"During" Not "In."
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is nominated by the Connecticut Democratic Party to be the candiadate for the open US Senate seat come the November election. Spoke Clyde Haberman, NYT, whose column "NYC," re his own Vietnam-era military service, makes careful mention that those who served in uniform in those days do not "mis-speak" of their conduct. Clyde Haberman was drafted and reported to duty in April 1968, just after the Tet catastrophe, and his unit was of the few that were sent to Europe, not to Vietnam. Clyde Haberman says that it is important to him to speak precisely of the fact that he wore the uniform 1968-1970 during the Vietnam war and not in the Vietnam war. Clyde Haberman asserts that Richard Blumenthal knows exactly how he spoke and that he spoke for effectiveness to his audiences and that it is extremely unlikely that the several recorded instances were errors of rhetoric. The NYT was careful to include a photo (below) of the New York City memorial to the 1741 dead from the city. This looks to be a fierce summertime engagement. Advantage the relentless hometown crusader of the NYT.
Washington Listens and Watches.
Spoke David Drucker re the Blumenthal flaps as well as the Rand Paul strange remarks re the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Drucker remarks that the senators are watching Connecticut closely because the assumption by the Democrats was that it was a most safe seat and that Blumenthal, the long-serving and vigorous attorney general, would easily replace the retiring Chris Dodd. Now the seat is rated toss-up. In Kentucky, Rand Paul is so far ahead of his rival that there is little reason for the candidate to campaign outside of his state. Nonetheless, the bizarrely foolish remarks by Rand Paul the last days that he opposes the 1964 Civil Rights Act have alarmed his Republican colleagues. Rand Paul declines his invitation to "Meet the Press" following the brouhaha of his remarks on MSNBC. The controversy will not fade, and neither will the Blumenthal mistakes. Pair of troubled sweet-talkers -- a matched set going into the summer campaigns.
Would it not be ironic (in a strictly literary sense) if the SEC were to lose its case against Goldman-Sachs? Its indictment of the financial giant helped to cement the government’s position that Wall Street is corrupt and in desperate need of draconian reform. When the president signs the new financial regulation act, the government will assume sweeping and open-ended powers over America’s financial industry.
This is as big a deal as health care reform was. But, unlike the health care bill, it did not arouse Tea Party ire except in a strictly peripheral sense. It fit neatly into the evil ‘fat cat’ narrative that is currently sweeping the country. The details of the SEC indictment fell well outside the understanding of most casual observers. Unlike universal health care that would affect every citizen on some level, Wall Street is still seen as being quite another planet where ‘obvious’ mischief is casually concocted. Only well-dressed Wall Street insiders ventured to express carefully worded reservations; along with Mayor Bloomberg, of course, who sees city coffers emptying by the hour.
If GS should be acquitted, the damage will already have been done: Our current incompetent and patently corrupt Federal government will effectively control New York’s Wall Street top to bottom. … and chameleon Bloomberg will continue to wonder where the money went.
The saga of Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut brings us back down to earth. Overtly lying to constituents about one’s resume is disgraceful; getting caught at it is unpardonable. Whether these NYT revelations will hurt Blumenthal in November is still up for debate. My guess is yes (it will hurt). People are less likely to remember a health care grab or the torpedoing of Wall Street (both of which will have been seamlessly woven into the fabric of modern socialist America by then) than a Harvard swim team captain who wasn’t – especially if there is a privately propelled incentive (as there is certain to be) to drive the point home.
http://peterkoelliker.blogspot.com/
Bloomy Wins, Linda Wins. Now the epic battle begins. Bloomy claims lawsits bring jobs to Connecticut, and has trouble speaking in public.
Will the workers at Health Insurance companies in Hartford, the Gun Manufacturers in Southport, the hedge funds in Stamford, or the Submarine workers in Groton support a party that wants to put them out of business?
Will Joe Lieberman support the party that despises him?
Linda is Education adviser to Jodi Rell, Gov. Rell has super high numbers in CT, adored by all after the Roland Fiasco. Reformers versus corrupt insiders. Linda has a nice clean message and a well oiled campaign machine.