Social Networks We Use

Categories

CT Tech Junkie Feed

Some Customers Say Transition From AT&T To Frontier Has Been Bumpy
Oct 29, 2014 2:26 pm
(Updated 7 p.m.) Customers who previously had AT&T Inc. landline, Internet, and video services were switched over to...more »
Social Enterprise Trust Honors Entrepreneurs Who Hope to Change the World
Oct 28, 2014 11:51 pm
Entrepreneurs interested in making social changes across the world as well as growing their bottom line are an...more »

Our Partners

˜

Democrats, Malloy Take Aim At Foley

by Hugh McQuaid | Aug 13, 2014 9:52pm
(7) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Election 2014, Hartford, Convention Center

Hugh McQuaid photo

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy

HARTFORD — Gov. Dannel P. Malloy laid into his newly anointed Republican opponent Wednesday night before an audience of about 1,000 Democrats at the party’s annual Jefferson Jackson Bailey fundraising dinner.

Malloy was joined by Democratic governors from New Hampshire and Delaware at the dinner held at the Connecticut Convention Center. Tickets to the event went for about $185 a plate.

The event served both as pep rally, where Democrats lauded policies Malloy passed during his first term, and as the first round of what is shaping up to be a contentious rematch between Malloy and his 2010 Republican rival, Tom Foley, who again received his party’s gubernatorial nomination Tuesday.

During his 19-minute speech, Malloy said Foley had spent the last three years rooting for Connecticut’s failure.

“Tom Foley was standing on the sidelines, hoping for rain on a sunny day, wishing that Connecticut would not move forward, hoping that people don’t notice that we’re making progress and that we’re on the road to recovery. He was in the cheap seats, saying cheap things while we were working hard — and that’s unacceptable,” Malloy said.

Several speakers made reference to Foley’s July press conference outside a closing paper mill in Sprague. The event and Foley’s bickering match with some of the mill’s workers and Sprague First Selectwoman Cathy Osten were the basis of an attack ad released by Malloy’s campaign earlier in the day.

Hugh McQuaid photo

Delaware Gov. Jack Markell

Delaware Gov. Jack Markell characterized Foley as a wealthy businessman, unconcerned with the lives of working people.

“Tom Foley seems to think that running a state involves hopping out of the back of a BMW to tell a bunch of workers they were to blame for their factory closing,” Markell said to applause. “Maybe he just can’t see it from the cabin of his private jet, the tens of thousands of people who are back to work since the Malloy administration took the reins.”

Malloy called the event the culmination of “a gigantic putdown” made by Republicans at the expense of Connecticut. He seemed unsure whether Foley arrived at the paper mill in the back of a BMW or a limousine.

“Someone got out of the back of a limousine or a BMW and went forward to tell people who lost their jobs that it was their fault they lost their jobs . . . this is unacceptable in our state or any other state. We can not have leaders like that,” he said.

The governor also criticized his newly-nominated opponent for refusing to offer specific policies on issues like the gun-control legislation passed following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Malloy said the shooting was “too raw” for him to dismiss as something that happened in the past.

“He calls [the gun law] an inconvenience. I know what an inconvenience is, sir, and making children safer is not an inconvenience,” he said.

Malloy said he plans to lay out specific plans for his second term on issues like sustainable infrastructure funding and assisting senior citizens.

“This is not something to be pulled from behind a curtain or out of a hat. Futures are to be discussed and embraced and cared for and nurtured and invested in,” he said.

Nancy DiNardo, chairwoman of the Democratic Party, framed the election as a referendum on many of the policies Malloy has passed during his first term, including strict gun control regulations, paid sick days, and increases in the state’s minimum wage.

“Over the last three-and-a-half years, we have made progress. We are jump-starting national conversations about important issues. We have become trend-setters for the rest of the country. That’s why Nov. 4 is so important. We can’t turn back after coming so far,” she said.

Tags: , , , , ,

Share this story with others.

Share | |

(7) Comments

posted by: dano860 | August 14, 2014  8:33am

The firearm law is more than an ‘inconvenience’, it is a farce, pandering to the unknowing and pseudo empathetic. If it did anything to provide safety to anyone I would fully support it but as I said when it was being devised. They went too fast to stick in a pretend bandaid that has and will do nothing except to make law abiding citizens criminals and the real criminals hero’s.
We can expect a lot of out of State money to flow for the anti firearms folks but let’s take a look at the Sheriff race that Milwaukee, WI. Just held. Bloomberg poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into the anti firearm candidate only to have them lose big. David Clark is a 35 year law enforcement officer and he has a ton of that uncommon item,“COMMON SENSE”.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/clarke-narrowly-leads-moews-in-sheriffs-race-b99327856z1-271020501.html?ipad=y

posted by: Stingy Blue | August 14, 2014  11:54am

dano, I am curious why you think that the firearm law is a farce.  I read the bill and the OLR analysis and see a few useful items: the deadly weapon offender registry, the mental health provisions that disqualify a person for a gun permit or handgun eligibility certificate (though I would have preferred that they include involuntary commitment as well), and the state bonding for school security upgrades.

posted by: Joebigjoe | August 14, 2014  1:09pm

StingyBlue if I may piggyback on your question to Dano. I’m going to use your own words and agree wholeheartedly with them. You said “you read it…and see a few useful items.” Again I agree.

This is why I couldnt support McKinney. Why couldnt he say the exact same things you just pointed out and then pointed out the farce parts of the bill based on what we have seen since the bill was passed. If he ran on “keep the good, repeal the ridiculous which came at a time of great emotion and political pressure from Obama” I think he would have won pretty easily.

He and other politicians around the country have underestimated the impact on targeting the law abiding and how personally offended and angered we are by that. New information just out shows that the Obama administration prosecution of gun criminals is lower than that during Bush’s time. I hope you realize how much that will rile up law abiding people as we face draconian and useless gun laws and court battles with uninformed liberal judges in a number of states and Washington DC. We arent stupid. We know what the end game is and we arent playing, but if forced to we will win.

posted by: dano860 | August 14, 2014  9:48pm

Stingy, do you really think that a person intent on causing another Newtown or workplace catastrophe will abide by any law?
Do the urban murders that occur daily, in our little cities, happen at the hands of properly licensed firearm owners?  No. These are predominantly done with firearms purchased in other States or stolen from sloppy firearm owners. These crimes are committed by ignorant thugs, bangers, drug dealers. Not what I would call upstanding citizens. Heck, these guys don’t even know how to hold a firearm, sideways, upside down…not the sign of a properly trained person.
Are these urban crimes committed with AR’s (adaptable rifles) ? No. Are these crimes committed with high capacity firearms? No.
If you want manufactured high capacity magazines just drive to Maine or Vermont. If you want to make your own do what we did in Vietnam.
If you are intent on using a firearm carry more than one, heck you know your not going to walk out of that situation alive anyway.
The State borrowing money to give schools is a waste too. $50M for a new school in Newtown is a waste. They beefed up security in schools to prevent students from wandering off or a person with a perverted bent from snatching a kid. That didn’t stop Adam nor will anything short of making a school a bomb shelter. A person intent on creating mayhem will only change their method of doing it.
You need only look at the preferred method of the radical Muslims, bombs! Suicide bombers at that. These are the same people that have access to many types of firearms but they are too limited. Bombs are better.
The farce of a midnight, behind closed doors, no citizen input, knee jerk reaction law has only served to create a confiscation list for the State. It also created felons out of law abiding taxpayers. It has hurt our economy, business structure and employees that used to be in our State. They needed to put a lot more time and thought into creating an enforceable, effective law that addressed the real problems. I said it then and it still is my belief, they need to rethink this law because it will not prevent another Newtown.
The prize commissions that reviewed the horrible event couldn’t even come up with answers as to why Lanza did what he did. They couldn’t recommend a solution either.
It’s a FARCE!

posted by: GuilfordResident | August 15, 2014  8:19am

I’m a law-abiding firearms owner. SB1160 is an infringement upon our civil liberties. This is why I voted for Foley and not McKinney and will be why I will vote for whoever didn’t support SB1160. Prior to SB1160, CGS provided for protections and limitations that would have prevented Sandy Hook if people who knew the Lanza’s took action.

posted by: Joebigjoe | August 15, 2014  1:37pm

Guilford makes a good point.

There is not one thing in this billl that had it been in place would have prevented Sandy Hook. If there was, even though it takes away state and federal Constitutional rights you wouldnt have that outcry because people would have said that it could have prevented Sandy Hook. That’s one thing we all wish for.

posted by: whatsprogressiveaboutprogressives? | August 16, 2014  9:36am

“We have become trend-setters for the rest of the country.” Well Dan-O, if you want to continue on a path like that of Detroit then you you are correct.
In terms of the gun bill, if the emergency decree to not allow public testimony against the gun bill was played post Newtown because of the severity of the crime and the perceived continued public threat,then why isn’t it being played now,post 1-1-14 when probably several thousand new felons were created because of did not register their hardware and become law abiding? Drawing a conclusion from your warped logic Danny, the perceived threat is actually worse now than it was 1-1-14. Come on Dan-O, it wouldn’t be because your up for re-election and you want the iron to cool only to put it back in the fire,possibly post election now would you?