<xmp> <body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d11782355\x26blogName\x3dConnecticutBLOG\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dSILVER\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://connecticutblog.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://connecticutblog.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-5344443236411396584', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script> </xmp>

Saturday, July 22, 2006

Extra, Extra...

read all about it.

NOTE: Another poll on Connecticut primary races was released today but since the polling info is not available to the entire public till tomorrow, I'll wait and break down the numbers once I analyze all the details Sunday (hint: it doesn't look very good for Lieberman).

New York Times endorses Malloy

Good news for Dan Malloy as the New York Times gives their seal of approval and endorses his candidacy for governor.
"My team and I are honored and proud to be endorsed by the New York Times," Malloy said. "The New York Times sees my candidacy as the one best positioned to challenge Governor Rell in the general election, with an understanding of the issues facing Connecticut and a track record to deliver results."


"This election is about overcoming Connecticut's challenges, such as how to grow jobs, implement universal health care, increase affordable housing, solve our transportation crisis, fix our broken property tax system and fund education," Malloy said. "These are problems that have been around a long time under 12 years of Republican rule. It's going to take a different kind of leader to solve these problems -- not the same old same old. My track record after more than 20 years of public service shows that I bring practical solutions to problem solving. My team and I are looking forward to winning the primary and engaging in a meaningful dialogue about Connecticut's future in the general election."

Friday, July 21, 2006

Genghis unhinges on Lieberman's campaign

Look up inthe sky!
It's a bird!?!

It's a plane!?!

It's one of those pesky bloggers playing "vigilante politics" with Sen. Liebreman's campaign.

At least that's what people like columnist Ray Hackett want's you to believe (yawn).

Blogger Genghis Conn of Connecticut Local Politics drops a ton of bricks on Sen. Lieberman and his campaign with a stinging post that rivals the critiques of Colin McEnroe and Paul Bass. It'a must read for everyone as he takes everyone back in time and goes over the decisions Lieberman made in the last eight years which has placed George Bush's favorite Democrat in the fight of his political life.
* Attacks on Clinton: Bill Clinton may be coming to Waterbury to campaign for Lieberman later this month, but back in 1998 Lieberman was one of the first Democrats to criticize Clinton over Monica Lewinsky, which added fuel to the Republicans' fire. This is when Lieberman vaulted on to the national stage for the first time, much like Lowell Weicker did during Watergate. And, like Weicker post-Watergate, it caused some in his own party to turn their backs on him.

* A Debate in Which he was Nice: Lieberman was cordial and genial during the 2000 vice presidential debate, when he faced Dick Cheney. Many Democrats felt he did a poor job at best.

* Down a Senator: Lieberman ran for both U.S. Senator and Vice President in 2000. What if he had won the vice presidency, as many believe he actually did? John Rowland would have appointed his replacement, and tilted the balance to the Republicans. President Gore would have faced an entirely GOP Congress thanks to Lieberman. More grumbling.

* Where'd You Go, Joe? I keep hearing that, after 2000, Lieberman was somehow different. He grew less responsive. He became, in his mind as well as in fact, a national political figure. He got too big for tiny Connecticut, which mattered not at all in the presidential primary season, and wasn't a swing state.


* Iraq: The war's never been popular in Connecticut. Lieberman, as seen above, has consistently supported it. That was bound to produce some friction, although Lieberman apparently never saw it coming.

* Worst Campaign Ever: Democrats in Connecticut started seriously searching for an anti-war candidate in late 2005, and conversations about a Lieberman challenger were going on long before that. But Ned Lamont would not have managed to be ahead of Lieberman in the polls right now without Lieberman's help. He has run a vicious, negative, petty and largely pointless campaign. The campaign has done more to undermine Lieberman's image as a genial statesman than Lamont ever could, and it's cost him.

* Independent Joe: Now he's willing to turn his back on Democratic primary voters by running as an independent should he lose. It's the last straw for some.

In short, Lieberman has always managed to annoy a certain slice of Democrats. That slice has been growing steadily during the endless crises of the past five years, and Lieberman himself has poured fuel on the fire during this campaign.

So if the Lieberman campaign is wondering why Connecticut Democrats have "suddenly" turned on their candidate, they should look to the past, and to Lieberman's own actions over the last decade.

OUCH! And I always thought Genghis was a mild-mannered man...

Douglas Schwatrz breaks down latest Q-poll report

Douglas Schwartz, director of the Quinnipiac University Poll, gave a press conference where he talked about the latest Q-poll report released yesterday and what it means for the senate and governor's race.

In case you missed the conference (it was only broadcasted on CT-N), here are the highlights (Schwatrz discussing Republican senate candidate Alan Schlesinger campaign is a gem).

Douglas Schwartz breaks down the polling information for the senate race.

Schwartz talks about the polling information in regards to the governor's race.

Schwartz and the press goof on Alan Schlesinger's campaign (too funny).

The stupidity of Alan Schlesinger: the GOP wants to help Joe Lieberman edition

The magical mystery tour of Alan Schlesinger's campaign seems to be coming to an end.
The Hartford Courant sent a bunker bomb in to Connecticut Republican U.S. Senate hopeful Alan Schlesinger's flagging campaign today with revelations that the former legislator was successfully sued for thousands of dollars in casino debts he ran up in Atlantic City venues. Schlesinger’s campaign was rocked last week by the news that, among other things, he had gambled in a Connecticut Indian casino under an assumed name, Alan Gold. His luck will have run out now.

Word of his gambling debts will renew calls for Schlesinger to abandon his tattered candidacy. His falling fortunes caused much speculation Thursday on a successor candidate in the wake of a Quinnipiac poll showing Democrat challenger Ned Lamont leading incumbent Joseph Lieberman for the first time in the August 8th primary. Fainthearted Republicans who had declined to run in the spring, when they thought Lamont a minor protest candidate, are witnessing the rare second chance in the simultaneous declines of Lieberman and Schlesinger.
Two words for Alan: It's over.

Although everyone should of seen this coming (including those who knew about Schlesinger's past when he first announced that he was campaigning for the senate seat) people should probably start paying attention to the real story: Gov. Rell and the GOP are planning to help Joe Lieberman's re-election campaign in order to increase Republican voter turnout which will benefit the Republican Congressional incumbents.
Any Republican hopeful will have to overcome a Lieberman boomlet. Advisors close to Republican governor Jodi Rell, who tried to get Schlesinger off the ticket last week, are scheming to give Lieberman a safe harbor on the GOP line in exchange for adding his drawing power to what they hope will be Rell’s. The potent combination would help three Republican congressmen, constitutional office candidates and some legislative hopefuls. State Central Committee would likely resist. Monday’s visit to Waterbury by former President Bill Clinton to rescue Lieberman's primary campaign will be a bitter reminder at the wrong time that Lieberman is very much a Democrat. Lieberman pal John McCain, wildly popular among Connecticut GOP, might be able to smooth the path to a fusion ticket.
Isn't it time for the media to start asking Rell's camp and GOP chariman George Gallo some quesitons such as:

1. Has the GOP and/or Rell's campaign been in contact with the Lieberman campaign?

2. Why did it take so long for Schlesinger's problems to surface if his troubles stemmed from things that happened over ten years ago?

