent memory - the unacceptable personal attack on Joseph Visconti. Our opponents have demonstrated their weakness of character. And from what I have seen and heard, their actions have caused considerable damage to themselves. This is the case even in the eyes of the mainstream press.

To set the record straight, there are a few things that need to be said about Mr. Visconti:

-- When the CTGOP was nearly broke and ready to close it's doors this past summer, Mr. Visconti (along with M. Clark) organized a fundraiser "Good Luck Back" to raise cash so that Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr. and his staff could have a headquarters from which to work from on behalf of Connecticut Republicans. Don't believe it? Ask Jerry.

-- Despite lacking full-time employment (construction jobs are in the tank), Mr. Visconti attended multiple fundraisers to support a great number of candidates, and helped Party-build - despite his financial situation, and due injury to himself

-- Mr. Visconti volunteered to assist over a dozen candidates across multiple districts and towns by attending events, helping with campaigns, and advertising through the use of his truck (in fact, he ran the truck into the ground doing so). He accepted only nominal contributions for gasoline reimbursement as part of the billboard hauling cost.

-- At the end of the Legislative Session when Democrats were forcing the Bathroom Bill on the books, Mr. Visconti went to the LOB and fought alongside the few activists willing to lobby against the bill. Where was everyone else?

-- Mr. Visconti has recently worked to solicit donations to support both the Family Institute of Connecticut, and the Connecticut Republican Party Straw Poll.

-- Despite false claims by his detractors, Mr. Visconti has neither asked for, nor taken one red cent for any of the work that he has done for the organizations mentioned above, including the Good Luck Back Fundraiser. Unlike so many others, he didn't barge into Chairman Labriola's office under false pretenses offering his services while at the same time demanding a piece of the action. In fact, he is one of the few people who has consistently offered to support the CTGOP and has stood by Chairman Labriola, Jr. through a tough start up period   Instead of supporting Labriola like they should, many discontented individuals scheme hard and long about how to undermine him. Trying to plant a wedge between Labriola and Visconti is just another of those failed schemes.

--And also, if you didn't know, Mr. Visconti after being denied the opportunity to run as a Republican in West Hartford - collected signatures, forced a primary, and ultimately became an elected Town Councilman for our Town of West Hartford! He did this all while dealing with a tough divorce, raising children as a single parent, and making bi-weekly trips to New York so his father could receive cancer treatments.   Mr. Visconti doesn't have a selfish bone in his body. Later, after no one had the guts to run against John Larson, Visconti took up the challenge while juggling all of the above, and sadly having to say a final good-bye to his father. Mr. Visconti kept it all together, and unlike Linda McMahon and others, he didn't give up the ship and file for bankruptcy (like he could of) - or cut and run.

-- Sure, Visconti has challenged the status quo. He's taken unpopular positions on Blue Back Square (which BTW is for sale), and on conservative issues, and has helped to champion cleaning up the existence of PATRONAGE within our withering Party via the Dean-Visconti Resolutions. Based on this act alone, we can understand why some feel so threatened. Why else would insiders and certain Candidates fight something so simple? This is something that should be a standard and a matter of common sense. If you're a delegate to the State Convention, are you really afraid to wear a badge saying that you've been paid by or are employed by your Candidate of choice? You'd think you'd be more than willing to wear a badge and brag about it? Heck, lobbyists wear badges, what's the big deal?

But to sink to the lowest level possible by posting (and distributing) personal information about a non-candidate's financial life and family history is by far the most heinous act seen in some time.  Believe me, I get a couple emails a week that tell of tales about candidate and non- candidate indiscretions, family issues, arrests, settlements, suspected crimes, and other such things. But I don't print these types of stories or approve these comments because - there are limits. I think we learned this week how some people plainly don't know any better - they represent the very worst in our society and are merely bottom feeders.

The simple fact is that what is driving some of these surrogates to act goes well beyond politics - the unwritten story is really about lies and jealousy. Hell hath no fury like a woman's scorn? Oh, yeah... Bingo!  The political component is just a vehicle to take revenge and the politicians are well aware of exactly what strings to pull to solicit a response.   And it conveniently serves both the personal goal and the political aim to diminish a critic. It was poorly executed because it backfired! We'll leave that there for now.

About two dozen of you have written to me out of anger and surprise about what you've seen transpire. Frankly, some of the names blew me away (hush hush). Of course, we have to realize that when it comes to rocking the boat where money and power are concerned - there are always dangers and the expectation that some people will stop at nothing especially when millions of dollars are at risk.

