Connecticut Smackdown

Connecticut's U.S. Senate race got down and dirty when noted drug-pushing violence peddler Linda McMahon released an ad that delivered on a promise she made - it exploits Richard Blumenthal's misstatements about his Vietnam-era service record. With Blumenthal holding a lead of only three percentage points in one poll, the McMahon campaign has clearly decided to deliver the coup de grace to Blumie by reminding voters of the controversy from May. And she brought it up in advance of the Senate candidates' debate on WTIC-TV in Hartford last night, aired on C-Span.

Before I go any further, let me comment on the styles and personas of the two candidates. Blumenthal had always seemed to me like an Eliot Spitzer manque, at least before the sex scandal that brought Spitzer down; indeed, many is the time I confused the two. Blumenthal is less personable than Spitzer, though, and he talks with a reedy, almost nerdy voice. But he commands himself very well, given is erect physical structure and self-confidence. While it may have shocked C-Span viewers outside Connecticut that Mrs. McMahon talked like a Southerner, that's because she happens to be from North Carolina, originally, and she very much comes across as a girl from a trailer park who came into a lot of money. Her lime-green pantsuit was hideous. She's not only an outsider in Connecticut politics, she's an outsider in Connecticut preppie culture.

Now, some substance. Blumenthal addressed the Vietnam issue head-on, saying that there was no excuse for his misstatements, apologizing for them, admitting his mistake, and expressing pride for his service. This is what Chris Matthews said he should do and this is also what Blumenthal and others thought he did back in the spring. Matthews will likely have complained that Blumenthal didn't seem genuinely contrite enough by the time you read this, but I don't know what else Blumenthal can do to please his critics in the media. McMahon, for her part, had to defend comments she made that the minimum wage ought to be reviewed. She insisted that she never meant to suggest repealing it. Even though she has no idea how much it is.

On other issues, Blumenthal supported government initiatives to sell American-made goods, such as rules for government contractors to but American products, and he cited the many cases in which he represented workers in Connecticut whose jobs were threatened with outsourcing, and supported middle-class tax cuts and letting upper-income tax cuts expire. McMahon, who wanted to extend all of the Bush tax cuts, recited the old canard how a government official like Blumenthal had no experience in creating jobs, while she contributed to the economy with her business ventures. Unfortunately for her, that business - promoting a rigged, theatrically violent and intellectually impoverished "sport," gave Blumenthal the opportunity to question the value of her business, and he responded accordingly.

Also in the debate was a discussion of the Steven Hayes case in Connecticut; Hayes was just convicted of killing a woman and her two children in a home invasion in 2007; the woman's husband manage to escape. When asked if the death penalty was warranted, both Blumenthal and McMahon came out in favor of it. Some liberal voters might not be so inclined to vote for Blumenthal on the basis of his answer, given the opposition to capital punishment on the left. They might just stay home.

Ironically, it was the legal distinction of another criminal case that may have helped Blumenthal close the sale with Connecticut voters. Linda McMahon noted a case against World Wrestling Entertainment - in which workers have been classified as independent contractors to trim costs - was opened in Connecticut on the day Blumenthal, the state attorney general, announced his Senate candidacy, an occurrence she found more than coincidental.

Except for one thing. The investigation is a criminal case being pursued by the Department of Labor, which is under the control of Jodi Rell, the outgoing Republican governor. Blumenthal pointed out his office has no jurisdiction in such a case; he only prosecutes civil cases.

Asked to respond, McMahon replied, to some audience laughter, "No comment." It was the only time she was at a loss for words.

This issue has surfaced before in the campaign, but never with the the kind of devastating effect on a candidate only possible in a free media format like a debate. If Blumenthal - ahead in a newly released poll by about seven points - manages to win, this will be remembered as the moment he got his groove back.

McMahon is one of three female business executives trying to buy elective office this year. The other two - Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina, the "California Girls" - are failing in the Golden State, what with Whitman losing steam in her bid for the California governorship over having employed an illegal immigrant housekeeper for several years and with incumbent senator Barbara Boxer pulling ahead of Fiorina in that state's U.S. Senate race. If McMahon similarly goes down in flames on November 2, it will be a good night for Democrats no matter how many contests Republicans win.