3. What are your opinions of Joe Lieberman?

4. Has the GOP considered endorsing Joe Lieberman's campaign and/or has the GOP talked to the Lieberman camp about this possibility?

At this point, one should be very suspicious with the actions of the Republican Party as this looks like something that comes right out of the playbook of Ken Mehlman and Karl Rove.

Think about it. The Republican Party knows that they have three Congressional seats, which are in danger of falling into the Democrats hands but unlike the problems the Republicans face in other states, Connecticut is unique because it has a very popular Republican governor and a senator in Lieberman who enjoys a high approval rating among conservatives.

What better way to hold onto those Congressional seats than to use the popularity of Joe Lieberman and Jodi Rell to the benefit of the Party on the national level? For Joe, he could care less how he's re-elected as the only thing that matters to him is that he is re-elected. For Rell (who already loves Lieberman) her main goal is to possibly grab some legislative seats and for Rove and Mehlman, using Lieberman will help Johnson, Shays, and Simmons and which could be enough to keep control of the House.

Remember, Connecticut WILL be the new Ohio and Florida in 2006. Three Congressional seats are up for grabs as well as the possibility of the GOP losing their favorite Democrat. The Republicans know how to play dirty and with polls showing that Americans want Democrats to control Congress, the GOP are looking at any scenario that could help them retain power.

I said this several times and I'll say it again, KEEP AN EYE ON JODI RELL AND THE GOP as they're up to something and it’s becoming more and more obvious as we get closer to primary day.

Thursday, July 20, 2006

Janes says...

"Unlike Mark Davis, you can't fool me"

You see, it seems like Joe Lieberman is getting a free ride with his distortions about Ned Lamont so it's about time someone sets the record straight about the junior senator and his finances.

Let's hope the media gets the message and stop falling for these Rovian tricks from the Lieberman camp as we approach August 8th. It would be nice if the media would avoid these tricks and make these politicians address the issues that are on the minds of those people who are going to vote in the primary.
This week Lieberman seemed to think it was a Really Big Deal that Ned Lamont owned some Halliburton stock, that this was some sign of abject moral depravity as he defaulted to his usual finger-wagging scold mode (seen in YouTube above at 4:25) as local journalist Mark Davis tossed him a softball:

LIEBERMAN: From the limited disclosure he had under the 'Senate ethics' that he has stock in 'Halliburton,' and he has stock in, more stock in some of the big oil companies. That's something for everybody to judge.

MARK DAVIS: That would be a crime?

LIEBERMAN: Oh no, this is just public right to know. None of this is about illegality. I think when you get into public office you've got an obligation to disclose all your financial holdings.

Now it turns out that Lieberman was playing Mark Davis for a fool, and he himself holds Halliburton stock. It is the third largest holding, in fact, in his "Victory Fund" mutual fund (PDF of Lieberman's 2005 Personal Finance Disclosure Statement, p. 7, line 7).

If Lieberman really believed in the "public's right to know" as anything other than a campaign talking point, perhaps he would have mentioned his own Halliburton stock at the same time? After all, Joe Lieberman is a sitting US Senator whose pro-war votes have been so helpful to Halliburton's stock over the years. (Davis himself simply took Joe's word for it and wrote a follow-up piece without further investigation into Joe's own finances, helpfully repeating Lieberman's scripted anti-Lamont tirade without troubling himself to look any deeper. That was quite a miss.)

Wonder is Davis will do a follow up report on Lieberman's connection to Halliburton as it seems like he has no problem talking about Lamont's holdings. We'll keep an eye on Channel 8 and see if Davis will set the record straight.

Malloy/DeStefano debate: the opening statements

Okay, since everyone wants to know who really won the debate between John DeStefano and Dan Malloy, I decided to see if I can set the record straight but I'm going to need everyone's help.

Here's how we're going to do this...

I broke the debate down based on opening statements, questions, and closing statements. For each video segment I post, there will be an online poll where you can vote on which candidate gave a better performance.

After all the video is posted, and polling is finished, I'll add up all the numbers and present the winner on Monday.

Since the debate lasted an hour, I'm going to post each segment in a seperate post between now and Saturday. That should give everyone enough time to view each candidate's response to the question presented to them by the panel and cast their vote.

Without further delay, here are the opening statements from both candidates.

Which candidate gave the better opening statement
Dan Malloy
John DeStefano
Free polls from Pollhost.com

DeStefano-Malloy: inside the numbers

Here's the latest poll info on the governor's race
Incumbent Republican Jodi Rell has a 74 - 13 percent approval rating and better than 2 -1 leads over either of her Democratic challengers:

* 62 - 25 percent over New Haven Mayor John DeStefano, compared to 64 - 24 percent June 8;
* 64 - 23 percent over Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy, compared to 65 - 22 percent.

Gov. Rell gets a 59 - 7 percent favorability rating from Connecticut voters, with 22 percent mixed and 11 percent who don't know enough to form an opinion. For DeStefano, 51 percent don't know enough to form an opinion; 75 percent for Malloy.

Among likely Democratic primary voters, DeStefano leads Malloy 52 - 32 percent, compared to a 46 - 35 percent DeStefano lead June 8.
With less than three weeks to go till the primary, Malloy has a good amount of work aheadc of him. Simply put, his "don' tknow enough about him" numbers are too high at this point in his campaign. In fact, both the candidate's "don't know enough about him" numbers are too high. For two politicians who've been in the race for over a year and a half, these numbers and unacceptable when you consider that one of these two candidates are going up against a popular governor.

Let's take a close look at the data.
TREND: Is your opinion of New Haven Mayor John DeStefano favorable, unfavorable, mixed, or haven't you heard enough about him?

TREND: Is your opinion of Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy favorable, unfavorable, mixed, or haven't you heard enough about him?

TREND: If the election for governor were being held today and the candidates were John DeStefano the Democrat and Jodi Rell the Republican, for whom would you vote?

TREND: If the election for governor were being held today and the candidates were Dan Malloy the Democrat and Jodi Rell the Republican, for whom would you vote?
Conclusion: It doesn't make a difference who wins this primary between Malloy and DeStefano. Both men are great candidates and if anything, it's a shame that we have to choose between these two guys. The real problem is that neither of these two guys seem able to make that connection with voters which is evident in their "don't know enough about them" numbers. When you add that with the fact that one of these men will be facing Gov. Rell, it's doesn't look too good for the Democrats.

But there is good news that can be described in two words: Lisa Moody.

Whoever wins this primary needs to pound in people minds the shady dealings of Lisa Moody and Gov. Rell inability to fire her. Malloy and DeStefano could make up ground quickly if they remind the voters about the Lisa moody scandal over and over again and tie her problems to the Rell administration. Unfortunately, neither of the two candidates have attacked Rell enough over the Moody mess which is unfortunate as the topic could chip away at Rell's popularity.

President Clinton answers the question

Damn, I didn't even get a chance to ask him the question myself.
Jay Carson, a spokesman for President Clinton, said that the former president and his wife share the same position. "President Clinton is looking forward to campaigning with Senator Lieberman on Monday and will work hard to help ensure he wins the primary, but he respects the primary process and will support the candidate that wins the Democratic primary."

