Claim Check: Linda McMahon Revisits Murphy’s Job Performance

by Categorized: Claim Check, Employment, Finance, Health, Media, Politics Date:

Flip on the TV these days and it seems like every channel is airing the fierce cage match between Linda McMahon and Chris Murphy. It remains to be seen if either candidate is bruised by the slugfest, but there’s little question that accuracy in political ads has taken a few body slams.

In this column, we’ll break down a McMahon spot that revisits earlier attacks on Murphy’s attendance record at committee hearings and accuses the three-term congressman of voting to cut Medicare and raise taxes on the middle class.

Is it true? Depends how far you’re willing to stretch the language.

McMahon’s ad, titled “Summarize,” begins by touting her work record – and work ethic. “Linda McMahon showed up for her job, and created more than 600 good Connecticut jobs – marketing, accounting, IT and more,” the announcer intones. “But newspapers say Chris Murphy skipped nearly 80 percent of his job in committees. And when he did show up, he voted to cut Medicare by $716 billion, and to increase middle-class taxes.”

It’s not a major point of the ad, but the 600 figure is likely a little overstated. At the time McMahon stepped down as CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, the company’s worldwide employee count was probably closer to 575 and never peaked higher than about 600 during her tenure. And with affiliates in several other countries, some number of those were not “Connecticut jobs.” Nevertheless, McMahon, as a key executive at WWE, can certainly take credit for hundreds and hundreds of Connecticut jobs.

But the meat of the ad is the attack on Murphy. The commercial is a bit cheeky in attributing the statistic on Murphy’s hearing record to newspapers – specifically an article two weeks ago in The Courant – and then engages in tortured grammar to say that Murphy “skipped 80 percent of his job in committees.”

The Courant, in a previous Claim Check, confirmed McMahon’s assertion that Murphy had missed a large percentage of his committee hearings (The Courant’s analysis found he missed 76 percent). But the paper did not characterize the importance or relevance of the statistic.

Some maintain that missing committee hearings is a grave offense for a member of Congress. Others say the hearings are rarely essential to understanding the issues before a committee or to doing the work of a committee member. That’s not a debate Claim Check participates in, and it is inaccurate to claim that The Courant said Murphy “skipped 80 percent of his job” with regard to the committees.

The ad also plays with language in its representation of Murphy’s voting record. McMahon’s claim that Murphy voted to cut Medicare by $716 billion is based on his support for the Affordable Care Act — commonly known as Obamacare. That $716 billion figure has become a popular political ping-pong ball. But as several fact-checkers have written before, nothing in the healthcare law cuts funding from the Medicare budget, which is expected to consistently increase over time. Instead, the $716 billion is a 10-year estimate of the savings that would be generated by various provisions of the law — most of which represent reductions in reimbursement rates to medical providers and to private insurers under the Medicare Advantage program. Those savings do not come from cutting Medicare benefits.

The claim that Murphy voted to increase middle-class taxes is based on Murphy twice voting against Republican proposals to extend the Bush-era tax rates. Republicans generally supported extending the lower rates for all taxpayers, while Democrats, including Murphy, generally pushed to extend the rates for all but the highest-earning taxpayers.

In December 2010 – with the tax cuts set to expire on Jan. 1 – Murphy and other Democrats in the House approved The Middle Class Tax Relief Act of 2010, extending the cuts for couples making up to $250,000 in taxable income and individual taxpayers earning up to $200,000. But Republican leaders in the Senate blocked that proposal and successfully pressed for a bill that extended the lower rates for all taxpayers.

Murphy voted no on that bill, and had Murphy’s side won the vote, tax rates for all filers, including the middle class, would have risen – at least temporarily – if Congress failed to rush through a new vote before the year’s end.

But the debate in 2010 – as it is today – was solely over extending the rates to the wealthy, and, while politically irresistible, it is sorely lacking in context to summarize Murphy’s action as voting to “raise taxes on the middle class.”

As in past ads from both sides of this race, this spot contains a variety of statements that are not false or made up, but are not entirely accurate either. That is, of course, a popular realm for political ads, and for the cumulative spinning in this commercial, we rate this ad Somewhat Misleading.

View McMahon’s ad below. Click here for more Claim Check columns, and here for information on how we analyze political ads.

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.

