How much fighting can we take?

When House Speaker Christopher Donovan visited several 5th District towns last week to announce he was running for Congress, you could say he came out fighting.

“Chris Murphy fought for the people of this district. And now that he is running for Senate, we need someone to  represent us who will fight for us like Chris did. Not fight for the banks, not fight for the insurance companies, not fight for the Wall Street fat cats, but someone to fight for Main Street. And someone who has fought for you and with you for years — and won.”

That’s five fights and two foughts in a 70-word statement, if you’re counting.

Donovan’s empty rhetoric in pursuit of the empty seat is important to me because I live in his 5th District and he enters the race as the presumed front-runner. The other three Democrats, Elizabeth Esty, Dan Roberti and Mike Williams, and four Republicans, Justin Bernier, Mike Clark, Mark Greenberg and Lisa Wilson-Foley, aren’t nearly as well known as the former speaker of the Connecticut House of Representatives.

True, all of them will have an opportunity to become better known, and a few may even raise enough money to buy TV ads that will probably tell us no more than Donovan’s announcement. If this be cynicism, wait until you see the commercials.

In letting us know he will fight for us and against them, Donovan and too many other candidates have been listening to political consultants who claim that telling the voters you’ll fight for them is extremely brilliant and can’t be said often enough.

This has been going on at least since Al Gore’s 2000 race for the presidency. Remember him looking terribly out of character, yelling, “I’m fighting for you!”?

A more recent fighting candidate was Dick Blumenthal, who turned to fighting for us after he failed to convince us he had been fighting the Vietcong. It worked so well against the issue-free campaign of Linda McMahon that Blumenthal continued to repeat the fighting words as a senator. He used the line so often in his maiden speech to the Senate, The Connecticut Mirror kept count and reported 10 references to fighting for the state and its citizens in a 12-minute speech.

 In fairness to Donovan — or maybe not — I must point out that he expanded upon his fighting rhetoric in appearances around the district. As he continued his tour, he listed many of the bills passed during his years in the Legislature, mostly of the liberal persuasion. The Torrington Register also caught him “fighting for families.”

“I have a background that is fighting for families,” he somewhat explained. “My whole career has been fighting for families. I’m going to take families and make sure government responds to them, make sure government listens to them and not only just listens, but makes things happen and wins for families.” And you thought he used only empty words and phrases.

Who could resist a candidate who makes things happen for families? So refreshing with all those anti-family candidates in the race. Send Donovan to Washington and happy days will be here again, especially for families.

I guess a politician pledging to fight for his people goes back to ancient times. The modern inspiration was Winston Churchill’s address to Parliament on June 4, 1940, with German armies overwhelming France and threatening to cross the Channel. It should be noted the speech was delivered just days after one in which he could offer the nation nothing more than blood, sweat, toil and tears. But this time, he offered something more:

“We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender.”

Notice Churchill did not pledge he would do the fighting for his people; the sacrifice would be shared. He said we shall fight, not I.

Simsbury resident Dick Ahles is a retired journalist. Email him at dahles@hotmail.com.

Latest News

Love is in the atmosphere

Author Anne Lamott

Sam Lamott

On Tuesday, April 9, The Bardavon 1869 Opera House in Poughkeepsie was the setting for a talk between Elizabeth Lesser and Anne Lamott, with the focus on Lamott’s newest book, “Somehow: Thoughts on Love.”

A best-selling novelist, Lamott shared her thoughts about the book, about life’s learning experiences, as well as laughs with the audience. Lesser, an author and co-founder of the Omega Institute in Rhinebeck, interviewed Lamott in a conversation-like setting that allowed watchers to feel as if they were chatting with her over a coffee table.

Keep ReadingShow less
Reading between the lines in historic samplers

Alexandra Peter's collection of historic samplers includes items from the family of "The House of the Seven Gables" author Nathaniel Hawthorne.

Cynthia Hochswender

The home in Sharon that Alexandra Peters and her husband, Fred, have owned for the past 20 years feels like a mini museum. As you walk through the downstairs rooms, you’ll see dozens of examples from her needlework sampler collection. Some are simple and crude, others are sophisticated and complex. Some are framed, some lie loose on the dining table.

Many of them have museum cards, explaining where those samplers came from and why they are important.

Keep ReadingShow less