Do Connecticut Democrats have “battered woman syndrome”?

An exchange on Jim’s show this morning made me laugh and think at the same time.  A caller remarked paying (well, bribing) companies to come to Connecticut is analogous to paying a high priced mistress: when the money dries up, she disappears in the middle of the night.

When you think about it, aren’t Democrats in CT like stereotypical battered women?  They keep voting in the same Democrats that have made CT one of, if not the, most expensive states in the country, to the point that CT is rated last on the list of desirable/affordable places to retire, with huge property taxes, outrageous fuel prices etc., etc., but every election they keep voting the incumbents in!  Think about it: the battered wife (voter), threatens to leave her husband (not vote for the CT Democrat pol), the husband makes all sorts of promises (campaign promises), including changing his errant ways (further assurances), then once she relents and comes back (votes for the pol), he goes back to his bad behavior (voting lockstep with the rest of the CT Dems)?  And the cycle repeats over and over again, the wife thinking that she can make him change (believes the promises yet again while taking the beating), or does it for the children (can’t sell the house with the huge mortgage).

Usually, at some point, the wife regains her senses and leaves, but in CT, where does she go?

You could further the analogy by having the state employee unions representing lovers to the cheating husband/pol, who get all the goodies (tax derived benefits like guaranteed pay, no layoffs), while the wife/taxpayer gets nothing but the abuse.  You could even look at the wife/taxpayer as paying alimony (taxes) to the cheating husband allowing him to continue his bad behavior!

At some point, the wife/taxpayer has to stop the cycle of abuse, and that will only happen when she gets a new husband/party, or can at least threaten the incumbents with an alternative.

I am wondering if continuing to support the ineffective and feckless Øbama is like stories of clods marrying imprisoned serial killers…!  My cup overruns!

Bottom line: two party states are like two newspaper towns: both keep the other honest.  Monopolies are never good for long.

Posted in ,


A TEA party partisan, guerrilla fighting in the trenches of liberal Massachusetts.


  1. crystal4 on February 9, 2012 at 2:37 pm

    Had the 2 party government…just recovering from Rowland/ Rell hell..forget?

    • Dimsdale on February 9, 2012 at 2:41 pm

      I remember that the legislature has a veto proof majority, being composed of nearly all Dems, and I don’t see any improvements with Malloy, or, in fact, with the first two years of total Democrat control of D.C. after ? was elected.? The voters seemed to agree in 2010.? Let’s hope they keep up the good work in 2012!

  2. sammy22 on February 9, 2012 at 3:25 pm

    See, crystal4, you can’t win. The usual whine has to do with the “veto proof” legislature. Never mind that Roland browbeat everybody to do his bidding and wound up in jail (to be resurrected and hailed again). As for Rell she muddled along. The “veto proof” BS is a cop-out.

    • Dimsdale on February 9, 2012 at 3:59 pm

      Hmm.? The only real recurring “whine” that I have heard is that it’s “Bush’s fault”.
      You’re right: clearly, the CT Democrat legislature has been doing such a fine job, that the blame for all the economic “goodness” that is CT could only be on a Republican executive branch.? There is no way that it could have affected the decisions of a Republican governor.? “Browbeating” is the only option left, although I can’t imagine it was that effective.
      And of course, the record of the economy since the D.C. Dems took control of the Congress has been so exemplary that we have what, tripled the debt and increased deficit spending beyond all records.? But pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!? LOL!
      Yeah, ya got me!? Are you, or are you going to retire in CT, by the way?? 😉

  3. RoBrDona on February 9, 2012 at 3:26 pm

    There is functionally only one party in CT, which is the most expensive place to live in mainland America. They don’t care, and will keep it that way until enough people wake up and leave.? I am gone in less than 3 years now. I can’t wait to leave the place I was born in and my family has been since 1641.?

  4. sammy22 on February 9, 2012 at 4:11 pm

    The Republicans are always ready to deny any role in the politics of CT. So be it. Since the Repubs have taken control of the House in D.C., they still have not accomplished much, but whine about the Dem controlled Senate as an excuse for their lack of accomplishments. As for my retiring in CT, it’s a moot point: I do not live there any more.

    • Dimsdale on February 9, 2012 at 4:17 pm

      Sometimes, blocking continued incompetent legislating is “doing something”.? Anything that puts the brakes on uncontrolled Dem spending is to the good.? If you want to blame the Republicans in CT, elect them!? You can always move back, sammy!
      But let us move back to the point of the post: why do CT voters keep electing the same Democrats that are ruining their state?

