YourCT.com header image 2
← Norwalk: Drug Bust Leads To Fire Norwalk: Slapin Trying To Prove Political Relevance →

Norwalk: Republicans Reveal Distirct D Candidates


by turfgrrl


July 19th, 2007 · 45 Comments

The names are falling into place, which is a good thing since the Republicans will be holding their nominating convention this evening. From The Hour:

“(We) want to continue moving forward with … repairs to the Perry Avenue bridge in Silvermine, securing a large portion of the former White Barn property in Cranbury as open space, fixing roads in the district and working with those involved with the sale of the Silvermine Tavern, in hopes that it can be retained as an inn and … preserved historically,” said Straniti, also District D chairwoman. “(We) also feel that it is important to continue with the very fruitful neighborhood community meetings they have held.”

Doug Hempstead and Kelly Straniti are running for re-election. Joe Beggan plans to run at large, and Jack Chiaramonte plans to run for the BOE.

source: The Hour, District D incumbents seek re-election, Robert Koch, July 19, 2007

Tags: In the News

45 Responses so far ↓ “Norwalk: Republicans Reveal Distirct D Candidates”



  • 1 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 6:31 am

    What!? Historic preservation as part of the Republican platform? Straniti must be secretly one of the 20 hysterical preservationists in Norwalk.

    A closet Democrat, perhaps? But then again, no. I’ve heard she’s so far to the right that she borders on being a fascist. Also that she carries a gun…

  • 2 indiga // Jul 19, 2007 at 6:51 am

    Hey, Straniti did show up at the NPT fund-raiser — the only Republican Council person to have the guts to do so. I’ll give her credit for that. Even the Mayor (who will usually go to the opening of an envelope) stayed home. This is not to say that she has been active in VOTING in any way that supports preservation…because she has not.

  • 3 turfgrrl // Jul 19, 2007 at 6:54 am

    indiga: What votes on the council would be considered voting to support preservation?

  • 4 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 7:06 am

    How about voting to extend the demolition delay to 180 days? If it ever gets to a vote.

  • 5 turfgrrl // Jul 19, 2007 at 7:10 am

    Anonymous: That would be a future vote, I’m curious about past votes.

  • 6 anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 8:53 am

    Hey Indiga, other people in the community are preservationists and historic minded other than your little clique. How preservation minded was one of your inner sanctum who said he was preservation minded then used that pretense to gain many zoning changes for his and his ex-wifes “preservation minded” development atrocity near the cumberland farms gas station, havibg a kick off party for a development that would make him and his ex wife millions of dollars. It was shameful how it was called historic preservation all the while stuffing more units than warranted and causing other taxpayers to foot the bill. He and his ex wife then flipped the property at a hefty profit and haven’t been involved since. Many people in the city are onto your little clique and its objectives. And many other people care about preservation and history, but do not want to hang out with your little clique, which is wholly irrelevant, and becoming more so each day.

  • 7 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 9:04 am

    Is that you, Chris? Nah, can’t be. Your grammar isn’t atrocious enough and you’re not screaming. Sounds more like Nick Kydes, maybe.

  • 8 anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 9:12 am

    Anna Duliep should spend more time cleaning her parents place on Wall Street instead of running for office. I was eating out the other night and when walked by her family’s property, there was garbage all over and it looked like a slumlord’s abode. Maybe the Duliep family is trying to have it look blighted. They are doing a good job on it and they stand to profit handsomely if it is in the wall street redevelopment area. Has Mrs. Duliep commented on what she will do to recuse herself on every redeveloment issue ? She should, because she and her family stand to directly profict from her actions on the council.

  • 9 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 9:18 am

    Nice way to deflect attention from the issue of Republican candidates. Taking cues from Karl Rove, are we?

  • 10 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 9:20 am

    Perhaps Doug Hempstead could run on an anti-drug platform now that he has personal experience with the arrest of his son for heroin possession.

    Drugs n’ Guns! Vote R in 2008 (we’ll leave the rock n’ roll to the Dems)!

  • 11 anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 9:26 am

    Well, if we are handing out accolades, leave it to the family values Duliep, who is divorced, with a little child, and involved with a young man in an uncommitted relationship.(Lex Paulsen). Rock-n-rollin between the sheets those dems, keep on rollin’.

  • 12 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 9:28 am

    Well, well. I guess every single unmarried Republican (heckuva job, Moochie!) can embrace the same family values. Leave to the party of family “values” to open its mouth without engaging the few brain cells left…

  • 13 disgusted // Jul 19, 2007 at 9:48 am

    Ok enough-Some ones personal life is not up for grabs here. How low can some stoop to gain votes. #10, 11 & 12 those are disgusting comments that should never be part of a political debate. What Ms. Duleep does in her personal life is none of your damn business. To say those hurtful remarks against Doug Hempstead is probably the sickest thing I’ve seen here so far. Are you aware that Mr. Hempstead has gone through much heartache because of this? Do you care that as a father he has done the best job possible with his kids and still was unable to keep his son from harms way? Let me explain to you one thing. No matter how well you rear your kids, they are individuals who have minds of their own and whether or not you approve of their behavior, they will do what they want, when they want. You can only guide them through life and hope your values guide them in the right direction.

  • 14 anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 9:51 am

    Doug Hempstead and Kelly Straniti rock, and many of us will be voting for them this fall.

  • 15 anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 10:11 am

    Right on #13. #10 you probably are not a parent, otherwise you would know the pain Mr. Hempstead and his family went through.

  • 16 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 10:11 am

    #13 - Perhaps you should address your comments to anon #6 and #8 as well since the barn door was opened there. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

    What’s that saying in Washington? “If you want a friend in politics, get a dog.”

  • 17 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 10:16 am

    Oh, yeah. For those who have been so eager to bring down Dems via the Pagano Seafood “scandal”, I guess that is in a different category than who owns what on Wall St. and whether the trash is picked up. Doesn’t the City take care of keeping Wall St. clean?

  • 18 disgusted // Jul 19, 2007 at 10:25 am

    #16 and 17-My comments were geared to anyone who has the mindset to stoop so low as to air someone’s misfortunes or lifestyles. I don’t care which side of the isle they come from, they are dispicable and hurtful. The pagano thing was directed at what was handled improperly but the comments about someones personal life should not come into play. None of us knows what happened or why decisions are made in one’s personal life. I would say, that on both sides of the isle, there is more than one person who has chosen to live without benefit of marriage and there is more than one who has personal family problems that are heartbreaking at least. But who are we to decide how they live their lives? What should be discussed is how they conduct themselves as elected officials and what they have or can contribute to making Norwalk a better place to live. To attack someone like goes on here is just plain hurtful and not welcome by many.

  • 19 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 10:33 am

    I’d be interested to see how many local Republicans conveniently ignored the disgusting RNC campaign attack ads on Diane Farrell last fall. Probably quite a few, I imagine. Probably the same ones who are making a fuss about what’s being said in this thread.

  • 20 disgusted // Jul 19, 2007 at 11:17 am

    #19-did you even read what I said? Personal attacks like those above are not acceptable. Attacks on Diane Farrell if I recall were ones that took aim at her ability to do the job. It focused on the problems that occurred while she was first Selectman in Westport. I don’t recall any materials that stated problems in her personal life. However, if this is true and she was attacked in her personal life, then that too is unacceptable.

  • 21 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 1:14 pm

    This site is so depressing. Everyone complains that they want to discuss the issues then they get on personal problems, family isssues, who owns what, who sleeps with whom. Moccia is running against Briggs, that should be the issue, do you like what is happening in Norwalk or not? Questions not accusations that are hurtful. Moccia’s personal life has been attacked, Briggs is blamed for what his grandfather did. Who cares. This comes from both sides, you all should knock it off. How about some kind of humanity, and try to be decent on the blog. There is a saying that the really great person is the person that makes every person feel great. Try it, and everyone might feel a little better. What have we all got to lose?

  • 22 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 1:52 pm

    #20 - I don’t think that RNC ads accusing Farrell of supporting the Taliban are problems that occurred in Westport.

  • 23 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 1:54 pm

    Why do dems keep trying to make Paganos about them? A couple of political people made a mistake in handling an unfortunate incideny. No one said it was them who should be punished. You’re supposed to learn from your mistakes.

