Find the cheapest gas stations in your area

In light of the soaring gas prices, I think you'll find this site very useful. Check it out and give it a try.

More funny stuff from Katheirne Harris

Oh man, I feel bad for this poor kid.

I know it has nothing to do with Connecticut but I just can't keep my eye off of this carwreck in progress.


UPDATE: A hard-core reader challenged me to make a connection between Katherine Harris and Connecticut.

Well, how about this for a connection.

Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ) and Katherine Harris getting "close" while Rep. Rob "I love the Gitmo Rice" Simmons babbles about something on the House floor.
Click here to view the video. It's priceless.

The polling data tells the story

Wondering why Joe Lieberman is airing television ads in April? Well, maybe this new polling data has something to do with it.

Here's the latest polling data from Survey USA on Bush's favorite Democrat.

Do you approve or disapprove of the job Joseph Lieberman is doing as United States Senator?

Among Liberals:

(3/13/06) 49% approve, 41% disapprove, 10% undecided
(4/10/06) 46% approve, 49% disapprove, 5% undecided

click on image to enlarge

Among Democrats:

(3/13/06) 56% approve, 35% disapprove, 8% undecided
(4/10/06) 54% approve, 41% disapprove, 5% undecided

click on image to enlargeSeems like voters are warming up to Ned Lamont which is bad news for Joe as his approval rating takes a nose dive.

I've said it many times before and I'll say it again, Joe Lieberman is in real trouble and the polling data tells only part of the story. The real indicator wil be how many delegate votes Ned Lamont receives at the primary. If Ned gets anything over 30 percent (which is very possible), Joe's campaign is going to hit the panic button and jump ship by early June.

Somewhere Ned is just smiling.

Dimwit, dolt conservative is at it again

Boy, this wingnut just doesn't get the message. I guess he's going around for another jump at the shark.

I know I promised I wouldn't go after this moron again but I he drew first blood attacking Lamont supporters and I can't let that stand.

Read this killer post from our favorite wingnut:

This is quite amusing. On a TV show, Colin McEnroe very obviously feigned being asleep as the newscaster covered a story on Sen. Lieberman, in order to show his lack of support for the senator. Only, for some Democrats who are eager to seize onto absolutely anything that could discredit Sen. Lieberman, it wasn't quite so obvious. Since then, the story has been taken up by a number of liberal blogs, including the Daily Kos and the Huffington Post, all of which report, explicitly or implicitly, that McEnroe actually did fall asleep. McEnroe has now had to come out and tell the Democrats via his blog, that, very simply, it was a joke.

Let's go back and take a look back at my post.

Title: My GOD! Joe Lieberman puts Colin McEnroe to sleep on air!

Well, not exactly but it was pretty close.

Joe Lieberman's best friend Colin McEnroe and AP Capitol Reporter, Susan Haighs, were on WTIC's Beyond the Headlines on Sunday and they explained why everyone should take Ned Lamont's campaign very seriously. They also go into why Joe's running scared and threatening to run as an independent (here's a hint: it's because there's a VERY good sign that Lamont will beat him in the primary).

BTW: Colin's snoozing is an instant classic...

Now, most who saw McEnroe on the air or saw the videoclip knew Colin was joking around and was goofing on Lieberman's interview while others thought he was nursing a hangover (which in retrospect, is also quite amusing). Although Colin clarified what actually happened on his blog, I really don't think even he really believes that everyone thought he fell asleep on-air as Sean claims (BTW: Please check out Colin's column from Sunday's Courant as the posting of his performance on TV overshadowed his incredible piece which was published on the same day).

Check out the responses to my post. Does it seem that anyone really took McEnroe's stunt seriously? The answer is no. Now, let's go one step further and check out the comment link Colin refers to in his post. A vast majority of people got the joke but this doesn't register in Sean's brain.

If you look at what I wrote, I explained that the point of the segment was how people in Connecticut are taking Lamont campaign seriously and how Lieberman has a tough primary battle on his hands. What Colin did in that brief moment was just one of those funny television moments and nothing more.

Take another look at the video and judge for yourself.

If you take a look at all of the responses from the numerous blogs that linked to my post, you can see that a vast majority of people knew McEnroe was kidding around. Obviously Sean could care less about this as his only mission in life is to mock liberals in his usual juvenile fashion.

The beauty of Sean's post is that it has yet another one of his trademark errors which we've all come to love. If you try and click on his link which should direct you to McEnroe's article, you’ll be directed to Blogger’s 404 error page (too funny).

Remember what I told you in a previous post Sean. Making silly mistakes like making a typo in a post while criticizing another blogger’s grammar (which you tried to cover it up until I busted you) or, in the case of your latest error, screwing up a link to Colin's response while attempting to make you silly point simply make you look like a fucking idiot.

Just in case our favorite wingnut attempts to fix his screwup and turn around and claim that his post was error-free (and also because I have better things to do than make fun of a silly blog which no one really reads), here's his HTML code to his post and a copy of his cached page (as of 4:40 P.M.).

Sorry for breaking my promise...now back to reality.

Rove can still be indicted

Oh, my dream can still become a reality!

Just as the news broke Wednesday about Scott McClellan resigning as White House press secretary and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove shedding some of his policy duties, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald met with the grand jury hearing evidence in the CIA leak case and introduced additional evidence against Rove, attorneys and other US officials close to the investigation said.

The grand jury session in federal court in Washington, DC, sources close to the case said, was the first time this year that Fitzgerald told the jurors that he would soon present them with a list of criminal charges he intends to file against Rove in hopes of having the grand jury return a multi-count indictment against Rove.

In an interview Wednesday, Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove remains a "subject" of Fitzgerald's two-year-old probe.

"Mr. Rove is still a subject of the investigation," Luskin said. In a previous interview, Luskin asserted that Rove would not be indicted by Fitzgerald, but he was unwilling to make that prediction again Wednesday.

[...]

Fitzgerald is said to have introduced more evidence Wednesday alleging Rove lied to FBI investigators and the grand jury when he was questioned about how he found out that Valerie Plame Wilson worked for the CIA and whether he shared that information with the media, attorneys close to the case said.

Fitzgerald told the grand jury that Rove lied to investigators and the prosecutor eight out of the nine times he was questioned about the leak and also tried to cover-up his role in disseminating Plame Wilson's CIA status to at least two reporters.

Sweet! Put the braclets on him already. If he's arrested, I'll personally fly down to D.C. to take pictures of the moment.

Manchester backs Lieberman?

Enough of the emails people and take a deep breath. Okay, now lets take a very close look at the delegate breakdown from Manchester.

In preparation for the May 20 state convention, town committee members spent about two hours debating the pros and cons of each of the Democrats hoping to gain the party's nod as a candidate - Malloy and New Haven Mayor John DeStefano, and Lieberman and Greenwich cable television executive Ned Lamont.

"We've got some negotiating and bargaining to do within the convention delegates," Town Chairman Ted Cummings said following a 13-6 vote in favor of Malloy and a 20-4 vote in favor of Lieberman. Some 13 committee members are uncommitted in the race for governor and eight are uncommitted for senator.

[...]

Cummings said that while he's uncommitted in the race for governor, he does support Lieberman's reelection - despite a resolution the town committee passed nearly unanimously this year that chastised the senator for his support of the Bush policy in Iraq.

Nevertheless, Cummings said, Lieberman shouldn't take Manchester's support for granted and the town committee should send its message clearly. He urged the delegates to split their votes 17-10 for Lieberman.

Although Cummings is backing Lieberman, there are some things to consider here.

1. Manchester is the first city to pass a resolution chastising Joe Lieberman for his supporting the Iraq War.

2. Currently, there are 8 uncommitted votes or in other words, some delegates don't like Lieberman but need to here from Lamont.

3. Cummings is urging his delegates to split their votes 17-10 for Lieberman.

Manchester is offering their support to Lieberman, the support is not as black and white as it seems. Based on Cummings own words, he's urging the vote count to go 17-10, which gives Lamont more than the 15 percent needs from the city. Nevertheless, the media will probably try to spin this as the first good news Lieberman because of Manchester's resolution against Joe based on the war.

You can't take any vote for granted and if the events in Manchester should tell you how important it is for a candidate to reach out to every delegate. In the end, Lamont will still have the 15 percent he needs to force the primary but nevertheless, Lamont's campaign will have to work extremely hard to get Ned's message out to the delegates simply because Lieberman has the name recognition while people are still learning where Lamont stands on issues other than Iraq. As we get closer to the convention, the delegates will need to be convinced that voting for Lamont will not jeopardize a "safe seat" in the senate.

UPDATE: Thirdparty nails it.

It's important for all to come to grips with the fact that the GOP will not put up any serious competition in November. Alan Schlesinger, the state GOP's preferred candidate, is only slightly less of a complete joke than Paul Streitz.

Voting for Ned Lamont at the convention or in August will not endanger this safe Democratic seat in November. Joe Lieberman will be the one who endangers the seat if he decides to leave the party to run as an Independent.

There is NO WAY the GOP will win the election with either Schlesinger or Streitz on the ticket. Streitz is a xenophobe and a nutcase and Schlesinger's campaign has already jumped the shark with his pitiful interview on Colin McEnroe's show. This race is between Lieberman and Lamont and Democrats didn't leave Lieberman, he left the Democratic Party ages ago. Look at Lieberman's record and you can see that the Democrats never had this seat in the first place.