53 thoughts on “Claim Check: Linda McMahon Revisits Murphy’s Job Performance

  1. steve

    Typical HC liberal slanted view. Protect the tax and spend liberals like Murphy. Taxes did go up on the middle class under Murphy. ObamaCare instituted a 10% excise tax on tanning salons and cut the maximum amount of money one could put into a FSA from $5,000 to $2,500. And in CT middle class is definitely $250K for two people. Remember Murphy like Barrack wants to raise taxes on this so called middle class just like DANNY BOY and the dems did. And yes Murphy is cutting $716 BILLION from MEDICARE to fund FREE health care. The CBO states this. The HC is a slanted liberal rag which hopefully will go out of business.

    Reply
    1. Matthew Oakes

      Wait, $250,000.00 is middle class? Wow to think before dad died mom and dad were raking in $50,000 and thought they were middle class. Guess they are poor. LOL YOU are out of touch.

      Reply
    2. Nancy

      Steve: Don’t you see Linda McMahon is running scared. She has invested a lot of money in her campaign, so a loss in this senate race would be devastating. She knowingly approved TV ads spinning untrue claims against Chris Murphy. I won’t vote for a person who does this because past behavior is usually an indicator of future behavior.

      Calm down and reevaluate the facts, which the Hartford Courant has fairly presented above. Remember: Who was president when the economy went into the toilet? Give credit to President Obama for even running for president in 2008. He inherited a big mess to clean up with no cooperation from the GOP.

      Reply
      1. jj

        Nancy,

        Go back to the first ad from Linda, the HC said her assertion that Murphy missed 80% of his committee hearings, he spun it his ad by calling Linda a liar and asserting that he voted 98% of the time. You may argue as others have that the committee hearings are not important but your guy did not do that, he changed the subject without any acknowledgement of doing so, that is spinning. When your guy was forced to address his multiple failures to pay his rent and and then his mortgage, his defence that he is not perfect but Linda did it too! She is open about it and he tried to hide it. He said both he and his girlfriend later his wife thought the other paid it, maybe the first time I would except that as an excuse but the second? Wow they must have a great relationship if they don’t bother to discuss why they are getting pass due notices either time. I imagine the HC will not look to closely at Webster Bank increasing their second loan at favorable rates which some may conclude allowed Murphy to catch up on his first mortgage ala Chris Dodd.

        The housing bubble was largely ignored by both parties for serveral years under the Bush administration. The Democrat controlled house and Senate did nothing to correct what was happening under Bush and Obama had two years of control of the House, Senate, and Executive branches to get control of the problem. Obama decided to pass health care reform instead. If none of these facts matter to you so be it. Obamas lack of focus on the economy is why their is an ongoing problem. Lately, the media and the White House is touting that 4.5 mil jobs have been created to replace the ones that were lost as if there is some one to one corrolation. There is not, many of the new jobs are much lower paying than the old jobs, now that is spinning. Each time Obama and the Dems tout their job creation record look at what the program promised then look at the actual results, jobs actually created were much lower than promised. The Dems actually try to count jobs not lost as jobs created again I call that spinning. Murphy in his ad brags about creating 60 temporary jobs and faults Linda for only creating close to 600 jobs. The big difference is he is in office, she is not. She managed with her company to outdo him almost 10 to 1 and hers are long term. The fact that the race seems to be so close in our state should make Murphy scared not Linda. With Dems out registering Reps by a wide margin he should be cruising. Maybe its his spin cycle that isn’t working so good.

        Enjoy the ads they will only get worse, both sides will pick and choose data and will attempt to spin that to their advantage, just don’t think it is one-sided. It never is.

        Reply
        1. Nancy

          Dear JJ,

          Do you realize it would have taken Obama more than two years to “fix” what was broken in the housing market since 1998. The banks were cleaning up on subprime mortgages because the federal government was handing out “bonuses” for every subprime mortgage approved by them. If Line Item Veto Act of 1996 wasn’t declared unconstitutional, things would have been different in Washington, D.C. today.

          I agree the job market sucks. Most new jobs are low paying service jobs, which is alarming to me. Big business, meaning big corporations and insurance, are still out of control in our economy. They continue to pay low wages, continue to outsource and continue to line their pockets with our money. Why does Congress continue to give “corporate welfare” to big businesses?

          You are aware when the unemployed stop looking for a job, their numbers are no longer included in the “unemployment” figures. Talk about spinning!

