Brain Dead?

Should we allow euthanasia for the allegedly "brain dead"?   

Not if their family's object.

Syria's Assad

Bashar Hafez al-Assad

Here's something most of us have missed entirely.

Syria's Christians Back Assad

From Christianity Today
 Syrian Christians rejected protestors' demands for embattled president Bashar al-Assad to resign. But Christians did broadly endorse democratic reforms that would bring an end to dictatorship.

"We do not support those who are calling for the fall of the regime, simply because we are [for] the process of reform and changes," said Yohanna Ibrahim, Syrian Orthodox Metropolitan of Aleppo, at a religious summit in France.

In late May, International Christian Concern, an evangelical ministry to the persecuted church, released to Christianity Today an anonymous open letter from a "trusted Syrian source" that explains why many Syrian Christians support Assad's regime. The two-page letter calls for help from the larger Christian community. It says in part:

• "Christian service has flourished remarkably in Syria. We regard Syria as a model Arab country when it comes to freedom of worship."

• Radical Muslim groups are "responsible for the disturbance" in the country. "Christians are the first to be persecuted when we talk about governmental change."

• "We are seeking [Christians'] help to prevent what happened in Iraq and Egypt from happening in Syria. Christian service in Syria is in danger now."

An influential Syrian seminary educator who asked not to be named told CT that Syrian Christians are very aware of what happened to Christians in Iraq, including the estimated 500,000 Christian refugees who fled to Syria during the Iraq war.

"[Syrian Christians] are unwilling to see themselves becoming refugees in Lebanon," said the educator, who is currently in the United States to teach. He told CT that a majority of Syria's 1.4 million Christians want the Assad government to speed up reforms. "In a nutshell, Syrian Christians desire to have both—the regime and the reforms."

Syrian Christians see their nation as a Middle East oasis of religious freedom compared with Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. Open Doors ranks Syria as 38th on its 2011 list of the world's worst persecutors of Christians. The secular government allows churches to preach, teach, evangelize, publish religious materials, and build sanctuaries. Christians have access to education and employment.

The Red Lion's Acknowledgement to Women's Rights

We had occasion to stop into the Red Lion for lunch this Saturday (the eve of my 62nd birthday) as my wife asked where I would most like to go. 

My family's been stopping by the place off and on for ages, my mother visited the Red Lion  in the 20's and 30's with her parents, and I recall my first introduction in 1958. 
With a family that's been in New England since 1620, it's a safe assumption that previous generations were familiar with the Stockbridge operation as well.

This afternoon we dined in the tavern; and from my vantage point I saw something that surely didn't exist until fairly recently.

A hook at the bar upon which women can safely hang their purses. (Circled above)


Oh........of course.
Lunch was great. 
Good service, delicious coffee, etc.
It's the The Red Lion for crying out-loud, what did you expect?

Hoodies and Robbery

Save for during inclement weather, no one wears a hoodie without some nefarious intention.

Such as armed robbery.

Google "Armed Robbery" images and you'll see the following:

Notice that race hasn't anything to do with it, but punks in hoodies regardless of their ethnic origins seem to be the problem.

Let's look at the record...

There is no question the Connecticut Republican Party is in dire need of reconstruction.

What the party faithful don't know, is that task

 has been going on for two years.

______________________________________________

Please don't underestimate the straits we found ourselves in.

People tend to forget or ignore the impact of the post Rowland era; which took a serious toll on our fund-raising abilities.

Further, it was difficult to do *ANYTHING* while we were embroiled in costly lawsuits, carried around a 6 digit debt, and were hard pressed to raise funds.
Were it not for former CTGOP Chair George Gallo, we might well remain in debt to this very day.
                  ______________________________________________

The state party has worked non-stop 
rebuilding our infrastructure. 
We have however done a poor (lousy) job of  communicating those efforts to our local town committees and the grassroots base.

In 2012, despite a Democratic presidential candidate carrying Connecticut, for the 1st time in decades the GOP lost no legislative seats in either chamber.

CT Republicans have already tried it.

Recently former Secretary of State Pauline Kezer suggested we allow unaffiliated voters to vote in primaries.

We tried that and it created a disaster.