A vote for Lieberman=a safe Democratic seat? We are talking about Bush's favorite Democrat right?

Scotty out, Snow in

Bring on the next whipping boy.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove is giving up his policy portfolio and press secretary Scott McClellan is resigning, continuing a shakeup in President Bush's administration that has already yielded a new chief of staff.

[...]

Appearing with Bush on the South Lawn, McClellan, who has parried especially fiercely with reporters on Iraq and on intelligence issues, told Bush: "I have given it my all sir and I have given you my all sir, and I will continue to do so as we transition to a new press secretary.

Bush said McClellan had "a challenging assignment."

Trying to explain you're incompetence with a straight face...a challenging assignment indeed (WOW, I just agreed with the President on something).

Who's set to replace Scotty you ask? Well, it seems that the President wants Tony "nine of diamonds" Snow as his new B.S. spinner.

White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten "has offered Fox News Channel anchor Tony Snow the job of White House press secretary," the D.C. Examiner reports. "Snow, who was once a speechwriter for former President George H.W. Bush, has not yet decided whether to accept the job. He recently recovered from colon cancer and has been helping launch a radio version of Fox News."

If Bush was looking for someone who could lie with a straight face, he definitely found his guy in Snow.

Oh Nancy, you just stepped in it

Oh, I can't wait to tell you what happened to Nancy Johnson in Danbury Tuesday night. She definately stepped into a hornet's nest and got stung.

Full report will come later, it's late and I'm going to bed. Can't wait to see how the News-Times writes about what happened...

Lieberman supports attacking Iran

First stop Baghdad, next stop Tehran:

Asked what last-resort military option was available, Lieberman said: "I don't think anyone is thinking of this as a massive ground invasion, as in Iraq, to topple the government." Rather, he said, he envisaged "an attempt to hit some of the components of the nuclear program," primarily from the air, with some potential for covert ground assistance.

"I think the only justifiable use of military power would be an attempt to deter the development of their nuclear program if we felt there was no other way to do it," he said. "And I use the word 'deter' because I'm skeptical of our ability - because they've spread their nuclear program and some of it is underground - to knock it out completely."

The goal of such action, he continued, would be "to delay it, to deter it, hoping that you set the program off course, so that by the time they catch up back to where they were, there's been a change in the government. That's the limited objective that I would see."

You know what to do.

Ned Lamont brings his message to Newtown

Ned Lamont had a busy day Monday as started the day meeting with student at Southern Connecticut State University, then with delegates in New Britan, and ended his day addressing the people from Newtown.

We caught up with Lamont as he made talked in Newtown and we'll give a full report of his visit (including the usual video you guys love to watch) shortly.

UPDATE: Things are kind of crazy as I'm following three huge stories now so I'll post on Lamont speaking in Newtown later. For now, here's a small video clip from Monday night.

Nancy Johnson touches the political third rail today in Danbury

What is Nancy Johnson thinking? Doesn’t she realize that she’s handing Chris Murphy a gift when she visits Danbury today?

This evening, Nancy Johnson is about to do something that NO other political person facing re-election would ever think of doing...she's meeting with a radical anti-immigration group that many people in Danbury consider to be racist and out of touch with the majority of the population.

Today, Johnson is meeting with the U.S. Citizens for Immigration Law Enforcement, an anti-immigration group that was originally part of Paul Streitz's group, Connecticut Citizens for Immigration Control (CTCIC). Although the group is no longer a part of Streitz clan, many of their members belong to both groups and their message is basically identical to CTCIC's (as well as irrational): throw the illegal aliens out period (no compromise).

When the CTCIC formed last year, many politicians distanced themselves from them because of their radical ways and outlandish publicity stunts. To this day, Mayor Boughton (the person who started the campaign against illegal immigrants and the immigration system) hasn't met with these people and for good reason...they're basically nuts and meeting with them would be political suicide. No other political figure has met with this group of wackos...not until today that is.

If Nancy Johnson is so concerned about immigration, why isn't she meeting with the person who raised the issue (Mayor Boughton) and meeting instead with a group which many people in Danbury consider to be racist. They are also well known for spreading misinformation (immigrants bring diseases, linking illegal immigrants to 9-11) and many people consider them the root of the racial tension in the area?

If Johnson thinks that her meeting with these anti-immigrant extermists will win her votes come November, she should think again. She's meeting with a group of folks who couldn't even get more than 100 people to come out to their anti-immigration forum a couple of months ago (which they highly publicized) whereas the last thing the pro-immigrant groups did in Danbury attracted over 1,200 people (look at the photo below).
Many in the area do not want to have anything to do with the anti-immigrant wackos and many in the city wish they would just go away as their hate rhetoric was assisted in placing a dark cloud over Danbury, a city which was onced named the number 1 city to live in America.

