<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, September 02, 2006

Labor Day holiday

The posts here will slow down a bit as I'm going to the U.S. Open for the weekend. Hopefully, it will stop raining...

Friday, September 01, 2006

Diane Farrell unleashes new TV ad against Rep. Shays

Today, Democratic 4th CD candidate Diane Farrell began airing her first television commercial to the local markets. According to her press release, her ad will focus on Rep. Chris Shays everlasting suport for the Iraq War.

From Farrell's press release.
"Congressman Shays has been President Bush's most loyal supporter in Congress on this war. Despite some of his recent comments, he still says he 'totally' supports the war and he still supports the president," Farrell said. "He has said he believes 'this is a war we have to win.' He has called it 'the Lord's work.' Congressman Shays has given the president everything he wanted to run this war and has demanded virtually no accountability in return. He's demanded no exit plan. The war in Iraq is a disaster and Congressman Shays bears some of the responsibility for that."

Here's the new ad.

Say it ain't so Joe, you're showing up the Labor Day parade afterall

Remember this fine quote from Newtown First Selectman Herb Rosenthal about Joe Lieberman attendance record at the Labor Day parade.
"I let him know that he would not be welcome to march with me," Rosenthal said. "He wouldn't be coming because he is a U.S. Senator. He'd be coming because he's a candidate."

Rosenthal said Lieberman has been invited to march every year for the last nine years and only came one time over those years and that was before 2000.

Well, it's funny how a tough election can bring Joe Lieberman back to town huh?For this first time in over six years (or should I say the first time this millennium), fifth-party candidate Joe Lieberman decides to pay Newtown a visit and march in the Labor Day parade (as a party of one of course).

From Connecticut for Lieberman Joe Lieberman's press release.



On Monday, September 4, 2006, Senator Lieberman will march in the Newtown Labor Day parade alongside volunteers and supporters.

WHAT: Senator Lieberman to march in the Newtown Labor Day Parade

WHO: Senator Joe Lieberman

WHEN: Monday, September 4, 2006
9:30 AM-11:00 AM

WHERE: Main Street, Newtown, CT

DIRECTIONS: From 84 E: Take exit 10 onto Rt. 6 W. Turn left onto Church Hill Rd./ US-6. Turn right onto Main Street.

From 34 W: Follow Rt. 34 W into Newtown. Turn left onto Roosevelt Drive./ CT-34. Continue to follow CT-34. Turn left onto Church Hill Rd. Turn right onto Main Street.
Too funny.

Help support Chris Murphy

As my regular reader are aware, I'm a big fan of Chris Murphy. He's the 5th CD Democratic candidate whos currently giving Rep. Nancy Johnson a serious run for her money.

Well, Ned Lamont is giving Murphy a helping hand by giving his fellow Democrat his full support and doing what he can to help Murphy give Johnson her pink slip.
On August 8, Connecticut Democrats voted for change in Washington.

The Democratic Party nomination for U.S. Senate carries with it a special responsibility. We are electing a coalition for change, and our organization will work in concert with Connecticut candidates promoting a message of progress at home, and abroad.

chris murphy

In Connecticut 's 5th Congressional District, Democrat Chris Murphy is running against rubber-stamp Republican Congresswoman Nancy Johnson, who has been part of the problem in Washington for 24 years.

We've built a sizable online community over the past six months, and today we are asking you to support our campaign, and our Party, by helping Chris Murphy. Can you make a $20, $50, or $100 contribution to his campaign today?


Republican Nancy Johnson and Lieberman Party candidate Joe Lieberman have a lot in common these days.

They share a "stay the course" message on the war in Iraq . Their support for the Bush/Cheney Energy Policy and campaign contributions from those who profit from high gas prices have Americans paying the price at the pump. And they are both funding massive GOTV operations aimed at driving Republicans to the polls.

But our Democratic coalition for change will prevail because of the strength of our grassroots and netroots support. Can you help send Chris to Congress with Ned Lamont by making a contribution today?


Fifteen seats. That's all we need to get a Democratic-controlled House of Representatives eager to ask President Bush the tough questions on foreign and domestic policy -- one that will serve as a check on the last two years of the Bush-Cheney Administration.

Chris Murphy's campaign is poised to be one of those fifteen seats that the Democratic Party can pick up this year. He is a rising star, and it will be an honor to work hand in hand with him next year, bringing much needed change to Washington , D.C.

For more information on Murphy, let me take you back in time and check out a eariler post of mine when urphy was nominated the Democratic Congressional candidate for the 5CD.

Murphy wants to keep on a positive note distancing himself from the negative attacks that have been launched against Johnson in the media. Although I don't see a problem highlighting the hyprocisy of Johnson nor do I have a problem attakcing politicians (it's pretty obvious), one must respect the way Murphy is running his campaign and hopefully voters will notice this as well during as the election season heats up.

Watch Chris Murphy in aciton...

In the end, Rowland wins so tell me again why I should vote for his number two?

Tell me again why I should vote for Jodi Rell?

Tell me again why it's unfair to connect Gov. Rell to Rowland?

After spending less and a year in jail, John Rowland adds insult to injury by selling his Bantam cottage and makes a HUGE profit at the expense of the taxpayers .

How is he allowed to get away with this? Where was Jodi Rell when the entire Rowland scandal was unfolding? This article brings back old memories and questions about what Rell knew when Rowland was running the show.
Former Gov. John G. Rowland has sold his Bantam Lake cottage, reaping a hefty profit thanks in part to the free renovations performed by state employees and contractors that led to his downfall.


The sale was approved recently by the White Memorial Foundation, which owns the property and held the $110,000 mortgage Rowland took out when he purchased it in 1997.

It's unclear how much of the profits Rowland will actually garner. His former wife, Deborah Rowland, filed a lien last year claiming that Rowland owes her more than $272,000 from their divorce settlement.

Her attorney, James R. Greenfield of New Haven, could not be reached Thursday for comment. John Rowland also could not be reached for comment Thursday.
In the end, Rowland got a minor slap on the wrist, Jodi Rell claims she knew nothing and gets a pass by the public, and we all get stuck with the bill while Rowland is laughing to the bank.

Lets take a walk back down memory lane...
Repairs to the cottage were among the more than $100,000 in gifts that prosecutors charged that Rowland received in exchange for the former governor's help in obtaining state work.

Rowland resigned July 1, 2004. Later that year, he pleaded guilty in federal court to a corruption charge. He served 10 months and was released in February of this year.