Lieberman flashback: The Clinton years

In honor of President Bill Clinton stumping for Joe Lieberman, I offer you this oldie but goodie from George Bush's favorite Democrat when he had no problem criticizing a president.
But the truth is, after much reflection, my feelings of disappointment and anger have not dissipated. Except now these feelings have gone beyond my personal dismay to a larger, graver sense of loss for our country, a reckoning of the damage that the President's conduct has done to the proud legacy of his presidency, and ultimately an accounting of the impact of his actions on our democracy and its moral foundations.

The implications for our country are so serious that I feel a responsibility to my constituents in Connecticut, as well as to my conscience, to voice my concerns forthrightly and publicly, and I can think of no more appropriate place to do so than the floor of this great body.


The President's intentional and consistent misstatements may also undercut the trust that the American people have in his word, which would have substantial ramifications for his presidency. Under the Constitution, as presidential scholar Richard Neustadt has noted, the President's ultimate source of authority, particularly his moral authority, is the power to persuade, to mobilize public opinion and build consensus behind a common agenda, and at this the President has been extraordinarily effective. But that power hinges on the President's support among the American people and their faith and confidence in his motivations, his agenda, and ultimately his personal integrity. As Teddy Roosevelt once explained, "My power vanishes into thin air the instant that my fellow citizens who are straight and honest cease to believe that I represent them and fight for what is straight and honest; that is all the strength I have."

Joe Lieberman rakes in money from typically GOP donors

Hmm...have you ever wondered who is donating to Joe Lieberman's campaign. Well, the New York Times was thinking the same quesiton and came up with some interesting information about George Bush's favorite Democrat.

When it comes to supporting candidates for public office, the Associated General Contractors of America gives 90 percent of its campaign contributions to Republicans.

And then there is Senator Joseph I. Lieberman.

The group, which represents the construction industry, wrote a $4,000 check last month to Mr. Lieberman, the Connecticut Democrat who is facing a spirited challenge for his party's nomination from a political novice, Ned Lamont. The money was just a sliver of the $260,000 he has collected from political action committees since March.


Anyone looking for evidence of Mr. Lieberman’s bipartisan appeal can find it in his roster of recent contributors, which includes organizations that traditionally give more to Republicans. They include engineering and construction firms, some with contracts in Iraq. Those firms include Bechtel, Fluor International and Siemens, which support Republicans 64 to 70 percent of the time, according to data compiled by PoliticalMoneyLine, which tracks campaign and lobbying activities.

Florida Power and Light, which supports Republicans 84 percent of the time, gave $5,000 to Mr. Lieberman. Areva Cogema, a builder of nuclear power plants that gives 70 percent of its contributions to Republicans, contributed $1,000.

An Ohio law firm that directs 80 percent of its donations to Republicans gave $1,000. SRA International, a technology consultant that favors Republicans 66 percent of the time, gave $1,000. America's Health Insurance Plans, representing health insurers, gives to Republicans 71 percent of the time and donated $2,000 to Mr. Lieberman.

The reasons for their support differ, and are not always clear. Most of these contributors did not support Mr. Lieberman in 2000, and many have supported only Republican candidates in Connecticut; the only other Connecticut candidate to receive a contribution this year from Areva Cogema, for example, was Representative Nancy L. Johnson, a Republican.


The Ohio law firm, Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease, which supported both Mr. Lieberman, for re-election to his Senate seat, and George W. Bush in 2000, did not respond to a message yesterday. Neither did the Hardwood Federation, which represents the lumber industry and gives to Republicans about 80 percent of the time. That national group, whose president runs a hardwoods company in Connecticut, has contributed $7,500 to Mr. Lieberman.
When you see the next negative Lieberman attack ad, remember who paid for them...Republicans and special interest groups.

DeStefano leads Malloy; Rell's numbers going down?

Oh man, there is so much info to absorb today, I don't know where to begin.

First, there's the latest polling info on the Malloy/DeStefano match-up which shows DeStefano increasing his lead over Malloy. Then there is the polling info on Gov. Rell which shows her numbers FINALLY going down a bit.

There simply isn't enough time right now to go through all this data and I'm in the process of uploading all the video from the big debate Tuesdauy night so we'll retuen to this topic later today.

The Ned Lamont interview with Jane Hamsher

The great Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake and your truly caught up with Ned Lamont after he held another "PUBLIC" event in New Haven on Tuesday. Lamont talked about a wide range of subjects including yesterday's successful Blogosphere Day.

Spazeboy was also at the event and has grat video highlights from Ned's appearence which you should check out (here, here, and here)

I have to say, it's easier doing video when I don't have to do the interview and hold the camera at the same time.


Someone isn't having a good day...
Democratic challenger Ned Lamont has pulled into a dead heat in his U.S. Senate race with incumbent Joe Lieberman, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday.

The poll shows Lamont ahead 51-47 percent among likely voters in the Aug. 8 Democratic primary. That compares to a 55-40 percent lead for Lieberman in a similar poll in June.


"More Democrats have a favorable opinion of Lamont, who was largely unknown last month, and see him as an acceptable alternative to Lieberman," said Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz. "But Lieberman's strength among Republicans and independents gives him the lead in a three-way matchup in November."


"We think the voters of Connecticut are continuing to realize that Ned represents the kind of change they want in Washington," said Lamont campaign spokeswoman Liz Dupont-Diehl. "It's clear that Joe Lieberman is just interested in hanging on to power."

Lieberman campaign spokeswoman Marion Steinfels said the poll simply shows that the race is "competitive."
Do you think Steinfels would be singing this tune if the poll showed that Lieberman was in the lead?

Here's the word from the horse's mouth.
"Lamont has turned what looked like a blowout into a very close Democratic primary race," said Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D.

"Lamont is up, while Lieberman's Democratic support is dropping. More Democrats have a favorable opinion of Lamont, who was largely unknown last month, and see him as an acceptable alternative to Lieberman. But Lieberman's strength among Republicans and independents gives him the lead in a three-way matchup in November."

All voters say 56 - 31 percent that Lieberman deserves reelection, but likely Democratic primary voters split 46 - 45 percent on this question.
Since there has never been a primary in August, when looking at the data, remember that the important thing to look at (and probably the only true indicator) is the TREND.

Now keep that in mind when looking at the raw data (click on data to enlarge).
TREND: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Joseph Lieberman is handling his job as United States Senator?

Is your opinion of United States Senator Joseph Lieberman favorable, unfavorable, mixed, or haven't you heard enough about him?

TREND: Is your opinion of United States Senator Joseph Lieberman favorable, unfavorable, mixed, or haven't you heard enough about him?

TREND: Is your opinion of businessman Ned Lamont favorable, unfavorable, mixed, or haven't you heard enough about him?

(If registered democrat)If the 2006 Democratic primary for United States Senator were being held today and the candidates were Joseph Lieberman and Ned Lamont, for whom would you vote? (If undecided q18) As of today, do you lean more toward Lieberman or Lamont? This table includes Leaners.

TREND: (If registered democrat) If the 2006 Democratic primary for United States Senator were being held today and the candidates were Joseph Lieberman and Ned Lamont, for whom would you vote? (If undecided) As of today, do you lean more toward Lieberman or Lamont? *Includes voters leaning toward a candidate.
Now, what can we take from this?