But just because someone has tens of millions of dollars to blow in their quest for power and position doesn't mean that they are any less accountable for their behavior, product, voting record, candidate contributions, and political positions, etc. Of course, these candidates rarely get involved directly, instead they send their surrogates to do their dirty work - whether it be a volunteer, paid staffer, or a pretend newspaper reporter, they are all of the same ilk - temporary, and unprincipled. They are just like a giddy schoolchild looking for praise and a gold star from their teacher - pick me, pick me!

We at The King's View accept that over the last year or so we have hit a few tender spots and exposed incredible dysfunction within the Connecticut's Republican establishment. The question people often ask me is why? Why do we bring down fire and rain on our own? And why now?

Before I begin, I'm going to start by saying that whatever rationale I provide, it will never-ever be acceptable to those who consider themselves the keepers of the the established Connecticut Republican Orthodoxy (a.k.a. and using the term humorously - "The Establishment"). Here is OUR RATIONALE:

-- The treatment of former Congressman Rob Simmons at the 2010 State Convention by Linda McMahon, Chris Healy and McMahon surrogates was unacceptable. Vote fixing, payments to delegates and RTCs and other forms of patronage damaged the integrity of the process.  Now we are seeing the whole thing starting all over again - a concentrated effort to stock the Convention with paid-for delegates, and make Chris Shays and Brian Hill receive less than 15% so they have to go out and collect signatures.

- We do not support candidates who give or gave donations to Democrats unless they were Democrats or Independents at the time of contribution and later switched Party. "Business consideration" is not a reason to help unseat a sitting Republican, or donate to Democrats. As a rule, Democrats do not give to Republican Candidates citing the same ridiculous reason. (Note: Lisa Wilson-Foley gave money to John Larson during this time - what a pal).

- We support the overhaul and removal of all deadwood leaders in the Party, and those who only participate solely for personal profit and business reasons. Many of those in CTGOP positions only seek to expand their personal wealth and have long since given up on advancing Republican ideology/policies. These people are happy to give the public impression that "they tried." Well, that's not enough.

- We are sick of losing. The last time Connecticut Republicans held the StateHouse was decades ago. The endless second place finish is appalling, and the fact that some are satisfied willing to see Connecticut gerrymandered in a manner where it doesn't impact their district is disgraceful.

- We continue to see Connecticut Leaders support poorly qualified candidates, or candidates they know can't win in exchange for financial contributions to their campaigns, businesses or Town Committees. The fact that these Leaders have supplied their endorsements proves they have lost the plot. Many of these people have lost ALL INTEGRITY.

- We see a organized effort to undermine Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr. by those who were part of the political alliance that previous lost or sought power. And we also see their ongoing effort to belittle him behind his back, and so forth. It is a daunting task to look out into a crowd and know that a little less than half the people in the gallery have a dagger with your name on it (figuratively speaking of course). To be VERY clear, there are also many GOOD people on the other side of the equation trying to help and get things done.

- We see disrespect and mistreatment of Tea Party Patriots by some elements of the CTGOP, notably those in Fairfield County. Certain campaigns have worked very hard to divide Tea Party members and pit them against each other. Eventually, these issues will come to light.

- For years, Connecticut Republican leaders have surrendered on social issues. We have not. And we will continue to beat that drum until Social Conservatives have a seat at the table. One leader said "We don't do Guns, Gays, or God." If we don't - who will? We can see how taking progressive positions on social issues has really helped us at the polls. We're not talking about becoming insensitive or hateful towards various groups - we ask Republican Representatives to stick up for basic traditional principles - such as traditional marriage, and keeping perverts out of our public bathrooms. Too much to ask?

- On the other side of the equation, we see weak leadership by our Capitol minority leaders who more often then not capitulate to Democrats in the name of progress and collaboration. Taxes are high, jobs are scarce, and businesses are leaving. The jobs bill was a disgrace.

For the most part of our tenure at The King's View we have focused on the State of Calmity owned by the Democratic Party. Their crimes against Connecticut and its residents are a disgrace. But you can't mount much of an offense with the watered-down version of Republicanism sold here. The real version which has been successful in the overwhelming majority of the other 49 States is not welcome by our Capitol Leaders and a great portion of our State Party Leadership (Jerry Labriola, Jr. not included - he is the real deal). Before we ever get to compete toe-to-toe with our mortal enemies, we set ourselves up for disaster. If we were a basketball team, we'd be considered self-checked.

Avon Native and Public Relations expert Ed Candels once told me, "If you always do what you've always done, you always get what you've always got." We are experts at that.

There are those who would disagree with The King's View, and that's perfectly fine. This blog is about a set of opinions on a variety of topics important to The King, not anyone else. For someone or some group to get bent out of shape about what's written in these pages is pretty pathetic. The King's View is not state enforced, mandatory reading (although it should be). My favorite insults are: "you're a nobody", "no one reads your blog" and "no one cares what you think." Ok, Good. Then what the hell are you doing commenting about it then? Amazing!

