<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, August 05, 2006

The numbers don't lie

Oh Joe, it's looking really bad for you.

If the primary for U.S. Senate were held today, which of the following candidates would you vote for?


Would you like to see Joe Lieberman run as an independent if he loses in the Democratic primary?

Not Sure........13%

Nuff said.

Friday, August 04, 2006

Lowering the expectations

Remember this gem of a quote from Joe (Doug Flutie) Lieberman yesterday.
Embattled Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman - facing a possible primary defeat Tuesday because of his strong backing for the Iraq war - yesterday launched a Hail Mary attack on the Bush administration's handling of the war.

"I supported our war in Iraq but I have always questioned the way it was being executed," Lieberman said.

"This administration took far too many shortcuts. We continue to suffer the consequences, as do the Iraqi people."
Desperate move from a desperate politician you say? You haven't seen anything yet.

I know everyone is looking at the latest polls and saying "Lamont has this in the bag" but this is FAR from the case. In fact, this race is close...REAL close.

Trust me, I love in CT and the Lieberman has a enormous staff working the streets. Also, Lieberman and Sean Smith know every trick in the book.
In multiple outlets, super-secret Lieberman leakers are telling the world that they are toast.

In Political Wire and the Washington Post, among other outlets, leakers tell reporters that their ground game is so dismal that they are scrapping it. From the Post:

Facing a likely defeat, Lieberman has scrapped plans for a massive and costly get-out-the-vote operation on primary day, according to several Democratic sources.

Mmmm hmmm.... National Journal, also today, reports another notion that's bubbling up - everyone in the party is thinking about a Lieberman loss (something they wouldn't do unless they thought he was going to actually lose):

If Democratic challenger Ned Lamont beats Joe Lieberman in Connecticut's Senate primary next Tuesday, we're told, Democrats will sigh heavily and wring their sweaty palms for the rest of 2006.

So who are these sources that are calling the time of death for Lieberman, days before a vote is even cast?

My bet is on Team Lieberman itself. This is the campaign's true Hail Mary - declare the whole thing over in hopes that Lamont volunteers and voters exhale a little before election day, and maybe jolt soft Lieberman support into gear, by painting scenarios of a Joe-less world.

In campaigns, this type of tactic happens on a much lower scale all the time; it's called lowering expectations. Whether it is predicting lower fundraising than you really have just before quarterly reports are filed, or pretending your opponent is an Oxford-level debater and yours is Howdy Doody, whispering to reporters that you're not as good as they say is a fun game.

But predicting your own political death is the "nuclear option" of campaigns. It could work, and get Lamont's network to take a little rest and pat themselves on the back prematurely, or it could backfire and completely destroy the morale of the Lieberman network of voters who lay down their arms and surrender before Tuesday.

It's simple, Ned Lamont has a great amount of work to do and he needs your help BIGTIME!

Donate a portion of your time this weekend and help GET OUT THE VOTE!

Greg Sargent on a roll, confirms lobbyist who heckled Lamont

Oh man, Gerg Sargent is having a hell of a great time going after Joe Lieberman's favorite (hitman) lobbyist, Richard Goodstein.

Greg, you keep reporting like this if I see you in Connecticut next week, the first drink is on me!

So I just reached D.C. lobbyist Richard Goodstein on his cellphone. Goodstein the lobbyist confirmed that he is indeed the guy on the front-page of today's Record-Journal who appeared to be heckling Lamont in a diner.


As the Record-Journal reported, a man named Richard Goodstein shouted at Lamont: "Are you a Bill Clinton Democrat, or an Al Sharpton Democrat?" Several blogs have since speculated that Goodstein is a corporate lobbyist in D.C.

Well, Election Central just reached out to the office of registered-D.C.-lobbyist Richard Goodstein, got his cell number, and reached him. When I asked him if he was a Lieberman supporter and was the man in the pic on the front of the Herald-Record, he confirmed that, yes, he was a Lieberman backer and that he was the same man as pictured on the paper's front page. Then the conversation went south.

When I asked him if I could confirm that he'd said what the paper said he had, Goodstein asked me why I wanted to do that and whether I worked for the paper. I said I didn't and noted that I wanted to get confirmation of his quotes straight from him.

After a hurried back-and-forth, Goodstein said: "Do me a favor: Email me the last good story you wrote about Joe Lieberman." When I asked why that was relevant, Goodstein said: "Bye. Bye." End of conversation.

Well, at least now we know for certain who the mystery man in the diner was, and that he's the same Richard Goodstein as the D.C. lobbyist Richard Goodstein. But I didn't get to ask him about the nature of the Lieberman supporters' surprise of Lamont or about the nature of Goodstein's relationship to the campaign. I've got a call into the Lieberman campaign about this. Hopefully we'll have more soon.

Why are the best people covering this eleciton from out-of state? Where everyone's favorite senior political reporter, Mark "fire in the belly" Davis when you need him. Still running after that Halliburton story?

Team Joementum: keeping us laughing since Feburary 2006. Pity it's all coming to a crashing end on August 8th...

FLASHBACK VIDEO: John Olsen rocks the crowd?

Let's see how good your memory is right now.

Remember that anti-war rally held back in March 2006 in Hartford?

You remember, it was the largest rally held at the Old State House and the event ended right in front of Joe Lieberman's office.

Remember how the people (in the freezing cold) placed coffins in front of his building people read letters of disappointment in Joe Lieberman’s unwavering support for the war?

It's coming back to you now...ah, good.

Well, try this on for size. Out of all the people who were present at the rally, can you pick the only supporter of Joe Lieberman in the following pictures?

Did you say the man in the last picture? DING, you're right, it’s AFL-CIO President and outspoken critic of Ned Lamont, John Olsen.

In honor of Olsen's glowing endorsement of Millionaire Joe Lieberman, I present you this flashback video of his emotional speech at the rally.

Ironic, don't you think?

UPDATE: Wow, didn't know so many of you loved the photos. If you want to see all the images from the anti-war rally, you can view them here.

Lieberman is a real class act

I know I told everyone that I would stay focused but this demands attention.

I'll let Matt over at MyDD break things down.

Ok, so this is instructive, so bear with me for a bit while I walk through one particular person who seemed to be spearheading he Lieberman charge at the cheeseburger joint yesterday. The Record-Journal story pointed out that the main guy harrassing Ned was named Richard Goodstein.

"It was supposed to be a laid-back event and (they) ruined it." "We're just using our right. We're just exercising our rights to enjoy a burger," said Lieberman supporter Alex Hoffman of Boston. Supporters of each candidate debated outside on the side­walk while many Lieberman supporters continued to badger Lamont, who acknowledged most questions. Richard Goodstein, one of the most vocal Lieberman supporters, repeat­edly shouted, "Are you a Bill Clinton Democrat or an Al Sharpton Democrat?" Lamont calmly said he supported both.

Is this the same Richard Goodstein who gave Lieberman $1500 for his 2004 Presidential run? Because that Goodstein is a lobbyist in DC for the chemical and health supplies industry.

Seems like Mr. Goodstein isn't too bright because WE have a photo of him yelling in Meriden yesterday. Take a look at the picture from yesterday against his bio at the National Home Infusion Assocation's 2nd Annual Legislative Conference.

Here's the classy guy's bio:
Mr. Goodstein is now Washington Representative for Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., and for Air Products Healthcare, one of the most prominent companies in the home medical equipment field. Mr. Goodstein has been an active advocate on behalf of Air Products Healthcare in Congress and with the administrators of the Medicare program. Mr. Goodstein also appears regularly on the Fox News Channel, MSNBC, and other TV networks to offer political and legal analysis.

So Lieberaman is now bringing in lobbyists to do his dirty work. Now which campaign is acting like rotten children?


(Hat tip to Lamontblog for the photo and Aldon for the research)

Quinnipiac Poll Press Conference

From yesterday, here's Quinnipiac Poll Director Douglas Schwartz's press conference. Schwartz explains what the latest poll means in a way that very easy to understand.