          If we, the U.S.public, didn’t demand the cheapest prices, American jobs would still be in the U.S. We are all helping to bankrupt the U.S. We should all seriously think about the consequences of our purchase power now and in the future.

          Reply
          1. jj

            Nancy, Maybe it would take more than two years to take care of the problem, but after the failed stimulus attempts he moved on to healthcare and used his blame Bush get of jail free card for the economy. Yes the dems are not counting the currently unemployed but not recieving benefits group which would by many accounts increase the unemployment rate to over 17%. Here is another Obama spin for you to consider, Oil imports are down which according to the dems is reducing our dependence on foreign energy. I believe the reduction is more due to the high cost and our economic depression rather than anything else. Just remember the old political slogan, a chicken in every pot. Sounds good if you have a pot in the first place.

            Always follow the money, Obama, not just Congress do not want to change big business. Obama attacks big business during the day, then sits down to dinner with them during his fundraisers. Bill Clinton and especially Al Gore have done quite well for themselves after leaving office, how many Company boards do they serve on? Do you think they really want change?

            But back to Murphy, Matthew just attempted to address the Linda lied spin and while he reaches some conclusions he leaves it up to us readers to decide if Murphy was spinning. Did he?

          2. Nancy

            Dear JJ:

            I believe it’s the Department of Labor issuing the numbers for unemployment. These figures are not political party related, just formatted according to DOL guideline criteria. It doesn’t make any difference whether Democrats or Republicans are in power, the unemployed, who are no longer looking for jobs, are never included in the released unemployment figures.

            Regarding oil imports: They are cyclical. Oil imports may be down, but this is a temporary state, which does not reflect a long term continuous trend.

            Yes, I agree with your assessment that oil imports are down now because of the depressed economy and prices at the pumps.

            After doing research on PBS, I found, previously watched, FRONTLINE: THE WARNING (DVD), which “discovers early warning of the crash of fall of 2008, reveals the intense battle among members of the Clinton administration, and uncovers concerted(consuming)
            effort not to regulate the lucrative derivatives markets, which became the ticking time-bomb in the American economy.”

            Brooksley Born, Chair of the obscure federal regulatory agency, Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)(1996-1999) resigned after her concerns and warnings were ignored by Clinton, Greenspan, Summers and Rubin at the first meeting in THE WARNING.

            CLICK ON LINKS BELOW. The first link posted will permit you to “watch the program DVD now (posted mid right side with with white lettering on red background).” Please take the time to do so. It is a real eye opener…

            http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/etc/synopsis.html

            http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/

            WATCH: FRONTLINE: TEN TRILLION and COUNTING

            http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tentrillion/view/

            WATCH: AMERICAN EXPERIENCE: THE CRASH OF 1929. A VERY INSIGHTFUL DOCUMENTARY EXPLAINING HOW,WHY,AND WHAT LED UP TO THE 1929 CRASH PLUS INTERVENTIONS TAKEN BY THE GOVERNMENT.

            http://video.pbs.org/video/1308436568/

            YOU CAN BUY ALL THREE OF THE FOLLOWING DVDs or go online to search CT public libraries to reserve your individual copy for pick-up from any CT library with your library card. You can request the individual DVD(s) to be transferred through their InterLibrary Loan System to your library or nearest library to you for pick-up.

            http://www.shoppbs.org/product/index.jsp?productId=4462473&cp=&sr=1&kw=frontline&origkw=FRONTLINE&parentPage=search&searchId=2883362

            IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN BUYING THEM, AMAZON.COM sells THEM ON THEIR WEBSITE.

            Previous presidents make a lot of money after completing their terms in office. They make their money from speaking engagements and writing books. In the past presidents like Dwight D. Eisenhower/Harry S. Truman never accumulated such wealth.Probably because they still considered themselves public servants, who didn’t use the presidency as a stepping stone to personal wealth.

            http://www.democracyprevails.org/democracyprevails/tax-rate-rich-under-eisenhower.aspx

            Republicans are bigots. They are against gay marriage, against pro-choice, and wish us to live in a “theocracy like Muslims”. My husband says, “if gay people want to get married, let them get married and be as unhappy as the rest of us.”