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

The Curse of Chris Healy!

2012-01-19T23:49:00.007-05:00

King Tutankhamen

Not every piece at The King's View is going to be of the stoic, tedious political variety. You'll have to go to The Hartford Courant and read one of Kevin Rennie's columns if you're looking only for that. :) We've been urged to throw in a bit of humor now and then to keep the setting light. After all, humor is the music of the soul. And we could all use a bit of laughter to get us through the winter blues...

3500 years ago in Ancient Egypt there lived a Pharaoh named Tutankhamun. The boy-king came to power at the age of 7 after his father, Akhenaten, was forced to abdicate his throne by Egyptian high priests after an uprising over his family's attempted force-conversion of Egypt to monotheism - specifically, worship of the God Aten. Guided by his step-mother, Nefertiti, Tutankhamum ruled Egypt until his untimely death at the age of 18. Theories abound that the cause of death was suspicious, but scholars believe that he simply died of infection resulting from a broken leg, combined with leiomyomata.

Tutankhamen was buried in the Land of the Pharaohs along side other noble Kings and Queens. As with the ritual of the time, a curse was installed by use of the magnetic placement (N/S/E/W) of the four magick bricks in accordance with Chapter 151 of The Book of the Dead (The Shabti figure "workman", the Torch, the Jackal, and the Djed Pillar). The words: "Death will come to those who disturb the sleep of the Pharaoh" were inscribed in hieroglyphics on the Wall of Tut's Tomb.

Despite several unsuccessful attempts at tomb robbing over the centuries, the tomb remained sealed until discovered by Lord Howard Carter on February 23, 1923. Upon opening the tomb, the curse was released, and the God Osris took revenge on dozens of those involved in descretion of the tomb (extending further misfortune to family, friends, and even pets) . History shows that six years after the opening of the tomb, twelve of the original excavation team were dead. And only one survived up to 1939.

Origin of the Healy Curse

The old bridge now referred as
"Healy's Bridge" still stands today

The story has been related to me as follows: Once upon a time, a young Chris Healy grew up a boy of privileged means. At the age of 23, he went to work on a pivotal Congressional Campaign. On election night, he was charged with the important responsibility of delivering a box of absentee ballots that a campaign worker had found outside of a polling place lying in a dumpster. He was directed to take the box from the polling place to the Town Hall for tallying. Given the location of the precinct, the ballots were considered favorable to his candidate, and would likely be the critical element that would win the election for his candidate .

Feeling proud and confident, young Healy began his journey. But instead of taking the main road to the town center, he opted to take a short cut by way of the old train trestle that crossed the winding river. In his haste, he ran and lost his footing in-between two planks, and tripped. Healy watched as the box of ballots flew high into the air and slowly and steadily zig-zagged to the water below. A saddened Healy continued to the Town Hall knowing that he may have accidently sealed his candidate's fate.

Upon arriving at the Registrar's Office, he was met by elderly Egyptian woman who had been eagerly awaiting the arrival of the ballots. When poor Healy related his story, her dark eyes narrowed and she abruptly flew into a angry rage. The woman waved her hands in the air and screamed at Healy alternating between English and Arabic. She gestured at him, pacing to and fro for twenty minutes while a drained Healy looked on through his coke-bottled glasses.

Suddenly, she stopped. She then looked him squarely in the eye, and moved toward him stopping at nose length. She raised her golden cane so that the handle baring the image of the Egyptian God Horus stared upon him. The woman breathed on him, and in a heavy accent chanted, "As a direct descendant of the royal family of Queen Nefertiti, King Akhenten, and King Tutankhamen, I set your fate! From this day forward, you are cursed. Any campaign you oversee, will crumble. Your plans will run-afoul. And men will laugh. " Trembling, young Healy put his head down, and walked out in the November frost. He never to returned to that town again.

The Healy Curse Today

CANDIDATES TAKE HEED!
The appearance of this Pharaoh on
your doorstep will bring doom!

As readers are aware, there is no question about the lingering effects of the dreaded Healy Curse. One doesn't have to look much further then the results of last few years to see that the curse as alive and well. From a sympatheic perspective, we sense this must be painful. Can you imagine the personal horror associated with knowing that everything you touch turns to dust? Seeing the fear in people's eyes because they know you have the reverse-Midas touch?

For those who don't believe, let us provide some evidence.

In 2006, Healy managed Rob Simmons re-election campaign to failure. Simmons lost by a mere 88 votes - certainly an avoidable loss caused by a strategic blunder in the Mansfield-Storrs area.

As Chairman, the Connecticut Republican Party lost a favorable Republican Congressional District, seeing an overall reduction from six seats to five.

