Monday, October 30, 2006

Murphy Leads Johnson

Today the Hartford Courant released its first poll of the fifth district race, and the news is great for Chris Murphy. The results show Murphy leading 46%-42% with 9% of voters still undecided.

More poll details from the Courant:
“These results paint a picture of a very vulnerable incumbent,” said Monika McDermott, the UConn poll’s research director. “Likely voters aren’t happy with Johnson’s performance, and they say they’re ready for a change.”

The UConn poll also points to the importance of another national and state trend – the rise of unaffiliated voters. In the poll, Johnson is predictably far ahead of Murphy with Republican voters, by 83 percent to 16 percent.

Among Democrats in the sample, Murphy is ahead by 77 percent to 16 percent. But the two “major” parties now represent just 55 percent of the registered voters in the 5th Congressional District, with 45 percent of voters registering as either unaffiliated or minor party members.

“These independent voters prefer Murphy over Johnson 45 percent to 36 percent,” McDermott said. “That’s a preference among unaffiliated voters that could well decide the outcome in this race.”

The UConn poll found that 9 percent of voters are still undecided and that the “soft” support for each candidate is about equal. (Among Johnson voters, 17 percent said they may still change their mind by Election Day; 15 percent of Murphy supporters say the same.) But McDermott said that these are fairly typical numbers coming into the last week of an election, and it’s very hard to predict how the undecided voters will eventually break out.

Geographically, the UConn poll also shows Johnson in trouble in one crucial area of the district – the affluent, educated Farmington Valley suburbs of Avon, Canton, Simsbury and Farmington. In her past two elections, Johnson has racked up tallies of 60 percent or more in these towns. But the UConn poll apparently shows that Johnson’s support there has been cut roughly in half, with Murphy leading among likely Farmington Valley voters by 52 percent to 36 percent.

The 5th District race got off to a negative start in April, when the liberal advocacy group,, attacked Johnson with ads accusing her of getting caught “red-handed” supporting the controversial Medicare Plan D for prescription drug reimbursement and for failing to question Iraq war contractors. Johnson quickly replied with negative ads against Murphy.

This atmosphere of negativity, however, seems to have hurt Johnson more than Murphy. When the sample was asked whose ads have been more negative, 34 percent said Johnson’s, and 29 percent said Murphy’s ads were more negative.

Murphy, reached Sunday afternoon while campaigning in Torrington, said the UConn poll results fell roughly in line with internal polls conducted by his campaign since the summer, which have showed that he has gradually closed the gap and pulled even with Johnson.

This race is ours! It's time to get out there and win over the 9% of undecided voters. Get off the computer and volunteer for the Murphy campaign! Just one more week of work to ensure the 24 years of Nancy Johnson ends!

Friday, October 27, 2006

Murphy Makes the Case, Johnson a Disgrace

As the congressional race in the fifth district begins to hit the home stretch, Chris Murphy has released a new ad that makes his final case to the voters. Murphy speaks directly into the camera about the need for change in Washington. The line of the ad comes when Murphy says of Johnson: "She's not a bad person, but she's become part of the problem."

While yours truly may take exception to the first half of Murphy's statement, its power is not lost on me.

While Murphy's ad seeks to have a serious conversation with the voters, Nancy Johnson's latest ad is a complete joke and another sign of desperation. Johnson sinks so low as to hire an actor to impersonate Murphy and then goes on to make outrageous lies about Murphy's record. According to Nancy, Murphy is not only a tax raising politician, but he also loves sex offenders and drug dealers. Oh yeah and don't forget he loves Al-Qaeda too.

Memo to Nancy...If you want to completely slander your opponent you should at least make attacks that are slightly believable. Nobody is buying this Nancy. Your increasing desperation is becoming quite laughable.

Let's leave it to Bob Englehart of the Hartford Courant to handle this:

Casting call, Nancy Johnson campaign. People are talking about re-election campaigns hitting a new low with Johnson's latest TV ad. Frankly, I think it's a new high ... in hubris and deceit.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not against negative ads.

It's a tradition of American elections and it goes back to the beginning of our democracy.

I think it's fair political game to attack an opponent's record, even to distort it for your own purposes, as long as there is some truth to it. I think it's fair to make your opponent look like the devil himself and to use his own true words and record against him. The operative word is "true."