1. Based on the TREND, as Lamont's unknown numbers go down, so does Lieberman's approval rating.

2. Based on the TREND, Lieberman is in a nose dive and his negative ads had no effect on Lamont's trend.

3. Based on the TREND, Lieberman should of taken Lamont's campaign seriously back in January when he had a chance.

4. Based on the TREND, with three weeks left till primary day, I doubt there is little Lieberman can do to stop Lamont's trend. What Lamont has to do is ignore Lieberman's attacks (which is having no effect on the poll numbers) and continue to spread his message out to the voters and keep his "I don't know enough about him" numbers going down. Again, BASED ON THE TREND, as his unknown numbers go down, his approval numbers goes up. This is the key to Lamont winning the primary, not Joe's baseless attacks.

5. Based on the TREND, the debate had NO impact on people's views of Lamont, Lieberman's ads had NO impact on Lamont's trend or in simple language, in other words, Joe's screwed (remember, the poll was taken after the debate.

Final thoughts:

The main problem with Lamont and Lieberman is not each other, but themselves.

For Lieberman, he has only himself to blame for the situation he is currently in right now. From day one, Joe laughed at Lamont's campaign, never took the amount of dissatisfaction people had for him in Connecticut seriously, told DTC members to simply persuade Lamont to drop out of the race instead of defending (and explaining) his record, and ran one of the worst campaigns in the history of politics in Connecticut. If Lieberman would of simply said that the Bush administration made bad decisions in Iraq and although he supports the war, he'll start to hold the president accountable for his mistakes, Lamont would not stand a chance. Instead, Lieberman stubbornly stood his ground, sheltering himself from the real people of Connecticut with his "invitation only" events, ignoring his critics as well as people who tried to give him good advise, and really pissed people off by turning his back on the Democratic Party and deciding to run as an independent (basically ignoring the Democrats if the primary doesn't go his way).

For Lieberman, his only shot at this point is running as an independent and hoping that the Republican and moderate vote can get him re-elected. It's a risky move seeing that he's turning his back on the Democratic Party at a time where Democrats can pick up three Congressional seats in Connecticut.

If Lamont wins the primary, it's safe to say that he'll become the hottest thing in the nation grabbing ALL the media attention (during the summer, there is usually little to no national political news so the media will have no problem jumping on the Lamont bandwagon). Given the attention Lamont will receive if he wins the primary, he can be the very person who can bring the Democratic Party together (again, media attention) and lead the Connecticut Congressional candidates (who currently have little or no media attention) to victory in November. Also remember that there are a good number of Democrats who would love nothing better than for Lieberman to lose in August so they can stand behind the Democratic nominee without any guilt of being seen disrespectful the incumbent.

For Lamont, his main problem is himself.

From the beginning of his campaign, Lamont has had to deal with the fact that he's an unknown going up against a 18-year senator. It's not that people like Lieberman...actually, Lieberman has been a thorn in the foot of all Democrats in Connecticut with his close relationship with a conservative party that has proven that they simply can't govern this country. The only hurdle Lamont had to overcome is his "unknown" factor, which he has done with the backing of an excellent campaign staff and a great strategy. The plan was simple: go to every small town in Connecticut and introduce yourself to the voters who would most likely vote in the primary. Lieberman took those people from the small towns for granted while Lamont listened to the people's concerns and expanded his message, which expanded beyond the war and addressed issues that really matter to voters (health care, education, energy independence, etc).

With less than three weeks to go till primary day, expect Lieberman to pull every dirty trick in the book at Lamont. Hopefully, Lieberman attacks will not trick Lamont, as he needs to stay on message which is obviously having an impact on people who didn’t know anything about him. Again, based on the TREND, as Lamont's "unknown factor" goes down, his approval numbers goes up while Lieberman's goes down.

Things are going to get very interesting around here...

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Two words...

contributeBlogosphere day!

Please contribute.

Go to the Family, Friends, and Neighbor's program and sign up.

Find a Lamont campaign office in your area and volunteer a portion of your time and help rip Connecticut of George Bush's favorite Democrat.

Anything you can do would be welcomed.

Feeding more fuel to the GOP-Lieberman connection

Political Wire offers up this gem.
The road will continue to get rougher, lonelier and tougher for Republican U.S. Senate candidate Alan Schlesinger as Republicans continue to lay down markers that he will be forced off the ticket. Last week's controversy over his gambling continues to percolate. He might have been able to discourage some skeptics if he'd filed the obligatory disclosure report for candidates with the Secretary of the United States Senate. The absence of certified information on his finances propels speculation on what had been a silent candidacy. Instead, he's sought two 45 day extensions until August 14th.

Connecticut has become fascinated with gaming in the 15 years since the approval of the Mahantucket Pequot casino. The state, however, is unlikely to embrace a Senate candidate who sounds like he spends more time with croupiers than with voters.

Schlesinger stumbled into a prize that he can't do much with though it grows more valuable as state politicos perceive Democratic challenger surging against bewildered incumbent Joe Lieberman in their August 8th primary contest. Anticipation grows on the eve of the release of a Qunnipiac Poll on Friday. How it measured likely primary voters will be a point of particular interest to all sides.

A Lamont victory in the bitter primary fight has Republicans conjuring sugar plums. Schlesinger's tormenters, who played their first card with tales of his gambling under an assumed name and being shooed from the casino as a card counter, are staying on his trail. The number of people volunteering tips and suggestions of what rocks to turn over would make an army recruiter jealous.

The GOP has not elected one of its own to the Senate since the 1982 election, and that was Lowell Weicker who many only grudgingly conceded as a Republican even then. Some believe that with the right breaks they could elect one of their own, though no one thinks Schlesinger can win under any circumstances. Others think offering the spot to Lieberman on a ticket headed by popular governor Jodi Rell (for whom Lieberman has had much praise) would give a powerful boost to the rest of the ticket.
This gem of a story comes from Hartford Courant columnist Kevin Rennie so his words carry a good degree of weight. Now, read between the lines and pay close attention to Rennie's words. In case you missed it, I'll post it again.
The GOP has not elected one of its own to the Senate since the 1982 election, and that was Lowell Weicker who many only grudgingly conceded as a Republican even then. Some believe that with the right breaks they could elect one of their own, though no one thinks Schlesinger can win under any circumstances. Others think offering the spot to Lieberman on a ticket headed by popular governor Jodi Rell (for whom Lieberman has had much praise) would give a powerful boost to the rest of the ticket.
Get it,? Got it? Good.

Now follow my logic and add Rennie's words with Lieberman slow response to Greg Sargent's question today and connect the dots.

Did Sargent catch Lieberman's campaign off guard? Is the GOP and Lieberman's campaign up to something?

This is getting weirder by the minute. Joe jumps ship one week and the GOP throws their guy Alan Schlesinger under a bus (ALTHOUGH everyone in the state knew about his past) and now they talk about placing either an anti-war candidate on the ticket or a person who got creamed in 2004 to Dodd?

Something just isn't right here folks.

It might be time for the media to press Gov. Rell and State GOP chairman George Gallo and ask them if they had any contact with Lieberman's camp lately.

UPDATE: The "mulling" is over, Lieberman puts GOP question to rest

Well, I guess we can turn off that Drudge light (for now).

Here's the update...
As I wrote below, Election Central posed a question this morning to the Lieberman campaign: Would he or would he not rule out a run on the GOP line if he lost the Dem primary and the line were offered to him?

Well, now campaign spokesperson Marion Steinfels has gotten back to me, and the answer is: He rules it out. Completely.