2008: Under his Chairmanship all Federal offices were lost to Democrats.

2010: All federal offices remained Democrat while National Republicans recaptured the House of Representatives, and picked up U.S. Senate seats.

2010: Connecticut's Governorship turned Democrat after a failed get out the vote strategy. Democrats took most State Offices, and kept majorities in the StateHouse and State Senate.

In 2010, the Connecticut Republican Party nearly went bankrupt, and the Party torn asunder by corruption through vote purchasing, profiteering, and cronyism during the State Convention and the US. Senate Race.

Also in 2010, his short lived campaign for Republican National Chairman failed, then he jumped on board to support Gentry Collins, where he publicly assailed the eventual RNC Chairmanship winner Reince Priebus.

2011: Healy joins Tim Pawlenty Presidential Campaign. After a few months, it folds.

2011: Healy runs Middletown Mayor Sebastian Guiliano's re-election campaign. Guiliano loses re-election.

2012: Healy named head of Rick Perry's Connecticut Presidential team. Perry drops out.

2012: Healy takes over Lisa Wilson-Foley's campaign. Result?? TBD. (But you know where I'd put my money if I were a gambling man.)

I've only highlighted a few examples from the Healy Curse. I'm sure there are many more fine examples that can be highlighted by our readers. It makes you really wonder why so many people follow this guy given his track record. Why allow him to set up a shadow State Chairmanship knowing that the result will always be the same?

Dr. Hawass is frightened for the public

In fact, the Healy Curse has become so well known, that Dr. Zahi Hawass, Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Egypt has publicly expressed concern about the situation. In a recent letter to CTGOP Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr., he wrote, "A Curse of this magnitude should not be taken lightly. Perhaps it would be better if Healy himself were shipped to Cairo to be made a permanent part of our exhibit. He would make a fine addition to our collection of artifacts."

In closing, my dear candidates - local, state, or federal - if you see Pharaoh Healy headed toward your campaign office - lock the door, turn out the lights, and grab your protective amulet. Else, your campaign may suffer the consequences of the deadly Healy Curse!

Be Warned! Be on your guard!

I AM

THE KING

Have a great Weekend! Enjoy the snow!

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment. No Egyptians were hurt during the creation of this piece. All rights reserved, except those with curses and infectious diseases.

CTGOP Ethics Resolution Creators Punished!

2012-01-17T21:46:00.001-05:00

Have you ever wondered how Connecticut Republicans who defy the will of State Party insiders are treated? Have you ever wanted to know how long-time conservative activists who've worked their hearts out to bring transparency and ethics to our processes are dealt with? Have you ever been curious about just how far Connecticut's Republican leaders would go to manipulate local politics in an attempt to punish whose who challenge the established order of things in order to affirm their power and control?

Well, this little story might shed some daylight on just that. This piece is meant to serve as cautionary tale for Republican activists who seek to change the status quo.

As you are well aware, in November of last year, two former Connecticut Republican candidates - Martha Dean, and Joseph Visconti created a set of resolutions to be entertained by Connecticut Republican State Central members which would require that delegates who are paid directly or indirectly by a campaign or its vendors would be required to wear a badge indicating their paid association with the sponsoring candidate. The concept was meant to address the clear corruption evident at at the 2010 Connecticut State Republican Convention which saw Linda McMahon collude with paid delegates and RTCs to win the U.S. Senate nomination over Rob Simmons.

The resolutions, known publicly as the Dean-Visconti Resolutions, were presented out to State Central Members in December and were expected to be debated and voted on this month. The goal being to address the appearance of a conflict of interest ahead of delegate section prior this year's GOP State Convention.

It's has come to The King's attention that over the last week, insiders representing Lisa Wilson-Foley, and possibly Linda McMahon (with assistance of former State Chairman Chris Healy - a lead staffer for Wilson-Foley) have actively campaigned against the resolutions, and have tried to make backroom deals to punish those responsible for both creating, and presenting the resolutions up for consideration. One does not need to be a rocket-scientist to recognize the dotted lines between the 2010, and this year's set of antagonists since the players have remained the same; only a few of the roles have changed. As a matter of record, The King has received communication from several RTC members which claim that Wilson-Foley, McMahon, and Healy have openly expressed their opposition to the resolutions, and their desire to make sure that "they go nowhere."

I will only address those things which are public and leave the sordid details of private conversations, and actions taken outside of the public purview alone - at least for the time being.