And I like a good laugh. Johnson's ad would be funny if she didn't have the power to sign her name to a piece of paper and make your life miserable, expensive and extremely complicated, as she did for our senior citizens with that Medicare drug bill that was mostly written by the pharmaceutical companies.

Talk about being a friend of drug dealers. Nancy Johnson is their best pal.

But to hire an ACTOR to portray your opponent hanging with pushers? Wow, even Karl Rove never thought of this one. The possibilities are endless and disturbing.

I can only hope that the ad backfires and the good, rational people of the 5th District will respond by voting this fabricator out of office.

She should be ashamed of herself, but she's been in Washington for so long, I think she's forgotten how.

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Johnson Calls War in Iraq a Distraction

Over 2,700 American soldiers dead...More than 20,000 wounded...More than 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed...Over $500 billion spent...

What does all of this add up to for Nancy Johnson?

Apparently nothing more than a distraction.

You really can't make this stuff up folks. In a story appearing in The Register Citizen, Nancy Johnson criticizes Chris Murphy for talking about the war in Iraq, saying that it is merely a distraction and that she has no control over it. I know it's hard to believe that even Nancy would say something that stupid so read it for yourself:
Johnson accused Murphy of distracting voters by bringing forward national issues such as the war in Iraq.

"I believe some very serious mistakes have been made," she said of the conflict overseas.

Johnson added that she wished to concentrate on issues more local to Connecticut that fall within the realm of her position's control.

"Nancy Johnson calling this war a distraction is just as offensive as the President calling it is a comma," Murphy said Friday. He added that Johnson had voted for the war and that congress could control the war.
You've got to be kidding me! Iraq is nothing more than a distraction? Then I guess Johnson would agree with Bush's belief that Iraq is "just a comma." These are the supposed leaders of our country? I'll let Jack Cafferty handle the outrageousness of these statements:

Since Nancy Johnson views Iraq as nothing more than a distraction, I guess it should come as no surprise that she has opposed helping Iraq veterans. Johnson has voted against increases in pay and healthcare for our troops. Fortunately, we have the DCCC to remind us of her record:

Saturday, October 21, 2006

New York Times "Strongly Endorses" Murphy

Today, the New York Times endorsed Chris Murphy for Congress. The endorsement marks the first time in the last two decades that the Times has not endorsed Nancy Johnson. Additionally, this stands as the earliest date in the last two decades that the Times has declared its endorsement of a candidate. Read the full endorsement for yourself below:
Nancy Johnson is running for her 13th term in Congress this year against Chris Murphy, a Democratic state senator. Ms. Johnson was once a reliable Republican moderate, waging a lonely battle to control Congressional spending in the late 1980's and early 1990's. Her attention to legislative details remains impressive, and she can claim some worthy achievements on issues like the environment.

Yet as she has risen in seniority and power within the Republican House Caucus, Ms. Johnson has receded as a critic of her party's far right leadership. Now Ms. Johnson is in the odd position of defending her party's assault on basic civil liberties and its freespending ways. A Republican Congress and the Bush White House have produced budgets that have paid for an unpopular war along with big tax breaks for the wealthy, resulting in the biggest deficits in history.

In the race, Ms. Johnson has used fearmongering commercials that try to paint Mr. Murphy as soft on terrorism and, most curiously of all, a big spender. It is unconvincing. Ms. Johnson is the senior member of an important committee. She has served longer in the House than any other Connecticut representative. Yet she has not been able to change significantly the House GOP leaders' reckless fiscal policy or its radical agenda.

Mr. Murphy, a lawyer, is impressive. He has spent eight years in the Connecticut House and Senate. He pushed for the state to adopt a system of campaign finance reform when he first entered the House, long before this was considered an important issue. He helped pass legislation that made it easier for uninsured to obtain health insurance. He wants to work on the same issue in Congress.

Mr. Murphy believes the war in Iraq has forced America into a false choice between war and civil liberties and has made us more vulnerable to terrorism. He advocates a timetable for withdrawal. Ms. Johnson has supported the war and has voted to continue the current open-ended commitment.

We've supported Ms. Johnson in the past, but are disenchanted with her support of her leadership's radical agenda. Mr. Murphy would be a strong candidate in any race, and even against a seasoned incumbent, is impressive. He would make a superb addition to Congress. We strongly endorse his candidacy.