Steinfels said that Lieberman would "absolutely not" run on the GOP line. She added: "He has said he's always been a Democrat, and he'll always be a Democrat."
Asked if he'd rule out accepting the line, Steinfels said: "Joe Lieberman will never run as a Republican. Never."
How much do you want to bet they read about their initial response on the blogs and freaked out (hi Joe, thanks for reading).

Telling someone like Greg Sargent that your "mulling" over a response to whether or not Lieberman is considering running on the GOP ticket is yet another in a long history of screw-ups from Lieberman's campaign. With less than three weeks to go, you would think they wouldn't be making these types of boneheaded moves that requires quick damage control.

Here's some things you should consider:

1. Why did the campaign have to "mull" over a response. It seems like a question such as "would you consider running on the GOP ticket" is a pretty simple question to answer for a Democrat like Lieberman. Is it fair to assume that there is more to this than meets the eye (or else why did Sargent have to wait for a response to a easy question. You know Lieberman should be screaming if Lamont had to "mull" over answering that question).

2. If the Republicans throw Alan "the card counter" Schlesinger over the cliff (which they are trying to do as hard as they can), would they put up a credible candidate to run for senate or would they clear a path for Lieberman to grab the GOP vote. Remember, Chris Shays and Nancy Johnson both praised Joe Lieberman for being a great senator.

3. If Lieberman is a proud Democrat, why won't he accept the outcome of the Democratic primary (if it's not in his favor).

If you ask me, Sargent was onto something and caught the Lieberman campaign off guard. With the GOP throwing Schlesinger under a bus (and the fact that Lieberman has a 60+ percent approval rating among conservatives) I'll bet the house on these two things:

1. The Republican leadership (i.e. George Gallo, Gov. Rell) has contacted Joe Lieberman within the last two to three weeks with a "run on the GOP ticket" plan or a "we'll clear the GOP ticket for you" offer (which would explain why they sabotaged Schlesinger's campaign since they HAD to have known about Alan's past).

2. The Lieberman camp contacted the GOP leadership about Joe running as an indy and look to see if they could get any support if Joe lost the primary. The GOP then threw Schlesinger under a bus (which happened after Joe jumped ship), offered two candidates who have no chance in winning the senate a.) Diane Urban-an anti war Republican (nuff said), and b.) Jack Orchulli-a Republican who had his ass handed to him by Chris Dodd when he tried to run against him in 2004. Now if Orchulli can't beat a liberal in Dodd, do you really think the GOP think Jack can beat someone like Lieberman who has high approval numbers AMONG REPUBLICANS).


BREAKING NEWS: Lieberman campaign "mulling" over running on the GOP ticket

Wow, just when you think Joe can't shock you with anything else, he proves me wrong yet again.

This is so explosive that I think it's time to pull out the damn Drudge light again...
Yesterday we brought you word that some Republicans in Connecticut think it would be a good idea to offer their line to Joe Lieberman if he loses the Dem primary to Ned Lamont and if current GOP candidate Alan Schlesinger can be given the push.

This is of course a pretty far-fetched scenario. But then again, everything about this race has been far-fetched.

So today Election Central has just posed a simple question to the Lieberman campaign:

Will Lieberman or will he not rule out running on the GOP line if he loses to Lamont in August and it's offered to him?

This is fairly straightforward: Yes, or no? Which is it?

The question has been posed to Lieberman campaign deputy press secretary Noah Kores, and the campaign is mulling it.
WTF!?! Joe's thinking about running as a Republican? Okay, at this point, how can any true Democrat in Connecticut vote for this guy in the primary? In fact, this proves that Joe has completely given up on winning the primary and looking towards November.

Lieberman's campaign should of answered the question of whether or not he'll run on the Republican ticket with a flat out "no" but team Joememtum showed their true colors by not ruling out that option.

Again, at this point, faced with the fact that Joe's "mulling" over the GOP idea, how can ANY true Democrat vote for this guy in the primary?

Now the whole "push Alan Schlesinger out the race" scenario makes more sense. I commented before about my theory about the Republican party and the Lieberman campaign and I'll say it again. Two things could happen:

1. The Republicans will get Schlesinger to withdrawal and they'll endorse Lieberman.

2. The Republicans will get Schlesinger to withdrawal, they'll endorse no one for senate which would leave Republicans voters to choose between Lieberman and Lamont in November.

Lieberman will do anything to get re-elected even consider running as an Republican.

What does that say about Lieberman the Democrat?

What does they say about Lieberman working for the good of the Democratic Party?

What does that say about Lieberman stating that if he wins as an independent, he will be on the side of the Democrats?

Again, how can ANY Democrat in Connecticut vote for Lieberman in the primary let alone support this guy? He's thinking about running as a Republican for goodness sakes! Doesn't that tell you something about his character?

Who do you want representing you in Connecticut? A person who only thinks about himself or someone who will work for the good of the Democratic Party? For me, the answer is simple so please give to Ned's campaign.

Malloy-DeStefano debate

NO, I didn't forget about the debate last night (silly).

I'm currently working on the video from last night's debate and I'll offer my opinions post video highlights, and post a multiple online poll as soon as the video is ready.

Happy Blogosphere Day

Happy what? Okay, here's the history lesson starting with 2004.
On Monday afternoon, July 19, Stephen Yellin, a 16-year-old politics junkie and frequent contributor to the lefty blog Daily Kos, noticed an intriguing development in Pennsylvania's 8th Congressional District, an area to the north of Philadelphia. The Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call was reporting that Jim Greenwood, the district's popular, moderate Republican congressman, had unexpectedly decided not to seek reelection, meaning that his House seat was now up for grabs. This is the sort of news that sets partisans like Yellin jumping for joy, and so, of course, he blogged about it.

Did he ever blog about it. Within hours the combined action of dozens of blogs raised over $30,000 for the otherwise anonymous Democratic candidate running in PA-8, Ginny Schrader. Her campaign went from 0 to 60 in the span of a few hours, fueled exclusively by the blogs. The next few days were a roller coaster of speculation. Would the DCCC find a more "suitable" candidate to run against Republican Mike Fitzpatrick? The blogs fought back, they provided Ginny the seed money to launch a credible campaign, a campaign no one had dared to run in a district many thought was a lost cause. At the end of the day, not only did the DCCC relent in finding another candidate, but to their credit, supported Ginny with resource down the stretch.
Now you know about Blogosphere Day 2004, lets take a look at what happened in 2005.
On the last play from scrimmage in the 3rd quarter, Cincinnati Bengals running back Rudi Johnson took the handoff from Carson Palmer and scampered 36 yards to the end zone giving the team a comfortable 20-10 lead. The Bengals would not look back, presumably to the delight of Jean Schmidt and the 65,806 fans at Paul Brown Stadium watching Cincinnati's first Monday Night Football game at home in a decade a half. In Iraq, Marine Corps Major Paul Hackett and the men in his unit were en route by military transport helicopter from Ramadi to Fallujah where they served as gatekeepers for supplies coming in and out of the city notorious for some of the worst violence seen in the war."

