Linda: It’s all about jobs, private sector jobs

and that’s not all. Linda McMahon pledged no tax increases and work to cut taxes, make government live within its means and roll back government spending to 2008 levels. Who knew such talk would be considered controversial in Connecticut?

Much of this you may have heard before, and some of it echos the Pledge to America … but I found it theraputic to hear it in person from the person who is looking more and more like Connecticut’s next Senator.

Republican Senatorial Candidate Linda McMahon spoke to what could be the last “Tea Party Movement” rally in the state before the election, drawing about 1000 plus people to the State House steps. Not bad considering it was the first sunny crisp fall weekend in New England. (I myself gave up the UCONN/Vanderbilt game). And the “Drain The Swamp” rally actually drew about the same number of people as Bill Clinton did last weekend when he came to stump for her opponent, Richard Blumenthal. Pictures follow.


Kudos to the Connecticut Grassroots Alliance and Bob McGuffle at Right Principles for putting this together.

Posted in

Jim Vicevich

Jim is a veteran broadcaster and conservative/libertarian blogger with more than 25 years experience in TV and radio. Jim's was the long-term host of The Jim Vicevich Show on WTIC 1080 in Hartford from 2004 through 2019. Prior to radio, Jim worked as a business and financial reporter for NBC30 - the NBC owned TV station in Hartford - and as business editor at WFSB-TV in Hartford for 14 years while earning six Emmy nominations and three Telly Awards.


  1. Anne-EH on October 2, 2010 at 2:39 pm

    Jim, today I was at the rally, and when Linda spoke, she told it JUST LIKE IT IS. There was no ifs, ands or buts in her rally speech. It is summed up in a four letter, pardon your omitting one less letter, VP Biden,it is three simple words:jobs,jobs,jobs. This month ahead is going to be a very important one ahead of the 2010 mid-term elections.

  2. Anne-EH on October 2, 2010 at 2:42 pm

    PS: Correction, I had forgotten to add, PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS.

  3. theignorantfisherman on October 2, 2010 at 4:48 pm


    Hey Jimmy…. It was Marta Dean today that was awesome… a true solid conservative… she was not afraid to use the G (God) word or the C (Creator) word or the M (morality) word. She was bold enough to talk about morality and strong family values… where did you or anyone else hear Linda McMahon talk about such things?! Linda will get my vote because she is the lesser of two evils or weevils … but 5 years ago we as true conservatives (social and fiscal) would have NEVER voted for this woman. It is America's moral dilemma that is destroying our nation.. not our reckless spending. Our American Families are in shambles. Fix the family unit and you will fix the spending problem and the "Give it to me" social programs for the immoral and lazy.

    Hate to sound off as "old school" and “old fashion”… but I reckon that is what I am…


    God Bless!


    P.S. Lennie Suzio was awesome too!


  4. Dimsdale on October 2, 2010 at 5:58 pm

    Hmmm.  Pledging no tax increases and working to cut taxes, making government live within its means and rolling back government spending to 2008 levels.


    Sounds sane, reasonable and likely to be quite effective.


    Now where is Rambo's pledge?

  5. TomL on October 3, 2010 at 3:31 am

    All we hear fom Blumie is you guessed it CRICKETS.                          

  6. chris-os on October 3, 2010 at 3:56 am

    Against spending Linda? Really? Then why did you take $10 million from the state of CT for "film tax" breaks?

    Gov. spending is OK if it comes into your own pocket from "we the people"??


  7. chris-os on October 3, 2010 at 4:00 am

    btw, the clinton rally was indoors, limited seating, so it was by invitation.

  8. RoBrDona on October 3, 2010 at 5:04 am

    Imagine! Corporate tax breaks! In a state that businesses are running from in terror! The motion picture tax credit program may be the only overt attempt to attract business in CT. A program of the DECD, a board of independant auditors have to review the requests first. They have to perform min 25% of production in CT, 50% of Post production with/or a minimum if $1M must be in-CT spending, and all goods and services must be purchased or rented from CT suppliers. It has been remarkably effective in ATTRACTING TAX $$ AND JOBS. It has paid for itself a number of times over since inception in 2006.

    Predictably Blumie hates it – It doesn't matter that WWE is eligible, they "abuse the credits' intent" in a time when WWE is laying off some workers. Did it ever occur to the dim-bulbs that the credits RETAIN JOBS that might otherwise be lost, and with the credits WWE has refilled those positions lost last year. I find it reprehensible that Blumie's office is actively bad mouthing, WWE (and by inference ESPN) with specious nonsense designed solely to bolster his election bid.   

  9. Dimsdale on October 3, 2010 at 5:35 am

    Chris, in a deep blue state like CT, who wrote these tax breaks in?  Not Republicans, to be sure.  Did she act legally?  Yes.  Does Rambo take tax breaks, free transportation and health benefits?  Yes.  Did he need those any more than McMahon needed those tax breaks?  That is for you to answer.


    I think RoBrDona nails it otherwise.

  10. Dimsdale on October 3, 2010 at 5:37 am

    Another thing about "tax breaks": the government loves them because it gives them power for social engineering.  You get your money back if you do what the government wants.  They just hate it when "non preferred" groups qualify too.

  11. chris-os on October 3, 2010 at 6:21 am

    Ummm, she took the money and LAID OFF 10% of her workforce whilst taking a $46 million dollar salary-admirable!

  12. Tim-in-Alabama on October 3, 2010 at 8:18 am

    So let me get this straight, Democrats enact tax breaks to encourage economic activity in the state, and then attack those who use them if they're Republican? If McMahon had done anything improper by taking the tax breaks, couldn't Blumie, as the state's official suer (sewer?) have sued her to get the money back? Were the tax incentives only meant for anti-war films or gay porn? The tax break line of attack is laughable. Lefties, face it. You hate Republicans. When you try to come up with reasons, you look even kookier.

  13. Dimsdale on October 3, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    I'm curious: why were those employees laid off?  You imply that it was for spite, but do you know?  I honestly don't.  Enlighten me.  Secondly, is it any of our business how many people a private business hires/lays off, or what the boss's pay is?  Or more specifically, is it the business of the government?


    Dan Malloy promises to shrink the Governor's staff.  How will he do that?  If he becomes gov, and lays off these people, what will you say?  If Rambo becomes Senator, and passes legislation that causes people to be laid off, will you be as critical?


    Øbama and the Democrats refuse to pass a budget or make decisions on, or refuse to reveal what taxes will be in the coming year and years.  It is causing layoffs and hesitation in hiring.  What should we think about that, chris?

  14. chris-os on October 3, 2010 at 2:34 pm

    1. Dims. I did not say the layoffs were from spite. I DID say that was the year L took home $46 mill. If she did not do the layoffs, what would she take home? $40 mill?

    2. Our wonderful gov. Rowland filled the state with "provisionary" workers (his friends and big contributors) after he enacted layoffs of many state workers (many necessary ones as a friend of mine was a probation officer-yeah they were overloaded  with cases to begin with-allowing, after the layoffs that were pure posturing-criminals not followed up on).

    (BTW, the "provisionaries are still there-Gramma Rell kept them.)

    3. There was just an article in the Courant about the "good-bye and thank you jobs" to Rell cronies that CT was angry about .

    Please do not speak about what is going on here, talk about what you know about in your own state.

  15. Dimsdale on October 3, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    Pardon me.  I didn't realize you owned Connecticut.  "Your" senator will affect me as well.

  16. Dimsdale on October 3, 2010 at 5:16 pm

    Oh, and you contradicted yourself in your first sentence.

  17. djt on October 3, 2010 at 5:49 pm

    In the interest of her shareholders,as her campaign has said, it was in her best interest to take the tax break, but it certainly does make her claim that govt spending is out of control at least a bit hypocritical. and yes, when you get in bed with the govt, it does become at least one duty of the govt (which they don't do well) to follow the money and make sure it was spent in the public interest in terms of employment. take the govt $$ and it becomes a govt interest , wasn't that the one of the big complaints with the bailouts?

    It matters not who wrote the tax break, whether or not it was written by dems (I think it was actually Rell and Jim Amann that had the biggest hands in it) doesn't make it right for her to have taken it and take the fiscal stand she is taking now. I thought most on this blog were against handouts to corporations and the governments involvement with the private sector. But Mcmahon took the $$ with good intentions, so its okay? It was written by dems so its acceptable? It wasn't against the law and if it were blumy would have caller her on it?

    Mcmahon supporters are twisting themselves in knots trying to justify this. Can't there just be an admittance where they wish she hadn't done it, but its still not enough to not vote for her. at least that way there wont' be this rationalization that borders on hypocrisy. It okay to admit your candidate isn't right all the time.

  18. winnie888 on October 4, 2010 at 1:30 am

    Huh…I would think that anyone who is so outspoken and clearly anti-McMahon would have been there at the Drain the Swamp tea party protesting her (apparently) deplorable business practices.  All conjecture about her business practices could have been put to bed with a simple face to face.  Ask the question! But, conjecture keeps the fantasy alive that one is right and everyone else is wrong.  And isn't that where this "us vs. them" mentality comes from?  God forbid a Republican or a gathering of Tea Party folks question the status quo and insist on better from their government.  They should just sit there, shut up and smile while they get screwed by the representatives they voted into office.  And really?  "gramma rell"?  I have yet to read anything from a lefty that makes a point without being insulting or condescending…

    I guess I should say, "Linda, shame on you for taking tax credits." OH!  I get it…(10 minute logic lag):  only people who do not pay taxes are entitled to tax credits without risking personal attacks for taking them!


  19. TomL on October 4, 2010 at 1:57 am

    Imagine that, a business or a person taking a tax break that they are entitled to. So you apply for a tax break and fill out the paperwork go through the regulatory hurdles and get spmething that as a taxpayer and employer you are qualified to get. I don't here any lefty's cpmplaining about the tax credits GE(msnbc) is getting. About those 10 people laid off maybe there was no work for them.

    Chris where do  you get off telling Dimsdale not to post here. Truth hurts huh. You lefty's have no answers so it's go away. Keep posting Dims I find you spot on.

  20. chris-os on October 4, 2010 at 2:28 am

    Do not read everyone's posts due to time constraints and some people that take things like what I write and twist them-urghh.

    I always read yours, Dims and enjoy the debate! keep posting by all means.

    You know I said that you are from MA and could hardly follow all the politics in Corrupticut, Dims as I cannot follow MA politics.

  21. Plainvillian on October 4, 2010 at 4:03 am

    I too thought Martha Dean was impressive.  I went prepared to be undewhelmed by Linda McMahon but her quiet passion and the fact that she spoke without notes briefly but pointedly won my respect.

    With respect to the tax break given WWE and other entertainment companies, few seem to admit that if you have to reduce taxes to attract businesses, then the taxes are just too high!  If you can reduce taxes to attract businesses, doesn't that punish those businesses already here?  Good grief, it's not quantum physics folks, high taxes drive businesses away.  So do punishing and arbitrary lawsuits.

  22. BEA on October 4, 2010 at 5:40 am

    It was a beautiful day to be outside and be encouraged! The gentleman next to me commented about how the women were on fire and I have to agree. I wasn't sure how I felt about Linda prior to rally…she was going to get my vote because there was no other option…but after I saw and heard her I feel better about my decision to vote for her. Although everyone did a great job and I appreciated their passion and committment I have to say I really liked Martha Dean! She really got me fired up!!

  23. rickyrock on October 4, 2010 at 12:41 pm

    I am an independent and really can't get myself to vote for someone that has the same overly simplistic rhetoric any high school kid could come up with : Lower taxes,smaller government,more jobs …more lunch boxes being taken to work. Remember under Reagan taxes were raised and government grew by 7%.(No I don't have the link, look t up) I'm tired of being played by McMahon,and Palin…….simple memorized talking points with no concrete plans to get us there.

  24. djt on October 4, 2010 at 1:06 pm

    wow, a little Linda criticism and the fangs come out!

    winnie, I only brought up rell to point out that the tax break was not only written by democrats, it was not pro or anti rell. I meant no condescension. And regarding your mention of the "us vs. them mentality"…a phrase like "anything by a lefty" doesn't exactly bridge the us vs. them divide.

    The fact is that her successful business took $10 million in reimbursements from the government. Legal, yes, in the best interest of her shareholders, absolutely, consistent with the platform of her run for senator…not exactly.

    I have not decided, I may actually vote for her, blumy certainly hasn't set the world on fire. Tonights debate will go a long way toward making the decision for me. But either way, no candidate is squeaky clean, it does us no good to sugar coat negatives with excuses and weak justifications.

  25. djt on October 4, 2010 at 1:25 pm

    Ricky, I believe you incorrect about Reagan. this is from the link I'll provide below…

    "The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981…featured a 25 percent reduction in individual tax brackets, phased in over 3 years, and indexed for inflation thereafter. This brought the top tax bracket down to 50 percent." The taxes he did raise in 1984 were very small compared to the tax cuts, and were primarily aimed at businesses.

    the link is from the US Treasury, scroll down to The Reagan Tax Cut

  26. djt on October 4, 2010 at 1:27 pm

    sorry for the typo… left out a word…" i believe you are incorrect about Reagan…

  27. JWM on October 5, 2010 at 11:04 am

    jim v. does a great job of dividing the state and inciting the people!

  28. Dimsdale on October 5, 2010 at 3:30 pm

    Dividing it into what, thinking blue staters (McMahon supporters), and non thinking blue staters (Rambo supporters)?


    More power to Jim!

Linda McMahon at Rally

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.