On Monday night there was a debate between Connecticut Senatorial candidates Richard Blumenthal and Linda McMahon. During the debate Linda McMahon asked Mr. Blumenthal, “How do you create a job?” Blumenthal’s answer was, well, see for yourself.
Watching this, I couldn’t help but be reminded of another example of genius on display.
On the bright side for Blumenthal, at least his lying about his military record will no longer be the worst part of his campaign.
The frightening thing is that Mr. Blumenthal is merely a reflection of his party. I doubt more than 2 out of 10 congressional Democrats, and 0 out of 1 Oval Office Democrats, would have been any more successful in answering the question than Mr. Blumenthal was.
Even among Democrat governors, who should at least know SOMETHING about job creation, I see little evidence that more than a handful could have coherently answered the question posed by Mrs. McMahon.
An entire political party made up of people who, on the one hand, hate employers, but, on the other hand, claim to love jobs, and without a clue about how said jobs are created.
“McMahon slams Blumenthal into the turnbuckle–and he’s looking dazed!”
Mr. Anderson’s proportions are precise.
Upstate New York has a congressional delegation of eleven. Ten are Democrats. Of the ten, precisely one was a businessman; one other has some academic background in economics; a third was a professional musician who had some exposure to the business world. (The solitary Republican is a businessman, wouldn’t you know).
As someone who has to answer questions on the spot in public for a living, I don’t really think that fumbles like this signify much. Frankly I’m amazed that it doesn’t happen more often.
Miss South Carolina has a great future ahead of her in politics. Like Blumenthal she didn’t let raw ignorance stop her from blathering on.
Oh, no!
Lessee: tax, no that doesn’t sound right; regulate, no; pay for abortion, no; ban oil drilling, no; call a union boss . . .
Oh, yeah! When I came marching home from Vietnam . . .
Linda McMahon is exactly right.
the thing about truth… you don’t have to memorize it, its always there.
Blackadder, about 70% of the man’s work history has been in public employment. Another 17% has been in law practice, specifically as a trial lawyer. (That particular firm now does commercial and real estate law as well). He spent one year as a newspaper reporter. Summer employment and part-time employment between 1961 and 1973 would make up the balance. Newspaper reporters (per Stanley Rothman) often consider themselves the antagonists of the business community and that sort of self-understanding is evident from his career as Attorney-General of Connecticut. That he could not answer the question is no accident. He thinks of the business community as shady characters out of whom you extract fines.
If character counts in Connecticut, and I by no means conclude in the affirmative (having spent a number of years in/around the state some two decades ago), then the man is toast. Whether or not he can succinctly (or at all) answer the job creation question, his character is warped by persistent fabrication. In no way could I begin to form the words in my mouth “We’ve come a long way since the days I served in Afganistan…” Because I have never been anywhere near the place, this simply couldn’t accidentally escape my lips.
This man is not a gaffe machine, he is a depraved liar.
The sad thing is, McMahon did no better. She had her stump speech talking point memorized very well, but a third-grade understanding of economics is OK only if you’re still in the third grade and not running for the US Senate. Both sides pandering to and betting on our ignorance: no wonder this looks like a race to the bottom. Is this the best Connecticut has to offer?
[…] Stupid Dem Alert! Â On the bright side for Blumenthal, at least his lying about his military record … His opponent, however, did no better. Â A grade-school understanding f economics is fins so long as you’re still in grad school (and not running for the US Senate). […]