  • 24 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 1:58 pm

    Maybe it’s time to resurrect the chocolate fountain thread!

  • 25 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 2:01 pm

    It’s not the Dems who are “trying to make Paganos about them.” Turfie tried to pull a Jason Leopold by “exposing” the Pagano story in the same way Leopold “broke” the news that Patrick Fitzgerald was going to indict Karl Rove for his involvement in the Scooter Libby Case.

    Once Turfie set the agenda on this blog for the Paganos story, the local media jumped into bed with her and printed the allegations.

    Claims of bringing justice to the victim by publicizing that story are transparent attempts to discredit Galen Wells, Alex Knopp and anyone else who was under suspicion of a massive left-wing conspiracy to cover it all up.

  • 26 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 2:07 pm

    This is number 21, I tried, and what happenened, look at the messages from 22-25, better luck talking to a 5 year old. Attacks again. We should all be ashamed of what is being said, even if we are not saying it, because these people live in our town.

  • 27 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 2:27 pm

    #26 - No. It’s not that you’re attempting to “talk to a 5 year old.” You’re attempting to talk to someone who could care less what your opinion is. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the fire.

    This blog is free of any preconditions for happy talk in order for people to post on it. That includes the bad with the good. That includes both sides. Are you so naive as to think that only the people who post on this blog bring up issues that don’t conform to your worldview? Think again.

    Political parties (most notably, and most recently, the Republicans, and locally, that includes the anonymous cowards who paid for the Firefighters’ Union billboard that trashed Alex Knopp and also Art Scialabba for attempting to trash Bob Duff) do this every election cycle, but they operate under the guise of respectability so are rarely taken to task because to do so would be unseemly.

    Wake up and smell the cat food.

  • 28 True Story // Jul 19, 2007 at 2:37 pm

    #25 Galen Wells is not a victim, this young person was hurt. The local dems have a problem with race and the people of this town are starting to wake up.

  • 29 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 2:37 pm

    #26 I have smelled the cat food and it smells much better than the trash that you spew. And all I said is that we should not get personal and that the attacks come from both sides, meaning Dems and R’s, but you showed your side by atacking R’s, but if had been attacking the Dems, I would say the same thing. It is not necessary. With regards to yourself, you represent the worst in Norwalk. As you said; this blog is open to any views. That is mine.

  • 30 Watchdog // Jul 19, 2007 at 2:44 pm

    Dear Poster #21: I wholly understand how you would say this thread is depressing, but the good news is that this sort of thing needs to come to its ugly, sadistic head. Attacking candidates at this level is … well, it defies description.

    It is only the small-minded and callous few - along with their own set of unresolved internal conflicts - who would ever, EVER attack ANYONE at these profound levels of personal relationships and family dynamics.

    Drug and alcohol addiction is a scourge that belongs to most of us at some level, either through a relative or a friend. Anyone who has ever gone through the pain and heartache of working through drug addiction with a loved one knows it is hardly something to snicker about. Couple that with witnessing your child’s lifeline stabilize at zero following an overdose.

    I pray that you are spared this pain, poster #10. Dearest “Disgusted,” thank you for having the compassion and intelligibility to say it so very well in your above response.

  • 31 L'arlequino // Jul 19, 2007 at 2:49 pm

    Goodness, me! I find it amusing to note that nobody is discussing the merits of the alleged offenses. Isn’t that what an open forum is for?

    I also tend to agree that if you’re in politics, you should have a very thick skin.

  • 32 Watchdog // Jul 19, 2007 at 2:59 pm

    Well, L’arlequino… goodness me that YOU are talking alleged offenses. Which candidate are you referring to?

  • 33 L'arlequino // Jul 19, 2007 at 3:03 pm

    Anybody that’s referred to in this thread: Anna Duleep, Bill Kraus and wife (implied in #6), the billboard bandits, and Art Scialabba. Enough?

  • 34 Watchdog // Jul 19, 2007 at 3:06 pm

    But, alleged offenses, L’arlequino? That’s a bit steep. For living situations? Alleged offenses borders on libel, I would think.

  • 35 L'arlequino // Jul 19, 2007 at 3:08 pm

    OK, whatever description you prefer. I’d just like to see the merits debated.