      2. Just paying attention

        Nancy,
        The Dems had 2 terms of control of both the house and senate, one under W and Obama, they failed to produce a budget both times. They had 2 years of Pres, House and Senate and got NOTHING done. Spin all you want about the Repubs blocking ALL the Obama plans….they had veto proof control.

        Where are the Shovel Ready Jobs from the 2 years of full veto proof control? They did manage to spend $6 TRILLION we don’t have.

        Obama promised to end Gitmo!

        Obama promised to add millions of teachers!

        Obama promised to end Earmarks!

        Obama Promised unemployment would not go over 8%! The USA has now has 44 months of 8%+ unemployment. Food stamps are now given to 42% of homes, 23 million are out of work, and it is all Bushes fault?

        Obama talks a good game, just does not deliver!

        Reply
        1. Nancy

          Dear Just Paying Attention:

          Are you on McMahon’s payroll? And speaking of her payroll, I don’t see any McMahon ads of her previous/present employees saying how great they were treated when working for the WWW. From what I have heard, most of McMahon’s employees didn’t have health care coverage either.

          Speaking specifically about Murphy, at least he paid off his mortgages. What did Linda pay back after declaring “bankruptcy?” Additionally, how could Linda afford to attend college when “bankruptcy” was previously declared? Please fill me on on these matters.

          Reply
        2. Nancy

          Dear Just Paying Attention:

          Are you on McMahon’s payroll? And speaking of her payroll, I don’t see any McMahon ads of her previous/present employees saying how great they were treated when working for the WWW. From what I have heard, most of McMahon’s employees didn’t have health care coverage either.

          Speaking specifically about Murphy, at least he paid off his mortgages. What did Linda pay back after declaring “bankruptcy?” Additionally, how could Linda afford to attend college when “bankruptcy” was previously declared? Please fill me on on these matters.

          Speaking of GITMO:

          http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/gitmo-detainee-turned-terror-commander-killed-reports/story?id=17202453#.UE7enK4U9bk

          Reply
          1. jj

            Nancy, I did not claim the dems fudge the unemployment numbers, just that they refuse to acknowledge the “real” numbers.

            If Republicans are bigots (without any qualifiers I assume you mean all of them) then Democrats are murderers because they are pro-abortion, re: spin term pro-choice. Of course not all Democrats believe destroying fetuses is justifable under all conditions. Likewise since marriage is largely a religous institution, usurping the term marriage to include same sex unions is an attempt to undermine the religions long held beliefs and tenets. It is quite likely I am overstating this contention but so did you.

            Again follow the money, not all of Clinton and Gore’s wealth is from the rubber chicken circuiit. For instance Gore makes money off of the carbon offsets scam which allows a less polluting company sell its carbon “credits” to a more polluting company. If Man- affected climate change is so critical why does Mr. Nobel Gore in favor of such a scam. Check to see which companies appoint democratic politicans to their boards of directors, many are the same companies being attacked by Obama and other democrats. Do you think they are serious about “fixing them”?

            Don’t resort to name calling it takes the discussion and reduces it to juvenile levels and serves no purpose at all.

  2. LINDA

    Linda McMahon is a disgusting human being. She should be run out on a rail. She has absolutely no qualifications for public office. She ran a carnivalesque, exploitative garbage business.

    Reply
    1. Just paying attention

      Why did Murphy miss 76% of the committe meetings? Was that so he could claim he did not know what was in ObamaCare that he voted for? Obamacare the plan that TAXES for 10 years and gives benefits for 6 years, and is projected to only lose $2 TRILLION taxpayers dollars. Why did Murphy vote YES?

      Reply
  3. Colon McEnroe

    Good ole Linda McMahon, her ads are fake, just like her business, which, by the way, her father in law started, NOT her!

    Reply
    1. Marie

      BUT you are putting words into Steve’s mouth, that may be YOUR reason but his last line says “The HC is a slanted liberal rag which hopefully will go out of business.” So if it goes out of business he won’t be able to “compare” views now will he? I guess people like him would just rather get their misinformation from Faux Snooze.

      Reply
  4. Yoda Morganstern

    Running a carnival freak show and running a government are very different endeavors. Ms. McWrestle has no real world governmental management experience.

    Were any her Wrestling employees unionized?

    Its sad that the republicans refuse to allow fact checkers dictate their campaign, as one Romney aide said. And Marathon Man Paul Ryan makes it up and doesn’t even try to be factual.

    We need more common people and less millionaires in government. Unfortunately our broken electoral system doesnt allow that.

    Reply
    1. Dannel's Poll Numbers dropped, again

      Running a criminal freak show – Are you referring to Dannel Malloy? He is letting Criminals out early, 2 new citixens have been killed by early release criminals, 10% that’s 700, are already back in jail.

      Are you referring to Dannels unlimited spending such as the $1 Billion on the CTFastrack to bankurptcy? (20 year cost $1 Billion Taxpayer dollars)

      Are you referring to JaxLabs paing a nonprofit company $300 million and they get to keep the building? (that’s a cool $1 Million per job for those counting)

      How about Dannel’s other coorporate welfare, $235,000 per job at CIGNA, Big bucks for UBS and ESPN.

      Are you referring to Dannle Unionizing daycare moms and taking the money the state sent for food for the kids and using it to pay union dues?

      When you speak of needing less millionairs in government are you speaking about Bloomenthal? or Rosa Deloro? or Obama? Not one of them have run a business.

      Reply
  5. pete

    I love you people you say Linda is unqualified for office. Please tell me what Barrack’s qualifications are, Murphys, Blumenthals, Liberman. Oh I SEE they are all LIBERALS. And as far as her workers being in a union who cares. Unions can only survive in state and local governments where they funnel money into the pockets of the politicians. Unionized workers only account for about 7% of the jobs in the private sector and it continues to drop. Just ask UTC as it moves jobs from UNIONIZED CT south. CT is dying. Thank the DEMS tax and spend policies for that

    Reply
    1. Nancy

      Dear Pete:

      President Obama practiced as a civil rights lawyer after graduating from Harvard Law School; taught at University of Chicago Law School; entered into Illinois politics in 1996. His advocacy work continued when he ran for Illinois State Senator in 1996 and won. Obama worked with both parties: Democrats and Republicans. He drafted legislation on ethics, expanded health care services, and early child education services for the poor. Wouldn’t you agree he is the “man for the people?” Richard Blumenthal served six terms as CT Attorney General; presently serving first term as U.S. Senator. Joseph Lieberman served in CT State Senate; then as CT Attorney General; elected to U.S. Senate(D); and was reelected as an Independent Democratic Senator. Lieberman was responsible for CT residents being able to double or triple the value of grocery coupons at the store for a decade. Chris Murphy served in CT House 1999-2003; CT Senate 2003-2007; U.S. House 2007-present. All have J.D. degrees.

      Please do not say all Democrats are liberals. I believe most of registered Democrats are “moderates.” At least I am, but, again, “traditional” on some beliefs/subjects. Consequently, I will vote for whom I consider the best man running in the presidential election of November 2012.

      Incidentally, unions aren’t the only ones to funnel money into the pockets of politicians and political parties. PAC(Political Action Committee)MONEY comes from wealthy individuals as well as BIG BUSINESSES AND INSURANCE COMPANIES. This money can greatly influence election results because it pays for campaign workers and staff, the media ads (print,radio,TV,internet) travel expenses of the incumbent or candidate in an election. What is disturbing about PAC Money, the best person suited for the elected office doesn’t always win the election.

      So, Pete be sure to vote for your choice of the best candidate running for elected office in 2012. Your vote does count!

      Reply
  6. Stern

    Anyone who values decent government should value the work your blog is doing to expose political propaganda for what it is. Please keep picking apart these ridiculous and manipulative ads. If a candidate is willing to use such tactics to gain office, would he or she hesitate to warp the truth to govern us? The alternative to exposing misleading ads is to allow our country to be governed as George Orwell imagined in the novel 1984: War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.

    Reply
  7. connecticut worker

    Ask Linda how many jobs for her company are in Bangalore, haven of off-shoring for American technlogy (by lots of Ct companies including most prominently our “esteem” mother aetna!

    Reply
  8. George

    Like the ad says, Murphy doesn’t show up for work. What the ad doesn’t say, is when he does show up he votes in lock step with Nancy Pelosi. After six years in DC he has no significant achievements — outside of the failed stimulus, and the hated TARP and Obamacare. Now he wants to be rewarded with a promotion?

    Murphy is a big government liberal. He wants higher taxes, more spending and debt, and more regulations and government interference in the private sector.

    Reply
    1. Matthew Oakes

      What the ad doesn’t say is that he has voted 98%

      out of 1654 votes. THAT is his job passing legislation. And he does it well.

      Reply
      1. jj

        The word you are searching for is voting not passing. I doubt Murphy voting on the winning side 98% of the time. I hope in your job you can pick and choose what you assigned tasks you think are important and ignore the rest. Why did your guy changes the subject from committee attendance to voting record without explanation? Is he too chicken to agree with you? How did Linda lie by stating a fact? Until the job description changes committees are a part of the job. I understand Nancy and Harry don’t actually want their members to read the bills before they vote, so lets add not reading the bills before the vote to a list of tasks Congressmen and Senators need not do before they vote. If we keep this up Murphy won’t need to go to D.C. at all to do his job. Now that is an idea I can get behind, keep him home.

        Reply
  9. Herman from Hartford

    It is probably time for Linda to get off the “Murphy did not show up for work” Kick. She has gotten her monies worth out of the ad. All i can think of is why did murphy leave a 170,000 job to get beat up by McMahon in a Tsunami of negative attack ads. Murphy’s timing could not have been worse. The economy is still recessed and Linda’s money is going to make it real tough for him to become senator this time around. She will continue to pound his record into the ground which will hurt his chances over the next 60 days. There is really nothing he can do between now and then except to hope that something real big news happens to take the place of Linda’s dominance of ct media airwaves. I am starting to dream of linda commercials they are on so often.

    Reply
  10. Happy camper

    I am so tired of the tax and spend democrat’s in this state that I am voting for Linda M as a protest vote to Malloy and the rest of the deceitful democratic party in charge of Conn.

    Reply
    1. Nancy

      Dear Happy Camper:

      You better wise up and read the links below.

      http://www.democracyprevails.org/democracyprevails/republican-roadmap-disaster.aspx

      http://www.democracyprevails.org/democracyprevails/about_author.aspx

      http://www.democracyprevails.org/democracyprevails/tax-rate-rich-under-eisenhower.aspx

      http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/09/edsall-the-ryan-sinkhole/?hp

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/opinion/sunday/romneys-tax-plan-defies-the-rules-of-math.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1347423250-94eg9sc7yn5UiMf+d8dt3Q

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/10/us/politics/romneys-tax-plan-leaves-key-variables-blank.html?pagewanted=all

      Reply
  11. B Oakes

    Interesting to hear the HC labeled as being “liberal/slanted”. I find myself detecting a “conservative/slant” when I read it. This makes me think that the HC is most likely an unbiased, reliable source of information.

    Reply
  12. Lee

    Why is the Courant spending so much time on this aspect of the Senate race? Is it because Linda is ahead and the Courant is trying to sway the election away from Linda?

    Reply
  13. Craig T

    Thank you Claim Check for making an attempt to clairify the distorted accusations and self accolades so common in this and other political contests. It only leads me to speculate on the moral character of those who “approved” these ads in the interest of being elected to lead our Country. And we wonder what is wrong with Washington.

    Reply
  14. MrLogical

    Before the HC condemns McMahon’s ad as “somewhat misleading” (viz., challenging the assertion of creating 600 jobs in CT) perhaps they should inquire about where those jobs were created.

    I would expect that the figure of 600 includes not only the 575 jobs noted, but probably dozens of others in companies that provide supplies and services to WWE.

    If WWE is like almost any large company, the jobs they create are not only those within the company itself, but also the jobs that support WWE.

    It should be an easy task for the Courant to investigate and validate this assertion before condemning it as factually untrue.

    Reply
    1. Matthew Kauffman Post author

      MrLogical: As part of the fact-checking process I did ask the campaign that very question and a spokesman indicated that the “more than 600″ figure referred only to WWE’s own employees. Hope that helps clarify.
      -Matt Kauffman

      Reply
  15. MrLogical

    Funny how when Governor Malloy touts the job creation figures associated with his crony capitalism efforts (the ‘magic’ busway, Jackson Labs, etc.), he includesall of the jobs directly AND indirectly associated with a given project – e.g., the dozens of ‘little’ companies and businesses that provide products and services for the company and its employees. And, OBTW, isn’t that how real economies work?

    Funny. Maybe it only works if you’re a Governor.

    Reply
  16. It's all the same BS from Both sides.