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

The Drug Companies' Best Friend

Watch this new Chris Murphy ad and see just how much money Nancy Johnson has taken from the drug industry.

With money like that, it's no wonder that Nancy Johnson forbid the government from negotiating lower prescription drug prices for seniors in the Medicare Part D legislation that she wrote. Nancy knows who's paying the bills. She sold her vote to the drug companies and turned her back on our nation's seniors in the process.

Johnson has also insulted the intelligence of her constituents through her phony attempt to pass Medicare legislation that would remove penalties for seniors who missed the program's enrollment deadline. The Danbury News Times has the story:
As the clock ticks toward Election Day, Democrat Chris Murphy criticized U.S. Rep. Nancy Johnson, R-5th Dist., for letting the clock run out on Medicare legislation she sponsored.

Murphy, a state senator from Cheshire challenging Johnson, held a press conference at Danbury Democratic Headquarters on Main Street. He questioned Johnson's intentions in not bringing the bill up for a vote before Congress adjourned for the campaign season.

The bill would have eliminated penalties against seniors who missed an enrollment deadline for the new Medicare prescription drug plan. Though Johnson is the chairwoman of a health subcommittee, she never pushed for a vote, Murphy said.

"This was either an intentional bait and switch or shows an inability to lead her committee," said Murphy.

Under the penalty, seniors who missed the May 15 deadline face a minimum 6 percent increase in their premiums, Murphy said.

The House Ways and Means committee and the Health Subcommittee met a total of 12 times, Murphy said, and neither took action on the bill.

Murphy says he wants to remove influence from Washington

"Did Nancy Johnson really think no one would notice that after the press-conference lights were turned off, she buried her own bill?" Murphy said. "As one of the highest ranking members of the Ways and Means Committee, she could have forced a hearing on the bill at any time."

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Esquire Endorses Murphy

Esquire magazine has released their endorsements for every state level race in the country. In the fifth district race, Esquire endorses Chris Murphy, saying:
You've probably heard of the "doughnut hole" in the new Medicare prescription-drug plan: It's the part that'll make billions of dollars for the pharmaceutical industry, at consumers' expense. And Johnson, who helped create the hole, gets loads from the industry in return.
What I found particularly interesting, though, is Esquire's stated criteria for selecting candidates:
In our selections, the slightest modicum of independence is rewarded. We have endorsed very conservative Republicans and very liberal Democrats and everything in between.
So if Nancy Johnson is as she says, "the most independent member of Congress" then why hasn't Esquire endorsed her? Maybe because they, like so many of us, see through the facade of independence and recognize Johnson's blind and unquestioned loyalty to the Bush administration and the Republican Congress. Seems like Nancy's old independent trick is fooling fewer and fewer people these days.

Monday, October 16, 2006

Update: More Debate Footage

Here's another video from ctblogger featuring some of Saturday's post-debate comments, including an interview with Chris Murphy.

Sunday, October 15, 2006

Nancy Johnson: Delusional Debater

Major thanks to ctblogger for his video coverage of Saturday's debate between Chris Murphy and my favorite congresswoman, Nancy "Donut Hole" Johnson.

Nancy really has lost it...Apparently No Child Left Behind actually is fully funded. Who would have known?

People are standing in line to thank Nancy for the prescription drug disaster that she created. Right...

Also, the war in Iraq is essential to fighting Al Qaeda...Despite the fact that Saddam Hussein had no connection to Al Qaeda.

Score this one as a knockout for Murphy.

Pre-debate rallying. Lots of energy in that auditorium.

Clips from the debate:

Saturday, October 14, 2006

Courant Exposes Johnson's Lies

The Hartford Courant ran a great article today regarding the new Chris Murphy ad and the hissy fit Nancy Johnson is having over it. The article points out the numerous lies that Nancy Johnson has made in her attempt to run from her record of ignoring constituents in need. Read it for yourself (I've bolded the good parts). Also, watch the story done by WTNH.

Johnson Attack on Ad Misfires: Murphy Commercial Is Rooted In Fact

At an emotional news conference in the state Capitol this week, U.S. Rep. Nancy Johnson took what many veteran campaign strategists would consider a dangerous political step.

