DIANE FARRELL - LEADING IN A NEW DIRECTION

The following letter was written To The editor of the "Wilton (CT) Villager" and published on June 30, 2006. I wrote the letter in response to another reader's letter. That letter writer's viewd Congressman Christopher Shays as a "statesman." That really bothered me as I view Shay's as an opportunistic politician who helps form the exremist Republican majority. He may be a moderate compared to the extremists who dominate his party and its leadership, but it is more important to wrest control of the Republican majority than it is to have a voice whispering in the back of the Rebublican caucus.

June 30, 2006

IT’S TIME FOR A NEW DIRECTION

<> Last week a letter writer (Nation political dialogue little more than soundbite[sic]” 6/23/06) began his letter with a definition of a “statesman” and compared it to a politician and as I read it I anticipated some intelligent dialogue calculated to energize the forgotten bipartisan spirit of this country. Instead, I discovered more inaccurate political propaganda concerning the upcoming Congressional election between Christopher Shays and Christine Farrell. The writer failed to disclose his party affiliation so the reader was unable to discern his objectivity but I strongly suspect that the writer wasn’t the most objective observer. I am a Democrat. I may not be objective either. But I thin I am more realistic than your previous writier. <>

In my lifetime I have been exposed to statesman from this country and from others. Chris Shays is not a statesman. Further it is difficult to know how Mr. Shays thinks. He has shown some streaky moderation as compared to the extreme right wing leaders and the vast majority of the Republican Party in Congress. But Barry Goldwater would have looked moderate compared to the Republicans who actually control Congress. And more often than not, Mr. Shays has stood by President Bush and in sync with the Republican majority. <>

The writer criticizes Diane Farrell for her views and her experience. The writer doesn’t share with us whether he has heard Ms. Farrell actually speak about the issues. I had the pleasure of hearing her last week and her comments about Mr. Shays included phrases like: “I like Chris, he’s a good guy.” “I won’t attack him personally.” “We just differ on the priorities for and the direction of this country.” In the meantime, Ms. Farrell was intelligent, articulate and well prepared for the most complicated issues of our time. Moreover, it seemed that she was well in tune with the mood of this congressional district. <>

One of the greatest aspects of politics in New England for as long as I can remember is that it lacked the bitter partisanship that exists throughout much of our country. That has permitted us to experience crossover voting to elect the candidate that will best serve the region’s interests. I grew up in Massachusetts where the governor was frequently Republican while the legislature was always controlled by Democrats. Massachusetts sent a Republican senator to Washington. We’ve seen a similar history in Connecticut, <>

But Washington is just a scary place where the extremists control all three branches of government now without the proper checks and balances that our forefather anticipated and the majority party is poised to perpetuate the wasteful spending, the brutality and indifference of both national and international policy, the irreparable harm done to our environment every day and a philosophy that permits the intrusion into our personal lives. While New England Republicans have generally been fiscally conservative and socially progressive, our national policy under the Bush administration has been fiscally irresponsible, environmentally devastating, internationally the U.S. has become a world pariah, and many of our liberties have been compromised. <>

The writer supports Chris Shays but Mr. Shays’ voice is a whisper in the Republican party. He has abandoned his base of progressive New England Republicans. He has played along with and supported the likes of Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay, Dennis Hastert and John Boehneur and most importantly, he adds a vote to keep the extreme philosophy in control of a Congress that has accomplished nothing. Isn’t it scary that the first vote that Mr. Shays will caste if re-elected will be to re-elect this same leadership that will keep the country moving in the same direction. <>

In 1994 when Mr. Shays endorsed Newt Gingrich and the “Contract with America.” Chris and his cronies endorsed term limits and he has broken that promise. He endorsed fiscal responsibility and he has broken that promise. He endorsed a fix to the social security system and not only did they break that promise but they hoodwinked the American public and the seniors in particular with the prescription drug program that has delivered more profits to the pharmaceutical industry than it has helped senior citizens. <>

Mr. Shays can only be considered a failed statesman or politician in his role a Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Homeland Security. He has been silent on the quagmire of the War in Iraq. A war that was unnecessary because there was not only no evidence of WMD but it turns out that the reasons for war given by the Republican administration were lies and Saddam Hussein and Iraq were under control of the “no fly zone.” Contrary to the stated goal, there will never be an American–like system of democracy in Iraq because of the ethnic and religious divisions that have always existed there. Instead of chasing Saddam, the leadership of this country, including Chris Shays failed to chase Osama bin Laden into Pakistan that is rapidly turning into another failed diplomatic objective. And while Chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee, Chris Shays failed to take steps to prepare this country for Katrina and other tropical storms, has failed to properly reorganize FEMA and stood by while the New York metropolitan area was stripped of much needed Homeland Security federal funding. <>

For those policy areas were Chris Shays does deserve credit for his support, like a woman’s right to choose, the environment and campaign finance reform, Diane Farrell will be as good if not stronger advocate, in part, because she won’t need to temper her enthusiastic support because of the extremists in her party. But perhaps most importantly, Diane Farrell will not be casting her initial votes for the leadership of a Congressional leadership tainted by bribery scandals and that has accomplished little if anything but further polarizing this country. It is time for a change of direction. It is time for Chris Shays to move on to something else and to give Diane Farrell an opportunity with her new ideas and fresh approach.