Anti-gun rally: 15 anti’s, 365 reporters

Mayors Against Illegal Guns Protest August  22, 2013

Mayors Against Illegal Guns Protest August 22, 2013

Fifteen people showed up to support the Mike Bloomberg gun ban initiative yesterday, accompanied by the usual entourage of national press. Greenwich Democrat candidate for First Selectman and gun-confiscator activist Stephanie, “There’s rape-rape, then there’s date rape” Paulmeno  did not attend. Reached for comment aboard Harbor Master Ian Macmillan ‘s boat, where she was helping yank moorings that offended the Harbor Master’s eyes, Paulmeno told FWIW, “the day’s rally was promoted as “No More Names”, so I took them at their word and didn’t show up to add my own. Do you think I misunderstood?”

UPDATE: I found the forgiving comments of Ms. Paulmeno towards date rape curious, given her fierce support of  abortion rights based, she says, on an absolute “right of privacy”

If the personal sanctity of your body and the right to make decisions about it is not reason enough, then I don’t know what is. When the audacity of some allows them to feel righteous enough to legally dictate not only what you do with your body but also lets them feel they can play with your mind, this raises the stakes very high for me. I think it should for any woman, and for any man who has a daughter, a wife, a sister or a mother.

What if it’s your date/rapist “playing with your mind”? That’s okay?

And there’s this:

I shudder in horror, and you should, too, that around twenty states now require women considering abortion to submit to a vaginal ultrasound, view the fetus and listen to the heart beat, an unabashed physical and emotional assault, in an effort to dissuade women from choosing an abortion. About ten more states are in discussion about moving forward in this direction. Aside from the unmitigated arrogance, this adds unnecessary cost, is an unwanted/unnecessary procedure, infringes on privacy rights and constitutes state-sanctioned rape and exploitation of women.

The medical dictionary ( defines rape as, amongst other things, the insertion of an [unwanted] inanimate object into the female vagina. An 8-10 inch vaginal probe, which mandates you to expose your most intimate and private parts, which is unwanted by the woman and her doctor, which serves no medical purpose, and which you are mandated to have against your will, constitutes rape and exploitation in my book. 

Who could argue with that? Who, that is, except Stephanie Paulmeno, who seemingly distinguishes between the insertion of an unwanted inanimate object in a woman’s vagina and an unwanted animate object, like your date rapist’s penis: not our soundest of thinkers, poor Stephanie, but as a reader points out, the perfect bookend for the Greenwich Democrat’s other nominee, cult follower Samarpana Tamm. These two are really the best they can do? How revealing.


Filed under Right wing nut rantings

66 responses to “Anti-gun rally: 15 anti’s, 365 reporters

  1. Mickster

    It’s about supporting the notion that everyone buying a gun should undergo a background check. Dont be a hater just because you would be excluded from owning any more guns.

    • Call me curious...

      Mickster: I’m curious, would you pass a “background check”? What is a background check? A NICS check? A full field FBI background investigation akin to those conducted for a SCIF job candidate??? Edward Snowden passed that one. Now he’s public enemy #1.

      Does Mike Bloomberg even know? Does Dullard Bill know? FF? Himes? Moiphy?? Maolloy??? Blumenturd???

      • Anonymous

        I order background checks done all the time. You’re missing the point, Curious. If they’re mandatory for ALL sales that should act as a deterrent for lots of undesirables. Are they 100% foolproof – no. I’ve seen judgements come up on a candidates check and 3 months later it no longer showed but an older one reappeared.
        Bottom line for me, if you want to buy a gun or ammo I want you checked and registered.
        Common sense – unless you have a real fear of that info being abused. That’s a whole other topic.

        • Call me curious...


          unless you have a real fear of that info being abused. That’s a whole other topic.
          No shit!

          As for the mandatory “Background Checks” Criminals intent on acquiring weapons will readily bypass the system (as they already do) and use other means to acquire firearms such as straw-buyers – a particular favorite technique of Obama/Holder for getting guns into the hands of their narco-traficante partners across the border. The other of course being trade in stolen firearms. If you say that you believe that background checks will solve the problem of guns getting into the wrong hands, then you are either lying or you are a willing naif.