Last week West Hartford Republicans held their caucus to select Republican Town Committee Members to serve a 2-year term. Former West Hartford Town Councilman and former First District Congressional Candidate Joseph Visconti was one of the individuals up for nomination for the WHRTC. Long-time manipulators of WHRTC went out of their way to ensure that Visconti failed to be elected to the RTC. As a matter of controversy, an employee of Wilson-Foley's campaign who only within the past few months moved to Connecticut (from Pennsylvania), and who has no service or accomplishment in West Hartford was intentionally selected by West Hartford insiders to serve on the RTC over Mr. Visconti. The fact that Mr. Visconti has devoted years to helping West Hartford Republicans get elected, himself served with distinction, and has been a generous attendee at WHRTC Fundraisers made no difference; the fix was in. The act of bouncing him from selection was out of pure spite, and a ploy unleashed in tag-team fashion between Lisa Wilson-Foley's campaign and Linda McMahon's camp to ensure that a McMahon activist was placed on the RTC. (The connection between the Wilson-Foley camp and McMahon camp is well-documented - as even apparent on opensecrets.org).

Second and clearly not a coincidence, former 2-time CT Attorney General Candidate Martha Dean, attended the Avon Republican Town Committee Caucus last evening to seek election to Avon's RTC. As most people are aware, Dean has been a regular attendee, and a consistent financial supporter of Avon Republicans for many years. Using numbers as their weapon, Martha Dean was intentionally blocked by Lisa Wilson-Foley's supporters from being elected to Avon's RTC (information provided by witnesses to the travesty). For Godsake, this is how we treat a stalwart defender of constitutional rights, and one of the few Connecticut activists willing to stand up publicly to challenge the liberal agenda of the far left? Ms. Dean has worked tirelessly to help Republicans across the state including even those with far more moderate positions than herself. This treatment is beyond outrageous!

The evidence is crystal clear to those willing to see it. Visconti and Dean have been intentionally marginalized through the collusion of those who have long abandoned Republican ideals. If you don't like an idea, eliminate the opposition - this is surely not in the mission statement of the Party of Lincoln that most of us have come to believe in.

How will this effect the resolutions, or the State Convention. I guess we don't yet know. But the public should understand that the requirement to become a Republican State Convention Delegate doesn't necessarily include being an RTC member, however - it's clear that RTC members are usually given first preference during the selection process. The underlying reason for excluding both Visconti and Dean is to make their appointment to the State Convention Rules Committee nearly impossible, and their appointment as a delegate more complicated.

We humbly suggest that both West Hartford and Avon RTCs revisit was has transpired this past week, and reflect on the public ramifications of punishing loyal, hard-working, conservative activists to satisfy the goals of two multi-millionaire nominees who are using RTCs to advance their personal ambitions for public power and prestige.

We call on West Hartford RTC Chairman Peter Martin, and Avon RTC Chairman Brian J. Ladouceur to correct this gross injustice and find Mr. Visconti and Ms. Dean spots on their respective RTCs - which they so justly deserve. Allow them to contribute and serve on behalf of the many ethical Republican constituents that they represent. We ask you to rise above the corruption, and help them and Dean-Visconti restore respectability to the CTGOP which is long overdue.

I AM

THE KING

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment

Lisa Wilson-Foley's donations to Chris Murphy

2012-01-13T12:00:00.000-05:00

Do voters in CT-5
really know what Lisa
Wilson-Foley stands for?

Given that Chris Murphy is the odds on favorite to win the Connecticut Democrat Party's U.S. Senate nomination sometime over the next few months, we found this tidbit (courtesy of NewsMeat.com) interesting as Republicans battle it out to determine who will be their candidate to represent them in Connecticut's 5th Congressional District race. The information below clearly shows that Wilson-Foley gave five grand to Democrat Chris Murphy, which was used to help unseat then-incumbent Republican Congresswoman Nancy Johnson.

Granted, this seems like ancient history (and we know its been previously reported), but what we find problematic in all of it is that Lisa Wilson-Foley has given donations to at least two prominent Democrats - John Larson and Christopher Murphy. Much like Linda McMahon's strategy, Wilson-Foley seems to have hedged her bets, so what does that say for her principle? Whether or not these contributions were truly ideological or not, is not known, but one thing is clear - like many would-be politicians, she has placed self-interest ahead of the public-interest which is an attribute voters want to see less of from their public servants in 2012 (at least on the Republican side).

Wilson-Foley has made a grand fortune from the healthcare industry which is not troubling, per se. Up to now and as a private citizen, she has earned her money honestly and no one can take that away from her. However, this nation is in an ideological war over the decision about whether or not we will devote 1/6th of our GDP to President Obama's National Healthcare scheme. Wilson-Foley has previously made statements supporting national healthcare, although lately and since becoming a candidate - she's made statements against it.

Much like her rationale to send cash to competing politicians on both sides of the aisle, would she also sell her vote to the highest bidder? Or to the one who would see her the largest personal profit? We just don't know.