Lieberman/Lamont primary race breakdown

Malloy/DeStefano primary race breakdown

Lieberman denies hiring College Republicans

Here's the latest regarding the College Republican/Lieberman campaign connection.

From the CT Post
Sen. Joe Lieberman's campaign denied Thursday that they are hiring Republican college students to help get out the vote in Tuesday’s primary. "It is another lie the Lamont campaign is pedaling," said Dan Gerstein, a Lieberman volunteer and former spokesman for the three-term senator. Liberal Web sites associated with the Lamont campaign have posted an e-mail from a Princeton University student that suggests Lieberman wanted to hire Republican college students to work on his re-election campaign. The e-mail, the bloggers suggest, reaffirms Lieberman’s cozy alliance with the GOP, saying: "Look who's getting organized on behalf of Joe Lieberman." The e-mail, sent to collegerepublicans@PRINCETON.EDU, suggests an “unconventional primary campaign opportunity” in volunteering for Lieberman.


Gerstein said that the e-mail was sent without authorization from the campaign. Elissa Harwood, a Princeton student and Lieberman supporter, was trying to drum up some volunteers for the campaign from among her fellow Democratic friends, he said. "She shared the information with a friend who happened to be Republican, and without permission the friend sent the e-mail to Princeton Republicans," Gerstein said. "Our campaign did not solicit any volunteers from college Republicans and the friend shared the information without permission."

So much news, so little time

Wow, there is so much stuff to cover. I can't seem to keep up with everything.

The governer's race between Malloy and DeStefano is really picking up pace with Malloy catching up to DeStefano with a few days to go till primary day. Lamont and Lieberman...well, you know about those two.

I have plenty of video to post including the latest Q-poll news conference which I'll post shortly. I'm also going to do something I've haven't done before and I'll get into that later today. If everyone helps out, it should be rather fun.


A brief word

I'll be real brief and then I'm moving on.

Jesse Jackson told us to focus and trust me, I'm trying my best but what happened yesterday was way over the line. I noticed a writer on another blog didn't notice any coverage of the event in the press. I felt that it was important to show him that this story did make it to the front page one major newspaper in the area. Other press were there and I'm sure more stories of what happened will surface as things really did get ugly.

Here's a screenshot of the paper.

Here's a high-res pdf version of the front page

You can read the story (Ambush at Ted's) by clicking here (paid sub).

It's sad that after all this time, the Lieberman campaign decided to turn things this ugly but I'm moving on because this is not important. What's important is that we get out the vote and make sure those people who would vote for a change make it to the polls on Tuesday.

Children will be children and it seems like some people need a time out but again, lets not lose focus. Please go to Lamont's website and give some of your time this weekend.

Moving forward, staying focused.

Thursday, August 03, 2006

LieberKidz gone wild

Oh man, the LieberKidz have gone crazy.

So I just tracked this down with several sources, and something really strange is going on. Lieberman's campaign seems to arming his supporters with aggressive talking points in order to pick fights at Lamont events. There were two separate events today where this happened. At a Machinists union endorsement event for Ned, some Lieberman supporters (probably paid) started arguing with union members, and a sign got torn.

Later in the day, Ned was ambushed at a diner stop. At 5pm, Ned was scheduled to stop at a cheeseburger joint in Meridan (Ted's Cheeseburgers). The burgers were really good, apparently, and the place is famous for delicious cheeseburgers. Mmm. As I write this it's dinner time.

Anyway, Lamont was going to the restaurant for a scheduled stop to do a meet and greet. The field organizer got there 20 minutes ahead of schedule. A bunch of Lieberkidz were already inside, but they were disguised because they weren't wearing their standard white T-Shirts. They were just sitting in the booths, in the smallish restaurant.

There were about 15 Ned supporters outside, holding signs and milling about. There were also some reporters, a photographer, and a bunch of journalists. Ned arrived at 5:05, and spent about 10 or 15 minutes outside before heading in to give a speech and eat a cheeseburger. He goes inside, and all of sudden the field organizer who was behind Ned heard a lot of screaming directed at Ned.

There were only four booths and six stools in the whole place, and they were basically all occupied. When Ned went in, all of the supporters ripped off their 'civilian clothes' and revealed their Lieberman T-Shirts.

A large man, around 50 years old or so, then started screaming at Ned, "Are you an Al Sharpton Democrat, or a Bill Clinton Democrat?" Ned was trying to answer, and the gentleman kept yelling. The Lamont press secretary tried to intervene, and meanwhile, the people behind the counter who owned the restaurant were horrified and embarrassed. Then Ned Lamont went up to the few people in regular clothes and introduced himself, even as the Lieberman supporters kept screaming. He also tried to introduce himself to the Lieberman staffers, but to no avail. The screaming continued, and it was so abrasive that he left, and the whole crowd followed him outside.

These kids poured out, and a half a dozen reporters were mostly outside. The large man kept yelling, and was joined by one particularly obnoxious Lieberman supporter who started yelling about national security and how Lamont would endanger the country. The messaging seemed rehearsed. The Lieberman supporters started getting aggressive, pushing some of the Lamont staffers. When confronted, the Lieberman staffers said that they are just doing what the bloggers did.

In the whole affair, one photographer caught an elbow and got a bloody nose. It seems that the Lieberman campaign is explicitly setting up their supporters at Lamont events in tense and aggressive situations, all in the presence of reporters. When asked, the Lieberman campaign is expressing outrage at the unsavory and unruly behavior of the Lamont supporters. Joe better call the dogs off before we catch them on video.
Okay folks, this is way over the line. Say what you will but I never heard of a Lamont supporter pulling this type of crap at a Lieberman event. This is totally uncalled for and disgusting. Whenever I'm at a Lieberman event, I'm as professional as any other report on the scene. I'm there to report the story NOT and not to be part of the story. I've never heard of a pro-Lamont blogger or supporter of Lamont act like a unhinged wacko and we have all the video online to prove it.

I might disagree with Joe but that does not mean I would ever go up to him and scream in his face. Say what you will about Sen. Lieberman or Lamont but they are human beings for crying out loud. It's one thing to get pissed off at Lieberman's campaign, it a totally different story when you become physical.

Joe, I might not agree with you on several issues but I always thought you were better than this. Call off the dogs, it's very uncool and you know Ned does not deserve that type of treatment. Say what you will about Lamont supporters but you know there has never been a case where you, your staff, or any reporter felt threatened.

I think you should take some advice from Ned and have a lemonade and chill.

(NOTE: Title to post changed.)

Meanwhile in land of Lieberman...

things are not so good.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman's (D-CT) Tour for Tomorrow continues to be punctuate with today's struggles to save his troubled campaign. In the aftermath of a Quinnipiac poll this morning showing the three term Democrat far behind behind challenger Ned Lamont in Tuesday's primary, Lieberman must decide how or if to salvage his get-out-the-vote operation.

Word is leaking out of the campaign that efforts to hire and organize several thousand itinerant campaign workers have fallen far short of expectations and necessity. Lieberman and his battered brain trust will now have to decide whether to continue investing funds in that effort or save money for November. These primary troubles are a preview of what he can expect in his new life as an independent should he lose on Tuesday. Much of his weak campaign organization will dutifully head to the triumphant Democratic nominee or simply sit out the race.

Party professionals are appalled at the parlous state of Lieberman's campaign organization. And that's something it takes more than a few weeks to build. The invoice for neglecting Connecticut Democrats for the past six years is now due. It's a ruinous sum for George Bush’s favorite Senate Democrat.
No time to smile right now. Save the champaign for Tuesday night when the results are final and until then, consider this a close race.

Remember, stay focus. Get involved and voulenteer your time this weekend!


It's really easy to lose focus when covering this wacky senate race.

For me, the thing that sent me down the wrong road was the disgusting race-baiting tactics from team Joementum. Personally, not only was this the lowest point in this campaign but, in my opinion, should go down as the one of the darkest moments in Connecticut politics and the lack of media attention regarding this sensitive subject was simply inexcusable as Sen. Lieberman tried to leave an impression in the minds of African-Americans that Ned Lamont somehow doesn't care about race relations (trust me, if this was the case, I would have nothing to do with the man).