        • Anonymous

          I’m neither naieve nor a liar. People break laws daily. Some laws are enforced better than others. There are those out there that shouldn’t have guns. Let’s prevent them getting them. And you can stop straw purchases with volume controls etc
          And back to your original question I would pass a background check but should never hsve a gun in my home.

        • jB

          I get my ammo, and my drivers license, and my prescriptions, in Tijuana. The service is so much better there.

  2. housecat

    I had forgotten about the sex offender story from a few years’ back. Didn’t realize she was the mother of a registered sex offender quoted in the original article. Just re-read it, and Stephanie, you ignorant, brain-dead (I can’t say the word here): you will NOT be getting my vote.
    My god, THIS is the best the Democrats can do? Rape-apologists and cult followers? What’s next?

    • Proud Democrat

      Ms. Paulmeno’s wasn’t comparing different kinds of rape. She was simply trying to say a violent sex act is different and should not be labeled the same.

      • “Ms. Paulmeno’s wasn’t comparing different kinds of rape” Really? She said it, not I; you have an issue with your candidate’s philosophy, take it up with her yourself – it’s silly to pretend the words were never said.

        And if Sarah Palin had said that? It’s the hypocrisy of the left that annoys me, not Ms. Paulmeno’s opposition to a ban on rapists at town parks (a position I agree with – the proposed ban was ridiculously over broad and unnecessary). You can’t be proud of that hypocrisy, so perhaps you just can’t see it. I’m here to point it out.

        • Riverside Resident

          I know Stephanie and her comments are taken out of context. She strongly believed that the child’s sex offender ordiance if passed would be challenged in court. She was trying to differentiate the difference between violent rape and a 18 year going to jail for having consensual sex with a 17 year old.

          • “She was trying to differentiate the difference between violent rape and a 18 year going to jail for having consensual sex with a 17 year old.”

            My mistake – I thought she was referring to her own son and his crime, not the hypothetical young innocent you describe. I regret the error.

      • Riverside resident

        People should not hold Ms. Paulmeno accountable for her sons actions. The DTC knew this, she ran for office two years ago, she publically speaks about differing viewpoints on sexual assault. No one should be surprised. The DTC encouraged her to run. So now this “placeholder” candidate and her strong views should be applauded. Farriker and the entire DTC leadership should stand by her. She has my vote!

        • Who on earth is trying to hold Miss Paulmeno accountable for anything? The post is about the hypocrisy of the left. If you like her “strong views” on date rape and abortion then by all means do vote for her; it’s (still, sort of) a free country. Don’t forget to rub your pyramid to bring Samarpana luck.

    • Longtime Greenwich resident

      She’s not apologizing for rapist, you idiot!

      • housecat

        At least I can pluralize, IDIOT. And, if you agree with her statements that acquaintance rape isn’t actually “rape-rape” then I sincerely hope that you experience the non-difference firsthand.

  3. They all look lily white in the picture.

    Hell, they must be racists!

    Trying to set back civil rights 100 years. Taking the vote away from women. I think one of them could be heard to utter a slur.

  4. weakleyhollow

    They got more than showed up in Richmond. There were three.

  5. Riverside Resident

    Stephanie is running for office. Not her son.

    • Those are Stephanie’s words, not her son’s.

    • DTC member and proud Stepanie supporter

      This is simply a case of a mother trying to defend her son. This quote is taken out of context and the DEMS should defend her. The Republicans won’t touch this. If they try and portray Stephanie as someone who somehow thinks rapist shoud not be locked up they will fail. She has my vote!

  6. Very offended female

    Her comments are utterly offensive! Rape is rape. Period.
    She is disgusting.

    • housecat

      Apparently, not everyone understands that.

      Here’s the deal: Dems (of which I am a registered member), if she DID NOT, in fact, say this disgustingly stupid thing, then urge your candidate to publicly set the record straight.
      If she DID, in fact, claim that rape isn’t really “rape-rape” if the victim happens to know the attacker, then as far as I am concerned she is too stupid to breathe and deserves neither your loyalty or support.

  7. Cos Cob resident

    Does anyone remember Congressman Todd “legitimate rape” Akin.

  8. Undecided voter

    I won’t judge her until she has a chance to explain.

