Attorney at Law
Tel: 860 794 6718 Fax: 860 233 3044
September 21, 2010
Dear Ms. Donovan:
I have attached my candidate profile. In view of my inability to satisfy several of the candidate vetting criteria, I suggest that the League waive them and include me in the attorney general debate notwithstanding.
My candidacy raises issues of
public corruption that are important to voters but that that won't be aired by
major party candidates. I am disposed to
hold a considerable number of our leaders liable for malfeasance. Public officials have not been held to
account for the destruction of
My candidacy is an alternative to party politics. I am endorsed by two emerging parties, each with its own distinct politics. Independents and Greens endorsed me with full knowledge that I'm doing this as a people's lawyer and not to advance a particular political agenda. I am none of the above. Excluding me would be seen as censorship. Recall that both the Democrat and the Republican in the congressional election of two years ago expressed open disapproval of my exclusion from that debate. More than 7,000 First District voters cast a ballot for me in that election.
My candidacy is
subversive. On principle, and most
particularly as a candidate for this office, I object to the elections
industry. I consider the practitioners
unethical. I hate the idea of giving
them money, and I hate the idea of asking for money to enrich them. Modern technology empowers
My candidacy depends on the secret ballot. I have expressed opinions on every issue, and my opinions are controversial. My Internet newsletter Current Invective receives hundreds of visits every month, and I have over 100 regular online subscribers. I have been part of organizing teams advocating impeachment and war crimes prosecutions (as well as nonviolence and Hartford Public High School spirit), and I have been passionate as an advocate. I was a catalyst for the dismantling of a corrupt Hartford Board of Education a dozen or so years ago. It's risky to associate politically with me. Should I be excluded from a debate among attorneys because of aggressive advocacy and lack of political correctness?
I trust the League of Women Voters to put the public interest in debate above arbitrary "vetting criteria" that effectively censor a broad swath of opinion.