    But Steve it was okay when they backed Linda in one of her ads right………………I just want to know one thing if she loses this time will she just go away like a bad WWE story line already.
    Great she created 600 jobs in her own company and myself and two other buisness partners created 15 jobs do I get to run for senator now.

    Reply
  17. Scott RC

    Amazing how the HC talks out of both sides of it’s mouth. In the print-paper, they stated that her attendance ads were “Factually accurate”. Now on the internet they state that they are “Somewhat misleading”. What an amatuer operation they’ve become.

    Reply
    1. Matthew Kauffman Post author

      Hi Scott. Just to clarify, the Claim Check columns we run in print are identical to the columns that appear here on the blog. I suspect you’re referring to two different columns on two different Linda McMahon ads. In the earlier ad, we found her analysis of Mr. Murphy’s attendance record to be “generally accurate.” We rated a subsequent ad “somewhat misleading,” not based on the analysis of his record, but rather for a misleading description of how newspapers had reported on the issue. Hope that helps clear things up.
      -Matt Kauffman

      Reply
      1. jj

        Matt, nice to see you respond to a comment. I posed a question to you which I thought was substantive regarding that Murphy accused Linda of lying about his attendence and supported his statement by using his voting record without rebutting her statement. How about it? Is his contention that she lied true? If not how did you rate his ad generally accurate? BTW I am waiting to see if you rate Murphy’s new ad generally accurate where they insist tax cuts for her none for the middle/lower classes. 575 permanent jobs vs 60 temp jobs. How come Murphy doesn’t count the Census jobs? I know the answer, they ended.

        Reply
        1. Matthew Kauffman Post author

          Hi jj. Thanks for writing.
          I address the back and forth on Mr. Murphy’s attendance record in a new Claim Check (http://bit.ly/UG1CeC), which I invite you to read. As you’ll see, I didn’t specifically link the ad hominen language in his original ad to his defense of his record. In a newer ad, however, he employs a similar construction but in a fashion that more clearly gives the impression of refuting Mrs. McMahon’s original claims. So I’ve addressed the accuracy of that.
          -Matt Kauffman

          Reply
          1. jj

            Matthew, thank you for your attempt to clarify, however I believe Murphy is using the same Bush tax cuts in the same way as Linda has while obviously coming to a very different conclusions. Why no comment on the all for Linda nothing for you language in his more recent ad, that was the perfect time to compare them directly. Maybe you should use charts to better visualize the ping-pong taking place in their ads. Stay on your toes, the ads will be coming fast and furious not to mention loose. I hope you continue with your efforts.

  18. Successful BusinessPerson v Politician

    Go Linda, would welcome a capailist, a successful wage earner, a successful employer and a person that can relate to being over taxed, over regulated, by big government. Go Linda!

    PS- What will Chris Murphy do when he has to get a real job and earn a living?

    Reply
  19. James Nelson

    I am so tired of the McMahon excessive invasion of my living room and mailbox with her controvercial ads. Other politians refrained from campaigning on Sept. 11th out of respect of the horror of that day and to honor those that lost their lives. Not Linda, she is an attack pitbull for her own interests.

    Reply
  20. jj

    Linda, not making $250k get over it.

    The $250k number for the upper range for the middle class, was assigned by the democrats. They did this to show who is not paying their “fair” share in taxes. If the democrats lack the courage to assign a “real” number to the upper range of the middle class, chastize them. If a Republican uses that number to describe the middle class perhaps he has been corrupted by the democrats or is merely using their words against them. Why is it that number has gotten you so bent out of shape, class envy?

    The democrats were very clever assign $250 to the high end of the middle class, it is high enough to give the real middle class breathing room, they won’t get gored on taxes, but it is also low enough they will get a larger number of people to take money from. This includes many family owned small businesses that provide most of the job growth in our country, that is until the dems get their hands on their money. I have an exercise for you to try if you feel like it, go to Forbes web site and look at the 100 riches people in the U.S. and add up their wealth. Then imagine the dems were brave enough to take it all from them and apply it to the deficit. It would not make much difference in short run much less then the long run. Now think of all that wealth taken out of the economy and imagine the impact that would have on companies and jobs. The only difference is that the democratic plan won’t take it all but they will go down to the $250k level. It still will not make a major impact on the deficit, because the government is way too much money and any new infusion of new revenue will go to new spending.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>