  9. Very smart person

    She doesn’t say legitimate rape. She says rape rape is different from date rape. A big difference.

    • Funny how liberals can parse distinctions in a fellow Democrat’s statements that they completely miss when the speaker is a Republican. Must be that “nuance” thing.

  10. A Republican offering advice

    If I was the democratic leadership I would throw her to the curb tonight. Yesterday last week as a matter of fact. How would anyone vote for someone who actually thinks date rape is somehow less tragic. How is this going to look? And do we really want someone representing Greenwich that actually believes this.

  11. One saving grace

    I guess Malloy, Blumenthal and Himes won’t be stumping for the DEMS this November.

  12. She should resign

    Her comments are highly offensive. I don’t care what she has to say!

    • Well she could file an anticipatory resignation, I suppose, but I suspect come November, she’ll be handing that document to Republican Tesei- Republicans don’t do much better than Democrats in candidate selection, but there are more of them.

  13. Roger Paulmeno

    Well I am Stephanie Paulmeno’s husband and I’ve attended all the meetings with her that are referenced here, and I can assure you that she NEVER said the words attributed to her by that reporter. I was there by her side the whole time she was at any meetings on this topic except when she was standing at the podium and that’s recorded on the Town website for anyone to hear for themselves. I urge you to do so! See September 2009 and September 2010 and listen for yourself.

    I thank the good people who wrote supportive statements about my wife or who have the good judgment to hold their opinions until they hear from her. There have been many cowards sending letters to the newspapers based on things they want others to raise…but not them because they undoubtedly know their facts are flawed.

    I cannot sit silently by and read the garbage above or hear you defile such a good person without making a comment…and I do know the facts. Anyone who knows her would know just how ridiculous such comments would be coming from her. They would never come out of her lips as it is against everything she believes in. You could not find a nicer, more caring or selfless person, or a stronger supporter of women, single mothers OR young girls on dates. She always has a helping hand and kind words for anyone and everyone.

    She has been a staunch supporter of the Stamford sexual abuse center and the domestic abuse program at the YWCA even recruiting speakers for their program, and marchers (including us)for their treck down Greenwich Avenue from Town Hall; and attending and recruiting participants to sit in support of their causes at a meeting and press event at the Stamford Government Center.

    Stephanie has used our son’s situation many times to talk with parents of teens, and to teens themselves, about just how easy it is to get into major trouble when you drink, and about parents needing to talk to their children before they go off to college where nobody is monitoring them. She has been the chairman of a major substance abuse prevention and education program for nearly a decade helping agencies to help fight the fight about teen drinking and substance abuse because she knows how kids’ judgments become impaired when under the influence, and there are some bad judgment calls that you just can’t take back and make better. Yes, alcohol use is frequently a significant factor in sexual misconduct. She has been utterly and brutally open about our family crisis since it began so that others could learn from it and not have to go through what we went through. Yes, parents are victims too when situations like this occur. It broke my heart to see her, such a great, loving and dedicated mother, go through what she went through.

    The Town should be so lucky as to get someone of Stephanie’s caliber, brilliance and selfless dedication to be their 1st Selectman, and so many out there know that, and I think they’re frightened by it, thus this horrific organized and orchestrated smear campaign. Shame on those of you, and we all know who you are, who have orchestrated this to benefit the outcome of a campaign! Politics really is dirty business, but Stephanie has been completely open about everything you have thrown at her here since its inception years ago. She has no qualms about continuing to be just as open now has she has been all along so the intended sting of your vileness will be lost on her. Because of her openness and sharing she has seen little but compassion and support from people around this town from all walks of life. Those with ulterior motives can play their petty and cruel games and reach other like-minded people; Stephanie is very approachable; get to know her and make up your own mind.

    Stephanie has served Greenwich and CT for over 30 years in all kinds of ways, never seeking glory or recognition for her services across the state. She has no motive for running for 1st Selectman beyond serving the good of the people, and I know this to be true.