Building permits showed that Rowland had about $13,500 worth of work done on the cottage. When The Courant reviewed those records and talked with subcontractors, it became clear that far more work was performed.

Rowland at first insisted that he had paid for all of the work. At a press conference in his hometown of Waterbury, Rowland downplayed questions about the cottage, saying that the cabinets were off the shelf from The Home Depot and that he had bought a hot tub that was sitting in the backyard.

He complained at that time about the high mortgage he and his wife Patty were paying.

Within days of the press conference, The Courant revealed that the hot tub was really a gift from a governor's office subordinate and her husband, a Rowland political appointee.

It was later revealed that much of the work had been done free, either by Rowland cronies or by employees of TBI Construction, owned by William Tomasso. Former Rowland aides Peter Ellef, Lawrence Alibozek and Vincent DeRosa had either paid for or arranged some of the work.
So lets recap:

1. Rowland lets power get to his head, becomes arrogant and openly rips the taxpayers off (on numerous occasions) while Jodi Rell is second in command.

2. Rowland lies to everyone, tries to cover up his actions and lashes out to the press (who will forget Patty's X-Mas poem).

3. The Republicans (who knew better) came to his defense while Jodi Rell (knowing that she would eventually become top-dog in CT) remained silent.

4. The press finally nails Rowland and he fesses up to his crime.

5. Rell becomes our new governor as Rowland is hauled off to jail (for less than a year).

Next thing we know...

6. Gov. Rell's Chief of Staff Lisa Moody lets power get to her head, becomes arrogant, and transforms into Karl Rove's evil twin sister.

Moody is freely allowed to go overboard with her historical hardball tactics and aggressively shakes the political money tree to the point where she crosses the line. Moody personally hands out invitations to Republicans to a Rell fundraiser (which in political terms means I'm handing you this invitation because I want money out of you so better bring your checkbook or else). This boneheaded action sets off a chain of events for Rell's Chief of Staff that results in the shamefully under-reported scandal called "Moodygate."

7. Moody gets investigated, allegedly lies under oath (and I use the term allegedly very loosely) and again, Gov Rell repeats her pattern of not knowing anything and gets a pass from most of the press.

Trust me, I just scratch the surface here folks. Those in the mainstream media could (and should) not only fill in the blanks, but start asking Jodi Rell some hard questions regarding her role in the entire Rowland scandal AS WELL as her role in Moodygate.

Remember, I'm just getting started.

Tell me again why I should vote for Jodi Rell?

Tell me again why it's unfair to connect Gov. Rell to Rowland?

Tell Newtown First Selectman Herb Rosenthal thank you

Oh man, it seems like the wheel have come off over at the Lieberman camp after Newtown First Selectman Herb Rosenthal flat out told team Joementum that they weren't welcomed to walk with the Democrats at the Labor Day parade.

This whole episode started when a mistake was made by a member of the Newtown DTC who sent out a letter to Joe Lieberman inviting him to march with the Democrats in the town's annual Labor Day parade. In an effort to do damage control, Rosenthal stepped up to the plate and told Lieberman that he was not welcomed to march with the Democrats since he IS NO LONGER a Democrat.
The task fell on the shoulders of First Selectman Herb Rosenthal, a Democrat, to contact Lieberman and tell him he wasn't welcome."I contacted Lieberman's people and told them it would be embarrassing for me and other Democratic town officials if he marched with us," Rosenthal said Thursday. "I and the Democratic Town Committee don't want to give the wrong idea that we are embracing his independent candidacy."

Well, that didn't sit well with our favorite hitman spokesman Dan Gerstein as he had yet another ah...episode.
Dan Gerstein, Lieberman's communications director, said Thursday that Rosenthal is backpedaling now on what his real statement to Lieberman was regarding his presence at the parade." Mr. Rosenthal told the senator that he was not invited, period," Gerstein said. "It was his intent to tell us that the senator was not welcome at the parade at all. He (Rosenthal) has since changed his story to say he was just dis-inviting the senator from marching with the Democrats."
Rosenthal then smacks back.
Rosenthal believes Lieberman's desire to march in this year's parade is campaign oriented." He won't be marching because he's a Democratic U.S. Senator," Rosenthal said. "We have invited him every year for the past nine years I've been involved, and he only came one time. That was before 2000 sometime. Senator Dodd comes more often."
It remains to be seen if Lieberman will actually show up but if he does, he won't be walking with the Democrats...that honor goes to Ned Lamont.

Please email the First Selectman and tell him thank you for being a proud Democrat and doing the right thing. You can email Rosenthal by clicking here.

As for Lieberman's Dannyboy, relax buddy and think about "good stuff."

Thursday, August 31, 2006

Now, Lieberman calls for debates

After months of ignoring and dismissing Lamont calls for a debate during early part of the primary, only agreeing to ONE deabte during the primary when the polls showed that Lamont was closing the gap, and after losing to Lamont in the biggest primary election in the history of Connecticut, Joe Lieberman sees the writing on the wall and announces that he's ready for a series of debtes.

Well Ned, you're going to get your old-fashion kitchen table debates afterall.
Sen. Joe Lieberman called on the four other candidates in the hotly contested U.S. Senate race Thursday to meet next week and agree to a debate schedule.

Lieberman, who lost the Democratic primary to businessman Ned Lamont and is now running as an independent, sent letters to Lamont, Republican Alan Schlesinger, Green Party candidate Ralph Ferrucci and Concerned Citizens candidate Timothy Knibbs.

"Voters are eager to know what we will do to solve the problems affecting their daily lives," Lieberman wrote in his letter. He also said the candidates have an opportunity to set "a high standard for a new politics of civil engagement."
You know, it's funny for Lieberman to talk about civil engagement seeing that he was anything but civil during the last debate.

In any case, game on. Lamont has come a long way since their first encounter and I'm sure he'll be ready for any curveball Lieberman throws at him.

Olbermann rips Rumsfeld

The last honest man on cable news.
The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack.

Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet.

Mr. Rumsfeld's remarkable speech to the American Legion yesterday demands the deep analysis--and the sober contemplation--of every American.

For it did not merely serve to impugn the morality or intelligence -- indeed, the loyalty -- of the majority of Americans who oppose the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land. Worse, still, it credits those same transient occupants -- our employees -- with a total omniscience; a total omniscience which neither common sense, nor this administration's track record at home or abroad, suggests they deserve.

Dissent and disagreement with government is the life's blood of human freedom; and not merely because it is the first roadblock against the kind of tyranny the men Mr. Rumsfeld likes to think of as "his" troops still fight, this very evening, in Iraq.

