Why In The World Would Dan Malloy
Want To Play The Race Card?
In this day and age it is almost inevitable that a campaign will stray from policy issues to questions of character and conduct.
Greenwich resident Ned Lamont recently became a target of such scrutiny and said the negative attack was planted by a desperate and trailing Dan Malloy.
Mr. Malloy who is trying to benefit from playing the race card, argues that this is a means of assessing an opponent's temperament and morality.
Whether Mr. Malloy's attempt at playing the race card will be decisive in assessing the ability of Ned Lamont to govern is ultimately up to each individual voter.
In the current race to become Connecticut governor front runner Ned Lamont has taken a hard "nonpolicy" hit.
Mr. Malloy is hoping that his race card maneuver will cause the popular Ned Lamont's to have an increase in "negative numbers".
The race card is a proven campaign method of narrowing a race.
In articles and press releases printed below, you will read about Ronald Keene, a former executive vice president of Lamont Digital Systems Inc., who sued Mr. Lamont in 2002.
Mr. Keene alleged his firing and failure to gain stock, bonuses and commissions from sales were the result of racial discrimination. Lamont denied the allegation of bias and the parties settled the case the following year.
Mr. Keene's contention of a racial factor could be accurate, erroneous or the result of a misunderstanding.
Mr. Keene's racial allegation could also have been just a legal tactic to gain the upper hand in an employee termination lawsuit. It would not be the first time that something like this has happened in America.
Businesses often find legal settlements to be the least costly course of action.
There is clearly no pattern of racial lawsuits at Lamont Digital Systems, this was a one time event.
However, Dan Malloy's Administration has been named in over 100 Connecticut Commission on Human Right's And Opportunities's complaints, as well as, scores of Federal lawsuits filed by Stamford employees.
The Republican Gubernatorial Opponents Are Enjoying Every Minute Of Dan Malloy's Attempt To Play The Race Card
If Former Stamford Dan Malloy's Desperate Maneuver Succeeds,
Then The Republican Party Will Probably Use The Race Card On Him In The General Election
By JON LENDER
Hartford Courant
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Ned Lamont, locked in an Aug. 10 primary battle with former Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy, was sued in 2002 by a black former executive in his cable television company who claimed that he'd been mistreated on the basis of race, federal court records show.
Ronald Keene — executive vice president in the Delaware corporate office of Lamont Digital Systems Inc. for less than two years ending in mid-2000 — sought at least $1 million in U.S. District Court in Pennsylvania. Keene claimed he was "maliciously" fired after being denied stock, bonuses and commissions from sales activity. The mistreatment was "because of plaintiff's race, which is African American," the suit said.
Lamont, a Greenwich multimillioniare entrepreneur, denied Keene's allegation of bias as well as other claims, such as eligibility for sales commissions. The case was settled in September 2003, months after a judge denied Lamont's motion to dismiss the suit and moved it toward trial, documents show.......
Then Dan Malloy Quickly Fired Off This Press Release:......
Responding to a story in today's Hartford Courant in which it was revealed that Ned Lamont was sued for racial discrimination, and that he settled the suit privately with a confidentiality agreement, Dan Malloy, the Democratic Party's endorsed candidate for Governor, released the following statement:
"Since the beginning of this campaign, I've said that my experiences as a prosecutor and Mayor are why I'm confident I can do the job Connecticut's next Governor needs to do. Ned has said time and again that he should be the next Governor because of his business experience. That's why Ned needs to answer the questions raised in today's Hartford Courant story - because they're about his business.
"There's another reason he needs to answer them: the Governor. We just saw Gov. Rell try to fire a commissioner and enter into a confidentiality agreement with the employee. It blew up in her face, and it should've blown up in her face. Government doesn't work when it's secretive. It only works when it functions in the open, in a way that everyone can see.
"Here are the questions he should answer:
· Why is the statement confidential?
· What did he or his company acknowledge doing?
· Were certain employees denied benefits that other employees of similar seniority and status received?
· How much money was the employee paid in order to keep quiet?
· Why does a Connecticut-based company have a corporate headquarters in the State of Delaware?
· Is there a tax benefit to doing so?
· What happened to all of Ned's employees? He's said numerous times that he hired "hundreds and hundreds" of people, yet the company today has only 36 employees, including just 8 in Connecticut.
"I know what Ned will say in response: 'this is an unfair, desperate attack.' That's wrong. He's asked tough questions of me, and I've answered every one of them. Campaigns are tough, and they should be tough - because the job we're seeking is a tough job. You get asked tough questions in a campaign, but you get asked tougher questions when you're Governor. If you can't answer questions in a campaign, how will you answer them as Governor?
"I think Ned should answer these questions, and I'd prefer that he do that in a debate with me. Ch. 3 and CPBN want to have Ned and me debate on August 3 - and if Ned doesn't show up, the debate is going on without him. Most candidates would probably be thrilled. While I'm grateful for their offer, I'm not thrilled to be there alone. I'm more than happy to give up half that time if Ned will show up.
"One more thing: Ned's been saying he doesn't want to debate me because debates are only about '1 minute canned response.' My response to that is, let's not do that. Let's just have a conversation between the two of us. A civil conversation in which we ask each other questions, and challenge each other's responses.
"Back in May I said I wanted this to be a campaign filled with substantive debates where we both answer tough questions. We don't have much time left, but there's still time for that debate to happen.
"I hope Ned will change his mind."
Lamont for Governor campaign manager Joe Abbey released the following statement regarding Dan Malloy's missive from earlier today:
"Dan's long list of questions today betrays an outright ignorance and hostility toward Connecticut small businesses. That press release was clearly written by someone who has never worked in small business or created jobs in the private sector.
"Dan has said time and time again that his years of experience running for political office entitle him to be governor. But throughout the nearly 10 years running that he's been running for governor, serious questions have been raised about his performance as mayor and the manner in which he talks about it. He should answer those questions.
"There's another reason he needs to answer them: Governor John Rowland. As Connecticut continues to try and erase the stain of a pay-to-play scandal in the governor's mansion, transparency and accountability in government are critical to our future. That is why it is so important for Dan to respond to the following:
• How many of the 55 civil rights complaints and 37 federal lawsuits were filed by employees reporting directly to you, or to your senior staff members?(Source: Greenwich Time -- http://www.greenwichtime.com/news/article/Sunday-print-exclusive-Racism-in-Greenwich-508827.php and public records).
• When did you first learn that three of your employees, two of whom you named employee of the month, were embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars from the city on your watch, as reported by the Courant? (Source: Hartford Courant -- http://articles.courant.com/2010-07-23/news/hc-stamford-arrests-fedele-malloy-07220100723_1_stamford-mayor-dannel-malloy-criticizes-michael-fedele)http://www.greenwichtime.com/news/article/Sunday-print-exclusive-Racism-in-Greenwich-508827.php
• Why do you continue to advance claims about your record on jobs that have been fully debunked by the Courant? (Source: Hartford Courant --http://www.courant.com/community/stamford/hc-malloy-jobs-0628-20100628,0,480540.story)
• Is it true that Stamford lost a net of 8,000 jobs during your term as Mayor?
• After you were investigated in 2004 for awarding lucrative no-bid contracts to companies that contributed to your political campaigns, did you continue to accept contributions to your previous or current campaign from companies that either held contracts with the city or aspired to do so? (Source: New York Times --http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/23/nyregion/23stamford.html?scp=3&sq=Stamford&st=nyt)
"I understand why Dan was so defensive in his statement saying, 'I know what Ned will say in response: 'this is an unfair, desperate attack.' That's exactly what it was.
"I hope Dan will address these questions on Thursday when he and Ned appear together in Windham, but in the meantime let's have that civil conversation on the issues Dan's always talking about."