    I didn’t see any other candidates two years ago giving up their election campaigning during the hurricane and flood, but she did, and she really wanted to be State Representative for the 150th District; she did exceedingly well in that race and would have done better had she continued campaigning or at least let the people know that she was serving them quietly and unassumingly instead of campaigning. She would hear none of that! She ran around our neighborhood checking on frail or ill neighbors to see if they needed anything. She wanted no one to know what she was doing because she felt that would be self-serving. What…this from a politician!! She served as the nurse in a Red Cross shelter without any fanfare for two weeks after the hurricane while everyone else continued campaigning and some took short stop-in shelter visit opportunities to have photo ops taken to bolster their campaigns. Not my wife, she rolled up her sleeves and worked long hard hours for the people, as she always has, and was exhausted for days on end. She fought afterwards for the animals because we had no town shelters that would take them. She came home in the storm to get one of our dog’s coats for a man who had to leave his freezing dog in the car while he was in the shelter.

    If the vile and ignorant comments above are any indication of the sentiment of many of the people of Greenwich, then they don’t deserve her.

    Chris Fountain, you sound like a bitter and angry person with hate in your heart. I hope your life gets better!

    • It seems to me, sir, your beef is with the Greenwich Time, not this blog, that merely linked to the original story. Those comments were attributed to her in 2010 – she’s had three years to demand a retraction – in view of her present campaign to win the top political position in town, this would seem a good time to remedy that oversight.

      • Roger Paulmeno

        She never even saw those 2010 comments until a vile letter was sent to the newspapers a week or so ago by an unnamed person, that referenced them. I looked the article up so that she could read it. Rubbish!

        • Democrat

          Did she make the comments or not? Or was she misquoted? Or
          did the GT article written by Vidgor take what she said out of context?

        • Roger Paulmeno

          The only thing Stephanie referenced in a committee discussion was about the range of people who end up on the sex offenders list in CT with no distinction drawn between them. She has often noted that young people are having sex at a very early age and that if an 18 year old is dating someone a few years younger than himself, and has consensual sex with them, he could be put on the sex offender list in Connecticut with the same degree of condemnation as someone who commits a brutal rape. She does not feel that a violent rape assault warrants the same label as two teenagers having willing sex on a date, or equally stigmatized on CT’s Megan’s list; much as we wish they wouldn’t, they are having sex quite young, and in doing so many young men could end up labeled sex offenders with their lives forever altered.

    • Roger Paulmeno

      One more thing in response to Chris Fountain’s article:

      Chris wrote: “Greenwich Democrat candidate for First Selectman and gun-confiscator activist Stephanie,… Paulmeno did not attend. Reached for comment aboard Harbor Master Ian Macmillan ’s boat, where she was helping yank moorings that offended the Harbor Master’s eyes, Paulmeno told FWIW, “the day’s rally was promoted as “No More Names”, so I took them at their word and didn’t show up to add my own. Do you think I misunderstood?”

      Stephanie was not on Harbor Master Ian McMillan’s boat “yanking up moorings” during Mayor Bloomberg’s gun-banning activity as Mr. Fountain alleges, nor does she know Mr. McMillian, but she looks forward to meeting him soon. Here yet again is another quote attributed to her that was never said, and attendance at an event that she never attended. Is this getting to be a pattern? Should we be looking for more alleged quotes and “mystery appearance announcements intended to damage her good name and a reputation of selfless service built over a 44 year career as this orchestrated smear campaign continues? Please folks, check your facts before you swallow the gibberish being fed to you as a political maneuver.

      As Stephanie’s husband I would ask those many, many people who know her and who have benefited from her services, her caring or her friendship to speak up and write up now on her behalf, not only in regard to this garbage, but about her as a candidate. “All that is needed for evil to prevail is for good [people] to do nothing.” Let’s let those of us who are not in this politically motivated smear campaign stand up for the best candidate!

      • “Stephanie was not on Harbor Master Ian McMillan’s boat “yanking up moorings” during Mayor Bloomberg’s gun-banning activity as Mr. Fountain alleges, nor does she know Mr. McMillian, but she looks forward to meeting him soon. Here yet again is another quote attributed to her that was never said, and attendance at an event that she never attended.”

        I take it you’re a new reader – welcome!

      • Greenwich resident

        With all do respect sir alcohol is no excuse for sexual assault! Please don’t blame getting drunk on committing such a violent act. If your wife was misquoted why wasn’t this brought up 3 years ago? Your defense of her is noble but blaming alcohol, blaming the Greenwich Time, blaming Chris Fountain seems a bit disingenuous. It would be more believable if Stephanie came out and just said my comments were based on emotion. Because of my love for my son. That I would understand.