It is also essential. Because just every once in awhile it is right and the power to which it speaks, is wrong.

In a small irony, however, Mr. Rumsfeld's speechwriter was adroit in invoking the memory of the appeasement of the Nazis. For in their time, there was another government faced with true peril--with a growing evil--powerful and remorseless.

That government, like Mr. Rumsfeld's, had a monopoly on all the facts. It, too, had the "secret information." It alone had the true picture of the threat. It too dismissed and insulted its critics in terms like Mr. Rumsfeld's -- questioning their intellect and their morality.

That government was England's, in the 1930's.

It knew Hitler posed no true threat to Europe, let alone England.

It knew Germany was not re-arming, in violation of all treaties and accords.

It knew that the hard evidence it received, which contradicted its own policies, its own conclusions -- its own omniscience -- needed to be dismissed.

The English government of Neville Chamberlain already knew the truth.

Most relevant of all -- it "knew" that its staunchest critics needed to be marginalized and isolated. In fact, it portrayed the foremost of them as a blood-thirsty war-monger who was, if not truly senile, at best morally or intellectually confused.

That critic's name was Winston Churchill.

Sadly, we have no Winston Churchills evident among us this evening. We have only Donald Rumsfelds, demonizing disagreement, the way Neville Chamberlain demonized Winston Churchill.

History -- and 163 million pounds of Luftwaffe bombs over England -- have taught us that all Mr. Chamberlain had was his certainty -- and his own confusion. A confusion that suggested that the office can not only make the man, but that the office can also make the facts.

Thus, did Mr. Rumsfeld make an apt historical analogy.

Excepting the fact, that he has the battery plugged in backwards.

His government, absolute -- and exclusive -- in its knowledge, is not the modern version of the one which stood up to the Nazis.

It is the modern version of the government of Neville Chamberlain.

But back to today's Omniscient ones.

That, about which Mr. Rumsfeld is confused is simply this: This is a Democracy. Still. Sometimes just barely.

And, as such, all voices count -- not just his.

Had he or his president perhaps proven any of their prior claims of omniscience -- about Osama Bin Laden's plans five years ago, about Saddam Hussein's weapons four years ago, about Hurricane Katrina's impact one year ago -- we all might be able to swallow hard, and accept their "omniscience" as a bearable, even useful recipe, of fact, plus ego.

But, to date, this government has proved little besides its own arrogance, and its own hubris.

Mr. Rumsfeld is also personally confused, morally or intellectually, about his own standing in this matter. From Iraq to Katrina, to the entire "Fog of Fear" which continues to envelop this nation, he, Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, and their cronies have -- inadvertently or intentionally -- profited and benefited, both personally, and politically.

And yet he can stand up, in public, and question the morality and the intellect of those of us who dare ask just for the receipt for the Emporer's New Clothes?

In what country was Mr. Rumsfeld raised? As a child, of whose heroism did he read? On what side of the battle for freedom did he dream one day to fight? With what country has he confused the United States of America?

The confusion we -- as its citizens-- must now address, is stark and forbidding.

But variations of it have faced our forefathers, when men like Nixon and McCarthy and Curtis LeMay have darkened our skies and obscured our flag. Note -- with hope in your heart -- that those earlier Americans always found their way to the light, and we can, too.

The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought.

And about Mr. Rumsfeld's other main assertion, that this country faces a "new type of fascism."

As he was correct to remind us how a government that knew everything could get everything wrong, so too was he right when he said that -- though probably not in the way he thought he meant it.

This country faces a new type of fascism - indeed.

Although I presumptuously use his sign-off each night, in feeble tribute, I have utterly no claim to the words of the exemplary journalist Edward R. Murrow.

But never in the trial of a thousand years of writing could I come close to matching how he phrased a warning to an earlier generation of us, at a time when other politicians thought they (and they alone) knew everything, and branded those who disagreed: "confused" or "immoral."

Thus, forgive me, for reading Murrow, in full:

"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty," he said, in 1954. "We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.

"We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular."

And so good night, and good luck.

Newtown Dems call Lieberman presence an "embarrassment" if he attended Labor Day parade

Attaboy Newtown Dems!
Democrats in Newtown have made it Lie clear to Joe Lieberman that it would be an "embarrassment" to have him march with them in the town's Labor Day Parade Monday.

"He's running as an independent, let him march as an independent," said Newtown's First Selectman Herb Rosenthal, a Democrat who gave Lieberman's office the word that he would not be welcomed marching with the other Democrats.

An invitation had gone out to Lieberman to march with the Democrats in error and it fell on Rosenthal's shoulders to call the senator and tell him he wasn't welcomed.

"I let him know that he would not be welcome to march with me," Rosenthal said. "He wouldn't be coming because he is a U.S. Senator. He'd be coming because he's a candidate."

Rosenthal said Lieberman has been invited to march every year for the last nine years and only came one time over those years and that was before 2000.


Ned Lamont, the Democratic Party's nominated candidate, will be marching in the parade.

(hat tip to 3BK for alerting me to the article. It's rare when you actually find news in the Danbury News-Times).

Please help me make the connection between the Johnson, Shays, Simmons, and President Bush

Back in January, I had this to say about the Congressional races in Connectcut and how President Bush was going to hurt the Republican Party. Pay close attention to the comment from Rep. Chris Shays from the Hartford Courant story I cited.
The Hartford Courant ran a piece on Monday which outlined the Republicans problems going into the 2006 election. Lets just say that Chris Shays, Nancy Johnson, and Rob Simmons won't be inviting President Bush on the campaign trail.
In recent mid-terms, incumbents usually coasted - 98 percent of House members were re-elected in 1998, and 96 percent won in 2002.

This year, though, Democrats see the rare chance to make the election a nationwide referendum on Bush, the Republican-led Congress and the war, and they have been relentless in pushing that agenda.

In recent mid-terms, incumbents usually coasted - 98 percent of House members were re-elected in 1998, and 96 percent won in 2002.

This year, though, Democrats see the rare chance to make the election a nationwide referendum on Bush, the Republican-led Congress and the war, and they have been relentless in pushing that agenda.

He pointed out that Connecticut's three Republican House members were re-elected in 2004, when Bush lost the state by 10 percentage points to Democratic nominee John F. Kerry and when Democratic Sen. Christopher J. Dodd got 66 percent of the vote.

"Is Bush's popularity going to get that much worse in Connecticut this year? I doubt it," Forti said.