On the night described above, Jean Schmidt was wined and dined by lobbyists in Cincinnati while her opponent in an Ohio Special Election, Paul Hackett, was flying from Ramadi to Fallujah as a U.S. Marine. The post received widespread recognition and was turned into a campaign commercial, debuting on July 19, Blogosphere Day. On that same day, Democratic blogs Swing State Project, Eschaton, MyDD and others allied with progressive organizations such as Democracy for America to raise a combined $100,504.47, propelling Paul within a hair's breadth of pulling off one of the most stunning upsets in modern political history.
Now, it's 2006 and Ned Lamont is the focus of attention during this year's Blogosphere Day.

contributeWhat can you do you ask? First, the best thing you can do is give what you can to Lamont's campaign. Ned will match all contributions dollar for dollar so lets make him write a big check.

Second, if you're from CT, please stop by one of Ned's offices and volunteer your time as any help is welcomed.

Last (AND MOST IMPORTANT), please take a few minutes and sign up for the Family, Friends and Neighbors program. I can't stress how important it is for everyone to sign up and use this innovative new tool as it's the best way to get Ned's message out to the masses.

Well, there you have it, it's Blogosphere day so help celebrate it by getting involved!

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Has anyone seen Joe?

These people are looking for him. I guess they didn't get an invitation to of Joe's "private" events...pity.

You can view the other new ads from Ned Lamont by clicking here.

FLASHBACK: Malloy/DeStefano debate

Here's another oldie but goodie.

In case you can't wait for the Malloy/DeStefano debate tonight, you can watch one of their earlier debates right now.

Clip 1: DeStefano opening remarks

Clip 2: Malloy Opening remarks

Clip 3: Question 1

Clip 4: Quesiton 2

Clip 5: Question 3

Clip 6: Question 4

What the Stamford Advocate failed to tell it's readers

While the Stamford Advocate reported that 70 percent of Lamont's campaign contributions came from out of state, they failed to mention that a whopping 80 percent of Lieberman's donations came from out of state with a good chunk coming from corporations. A majority of Lamont's donations are from individuals.

Will we see the media focus on people who contributed to Lieberman's campaign? Isn't that a fair question to ask if Lieberman is bringing campaign contributions and personal finances into the mix?

Hartford giving Lieberman the thumbs down?

I knew something didn't sound right about Joe's visit to Hartford.

You see, I was raised in the North-End section of Hartford and if there's one thing I know for sure, it's that you can't fool African-Americans with campaign promises such as federal funding to tackle urban violence. We've heard those types of empty promise so many times from desperate politicians that it's hard to keep count.

Street crime has been a large problem for over 20 years in Hartford which origins stems from the rise in unemployment and the introduction of crack cocaine in the area during the early to mid 80s. I can vividly remember countless numbers of friend's parents losing their well-paying jobs in the insurance or manufacturing industry and being forced to find meaningless "service-related" jobs (a.k.a. McDonald's) that barely paid the rent let alone support a family.

"Where was Joe when WE needed him back then?"

The fact is that no one wanted to deal with the serious problems associated with the North-End as funding for programs designed to help keep kids off the street were cut drastically and I know this from personal experience. I use to participate in a youth tennis program in the North-End which was designed to get kids off the street and expose them to a different sport. Tennis great such as Arthur Ashe made appearances to our tennis courts at Kenny Park and the program had such an impact on myself and countless others who, without the program, probably would of gotten into trouble.

When I was older, I contributed back to the program as an instructor and my job included going into some of the toughest housing projects and introducing tennis to the kids who otherwised played in the streets. I'll never forget people in the community (including gang members, many of whom were also parents) thanking me and my tennis partner for being there for their children when no one else was around. Although this program had a lasting positive impact on the people associated with it, the program's funding was decreased every year to a point where the program barely exists.

"Where was Joe when WE needed him back then?"

Yeah, I could go on and on about the urban problem in Hartford and how Joe Lieberman never helped out those how needed him the most, but let me get to my point...

As I said, you can't fool African-Americans with B.S. and according to Kevin Reenie, some local officials in Hartford aren't too happy with Lieberman's indy run and aren't fooled by Joementum's B.S.

Hartford Courant columnist Kevin F. Rennie 's latest exclusive dispatch from Connecticut.

Joseph Lieberman is hoping fear where work where persuasion has failed. Life on the ropes has caused the three term incumbent to call in Washington pro, Tom Lindenfeld to put together an organization to call, identify and inspire Lieberman primary voters for the August 8th showdown.

The theme of a Saturday conclave of Greater Hartford Democratic town committee chairs was that if Lieberman loses the primary he will hurt all other Democratic candidates by running as an independent in November. The message was clear: help him now or your favorites suffer in November.

The response of the crowd of about 50 could not have been encouraging, though Lendenfeld impressed with his plan. Still, there was much resentment about Lieberman's support of the war in Iraq and, now, threat to bolt party if he falls short on 8/8. Reactions ranged from support to nods to hostility. Most local leaders are far more interested in the gubernatorial race with its tangible rewards in patronage and prestige.

One of Lieberman's problems became evident in aftermath of meeting: lots of local leaders are quietly opposing him and were eager to share tales of the event. Plan is to hire workers to make calls and hit the pavement. Fears are growing that Lieberman will have no chance of winning in a low turnout. Twenty percent, the number batted about, is thought to be fatal to his chances.


Lieberman needs a pro like Lindenfeld . His camp has been infiltrated by hostile Democratic officials who are surprised they get invited to his meetings when they have no intention of doing any work for him, let alone giving him their votes.
Like I said, you can't fool everyone in Hartford.

Later, I'll go over some Lieberman points I'm sure Joe didn't bring up in his insulting "I love African-Americans and I feel your pain" photo-op.

Nancy Johnson testing negative talking points on Murphy?

Oh my, looks like Nancy Johnson is planning to go negative on Chris Murphy.
I just received a push poll, didn't take down the detailed information (sorry)but it was essentially a generic political poll followed by several nasty questions about Chris Murphy, Nancy Johnson's opponent in the race. There was nothing negative presented about Nancy Johnson.

Moveon.org was also slammed in the push poll as an "ultra-liberal organization," and the most memorable question was:

"Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for Chris Murphy knowing that he has the support of organization that used the coffins of dead American soldiers in their advertisements?"

The other push polly questions were about some changes to medicare (increasing costs to senior), something about a senior athletic competition (?) and the horrors of translating documents into french and spanish...

The greatest thing about this push poll: I started being somewhat supportive of Chris Murphy. By the end, I was ready to volunteer for his campaign.
So much for Nancy running on her record. BTW: Wasn't it Johnson who complained about negative ads?

(cross post from Hat City Blog)

Malloy FLASHBACK: Shelton DTC

(In honor of tonight's big debate between John DeStefano and Dan Malloy, I'm unlocking the ConnecticutBLOG archive and re-posting several of my encounters with the two candidates. I hope you enjoy the trip down memory lane. Be sure to check back often as I'll provide more video highlights between the two men who want to challenge Gov. Rell)

(Originally posted 3/06)

Boy, did the people of Shelton get a treat on Tuesday night.

Ned Lamont, Dan Malloy, and John DeStefano addressed the Shelton Democratic Town Committee and answered a wide range of quesitons. I've received a number of emails from readers asking me to do more coverage of the other primary happening in Connecitcut between Malloy and DeStefano. Since I aim to please, I'm happy to bring you video footage from last Tuesday's meeting.