This was originally posted on August 17th 2006 at another site:
http://connecticutlocalpolitics.blogspot.com/2006/08/lieberman-rell-with-large-leads.html

Dick Bozzuto

English as a 2nd language, self made man (people confuse him with his now late half-brother, Adam the IGA mogul who was also a wonderful man) drop dead straight, ethics and behavior beyond reproach.

Moderate Republican, before the word got ruined it was "Progressive" Republican he was/is a populist.

Former CT state senator. 

Ran for senate in 1980; got beat by a carpetbagging ultra-conservative named Buckley who in turn lost miserably.

Had the 82 Gov nomination sewn up when convention chair Larry DeNardis allowed the convention rules to be broken by Labriola & Rome; they had a love-fest and there was as a result no 2nd roll call.

Bozzuto had 49.7 % of that convention. 

At the same convention Prescott Bush Jr had challanged Weicker had received around 24% (??) of the vote more than enough to primary.

Lowell didn't like that and called Dick to get his delegates to back his hair-brained idea to allow ind. to vote in state wide GOP primaries in case it ever happened again. 
For this Lowell is 100% behind Dick in 86.
They shake on it.

We all held our noses, took a stiff drink and did so at a special rules convention.
(I was at all these things)

1986 - Lowell rolls out Julie Belaga who barely gets enough votes to primary. 
Weickers people start up the "in the Mafia" nonsense against Dick (as if every Italian with 3 bucks is a hood).

There's Richard C. Bozzuto, the literal personification as to what is right and good about our nation and state and these disgusting people had the nerve to smear his good family name?
IT WAS TRULY HORRIBLE.

Sept. 9th 1986 - with an astonishing number of poll workers (same way Weicker won Gov in 1990) Belaga beats Bozzuto the GOP convention nominee.

Nov. 1986 - worst defeat in the history of the Republican Party in CT.

Dick had used his popularity and whatever celebrity he might have enjoyed to the benefit of others including myself, tirelessly and liberally. He would show up for a function anywhere in CT if one of his supporters thought it might help him or her win a few votes for Planning & Zoning, Alderman, Town Council, or Dog Catcher. He went door to door with me and spoke Italian to voters who clearly adored him and he certainly didn't do me any damage in doing so either. (I'm a WASP)
Dick was the most loyal ranking Republican I ever had the honor to associate with in my life.

Many single words could be used to describe him, including; Good, fair, honest, but the one overwhelming characteristic he still enjoys is kind. The man is kind to fault even eclipsing the one thing upon which he most prides himself - loyal.

Were we to drag him (kicking and screaming I'm quite sure) back into the game he would light a fire; the man can really speak and has some other quality that maybe someone with a high degree in English might be able to quantify in words but I can't. But I would to this day go though a wall for him, or for that matter follow him into the gates of hell and I'd assume we were going to come back victorious.

Is the Connecticut Republican Party Guilty of Groupthink?

Is our desire for comradery so over-whelming 

that we've become Lemmings?

“Groupthink” is said to occur within a group when the organization’s desire for cohesion and unanimity overrides its ability to objectively engage in thorough, rational discourse on a subject.  It is a disease of thought that has infected various organizations, ranging from think-tanks, policymakers, corporate boardrooms, and has even made its way presidential “situation rooms.”  Groupthink is most certainly as grave a threat to national security as proposed by Irving Janis, and every precautionary measure possible must be made in order to prevent it from taking root.

It can be asserted that Groupthink is an unfortunate side effect of humanity’s innate, evolutionary predisposition towards favoring organization.  It has been linked to various disasters throughout history, such as the Challenger space shuttle catastrophe and the Bay of Pigs.  While it is true that Janis established a connection between these events and groupthink retrospectively, it is worth noting that in the decades following his initial report on groupthink, his theories and findings have been validated by a fairly substantial body of literature and independent research, (Aldag, 1993).

