Kohut Defends Keila Torres: ‘Third World Demagogues’

Jeff Kohut, a 2011 mayoral candidate, defends Connecticut Post columnist Keila Torres, following an email from Mayor Bill Finch’s office condemning coverage. From Kohut:

It is truly telling of the Finch Administration that they find it necessary to resort to the tactics of Third World demagogues in their desperate attempt to assert a claim to credibility in regard to the exposure of the nefarious, parasitic, political and economic policies that have been unleashed on Bridgeport’s largely unsuspecting public since November, 2012.

Indeed, the insidious, back-alley attack on gutsy, cracker-jack, Connecticut Post scribe Keila Torres, in regard to her recent commentary on the sleaze and ineptitude of the Finch Administration, reeks of Third-World-style “kill the messenger” political retaliation tactics against the media.

Specifically, the recent letter to the regional business community, et al., from Bill Finch’s chief of staff, Adam Wood, assailing Torres’ criticism of the recently announced Steel Point retail anchor Bass Pro for their alleged discriminatory hiring practices, and for her criticism of the Finch Administration’s Third-World-style rigging of an election-ballot question–which was clearly designed to mislead Bridgeporters and deprive them of critical Board of Education voting rights in order to facilitate a Bridgeport Regional Business Council-instigated, mayoral power grab–clearly exposes a clueless mayoral administration blindly taking direction from a subversive, regional cabal of “business leaders” seeking to further their parasitic relationship with the Bridgeport public school system.

Shame on the Finch Administration for using the tactics of Third-World, lowlife politicians! Shame on Paul Timpanelli, et al., of the Bridgeport Regional Business Council (BRBC) for inspiring and endorsing these tactics!

By way of commentary on the subjects in the Keila Torres Connecticut Post pieces that elicited the Finch-Timpanelli vitriol:

The selection of Bass Pro as the anchor for the Steel Point development project was a ridiculous choice of anchors for a ridiculous development project that will cost hundreds of millions of dollars for Bridgeport taxpayers and deliver no tax payoff for the city in the foreseeable future. The Steel Point project is largely workforce-housing designed to accommodate the workforce needs of Stamford/The Gold Coast at Bridgeport’s expense. Bass Pro is a gun-selling, allegedly discriminatory retailer that will provide only a few, low-paying/no-benefits jobs to Bridgeporters after costing Bridgeport taxpayers millions of dollars in taxes for new infrastructure needed to accommodate their Steel Point location.

Keila Torres’ criticism of the choice of a firearms-selling retailer in shooting-murder-plagued Bridgeport was appropriate and on target. We need productive businesses that provide a big, per-acre living-wage-job bang in our land-poor city —we don’t need Bass Pro or dormitories for Stamford, we need a GE division or the like that will provide thousands of living-wage manufacturing jobs, with benefits, on the precious acreage of Steel Point.

And the Connecticut Post was certainly right to sound the alarm bells about the alleged discriminatory hiring practices of a corporation that could receive millions of dollars from Bridgeport taxpayers. (But shame on the Post for not backing up/backpedaling on their scribe on the gun-retailer issue!)

The issue of the Finch Administration’s attempt to rig the ballot question concerning Bridgeport Charter Revision is, perhaps, the political issue of the decade in Bridgeport.

If the Finch Administration is allowed to undermine the voting rights of the citizens of Bridgeport at a time when it is of paramount importance for the economic and political well-being of the city to bring voters to the polls and involve parents in their children’s education in the public school system, it is the last thing Bridgeport needs. For the Finch Administration to deliberately poison a ballot referendum question at the behest of sinister corporate interests that covet public-school funding meant for Bridgeport’s children is about as morally repugnant and “Third World” as anything that has ever happened in this city. Indeed, it resembles an indictable offense by American standards. What kind of mayor–and what kind of city council–would have Bridgeporters surrender their voting rights and their right to have a voice in their children’s education by way of a rigged ballot question?

In this era of ersatz journalism that more often than not apologizes for the sleaze and excesses of parasitic politicians and their private-sector instigators, thank God for gutsy scribes such as Keila Torres!

Thanks Keila! (Shame on Bridgeport City Hall and their BRBC instigators.)

Bridgeporters, just say “NO!” to Charter Revision/Changes in Board of Education Governance–and Third World Bridgeport politics–on November 6.

0
Share

5 comments

  1. During June I attended the first four Thursday music sessions at McLevy Green. As a writer about Bridgeport governance I was curious what members of our diverse public might be thinking about the issues facing the City. I conducted an informal survey for about one hour each evening. Talked to an equal number of males and females over the four sessions, all ages, all everything and found some interesting answers. Not one person I asked declined to talk to me and answer the four questions. I came away with a distinct impression this is one of the things missing in Bridgeport: who will respect me enough to listen to me instead of shutting me out!

    But the two things that stood out as survey results to me is less than one quarter of the people were able to tell me they knew about the Charter Reform group and that its focus was on creating a Mayor-appointed BOE. Thirty-five meetings, coverage in the media but very little dent in the public looking to kick back and be entertained on Thursday evenings in the summer.

    Will Bridgeport voters in the fall reveal similar ignorance or disinterest? Will palm cards and City messages push the issue? Will the public become more attuned and interested as we get closer to November? What’s going to happen? Time will tell.

    0
  2. I applaud Keila Torres and her work. I like the way she thinks and writes.

    That being said, I don’t agree with her recent work on the Steel Point/Bass Pro development. I’ve had discussions with the economic development folks at city hall, who actually negotiated the specifics of the deal between the Steel Point developers and the city. This is a good deal for the city and a good deal for us taxpayers. In my opinion, this initial piece of the development is the highest and best use for this property, at this time.

    Bass Pro will be a regional draw (from NY, MA and RI) with an average customer stay of 2 hours. The Bass Pro retail use has been placed tight along I-95, which still allows for water-related/water-dependent uses to be developed along the waterfront.

    We need to support something like this. Bass Pro sells more than guns. They sell boats and tents and lots of other things for outdoor recreation. And on the subject of guns, I’m not so sure having a bunch of hunters from New York, CT and Mass converging on the East Side of Bridgeport is such a bad thing. It may help to scare off the drug dealers, etc.

    I’ve watched the activity surrounding the Steel Point property for the almost 30 years I’ve lived in Bridgeport. This is a good thing that is happening and we need to support this to insure it is implemented.

    0
  3. David,
    Happy to see someone who has lived, paid taxes and also been involved in construction projects professionally is writing regularly.

    You may have seen I am focused on the City and its financial moves, and that can cover most areas of governance because most activities have an expense attached for the taxpayer to cover. You mention you have talked with the people who negotiated the specifics of the deal. Apparently enough of the deal was provided to you for you to come away singing its praises. All well and good. Can you indicate how much value, over what time period you expect to come from this? I don’t believe that subject has hit these pages specifically. Secondly, since you feel Bass as first anchor indicates highest and best use at this time for the location, can you provide an outline of what will be coming?

    I am really looking for specifics on the “economic development” here that will be of value to the residential taxpayer after all of the up front, special district, repayment or recovery cash flows are settled. Hope you will answer soon. Many are interested certainly. Peace. JOHN.

    0

Leave a Reply