In the end, Johnson's meeting with the members of U.S. Citizens for Immigration Law Enforcement will only give the anti-immigrant advocates a false sense of legitimacy.

You can bet that her visit will become a political issue as the election season heats up. Somewhere, Chris Murphy's campaign is just grinning.

In the end, Johnson will regret ever meeting with this group and she should fire whoever told her that meeting with the anti-immigrant extermists was a good idea.

Is Nancy Johnson meeting with anti-immigration extremists in Danbury?

(bumped to top of page)
Reports circulated that Congresswoman Nancy Johnson is planning this week to meet with US Citizens for Immigration Law Enforcement, a group that has close ties to the infamous Connecticut Citizens for Immigration Control (many members are in both organizations).

In other words, a Congresswoman is meeting with a group that not only has close ties to a Streitz's silly, bigoted, simple-minded group, but an organization that many in Danbury consider to be racist and bigoted?

You say this can't be true? We'll think again. Johnson plans to meet with members of the US Citizens for Immigration Law Enforcement on April 18th at the Concordia Society, 6 Crosby Street Danbury CT at 7 P.M. (Google map).

Lamont has Lieberman running scared

Look who's afraid of the Lamont challenge.

We tried to arrange a radio debate between incumbent Senator Lieberman and his challenger for the Democractic nomination, Ned Lamont. The Lamont campaign accepted our invitation. On Friday, April 14th, we received the following response from Sean Smith, Lieberman's campaign manager:

Our campaign is focused on winning over delegates to the State Democratic convention on May 20. We anticipate being the endorsed Democratic candidate for Senate coming out of that convention. If our opponent petitions to challenge us in a primary, then we will enter into debate negotiations with his campaign at that time. Until then, we are focused on securing the necessary delegates to be the Democratic nominee for Senate.

Winning over delegates? Oh, please. If anything, Joe is losing delegates support with each statement he makes. Anyone who has kept an eye on this senate race knows that Ned Lamont has more than enough delegates to force a primary and you can bet Lieberman's camp is aware of this. Joe is avoiding the public as he runs around the state holding "private meeitings" with state delegates and now he's avoiding the Ned Lamont challenge because Ned would attack Joe's 18 year senate record and make Joe look weaker than me looks right now.

Is this what we want from a senator...a person who avoids being asked tough questions from the public and runs away from a challenge? If Lieberman is so confident of his record, he should be able to debate Lamont and put Ned in his place. Instead he declines the debate and offers a lame excuse.

Thirdparty sums it up Lieberman perfectly by using a simple photo.
UPDATE: Matt Stoller gets the big prize with his post as he's right on the money with his analysis on Lieberman.

Watch the convention and the number of delegates Lamont gets. If it's a big number, Lieberman is in serious trouble. If it's a small number, Lieberman has a tough choice - does he risk the primary where he can lose despite institutional support, or does he go as an independent and bet on his popularity among independents and Republicans?

My guess is that Lieberman is going to jump. He's a cowardly man, and he doesn't think that the left is relevant, organized, or principled. He doesn't understand what's happening to him right now, and he's angry. That anger is not dissipating, which is making him much weaker as a political figure. Lieberman is losing, badly, and he will never again have the stature he once had.

My GOD! Joe Lieberman puts Colin McEnroe to sleep on air!

Well, not exactly but it was pretty close.

Joe Lieberman's best friend Colin McEnroe and AP Capitol Reporter, Susan Haighs, were on WTIC's Beyond the Headlines on Sunday and they explained why everyone should take Ned Lamont's campaign very seriously. They also go into why Joe's running scared and threatening to run as an independent (here's a hint: it's becasue there's a VERY good sign that Lamont will beat him in the primary).

BTW: Colin's snoozing is an instant classic...

UPDATE: Whoa, I'm getting alot of traffic here. Already at 18,000 hits and the sun is still up. Thanks to Huffington Post, Atrios, Daily Kos, Raw Story, and My Left Wing for linking this post on their site.

Please check out Ned Lamont's site for more info on his exciting grassroots campaign (and donate of you can) Also, check out Lamontblog, La Resistance, My Left Nutmeg and ConnecticutBLOG for all the Ned Lamont info your brain can handle (all sites are based in Connecticut and where keeping a close eye on this important campaign).

It's all about Chris Shays

Chris Shays only thinks about himself when it comes to Iraq.

Representative Christopher Shays, a Connecticut Republican whose campaign opponent has made Mr. Shays's support for the war an issue, said Saturday that he believed his prospects would be brighter if Mr. Rumsfeld were to go, though he has not called for his resignation.

"Do I think someone else would do a better job, and if someone else would do a better job, does it help me?" said Mr. Shays, who has previously criticized the conduct of the war. "Of course it would."

It's great to see what's important to Chris Shays...his campaign.

Two words: Diane Farrell