Also troubling to me (and wound up sending me down the wrong path) was the inability of certain members of the local media to properly challenge Lieberman's cheap and utterly despicable race-baiting tactic in a timely fashion (although one television reporter openly admitted knowing about rumors the Lieberman campaign were spreading about Lamont in the African-American community weeks ago).

Simply put, the press failed in their obligation of being a watchdog for the public and certain reporters were bamboozled into echoing talking points spoon-fed to them by team Joementum simply on face value. When finally realizing that they were being used for fools, the press refused to press the Lieberman camp to get back on topic and settled for Marion "the last comic standing" Steinfels signature "no comment" remark. The utter failure of some members in the local media to engage the Lieberman campaign on the relevant issues (i.e. Lieberman's independent petition drive, views on the Iraqi PM statement on the Israeli bombing in Lebanon, Lieberman's views on John Bolton, etc) left me questioning some reporters sense of "objectivity" and balance in their reporting.

I lost focus and needed a wake up call.

Thank goodness for people like the Rev. Jesse Jackson to put you back on the right path.

Last night in New Haven at the Dixwell's Mount Bethel AME Church, I was fortunate enough to get an interview with a person I idolized as a child. Although it was an honor to interview Rev. Jackson, what I wasn't prepared for was how he was able to put me back on the right path adn remind me about what was really important in regards to this senate race. As I questioned Rev. Jackson on why he so vigorously supported Ned Lamont’s candidacy, his answer should be a reminder for many of us who have somewhat lost focus and forgotten what Lamont’s primary challenge to Lieberman is all about.

Enough of my rabbling, all I ask is that you simply watch, listen and focus.

Did you get the Rev. Jackson's message? Is everything coming back into focus now.

Remember the Iraq War?

Remember the way Lieberman undermined the Democratic Party?

Remember how Lieberman failed to hold the Bush administration accountable for anything?

Remember Lieberman's statement regarding womenm, the Plan B pill and Catholic hospitals?

Remember Lieberman's support for Cheney's Energy Bill?

Remember Lieberman's role in Katrina (including the 42 minutes of shame which led to Michael Brown becomming the head of FEMA)?

Remember the countless other reasons which led to Ned Lamont to challenge Lieberman in the first place?

Focus. Is it coming back to you now? Good!

Do yourself a favor...stay focus, keep your eye on the prize and help Ned get out the vote! Also, today is the last day to sign up for the family friends and neighbor's program so if you haven't signed up, NOW is the time.

...and thank you Rev. Jackson for getting me back on the right path. I knew there was a reason why always held you in such high respect.

People, there isn't a moment to waste. Now is the time. You know what to do.

(NOTES: Thanks goes out to CTBob for assisting me in this interview. I am in your debt. Due to a very busy day I'm having, I'll post my full report on Rev. Jackson's visit to Connecticut later today.)

More union love for Lamont?

If you think the Q-poll was bad news for Lieberman, guess who is jumping on board the Lamont bandwagon now.
I'm told that the powerful SEIU Local 1199, which likes to be with a winner, is backing Ned Lamont over Joe Lieberman.

It's a break in labor's ranks, a sign both of Lamont's momentum and of the intra-party scrap to come.
Oh my! I'm sure John Olsen is happy about this development.

Come feel the Joementum

Joe Lieberman Bus Tour 2006:
(Tomorrow doesn't look good for me edition)

Thursday Schedule

9:45-10:10 AM
Bristol City Hall
111 North Main Street
Bristol, CT 06010

10:40-11:00 AM
West Hartford Farmers Market
Corner of LaSalle Road & Arapahoe Road
West Hartford, CT

11:00 AM-12:00 PM
Children's Museum
950 Troutbrook Drive
West Hartford, CT

12:05-12:45 PM
West Hartford Senior Center
15 Starkel Road
West Hartford, CT

1:30-2:00 PM
West Hartford Shopping Center
Intersection of LaSalle Road and Farmington Ave
West Hartford, CT

2:00-2:30 PM
Walking from Main Street to Walden Street
West Hartford, CT

Lamont increases lead over Lieberman in latest Q-poll

How that for Joementum.
Momentum for Ned Lamont, the anti-war Connecticut U.S. Senate candidate, increases as he rolls to a 54 - 41 percent lead over incumbent Sen. Joseph Lieberman among likely Democratic primary voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This compares to a 51 - 47 percent Lamont lead among likely Democratic primary voters in a July 20 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.

In this latest survey, 5 percent of likely Democratic primary voters remain undecided, but 85 percent of voters say their mind is made up.

Among Lamont supporters, 65 percent say their vote is mainly against Lieberman.

Lieberman's support for the war in Iraq is the main reason they are voting for the challenger, 44 percent of Lamont voters say, with 50 percent who say the war is one of the reasons.

"Sen. Lieberman's campaign bus seems to be stuck in reverse. Despite visits from former President Bill Clinton and other big name Democrats, Lieberman has not been able to stem the tide to Lamont," said Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D.


"Three months ago, Lamont was virtually unheard of, except perhaps on the blogs. As Democrats get to know Lamont better, they like what they see. Lamont has established himself as a credible alternative to Lieberman," Dr. Schwartz added.

Connecticut likely Democratic primary voters give Lamont a 46 - 14 percent favorability rating, with 20 percent mixed and 19 percent who say they don't know enough to form an opinion.

Sen. Lieberman gets a split 37 - 34 percent favorability among Democrats, with 26 percent mixed.

Oh my, it looks real ugly for Joe. I guess Sean is packing his bags.

Interesting things pop out in this poll for instance, the appearence of Bill Clinton had NO impact on people, the trend for Lamont is off the charts, and it seems like most people have their mind made up.

What's rather interesting is Lieberman's favorability among people who who make under 50,000 per year. This shows that Joe is popular among lower income people but whether or not this translates into votes (August primary, low income people tend to work more than one job) remains to be seen. Also interesting is the fact that the Q-poll didn't survey Lieberman running as an indy in a three way match against Lamont and a Alan "Gold" schlessinger. In other words, this is a limited poll so a victory for Lamont is not a guarentee so GOTV is important more than ever (remember, Lieberman has an army of people hitting the streets).

Still, it's nice to see that someone who NOBODY knew months ago is kicking the stuffing out of a three-term senator (after all of Lieberman's dirty tricks). If Lamont wants Joe's indy run to come to an end, he HAS to win big time so again GOTV is very important with primary day around the corner.

Here's the highlights from raw data (click on the data to enlarge).
4. 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 q4) As of today, do you lean more toward Lieberman or Lamont? This table includes Leaners.

TREND: 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? This table includes Leaners.

9. (If Lieberman voter q4) How much does Bill Clinton's endorsement of Lieberman influence your decision to vote for Lieberman - Is it the main reason you are voting for Lieberman, is it only one of the reasons, or is it not a reason at all?

11. (If Lamont voter q4) How much does Lieberman's support of the war in Iraq influence your decision to vote for Lamont - Is it the main reason you are voting for Lamont, is it only one of the reasons, or is it not a reason at all?
Remember, no time to do the happy dance. GET OUT THE VOTE!

GOTV: The Rev Jesse Jackson edition

When Rev. Jesse Jackson asks for volunteers to help get out the vote...

People stand up and volunteers their time to help get out the vote!

I'll have the report on last night's highly charged event from New Haven (including my interview with Rev. Jackson) posted later.

Wednesday, August 02, 2006

So Joe, how are those petitions going?

This afternoon, CTBob (a.k.a. happiest aggressive interrogater) asks Millionaire Lieberman a few questions while George Bush's favorite Democrat tried to put on his best face (so sad).

Instant classic!

Did Genghis get a push-polling call regarding Joe Courtney?

Check out what he has to say and judge for yourself.
First Nancy Johnson, now Rob Simmons? Isn't a little easy for these people to be making these type of polling calls?