Johnson, a 24-year Republican incumbent, is in the middle of a bruising re-election battle against Democratic state Sen. Chris Murphy, a race that is on its way to becoming one of the most expensive - and nasty - in state history. Quite beyond their differences over issues such as Iraq and health care, the core drama in the 5th Congressional District contest has been a lively exchange of negative political ads by both sides, an intensity that reflects the district's importance in determining whether the Democrats seize control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

On Wednesday afternoon, Johnson attacked her opponent for an ad that had attracted little notice before Johnson angrily condemned it. This was a television spot, aired by the Murphy campaign, narrated by a mother with a son who was born in 2001 with a cleft palate and lip. The mother, a Burlington woman and occasionally active Democrat named Erin McCall-Goldie, says in the ad that Murphy had helped her get state legislation passed to secure insurance reimbursement for her child's expensive surgery.

The ad strongly implies that Murphy helped her after Johnson refused to do so. What Johnson considered a fundamental misimpression drove her to call the press conference and condemn the ad.

A closer look at the timeline involved shows that McCall-Goldie tried to get Johnson to sponsor a similar bill in Congress, but this was years after she had been helped by Murphy's legislation. It was the Burlington woman's more recent attempt to help families nationwide with the same problem that Johnson rejected.

But Johnson's criticism of the ad was drowned out by a host of additional charges - many of them untrue - that she lobbed at her press conference.

The McCall-Goldie ad first aired on Sunday, and three days later Johnson held her news conference at the Legislative Office Building to castigate Murphy. Her voice quivering, Johnson labeled the ad "maliciously dishonest, " and introduced a string of Republican state legislators and health care workers - including two doctors in white lab coats - who shared her view that Murphy had distorted the truth in the ad.

Johnson said that the Murphy ad "was a grave disservice to the voters. The message of the ad is that I didn't help and that he did. At its core, [the ad] is dishonest. .... It reflects a new low in Connecticut politics."

The medical saga in the McCall-Goldie family began in December 2001, when Erin's first child, Connor, was born with a cleft lip and palate. Facing years of surgery and medical bills to surgically repair his condition, McCall-Goldie founded a Connecticut support group, Families Advancing Craniofacial Excellence, and began to lobby the legislature to secure insurance reimbursement for reconstructive and orthodontic surgery. In 2002, her state senator at the time, Kevin Sullivan, introduced her to Murphy, who was chairman of the General Assembly's public health committee.

Within six months, Murphy had held hearings and written and introduced a bill addressing the craniofacial group's needs. "An Act Requiring Health Insurance Coverage for Craniofacial Disorders" was passed and signed by the governor in May 2003.

"Murphy was wonderful," McCall-Goldie said during an interview this week. "He didn't simply present the bill on the Senate floor, but he came out and met all the craniofacial families and got very involved."

Last October, McCall-Goldie learned that similar legislation had just been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives. Within a week she e-mailed Johnson, asking her to co-sponsor the bill, hoping that Johnson's leadership of the powerful subcommittee on health would make a difference. But McCall-Goldie says that she became increasingly frustrated as months went by and she received no response.

"Nancy Johnson was my congresswoman," McCall-Goldie says. "I had a very severe and expensive medical condition with my son. So I asked for Johnson's help, and she never replied. Never. After a while I realized I should start keeping a record, so I saved all the dates that I called her and got no reply."

Over the summer, McCall-Goldie was able to speak with Johnson, but only because she saw her at the Unionville Fire Parade and the Avon Day festival.

"I had to hunt Nancy Johnson down in a public place, and then do you know what she told me?" McCall-Goldie says. "My congresswoman told me that she couldn't help me because she didn't believe in sponsoring bills that would help just a few people, and that she wasn't in the business of telling insurance companies what to do."

In May, Murphy asked McCall-Goldie to deliver his seconding speech when he was nominated to run against Johnson. In late August, when the Murphy campaign was looking for a way to distinguish his health care record against Johnson's, they decided to film McCall-Goldie.

