 |
| Stefanowski |
It took no more than a few hours after Bob Stefanowski had formally announced he was running as a Republican to cast a pall over his nascent campaign.
The title of a Hartford story read: “Stefanowski seeks rematch: Strident
conservative throws hat into the ring for second time by blasting Lamont,
Democrats.”
The lede read: “Outspoken conservative Republican Bob
Stefanowski jumped into the race for governor Wednesday morning, looking for a
get-tough-on-crime and cut-taxes agenda to lead a successful rematch against
Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont.”
One may well wonder: are all conservative Republicans
“outspoken?” Do all of them, or just this one, carry verbal bombs in their
pockets with which to assault innocent, unoffending Democrats? What are the
limits of campaign oratory, and do only Republican conservatives transgress the
limits?
Stefanowski is quoted in part: “’Over the past three years,
our state has become less affordable and more dangerous,’ he said. ‘We already
have some of the highest taxes, utilities, and child care costs in the country,
and runaway inflation is making it even worse.’”
These items, lightly touched by Stefanowski while throwing
his hat into the ring, are pretty much common knowledge. Many Connecticut
papers have reported on the state’s high taxes, its costly utilities and rising
child care costs. Inflation has raked everyone in Connecticut, rich or poor,
conservative or moderate, progressive or socialist. No rhetorical bombast here.
The report noted that Stefanowski’s announcement “drew
immediate attacks from Connecticut Democratic leaders, who repeated their
accusation that he’s far too right wing for a blue state.” The attacks in the story,
quoted at length, were aimed at the messenger, not his message.
“'CT (sic) knows that Bob Stefanowski [is, sic] a die-hard
Trump supporter who has proposed slashing money for schools and rolling back
health care,’ said Connecticut Democrats on Twitter, minutes after his
announcement. ‘He stands with the conspiracy theory-promoting, insurrectionist
fringe.’”
The “insurrectionist fringe” is a reference to the crowd of
bitter malcontents that stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6. There is no
indication that Stefanowski was present fomenting the mob. A simple phone call
from a reporter asking – Where were you when…? would have been sufficient to
provide Stefanowski with an ironclad alibi.
No matter. The purpose of the rhetorical blast is to
associate in the minds of possible voters the “strident conservative” with the
mob, detached from a Trump rally, that stormed the Capitol on January 6, the worst instance of insurrection, some Democrats intimated, in U.S. history.
“Worse,” a few calming voices asked at the time, “than the
Civil War, an authentic insurrection?”
Apparently so. The bandwidth of the word “insurrection” can
accommodate anything from armed rebellion to violent protest to, in
Stefanowski’s case, membership in a Connecticut Republican Party associated
with a National Republican Party connected with President Donald Trump, who may
or may not have incited a mob to attack the U.S. Congress.
In happier days, this intemperate free association might
have been denounced by reporters, every one of whom should be dedicated to
right-naming things, as a bit over the top. Was the apostle Peter, along with
Judas, guilty of deicide – fortunately, temporary -- because both belonged to
the same apostolate? What about the present Pope? Is he also tainted with
deicide? Is President Joe Biden, on occasion a practicing Catholic, also
culpable?
Whatever else he may be, Stefanowski is no Donald Trump.
After years of political character assassination, Americans have developed a
tough, resistant hide. They have long since come of age at a time when reigning
parties, fearful of defending their own failed policies, resort to methods
successfully deployed in the past by “Big Lie” masters of political propaganda.
One hopes that Stefanowski during his campaign will be
courageously outspoken. A conservative governor might have something to offer a
seriously wounded state that has not yet been tried and found wanting. Stefanowski's nascent campaign appears to rest, so far, on stout pillars. As any
dispassionate observer who has met and talked with him knows, the conservative bomb thrower is
highly analytical and pretty much the opposite of theatrical.
His opening first ad
burns no one’s barns and responds well to real rather than politically manufactured
issues: “Over the past three years, our state has become less affordable and
more dangerous for the good people who live, work, and go to school here. We
already have some of the highest taxes, utilities, and childcare costs in the
country, and runaway inflation is making it even worse… People in Connecticut
are not asking for a lot. They want to be safe, to trust that state government
is being open and accountable, and to be able to afford to live, work, and
retire here. Unfortunately, these are not the priorities of the current state
leadership, who continue to serve the political insiders more than they do the
people they represent.”
Such statements are fearful to the reigning power because
they are, all of them, true.
Comments