DeStefano makes announcement in Danbury

(crosspost from Hatcity blog)

Democratic gubernatorial candidate John DeStefano came to Danbury to unveil his new education plan
Books for children in low-income homes and universal preschool are keys to closing the achievement gap between rich and poor students, Democratic gubernatorial candidate John DeStefano said.

His $73 million education plan called "Every Child Reads by Third Grade" could mean a tax increase for Connecticut's wealthiest residents."Wouldn't it be great if we could be a state where every third-grader reads at grade level?" said DeStefano, the New Haven mayor. "I want preschool for every 3- and 4-year-old to be a fundamental right."

One week before facing Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy in the Democratic primary Aug. 8, DeStefano unveiled his education plan at Mill Ridge Primary School.

DeStefano was joined by six campaign supporters, including former Danbury Mayor Gene Eriquez and former U.S. Rep. James Maloney of Danbury.

"The greatest investment we can make is in early childhood education," Eriquez said at the small rally.

DeStefano said he chose Mill Ridge because Danbury is one of the state's 19 priority school districts. These district have a large achievement gap. "This is a municipality that is not always thought of as distressed," DeStefano said.

Children from low-income families enter kindergarten with vocabularies of 5,000 words, DeStefano said, while children from high-income families enter kindergarten with vocabularies of 30,000 words.

To pay for the program, DeStefano wants to increase income taxes on residents making more than $1 million per year. He also wants to maintain the estate tax.

Specifically, the proposal would provide preschool for all 3- and 4-year-olds.

The plan also calls for a Books for Children and Families program, in which the state would work with nonprofit groups to buy books for poor families, to encourage parents to read to their children.

Finally, the proposal calls for increasing the number of teachers who specialize in literacy for young children.

Malloy-DeStefano bloodbath heating up

Good Lord!

Malloy and DeStefano are going for each other's throats this week. I'll post both of their negative ads and give you the update on the latest from Malloy's EEC complaint against DeStefano.

Time to place the spotlight on these two guys (which is LONG OVERDUE!).

BTW: I have plenty of stuff to roll out on Malloy and DeStefano so don't think I'm not forgot about this primary battle.

Why are these two people smiling?

It's almost like Sean and Marion have no idea that their heads could be on the chopping block.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) will shake up his campaign staff if he loses Tuesday's Democratic primary to challenger Ned Lamont. Lieberman supporters have watched with growing dismay since the spring as the three term senator's campaign has gone from oblivious to defensive. They expect to reap a bitter harvest in 6 days.

Expect Lieberman to can anyone who was associated with 2004 Kerry campaign and replace them with a team of pungent veterans who will take the fight to Lamont. As Lieberman tours the broiling state, you can almost hear the gloves coming off in preparation for a fight to the finish in November.

So much for that "low-information" voter strategy Sean...

Lieberman one of the first senators to fight for Social Security?

Excuse me?!?
Election Central has just obtained a political mailing which touts Joe Lieberman as "one of the first Senators to stand up to George W. Bush's dangerous plan to privatize Social Security."
Whoa there big fella. This is a BIG FAT LIE and everyone knows it. Millionaire Joe Lieberman was ONE OF THE LAST Democrats to oppose President Bush's proposal to scrap Social Security.
Contrast the mailing's assertion with this about Lieberman in the Times in March 2005, when President Bush was pushing his phase-out plan: "In recent weeks, he has angered Democratic activists nationwide for expressing a willingness to work with President Bush to change Social Security." The full text of the mailing -- and more from that Times article -- after the jump.
Although this mailing didn't come directly from the Lieberman camp, you can bet the house he gave the green light to publish it since he's ran around the state stating the same thing.

Hell, I'll let Sargent break it down, he makes it REAL easy to understand.
And here's more from that Times article:

Mr. Lieberman says he refuses to let partisanship interfere with solving real problems, including the solvency of Social Security.

"There is a whole attitude out there, 'Just say No!,'" he said. "In other words, 'Let the president sink with this proposal. We are winning.' But we are not winning because the victory here is to solve the Social Security problem."

Mr. Lieberman said he agreed with Mr. Bush that solvency gets harder to attain each year. But as for the president's proposal to divert part of the payroll tax to private retirement accounts, Mr. Lieberman said he had already rejected that idea before the 2000 election...

Republicans, however, see Mr. Lieberman as a potential partner and say Democrats are resorting to pressure tactics to hold members in line...

Mr. Lieberman set off alarms within the party even before the State of the Union address. "This is an ongoing problem, and we'd be wise to deal with it," Mr. Lieberman told The Hartford Courant in January when asked about Social Security. "If we can figure out a way to help people through private accounts or something else, great."

Then the night of the speech, and the kiss, Mr. Lieberman said in a statement that preserving the program's benefits ''may require we make some changes.''

A week later, Mr. Lieberman praised Mr. Graham for trying to fashion a plan that could win bipartisan support. Soon after, an unnamed aide to Mr. Lieberman told CongressDaily, a Washington newsletter, that ''he's still in a listening and learning stage and keeping an open mind'' but had not taken a position.

That report sent the network of liberal Web logs into apoplexy. "Stop the Presses!" Joshua Micah Marshall wrote on his blog, Talking Points Memo. Mr. Marshall refers to Mr. Lieberman as the "dean of the faint-hearted faction" -- a list of Democrats most likely to break with the party on Social Security.

r. Lieberman this week clarified his position on Social Security, telling his hometown paper, The New Haven Register, that he was ''totally unconvinced'' by the idea of creating private accounts, calling it ''a very risky thing to do.''

And on Thursday, Mr. Lieberman put his name on a letter signed by 42 Democratic senators urging the president ''to publicly and unambiguously announce that you reject privatized accounts funded with Social Security dollars.'' A spokesman said his previous sympathetic references to private accounts were intended to mean in addition to Social Security.

Ms. Clark, the New Haven activist, said she believed the outcry in Connecticut forced Mr. Lieberman to retreat. ''He backed off his previous position and that is a result of the pressure that the grass roots was applying to him..."

Lieberman looks for help among College Republicans

Good grief. This brings new meaning to the term Democrat in Name Only.
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 18:52:09 -0400
From: "[windows-1252] College Republicans"
Reply-To: College Republicans
To: collegerepublicans@PRINCETON.EDU
Subject: Unconventional Primary Campaign Opportunity (LIEBERMAN)


I hope everyone is enjoying their summer. In June, I informed you all of a campaign opportunity for State Senator Tom Kean race for U.S. Senate in NJ. Continuing the tradition of letting you about summer campaign opportunities here is a much more unconventional option:

Incumbent Senator Joe Lieberman (Democratic Primary)
Lieberman is facing a tough primary fight versus far-left anti war activist Ned Lamont.
August 4-9th Primary Campaigning:

Elissa Harwood '09 (NOT A CLUB MEMBER) has organized a series of buses departing on Friday August 4 from Washington DC (6:30 Foggy Bottom Metro) and NYC, destination: Hartford, CT

People interested in campaigning for Lieberman in the Democratic Primary will have lodging accommodations paid for (by his campaign), as well as food and transportation.

Buses would bring you back on August 9th.

If Interested, E-mail: XXX@Princeton.EDU or call her
at (757)-XXX-XXXX.
So Lieberman (the Democrat) is paying for Republican supporters to help him out.
Well, you can help Lamont ouy by giving some of your time towards his campaign. Click here for more information.

Lieberman filming new ad today?

The rumor on the street is that Millionaire Joe Lieberman is planning to film a new ad later today (which might explain why his schedule for today ends at 3:15). Again, this is only a rumor but I can't see how the Clinton ad would be the last thing we see from team Joementum on TV.

I wonder if Joe will address his "whisper" smear campaign he's running in the African-American neighborhoods with his race-baiting flyers?

I'll keep you updated if anything develops.

Millionaire Joe Lieberman's best friends

These people have Joe's back!