In the finished ad, McCall-Goldie sits facing the camera as before- and after-surgery pictures of her son are shown. The entire spot is narrated in her voice:

"My son Connor was born with a cleft lip and palate. I worried about his health and whether our insurance would cover expensive corrective surgery for Connor and others like him. I contacted Nancy Johnson's office repeatedly. She never called back. [On screen: "No Response."] But I went to state Senator Chris Murphy and within six months Chris passed a law mandating insurance coverage for reconstructive facial surgery. For us, Chris made the difference."

The Johnson campaign has vigorously argued that, because Murphy is not formally listed as a sponsor of the bill, he is claiming credit for legislation which he did not introduce. Johnson also insisted at her press conference that she had "personally spoken to the woman [McCall-Goldie] twice, months before Murphy began running the ad." The strong impression created by Johnson was that she had returned McCall-Goldie's phone calls.

None of these claims by Johnson has held up to scrutiny.

The state Senate transcript for April 9, 2003, when the craniofacial bill was passed, makes it clear that Murphy not only introduced the bill, but was given credit by Kevin Sullivan for steering it through committee. The Johnson campaign has also conceded that Johnson offered McCall-Goldie no help on the federal bill.

"Yes, it's true, Nancy Johnson did decline to sponsor the legislation," says press aide Brian Schubert. "Health insurance mandates are the purview of state legislatures, not the federal government."

Schubert also says that there is no evidence that Johnson's office answered McCall-Goldie's e-mail, and confirms that Johnson never returned McCall-Goldie's calls.

By this weekend, as the first debate between Murphy and Johnson approached, it seemed clear that the damage to Johnson's credibility might go well beyond this single ad. Two of Johnson's ads - one accusing Murphy of voting 27 times to raise taxes, and another attacking his position on the surveillance of known terrorists - have been criticized for distorting Murphy's positions.

Thursday, October 12, 2006

Update: The Truth Hurts

From the Hartford Courant:

After months of relentlessly broadcasting negative ads, U.S. Rep. Nancy L. Johnson, R-5th District, has had it with negativity - her opponent's, that is.

At a Capitol news conference Wednesday, an irate Johnson, who is running for a 13th term, demanded that Democratic state Sen. Chris Murphy pull a recent TV ad that features a mother whose son was born with a cleft palate and lip. The mother, Erin McCall-Goldie of Burlington, had sought both Johnson's and Murphy's help in passing legislation that would require insurance coverage for reconstructive surgery.

The Murphy ad states that McCall-Goldie contacted Johnson's office repeatedly and received no response. But when McCall-Goldie contacted Chris Murphy, who was chairman of the General Assembly's public health committee, Murphy within six months had won passage of a bill in 2003 requiring insurance coverage for surgery to correct her son's condition.

Among other complaints, Johnson claims that the Murphy ad says that she never called McCall-Goldie back. But Johnson insists that she called McCall-Goldie twice "months before Murphy began running the ad."

"That simply isn't true," McCall-Goldie said Wednesday evening. "The only time I spoke with Johnson was when I hunted her down at the Unionville Fireman's Parade and at Avon Day in Avon. It's ironic that Nancy Johnson now says that Chris Murphy is lying, because she is lying. I'm a constituent who needed her help and she did nothing."

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Do Nothing Nancy Ignores Family In Need

Have you seen this powerful new ad?

Is there any more damning evidence of a do nothing congresswoman than that? A desperate mother calls Nancy Johnson to ask for help in obtaining the necessary procedure for her son, and she doesn't even return a phone call. She completely ignored the needs of a constituent. Johnson was probably too busy meeting with her lobbyist friends though.

Chris Murphy, on the other hand, listened to the pleas of this family and passed legislation that mandated the necessary surgical procedure be covered by insurance. While Nancy Johnson was too busy to even return a phone call, Chris Murphy not only listened but fought to change the law. The difference between Murphy and Johnson could not be any clearer. We can keep Nancy Johnson in Washington and hope that she will find the time of day to return a phone call, or we can elect Chris Murphy, who will bring new energy to Washington and actually work to get things done.

This ad is extremely compelling and could be the knockout punch to Johnson. You can tell how scared she is by her reaction. Johnson immediately held a press conference attacking both the mother in the ad and Chris Murphy. A reporter covering the story said Johnson was, "visibly upset."

Sorry Nancy but when it comes to believing what you say in the middle of your reelection campaign or a mother who has nothing to gain politically from her story, I'll believe the mother.

