A few more words about the Fifth

by Categorized: Uncategorized Date:

Got an email today from a Donovan supporter angry about this column. She ended it “Bye. bye, former friend,” even though (a) we are not friends and (b) some time between the ages of ten and twelve, most of us realize we will not always see eye to eye with our friends.

But I did reply and it helped me clarify my own thoughts on the race.

As a Congressman, Chris Donovan would probably vote, most of the time, the way I want members of Congress to vote. I have no such confidence about Elizabeth Esty. Dan Roberti’s candidacy is ridiculous. He has recently tried to liken himself to Chris Murphy, but he’s Murphy’s polar opposite. Murphy has a long record of civic engagement and of learning the ropes. Roberti is much closer to Linda McMahon in that regard: a person with no real record of caring about how government works, a person who woke up one morning with a big dream and the money to move it forward. Kaspar Hauser with a trust fund.

I really should support Donovan, but I can’t. For about two decades I  have trumpeted the ideals of clean government and clean elections. I have made a point of holding elected officials and candidates responsible for the actions of their subordinates. I considered Rell responsible for Lisa Moody and Rowland responsible for Peter Ellef. I hold Lisa Wilson-Foley responsible for whoever set up the deal with Rowland, even if that wasn’t her.

I can’t support Donovan. He did the right thing by firing the errant staffers promptly. But there is no doubt in my mind that campaign contributions were made illegally and that the legislative process was subsequently tainted. I don’t see how that earns him a promotion.

There really is no good outcome(for me) in the Fifth. 15 years ago, I would have been very comfortable supporting a Republican like Andrew Roraback. Good guy. Honorable. Not a zealot. Now, of course, he’ll vote a lot of the time with a caucus that I regard as having been hijacked by extremists and poseurs. Roraback has a conscience, but moderate who try to vote their consciences are punished in that climate.

Unlike my correspondent, I see this complicated field as one where people are going to sort things out for themselves and where it is possible for good people to come to very different conclusions.




The Courant is using Facebook comments on stories. To comment on courant.com articles, sign into Facebook and enter your comment in the field below. Comments will appear in your Facebook News Feed unless you choose otherwise. To report spam or abuse, click the X next to the comment. For guidelines on commenting, click here.

26 thoughts on “A few more words about the Fifth

  1. Richard

    We don’t get visionaries in the 5th and a visionary is what we need. The vision under Murphy is not much more than I’ll vote ‘Yea’ on any Democratic spending proposal that gets brought to the floor (98% according to Wiki and Open Congress–opposing the party 2% and abstaining 5%).

    Murphy’s 2% votes against the party are usually amendments to defense bills and this isn’t uncommon given CT defense appropriations and the pork barrel amendment process.

    7 of Murph’s co-sponsored bills made it into law over 5 years. Bills like the “Raoul Wallenberg Centennial Celebration Act” and ‘Designating room HVC 215 of the Capitol Visitor Center as the “Gabriel Zimmerman Meeting Room” Act’.

    I wish I was joking about that. The other 5 bills are of similar ilk. Like the ‘Mark Twain Coin’ act and the ‘Baseball Hall of Fame’ coin act. One of those every year over 6 years and you’ve got a lifetime career I guess.

  2. DrHunterSThompson

    to witless:

    well, i think you are far to nice to Donovan. i know you don’t hang at the capitol, but he is a mean-spirited individual with a penchant for revenge and he is in love with power for powers sake.

    Roraback is just the opposite. He is a moderate with a sensitivity and understanding for his constituents and the people of Connecticut. He tries to understand each issue (Donovan does not) and he talks to every side of the issue before he votes. He is honorable and capable.

    You are no better than the rest of the media. Sitting on high, using a few big words here and there, poking fun, but never really understanding what public life should be about.


    1. Cynical Susan

      Wait, didn’t Colin also say that Roraback is honorable? That he has a conscience? He only bemoaned that he will be having to vote with extremists. That doesn’t read as poking fun to me.

    2. cmcenroe Post author

      So …because I said I couldn’t support Donovan…and said I do like Roraback…you’re upset with me because…I’m trying to understand this …you want me to be against Donovan and for Roraback.
      I mean, your comments are usually pretty empty, but this one is unfathomable.

      And please get a new handle. Hunter Thompson was a lot of things, but he wasn’t a sad little troll afraid to put his name on his thoughts. Thompson was funny, bold, original, annoying, appalling and often dazzling in his choice of words.

      You are only two of those things.