(hat tip to MikeCT)

Book author and Guiford native returns to home state

Eric Boehlert, reporter and author of the highly-acclaimed book Lapdogs: How the Press Rolled Over for Bush, is having a book signing at RJ Julia Booksellers on Monday August 7th at 7 P.M. Boehlert will also be in town to discuss the beltway media's coverage of the Lieberman/Lamont race (which should be interesting to say the least).

This book is a must-read for those who want to understand the story behind the media's unwillingness to hold the Bush Administration accountable for their numerous lies and distortions during the last six years. If you think FOXNews is bad, wait till you read this book that exposes the failure of the entire media to properly inform the public about the Administration's claims regarding such issues as the Iraq War, Terri Schiavo, the NSA wiretapping case and so on. After reading this book, you'll never look at the mainstream media the same way again.

Here's a brief description of this important book.
Lapdogs is the first book to demonstrate that, for the entire George W. Bush presidency, the news media have utterly failed in their duty as watchdog for the public. In blistering prose, Eric Boehlert reveals how, time after time, the press chose a soft approach to covering the government, and as a result reported and analyzed crucial events incompletely and even inaccurately. From WMDs to Valerie Plame to the NSA's domestic spying, mainstream fixtures such as The New York Times, CBS, CNN, and Time magazine too often ignored the administration's missteps and misleading words, and did not call out the public officials who betrayed the country's trust. Throughout both presidential campaigns and the entire Iraq war to date, the media acted as a virtual mouthpiece for the White House, giving watered-down coverage of major policy decisions, wartime abuses of power, and egregious mistakes -- and sometimes these events never made it into the news at all. Finally, in Lapdogs, the press is being held accountable by one of its own.


Boehlert asserts that the Bush White House never subscribed to the view -- commonly held by previous administrations -- that a relationship with the press is an important part of the democratic process. Instead, it saw the press as just another special interest group that needed to be either appeased or held at bay -- or, in some cases, squashed. The administration actively undermined the basic tenets of accurate and fair journalism, and reporters and editors accepted their reduced roles without a whimper. To an unprecedented degree, journalists too often stopped asking uncomfortable questions of people in power. In essence, the entire purpose and pursuit of journalism was sacrificed.

Riveting in its sharp denouncement, supported by dozens of glaring and troubling examples of journalistic malpractice, Lapdogs thoroughly dissects the press's misconduct during Bush's presidency and gives voice to the growing public dismay with the mainstream media.

Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Did Susan Haigh get the message?

I think so but Marion Steinfels squeezed out another lump of turd and flat-out lied (again).
But Lieberman has received some criticism for his efforts to reach out to minority voters. The flyer touting his civil rights record and featuring a photo of Lieberman and Clinton embracing also takes aim at Lamont's decision to drop his membership to the exclusive Round Hill Club golf course in Greenwich before running for the Senate. One Internet blogger called it race baiting.

The flyer quotes Lamont in a New York Times article saying he dropped his longtime membership because he was concerned the club was not as diverse as it should be and he didn't want the club issue to be distraction in the campaign.

"We continue to be disappointed at our opponent's personal and untrue attacks," said Lamont campaign spokeswoman Liz Dupont-Diehl. "We think the fact that the Rev. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have been inspired to come and work for Ned are indications of his commitment to affirmative action and equality."

Steinfels said the flyer is being distributed to other groups besides black voters, is relevant to the race and includes Lamont's own words.

A few things:

1. I'm not the only blogger who's calling this race-baiting as this story is all over the blogs and even Stevie Wonder can see that it's race-baiting plain and simple.

2. Lets go over this again (ugh). Lets go back to the flyer, back side:

Key words:


"He didn't pay as much attention to race...until he got into the senate race"

Okay, lets examine this.

1. The dishonest headline gets you ready for Lamont's so-called views on civil rights record then...

2. Dishonest out of context quote leaves people with the impression that Ned Lamont (a person who teaches at an inner city high school in BRIDGEPORT) doesn't care about race relations.

Okay, scream with me...THAT'S RACE-BAITING!

I'm a proud, smart, African-American who is well-educated I know what race-baiting is and if you look up the term in the book, this crap from the Lieberman campaign would fit the description 100 percent. In fact, this is right up there with Karl Rove's dirty "black baby" smear on John McCain in South Carolina and it's disgusting.

Okay, let me try this in another way...

Picture this:

I was a uninformed (or as Sean Smith would say, low-information) voter who was planning to go to church on another typical Sunday. Out of nowhere (which would be the case since Joe Lieberman doesn't publicly announce his events in advance) there is George Bush's favorite Democrat on the mic gleefully talking about walking with Dr. Martin Luther King during the 60s, offering up proposed "earmark" to help with urban violence in the North-End and THEN asking for your vote (now lets not forget at some point, Millionaire Joe will talk about Lamont's money and his "holdings" in Halliburton (without mentioning that he has holdings in the same company).

Okay, church is over and you walk outside and go to your car. "Oh my," you say and you take this flyer off your window shield which talks about how great Joe Lieberman is and the fact that he was endorsed by Bill Clinton (who some in the African-American community regard as the first black President). You flip the flyer over and POW! You learn that (according to Lieberman) Ned Lamont doesn't care about race relations.

Now everyone scream with me...THAT'S RACE-BAITING!

Now (again) let's take a look at the part of the quote (which the Lieberman camp mysteriously leave out).
"It's not as diverse as it should be," Mr. Lamont said. "I didn't pay as much attention to that before the race began, to tell you the truth.

"They don't have any discriminatory policies," he added.

Now, some other things to consider:

-This was one of the topics presented in the Lieberman push-polling call before the debate.

-The club is based in an area where there is not a large population of minorities.

-The club DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE and the Lieberman camp has no evidence to suggest that it does discriminate.

Look at DLC hitman Dan Gerstein's response to the question:

"We're surprised that the Lamont campaign wants to make an issue of this,"
Gerstein told Election Central. "This flyer simply states the facts, and in particular repeats a very questionable statement Mr. Lamont made which raises many questions he has yet to answer. If he's so concerned about discrimination, why didn't he resign from this club before he became candidate for u.s. senate? Also, what are the policies at the club and why won't he answer that question?"

Okay, for the last time, lets go back and view what Ned said (I'm getting tired of this).
"It's not as diverse as it should be," Mr. Lamont said. "I didn't pay as much attention to that before the race began, to tell you the truth.

"They don't have any discriminatory policies," he added.
In short, the club is freaking expensive which has nothing to do with race BUT the Lieberman people (without any evidence) wants to plant that impression in the minds of the same "low-information" voter who just heard Lieberman's "inspirational" speech and is endorsed by Bill Clinton. To add insult to injury, Lieberman's camp wants Lamont to prove that the club isn't racist although THEY HAVE NO EVIDENCE THAT THE PLACE IS RACIST.

Again, scream with me...RACE-BAITING!

BTW: Susan, you definitely get props for writing the piece so quickly. I'll never put you in the category with Mark Davis again (although, it would of been sweet if you would of asked Marion if she had any evidence of racism at the club and explain that Lamont stated that the club does not discriminate...but your piece is a good start).

Where are the other reporters? You shouldn't let the Lieberman camp get away with this race-baiting act as it's dishonest and as the worst offense from them in this campaign.

Joe Lieberman: desperate, desperate, politician who will do anything to save his seat, even use the very race-baiting tactics that would offend Dr. Martin Luther King (the very person Joe has no problem aligning himself towards whenever he sees an African-American).

UPDATE: Ah, Susan, Lamontblog picks up on something you probably missed (most likely, you didn't have the flyer in your hand when you questioned Marion...)
Steinfels unloads another laugher:

[Lieberman spokeswoman Marion] Steinfels said the flyer is being distributed to other groups besides black voters...

"Other groups besides black voters?" Which particular groups is Steinfels talking about? Seeing as that the flyer is obviously targeted towards black voters, even going so far as to state in large type:

What do you think folks, time for a follow-up question?

People-Powered Media.

Joementum coming to an area near you!