Erin McCall-Goldie refused to back down to Johnson's attacks saying:
Nancy Johnson doesn't understand why I am an advocate for children with craniofacial conditions because she never called me back to discuss the needs of my family and the thousands of families like mine across this State. I have been working to get Mrs. Johnson involved in this issue because as my Representative in Congress, I thought she would be interested and willing to help. She was not.

It has been my personal experience that Chris Murphy fights for real people who need his help. He made a real difference for kids like Connor, and that'’s why I am supporting him. It'’s that simple.

I am also puzzled as to why Mrs. Johnson would excuse her failure to sign on to federal legislation that would help kids like Connor by saying that the bills that are currently pending do not have a large number of co-sponsors. Why is it that Mrs. Johnson believes she should not support a bill until her friends support it? I want a representative who will be a leader, not a follower, on issues that affect my family.

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

Wined and Dined

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released this new ad attacking Nancy Johnson for the billions of dollars she's given away to her special interest friends. Whether it be the oil companies, drug companies, or another special interest group, Nancy Johnson knows who to look out for in Washington. I guess she's just returning the favor for all the dinners, trips, and campaign contributions she has received from lobbyists. Nancy Johnson certainly enjoys getting wined and dined...The only problem is that we're getting stuck with the bill.

Monday, October 09, 2006

Mumblin, Bumblin, Stumblin...

CBS Evening News did a profile of the fifth district race. Watch the story here to see how Nancy Johnson stumbles through the interview.

My favorite part is when Johnson is asked if she has actually challenged the president on any of his policy in Iraq.

Her response: "Oh they don't report what individual congressmen say."

That's it Nancy...When you can't think of any times that you've opposed George Bush's policy just blame the media! I'm pretty sure that C-SPAN has 24 hour coverage of all House proceedings though, and I can't recall ever seeing you question the Bush administration's failures in Iraq. Maybe I just missed it though...

Johnson also went on to say that it wasn't clear to her that Dennis Hastert had made a mistake in his handling of the Mark Foley sex scandal.

It's not clear that Dennis Hastert made a mistake!? Are you kidding me? He knew of Foley's relationship with an underage page for many months and did nothing! It was at the very least a huge mistake, if not an intentional coverup. What exactly constitutes Nancy Johnson's definition of a mistake? She seems to live in a world of infallibility, unable to find any fault in the countless screwups of George Bush, Dennis Hastert, and the Republican Congress.

It's really kind of sad how out of touch Nancy Johnson has become from her 24 years in Washington.

Friday, October 06, 2006

Johnson's Half-Hearted Stand

As public outcry over the Mark Foley sex scandal and attempted Republican coverup continues to grow, Nancy Johnson ended her week of silence on the matter by issuing a brief and rather weak statement. Johnson is talking out of both sides of her mouth by trying to appear as though she's demanding action on the issue while not wanting to upset her Republican friends. Johnson's statement, published on her website, is as follows:
If any leader from either party tried to cover up this information at the expense of the safety of our children, then they should resign their position immediately.

It would be reprehensible if any Republican leader intentionally covered up the full facts of the case, and it would be equally reprehensible if Democrat leaders sat on this information for a year in order to release it 30 days before an election.

I want an investigation to go forward to find out answers to these questions.
So you want an investigation to go forward Nancy? Wow, you're really going out on a limb there. But that's what I would expect from such a maverick independent like yourself...

There is little doubt now that Dennis Hastert had knowledge of Foley's behavior many months ago. Members of his own party have even said so. He chose to do nothing, so that a Republican seat would not be put in jeopardy. Sounds like a coverup to me. So why isn't Nancy Johnson demanding Dennis Hastert's resignation? Rather than taking a stand, Nancy Johnson chooses to get right in line with a completely corrupt Republican Congress. I never realized how 24 years in Washington could make someone so out of touch.

Thursday, October 05, 2006

Murphy Erases Johnson's Lead

A new internal poll conducted by the Murphy campaign shows the fifth district race in a dead heat. The same poll showed Johnson with a nine point lead back in June. Clearly, voters are responding to Murphy's positive message of change and aren't buying into Nancy Johnson's fear mongering. The poll also showed Murphy's support to be stronger than Johnson's, as fewer people are likely to change their minds between now and November.
Who would you vote for if the election were held today? (June results)

Murphy: 42% (34%)

Johnson: 42% (43%)

Undecided: 12% (21%)

Will you definitely vote for Murphy/Johnson, or might you change your mind before the election?

