Skip to main content

Pols on Parade

Amann Among The Lilliputians

“I acknowledge that you can't keep an organization together without patronage. Men ain't in politics for nothin'. They want to get somethin' out of it” – George Washington Plunkitt

Jim Amann, the powerful Speaker of the state House of Representatives, has come under fire for behavior that turn of the century Tammany Hall boss William Jefferson Plunkitt would have considered praiseworthy.

In his day job, Amann raises funds for the Greater Connecticut Chapter of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, which pays him a yearly salary of $67,5oo. By tapping the shoulders of lobbyists for contributions to the charity, newspapers have said, Amann has created for himself, if not a conflict of interest, then the “appearance” of a conflict of interest. Are the lobbyists turning out their pockets for the charity because they are charitable or because they wish to curry favor with the speaker? Would they have given as avidly to, say, Mother Teresa, who is not running for office this year?

Probably not.

What Would Senator Dodd Do?


Dodd, on the presidential stump in Providence Rhode Island recently, was asked about his “mistaken” vote authorizing President Bush to intervene militarily in Iraq, overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussain, not a Catholic, and do things that Dodd, on further refection, has found objectionable.

Projo reports:

“An opponent of President Bush’s Iraq war policies, Dodd has called mistaken his 2002 Senate vote authorizing the president to send troops to Iraq. Dodd now says he would move immediately to bring troops home from urban areas of Iraq and gradually redeploy and bring home the rest of them.
“’I would be moving our troops out of urban areas tonight,’ he said.

“Dodd said he had no problem acknowledging that his 2002 Senate Iraq vote was a mistake. ‘I’m Catholic, I’ve been to confession,’ he quipped.”

Dodd’s record of votes on abortion in the U.S. Senate – a perfect 100% from the usual pro-choice groups; the senator, and other notable Catholic Democrat congresspersons in Connecticut, favors partial birth abortion -- probably has caused a few embarrassing moments in the confessional.

Comments

Anonymous said…
It is so simple, yet so difficult to implement and maintain – welcome to Life University – Morales, Values and Ethics – we are all enrolled.


As for Dodd....

Rain is no respecter of persons
the snow doesn’t give a soft white
damn Whom it touches
- e e cummings

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Taking The Fifth, After Esty

Whether or not U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty will serve the remainder of her term or resign immediately is very much an open question. But, in any case, the battle for Connecticut’s 5 th U.S. Congressional District has begun with a show of unexpected fireworks. For many years, the 5 th District was a toss-up proposition; both Republicans and Democrats have held and surrendered the seat. Geographically the 5 th District touches the border of New York from Connecticut’s northern-most point to Danbury in the southern quadrant and includes much of Litchfield county and parts of Fairfield, Hartford and New Haven counties. Party affiliation is competitive, in round figures, 30 percent Democrat, 25 percent Republican and 45 percent unaffiliated. Over the years, the Democrat Party in Connecticut has moved from the center to the left, but the 5 th District has been a moderate preserve. During the Obama presidential election, Republican moderates within Connecticut's U.S. ...

PCBs, GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH

By Gerald and Natalie Sirkin c2007 A front-page story on PCBs in the March 9 News-Times is just wrong. The first thing to know about PCBs is that they never killed a single person nor did they ever cause cancer. The second is that although they are invariably called “cancer-causing,” that designation comes chiefly from a single rat study. The third thing is that the subject rats were exposed daily for 21 months to 100 parts per million (ppm) of PCBs containing 60% chlorine. (The 100 ppm was about 5,000 times the tolerable daily intake of PCBs set by FDA in 1973.) When rats were exposed to PCBs containing less chlorine, they developed no cancers. The fourth, that when the exposed rats were allowed to live out their lives, they had fewer cancers and lived longer than the unexposed rats. PCBs is a family of chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls. PCBs contain chlorine ranging from 12% to 70%. They were used in two General Electric plants that manufactured electrical equipmen...