      1. Bartleby45

        …and literate and grammatical too. I never wanted to be Mr. Thompson—his lifestyle would have killed me in a week—though I wouldn’t have minded being able to write like him. I don’t feel quite the same about the new HunterSThompson (Dr? Really now?)though at times I do feel, if not so much fear, a little smidgen of loathing.

      2. DrHunterSThompson

        To witless:

        Often I wonder how it is that I type on my phone, hit submit, and suddenly an aboriginal sitting in the rain drenched outback under a natural shelter can read my trolling speak if he has a satellite connection. Wild, isn’t it?

        Yeah, if you knew Donovan you would not speak in his favor. That’s sort of the point – writers, journalists, trolls, witless one’s – speak with authority, try to be clever, insightful, and so on, without basis. That, you do well.

        Hey, speaking of trolls, I missed the troll show! Did you talk about me?


      3. Fuzzy Dunlop

        Maybe this is sort of a chicken or the egg type thing. You think Roraback is a reasonable chap. So is the problem that we elect reasonable Republicans like him, and they end up getting turned to the Dark Side, pressured by the likes of Grover Norquist and his ilk, or is the problem that we don’t elect enough reasonable Republicans to begin with anymore?

        In any other year, I’d say the answer is vote for Roraback and hope if we elect him and other moderates that it might bring some measure of sanity back to the GOP. Problem is, Obamacare still isn’t safe, despite the SC’s ruling and repeal will almost certainly be on the table if the Republicans can win back at least one chamber and the White House. A vote for a Republican in this election is essentially a vote for repeal.

        Btw, curious where you see Esty voting much differently than Donovan? I don’t know anything about her, so I’m not saying she would or wouldn’t, but I’m curious on what issues they really differ.

        Finally, one thing that can’t be discounted: this is an August primary. My money says that in an inevitably low turnout election, union support gets Donovan the W. The general election, however, is another matter. In the immortal words of one of our greatest visual novelists, the Republicans are gonna use that indictment to beat on his white-ass like it’s a rented mule.

  3. John R. McCommas

    Well if Mr. McEnroe, if can’t support Donavon because of ethics (a lost cause at this point so what have you really given up?) than where were you on Denise Merrill and the Rat Issue? If you wrote about that, I missed it. I have only started reading the Courant again the past year or so.

    Merrill was Co-Chairman of Appropriations as you may recall. What most readers of the Courant might not know about the bicameral co-Chairman of the legislative committees is that despite what their committees may or may have not done, they can just stick any legislation in a bill they want in the middle of the night and the committee does not need to take a vote on it. The chairmen don’t have to even tell anyone about it. They just cut and paste and stick it in there and hope no one catches it. If no one does, it is law. What about that?

    Merrill evidently doesn’t like practicing Catholics much so in the middle of the night she just went to her computer and just cut and pasted the language of a defeated bill of that year and put it in the budget.

    The bill was the so called “Plan B pill bill”. It said that if rape victims were brought to Catholic hospitals that the faith-based institution would be forced to prescribe what the Church considers to be a chemical abortion pill. Merrill was not interested in an alternative law that would require the Police to take rape victims to public hospitals rather than Catholic institutions. That would as columnist and blogger Don Pesci wrote would have nicely avoid the Constitutional question altogether. Mr. Pesci pointed out that there are public hospitals in the vicinity of all the Catholic based hospitals in Connecticut.

    But the thing was Denise Merrill really wanted to stick it to the Pope.
    Where were you on that? Denise – The Rat- Merrill abused her role as chairman because doesn’t like Catholics. Merrill also thumbed her nose at democracy.

    Merrill’s stunt was caught by a shrewd Republican state representative who is best known for actually reading the bills no one else does and catching these rats.

    The State Senate took the rat out once discovered that year but the bill eventually passed in legit fashion a few years later. The Church declined to sue as they should have because I think they would have won.

    What do you have to say about Merrill’s ethics? What did you have to say then? I don’t know. For all I know you were all over this. Is what she done any better than Donavon?

    Merrill not only got away with it, she was promoted to majority leader and then nominate for Secretary of the State and won a Democrat primary and General Election.

    Ironic that a woman we could not trust to be an Appropriations Committee Co-Chairman is now the one we trust to count our votes; no?

    1. Richard

      Thanks for bringing up Denise Merrill and the Democrats “Pills and Plague” contraception policy backed by Esty and others.

      No where do the Denise Merrill’s acknowledge that the increased distribution of these pills is accompanied by a decline in safe sexual practices, increased sexual activity of younger kids, and an upswing in SDTs.