But Rep. Christopher Shays, R-4th District, considered one of the country's most vulnerable Republicans, was less confident that Bush would not be a drag on GOP candidates.

"If things go badly, particularly in Iraq, you're going to have a very unhappy constituency," he said, "and I'm afraid Republicans will pay a penalty."
After quoting from the Courant piece, I had this to say.
Simply put, voters are now realizing that the Republicans led by Karl Rove and Dick Cheney lied to the people to the pleasure of the radical wingnuts and neocons (a.k.a their political base). People want to know why over 200 billions dollars was spent on this needless war (why people who did everything possible to avoid military service when it was their time, can turn around and call anyone who questions the Iraq war "anti-American"); they want to know why low income people and students are being screwed with cuts to benefits such as student aid and Medicare while taxpayers are enjoying another tax break; they want to know how could FEMA screw the people of New Orleans when we were told they we were more prepared for a national disaster.

The list goes on and on.

Serious questions are now being asked the Republicans in office know that voters are pissed off and their having a hard time defending themselves. Voters in Connecticut are angry...very, very angry and Simmons, Shays, and Johnson are in for the fight of their lives.


In order for the incumbent congressmen to have any chance, they need to distance themselves from Bush's record, as his popularity is very low in Connecticut.

Well, that wa then and this is now and look how these shameless Republicans are trying to run away from President Bush.
President Bush has become the invisible man of the Republican Party's effort to keep control of the House and Senate in November's midterm elections.

The Web sites of the party's candidates in the most competitive races across the country either give only a passing nod to the president or don't even mention Bush, whose popularity has been weighed down by the war in Iraq, high gas prices, economic anxieties and lingering memories of last August's Hurricane Katrina.

With about nine weeks to go before the Nov. 7 election, the Bush online invisibility mirrors a strategic divide between Republicans who want to keep the congressional elections as local as possible and Democrats who want to turn the midterm vote into a national referendum on the president and his policies.


"It all comes down to whether the election is a mandate on President Bush,'' said UC Berkeley political scientist Bruce Cain. "If it's a mandate on President Bush, it works to the Democrats' advantage. If it's about local members, it works to the Republicans' advantage.''

Three out of the four biggest cheerleaders for President Bush in Connecticut are now running campaigns as if they're independent candidates.


Instead of defending their pro-Bush record, they're running away from the President like he's the plague.
Rep. Nancy Johnson, R-Conn., one of three Connecticut GOP House members targeted by the Democrats, just can't bring herself to use Bush's name. Instead, four times in her issues section on national security she mentions how she supported "the president'' on votes involving Iraq and funding for the war on terrorism.

Her colleague, Rep. Rob Simmons, R-Conn., on his campaign site's home page, runs a photo of himself with Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who leads polls for the party's 2008 presidential nomination. No mention of Bush anywhere, and Simmons boasts to home state voters that he is "one of the most independent Republicans in the entire U.S. House.''

The state's third GOP House Member, Rep. Chris Shays, said last week after his 14th visit to Iraq that he had switched positions and now favors a timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces.
Oh, this is just too much! The biggest cheerleaders for President Bush are too afriad to stand next to him now. I don't know where to begin...


If Johnson, Shays, and Simmons are trying to distance themselves from the President, I feel that we, the voters of Connecticut, should hold these Republicans accountable for the decisions they made over the last six years.

If they had no problem boasting about their pro-Bush record then, they shouldn't be allowed to distance themselves from the President now.

From Johnson and Simmons taking HUGE donations from big pharma, to Shays being the one of the biggest cheerleaders and defender for the Iraq War, these politicians (each facing a really tough re-election battle) should not be allowed to fool the public with their attempts to distance themselves from the stupidity of President Bush. Help me connect the dots between these corrupt Republicans and the President.

If you have any damaging information that connects any of these spineless Republicans to the Bush Administration, please email me at ctblogger@yahoo.com and tell me about it. I'll keep a running list of these pro-Bush Republicans neo-con decisions and together, we can hold them accountable for their actions.

Hell, I'll even take your information you give me, grab my videocamera and have the Democratic candidates (Diane Farrell, Joe Courtney, and Chris Murphy) comment on them.

Come on people, this is A PPM alert so get to it and don't let me down!

Remember, YOU HAVE THE POWER so lets hold the Republicans feet to the fire.

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Hey Joe, here's a real Connecticut sunset!

hat tip to CTBob and The Kiss float.

President Bush gives C students a bad name

I really can't stand this President, his administration (or Joe Lieberman) and the anniversary of Katrina is like pouring salt on a wound that will not heal until January 2009.

I've been going back through my archives from last year when the events of Katrina unfolded and it's painfully obvious that President Bush will go down as the worst President of all time (including all future Presidents). Unless a future President trips and falls on the nuclear button, I can't see how anyone can match the stupidity of this out-of-touch President.

Let's go back in time and check out some of my past Katrina posts.

I'll never forget the day I started to lose it when I saw President Bush and John McCain having a great 'ol time while people were dying right and left. Now, remember, this post was written when the hurricane was hitting the Gulf coast and the levees first broke.

I'm speechless and stunned at the stupidity of this President during this hurricane crisis.

I tried to not go on a political rampage over this but the more I think about this situation, the more upset I get over the lack of action from our President.
I'll let AMERICABlog's John Aravoris explain the situation

Mr. President,

There is something wrong with this picture.

Hurricane Katrina is now being called one of the worst, if not the worst, disaster in US history. Instead of focusing on this growing tragedy in the southeast, you are at this moment giving a speech in California about World War II and Iraq. Yes, you devoted one minute of that speech to the hurricane, but now it's been 20 minutes and you are still talking about WWII and Iraq.

Mr. President, the entire nation is focused on one issue today, and it is not WWII. We are fixated by the images we're seeing on TV. The images of uncontrollable fires blazing across New Orleans. The images of people stranded on their rooftops waving white t-shirts for help. And as I write this, the water levels are still rising in New Orleans and the situation is getting desperate.

In the face of this tragedy, rather than call off your vacation days ago and head back home to coordinate the relief, but even more importantly, to show the American people that you care and are in charge, you did not fly east to Washington. You flew west to Arizona and to California. While New Orleans and the south was in the process of being destroyed yesterday, you flew west and devoted the day to Medicare. While the death toll for the hurricane increases by the hour, and even FOX News has just now cut away from your live WWII speech in order to return their coverage to New Orleans, you continue to babble on about WWII and Iraq.