Murphy: 78% Definite, 21% Might Change

Johnson: 68% Definite, 31% Might Change

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

Update: Murphy Demands Johnson Speak Out

Chris Murphy's campaign just issued a press release demanding that Nancy Johnson publicly call for Dennis Hastert's resignation as Speaker of the House, saying:
If Nancy Johnson had the courage to stand up to her morally bankrupt colleagues in Washington, she would have done so already in a direct, public manner. The Republican leadership she proudly proclaims herself to be a part of knew what was going on and turned a blind eye. Now the people of Connecticut know without a doubt that Nancy Johnson is more interested in staying in Washington than doing what is right.
Johnson has continued to maintain her silence on the issue.

The Sound of Silence

Listen. Do you hear that? Do you know what that sound is?

It's the sound of Nancy Johnson's "strong, independent voice" standing up for what's right. It's the sound of a true independent politician putting aside partisan politics, taking on party leadership, and speaking her conscience. It's the sound of an outraged citizen demanding the resignation of Dennis Hastert and all other officials who did nothing to stop a pedophile despite full knowledge of his actions. It's the sound of integrity.

Wait...You don't hear anything?

Me neither.

For all of Nancy Johnson's talk about her independence, she's been completely silent when it comes to questioning the Republican leadership. As more and more facts come out about the Mark Foley sex scandal, one thing has become quite apparent. The Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, along with other GOP leaders knew many months ago of Foley's inappropriate contact with congressional pages. Instead of doing everything to ensure Foley did not harm any children, however, the GOP leadership remained silent out of fear that reporting Foley could cost them a House seat. Dennis Hastert did not even remove Foley from his position as co-chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children Committee. Instead, Hastert tried to cover everything up and left children in danger.

It's time for Dennis Hastert's resignation. Even the conservative Washington Times thinks so, saying:
Mr. Hastert has forfeited the confidence of the public and his party, and he cannot preside over the necessary coming investigation, an investigation that must examine his own inept performance.
So, if a strong conservative newspaper like the Washington Times is demanding Hastert's resignation then why isn't a supposedly independent Republican congresswoman? Perhaps Hastert bought Johnson's silence with his $5,000 contribution to her campaign? Or maybe it's just that Nancy Johnson isn't the independent voice she claims to be.

For if Nancy Johnson was truly "caring and independent" as her website proudly proclaims, she would stand up for what's right and demand Hastert's immediate resignation. She would use the influence gained from 24 years in Washington to demand action. But I guess I shouldn't be surprised by Johnson's lack of action when it comes to ethical issues. After all, she stonewalled the House Ethics Committee's investigation of Newt Gingrich in 1996.

I guess I'm just naive. I keep waiting for Nancy Johnson to speak up and do the right thing.

But all I hear is silence.

Sunday, October 01, 2006

Nancy Johnson: Master Architect

Sunday's Hartford Courant had a great editorial cartoon by Bob Englehart depicting the incompetent nature of Nancy Johnson's Medicare Part D creation. Englehart had this to say about his cartoon:
My editorial cartoons are inspired almost exclusively by published items in The Courant. Editorials, op-eds, news stories, columns, photos and letters to the editor. That's right, I said letters to the editor.

I'm not one of those people who get their news from websites or TV. I get it from sitting down at the dining room table every morning and making notes in a reporter's notebook as I read ink on newsprint.

Letters to the editor are a viable source for me to hear about issues concerning our readers. When I read a letter that mirrors my thinking, it's off to the races.

Today's cartoon was like that, based on a letter to the editor complaining about Nancy Johnson's role in creating this Frankenstein monster of a Medicare prescription drug program for our senior citizens. The Frankenstein monster would've made a good metaphor, but I've used it so often I decided to go for something different. I jumped on the word "architect.

I watched my 86-year-old mother-in-law anguish over the unnecessarily complex choices that were designed to benefit the drug companies, not elderly Americans like her.

Frankly, I believe no congressman or woman who was involved in designing that insanely complex prescription drug program should be returned to Washington, unless they're wearing a warm coat of tar and feathers.