    • Jeff S on February 10, 2012 at 9:56 am

      How many bills did the house pass that Reid will not even table in the senate.? ?

  5. Lynn on February 9, 2012 at 4:15 pm

    LOL Dimsdale, that’s quite a soap opera. Statistics are that the wife will stay, and in CT will not find another husband/party. I think CT will go totally broke, but we will have beautiful buses to go nowhere.

    • Dimsdale on February 9, 2012 at 4:18 pm

      I am trying to make a restraining order analogy.? Have any ideas?? 😉

    • Chetan on February 9, 2012 at 7:17 pm

      The restraining orders are kind of interesting.? When one files and says how bad the other is, but as it often happens they drop the restraining order.? Seems like that bad guy learned his lesson.? But in reality the lesson learned is that the victim ie voters will always cower to the abuse because it means that the abuser loves them.

  6. sammy22 on February 9, 2012 at 4:48 pm

    Blocking spending is good, I agree. However, that was not exactly what the Republicans ran on in 2010. I believe that they talking about jobs. I would have settled for tax reform: good luck with this bunch!

    • GdavidH on February 9, 2012 at 7:10 pm

      Off topic? But I have to ask.

      How many bills are sitting in Harry Reids circular file that were passed, and sent to the senate,?by the “do nothing republicans” in the house of representatives?

      Your talking point has expired.

      By the way Dims….Great analogy.?The psychology is kinda?creepy how similar it sounds.???????

    • crystal4 on February 10, 2012 at 8:47 am

      Boehner has been bleating around about the 15 “jobs bills” passed and sitting on Reid’s desk.
      Seeing that the Republicans had introduced “zero” job creation bills, PolitiFact gave it a rating of Pants On Fire.
      Hey Boehner, we remember the campaign of 2010, where are the “jobs” bills???

    • Dimsdale on February 10, 2012 at 11:04 am

      Are you talking about new jobs sponsored by the Republican legislation, or reclaiming all the jobs lost by the Democrat legislation and “leadership”?
      Let’s review that “laser like focus on jobs” that ?bama repeatedly proclaims…
      Now, back to the post: why do CT Democrats keep voting for the same clods that have driven the state into the financial toilet?

  7. ricbee on February 10, 2012 at 12:05 am

    No,they just have the greed for money & power just like the Democraps.

  8. Jeff S on February 10, 2012 at 9:59 am

    There is talk that Ganim wants to run for mayor again in Bridgeport, as long as he has a “D” next to his name he shouldn’t have a problem.

    • crystal4 on February 10, 2012 at 5:10 pm

      And the Repub, convicted felon, Rowland (and his sidekick ) keep hinting about a run for governor.

    • Dimsdale on February 12, 2012 at 10:47 am

      And Maxine Waters, Rangel, Geithner etc. continue on, blithely uncaring of the charges of corruption against them.? Holder persists even though he is ultimately responsible for the deaths of border guards etc.? At least Rowland paid his debt to society.

  9. sammy22 on February 10, 2012 at 11:35 am

    Maybe the Dems keep voting in the same “Dems”, is because the Repubs cannot field more “worthwhile” opponents.

    • Dimsdale on February 10, 2012 at 12:31 pm

      You are correct.? I think it is an issue of the fielding anyone in what is perceived as “hostile territory”.? A big mistake.
      But that assumes that there aren’t better Dems.? Why aren’t they fielded?

  10. sammy22 on February 10, 2012 at 12:38 pm

    Chances are slim-to-none that one can win against an incumbent.

    • Lynn on February 10, 2012 at 1:07 pm

      Correct and some Republicans can’t afford to fall on their swords. Incumbents get to mail their political literature as Public interest mailings.? Plus incumbents go to ribbon cuttings etc. and have press.

    • Jeff S on February 13, 2012 at 8:25 am

      As weird as it may be to quote Bill Maher, but years ago before he went off the deep end, he once said that Congress has the re-election record that the “Politburo” would envy.

  11. Mild Bill on February 10, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    Here in Connecticut we have the GOP establishment Republicans, you know, RINO’s, democrat lite.

    We need a conservative to draw a line in the sand, however, I doubt there is a location in all of Connecticut where the sand hasn’t been paved over with tax dollars, buying votes.

    Too many rich Democrats, in this state, haven’t been taxed enough yet to be hurt by their own stupidity.


The website's content and articles were migrated to a new framework in October 2023. You may see [shortcodes in brackets] that do not make any sense. Please ignore that stuff. We may fix it at some point, but we do not have the time now.

You'll also note comments migrated over may have misplaced question marks and missing spaces. All comments were migrated, but trackbacks may not show.

The site is not broken.