Here's another post from August 31st...man, if there is ever a picture that expresses just how out of touch this President was during this disaster, this was THE PICTURE.
A picture is worth a thousand words...

From Yahoo News

President Bush plays a guitar presented to him by Country Singer Mark Wills, right, backstage following his visit to Naval Base Coronado, Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2005. Bush visited the base to deliver remarks on V-J Commemoration Day. (AP Photo/ABC News, Martha Raddatz)

I'm speechless. On a day which hundreds of people could be dying, our President is at a naval base acting like he can play a guitar! Again, I say, imagine what the conservatives would say if Clinton did something like this...

I can't make this stuff up.
Not only was the President asleep at the wheel, the ENTIRE Republican Party was out to lunch also (don't get me started on Joe "let's not play the blame game" Lieberman during this period). This post tells the story.
This is simply amazing (hat tip to daily.kos).

I went to both the Republican National Committee (http://www.rnc.org) and the Democratic National Committee (http://www.democrats.org/) websites to see how they are dealing with the hurricane crisis and this is what I saw.

First, the Republicans (from today at 4:35 p.m.).

Now the Democrats (from today at 4:40 p.m.).

If you need any more proof that Bush and Co. are out of touch with reality, this should do it.
And how can we forget the wonderful Condi Rice playing tennis and buying shoes while while people were drowing in front of our eyes on television.
How f*cking stupid can one person be! People are dying and she's out playing tennis with Monica Seles and buying shoes? Could you imagine what the conservatives would say if that happened under Clinton's watch?

Oh, please let me be the Republican nominee for President in 2008!

(BTW: This just happened over the last 24 hours)

From Drudge Report (I can't believe I'm quoting an article from this guy)

Eyewitness: Sec of State Condi Rice laughs it up at 'Spamalot' while Gulf Coast lays in tatters. Theater goers on New York City's Great White Way were shocked to see the President's former National Security Advisor at the Monty Python farce last night -- as the rest of the cabinet responds to Hurricane Katrina...

From Gawker
According to Drudge, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has recently enjoyed a little Broadway entertainment. And Page Six reports that she's also working on her backhand with Monica Seles. So the Gulf Coast has gone all Mad Max, women are being raped in the Superdome, and Rice is enjoying a brief vacation in New York. We wish we were surprised.

What does surprise us: Just moments ago at the Ferragamo on 5th Avenue, Condoleeza Rice was seen spending several thousands of dollars on some nice, new shoes (we've confirmed this, so her new heels will surely get coverage from the WaPo's Robin Givhan). A fellow shopper, unable to fathom the absurdity of Rice's timing, went up to the Secretary and reportedly shouted, "How dare you shop for shoes while thousands are dying and homeless!" Never one to have her fashion choices questioned, Rice had security PHYSICALLY REMOVE the woman.

Now, why do I bring all of this up? Well, it's a year later and NO ONE has forgotten about these magical moments and as Spike Lee reminds us, these idiots are as just as stupid now as they were last year when all hell broke loose.
You see, President Bush wasn't the only person asleep at the wheel...his entire administration should be held accountable for their actions as well as people who didn't have the courage to bring themselves to speak out against their friends.
(Note: links to articles in pasts post might be dead or no longer availiable).

Lieberman expresses his true feelings about the Democratic Party

Foxnews asks "Will Connecticut senator's independent run help embattled GOP candidates?"

Joe's response? "Well, they should have thought of that before they had the primary."
As I stated on numerous occasions, Joe Lieberman only cares about one thing...Joe Lieberman.

Lieberman does not care about the Democratic Party.

Lieberman does not care about how his campaign will impact the Congressional races.

Lieberman is good friends with Rob Simmons, Chris Shays, Nancy Johnson, and Jodi Rell.

When will people wake up and see this man for who he truly is...a selfish, desperate, arrogant politician.

(hat tip to the great Scarce)

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

NEWSFLASH: Lieberman unleashes dumbest political ad of all time!!

How ironic, Lieberman's political career is just like the sunset, it's fading to black. Man, I though the bear ad was bad, this is awful.

Ned's negative ads?

Ned distorting Joe's record?

Joe keeping us safe? Hey Joe, remember the 42 minutes.

You know, this ad is so pathetic that I'm not going to waste my time ripping it to shreds right now as I have bigger issues to deal with and it's obvious that Lieberman's campaign is worse now than during the primary.

What a sad ending to a senator's career. He really should just end his campaign now before he does more harm to his already tarnished legacy.


UPDATE: Aww, Joe's campaign is deleting comments from his YouTube page. Too bad I know how to copy and paste.

Comments as of 5:08 p.m.
freddereau (30 minutes ago)
Are you kidding me?
(reply to this)
mark as spam

PsiFighter37 (24 minutes ago)
Just when I thought the ads couldn't get any worse - or more hilarious - after the new 'bear cub' ad, this one takes the cake.

Absolutely side-splitting.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

blogswarm (21 minutes ago)
Did Tom Swan create this ad or is the Lieberman campaign trying to look foolish on purpose?

A sunset is the perfect way to illustrate what happened to Liebermn when he LOST the primary. Bonus points for the feeling of solitude...like Joe Lieberman is all by himself. Double bonus points for waves invoking the idea that Lieberman is washed up.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

rynato (18 minutes ago)
that's retarded
(reply to this)
mark as spam

johnno22 (12 minutes ago)
A setting sun... the perfect image for a career that's about to end.

Plus, bonus points for indirectly attacking your opponent in an ad that whines about negative attack ads.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

blogswarm (6 minutes ago)
Did Tom Swan create this ad or is the Lieberman campaign trying to look foolish on purpose?

A sunset is the perfect way to illustrate what happened to Liebermn when he LOST the primary. Bonus points for the feeling of solitude, like Joe Lieberman is all by himself. Double bonus points for waves invoking the idea that Lieberman is washed up.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

jskaroff (3 minutes ago)
This is a laxative commercial right?
(reply to this)
mark as spam

mrCurmudgeon (8 seconds ago)
Good God, that ad is horrible.
"Just sit back and think about...good stuff" ?

No, not Iraq!
No, not soldiers being maimed and killed!
No, not Iran or North Korea!
No, not health care!
No, not history debt!
No, not job security!
No, not gas prices!
No, not ineffectual leadership!

Just...think of Joe Lieberman, relaxing on the beach. Then, if you live in CT, VOTE him out in NOVEMBER and plunk his ass down in the sand, so he can get started on his own list of "good stuff" to think about.
(reply to this)
Hey Joe, keep deleting the comments, I'll keep taking snapshots of your page.