The first set of video will be highlights from Dan Malloy's presentation. In order to keep the video quality high, I broke the viedeo into three segments; the first is Malloy's stump speech and the other two are Malloy answering questions from the audience.

Tomorrow, I will post highlights of DeStefano's speech and Q&A session. NOTE: I'm trying out YouTube for my video postings. If you experience slowplayback, pause the video and give the computer time to download the video file.


1. Highlight of Dan Malloy's presentation:

2. Dan Mallloy answers question regarding corruption in Connecticut:

3. Dan Malloy answers question regarding raising money for his campaign.

4. Dan Malloy answers final question and wraps up his presentation.

DeStefano FLASHBACK: Shelton DTC

(In honor of tonight's big debate between John DeStefano and Dan Malloy, I'm unlocking the ConnecticutBLOG archive and re-posting several of my encounters with the two candidates. I hope you enjoy the trip down memory lane. Be sure to check back often as I'll provide more video highlights between the two men who want to challenge Gov. Rell)

(Originally posted 3/06)

As I stated before, on Tuesday night, the people of Shelton were very lucky to have democratic gubernatorial candidates Dan Malloy and John DeStefano attend their meeting. Both candidates made their case to the committee and each answered a wide range of questions from the audience.

In all, it was a very informative meeting and it was a rare treat to hear from both candidates on the same night. Hopefully, both candidates will talk to other town committees on the same night in the future.

In the second part of my reporting from the Shelton DTC, here's video clips of candidate John DeStefano as he lays out his case to the Shelton delegates and town committee members.

1. John DeStefano's opening remarks:

2. Highlight of John DeStefano's presentation in which he describes how democrats in Connecticut can win an election:

3. John DeStefano answers question from a committee member:

4. John DeStefano answers final question from committee members:

More proof that Joe's camp is out of touch with reality

Out of touch.
Lieberman's campaign captain in Torrington, Bill Battle, set up Monday's visit and feels Lieberman is more in line with the Democratic party than those promoting Lamont.


"There is no statistical data implying that all Democrats are against the war," Battle said. "Moveon.org does not speak for Connecticut Democrats."

26. Do you think going to war with Iraq was the right thing for the United States to do or the wrong thing?

Monday, July 17, 2006

Connecticut for Lieberman: petition update

Report from Orange:
I was at a private party Saturday night, heavily attended by local DTC members and Democrats. The petition for Lieberman was being circulated. One of the founding members (i.e. the required Party Designation Committee of a Petitioning Party) of the "Connecticut for Lieberman" party is from Orange, so it's not suprising he was getting signatures. He believes strongly in his candidate.

I would guess that a lot of people will sign the petition here in Orange. They don't view it as disloyal to the party, but as a sign of loyalty to Joe as well as loyalty to the local Democrats who support Joe. How many of those signers will also get out to the polls and pull the Joe lever? I'm not sure that will be 100%.


As an aside - it may be entirely possible that Lieberman will get all his signatures this way. He might not have to collect the signatures in public at all.
Joe doesn't do anything in public...everything he has done to this point, has been strickly in private...why should he stop now.

I guess his new political party will be private also. Petitioning for signatures in private speaks volumes about how strong his independent option is among your average everyday voter in this state.

But in Lieberman's world, things are getting better in Iraq

Tell that to this guy.
As I hung up the phone, I wondered if I would ever see my friend Ali alive again. Ali, The Times translator for the past three years, lives in west Baghdad, an area that is now in meltdown as a bitter civil war rages between Sunni insurgents and Shia militias. It is, quite simply, out of control.

I returned to Baghdad on Monday after a break of several months, during which I too was guilty of glazing over every time I read another story of Iraqi violence. But two nights on the telephone, listening to my lost and frightened Iraqi staff facing death at any moment, persuaded me that Baghdad is now verging on total collapse.

Ali phoned me on Tuesday night, about 10.30pm. There were cars full of gunmen prowling his mixed neighbourhood, he said. He and his neighbours were frantically exchanging information, trying to identify the gunmen.

Were they the Mahdi Army, the Shia militia blamed for drilling holes in their victims' eyes and limbs before executing them by the dozen? Or were they Sunni insurgents hunting down Shias to avenge last Sunday's massacre, when Shia gunmen rampaged through an area called Jihad, pulling people from their cars and homes and shooting them in the streets?
I encourage everyone to read this article that details the horror people are facing in Iraq. Keep this in mind when you read this horror tale, Senator Lieberman still stands by Bush's policies and refuses (to this date) to hold this administration accountable for the numerous mistakes which has placed Baghdad into utter chaos. Now, Lieberman is angry that someone is challenging him for "his seat" based on his close relationship with conservatives and his shameless willingness to chastise Democrats who opposed the President over the years.

What Lieberman doesn't understand is that he's part of the problem. You see, Bush's incompetence is one thing but that's nothing compared to an 18-year Democratic senator who stubbornly refuses to challenge the policies of this administration (to the delight of Republicans). Instead of working with the Democrats, Lieberman gleams in his role as master cheerleader for the neo-cons with his repeated boneheaded assertions that things are getting better in Iraq we should "stay the course."

Can anyone still take this claim seriously when faced with the overwhelming evidence that things are not getting better in Iraq..in fact, they're getting worse by the day.

Here's a question senator, why don't you defend your record in supporting Iraq. Instead of changing the subject and smearing Ned Lamont with outright lies, go across the state and do stump speeches supporting this war and convince us that you made the right decision.

Convince us why we should respect the courage of your convictions. Convince us why we should respect the word of a man who, like his neo-con buddies, had no problem taking deferments when it was his time to serve in Vietnam.

Let's see you convictions senator and defend your Iraq war record and stop calling anyone who challenges you a "plant from the Lamont campaign." While you're at it, try holding an event where the public can attend instead of your "invitation only" photo-op campaign stunts.

The public is waiting...with three weeks left till the primary, is the senator up for the challenge?

Where's the details Joe?

Oh, this is just too much.
Lamont's campaign released a breakdown of contributions Monday; Lieberman's campaign has released totals but not yet provided details about who gave what.
Is this the same senator who been screaming for Lamont to release his tax returns (which he has already agreed to doing) because he wants to see how Lamont accumulated his income?

Right back at you Senator Lieberman...when are you going to give us the details so we can see who's funding YOUR campaign?

Boxer taking a pounding over promise to stump for Lieberman

She had this coming to her...
Liberal activists, including some California Democrats, are furious with Sen. Barbara Boxer -- a leading critic of the Iraq war -- for her active support of Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Democrat who staunchly defends the war in Iraq.


That decision has divided his Senate colleagues and Democrats nationwide. And the Lieberman race has ignited a fiery debate among Democrats, now raging on political blogs, about loyalty, political principles and whether the three-term senator has betrayed his party and should be tossed out.

Boxer, a California Democrat, said she decided to support Lieberman, and campaign for him in Connecticut, even though ``we have no common ground surrounding the issue of the Iraq war.''


Within days, Huffington Post and Daily Kos, another liberal blog, were filled with angry responses from Californians. ``She better cancel that [Connecticut] trip if she wants any more donations from me and other California activists,'' wrote one.

``She's a damn foolish, selfish sellout,'' another wrote.

One leader of the Progressive Democrats of America, Mervis Reissig of Sonoma County, said: ``I'm in a state of shock. What Sen. Boxer is doing is a total invalidation of one of our main values. Right now the war is a more important issue than choice.''