      It was hard enough getting the kids to practice safe sex in the “Fear of God” and “Fear of Pregnancy” era. Now, the fear of STDs is simply not enough. There’s a morning after pill free and ready to go and easy access to free abortion.

      27 English Studies come to the same conclusion.


      THe outbreak of more virulent forms of antibiotic resistant super STDs is well noted by the CDC as the $19 billion now spent on STDs (not including AIDS/HIV) passes the costs of preventing unwanted pregnancies.

      The ‘Pills and Plague’ crowd is so happy to get their free condoms and pills in the suburbs they fail to notice the 16,000 low income adults being thrown off Medicaid by Malloy to a balance health care costs. As long as they got their free pills and sheepskin they are oblivious to the social harm to minority women with STD infection rates approaching 50% in major US cities.

      Of course, the goal is 100% infection while the suburban ‘pills and plague’ crowd chortle over their new found freedoms in the “War on Women”
      Denise Merrill. She’s very, very sick John. With a very demented sense of humor over the “War on Women”.

      Wait! On the horizon. Democrats note surge in STDs. Instead of rolling back ‘free and easy’ abortion and pills policies they approve $100 billion in war on STDs.

      Much like the US military it’s a form of arming both sides of battle while nurturing the Mother of all bioresistant STDs.

      1. Richard

        The women’s SuperPac stuffs money in Esty’s purse! $300,000! The War on Women by Women continues! CDC warns that funding and moral acceptance of liberal pregnancy termination efforts undermines proactive STD prevention efforts like abstinence and barrier contraception!

        50% of minority urban women (and young girls) are infected with Plague! Planned Parenthood and Esty celebrate victory! Pills and Plague wins!

        CDC deplores the trend….it falls on deaf ears among the bought and sold Planned Parenthood yip yip dogs!


        Public Health undermined by single issue Women’s Health Groups! Rally in Bushnell park April 28! Celebrate the rise of STD infection rates and social costs with the “Women who had an abortion and need social acceptance and absolution crowd”! Play the part of Community Psychiatrist during Primal Scream confessionals!

        Planned Parenthood sees an opening to grab new funding! Yip yip dogs go wild!

  4. peter brush

    I consider it an honor and privilege to represent you as I run for Congress in the 1st Congressional District. I look forward to a time when we elect real people at home in their communities instead of re-electing career politicians interested in spending our money and in their own self-preservation.

    Thank you.

    John Henry Decker
    John Larson, career hack, regrets that he only has one country to give for his career. Big into “campaign finance reform” while he runs the country into the fiscal ditch, emasculates the military, and destroys the medical sector.

  5. Deidra Ierardi

    Luckily, you don’t live in the 5th. Many of us who do, believe that we need to give Donovan the benefit of the doubt..what is taking the FBI and the Federal prosecutor so long. Are they fishing for a crime by Donovan? I’m voting for Donovan because he will represent me best in Congress and because I trust that there was NEVER a quid pro quo between Donovan and the RYO people or anyone else.

    Respectfully disagreeing…

    1. beantownbilly

      In America everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. True, there is no signed contract for Donovan to kill RYO in return for $27,500 in cash. However, please consider the simple chain of events:
      1. Agreement between RYO/FBI that if Donovan kills the RYO tax, RYO/FBI will be very grateful.
      2. Donovan kills RYO tax bill
      3. Immediately – next day – the money moves from RYO/FBI to Donovan campaign.
      Coincidence? Only if you are still leaving cookies and milk out for Santa.

      1. AndersonScooper

        Own set of facts?

        Tell me again how Donovan killed the RYO bill in the CT State Senate? Then do us a favor and quit making sh*t up!

  6. Alpinglow

    Isn’t great when one calls a troll out, and it responds by confirming at length that it is a troll? How one wishes that this will happen with greater regularity.

    Also, the choices, Esty and Rorabach, are exactly right.

    And, it is the best outcome for the district, even if it favors the Democrats.

  7. Joe Smith

    Democrats and the media like to paint Republicans as the party of big money, calling out Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers, when in reality the progressive money machine vastly outweighs conservative sources of funds. The Democrat money advantage is so one-sided, in fact, that it is a wonder that Republicans and conservatives are able to win as many elections as they do.

    We on the right hear much of George Soros and the Tides Foundation, but it is never quite clear just where all the money comes from to support the myriad left-wing pressure groups that agitate the public and shift the national debate farther and farther to the left.