Too funny.

UPDATE 2: The comments keep coming, Joe keeps deleting, and I copy and paste them here.

Comments as of 5:52 p.m.
PsiFighter37 (34 minutes ago)
Way to go, Lieberman folks - keep censoring us.

It still won't save you from the complete crap that this ad is.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

FireCrow1961 (29 minutes ago)
Off into the sunset you go Joe. Will you please stop being such a crybaby sore loser. It is embarrassing.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

verite (29 minutes ago)
Actually, I like this spot. Doesn't outweight a lot of my other feelings about the race, but I think its a good ad.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

richardgozinya (26 minutes ago)
"I'm Joe Lieberman, and if your erection lasts more than four hours, see a doctor immediately."
(reply to this)
mark as spam

jaywillie77 (26 minutes ago)
Is this a political ad or a promo for Ambien? I can't figure it out. But this is definitely one of the WORST political ads I have ever seen. Think good stuff???

Oh, yes, indeed...like Joe Lieberman being retired by the voters of Connecticut on November 7th.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

newagez (20 minutes ago)
(reply to this)
mark as spam

jaywillie77 (14 minutes ago)
This ad is crap. Joe doesn't want to talk about any of the issues hounding his campaign - Iraq, cozying up to the inept Republican leadership, etc.

And he has the gall to suggest Ned Lamont is going negative for criticizing Joe's positions.

I wonder who he'll blame WHEN he loses on Nov. 7th, because he's sure as hell not going to point the finger at the one person who is most responsible for his political misfortunes - Joe Lieberman.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

ASTalbot (10 minutes ago)
Honestly Joe, I know Bill Hillsman (not really), I've worked with Bill Hillsman (ditto), but you're advertising firm, sir, they're no Bill Hillsman
(reply to this)
mark as spam

jaywillie77 (8 minutes ago)
It certainly is funny. Effective? Not so much.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

cglcivics (6 minutes ago)
Ask Your Doctor if Joementum is Right For You.

possiblesideeffectsmayincludedrowsiness, dizziness, cranialdiscomfort, compulsivevomiting, myopia, electiledysfunction, analleakage, inertia, suddenfitsofhysteria, confusion, delusionsofgrandeur, plaguesoflocustsandverystrangebedfellows. ProductnotapprovedforuseoutsidetheNortheastAtlanticCorridor.
(reply to this)

In case Joe deletes these comments.

Comments as of 9:25 p.m.

mrCurmudgeon (2 hours ago)
Is his strategy to get people to feel sorry for him?
I think it may be working, 'cuz boy do I pity the fool that has that as their campaign ad.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

mrCurmudgeon (2 hours ago)
(reply to this)
mark as spam

thefoulgerm (2 hours ago)
Wait, don't fall asleep, Connecticut voters! Feel The Joementum!!
(reply to this)
mark as spam

slkygrl (2 hours ago)
Beyond stupid. You're throwing good money after bad Joe. Save the money, drop out and buy a nice condo at Boca Raton and let Hadassah pull in the big pharma bucks. While she's working, you can watch Droopy on Cartoon Network.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

PharaohNineD (1 hour ago)
The sun now sets on a 18 year career. Bye bye little sycophant time for somebody who listens to contituants and will not block looking into war profiteering. No but realy ain't that voice actor Billy West doing his Paul Tsongas impersonation... obscure reference to Ren&Stimpy that.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

clyde1952 (1 hour ago)
Ronald Reagan is back from the dead! It's morning in America once again! I'll have to dig that ad out and post it.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

poolitics (1 hour ago)
You only see one set of footprints because that's when the Republican party was carrying Joe.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

RoboticG (1 hour ago)
Joe...give it up. You are an embarrassment.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

bobonze (1 hour ago)
Nice... a sunset over what appears to be an ocean. soothing. Where might this video have been shot? I'm pretty sure not in Connecticut (which is located on the East Coast) I've been livlng here in CT all my life (30+ years), and I don't recall ever seeing a sunset over an ocean here.
(reply to this)
mark as spam

CTBob (1 hour ago)
"If your Joe Lieberman lasts more than 18 years, contact your doctor."
(reply to this)

Lieberman push polling again

Good grief, here we go again.

Chris Shays ripped apart on Hardball over Iraq flip-flop

Flip-flop, flip-flop!

Oh man, you can tell Norah O'Donnell had a great time grilling Chris Shays on Hardball yesterday and although I'm not a big fan of O'Donnell, she did the right thing and called Shays out over his sudden change of heart and calling for a timetable for U.S. troops in Iraq.

After 14 visits to Iraq it seems like the Congressman from the 4th district did a magical 180 degree turn when it comes to Iraq (maybe it had something to do with Ned Lamont beating Shays' buddy Joe Lieberman in the primary by 10,000 votes or the really tough re-election campaign he's facing against Democratic Congressional candidate Diane Farrell).

You see, besides Lieberman, Shays was (and still is) one of the biggest cheerleaders when it comes to supporting this war so it speaks volumes when he does this obvious flip-flop and as you'll see in the videoclip, O'Donnell turned on the grill and cooked him until he was well-done.

I almost feel bad for the guy as he fell on his own sword in front of my eyes (notice how O'Donnell laughs at him at the end of the interview...classic).

If you think O'Donnell was harsh, read what Diane Farrell had to say about Shays' change of heart.
Chris Shays' position on Iraq is as clear today as it was three-and-a-half years ago - he fully supports the war, he's been the president's most loyal supporter on the war and he continues to give the president a blank check to conduct that war, said Diane Farrell, Democratic nominee in the 4th Congressional District.

"Three months before Election Day, Chris Shays is trying to change history, but the record is clear," Farrell said. "Our positions couldn't be any different or clearer. Chris supports the war; I oppose it. Chris thinks we're making progress; I don't. Chris isn't calling for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to resign; I have repeatedly. Chris doesn't think we need an exit strategy; I do.

"I have always opposed this war, going all the way back to its run-up when, as first selectwoman of Westport, I addressed Congressman Shays directly and asked him not to do exactly what he ultimately did - give the president a blank check to pursue a misguided war.

"Chris Shays has been to Iraq 14 times. Thirteen times he came home saying things were great. Now all of a sudden he sees what I've been saying for years. I find that quite curious."


"Bottom line," Farrell said, "It's the president, the commander-in-chief, who has the power to bring an end to this war and bring the troops home. Congress, and especially Chris Shays, have been absent from their duties which should have been to ask for a plan from the very day this war was authorized.

