----------------
“Today is a sad day for American conservatives. Particularly, that’s the case for conservative republicans here in Connecticut where once again liberal democrats have run the table and swept every federal office in the state. The natural tendency is to wring our hands and ask: "where do we go from here?"
But here is the truth.
We played hard and left it all on the field. Today, we are exhausted, our uniforms are torn and stained, and our psyche bruised and battered from the political thrashing that we have taken. We have nothing to be ashamed of. The values and principles that built this great nation remain just as true and worth fighting for as they ever were.
Remember, the final whistle has not sounded on the future of our country. We are still in the game.
The people have spoken and now the other team has the ball. They must either advance it or be held accountable for their failure. There can be no excuses, no rationalizations, and no evasions.
Like George Washington's army at Valley Forge we will persevere through this long continuing winter of liberal rule. We will marshal our resources and hone our message. When the politics of free stuff and deficit spending fails (and it will), we must be ready to march in the spring of the next election.
Yes, today is a sad day for America, but the saddest day would be the day we stop fighting for America.
God bless you, your family, and may God Bless America.
It is this type of negativity that kept me from voting for any Republicans this election. The sooner we have parties working together the sooner we'll get out of this mess. Stating "it's a sad day for Americans" And that the policies of the current administration will fail does little to help move forward. Mr. Winsley uses game analogies in his letter yet shows little in the way of good sportsmanship. America has spoken. Cooperation rather than criticism will go a long way to solving our problems.
ReplyDeleteMr. Winsley should think a little more about the lessons to be drawn from this election. Here's what I learned: From the Roraback v. Esty campaign, I saw that a quality Republican candidate with adequate funding can run a competitive campaign. The President's coattails probably carried the day for his opponent this time. From the McMahon v. Murphey campaign I saw that a Republican with a ton of money can buy you some votes, but can't buy a victory. And from DeLauro v. Winsley I saw that a Republican who has no experience, qualifications, ideas, money or support is going to get creamed.
ReplyDeleteMr. Winsley's claim that he lost because of the "politics of free stuff" is ridiculous. He lost because he lacks the qualities people want in a representative in Congress and his campaign,like his press release, consisted of nothing but meaningless platitudes, grandious claims of his significance, insane lies about his opponent and a disconnect from reality. There were many Republicans in this state that were elected and re-elected on Tuesday and others that lost close races. He was trounced. The difference between the successful Republicans and Mr. Winsley is the quality of the candidate and their ideas.
Rosa DeLauro has those qualities?? What's she worth 20 Million or is it 25 Million..?
ReplyDeleteConnecticut can't fathom an African American Conservative.. Let's be real!
Dear Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteWhat does Rosa DeLauro's wealth have to do with her character? I'm assuming that you voted for Roomney.
To say that most of CT voters would not vote for a conservative would be, I believe, true. Most want Moderates. To say that the fact that Mr. Winsley is African American is why people did not vote for him is not only ridiculous but insulting. I did not vote for him because I believed that he lacked the qualifications.
Funny how the Eye didn't publish any press releases from Mr. Winsley stating his qualifications or any of his talking points- only this one to make him look bad. Subjective bias reporting once again.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletefunny how anon says the Eye makes Winsley look bad by publishing Winsley's own press release - his words, not the Eye's, so if you think the PR Makes him look bad, that reflects on Winsley, not the Eye. The Eye posted advance notice of one of Winsley's campaign events http://middletowneyenews.blogspot.com/2012/08/coffee-danish-meet-greet-with.html and mentioned him in the notice of the Westfield meet and greet. So anon, next time you accuse the Eye of "bias" reporting, maybe you can first 1) look up proper usage of 'bias' in the dictionary and 2) type any old search term, say for example, 'winsley' into the Eye's search box and pull up the past Eye posts that are there regardless of your assumption that they are not.
ReplyDeleteI noticed that the post stating that they would not come into my store because of my "blind support of the Democrats" was taken down. I would like the opportunity to respond to it.
ReplyDeleteI have never "blindly" supported any candidate. I have volunteered for, voted for and supported Democrats, Republicans and Independents.I study the issues and support the candidate I believe will do the best job.
I first contacted Matt Lesser because I strongly disagreed with him on a particular issue. We still disagree on that issue. I became a supporter of his because he listened with repect and civility (and I am not a one issue voter).
In the eight years that I have owned my store I have conducted numerous fund raisers that have pumped thousands of dollars back into our community. Never once did I ask the organizers political affiliation.