Millionaire Lieberman Bus Tour 2006:
(More fake than a Milli Vanili concert)

Panic Wednesday schedule

Remember to ask Joe about accepting money from Wal-Mart
and/or his race baiting flyers.

TIME: 8:00 AM
PLACE: Colony Diner
611 North Colony Road
Wallingford, CT

TIME: 8:45 AM
PLACE: Jennies Diner
833 East Center Street
Wallingford, CT

TIME: 10:00 AM
PLACE: Milford Senior Center
9 Jepson Drive
Milford, CT

TIME: 10:35 PM
PLACE: The Sundae House
499 New Haven Avenue
Milford, CT

TIME: 11:30 AM
PLACE: Galaxy Diner
4241 Main Street
Bridgeport, CT

TIME: 12:00 PM
PLACE: Bridgeport City Hall Annex
999 Broad Street
Bridgeport, CT

TIME: 1:00 PM
PLACE: Testo's Italian Restaurant
920 Madison Avenue
Bridgeport, CT

TIME: 2:15 PM
PLACE: Stratford Stop and Shop
The Dock Shopping Center
200 E Main Street
Stratford, CT

TIME: 3:15 PM
PLACE: Kevin's Community Center
31 Pecks Lane
Newtown, CT

1.7 Billion

Remember this oldie but goodie with ANDREW NATSIOS, the former administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), talking with Ted Koppel on Nightline in April 2003
(Off Camera) Well, it's a, I think you'll agree, this is a much bigger project than any that's been talked about. Indeed, I understand that more money is expected to be spent on this than was spent on the entire Marshall Plan for the rebuilding of Europe after World War II.

No, no. This doesn't even compare remotely with the size of the Marshall Plan.

(Off Camera) The Marshall Plan was $97 billion.

This is 1.7 billion.

(Off Camera) All right, this is the first. I mean, when you talk about 1.7, you're not suggesting that the rebuilding of Iraq is gonna be done for $1.7 billion?

Well, in terms of the American taxpayers contribution, I do, this is it for the US. The rest of the rebuilding of Iraq will be done by other countries who have already made pledges, Britain, Germany, Norway, Japan, Canada, and Iraqi oil revenues, eventually in several years, when it's up and running and there's a new government that's been democratically elected, will finish the job with their own revenues. They're going to get in $20 billion a year in oil revenues. But the American part of this will be 1.7 billion. We have no plans for any further-on funding for this. [...]

(Off Camera) If it's cost plus, in other words, if they come back to you in another six months or in another year and say, gee, you know, we gave you best estimate we could but here's what it ended up costing and it ended up costing double what we said it was gonna cost.

Oh, no, no, we have, that's the amount of money we have to spend. We're gonna do less if it costs more than that, because we have an appropriation, we're gonna go within the limits of the appropriation.

(Off Camera) But what you are saying is, maybe, maybe fewer tasks will be accomplished. The amount of money, however, is gonna be the same?

That's correct. 1.7 billion is the limit on reconstruction for Iraq. It's a large amount of money but, compared to other emergencies around the world. But in terms of the amount of money needed to reconstruct the country, it's a relatively small amount. [...]

1.7 billion is the limit on reconstruction for Iraq. It's a large amount of money but, compared to other emergencies around the world. But in terms of the amount of money needed to reconstruct the country, it's a relatively small amount.

Cost of the war as of August 1, 2006 @ 5:10 pm = $300,440,440,301

To put this figure of $300,440,440,301 in perspective:

We could have provided 14,564,700+ students four-year scholarships at public universities.

We could have paid for 39,793,500+ children to attend a year of Head Start.

We could have insured 179,905,200+ children for one year.

We could have built 2,705,100+ additional public housing units.

We could have hired 5,206,600+ additional public school teachers for one year.

(Hat tip to AAR for posting the Nightline transcript). Figures courtesy of Cost of the War.

New Lamont ad released

Hillsman is a genius.

Sargent gets Sharpton on the record regarding Lieberman "race baiting" flyers

I hope this guy gets a prize for all the great reporting he's doing (note to Susan and Mark, this is how reporting is done).

Lieberman race-baiting flyer

Front side:

Back side:

In a phone interview with me, Sharpton, who has endorsed Ned Lamont, criticized Lieberman for what appeared to be the first time during this campaign. He hammered Lieberman for the flyer, saying it was "beneath" Lieberman and "beneath the kind of person I thought he was."

Sharpton also told me that he planned to raise the issue of the flyer in a private conversation with Lieberman he intended to have before going to Connecticut to campaign for Lamont tomorrow.

Sharpton faulted the Lieberman campaign for bringing up the country club issue.

"I think it is very unfortunate and disappointing," Sharpton said, adding that he wished the campaign would focus instead on "the issues that are of concern to voters, particularly African American voters -- like this war, which has certainly bled from our community at a disproportionate rate, and questions about Lieberman's closeness to Bush throughout Bush's tenure."

"I respect and like Joe Lieberman as a person," Sharpton added. "This country club stuff reminds me of how people smeared Bill Clinton. It's ironic that they have a picture of Clinton on the cover of the flyer."
When Sargent asked LIEBERMAN ADVISER Dan Gerstein (the former blogger, (as of July 27th) who tried to cover his tracks talking to Sargent on the 27th as an unidentified advisor for team Joementum, as well as a day before to the NYT as an "informal" adviser in his pathetic attempt to smear Lamont) offered up this line of bullshit.
Dan Gerstein, a Lieberman adviser speaking officially for the campaign, said that the flyer raised perfectly legitimate issues.

"We believe that Ned Lamont's hypocrisy is very relevant to this race," Gerstein told Election Central. "All we did with this flyer was point out on the one hand the facts about Joe Lieberman's great record on civil rights, and on the other the facts about Ned Lamont's membership in an all-white country club."

Asked if he knew that the club was in fact "all-white," Gerstein said: "No one's proven to the contrary."
Like I said, more bullshit from team Lieberman as there is NO evidence that the club does not allow African-Americans members.

Yawn...anyway, Sharpton says he's going to raise the issue with Joe before stumping for Lamont.
Sharpton concluded that he would air his objections to the flyer in a private conversation with Lieberman before campaigning in Connecticut for Lamont tomorrow. "I'm gonna raise it," Sharpton said. "I'm gonna ask him, Is he aware of it?"
Note to Sharpton: Don't fall for Joe's lies. At this point, he doesn't even deserve your respect SINCE his campaign acknowledged yesterday that they were behind the flyers that was clearly targeted towards the African-American community.

Do you want a senator who offer up his association with Dr. Martin Luther King at African-American churches (with a smile) while giving the green light to pass out race-bating flyers on the church members cars? Connecticut can do better than someone like Lieberman representing us in Washington.

I trust Ned Lamont would never lower himself to this type of disgusting campaigning.

NOTE: For the record, Lieberman's camp used the flyer as a RACE-BAITING tactic. They didn't come right out and call Lamont a racist but they left that judgement up to the readers of the misleading flyer (thus the term race-baiting).

Again: here the key phrase on the back of the flyer:

"He didn't pay as much attention to race...until he got into the sente race"

Not only is this misleading, it's clearly a race-baiting tactic and below any Democratic politician's standard, especially someone who touts his high level of professionalism and good conduct such as Lieberman.

Joe Lieberman and Wal-Mart

Oh, this is rich!

I don't know where to begin. Let's see, allow me to take you on a little journey...

Ned Lamont is scheduled to participate in the Change Wal-Mart, Change America tour this week. From here on, this whopper of a post has two parts.

1. Dishonest media:

Now, here's the uneditied article about the event. Note the section in bold.

One of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s most vociferous union-funded critics is taking its campaign against the world's largest retailer on the road with a cross-country bus tour from New York to Seattle.

The tour begins Tuesday and will feature several Democratic politicians.

WakeUpWalMart.com, launched last year by the United Food and Commercial Workers union, will visit 35 cities in 19 states for 35 days of rallies, town hall meetings and state fair visits to back its calls on Wal-Mart for higher pay and better health insurance for workers.


WakeUpWalMart.com said Democratic politicians appearing at some of the stops will include Ohio U.S. Senate candidate Sherrod Brown, Connecticut U.S. Senate candidate Ned Lamont, Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack and former vice presidential candidate John Edwards.

The group approached Republicans as well but got no response, said Chris Kofinis, a spokesman for WakeUpWalMart.
Okay, lets see how the Stamford Advocate ran the story (again, not the highlighted section as well as the editioral note).
Eds: SUBS 8th graf to delete extraneous first reference to Lamont.

One of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s most vociferous union-funded critics is taking its campaign against the world's largest retailer on the road with a cross-country bus tour from New York to Seattle with a stop in Connecticut.

The tour begins Tuesday and will feature several Democratic politicians.

WakeUpWalMart.com, launched last year by the United Food and Commercial Workers union, will visit 35 cities in 19 states for 35 days of rallies, town hall meetings and state fair visits to back its calls on Wal-Mart for higher pay and better health insurance for workers.

The tour plans to stop in Bridgeport on Wednesday with a rally on the steps of the City Hall annex. Among Connecticut Democratic politicians scheduled to appear are U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, U.S. Senate candidate Ned Lamont, gubernatorial candidate John DeStefano and Diana Farrell, a candidate for Congress.

Wal-Mart, based in Bentonville, Ark., dismissed the tour as a "political stunt" and said the group was attacking the wrong company.

"Wal-Mart offers associates $23 per month health plans, and in some places as low as $11 per month, creates tens of thousands of jobs per year and is selling more organic and environmentally friendly products," Wal-Mart spokesman David Tovar said.

Unions should let working families decide for themselves where to shop, Tovar said.

WakeUpWalMart.com said Democratic politicians appearing at some of the stops will include Lamont, Ohio U.S. Senate candidate Sherrod Brown, Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack and former vice presidential candidate John Edwards.

The group approached Republicans as well but got no response, said Chris Kofinis, a spokesman for WakeUpWalMart.

Hmm, that's strange, I didn't see Joe Lieberman's name in any of the other newspapers that ran the AP piece? Why would the Stamford Advocate add Joe's name to the list? Because Joe Lieberman had no intention of participating in this event UNTIL Ned Lamont jumped on board. Team Joementum probably called the Advocate and gave them a press release alerting them about Joe throwing his hat into the event. The Advocate them chopped up the story to make it look like Joe signed on to the event from the get-go. If only I had a copy of the print version of the Advocate from yesterday but you get the picture.

2. Okay, onto the second (and most outrageous) part of this post.

Seems like Joe and hypocisy goes hand in hand. I'll let Maura give you the run-down sine she did such a great job exposing phony Joe.
Wake Up Wal Mart brings its Change Wal-Mart, Change America Tour to Bridgeport tomorrow.

Bridgeport City Hall Annex Steps
99 Broad Street
12:00 Noon


WalMart has a political action committee to further this right wing agenda.

Sounds good to get the word out to Americans about Wal-Mart's detrimental policies, right?

Both Joe Lieberman and Ned Lamont are scheduled to appear at the Wake Up WalMart rally in Bridgeport.

But only one of these two candidates for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate has accepted campaign contributions from Wal-Mart's right wing PAC. Want to guess which one?

Bingo! Joe Lieberman. $1,000 from Wal-Mart's PAC just this February. When Lieberman ran for President, he also received maximum contributions from Wal-Mart family fortune heir John Walton and his wife Christy. (This is just an initial search - I may find even more.)

Once again Joe Lieberman tries to have it both ways - scold WalMart when he wants votes from people who care about good jobs and health care, but take campaign contributions to advance Wal-Mart's right wing agenda.

Phony Joe shows his true stripes again.

The screenshot tells the story.

Okay, lets recap what we learned so far:

1. Lieberman gladly accepted donations from Wal-Mart to his campaign as early as Feburary to the tune of 1,000.

2. He agreed to join the tour AFTER learning the Ned Lamont was going to be at the event with other politicians from Connecticut. Here's the list of the others who were on board. After reading the list, you'll see why Joe changed his tune.

-- Senate Candidate Ned Lamont

-- Rep. Rosa DeLauro

-- Gubernatorial Candidate John DeStefano

-- Gubernatorial Candidate Dan Malloy

-- Congressional Candidate Diane Farrell

-- State Party Chair Nancy DiNardo and Bridgeport Council President Andres Ayala

With a list like that, you can see why Lieberman jumped on board but now you see that Joe's participation is just full of crap.

I wonder if the media will jump on this story?

...and Maura is amazing, simply amazing!

Yet another example of "People-Powered Media" in action.

What is the point?

Look at the following grafs in Susan Haigh's latest AP piece and tell me which part doesn't make sense (I'll highlight it so will be easier to pick out).
Lieberman is petitioning his way onto the November ballot as an independent just in case. In what he calls the fight of his political life, the senator has tried to portray his rival as an inexperienced, flip-flopping millionaire whose only motivation for being liberal is to win the Senate seat.

"My opponent is spending a lot of his own money to tell people things that are not true about me," Lieberman recently told parishioners at a Hispanic church. "But you and I know each other. We are like familia," he said, using the Spanish word for family.

The Lieberman campaign cites Lamont's recent decision to drop his longtime membership at Greenwich's exclusive Round Hill Club golf course, where Prescott Bush - the father and grandfather of the two Bush presidents - once was the club's president. Lamont said the club was "not as diverse as it should be."

In the past, Lamont has donated $1,500 to Lieberman's campaigns, including $500 as recently as February 2005. Lamont's campaign manager, Tom Swan, explains that Lamont only gave the $500 to get into a fundraising event so he could question Lieberman about the Iraq war.
Now, can someone PLEASE tell me why the highlighted portion of Haigh's piece ever made it to print? Why is Haigh writing this crap when it now well known that the Lieberman camp is using this issue as a race baiting move? For God sakes, the graf doesn't make any sense when the read the piece AND the outrageous claim if left unchallenged!

Susan is a better journalist than this and should know better than to fall for this Lieberman trick. I heard from people that bloggers should not go after journalists but this type of nonsense has gone on throughout the entire campaign by journalists who should know better and it really needs to stop.

Why won't reporters like Haigh report on the real issues surrounding this race? Why do we have to read about crap like this with seven day to go until the primary?

As a reporter, I'm sure Susan was aware of the race baiting techniques of the Lieberman camp (she's based in Connecticut). Why then did she place this Lieberman talking point graf in her piece (again, unchallenged)?

Susan, here's a few questions for you. Believe me, I'm not trying to be harsh, I just want to understand where you're coming from so don't take this the wrong way.

What's the point of the reference to the country club in terms of your story?

Why are you bringing up this non-issue without challenging the Lieberman camp over their race-baiting tactics with their misleading flyer which was distributed in the inner cities last weekend?
Why didn't you either cite the Lamont campaingn's response to this stupid non-issue which they clearly addressed in a July NYT piece (which was repeated here and by other reporters). In case you missed it, I'll post the it again.
But the Lamont campaign dismissed the tactic as a dirty trick. "We have been consistently disappointed with Senator Lieberman's tactics throughout the campaign," Lamont spokesperson Dupont-Diehl said. "We prefer to focus on the issues."

Lamont says the club isn't discriminatory, though he has acknowledged that the club isn't perfect on race. In the flyer the Lieberman camp left out a couple other of Lamont's quotes in the July Times story, which read as follows:

"It's not as diverse as it should be," Mr. Lamont said. "I didn't pay as much attention to that before the race began, to tell you the truth.

"They don't have any discriminatory policies,"
he added.

Matt Browner Hamlin nails it with his analysis of Haigh's piece.
Haigh has a responsibility to her readers, if not truth as such, to rebut false claims coming out of the Lieberman camp. Her piece on whole is really about Ned's success and his money - not exactly what voters want to be reading about one week before the primary (I'm not certain this wasn't written six months ago) - but her reproduction of Steinfels' attacks verbatim really Iraqs up this story.