"Congressman Shays may think he can change history by trying to morph his position in year four of this war. But the record is clear - he still supports this war and he will have to answer for that."

Diane Farrell: True Democrat. Chris Shays: scared shitless over losing his Congressional seat.

The stupidity of Michael Brown and the arrogance of Joe Lieberman

As I promised, this week I'm going to talk about Joe Lieberman's role in the Katrina disaster and how his lack of leadership as senator ultimately cost people their lives.

You see, Joe Lieberman should carry a great amount of the blame since he chaired the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee when Presedent Bush nominated Michael Brown. Lieberman (in hooking up his best Republican friend) held a cute 42-minute love feast interview with Brown before he offered his full support.

42 minutes.

Now, since Lieberman chaired the committee, he obviously had access to Brown's resume, you know the resume that was full of lies that Time magazine picked apart in a matter of days (if not hours). It was Lieberman's responsibility to make sure that Brown qualified for the job but not only did he fail in his responsibility, he had the arrogance not to criticize or even question Brown or FEMA as the disaster unfolded right before our very eyes and millions of people around the world were watching Brown, the Department of Homeland Security (I'll come back and talk about Lieberman's role in creating this department later) and the entire Bush administration fall flat on their face.

First, lets look at a video highlight of Michael Brown from Spike Lee's documentary "When the Levees Broke" including the now infamous Michael Brown interview with on September 2 2005 and CNN's Soledad O'Brien where she ripped him to shreds and Brown looked as clueless as a newborn child. Again, please, please, please, remember that during this time, Joe Lieberman couldn't bring himself to either question of criticize Brown. In fact, Joe "always in front of a camera" Lieberman was all but silent during the height of this national disaster.

Now what did Joe Lieberman finally say after the media caught up with him. Was he outraged? Was he upset? Well, not really. According to Lieberman, he didn't want to play the blame game. Well I wouldn't either if I was responsible for appointing Brown to head FEMA or had access to his "padded" resume back in 2002.

No, Joe felt it was more important to protect his and the President’s ass.

There's Bush's favorite Democrat protecting him when everyone else in the world could see that the Bush administration failed the American public.

"Let's have hearings and get to the bottom of this!" Lieberman declared. Why? You know what happened and you knew your role in what happened. Instead of being a man and accepting responsibility for his role, he waved his hands and had the nerve to say only, "let's not play the blame game."


Now, when the media did their research and learned about Lieberman's role in the
42 minutes of shame, his response was also a Joementum classic (and pathetic).

To this day, we haven't received a clear answer from Lieberman on why he approved Michael Brown to ultimately run FEMA nor has he ever acknowledge that he basically screwed up. You see, Joe's to proud of a man to admit when he's wrong, like when he continues to be a cheerleader for President Bush's idiotic war in Iraq or when he was a the only New England senator to approve Dick Cheney's awful Energy Bill and so on and so on.

In closing, don't think Joe Lieberman's hands are clean when it comes to Katrina and the failure of the federal government to protect the people. Lieberman's failure to do his job costs people their lives and to this day, he has failed to acknowledge this obsolute fact. Never mind the "Katrina hearings" that happened after the event as tht was nothing but politicians covering their own asses, Lieberman could have done something very simple before Katrina ever happened, which was simply to do his job when he chaired the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee and first learned about Michael Brown.

Explain to me again why Lieberman deserves to be re-elected?

Monday, August 28, 2006

Why 24/7 cable news sucks: reason # 1,029,392

WOW, I'm so fucking surprised.
Prosecutors abruptly dropped their case Monday against John Mark Karr in the slaying of JonBenet Ramsey, saying DNA tests failed to put him at the crime scene despite his insistence that he was there when the 6-year-old girl was killed.

"The warrant on Mr. Karr has been dropped by the district attorney," public defender Seth Temin said outside the jail. "They are not proceeding with the case."

Boulder County District Attorney Mary Lacy's office did not return repeated calls from The Associated Press.

"We're deeply distressed by the fact that they took this man and dragged him here from Bangkok, Thailand, with no forensic evidence confirming the allegations against him and no independent factors leading to a presumption that he did anything wrong," Temin said.

Earlier in the day, Denver's KUSA, citing two sources close to the investigation, said that hair and saliva from Karr were tested over the weekend at the Denver police crime lab and that he was ruled out as the source of the DNA taken from the crime scene.
Was this a surprise...oh yeah, it was a surprised to the STUPID FUCKING MAINSTREAM MEDIA who shoved this stupid non-story down our throats for the last two weeks (with MSNBC being the most pathetic). I'm sure Karr was laughing his ass off the entire time (especially when he boozing it up first class style on th way back to the States). Thanks cable news for yet again jumping the gun and showing us again why "People-powered media" is so popular.

In a while, I'll bring you a list of stories the MSM "overlooked" while covering this non-story. Here's a quick one you might of not noticed due to the 24/7 of Karr.
At least 20 Iraqi soldiers were killed in street fighting with Shi'ite militiamen in the town of Diwaniya on Monday, some of the bloodiest clashes yet among rival powers in Shi'ite southern Iraq.

A Polish helicopter was hit by gunfire as it provided air support to Iraqi troops but landed safely. U.S. aircraft also took part and U.S.-led foreign troops sealed off the city before calm returned by nightfall after talks among Shi'ite leaders.


The Defense Ministry, local officials and the Mehdi Army of populist young cleric Moqtada al-Sadr gave conflicting accounts of battles overnight and into the day in Diwaniya, a normally placid provincial capital, 180 km (110 miles) south of Baghdad.

A Defense Ministry spokesman in the capital said 20 of its soldiers were killed along with 50 unidentified "gunmen" who had stormed police stations after dark on Sunday. A local leader of the Mehdi Army insisted only two of his men had been killed.

A U.S. military official said 30 Iraqi troops were wounded.


The Baghdad bombing resembled many carried out by al Qaeda and pro-Saddam Hussein militants from the once dominant Sunni minority and was one of the worst in the capital since U.S. and Iraqi troops launched a security clampdown three weeks ago.

Eight U.S. soldiers were among more than 60 people killed on Sunday in violence that challenged Maliki's latest assertion his forces had the upper hand and there would be no civil war.

The chief U.S. military spokesman said killings in Baghdad had almost halved this month from last and that car bombings were at an eight-month low. But Major General William Caldwell acknowledged there had been a spike again in the past two days.