Foley, Lisa Avon, CT 06001 Blue Fox Enterprises/President	MURPHY, CHRISTOPHER SCOTT MR. (D) House (CT 05) COMMITTEE TO ELECT CHRIS MURPHY	$2,300 primary	06/25/07
Foley, Lisa Avon, CT 06001 Blue Fox Enterprises/President	MURPHY, CHRISTOPHER SCOTT MR. (D) House (CT 05) COMMITTEE TO ELECT CHRIS MURPHY	$2,100 primary	03/30/06
Foley, Lisa Avon, CT 06001 Blue Fox Enterprises/President	MURPHY, CHRISTOPHER SCOTT MR. (D) House (CT 05) COMMITTEE TO ELECT CHRIS MURPHY	$700 general	03/30/06

And please don't get cranky with me for publishing these figures. I don't have some personal vendetta against Lisa Wilson-Foley - although her significant financial contribution to help unseat an incumbent Congressional Republican is distressing. It's critically important for voters in CT-5 to understand who and what they are voting for. Generally speaking, what's most consistent about Lisa Wilson-Foley is her lack of consistency on politics and policies - and that is very troubling to both voters and insiders, alike.

The fact that she was one of the first Republicans in CT-5 to announce her candidacy, and the fact that so many Republicans have subsequently decided to jump into the race speaks volumes about Republican concerns with how she would represent constituent in Washington. Everyone knows she would become an immediate magnet for healthcare lobbyists.

Congressional District 5 has a lot of good candidates for Republicans to choose from. We just aren't sure that Lisa Wilson-Foley is one of them. It's The King's View that Republicans are best to sort this situation out before Chris Donovan and the Democrats do.

I AM

THE KING

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment

Brother, Can You Spare a Dime? Or How About $20?

2012-01-09T16:04:00.005-05:00

One of the most annoying aspects of the campaign season (as if it's really seasonal) is the endless amount of junk mail, (and now thanks to the advent of social media) tweets, posts, and email asking for donations from political candidates, PACs, and Political Parties. Given the scarcity of disposable income, an 8-9% unemployment rate, rising taxes, and the stress of having to make ends meet, being asked to cough up greenbacks to help support another person's crusade seems a bit presumptuous, if not downright frustrating. And the language in some of the fundraising correspondence I've received is not just misleading, it's dishonest. The world will not be swallowed up into a black hole by Satan if so and so doesn't get a donation from me. Sorry we aren't that gullible.

Now before some of my friends in the GOP start getting uppity, this isn't a piece urging voters to not donate to Republican candidates, but rather a reasonable look at what they'd be getting for their buck, if anything. This piece is written from a voter's perspective, not a candidate trying to beat the clock to show progress against their competition on a ledger. That's not our problem.

Donating to the State Party:

First let's start with the State Party - the Connecticut State Republican Party. Most of us have seen several fundraising schemes distributed over the last few months from our friends at CTGOP. The first was an invitation to join the CTGOP 2012 Club. (contributors where asked to send in a check for $20.12). I'm not quite sure what happened to this or how many people joined, but I haven't seen anything more about it recently - so I'm going to assume that this idea has been shelved. There's been banter about a foul-up involving the 2012 Club - but I'm going to leave that go for now since it seems it's neither here nor there.

The latest scheme involves paying $20 to participate in an online Presidential straw poll. Last week you may have seen my tweet: "Does anyone have $20 I can borrow? I want to vote in this #CTGOP online presidential straw poll. This isn't a form of online gambling, is it?". Of course, the day that the correspondence came out about the online poll, former Governor John G. Rowland was ranting on WTIC 1080 about the dangers associated with online gambling, so I found the timing mildly amusing and thought I'd poke fun at the idea. The tweet was retweeted by a few other tweeters, and a few people got a little steamed at me for my unique sense of humor. What am I going to do with you people?

Look, having thought about it, the online poll for $20 isn't the worst idea, but it isn't the best idea either. The timing of this is a little odd given all of the controversy surrounding reports that Senate Candidate and Pro-Wrestling Mogul Linda McMahon has sent donations to several RTCs and may be purchasing convention delegate votes, while an ethics resolution is pending review at State Central Headquarters. The fact that CTGOP would go down the road of selling (poll) votes to raise funds is disappointing. As one reader pointed out, this fundraiser was created by people who who want to intentionally thumb their noses at those trying very hard to eliminate the impression that Connecticut's Republican Party is for sale.  Alas - the point is well-taken, but there is little that can be done at this point. It's The King's View that a little more caution might have been in order before shoveling more controversy atop of existing controversy.