A mortgage broker in Topanga Canyon, Dorothy Reik, said Boxer's decision ``shows she's part of that `old boys' club' in the Senate, where some sort of personal loyalty overrides your principles.''
Question: give me one word that best describes Joe Lieberman right now.


Well, at least Sen. Boxer can't use the "I missed the train" excuse when she backs away from campaigning for Lieberman in Connecticut. That line has already been used by Sen. Biden and as we all know, double dipping is a BIG no no.

Oh yeah, there is another primary

In honor of John DeStefano and Dan Malloy's big debate this week, I'll recap my various interviews with these two Democrats and give a full-rundown of their debate.

It's been a while since I looked at the archives I have on these two fine Democrats so it will be interesting to see what I have in the vault. Also, I still have to big video interview DeStefano gave to various bloggers in Rocky Hill and I'll unleash that interesting interview on everyone later this week as well.

With three weeks to go till primary day, expect both Malloy and DeStefano to step up their game with ads and interviews galore. These guys have been at it for well over a year so expect them to come out swinging on each other as we approach the home stretch.

Watching these two mayors go at it reminds me of the golden rule of Thunderdome: Two men enter, one man leaves.

Liebermania goes wild!

Oh snap, he went there!

Joe goes to a Baptist Church?

Oh, this was sure to be a bomb. What was Joe's staff thinking?

A little bird gave me this report:
Joe showed up late last night at Mt. Aery Baptist Church with a large entourage and a cameraman. He was told he could worship with the congregation, but not speak, and the camera could not come in.
Now really Joe. At the last minute, you're running to the African-American community for support...and YOU SHOW UP LATE WITH A POSSE AND A CAMERA like you're some type of hip-hop artist!?!

Does Lieberman take African-Americans for fools?

You go to one of the biggest Baptist chruch in Connecticut for a cheap photo-op...AND YOU SHOW UP LATE!?!

Where were you when we needed you? Where were you these last six years? You haven't answered a phone call much less show up anywhere near a Baptist church so why do it now.

Does Lieberman take African-Americans for fools?

While you were at Mt. Aery Church, did you care to explain to the congregation about your record regarding Affirmative Action or school vouchers? What about Social Security and your refusal to object to the President's proposal to privatize the program till the very last minute?

And what up with bringing a posse to a Baptist church (with a camera no less)? What a cheap stunt as your only objective was to be photographed/videotaped next to minorities.

Does Lieberman take African-Americans for fools?

Well Senator Lieberman, as an African-American, I find this stunt not only cheap, but very upsetting. Don't think this will get you any votes...African-Americans are on to your tactics and see right through you as if they have X-ray vision.

BTW: Ned Lamont didn't insult people as he met with people at a large Baptist Church on Friday night in New Haven and he definitely didn't show up with a POSSE and A FRICKING CAMERA to record his every word.

...and he definately didn't diss people by showing up late!


Good Lord, I almost dropped my coffee this morning.

Bill Finch finally responds
to readers' complaints regarding "the simple question."

Well, he sort of replied...
I have known Joe Lieberman for over 30 years. Sometimes I agree with him sometimes I don't. But he is a progressive with great credentials as State Senator, Attorney General, and US Senator.

Joe's views are nearly identical to President Clinton. Sure we don't know how Clinton would have voted on issues like Alberto Gonzalez, but they are real close nonetheless.

I believe that only a centrist progressive coalition can take back the White House, Senate and Congress. Combine that with my long standing friendship with Joe Lieberman and you can understand why I will support him wholeheartedly in the primary. I am sure he will win.

You ask me to comment on the unlikely event Joe were to lose - would I support the winner? I cannot conceive of either event.

I am not certain if I can stop supporting Joe. I will let you know a day or two after Primary Day.
Although it is nice that the senator responded, his answer is still confusing. Again, I'll point everyone to my original post regarding Finch's answer to the simple question.
Received this from Bill Finch's office:

Sen. Finch supports Joe Lieberman, believing that he is in lockstep with the democratic platform and the DLC 90% of the time, and that the 10% where Lieberman breaks from his party is on personal principle.
Now, based on this response, I posted the following and placed Finch's name under "undecided" or "on the fence"
In my opinion, this is about as close as you can get to being classified as a Liebercrat without actually saying that you're a Liebercrat.
Finch's stance on the question was never in dispute. What is in dispute was Finch's claim that this blog (and the readers who've called politicians and asked them the question) are out to "sandbag them."

From Senator Finch:
Recently, someone contacted my office to make an inquiry into a particular position of mine in one of the upcoming primaries. When my aide responded in a timely fashion, accurately stating my position, he was quoted on a blog as me. While I support the efforts of my aide, I would have appreciated the opportunity to respond to something that was going to be quoted myself.
The problem with Finch's statement is that in my original post, I clearly stated that this statement came from his office and furthermore, not only does he not dispute the statement his aide gave to the reader, he stands by the statement while attacking this blog.

Again, I don't really have a problem with what he said, he's a Lieberman supporter and he might feel that he's in a tough bind but, answering the question shouldn't be hard. What Finch (and others who refuse to answer the question) fail to realize is that this isn't about Ned Lamont or Joe Lieberman, it's about the Democratic Party and what is more important, personal loyalty or respecting the wishes of the Democratic voters and accepting the outcome of the primary.

For me, it's simple and I've stated this countless times, I will support whoever wins the primary as I feel that a Democratic majority on Congress should be our ultimate goal. Isn't this the type of response every Democrat should respect and admire? I (as well as others) want to know where our representatives stand on this issue and as Dan Malloy even stated, it's a fair question.

Senator Finch,

Your reply to the question was never in dispute (not for me). What was (and still is) in dispute is the claim that I (or anyone who questions a politician with this question) is out to sandbag them based on their support for Senator Lieberman. This simply is not true and for the life of me, I can't understand why people don't get it.

For me, it's simple, you do what you want to do during a primary but we all come together as Democrats after the primary is over for the good of the Party. Why is this so hard to understand? Why is this so difficult to state?

Why have people like Dan Malloy, John DeStefano, Richard Blumenthal, Susan Bysiewicz, Joe Courtney, Chris Murphy, Diane Farrell, John Geragosian, Peter Tercyak, Michael Cardin, Robert Duff, Tom Colapietro, Martin Looney answered the question (many of whom are presently supporting Senator Lieberman). They answered the question because they know the unity is supperior to any disagreements we might have. That's a hallmark of a true Democrat and the type of people I want representing me in Connecticut and Washington.

Again, while I thank you for personally clarifying your position (which again, was never in dispute), your characterization that bloggers and people who read blogs are out to sandbag people.

From the beginning, I've always tried to take the high ground even asking my readers to be polite in responding to your claims about me. I'm simply asking for the same in return with a simple retraction of your claim about me, my site, and the faithful, loyal, Democrats who read this site and are interested on the responses to the simple question which has caught so much attention, that the mainstrem media has picked up on it and adopted in their interviews with politicians.

Maybe you were pissed over the picture I used of you, Ernest Newton, and Mayor Fabrizi, maybe you were upset over getting dragged into anytihng relating to the senate race, honestly, I don't really know. What I do know is that your repsonse to my post was wrong and I'm simply looking for you to do the right thing.

I thought we were on the same team?