  • 36 L'arlequino // Jul 19, 2007 at 3:10 pm

    Actually, the #6 post is about an implied situation that would be described as unethical, if there is any merit to it.

  • 37 Watchdog // Jul 19, 2007 at 3:15 pm

    Well, I wouldn’t know, L’arlequino. I find IT very amusing that we are in a District D thread and not ONE darn issue has surfaced….just “alleged offenses,” as you say. That leads me to believe that the knowledge level of issues, specific in nature to District D - or otherwise, for that matter - is rock bottom.

  • 38 L'arlequino // Jul 19, 2007 at 3:17 pm

    Well, I can’t say that beyond the Silvermine bridge and Tavern, much was brought up to discuss. Save Cranbury has been in the works for quite a while and is pretty well settled.

  • 39 Police Dropped Investigation // Jul 19, 2007 at 3:17 pm

    Let’s be clear on the Pagano story. Galen Wells smeared David Watts by saying that there never was a child exposed to porn at Paganos. Galen Wells lied in front of a room full of DTC members. Galen and Alex could have cleared up the whole issue by doing right for the child and putting their very large egos aside, and for starters ackowledging the incident, doing something about it and not saying publicly that Watts was lying. Watts is the real victim here if you want to call it a political witch hunt. But shame on us all for not caring about the young boy who was afraid to come forward because of threats against his mother. No one wants to talk about that.

  • 40 Police Dropped Investigation // Jul 19, 2007 at 3:18 pm

    Let’s be clear on the Pagano story. Galen Wells smeared David Watts by saying that there never was a child exposed to porn at Paganos. Galen Wells lied in front of a room full of DTC members. Galen and Alex could have cleared up the whole issue by doing right for the child and putting their very large egos aside, and for starters acknowledging the incident, doing something about it and not saying publicly that Watts was lying. Watts is the real victim here if you want to call it a political witch hunt. But shame on us all for not caring about the young boy who was afraid to come forward because of threats against his mother. No one wants to talk about that.

  • 41 L'arlequino // Jul 19, 2007 at 3:20 pm

    Them’s fightin’ words! Sounds like yer talkin’ libel now, podner. I hear lots o’ jibber jabber ’bout this young feller Watts but mostly just folks trying to get his name in edgewise, like.

  • 42 Watchdog // Jul 19, 2007 at 3:48 pm

    #40 - Thanks for sharing the skinny on Watts. It’s a pretty nasty business, this politicking thang.

    Come on, Arlequino.. there are ALWAYS issues. Let’s see…what about highlighting the many accidents at the four way stop at the intersection of Cranbury and Newtown, for starters? Sure could use a traffic light. What about the need for a neighborhood association?

  • 43 L'arlequino // Jul 19, 2007 at 3:52 pm

    How about more police presence on Gregory Blvd? How about yet ANOTHER bank robbery in Norwalk? Hellooo, Mr Greenpeace? Are we becoming the bank robbery capital of CT? Maybe they should advertise: “Come on in, get a free toaster, will that be unmarked bills in twenties or tens?”

  • 44 Anonymous // Jul 19, 2007 at 5:41 pm

    Watchdog, you’re accepting a lot on faith. What credibility does PDI have? A statement like “Galen Wells lied” has nothing to back it up. If someone said that about the Republicans there would be plenty of howling about it. Threats against the boy’s mother? Who says? Where are the facts here?

  • 45 Watchdog // Jul 19, 2007 at 6:08 pm

    To #44:
    You are positively right, and when I replied with “Thanks for sharing the skinny on Watts,” I was simply acknowledging PDI’s concerns, sort of like validating the weather {Looks like rain. Yep, sure does.”]

    I’ll admit I’m guilty of choosing my battles on this blog. There is so much hearsay and truth-stretching. Isuppose I should have said, “Thanks for sharing your feelings on the matter, but I am totally unaware of the facts, so I really can’t form an opinion at this time.”

    So, wait… did you give your spin on this?

    Hmm… you didn’t write much of your take on the issue. It really seems like an issue laden with emotions from all corners and I really think it best to be decided upon in a court of law, if need be.

    By the way, I do usually dismiss an accusation like so and so lied. That is a very strong statement, I agree.
    Thanks, 44, for clearing that up.

Leave a Reply