    From illegal immigration and socialized medicine to radical environmentalism and formidable government unions, there is a never-ending flow of funds and coercion toward left-wing causes, at the expense of traditional, conservative American values.

    A recent book, The New Leviathan, subtitled How the Left-Wing Money Machine Shapes American Politics and Threatens America’s Future, by David Horowitz and Jacob Laskin, examines the forces behind the dangerous and seemingly inexorable push to the left on so many issues of critical national import.

    The authors focus on the numerous foundations that provide funding to such radical groups as the National Council of La Raza, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights League, and the Center for American Progress.

    The central point of the book is that left-wing foundations outweigh conservative foundations by a factor of more than ten, in both total assets and the value of grants awarded. This is exactly the reverse of what the left-controlled media recites over and over again in its drive to promote the Democrats as the party of the little guy.

    An exhaustive appendix of tables listing progressive and conservative foundations, their assets, and their annual grants and revenues shows progressive foundations with assets totaling $104.6 billion, compared with $10.3 billion for conservative foundations, and progressive grants awarded totaling $8.8 billion, compared with conservative grants awarded totaling just $0.8 billion1.

    The result is that the resources available to progressive immigration groups, for example, are 22 times those available to conservative groups2, a fact reflected in the continual pressure from the left to open the border and decriminalize illegals.

    The authors also find that there are 552 “progressive environmental groups that promote radical views that are anti-business,” and just 32 “conservative environmental groups that promote market-friendly solutions,” with similar massive funding advantages accruing to the environmental extremists3.

    As the authors note, the aggressive environmental agenda of the Obama administration reflects the fact that “the financial muscle of these foundations brought the radicals out of the wilderness and into the mainstream of the nation’s environmental politics”4.

    A look at the Grants Database of the Ford Foundation, which is the second-largest foundation in total assets (to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation), and which provided the seed money for both the Environmental Defense Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Fund5, shows hundreds of entities receiving grants, including the National Council of La Raza for $1.6 million this year, and the Center for American Progress for $1.7 million, as well as

    the Tides Foundation for $250,000, the National Network of Abortion Funds for $300,000, and the National Health Law Program for $300,000, to name a few.

    A few minutes perusing the Ford database is instructive as to the nature of the groups receiving grants from the Foundation. Note that the foundation’s website states that the foundation gradually divested its Ford Motor Company stock by 1974 (lest you wonder if your new car purchase is funding leftist causes).

    Compounding the left’s big-money advantage are the public-sector and other unions, from the SEIU to the NEA, whose intimidating tactics and powerful financial influence promote the same radical agenda and were a major factor in the election of our current president.

    As the authors point out, the inability of conservatives to influence the ObamaCare debate “illustrates the Left’s institutional advantage in orchestrating social change – its financial dominance and its far more developed political coordination”6.

    Horowitz and Laskin employ the example of the Woods Fund, whose board Barack Obama and Bill Ayers both served on, and observe that after the most active Woods family member died, “control of the previously traditional charity fell into the hands of leftist staffers, including veterans of the Midwest Academy, who hijacked its agenda and pushed the foundation aggressively to the left[.]” Further7:

    The Woods fund trajectory – an apolitical, even conservative, foundation swerving dramatically to the left – was to repeat itself throughout the philanthropic culture.

    The authors also detail the transformation of the now-progressive Pew Charitable Trusts, a group founded by “oil tycoon and Christian conservative J. Howard Pew in 1957 to educate Americans on the ‘values of the free market’ and the ‘paralyzing effects of government controls on the lives and activities of the people'”8.

    These were foundations created by good men who worked hard, amassed a fortune, and left it for what they hoped would be good in the world, only to have it hijacked by radicals seeking to transform and reorder the world.

    The authors conclude by observing that the foundations of the New Leviathan do not answer to voters or to supporters and are accountable to no one for the agendas they advance to change the direction of America9:

    The New Leviathan is self-sufficient and self-perpetuating. It is an aristocracy of wealth whose dimensions exceed any previous accumulations of financial power, whose influence already represents a massive disenfranchisement of the American people and whose agendas pose a disturbing prospect for the American future.

    With the overwhelming financial advantage of the left-wing money machine, it is hard to take seriously a president who castigates Republicans as the party of the rich.

    1. Richard

      With the race to attract Chinese distribution and business partnerships The Democrats high profile donors are great fodder for ‘outsourcing wars’ come the October ad cycle.

      It was announced this week that Dreamworks is dropping $3 billion in China and James Cameron just signed a deal worth hundereds of million for 3-D technology transfer to China with his new China production partners.