The bigger question is whether it makes sense to give money to the Connecticut Republican Party, at all. If you were to consider yourself an investment banker, and Chairman Jerry Labriola, Jr. walked into your office and asked you to invest in the CTGOP, what would be the first question you would ask him? Why, you'd ask for a WRITTEN BUSINESS PLAN which would contain a list of specific goals, a high level outline of how goals would be achieved along with a detailed roadmap showing how he would get there. You'd also expect to see a detailed budget of how the money would be spent. Business 101. Not very complicated, right?

The simple fact is that right now no such plan exists. And I've been getting a lot of heat for supporting the new Chairman for so long and giving him a free pass, and putting the blame for disorder on former Chairman Chris Healy. Well, the six month honeymoon is over, and like President Obama - the statute of limitations on the blame game has expired. I'm not going to go out of my way to hammer the new Chairman, but I can't defend him at this point if there isn't a strategic plan, and our coffers are nearly empty. And I would not be inclined to mail him $20 without knowing that he and his staff, or the 72 members of State Central had a formal plan in place. And there is no secret plan hidden under a floorboard in New Britain, and a verbal barrage of impromptu thoughts doesn't cut it. The only plan that is acceptable is one that is formally written down and has been vetted, and approved by State Central members. Anything else is simply unacceptable. Anything else is lip service.

Before I move on, let me point out that you don't need funds to create a plan. Anyone who tells you that is a liar. You only need utilize the depth of experience from within the Party membership to assemble a plan. So cut the excuses - pick a weekend, pick a team, and have a working session and get it done. No plan is going to fall out of the sky. After you get a good plan together, then you can pester people for money. For now dear Republicans, keep your $20 in your pocket.

If someone from the Connecticut State Party asks, "Brother, Can You Spare a Dime? Or $20?"

You reply: "Brother, Can You Get Off the Dime?"

Donating to Political Candidates:

I've always believed that if you were going to donate money in politics - then you should do so by donating to the candidate of your choice, directly. Not to a PAC working on behalf of your candidate, but ONLY to your candidate of choice. If you decide to donate to a PAC for specific purposes - that's fine, just keep in mind that your money may be merged into a fund and used for all kinds of purposes unrelated, or even contrary to your desires! Fact is that tracing PAC money expenditures is pretty tricky. I happen to think that a lot of these consultant firms, PACS, and so-called think tanks are full of people who've created a phony business around themselves so they don't have to work for a living like the rest of us. Scam City!

In The King's View, there are really two reasons to donate to a candidate - 1) they are actively running and you believe they can win, or they can make the opposition spend their money (else it will end up in the coffers of another GOP candidate's opponent, or opposition PAC), or 2) to help a previous candidate clear their campaign debt. Too often people in the first category are promised big things from Party hacks who encouraged them to run in the first place, and end up in the later category having overextended themselves and find that they're left holding the bag. Not everyone can write massive checks to themselves like Linda McMahon and Tom Foley, which is why I become incensed when people of means put out a fundraising letter ripping their primary opponent for carrying a campaign debt that they could have helped to reduce, in part or whole. Fact, it's even more amusing to me to see how frugal some of our richest candidates have been when its come to donating to Connecticut Republican campaigns at all (see http://www.opensecrets.org). They'll drop $600 bucks on a big dinner in New York, but could care less about anyone else, unless it comes with a favor attached. Simply amazing. Now mapping who donates to who and why is another story for another day.

I'll have to say that a candidate like CT-5 House of Representative Candidate Mark Greenberg sets the standard in terms of generosity to fellow Republican Candidates. That in itself shows that Greenberg cares more about Republican Party goals instead of selfish ambition for promotion and power. There are some CTGOP candidates who haven't shelled out a single penny to ANY candidate, yet I bet you'll see an email begging constituents and RTC members for their hard earned cash so they can fund their campaign.

I also suggest that if you get a campaign fundraising solicitation from a candidate that is full of negative bullet points about their opposition, that you don't donate to their campaign. If you reward negative campaigning with cash, you're opt to end up encouraging more negative campaigning, and never see anything tangible about what the solicitor plans to do if elected.

And by the way - millionaires and billionaires don't need a penny from you - how do you think they became millionaires and billionaires?

I want to make one more point on the topic of donation solicitation when it comes to being asked to donate to either local, state, or federal campaigns which voters should remember - if you can't afford to donate, then don't. Don't be guilted into sending in money that you need to manage your own life. As one person told me: "You can't save the world if you can't pay the bills."  And a decent candidate will accept that, they WON'T keep badgering you for a smaller increment, or suggest a payment plan. That is bollocks!   All you need do is VOTE. There is no obligation to donate just because you care more about the political process than the guy down the street. Personally, some candidates could better use volunteers rather than cash - the value of hardworking individuals - making calls, folding fliers, and going door to door is invaluable!

Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?

