“You don’t have to
love me. I’m a porcupine” -- Governor Dannel Malloy
There are two ways to lose an argument: by not saying enough
or by saying too much. Likewise, there are two ways to lose an election. The
Republican nominee for Governor, Tom Foley, cannot be accused of having said
too much in his attempt to wrest the gubernatorial office from Democratic
Governor Dannel Malloy. Mr. Malloy, on the other hand, has never in his long
political career said too little.
Mr. Malloy’s second gubernatorial campaign and President
Barrack Obama’s second presidential campaign were remarkably similar. Of the
two, fortune -- as well as lots of money, a suburb ground game, sharper
demagoguery, a media used to genuflecting before incumbents and a progressive
ideology that has not yet wearied the general public in Connecticut – smiled
broadly on Mr. Malloy, while baring its teeth towards Mr. Obama. National
progressives lost the Senate and sent Joni Ernst to the chamber where she will
no doubt “make the pigs squeal.”
The headline on the Drudge Report early the morning after was
celebratory: “REPUBLICANS TAKE CONGRESS +7 +8? +9? SENATE, THE DEM DISASTER.
In South Carolina, Tim Scott was appointed by Governor Nikki
Haley to the U.S. Senate after Republican Jim DeMint resigned to join the Heritage Foundation. Now returned to the Senate, Mr. Scott
is the first black candidate to win a race in South Carolina since just after
the Civil War and the first African-American senator from the South since
Reconstruction. Governor Haley more than a year ago warmly embraced PTR, formerly a Bristol, Connecticut based
semi-automatic weapons manufacturer fleeing Mr. Malloy’s thrown quills. Malloy
said, following the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass murder that gun
manufacturers want “to sell as many guns to as many people as possible—even if
they are deranged, even if they are mentally ill, even if they have a criminal
background. They don’t care. They want to sell guns.” Sturm Ruger of Southport
Connecticut had at the same time begun the process of expanding its business in Mayodan, bringing 500 new jobs to North
Carolina over the next five years.
Both Mr. Obama and Mr. Malloy are progressive politicians,
which is to say both tend to yield to autocratic leftist impulses. To put it
another way, progressives, as a rule, do not fancy trickle-up democracy. In Mr.
Obama’s case, the chief executive, faced with a legislature one house of which
was dominated by the opposition party, simply misused the Constitutional
prerogatives of his office to redraft legislation by choosing which portions of
bills passed into law he would or would not execute. Mr. Malloy does not have
this problem, both houses of Connecticut’s General Assembly having been
dominated for decades by members of his own party. Under the Malloy
administration, Connecticut has what might be termed unitary party problems.
In a governing system in which power is shared between the
two major parties, political corruption is more easily rooted out. In a
tripartite system in which the balance of power is evenly distributed between
the three departments of government – the executive, the legislative and the
judiciary – corruption is more visible because there are more competitive eyes
on the ground to report such indelicate corrupt activities that political flesh
is heir to. A legislative branch in which both parties share power is more keenly
aware of corruption and more ethically ordered. Disclosure is the most formidable
enemy of corruption, and disclosure is more likely in a legislature in which
power and authority is shared between the parties. In a political system in
which the legislative and executive power is vested in a single party,
corruption – politically defined as non-democratic, authoritarian governance –
tends to become the well hidden rule rather than the exception.
In Connecticut, where Democrats once again have swept the
boards, back room deals, questionable elections, opacity in government and the
arrogance of unchecked power – Mr. Malloy is expert in throwing his quills at
those who presume to question him – will be the rule for the next few years.
Connecticut’s U.S. Congressional Delegation, all Democrats, will be returning
to a Congress masterfully captured by Republicans. The raucous voices of
Connecticut’s two U.S. Senators and their influence over Congressional events
will be muted for the last two years of Mr. Obama’s lame-duck presidency; the
media influence on the Malloy administration will be similarly ineffectual. The
few contrarians in the state’s largely pro-status quo Media conglomerate -- those few, that brave band of brothers – had better be on the lookout for the
sharp quills.
Comments
--------------
No question that the Connecticut electorate contains a large left wing element which believes that its truth must march on interminably, or until it runs out of other people's money. But, looking at yesterday's results in equally ideologically blind Mass., Maryland, and Illinois, and given how unattractive Malloy is to everyone with eyes and even some without, it's difficult to avoid the conclusion that Mr.Foley has been a terrible candidate twice. The State of Connecticut is in for continued decline and extended corruption, but the results in other moonbat states provide hope that the less-ideologically motivated swing voters might go for a sane candidate next time.
Foley liked to quote Einstein, saying the definition of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results". This after receiving the Republican nomination for the second time in a row.
It's ironic that the Connecticut Republican party itself operates as if the term "Connecticut Republican" is an oxymoron. Do you really think someone like your crush, Joni (not Jodi) Ernst, would fly here in Ct.?
Two things to ponder:
1. 818,000 unaffiliated voters in Ct.
2. John McKinney
Since Democrats control 1) the General Assembly, 2) the Governor's office, 3) all the Constitutional offices, 4) the entire U.S. Congressional Delegation, it is much more likely that political corruption would stem from Democrats rather than Republicans.
Regarding Einstein: Wouldn't it be best to let that sleeping dog lie? Connecticut is, after all, the only state in the union not to have recovered fully from a recession that ended five years ago, which seems to me and Einstein to suggest that our state has been doing something insanely wrong. The clean sweep by Democrats in Connecticut suggests that the folly will continue unabated, despite Einstein's warning.
I corrected Joni's name; thanks for pointing out the typo. Would that Democratic folly were so easily corrected.
--------------
Please, Don, let me take (temporary?) solace in the belief that Herbst may still win the Treasurer posish. I don't know Nappier, but in her silence she provides cover for the pols in the legislature who are grossly under funding the pension funds. As said by the prudent folks at the "Courant" who joined the wise-persons at the "Day" and the "Register" in endorsing the Republican, Herbst "could make it difficult for the Democrats in power to ignore this ticking bomb." Never mind that the "Courant" endorsed Malloy whose increasing spending on progressive projects like Medicaid and corporate welfare will crowd out proper funding of the pensions.
----------
Though Ms. Nappier is not directly responsible for the state's skimping on its pension obligations, she hasn't mounted a forceful campaign to get everyone to do the right thing.
http://www.courant.com/opinion/editorials/hc-ed-herbst-for-treasurer-20141027-story.html