        • If Stephanie wins the election, will we have to reserve a place at Selectmen meetings for her husband? Not quite the “bold leadership” politicians always promise us but perhaps this, like her running mate Ramadamadingdong Tamm’s own candidacy, is an example of New Age politics. Ooooommmm

        • Roger Paulmeno

          I have run a mental health clinic for nearly 30 years and I know that alcohol use is a highly correlated factor with many acts of poor judgment including sexual misconduct, especially among young people. Drinking in college is a rampant problem, as it is right here in our own town schools. The papers point that out quite regularly. You are absolutely right that getting stone drunk is no excuse for sexual assault or misconduct of any type but it happens, and it happens a lot. The misuse of alcohol in and of itself is poor judgment that further compounds additional poor decisions that young people are known for. No one is watching our kids when they go off to college. If we had known our son had begun drinking heavily, we would have taken immediate action and brought him home. We didn’t care if he was the top student in the school as his advisor and dean told us when we flew out upon learning of his situation. We would have brought him home on the spot for treatment. Kids in college (and high school) have to learn that they are their brothers’ keepers, because somebody ahs to be when they are away from family supports and oversight.

          • Oh dear, this little side trip on a boring August weekend was not intended to drag up a long ago crime that was paid for by 8 years of incarceration. The local paper’s reporter, a man who primarily serves as a sympathetic mouthpiece for Greenwich Democrats, quoted a Democrat saying things that, were she a Republican, would have generated furious outrage among the Left. Instead….crickets. I brought up the quote to point out the hypocrisy attending leftists’ pronouncements on sexism, women’s rights, etc.
            Now you deny she made those comments, drew those distinctions. Again, if Neil Vigdor invented that story, your complaint lies with him.
            But this is not about alcohol and it is most certainly not about your son, who isn’t running for office. It wasn’t even intended to be about your wife, although she IS running for office. It is about removing the mote from one’s eye.

    • Long time Greenwich resident

      With all due respect……
      This is nothing but a mother defending her son. Her judgement and decision making is clouded. She is not fit for office. I encourage her to continue volunteering. But her campaign trying to clear any misconceptions about her is wrong. This poor woman was a victim of a horrific crime. Google his name and read for yourself. This was not a case of a drunken mistake. Please stop dismissing it. For the girl and girls family sake.

      • Roger Paulmeno

        It is obvious that it is you whose decision making is clouded, or perhaps you’ve been fortunate enough to never have had anyone in your family have a run in with the law. It was quite a learning experience. Perhaps you are unaware that police and prosecutors can put all kinds of misinformation out in the newspapers to entrap you and can tell you all kinds of things that are not true; they can, but we cannot. Check out some law books and state statutes. At the sentencing hearing the prosecutor said that it was a good thing he plea bargained because they had no evidence against him, and they didn’t, but we didn’t know what had happened, and neither did he; the women in the scenario didn’t even know who he was between him, 5’9 and muscular, and a tall thin light skinned black man. Being blind drunk is a bitch when you can’t even defend yourself.

        • Counselor

          So now it’s the woman’s fault? And your son had nothing to do with it? And it was a set up. What about the blood? DNA?

  14. Please answer

    Stephanie or Mr. Paulmeno,
    What did Stephanie mean when she is quoted as saying ” no is no but date rape is different than rape.”
    And what did Stephanie mean when she said taking inappropriate pictures is different than touching or molesting a child?”
    I know you are defending your wife but these comments are deplorable.
    I do however wait your response before I make full judgement.

    • Concerned citizen

      And what did she mean by saying
      The convicted sex offenders who live in Greenwich only took pictures and didn’t actually touch anyone? Isn’t taking pictures of underage children naked a crime? Isn’t it wrong? Shouldn’t parents be concerned?

      • RTC member

        Do you know who Tod Aiken is?

        Please…..consider asking your wife to resign. She is not qualified!