(Composed by Jay Gorney; version recorded by Al Jolson, 1932)

In summary, I'd say think twice about the whole business of sending donations. Give to those deserving of your hard earned cash. And don't give to anyone or any group that claims it needs money to get itself organized. Ideology doesn't require cash, it requires smarts, conviction, and dedication. Money can't buy those aspects.

In closing, here are a few of The King's Rules for donating to PACs , Candidates, and Political Parties and Groups:

Validate that the political correspondence comes from a legitimate organization, and/or candidate. You can do this buy calling the campaign directly or contact the Secretary of State's Office.

If the soliciting brochure contains more bullets and information about the sender's opponent, rather than the sender than throw the brochure in the trash. Or better yet call the sender and tell them you tore up their brochure because it tells them nothing about how they are going to solve the economy, jobs problem, energy, etc.

If the fundraising correspondence is written by anyone other than the candidate themselves, than throw the correspondence in the trash. There is nothing worse than being bullied by someone from another district, state, or political office telling you who to vote for. You can make your own mind up without someone half a continent away telling you what to do.

If you have a question about where a candidate stands on an issue before you donate, call their campaign and ask. If they don't know, ask them to find out. If they don't want to tell you or they give you a cryptic answer - don't donate.

If it's a political party, call the party and ask them exactly how your money will be spent. If you like what you hear then donate, if you hear some broad answer like "use the money to defeat democrats" or some boring sales pitch with few specifics, then hang up. Also, be aware that only a percentage of what you donate will go to the CTGOP, as in previous years, individuals working to help collect money are getting a HANDSOME percentage of the cut. That part of it is the single most dishonest part of the transaction - what the rest of us in the real world refer to as - the hidden fees.

If its a PAC, use the internet to find out where they distribute their fundraising dollars to. This information is public. If the dollars go to lobbying firms unrecognizable to you, then don't donate. Donating to the wrong PAC could mean putting money in the hands of the wrong candidates or the wrong special interest group. Also, find out who is running the PAC and what their true agenda is.

All things being equal, if you have to decide between giving to a federal candidate, state candidate, or local candidate, always give to the local candidate first. God Bless your neighbor for putting his neck on the line and trying to make a difference locally.

Lastly, if you give, expect nothing in return from the candidate or organization except the right to say that you gave. Donating to candidates should be seen as a selfless act with no strings attached. The only thing you should expect is that you'll wind up on someones public report, and that you can bet your bottom dollar that you'll become a magnet for future political solicitations.

I AM

THE KING

This original blog post can be found on 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

Congressional Candidate Donation Oddities

2012-01-06T23:00:00.033-05:00

In fairness to everyone, we aught to look at who else in the current CT GOP field has given to Democrats and Democrat PACs in recent memory. (Source: www.opensecrets.org - covering federal campaigns):

Lisa Wilson Foley: (5th Congressional District Candidate)

WILSON-FOLEY, LISA SIMSBURY,CT 06070	COMPLEX CARE	5/29/96	$1,000	DNC Services Corp
WILSON-FOLEY, LISA SIMSBURY,CT 06070	BLUE FOX RUN	10/17/98	$1,000	Larson, John B (D)
WILSON-FOLEY, LISA SIMSBURY,CT 06070	BLUE FOX ENTERPRISES/OWNER	3/30/04	$1,000	Larson, John B (D)
WILSON-FOLEY, LISA SIMSBURY,CT 06070	HEALTH MARKET	10/10/95	$250	Emily's List

Other Searches:

Justin Bernier (5th Congressional District Candidate): No controverisal donations reported

Andrew Roraback (5th Congressional District Candidate): No controverisal donations reported

Michael McDonald (1st Congressional District Candidate): No controverisal donations

Daria Novak (2nd Congressional District Candidate): No controverisal donations reported

Christopher Coutu (2nd Congressional District Candidate): No controverisal donations reported

Wayne Winsley (3nd Congressional District Candidate): No controversial donations

Dan Debicella (4th Congressional District Candidate): No controverisal donations

Rob Merkle (4th Congressional District Candidate): No controverisal donations

Will Gregory (4th Congressional District Candidate): No donations

Not exactly an exciting post. Oh, well - not every post is going to shake the rafters. There's nothing really exciting about Lisa Wilson-Foley contributing to two of Democrat John Larson's campaigns - is there? Well, unless I suppose you were Larson's Republican opponent, I guess.

If Republicans in the 5th Congressional District were looking for reasons to disqualify a candidate in an overcrowded field - perhaps giving money to one of Congress' biggest liberals just might be a good one. Does anyone know if Wilson-Foley ever explained why she forked over cash to liberal Democrat John Larson?

I AM

THE KING

This original blog post can be found on www.thekingsview.blogpost.com

Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment