« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Meet Rob Simmons (R CAND, CT-SEN).

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  May 20th, 2010 at 08:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I had the opportunity to talk with Rob Simmons (R CAND, CT-SEN) this afternoon, so of course we discussed the recent art theft in Paris… no, of course I’m joking. We talked about Dick Blumenthal’s lying about his military record:

Rob Simmons’ site is here: details about the Vets for Freedom PAC endorsement here.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

Tags: , , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • swami7774

    Not as conservative as many of us would like, but it’s Connecticut and he’s about the best we can expect to get.

    Moe–take a look at Jeff Perry(MA-10).

    http://jeffperryforcongress.com/

  • rrreaganite

    that conservatives rally around. If anyone thinks that Linda McMahon won’t be smeared about her record at WWE, they are dreaming. Simmons is fairly conservative on issues other than social issues, which is very typical of a New England Republican.

    Also I love the idea of a of a decorated veteran (Simmons) who actually served in Vietnam , running against that weasel Blumenthal.

    ps. http://www.joinrobsimmons.com/

  • rrreaganite

    Linda McMahon donated 10,000 to Rhambo and the DCCC in 2006, which is unforgivable to me. This money helped put Nancy Pelosi in power and defeat republicans like Rob Simmons.

  • SirGladiator

    I like winning as much as anybody here, but winning with a guy this liberal doesn’t mean anything to me. Obviously Schiff is the only Conservative in the race, but Simmons is so liberal he actually makes Linda McMahon look fairly conservative by comparison, The good news is that Linda is running way better than this guy in the general according to the most recent poll I saw (haven’t been following the race particularly closely, only saw the one poll recently, don’t know if there are others showing something different). So while Schiff is the only Conservative in the race, and the only one I would support in the primary, I’m quite hopeful that if he doesn’t win that we can get McMahon instead, at least she’s an outsider who would probably be a fair bit more conservative than Simmons if elected.

  • redtillimdead

    Every in CT needs to help this man win the party endorsement at the convention.

  • RINKER

    Simmons is pretty liberal.

  • vinick

    A decorated Vietnam vet going against an unprincipled opportunist who lied about the very same thing would be a fun campaign to watch. Unfortunately McMahon is leading in the polls, though hopefully that will change after the convention this weekend. I say unfortunately because even though either Simmons or McMahon would be light years better than Blummenthal, I have serious reservations about McMahon as a candidate. There just has to be something in her closet from her days at the WWE that is going to come out, and even if not there is already enough fodder out there to turn a significant portion of the electorate against her if it is disseminated widely enough. I also didn’t like how she bragged about tipping the Times off on the Blummenthal story; they should’ve kept their mouths shut and the fact that they didn’t raises serious questions about the competency of her campaign. Simmons is a tested candidate who has won multiple elections in the past. He’s our best bet.

  • RINKER

    while Dan Coats and Carly Fiorina are not?

  • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

    because a majority is a majority and you don’t want to lose the one seat you need to gain it.

    The reality is, the Senate won’t be decisively in the hands of one party or the other again any time soon. So you have these so-called moderates who swing across the aisle if the other side can demagogue enough.

    Why settle for them? Do they promulgate a conservative ascendency when they fail to draw real lines between them and the other party? Do the voters really get a choice?

  • vinick

    The job of Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Scott Brown is not to serve the readers and bloggers of RedState, but to serve the citizens of Maine and Massachusetts, who are much more moderate in their views. Jim DeMint couldn’t get elected in Massachusetts, so its either Scott Brown or Teddy Kennedy. Even if Scott Brown only votes with the GOP 50% of the time, that’s a bunch of votes coming out of deep blue MA that the Republicans never imagined they would have.

  • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

    If Gingrich says right of center people should welcome so-called moderates.This would be further proof of why Gingrich should be ignored. He constantly criticizes right of center common sense with ridiculous word games, criticism which goes out on tv, radio, and internet forever. What I gather he characterizes as moderate I characterize as life and death. Such as global warming, crippling cap and trade over something that doesn’t exist, amnesty, free health care, and voting rights for millions of illegal aliens. I understand no elected official-moderate or purist- stood up and objected to a lashing of America by a third world corrupt Mexican president. No moderate or purist has demanded Soros stop being treated like a head of state. As always, Gingrich does nothing with his notoriety except diminish right of center people, in this instance by saying they shouldn’t criticize so-called moderates. The term has come to be meaningless and a toy to people like him.

  • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

    And my specific beef with Scott Brown on this bill is that he sold out too easily, and should have demanded Freddie and Fannie get the same treatment in this bill, at a minimum. Those are not wild right wing issues.

    Instead, he got nothing.

    He is being used as a wedge against Republicans, when he could be a wedge against Democrats.

    It’s not too much to ask, on a bill like this, that he does not do more of the latter.

  • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

    like Scott Brown, though in 1994.

    He hit the lottery on a handful of game changing issues, did some good for a while, but squandered it.

    I remember him back then on CNN suggesting the Federal government buy students laptop computers.

    There enough Paul Ryans and Marco Rubios who can articulate the dire consequences of more (or less) of the same, and the path to real change. I have no gripe against Newt reinventing himself, but he has to compete in the arena of ideas with a new and different starting lineup. There have been times recently where he had the chance to go for the ideological jugular and backed down. The times demand something different than that.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    …particularly negative about either. Be so good as to provide me a link to where I did?

    That’s not a request.

  • JSobieski

    that we know about.

  • taxmaiden

    Peter Schiff is for smaller, limited government and has fiscally conservative principles. Peter believes that our economic recovery should be left to the free market through businesses and individuals ? not the federal government. He is not a politician and doesn’t want to be one. Therefore, he can not be bribed or threatened into voting against his principles. He has built a successful business, a REAL business, from the ground up. He is the one who predicted the financial meltdown years before it happened and he is the one who can help fix this mess. I believe that out of the 100 members in the US Senate at least one should have some real world experience in finance and economics. Check him out at www.schiffforsenate.com

  • swami7774

    As I recall, Newt wanted the federal government(i.e., the taxpayers) to buy laptops for the homeless.
    One of his “thinking outside the box” moments.
    Newt’s a fountain of ideas, but also–unfortunately–a fountain of hubris. At times.