There are several reasons that Groupthink must be viewed as a potential threat to national security.  First and foremost, by definition, it entails the clouding of judgment of the “experts” who compose a group.  Anything but the most rational and sound discussion on a topic as sensitive as military strategy or counterterror can obviously have profoundly grave consequences.  Furthermore, and more abstractly, Groupthink contradicts the very reasons for the establishing of many of the organizations it affects.  It can be reasonably assumed that many panels or boards were created in order to provide a diverse set of minds and backgrounds to analyze a situation, thus limiting the role that human error tied to the fallibility of one lone mind can play during the decision-making process.  If the flow of free thought becomes contaminated in such a manner, the group’s usefulness is essentially nullified and any decision they reach may be only marginally better than a unilateral decision made by one sole actor.

There are eight calling cards, or symptoms that an organization may be operating under the influence of groupthink, and they are:

Invulnerability, the idea that the group is beyond or immune to making errors.

Morality, the notion that the group’s cause is the upright or “morally justified” one.

Rationale, which entails the rebuttal of warnings possibly through the use of past experiences in order to delude the group members into believing that such warnings are unfounded, (the example given during the Challenger disaster was citing the fact that take-offs hadn’t been a problem in the past, despite the newfound problems).

Stereotyping, which involves the creation of a largely imaginary “them and us” dichotomy, tied to the idea that those outside of the group are ignorant or possibly misinformed.

Self-censorship, which is the suppression of ideas viewed as being contradictory to the consensus of the group as a whole.

Illusions of unanimity, which is when silence is viewed as a passive form of agreement.

Direct pressure, labeling dissenters within the group as being disloyal; and finally;

mind-guards, the self-appointed individuals who actively attempt to “shield” the group from outside thoughts or ideas which may undermine the current thoughts within the group, (Janis, 1971).

Interestingly, it seems as though the risk of Groupthink infiltrating an organization is directly proportionate to the level of camaraderie felt within said group.  As individuals become more comfortable with one another, there is a general tendency to lower one’s guard when in their presence.  Concurrent with this is the desire for work to be accomplished and for conclusions to be reached.  This provides an ideal breeding ground for the insidious nature of Groupthink to flourish.

Very recently, there has been some level of debate in the media surrounding Groupthink.  The recent discourse began shortly after the death of Steve Jobs, and there seem to be two schools of thought pertaining to it.  One camp asserts that “the lone genius” is more productive and efficient when they are permitted to work in isolation of others and by definition will never succumb to Groupthink, (Cain, 2012).  The other insists that the greatest strategies have emerged from the result of group-based discussion, but still openly admits that precautionary measures must be taken to inhibit the development of Groupthink, (Govindarajan and Terwilliger, 2012).

Earlier this month, the topic of Groupthink arose in relation to the appointment of John Kerry as the new Secretary of State.  Kerry, a long-time supporter of close relations between the United States and Armenia, has been accused of succumbing to the Washington DC’s Groupthink surrounding the fostering of a stronger Turkish-American alliance.  The author, of obviously pro-Armenian bias, contends that Turkey should not so readily be considered an ally of the United States, as there is a trend under their current president of Islamism slowly creeping back into the culture of the nation, and that Armenia and its surrounding region are of strategic value to the USA as China has expressed interest in expanding their influence in the region, (Seto, 2013).  For this reason, the writer claims that Kerry is guilty of abandoning his own beliefs in order to conform to the prevailing beliefs of his peers, and thus, is jeopardizing foreign relations due to Groupthink.


Aldag, R. J., & Fuller, S. R. (1993). Beyond fiasco: A reappraisal of the groupthink phenomenon and a new model of group decision processes. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3).

Boyadijian, Seto (February 8, 2013).  Kerry’s Dilemma: The Groupthink on Turkey.  Asbarez.com. Retrieved from:  http://asbarez.com/108218/kerry%E2%80%99s-dilemma-the-groupthink-on-turkey/

Cain, Susan (January 13, 2012). The Rise of the New Groupthink. The New York Times. Retrieved from:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/opinion/sunday/the-rise-of-the-new-groupthink.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Govindarajan, Vijay and Terwilliger, Jay (July 25, 2012). Yes, You Can Brainstorm Without Groupthink. Harvard Business Review Blog Network.  Retrieved from:http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/07/yes_you_can_brainstorm_without.html

Janis, I. (November 1971). Groupthink. Psychology Today.


Thank you to UNH Masters candidate Coulson Hageman for his work which appears above.