Fellow capitol reporter Chris Keating of the Hartford Courant wrote a story that is deservedly garnering plenty of attention today. Keating interviewed Billy Graham, a wrestling superstar from the 1970s and 1980s who does not have nice things to say about his former boss, Linda McMahon.
McMahon, head of Stamford-based World Wrestling Entertainment, earlier this year stepped into the public arena when she joined the state Board of Education and is currently seeking the GOP nomination to take on Democratic U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd in 2010.
Graham told Keating he is outraged by “recent attempts to sanitize the wrestling mega-enterprise (and) graft a family-friendly face” onto the WWE in order to, he alleges, make McMahon a more palatable candidate.
One of the best examples of McMahon’s working to improve her image came during her confirmation hearings for the Board of Education, during which she faced similar questions about whether it was appropriate for her to be a candidate for the position considering the sexual and violent content of WWE programming.
The WWE and Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell’s office gathered several letters of recommendation from a variety of bi-partisan sources, male and female, who clearly either had no clue about the WWE or didn’t think it should be an issue.
And chances are most, particularly the Democrats, had no idea McMahon would just months after being confirmed to the board take on Dodd.
Here are some of those names. This list is worth holding on to as McMahon’s Senate candidacy moves forward and the debate over her professional wrestling background heats up.
1. Stamford Mayor and potential Democratic gubernatorial candidate Dannel Malloy
2. Secretary of the State and potential Democratic gubernatorial candidate Susan Bysiewicz
3. U.S. Congressman John Larson, a Democrat from East Hartford
4. Anthony Cernera, President of Sacred Heart University in Fairfield
5. Kay Maxwell, a past president of the League of Women Voters of the United States and, like McMahon, a Greenwich resident
6. Kenneth Gammill, a partner at Stamford-based Robinson & Cole, a very prominent state law firm which represented the WWE for several years
7. Lawrence Gilgore, General Director of the Connecticut Grand Opera
8. Scott Mitchel, a Greenwich businessman and director of Stamford-based SoundWaters environmental and educational charity
9. Robert Wolf, President of Stamford-based UBS Investment Bank
10. Dannel Malloy and Susan Bysiewicz (I just think those two names are worth repeating since the state Democratic Party has been particularly eager to challenge McMahon’s qualifications for U.S. Congress based in part on the content of WWE programming.)
Wow… A bunch of insiders and politicos kissed a billionaire’s rear end. Imagine that. (not to mention, but at that time Linda was giving heavily to Rahm Emanuel, Senator Mark Warner, (VA-D), and the Democratic Congressional Committee.)
The question of whether Linda McMahon is U.S. Senate material still remains. What does she know about foreign policy? What does she know about economics? Does she even know how Congress works?
A cynic might think that you all in the press are giving her a free pass on all of the substantive matters, b/c you want the headlines to keep circulation alive.
Me, I doubt that. But to use those letters of recommendation as virtual endorsements is kind of weak. (unless you think a spot on Rell’s State education board is equivalent to representing us in the U.S. Senate.)
Comment by AndersonScooper — November 19th, 2009 @ 1:39 am
Anderson,
Thanks for posting.
Nobody said these were “virtual endorsements” of her Senate bid. In fact I noted above it is doubtful any of the senders knew she was planning to challenge Dodd.
Those letters are proof, however, of how hard McMahon was working to polish her image as a successful businesswoman and get people to look beyond the violent/sexual content of WWE’s programming.
When some state lawmakers and members of the media were questioning the appropriateness of appointing a woman whose fortune was built upon televising cage matches and bikini matches, Dan Malloy, Susan Bysiewicz and others were willing to stand up and, in writing, make the case that people should consider Linda’s business savvy and contributions to civic life.
That debate is only going to intensify as McMahon pursues higher office, so it’s just worth reminding folks of the individuals who chose to stand behind her earlier this year.
Some of the complimentary things said in these letters might even be used by the McMahon campaign to deflect some of the criticism about her business.
As one prominent Democrat told me yesterday after reading my blog:
“Those letters are in the public domain. If they didn’t want to be associated with her they could have said ‘no’. But (they) said ‘yes’ and whether they meant what they said or didn’t they signed those letters. Kind of hard to argue now ‘I meant what I said when I thought she was only going to be on the state board of education but I would never had said them if I knew it might come back to bite me’.”
Comment by Brian Lockhart — November 19th, 2009 @ 10:38 am
Brian, fair points all, I guess.
But many people like me are far less interested in the WWE angle, and more curious about whether Linda has what it takes to make a good Senator.
How versed is she in foreign policy, the workings of the Fed, heck, even the workings of Congress. And how well does she know the state. Could she find Pomfret on the map?
The McMahons’ marketing smarts are notable. But maybe those aren’t the kind of smarts I want representing Connecticut in the United States Senate…
Comment by AndersonScooper — November 19th, 2009 @ 3:28 pm
The most interesting endorsement comes from Mayor Malloy in Stamford. I believe that is called political payback for having your headquarters in Stamford CT. But again not sure what a Board of Ed seat has to do with Governor. But then again you gotta start your political career somewhere.
I think Mrs. McMahon is a breath of fresh air and wish her well in her bid to unseat Dodd.
