Professor Duquette

Profile picJerold Duquette is an associate professor of political science at Central Connecticut State University. He is the author of Regulating the National Pastime: Baseball and Antitrust and has published articles and book chapters on campaign finance reform, political parties, Massachusetts politics and political culture, public opinion, and political socialization. In addition to his university work, Mr. Duquette also works on occassion as a political and public policy consultant and public speaker, and served for many years as a faculty consultant to the Educational Testing Service in princeton, NJ.

Professor Duquette teaches courses on public administration, public budgeting & finance, public policy analysis, American national government, interest groups, political parties and elections, public opinion, public sector ethics, and state and local government. He also teaches critical thinking & persuasive writing in the University’s Honors Program. He has served as the faculty advisor to both the College Democrats and College Republicans at CCSU.

Professor Duquette earned an M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, an M.P.A. from the Graduate School of Business & Public Management at The George Washington University, and a B.A. in politics from The Catholic University of America.

Other professional experience includes work as a staffer on Capitol Hill, an analyst at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and an assistant professor at George Mason University teaching in the MPA program. Early work experience that didn’t seem relevant at the time, but that has since proved quite valuable, includes work as a public works laborer, a liquor store clerk, a dish washer, a correctional officer, as well as “grass-roots” (read astro-turf) lobbyist in Washington, DC.

Professor Duquette lives in Longmeadow, Massachusetts with his wife Kara, an attorney and Lt. Col. in the U.S. Marine Corps, and their four children. He served as an elected member of Longmeadow’s School Committee from 2004 to 2007 and is active in state and local politics. He is a former elected member of the Massachusetts Democratic State Committee and presently serves as an elected member of the Longmeadow Democratic Town Committee. In addition, Mr. Duquette is a football, soccer, basketball, and baseball youth sports coach in his hometown.

CONTACT INFO: Central Connecticut State University Department of Political Science 015 Frank Diloreto Hall New Britain, CT 05053 860-832-2964 duquettej@ccsu.edu Jerold Duquette | Create Your Badge

2 Responses to Professor Duquette

  1. John J. Fitzgerald says:

    Hello Jerold,

    I have a short piece on the JFK assassination and the Warren Commission. Can you get it posted for discussion?

    Here it is:

    Some Reflections on JFK and the events of November, 1963

    As we approach the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, it might be worthwhile to look at the event with 50 years of analysis and reflection behind us. The question that surrounds the assassination is simply stated: Who killed President Kennedy?
    I believe that the evidence supports the claim that Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, shot and killed President Kennedy after firing three shots and making two hits. Kennedy was hit twice and the second hit was lethal. This was and is the conclusion of the Warren Report that was released in 1964. The Warren Report is the starting point for all of the theories that surround the assassination.

    There was no conspiracy to kill the President.

    Kennedy was killed by a homegrown American psychopath. Oswald was trained by the U.S. Marine Corps to be an “expert” marksman. He did not seem to be an expert in anything else in his life. Killing a President, a national and international figure, of great fame and fortune, could very well have seemed to Oswald to be a way of getting even with a world that had ignored and rejected him. Oswald was a personality without a network of friends and family to support and nurture him. His wife was demanding a divorce. His behavioral profile matches that of a number of the school shooters of recent years. Oswald was and is a classic example of a victim of child abuse and neglect, which produced a deeply scarred, socio-pathic personality.

    Could Oswald have done the deed by himself?

    The evidence seems to support this view. From where he was firing in the Texas School Book Depository, Oswald was shooting at a target less than 90 yards away. His rifle was equipped with a scope that made the target appear to be 22 feet away. The first round was in the chamber when the firing sequence commenced. The first shot missed and hit the pavement. The second shot went through JFK’s throat and entered Connally’s shoulder and wrist. There was more than enough time for one person to fire again after the second shot which was the first hit. The third shot hit Kennedy’s head and killed him. Oswald fired three shots and had to rapidly reload only twice. The firing sequence was: miss, neck and head. Oswald could very well have done the deed by himself. There is no evidence to support any theory of other shooters.

    The Warren Report documents that Oswald had earlier attempted to kill a retired U.S. Army General named Walker. This attempt failed, but showed Oswald’s capacity for violent actions. After killing Kennedy, Oswald raced away from the School Book Depository. Oswald then killed a Dallas policeman named Tippit. It was for this killing that he was pursued and finally arrested in a movie theater. In the Dallas police station, they realized that Oswald, Tippit’s killer, was also the man they were seeking in the killing of Kennedy.
    To explain the subsequent killing of Oswald by Jack Ruby, we need to examine the situation in Dallas, Texas. This was a city with no real gun control policy. This was a city with a large population of unbalanced and violent people. Ruby seemed to think he was going to be a hero by killing the villain. He probably acted on the “spur of the moment”. No credible evidence exists to show that Ruby was a “contract killer”.
    After the assassination, Robert F. Kennedy, the Attorney General of the United States, never publicly questioned the findings of the Warren Commission. However, he did do as much as possible to shroud the death of his brother in mystery. This added to the politically useful image of Kennedy as a brave young hero cut down before his time. Kennedy soon emerged to be larger in death than he was in life. This also happened with Lincoln.
    Before his own death, Kennedy had been planning the assassination of Fidel Castro. He had given permission for the coup against Diem in the Republic of Vietnam, which resulted in the killing of Diem and his brother. Kennedy was a “Cold Warrior” who was not beyond using assassination as an instrument of statecraft. He seemed to enjoy James Bond novels. (Google the name “Desmond Fitzgerald” for further information.)
    Several government agencies were derelict in their duties and did participate in a cover-up to cover their tracks in Dallas. The F.B.I. and the Secret Service were the biggest culprits. They did not do a good job protecting Kennedy or investigating Oswald. The C.I.A. knew about the Kennedy-authorized, planned attempts on Castro and did not want this to become public knowledge. It was public knowledge in Cuba. This failure to discuss the attempts to kill Castro, called “Operation Mongoose,” added to peoples’ suspicions about the Warren Commission Report.
    President Johnson did not want the assassination to be used as a reason for going to war. A war with the Soviet Union was not in any body’s interest and a war with Cuba was not essential either. A full explanation of all the facts of the case would have led to some serious questions about American foreign policy. Johnson did the country a disservice in stifling this full disclosure. It had the short-term effect of calming the nation, but it laid the basis for several conspiracy theories to grow. There was more to Kennedy’s foreign policy than we were led to believe and most of it was quite ugly. Johnson did terminate the “Operation Mongoose” activities against Cuba.
    The killing of President Kennedy was an immoral and illegal act. It has shaped our world-view and made us all a little less confident in our fellow man. It is hard to claim that some good came out of it. It remains the best single argument for a vigorous gun-control policy and a renewed commitment to civilized modes of conflict resolution through debate and discussion. It strongly underlines the role of violence and the inculcation of violence as a major problem in modern American society.

    Regards,

    John J. Fitzgerald

  2. Jim Walsh says:

    I just became aware of your website via Massterlist and was about to comment on the Gomez situation. Having read your biographical info I wondered if you ever met Fr. Douglas A. Morrison at Catholic U? If so, I’d love to share some stuff about him and my relationship with this wonderful man.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>