Writing irrelevant pieces that carry unfounded partisan attacks pro-bono is no way to practice journalism, Susan. Let's try to do better the last week before the election. Voters might actually what to read about Lieberman's position on Iraq (wait, does he have one?) and why he thinks universal healthcare is a bad idea.
With one week until the election, is this the type of garbage we need to be reading about? People like Haigh and Mark Davis (both have been covering Connecticut politics for over 10 years) should know better then this type of smearing has to stop as it's a disservice to their readers/viewers.

Ned Lamont does The Colbert Report

Watch the interview everyone is talking about.

(hat tip to C&L)
UPDATE: The reviews are in...
Politicians who try to mix it up with Colbert in his off-kilter broadcast world frequently look silly or worse, two unattractive options for a Senate candidate just eight days before a too-close-to-call Democratic primary with Connecticut's three-term senator, Joseph I. Lieberman.

But Lamont's campaign has taken odd turns before, so shortly before 7 p.m., it turned left on West 54th St., where, waiting, was a small, young studio audience - and a TV audience of more than 1 million people, generally ages 18 to 34.

What exactly was the media strategy?

"It's another chance to engage and excite young voters," said Tom Swan, Lamont's campaign manager, who chewed gum like an expectant father.


Lamont was scheduled for the last segment, but he and most of his posse headed into the studio to watch. Hillsman opted to watch on a monitor. Nodding at the TV, he said, "This is reality."

After a hilarious bit at the expense of Mel Gibson, the actor trying to explain a DUI arrest and an anti-Semitic outburst, it was time for Lamont.

"Mr. Lamont, thanks for coming on. Brave man," Colbert said. Then, he deadpanned, "Have you come on to announce you are dropping out?"

Lamont smiled and said he was in the race to stay.

"You're only up by four points in the polls," Colbert said.

Lamont asked for help from Colbert and his audience to get across the finish line.

"I'm not sure if I can give you my help, sir." Colbert said. "You just got the endorsement of The New York Times. OK, you know they are destroying America. You know that newspaper is destroying America, correct?"

"It was a well-written, articulate analysis of the issues, and I think they came to the proper conclusion," Lamont said.

"Really?" Colbert said.

"What do you think?" Lamont asked.

"I don't know. I just met you, sir," Colbert said. "Let's find out. What have you got against Joe Lieberman. He's my kind of Democrat. What's your beef with him?"

"I think George Bush is driving this country into a ditch, and if Joe Lieberman won't challenge him, I will. I think it's time for the Democrats to stand up and ..."

The audience drowned out the rest of his answer with cheers.
Not a bad start for Lamont...and it gets better.
In the studio, Lamont seemed relaxed - even when Colbert teased that Lamont's campaign would collapse if the war turned around in the next eight days.

He left to applause.

Campaign manager Swan walked out smiling and gave a thumb's up.

Lamont's driver Bradley muttered, "That was nerve-racking."

Lamont hugged his wife, accepted congratulations from the Colbert staff for generating the most applause in memory. Then he was standing on West 54th.

Before he could relax, another door burst open and the audience spilled into the muggy night air. A pretty, dark-haired woman did a double-take at seeing the guest on the street.

"You did a great job. He can be tough," she said.

"Lieberman is terrible," said a bearded young man.

"Can I get your picture?" asked another young man.

Annie Lamont watched an ad hoc receiving line form in front of her husband. She shook her head and smiled.

What Joe Lieberman doesn't want you to know

For Joe, this election is all about Joe and he could care less about the Democratic Party. If this is not the case, whey then is he collecting signatures for his independent run?

By the way, who's collecting those signatures and why is Lieberman and his campaign staff avoiding answering questions about Connecticut for Lieberman?
Judy Yost won't talk about the petitions she's circulating to ensure Sen. Joseph Lieberman a spot on the November ballot.Not that Yost is reticent about the senator. One of his staunch supporters, she will rhapsodize about anything Lieberman with little prompting.

But Yost knows that Lieberman's campaign staff is a little touchy on the subject of his backup plan to run as a petitioning candidate if he loses next week's primary. At least you get the sense they would be touchy if you could get one of them to actually discuss it.

Or return a phone call, even.

"I'm afraid I'm going to disappoint you," was the breezy response from Lieberman's campaign manager, Sean Smith, when asked about the petition drive last week. "I don't get updates. I am completely uninvolved."

So uninvolved, Smith said, that he has no idea who is running the petition drive. After saying he would find out and call back with the information, Smith failed to return repeated phone calls last week. Messages left for the campaign's spokeswoman, Marion Steinfels, were also unreturned.

It is not surprising that Lieberman prefers to avoid the topic of the petition drive. Its very existence speaks to his uncertainty about winning the Aug. 8 primary against Ned Lamont.

More significantly, though, Lieberman is also said to be afraid of further alienating Democrats by refusing to step aside if Lamont wins Aug. 8 and becomes the party-endorsed candidate. Most high-profile Democrats, including Bill and Hillary Clinton, have said they will support whoever wins the primary.

"They don't want anybody to know about it," said George Jepsen, a former state Democratic party chairman and a Lamont supporter. "Because when Democrats understand he's trying to have it both ways, they're appropriately offended by this. Joe Lieberman owes his career to the Democratic party."
Offended is an understatement. Here's the great Democrat Joe Lieberman willing to spit in the eye of any Democrat who opposes him. He has consistantly undermined the Democratic Party on so many issues that it's hard to keep count and now he is trying all he can to keep his ultimate act of betrayl under wraps.

The Lieberman campaign has been spotted at Constitution plaza recently collecting signatures as well as quietly collecting names at individuals plaes of work. The people collecting names won't talk to the press and run away as fast as they can.
But it's impossible to miss the aura of secrecy emanating from the Lieberman campaign these days. Like a dotty Victorian aunt stashed in a back room, the petition organization is kept under wraps lest it attract too much attention and scandalize proper Democrats.

At the Crown Market in West Hartford on Monday, for example, two men collecting signatures for Lieberman packed up their table after being approached by a Courant photographer and hurriedly left, saying they had been ordered elsewhere. They would not disclose their new location.

Lieberman workers were also spotted catching shoppers coming and going outside Waldbaum's Food Mart in West Hartford on Saturday morning, with a man in a red shirt soliciting signatures at the entrance and a man in a blue shirt working the exit.

The man at the exit, wearing a prominent Lieberman sticker on his shirt, greeted shoppers with, "I'm collecting signatures for Joe Lieberman." To those shoppers willing to pause and inquire further, he elaborated, "To get his name on the ballot."

The word "petition" was absent from the drill.

"I don't think we're supposed to give any information out to The Courant," the man in the blue shirt said when approached by a reporter. Would he at least give his name? "I don't want to do that."

Yost, for one, said she is proud to be one of the people gathering signatures. She's been a Lieberman supporter since the 1970s, when he hired her to work on his staff after he was elected to the state senate.

"Do I want him to run as an independent? No, I want him as a Democrat," Yost said. "But if I can help him through this process I will do it. I just truly respect him as a person."

Yost, who is volunteering her time, said she was told by the Lieberman campaign not to discuss the petition drive with the media without first getting approval.

Others, such as Lieberman supporter Daniel I. Papermaster of West Hartford, also declined to speak. Papermaster, also a volunteer, said the campaign would rather the volunteers not discuss the petition drive.
Lieberman dances around the petition question while smiling at journalists. Fortunately, one fearless man wasn't going to take Joe's slip away from the question (and he happen to get the encounter on videotape).
Lamont supporters have taken to posting online videos of these encounters, including one at a July 24 campaign stop. Lieberman was challenged by reporters after he said he wasn't "thinking about the day after the primary."

"Senator, if you're not thinking about after the primary," a reporter asked, "why are you collecting signatures right now?"

"You're not going to stop," Lieberman observed wryly.

"I just would like an answer," the reporter persisted, shouting to make himself heard as Lieberman walked into a building.

"The interview's over," a burly security man said.

Watch the encounter for yourself.

I'm just happy the fearless one didn't shit on himself...