        • Roger Paulmeno

          You truly are an idiot. Open your eyes and your ears or are you too much in lockstep with your party to think logically based on facts and not hearsay put out for the intended purpose of creating a smear campaign… OR are you one of the smear campaign letter writers who doesn’t have the guts to stand behind what they are saying? She is by far the best candidate for office as people from here to Hartford, in this administration and administrations past have demonstrated through including her in statewide projects. I don’t believe your candidate can say anything like that. Tod Aiken believed his jiberish. My wife has no belief in anything that has been attributed to her and has decades of history behind her to prove that.

    • Roger Paulmeno

      I think I answered the first part of your question in a previous comment. She believes quite completely that rape and date rape are equally vile and both offenders earn the right to be called sex offenders. She differentiates that from two young people on a date having consensual sex where one has become 18 and one is still underage (which happens a lot).

      If you listen to the RTM Meeting videos on The Town website for Sept 2009 and September 2010, my wife discusses the 4 and then 6 registered sex offenders in Greenwich in terms of the child safety zone issue and notes that of the 4 (and then 6) only one has ever been convicted of a crime against children, and even he has never touched or molested a child, just took pictures of them (This young man took pictures of the boys swim team in the swimming pool at Greenwich High School from the viewing window; all were dressed).

      • Former RTM worker

        Ms. Paulmenos comments to GT were made months before the RTM meeting. If GT misquoted you why didn’t you object then. When was the interview with Vigdor conducted? The comments attributed to Ms. Paulmeno are awful. Rape is rape Ms. Paulmeno! Period! I don’t know exactly what happened to your son and why he did what he did but please don’t blame in on alcohol. Instead of defending your son and making excuses. Be honest an apologize for your hurtful words.

      • Avid reder

        That’s not what she said!

      • jB

        “She differentiates that from two young people on a date having consensual sex where one has become 18 and one is still underage (which happens a lot).”

        I’m sympathetic but that’s the nature of our laws. As I recall there are two components involved: informed and voluntary consent. While the sex may have been consensual, or voluntary, the underage status precludes the informed part. It seems quite arbitrary to me, 17 vs 18 years of age. It must be quite frightening to any mother of an 18 year old son knowing what teenage girls are capable of. So, when is rape rape? And when is it not? And how many people have to suffer a life time of indignation of negative background checks for a young person’s indiscretion? An indiscretion celebrated in literature since literature was invented. Who exactly is in favor of this zero tolerance? Who exactly is responsible for this no chance of redemption? Jaded me thinks redemption isn’t for little people.

        Let the candidates pass a background check to buy ammo. Publish the results. Good enough for a gun owner, good enough for a gun regulator.

        two cents

    • Roger Paulmeno

      To answer the response above this one, there was no evidence of any sort linking him to the crime; blood, saliva, hair, fingerprints-nothing, etc. as per the prosecutor herself. ALL the DNA, fingerprints and semen found in the woman’s bed or apartment were identified as belonging to other people.

  15. Paulmeno for First Selectman supporter

    I think Stephanie was trying to differentiate between date rape and statutory rape. There is a difference between the two. And I thank her for honesty. And I thank her for all she has done. She has my vote.

  16. Cos Cob resiident

    I would not be surprised one bit of the Greenwich Time misquoted her!

  17. Rape counselor

    Rape is rape!

    • Roger Paulmeno

      Two kids on a date having consensual sex is NOT the same as a man raping a woman; one is a violent act and one is based, hopefully, on mutual caring between to kids, albiet perhaps misguided and premature because of their ages.

  18. Convicted sex offender

    She has my vote too!

  19. Local resident

    The Greenwich Time is always misquoting. Thank you Roger for clearing this up!

  20. Independent voter

    With all due respect has Stephanie released a statement?

  21. Roger Paulmeno

    My wife just announced she was running two weeks ago. She just had her 1st campaign planning meeting on Thursday, and is planning an overall campaign strategy, of which this is one small, misguided piece. She has had nothing to respond to because the cowardly letter writers have noted they do not want their names used or their letters published. They want the papers to dredge this up and make it a story, which to their credit they have not done after viewing the tapes themselves, as I urge you to do. She will be making a speech at the Democratic Kick-off Picnic on September 8th, if not sooner.

  22. Chris what the hell are you doing ?
    Demanding background checks on candidates ?