Comment by Full Disclosure — November 21st, 2009 @ 12:14 pm
I didn’t know she was on the state Board of Ed. Does it really matter?
I do know one thing – Mrs. McMahon is far far far — I mean LOTS — more qualified than the has-been incumbent senator who could have nipped the meltdown in the bud as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.
Mrs. McMahon is sexist? I don’t care! I would vote for a Playboy centerfold over Chris Dodd. I would vote for anybody picked out at random from the phone book over the incumbent.
I really don’t think the idea that wrestling is sexist has legs nor should anyone care about some muscle-head, bitter ex-employee has to say about the lady. Of course she has had to thump a few heads. What millionaire hasn’t? I have no intention of reading the Keating article. Not interested. Sorry.
I also think it is hugely unlikely she will bonk out Rob Simmons for the nomination but she could switch races or run another time. I want to know important things like how she stands on issues important to Republicans like abortion, Defense and ObamaCare. Her glossy mailers so far haven’t said.
Comment by John R. McCommas — November 22nd, 2009 @ 3:18 pm
Mr. McCommas would you really cast your vote for anyone to represent you in congress? Are you paying attention, at all? Apparently, not, if you havent been following Brian’s work the last year. Please inform yourself. If mailed flyers is your sole source choice of information, please stay home November 3rd.
Comment by We Do Care — November 24th, 2009 @ 2:35 pm
What qualifies Linda McMahon to be a U.S. Senator? Nothing.
Oh, except money. Which came from a business she didn’t create. Not that money or business experience is bad, it’s just that it has nothing to do with governing, or knowing how to function in a legislature.
All of the present or past Republican candidates for US Senate are more qualified that Linda McMahon — Foley was an ambassador, Caligiuri is State Senator, Simmons was in Congress. OK, not Schiff.
The possible Democratic candidates: Dodd has over 20 years experience in Congress, like him or not. Blumenthal has over 20 years in the state legislature and as state attorney general.
Linda McMahon? Two years on the state board of education? Is this a joke?
Comment by Billygoat — November 25th, 2009 @ 7:39 am
Evidently Mrs. McMahon is under the false impression that this is a free country or something.
For your information I have decided to vote for Simmons as he was the best damn congressman Connecticut ever had. He is a bit liberal for me but he is a perfect fit for Connecticut.
I stand by my statement that I will vote for anyone but Dodd. If Mrs. McMahon wins the primary, she has my vote in the bag. Dodd should be in jail for his malpractice as Senate Banking Chairman. Anyone and everyone is more qualified than he.
process is going forward and the media elites will just have to trust the voters to make up their own minds – something they hate to do.
The elites always think they know better. I hear this stuff all the time how this person should not be in the race or that person is not “qualified” – what ever that means.
Every taxpayer is “qualified”. Me, you or the person down the street. We don’t have special classes in this country though you would not know that to hear some talk.
I happen to like people outside the political class getting involved.
Comment by John R. McCommas — November 25th, 2009 @ 1:01 pm
“Every taxpayer is “qualified”. Me, you or the person down the street. We don’t have special classes in this country though you would not know that to hear some talk.”
That’s idealistic, but just not true. Like large businesses, non-profits and pretty much every thing else legislatures and government function in their own ways, it takes expertise to master them and be effective. You don’t put neophites in the operating room, the board room or in the U.S. Senate.
It’s not a matter of “right”. Yeah, everybody has a right to run. It IS a matter of qualifications, like it or not. When a candidate’s only claim to high office is that he or she can afford to pour millions into a campaign it is not good for democracy. And, yeah, that applies to would-be Governor Lamont, too.
Comment by billygoat — November 27th, 2009 @ 4:52 pm
Well we discussed litmus tests with the W. and considering the huge mess that occured on his watch we seriously should consider some type of basic test for elected office.
You have to take test to get any federal job, why our appointed and elceted officials exempted? Are these positions, not, the most important? Have to take a test to get G-1 but if your rich – gazes @ McMahon no test of competency to control everything and everyone.
We can, technically, put a West Virgina hillbilly with no reading or writing skills in charge of of a vast complex organization with millions of employees and budgets and geopolitics that boggle even the best educated minds?
Any questions, why things are so bad?
Yes, I vote for a basic government test for all appointed and elected officials local, state and federal. I also strongly support campaign finance reform. When we have a country where money buys the seat, its not a democracy no matter how you costume the manequinn.
Yep lets just keep em all uneducated, intoxicated and in fear and everyone will be too busy to notice.
The difficulty with this well worn strategy is innate, every once in awhile a generation wakes up and notices. We have been slapped up side the head, big time, (9/11/01), yet we are still are enamoured in our repose of self endulgence.
Shame on us, all of us Americans for lowering the bar so as to legally allow capetbagger snakeoil marketing persons to con us.
And no McMahon has not been on the state Borad of Education for two years, she hasnt even completed a year in that(appointed) – (bought)seat and look what happened to the schools under her watch.
If it bleeds it leads, welcome to the four ring circus and your master of ceromonies will be…….
Comment by I want it, I want it NOW! — December 6th, 2009 @ 12:52 pm