      Ask any of the Dodo’s running for the 5th if there’s upside to any of this and how it will impact the 5th.

  8. Mike Becker

    Harry Reid is a pedophile
    I got that from a reliable source who made me promise not to reveal his name. But he knows. Honest.

    Now I’m sure some would expect me to back up this claim with some of those “fact” thingys or maybe a link or two. Well, given that I’ve promise anonymity for my source, not happening. Just Google “Harry Reid pedophile” there are 1.79 million hits.

    I’ve known this for some time but I was reluctant to go public with the information because I always back up my writing with facts and links. Since I’m sworn to secrecy this time I was uncomfortable putting this story out until some seminal events occurred this week, and I figured “what’s good for the goose…”

    As I’m sure you know, Harry Reid (the pedophile), told a reporter that “somebody” at the evil Bain Capital told him that Mitt Romney won’t release his taxes because he didn’t pay any taxes for ten years. And today Harry Reid (the pedophile) doubled down on this statement in the Las Vegas Review Journal:

    On Wednesday, Reid stuck to his story, and broadened it.

    “I am not basing this on some figment of my imagination,” Reid said in a telephone call with Nevada reporters. “I have had a number of people tell me that.”

    Asked to elaborate on his sources, Reid declined. “No, that’s the best you’re going to get from me.”

    “I don’t think the burden should be on me,” Reid said. “The burden should be on him. He’s the one I’ve alleged has not paid any taxes. Why didn’t he release his tax returns?”

    So, goose, meet gander.

    I’ve had what I consider to be very credible sources (multiple) tell me Harry Reid is a pedophile. One even said he’d seen child porn on Harry’s umm office computer. That’s a pretty specific charge and I think the Capitol Police should get a warrant.

    I’m expecting this story to be P1 above the fold in the NYT and WaPo in the next few days and Redstate traffic should get a real bump – you’re welcome Erick.

    Feel free to tell your friends, post on your blogs and drop a letter to the editor of your local paper. Harry Reid is a pedophile and one hell of a lot worse, and a bigger story, than Mitt’s taxes.

  9. jharrity

    Colin – Chris Donovan will be a great Congressman, despite your misgivings. There is NOTHING that’s come afloat during the FBI’s exhaustive dredging operation that proves or even indicates persuasively his participation in any crime.
    There are 8 indictments, but of that 8, only two were Donovan staffers. Three were RYO guys, one a construction guy, and two union volunteers. Much of the uproar over the indictments is barely contained glee, repackaging already-formed opposition to Donovan into the mock outrage of some Upright Citizens’ Brigade.
    Your abandonment of Donovan, despite his still uncontested innocence, might be considered pragmatic, but i see it as ethically compromised in its own right.
    Your strongest argument — Donovan should have known — dismisses the skills of talented people actively conspiring to deceive.
    Why “risk” backing Donovan? Maybe because he’s the most principled and progressive candidate in the race, has served the people of the state with skill and distinction for decades, and does not deserve to have his future — from which the people of the state would benefit greatly — be foreclosed because of others’ bad judgment. Donovan is the most down-to-earth elected leader I know. A man of the people. He will make a great Congressman.

  10. peter brush

    I’m voting for Donovan because he will represent me best in Congress
    One hears this formulation often. It’s true that the Reps do just that; represent “the people.” (As opposed to Senators who, despite our new improved Constitution, might still be said to represent the states.) But, while there’s no necessary contradiction, what we want is law-makers representing us while they do what’s best for the country as a whole, in the case of federal guys, as well as what’s best for the folks and the states.
    I ponder the Donovan web-site, and must say his presentation is pretty good; seems honest and provides footnotes, even. But, I look in vain for his opinion on our national fiscal position. Are we spending, taxing, borrowing too much, just right, too little, who knows? He wants not only to maintain Medicare “as we know it” but to make it universal; not a word about the fact that it’s current incarnation is driving us broke, or about where our kids will get the $ to pay for even more.
    As for his ethical qualifications, it’s true, as far as I can see, that he’s not been accused let alone convicted. The issue is one of management. If a bunch of players are fixing games do we not question the manager’s abilities, even if the guy isn’t corrupt himself? What’s the upside to taking the risk that Donovan could be in trouble after he’s elected? Is he really so unique that a suitable alternative can’t be found to hold the seat for two years?Speaking as a (for present purposes cynical) Republican with no knowledge of the political acumen of the Dem alternatives, I rather approve of the Dems nominating Mr. Donovan.

Comments are closed.