It deeply saddens me that some of us have become so divided that one would be attacked for exercising their right to express their opinion. Isn't that kinda what we're supposed to be all about?
Need to go to set up for our Make A Wish fund raiser. It's been four years that we've been helping our Make A Wish child Nate and I don't know or care what party his parents vote for.
Democrats, Republicans, Independents; you're all invited into my store.
Hi Priscilla & all, I'm the one that took the comment down, after a debate with Stephen DeVoto. He and I have had countless conversations over the years about what kinds of comments to allow on the Eye. In this case, I thought it was mean-spirited enough that it shouldn't be allowed to stand as an anonymous comment - but I feel that way about most mean comments on the Eye - I think we allow too many, but it's not easy to find a balance. Does the commenter have a valid point that knowing your political preference in the recent election will influence her/his choices of where to shop? Sure, that's something that would be allowed in most newspapers or blogs if it was signed - but should she/he be allowed to be snarky to you, who are making valid civic contribution by endorsing a candidate and taking responsibility for it by being public, when he/she hides behind "anonymous"? I'd rather not and after my discussion with Stephen, I decided to pull it. I feel the same way about the comment, probably made by the same person, about our Tree Fantatic - but we decided to let that one stay. Why? Hmm. I guess I was worried about your feelings and didn't want to give a bully a platform in our blog. But since it's been such a topic of discussion here, I'll reprint what the commenter said :
ReplyDeletePriscilla- your blind devotion to the Democratic party and support of Matt Lesser- ie I received a mailer with your picture from him as a supporter - has stopped me from ever buying ice cream at Coldstone again. I will be encouraging my friends to do the same. I bet you have never voted anything but Democrat and do not ever consider the candidate and not the party.
We also got a comment with similar wording in the same time frame (probably by the same anonymous) but deleted it before posting - come to think of it I was probably influenced by the nasty tone of this one in my decision on the other one. Here's that one that never ran:
Priscilla- the fact your face was plastered on Matt Lesser's mailer makes me sad. I will never shop at at Coldstone again. If the shoe were on the other foot- you would never criticize DeLauro. Once a blue in the wool Democrat always.
As always, the Eye is a product of whoever works on it that day - others can and do decide these things differently.
-Jen Alexander
I appreciate local businesses and their support of good causes! Keep up the great work, Priscilla (and the many other local business owners doing the same)!
ReplyDeleteI think everyone who disagrees with a-ho**...I mean, anon 8:15, should head down to Coldstone this weekend and buy a cone in protest of anon 8:15's ridiculous suggestion to boycott.
ReplyDeleteC'mon Ed was that really necessary?
ReplyDeleteJen, if the Eye's position is to pull comments when they are used as a bully pulpit, then in all fairness, you really need to pull Ed's 3:27 post. Calling people expletives falls into the bully pulpit category.
To anonymous @ 5:03. First, look up what "bully pulpit" means. Second, Eye moderators will always distinguish between comments that are signed and comments that are unsigned--there is a profound difference between an anonymous attack on a named individual, and a signed attack on one who cowers behind anonymity. Yours fell into the first category, and Ed's into the second. Give readers the opportunity to attack you by name, and we will then stop all anonymous attacks on your character.
ReplyDeleteEd, Stephen and Jen
ReplyDeleteIf you are going to have a double standard and allow obnoxious and insulting characterizations by your contributors to anonymous posters but not ones who divulge their identities then you need to eliminate the ability to post anonymously.
Don't blame folks for not identifying themselves if Ed is going to call them names.
Wow. As a member of the BOE, Ed should be modeling appropriate behaviors to respond to those he disagrees with. Is this how we should teach our students to handle conflict?
ReplyDeleteBOE members take note of the bully in your midst and demonstrate how they should be handled.
It's pretty well known around town that Ed uses this blog as his personal bully pulpit and is fairly intolerant of views opposing his.
ReplyDeleteSo Stephen, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, chances are it is a duck despite any dictionary definition.
It's a pretty hilarious suggestion that I should apologize to an anonymous poster. It's like apologizing to an apparition. Kindly state your name, and I'd be glad to apologize.
ReplyDeleteThe only bullies on the internet are anonymous posters.
Last fall one of the topics of discussion around town was the impact of Wesleyan students voting in the local election when they often are residents for only their academic years. It seems like the students and / or Wesleyan is going to have another chancee to impact Middletown.
ReplyDelete