Enfield Republican Leader Kaupin Rips Cocoa Puffs’ Phony Probe

October 6, 2007


Scott Kaupin, Town Councilman & Republican Minority Leader has left a new comment on your post “Duh”:

Why does the Journal Inquirer continue to write about an investigation when there was no investigation? The opinion from the Town Attorney’s Office that is referenced in this article was issued before the Mayor single handedly called for an investigation. This information was relayed to the reporter twice, by me, when contacted for both “articles”. The opinion was in hand when the first article was being written. The Mayor does not have the authority to single handedly call for an investigation … that is only with in the authority of the full Town Council. The Journal Inquirer really needs to get the facts straight before publishing “articles”.

Posted by Scott Kaupin, Town Councilman & Republican Minority Leader to The Cool Justice Report at 10:47 AM

  • Duh
  • Dangerous Muzzling
  • Turner To Cocoa Puffs:
  • Cocoa Puffs To Citizens:
  • Advertisements

    6 Responses to “Enfield Republican Leader Kaupin Rips Cocoa Puffs’ Phony Probe”

    1. Anonymous Says:

      Mary Ann Turner did nothing wrong per the Town Attorney. But she also didn’t come forward when people were accusing Cindy Mangini of being the “woman on the town council” who talked to the contractor. If she knew she hadn’t done anything wrong why didn’t she step forward? Why did she mis-represent herself to the contractor? Why? Because she’s a crackpot and hasn’t a clue how to act with integrity and professionalism.

      Enfield has some problems. And they exist with both Democrats and Republicans. Particularly the leadership of both parties. Don’t paint all democrats and republicans with the same brush as a few who have pushed their way into leadership. There are members of both parties who have the best interests of the community at heart and are willing to work for Enfield inspite of their party leaderships’games. And they are trying to make changes in their parties.

      Use your head Enfield. Vote the individual, not the party on Nov 6th!

    2. Anonymous Says:

      What obligation did Mary Ann have to come forward. Last time I checked, in America you’re innocent until proven guilty. Except when Tallarita’s fascists are running things.

      How did Mary Ann misrepresent herself to the contractor? What if she were the CEO of MassMutual calling up, referring to herself as powerful, and warning people? That’s what the douchebags on the council don’t realize. Not everyone who’s powerful holds public office, and not everyone who hold public office is powerful.

      Now about the “good democrats”- why haven’t they done more to distance themselves from Tallarita? If they vote with him all the time, what does anything else matter?

      It seems like the only one who had the balls to stand up to Tallarita is Red Edgar, whose running unopposed. So at the end of the day, it looks like the rest of them are all the same. Who are the “good democrats”? Even if they talk differently, if they vote with Tallarita and company, it doesn’t make a bit of difference.

      Everyone knows that Hillinski and Crowley were Tallarita’s two main lackeys. Crowley was the big insider who had been around Enfield forever. Hillinski was Tallarita’s mediocre deputy whose only skill was taking orders. Boring, and untalented, he was made deputy because Pat knew he’d never be a rival?

      By the way, where does the mayor like to drink? Someone told me that he’s a regular at the Cloverleaf and Jiggy’s.

    3. Anonymous Says:

      Mary Ann Turner did nothing wrong per the Town Attorney. But she also didn’t come forward when people were accusing Cindy Mangini of being the “woman on the town council” who talked to the contractor.

      I guess my question is which member of the Council posted this?

      From what I learned from talking to a Council member, until Cocoa Puffs called the J.I., this was an executive session discussion so how would Mary Ann have known? Or is it routine to discuss Executive Session with people outside the scope of that session?

      In either event, your comment is right in line with the article the JI wrote in that it is purely political. But hey, I’m glad you see the writing on the wall. Hope you enjoy studying it the 2 years between now & the next election.

    4. Anonymous Says:

      As a former insider, letting information out of an executive session is illegal.

    5. Anonymous Says:

      >Now about the “good democrats”- why haven’t they done more to distance themselves from Tallarita?

      You haven’t been paying attention. I am with the fire service and we only have 3 friends on the council. The 3 Democrats reached out to some Republicans to help us and I hear they took a big beating for doing it. They stick with us even when the mayor puts up every road block. I won’t forget our friends and their friends who helped.

    6. Anonymous Says:

      Revealing information discussed in executive session is not necessarily illegal. It depends on the information being revealed. It might be illegal to discuss a town employee’s health records. It’s not illegal to reveal political maneuvering or a matter of significant public interest that was wrongly discussed behind closed doors.


    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

    Connecting to %s

    %d bloggers like this: