Skip to main content


In 1835, Benjamin Disraeli, then a young man on the cusp of a promising political career, achieved anonymity. Under cover of a pseudonym, Disraeli began to belabor his political opponents in a series of columns written for The Morning Post, a political journal of the day.

Something of a dandy – Disraeli’s manner of dressing easily might have brought a blush to the cheek of Lady Gaga – the future prime minister of Britain and accomplished novelist had a way with words. He was, without question, one of the most captivating rhetoricians of his time.

John Campbell, later to become the first Baron Campbell, was, Disraeli wrote, “a base-born Scotchman, a son of the manse, that course Pict,” a “booing, fawning, jobbing progeny of haggis and cockaleekie.” Daniel O’Connell, a Member of Parliament for Dublin, one of Disraeli’s most persistent critics, was “an incendiary and a traitor.” Not to be bested, O’Connell replied in kind that Disraeli was “a living liar,” a “miscreant” who possessed “all the necessary requisites of perfidy, selfishness, depravity, want of principle etc. which would qualify him for the change from Radical to Conservative. His name shows that he is of Jewish origin. I do not use it as a term of reproach; there are many most respectable Jews. But here are, as in every other people, some of the lowest and most disgusting grade of moral turpitude; and of those I look upon Mr. Disraeli as the worst.”

Having once killed a man in a duel, Campbell had taken a vow not to fight again on the field of honor. Unable to challenge to a duel a man who had foresworn dueling, Disraeli sought satisfaction from Campbell’s son: “I beg that you, or someone of his [father’s] blood, may attempt to avenge the inextinguishable hatred with which I shall pursue his existence.”

Young Campbell politely declined the offer.

The 19th century was a rough and tumble time for ambitious politicians on their way up the greasy pole.

Put the mask of anonymity on a politician, give him a hiding place in the underground, and he will be puffed up with a superfluity of courage and vitriol. Abraham Lincoln narrowly avoided a duel challenge that arose as a result of a pseudonymous piece attributed to him by an aggrieved politician.

Few of the quarrelsome politicians of the 19th century would be surprised by some of the 21st century’s highly misleading and suggestive political ads. Most modern ads are endorsed by the politicians who benefit by them. Some are produced by groups that support this or that political saint of the moment. As always in these matters, haste goeth before what Mark Twain might have called “a stretcher.” Fortunately, there are among us some conscientious journalists not yet poisoned by partisanship, who track the stretchers, half truths, glittering generalities and outright fabrications.

The latest Blumenthal anti-McMahon ad is a piece of fiction that five minutes careful attention by a conscientious journalist would have exploded. The centerpiece of the ad rests on the false notion that McMahon said she would favor a reduction in the minimum wage.

That was never said. McMahon simply noted that the minimum wage set by congress, like any wage, may be pegged too high. When it is pegged too high, the cost of labor is driven up and low wage jobs begin to disappear. The price of labor, like the price of any product, will remain unpurchased if it is too expensive. In fact, that is precisely what is happening with increasing frequency in many cities. Those who suffer from an inflated minimum wage are primarily young people acquiring their first jobs, many of them young African Americans in search of a little extra cash and a job fetching line in their resumes.

McMahon’s remark that the level at which the minimum wage is set should concern congress was quickly “translated” by her political opponents and quick as a wink a revised version appeared in newspaper headlines and political ads in which McMahon was said to have favored a reduction in the minimum wage. Blumenthal hastily put out an ad pumping the false claim at the end of which the attorney general, who appears not to know how jobs are created, pointedly did not assert that he approved the false message.

An anti-Blumenthal ad put out by the U.S. Chamber Of Commerce is rather bracing, but it falls far short of being false.

This one begins with a distressed lady sitting at a table, possibly filing out a job application for a position that may not be available. Written on the floor in red letters are the words “Rising Unemployment,” followed by a voice over, “Rising unemployment means families are suffering. And after 40 years in politics, can Richard Blumenthal handle the truth about his record… He’s been crushing small businesses for years with thousands of frivolous lawsuits, forcing some to close. His sue first and ask questions later stampede has earned him the worst attorney general in the nation in 2007”

A little chastening, but nothing to fight a duel over.


Richard E. said…
Getting REAL? and The Norwalk Debate

Attending the event was slightly different then watching on Cable. Linda hands down won the event live and by a landslide! It was not open for debate :) by the attendees who hung around and conversed. . .

On TV it had a different feel, where it appeared Linda won easily or handily, at least to me.

