Skip to main content

Democrats Demagogue Boughton

“The hardest thing about any political campaign is how to win without proving that you are unworthy of winning”-- Adlai Stevenson

In her most recent press release, one can almost see state Democratic Chairwoman Nancy DiNardo ticking off the “made in Washington” campaign talking points:

Boughton, “war on women,” check.

Boughton,” anti-gay,” check.

Boughton, “Tea Party,” check.

Boughton, “extremist,” check.

A busy demagogue, Ms. DiNardo usually is able to mold her mud pies into brief media bites at a moment’s notice. Here is the core of her media release:


“Mark Boughton needs to let Connecticut know why he is so close to such a dangerous extremist and if he agrees with Senator McLachlan’s agenda. Does Mark Boughton want to force ultrasounds on pregnant women? Does he support McLachlan’s anti-gay views and Tea Party agenda?”

The “dangerous extremist” whom Mr. Boughton is “close to” would be State Senator Mike McLachlan. Apparently, in Ms. DiNardo’s world, extremism is catchy, like the flu. One has only to be “close to” a retrograde senator like Mr. McLachlan to be infected with the affliction of extremism. 

In current Democratic demagoguery, “an extremist” is anyone whose positions on a narrow range of “social issues” do not correspond with those of Ms. DiNardo and other seeming “moderate” social engineers who want to change the nature of marriage, economics, constitutional prescriptions, religious prescriptions and the always delicate balance between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government in the United States.

The Democratic Party in Connecticut has over the past couple of years abolished the death penalty for multiple murderers shortly after two vicious murderers, Steven Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky, had slaughtered the Petit family in Cheshire, and only a few months before Adam Lanza had murdered his mother, six faculty members and twenty school children at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Mr. Lanza committed suicide upon the arrival at the school of first responders but, had he been taken alive, Mr. Lanza could not have been executed for mass murder in Connecticut, thanks to a bill produced in the General Assembly that ended capital punishment for all future felony murders, however horrific.

Republicans voted against abolition. Democrats, in voting for abolition, flouted their seeming high minded courage by exempting from their abolition bill the ten convicted murderers awaiting execution on death row. This exemption, a clear violation of the “natural law” underpinning all jurisprudence – which holds that in the absence of a proscriptive law there can be no punishment – is likely to be found unconstitutional by any appellate judge who has a nodding acquaintance with the Code of Hammurabi, the Magna Carta or the U.S. Constitution. It would have been politically inconvenient at the time for Democrats to reverse so many very expensive court decisions relating to the “Death Row 10.” The abolition measure, universally embraced by Democrats, we are to assume, is neither a “social issue” nor is it dangerous to the public weal. But Mr. McLaughlin IS a dangerous extremist and must be publicly shamed and demagogued by “non-extremist” Democrats who voted to abolish the death penalty for cop killers, terrorists and mass murderers.

All laws affect society, and there is not a piece of legislation created by any legislative body in the United States in the last 238 years that has no social repercussions. The term “social issue,” especially when employed in campaigns by demagogic partisans, is a false category.

Really, one wonders how many of Mr. McLachlan’s Democratic colleagues in the General Assembly – law makers all, artificers of social legislation -- feel comfortable with Ms. DiNardo’s estimation of him as a “dangerous extremist?” Has anyone taken a poll?

Do Democrats in the General Assembly who find themselves in agreement with Ms. DiNardo’s demagogic assessment of Mr. McLaughlin believe that the Senator’s imperfections have been transferred to Mr. Boughton through a process of osmosis? If Mr. Boughton has been tainted by his proximity to Mr. McLaughlin, what of the members of the General Assembly who were “close” to Mr. McLaughin as they toiled together in the same body to hammer out various laws? Will the pox that has spread so rapidly from Mr. McLaughlin to Mr. Boughton through mere association also affect General Assembly Democrats who worked cheek by jowl with Mr. McLaughlin? Have Governor Dannel Malloy and leading members of the General Assembly been polluted by their close proximity to former Speaker of the House Chris Donovan, some of whose political associates have been convicted of crimes and sentenced to prison?

This is mud-slinging of a high order. Why, if Mrs. DiNardo could order up capital punishment for Tea Party members in her state, her rhetoric suggests she might go for it. But her party has abolished capital punishment for mass murderers, and it would be politically indelicate to send to the death chamber what one Tea Party organizer called “Governor Dannel Malloy’s neighbors” after having abolished capital punishment for Connecticut’s future Lanzas.

Comments

Joe Visconti said…
Nancy DiNardo and the Democrat Party think they can win the Governors race based on calling someone Tea Party. The Tea Party has been vindicated as the IRS and "The Look The Other Way Obama Administration" tried to silence their movement through government interference. Everyone in CT knows the Tea Party called it right and Liars like Obama and his Democrat Toadies including Senators Murphy and Blumenthal-Rambo) terminated your healthcare plan, jacking up your new premiums to God knows how high. Its liars like Obama and useless tools like Malloy that will continue (during 2014) to see their approval rating drop faster than a Pre Obamacare Health Plan. Good Luck Nancy and Jonathan Harris.