No I Am Not Talking About The Malloy Boy Arrested For Dealing Drugs
No I Am Talking About The Other Malloy Boy
The lawsuit, filed in May, accused the city of "failing to act in part because one of the callers is the son of Stamford Mayor Daniel Malloy."
The exact amount the Board Of Education paid the family of Candace Owens, now an 18-year-old Stamford High graduate, was made public yesterday after The Advocate filed a Freedom of Information request last week.
The Board of Education spent an additional $25,000 on legal expenses, including representation by a Hartford law firm, Shipman & Goodwin LLP, school board spokeswoman Sarah Arnold said.
The case was terminated two weeks ago at a settlement conference, according to court records. As part of the settlement, the Board of Education denied any wrongdoing and liability.
The school board has 30 days from the settlement date to pay the Owens family by check to their attorney, Norman Pattis. The entire $62,500 tab will come out of a $375,000 legal fund.
"The case was resolved to the mutual satisfaction of both parties," said Patrick Fahey, one of the attorneys who represented the Board of Education.
He declined to comment further.
Neither Pattis nor Robert Owens, the father of Candace Owens, returned phone messages.
The Board of Education attempted to keep the terms of the settlement from being disclosed because of a confidentiality clause. But the Freedom of Information Commission said that any settlement funded by taxpayers is public record unless it is sealed by the court.
The settlement marked the end of a yearlong controversy that stoked racial tensions and political drama.
Last February, at least one of five teenagers sitting in a car left messages threatening to kill Owens, who is black, and repeatedly used a racial epithet. In one of three messages, one of them referred to her as "dirty" and threatened to burn her house down and tar and feather her.
The group included Malloy's youngest son, Sam Malloy, then 14. The mayor released a statement in March saying his son cooperated with police and did not know the alleged ringleader, Evan Kopek, or Owens before the night of the calls. He has declined comment since then.
Kopek, now 18, was a former friend and classmate of Owens. Two days before the phone incident, they had a shouting match during class. School officials suspended Kopek for that but would not discipline him and the other boys for an incident committed off school grounds unless the police made an arrest, which drew criticism from the state National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
Owens left school for six weeks, saying it was traumatic to attend with the alleged callers. She returned after Kopek was arrested in late March. Another teen was arrested later that spring. School officials would not say whether they disciplined Kopek after the arrest.
The lawsuit said the decision to delay suspensions amounted to a failure to protect Owens. The suit accused the city of violating the federal Title IX rule banning discrimination in schools that receive federal funding. The school system has "continued to do nothing to protect Ms. Owens from repeated harassment and intimidation by the young men and their friends," the suit stated.
None of the students involved in the case attends Stamford High any more, Arnold said.
Candace Owens was arrested in an unrelated harassment case in October. In November, Kopek pleaded to being a youthful offender and had his case sealed. He will have no criminal record. He faced charges of first-degree harassment and second-degree intimidation by bigotry or bias.
It is not known whether Malloy's son was charged because he is a juvenile.
What Other Bloggers Are Saying:
My Left NutMeg
When the media tried to use the arrest of three Stamford city employees on embezzlement charges to start a cat fight between Ned Lamont and Dan Malloy, Lamont chose not to take the bait and declined comment.Why? Presumably because the allegations, absent any evidence that Malloy was complicit in their alleged crimes, had zero bearing on the governor's race.
But Dan Malloy isn't stupid enough to be gracious.
Today the Courant reported on a 2002 lawsuit against Lamont Digital alleging racial discrimination. ("Hold the presses! Breaking news!!)
In less time than it takes to write $505,000 worth of checks to pay for renovations on your $2-million dollar mansion, Dan Malloy released a statement in which he, a former personal injury lawyer of all things, expressed shock -- SHOCK! -- that lawsuits get settled out of court with confidentiality agreements attached....
==============================
Please send your comments, news tips and press releases to GreenwichRoundup@gmail.com