As the Live crowd was different and very into it . . . and had at least a 75% + pro Linda atmosphere . . . boisterous (as far as debates go) on the issues and responses . . . many were clapping cheering to Linda McMahon statements, that was not picked up on camera AT ALL . . . highlighting that at all key points(healthcare taxes jobs) . . . there were also many uttered comments like "no way" "are you kiddin" "come on ?" many grumbled to Mr Blumenthal responses and the major fact that HE voted to raise our taxes 800 million during his previous senate term WITHOUT Defense and the Littany of Lawsuits vs taking care of selective situational pursuits to Mr. Blumenthal, did not go over well for him. . .

While Linda got a standing ovation, stayed on for additional interviews, questions . . . while Mr Blumenthal and his people just stood up and walked out ?

Since this was mainly attended by a diverse membership of local businesses people (dems & repubs) invited through the Norwalk Chamber of Commerce, press, politico's, a HS Political science class of 25-30 as well as a balance of followers from both side.

There could be little interpretaion for a skewing of the people in attendance as pro one way or another, as it sure felt genuine.

"what a lier" was mentioned on more than one occasion, and in a very serious tone. and it got so bad that it ended on a SNL moment where they cut 'ol MR. B for Bluster off and his Mike at the end with everyone getting up and walking out with him pleading for one more minute holding up one 1 finger. PRICELESS. Gotta get tha ton You Tube

it sure seems that the overwhelming # of people there "get it".

Linda McMahon ran a business through thick n thin has a plan for jobs and the economy, while Mr Blumenthals history of and I will say this kindly "embellished reports" w/ spending and taxes, that he wants to extend into the senate is not what this crowd wanted.

DON . . maybe you should add this to every Blumenthal article on real vs. "not so" real
Bruce Rubenstein said…
How can you say that Blunie has filed "thousands of frivilous lawsuits" when 97% of the lawsuits in the AG's office are mandatory and forced by either statute or regulation.Perhaps you mean the law or regulation requiring Blumie to sue is wrong.If so the Republican Governor and Democratic legislature should have been the focus of this post.

Again, these mandatory lawsuits in the AG's office have what to do with prospective Senator duties ?
Don Pesci said…

Not sure how they arrived at the “thousands” figure, but it falls within the realm of possibility when you consider that the office reported more than 36,000 backlogs cases on its financial report during the last reporting period. And then, of course, Blumenthal has been attorney general for more than 20 years.

The whistleblower law, in which Blumenthal office represents both whistleblowers in state agencies and those in the state agencies, usually administrators, who are the objects of the complaints is certainly awkward. The Dickman case, about which I’ve written here -- -- is such a case, and there are many others. There was a Bill before the legislature that would have settled that difficulty, but Blumenthal snuffed it.
Richard E. said…
Understood . . . on the "mandatory" lawsuits (as both plaintiff & defendant) I am specifically talking about outside that area

when his overreaching frivolity occurs . . . ex: company layoffs, a company refund policy, a company cutting back on overtime, closing down of a car dealership, local zoning, charity poker games, facebook information, an out of state bonus

do ya want more :) and all the best sir
Richard E. said…
sorry forgot to address your last question what does this have to do with a senate position.

It goes towards reckless spending. Mr Blumenthal has tripled his budget over the last 3 years. During this recession? Fully knowing state $$ and cut backs

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."

Dave Walker, Turning Around The Misery Index

Dave Walker, who is running for Lieutenant Governor on the Republican Party ticket, is recognized by most credible political observers as perhaps the most over qualified candidate for Lieutenant Governor in state history.
He is a member of the Accounting Hall of Fame and for ten years was the Comptroller General of the United States. When Mr. Walker talks about budgets, financing and pension viability, people listen.
Mr. Walker is also attuned to fine nuances in political campaigning. He is not running for governor, he says, because he had moved to Connecticut only four years ago and wishes to respect the political pecking order. Very few people in the state think that, were he governor, Mr. Walker would know less about the finance side of government than his budget chief.

Murphy Stumbles

U.S. Senator Chris Murphy has been roughly cuffed by some news outlets, but not by Vox, which published on April 16 a worshipful article on Connecticut’s Junior Senator, “The Senator of State: How Connecticut’s Chris Murphy, a rising Democratic star, would run the world.”
On April 15, The Federalist mentioned Murphy in an article entitled “Sen. Chris Murphy: China And The World Health Organization Did Nothing Wrong. The lede was a blow to Murphy’s solar plexus: “Democratic Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy exonerated China of any wrongdoing over the global pandemic stemming from the novel Wuhan coronavirus on Tuesday.
“’The reason that we’re in the crisis that we are today is not because of anything that China did, is not because of anything the WHO [World Health Organization] did,’ said Murphy during a prime-time interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper.”