I'm Joe Visconti, I'm running for Governor, and I approve this message.

www.viscontiforgovernor.com
PAID FOR BY VISCONTI FOR GOVERNOR, SUSAN LAVELLI TREASURER, APPROVED BY JOE VISCONTI
Don Pesci said…
There's more about the Tea Party here: http://donpesci.blogspot.com/search?q=tea+party
CT Guy said…
As a republican since 1975 , I cannot support any nominated Republican for Governor who is Democrat Light . ANYONE who supports curtailed Constitutional Second Amendment rights is toast ( hear that,McKinney ? ) . Once they start choosing amendments to ignore,where is the limit ? I've been Republican since 1975, member of the TTC for a few years and I'm ready to go Independent given the Democrat Light Pansies that seem to float to the top of Republican candidates . Can any candidate just say NO to more spending,more government ? It sure doesn't seem so .
peter brush said…
hear that,McKinney ?
---------
Share the frustration, but we have to be sensible. The current Gov. is not trustworthy, and is content to run the ship of state into the ground. If we can get a candidate good on guns and rule of law, so much the better, but I'll settle for an honest pragmatist if that's the choice opposed to Dannel Malloy.
peter brush said…
A nutmeg Gov. can't do much about it, now that the U.S. Supreme Court of Harvard Lawyers has told Az it can't enforce immigration laws.
Still, it's a hopeful sign that we have a candidate who not only hasn't yet caved to the open borders lobby, but tells it to go to Hell. I'm not endorsing him (something for which he may not be ungrateful), but I do commend him, as I do Mr. Visconti (above).
-----------
"I haven't changed my opinion one bit," said Boughton, a Republican gubernatorial candidate said, adding "I really wasn't interested in getting engaged in some kind of controversy where people are interested in suppressing my First Amendment right to freedom of speech."

The Latino Law Student Association at the University of Connecticut School of Law in Hartford released a statement Monday afternoon, calling Boughton an "anti-immigrant crusader" who "should not be given a platform to espouse his views."

"Mark Boughton's hate speech and discriminatory policies targeting immigrants should not be tolerated," said the e-mail, which was sent to the entire law school community.
http://www.newstimes.com/news/article/Boughton-gives-up-seat-on-UConn-immigration-panel-419419.php
Don Pesci said…
PB,
Right. Because the Democrats more or less own academia, the party can always cite university groups as non-partisan sources. They seem to perk up considerably during the campaign season. Try to imagine a UConn association that might be objectively critical of Governor Dannel Malloy, who has been very generous to UConn, and you will have some appreciation of the pious academic fraud. Most recently, the non-partisan WHATEVER at UConn cited a poor job recovery in the current recession as a reason for spending dollars already allocated in bonding on WHATEVER, probably more building activity at UConn. Most rational people just block out the White Noise.
peter brush said…
Apologies, Don.
That snippet was from 2010. A friend of mine who went to that Nutmeg Government School for Lawyering says that in the early eighties there were precisely 4 members of the fledgling Federalist Society. An auditorium was needed to hold the members of the National Lawyers Guild (which, according to Wikipedia was not a Commie front group, just a fellow traveling one).
Boughton is still under attack, and hasn't folded. If nothing else I admire his choice of enemies, but it also appears as if he may have common sense and the courage to defend it.
------------------
Having once taken a hard line on immigration, going so far as to ask then-Gov. M. Jodi Rell to deputize state troopers to enforce federal immigration law in the city, Boughton has tried to smooth over his stance on the issue in recent years.

Talking tough on immigration may have worked well a decade ago, but not in today's political environment.

Harris, of the state Democratic party, said Boughton still has a lot to answer for.

"He showed some intolerance on the immigration issue," Harris said.

Members of the Latino and Puerto Rican Affairs Commission have not forgotten.

When questioned by commission members about a recent "racial profiling" case in which a police officer was disciplined for making disparaging remarks to a Hispanic immigrant during a routine motor vehicle stop, Boughton tells of his hard disciplinary line on those involved.

He also denies it was racial profiling.

"I saw the video of the incident and you couldn't tell who was driving," he says.
http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Powering-up-Danbury-Mayor-Mark-Boughton-4691288.php#page-3
peter brush said…
I'm happy to see the gun guys enforce their preference in the primary. My hope is that in the fall they'll hold their noses if required to vote for a squish opposed to Malloy who's a fanatic.

I would appreciate it if the gun guys and their candidates, if there be any, would address the Connecticut Constitution's right to bear arms rendered a RINO (right in name only)by our Court (Justice Peters).

-------------
“Mayor Boughton is a coalition member of an active anti-2nd Amendment organization (MAIG) that claims to support sensible gun reforms.
In reality the group, ‘Mayors Against Illegal Guns’ continually works to infringe on the rights of law abiding gun owners.
The Mayor’s statements about the recently passed gun laws, are also very troubling to gun owners in Connecticut”.


Read more: http://www.ammoland.com/2014/01/connecticut-citizens-defense-league-says-no-on-mark-boughton/#ixzz2qZDjtVb6
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

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."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p