A hospital official and an army source in Diwaniya both put the army's death toll at 25 with a further five missing. A Reuters reporter saw 19 bodies in army uniform in the morgue, as well as seven civilians. The hospital said nine civilians died, adding that 51 people, including eight soldiers, were wounded.

DeStefano endorsed by SEIU, repeats his support for Lamont

Today, John DeStefano was endorsed by the Service Employees International Union along with Ned Lamont and the Democratic candidate for Governor had no problem repeating his support for Ned Lamont.
"I don't stand here by accident with Ned Lamont. I stand here fully supportive with the message he is taking both to the families of Connecticut and to the nation," DeStefano told the crowd. "This election is about change, it is about change and the things that our families want and I'm proud to be standing here today in supporting Ned Lamont, clearly, wholeheartedly, completely, as our next United States senator."


"Ned Lamont took a stand and spoke to what was in the hearts and in the lives of Connecticut's families," he said. "And voters responded to that and they sent a very clear message about what they want."
With November creeping up on us, this union endorsement should help both candidates' GOTV effort. I'll have more on DeStefano's endorsement later.

Lessons from Katrina

This is a must read.

Major union dumps Joe, endorses Lamont

Today in Hartford, Service Employees International Union-32BJ becomes the first union to back Ned Lamont after endorsing Joe Lieberman during the primary.

From Lamont campaign press release.
"After hearing from both candidates our members voted overwhelmingly for change in Connecticut and Washington," said Paul Philson, State Director of SEIU. "Our 50,000 workers are going to get off the sidelines and work enthusiastically for Ned Lamont to bring change to Connecticut and Washington."

"If we want to change the way we do business we need to change the people who represent us," said Mike O'Brien of CSEA. "Joe running as a minor party candidate can only hurt the working people of Connecticut."
This is a pretty big thing for obvious reasons and I woulod be shocked if more former Lieberman endorsements cahnge their tune and switch to Lamont.

Congressional races gaining national attention

This should show you just how important the Connecticut Congressional races are to both political parties.
Overshadowed by a nationally watched U.S. Senate contest, several Connecticut congressional races are starting to draw big names and attention of their own.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was in Connecticut Wednesday and Thursday to campaign for Diane Farrell, who is challenging Republican Rep. Christopher Shays in the 4th District, and Chris Murphy, who is challenging Republican Rep. Nancy Johnson in the 5th District.

Campaigning with Murphy at an event in Waterbury on Thursday, Pelosi called Murphy, Farrell and 2nd District challenger Joe Courtney a "high priority" for national Democrats.

"The three House seats in Connecticut are very important to taking back the Congress for the American people," she said.

Democrats can take control of the House by winning 15 seats on Election Day.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which raises money for congressional candidates, has all three of the races on its "targeted" list, meaning they're getting visits and fundraising help from big-name Democrats, said spokeswoman Jen Psaki.

Some Democrats have expressed concern that House challengers could be hurt by the fierce U.S. Senate fight between primary winner Ned Lamont and U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, who is running as an independent. But Psaki said she isn't concerned that the Senate race will overshadow the House races.

"These are three of our top fundraisers," she said of the candidates, adding that there are thousands of new Democrats in Connecticut because of the primary and that Lamont and Lieberman had endorsed all three. "All of those things are helping these candidates."

On the Republican side, Republican National Congressional Committee spokesman Ed Patru said all three are expected to be "vigorous" races.

"The environment is certainly tougher than it has been in past years for a number of reasons. There's anxiety among voters and the president's numbers aren't as high as some would like them to be," Patru said. "But ultimately, all three of these races are going to be local races. No voter in Connecticut will be voting for a Democratic or Republican Congress nor will they be voting on the president. They'll be making a choice between two candidates and two contrasting messages."

Pelosi stopped at a Farrell fundraiser in Stamford Wednesday night, and Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel, chairman of the DCCC, stumped for her there Thursday.

In the 4th District, which includes southwestern Connecticut, Pelosi focused on six goals for the Democrats if they take back the House, including a phased redeployment of troops in Iraq, making college tuition tax deductible and making the country more energy independent. Emanuel focused on Iraq.

In the 5th, which includes central and western Connecticut and is home to many elderly residents, Pelosi and Murphy talked about reforming the Medicare prescription drug benefit.

Democrats aren't the only ones bringing in big names.

Shays plans to bring in former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, Arizona Sen. John McCain and former Oklahoma Congressman J.C. Watts, according to Shays campaign manager Michael Sohn. Ken Hiscoe, Republican Rep. Nancy Johnson's campaign manager, says McCain also plans to stump for Johnson next month.

In the 2nd District, in eastern Connecticut, incumbent Republican Rob Simmons has scheduled a Sept. 6 fundraiser with former President George H.W. Bush, whom he knows from his time in the CIA.

Chris Dodd for Prez?

Seems like someone is testing the waters but why is he coming out of the gates so late?
Sen. Christopher J. Dodd will make his first visits to the key 2008 states of Iowa and New Hampshire next month to test his appeal as a possible White House contender - but he's starting later than most candidates, and is far less known.

Dodd, who has planned appearances in Iowa the weekend of Sept. 8-10 and New Hampshire the following weekend, is the latest in a field of about a dozen Democrats thinking of vying for the party's presidential nomination, most of whom have already stumped in those states and are building organizations.

Dodd's New England roots are expected to help him in New Hampshire, but he faces two challenges in Iowa, where the Jan. 14, 2008, caucus will be the first test of the 2008 presidential season.

First, he's not a familiar face. "They think he's the other senator from Connecticut," said Dennis J. Goldford, a professor of politics at Drake University in Des Moines, referring to the publicity about junior Connecticut Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman's Aug. 8 primary battle with Ned Lamont.

Second, said Peverill Squire, a professor of political science at the University of Iowa: "He's showing up a little bit late."

Sunday, August 27, 2006

Lieberman campaign tries to cover their tracks over non-combatant statement

WHOA! Hold it now!! Please tell me I'm seeing things...

I was doing my usual checking of my favorite websites when I came across a headline at Raw Story that read "Lieberman still rooting for Dem candidates" and I almost fell out of my chair.

I said to myself, "oh this is a load of B.S." knowing that Joe has been showing his true Republican colors of late, so I clicked on the Raw Story piece and it had this to say.
An aide to Joe Lieberman told The New York Times on Saturday that the senator already endorsed all the Democratic candidates for the House in Connecticut and "still hoped" they'd win, although he doesn't expect to be asked to hit the campaign trail for them after his loss in the primary to challenger Ned Lamont.

"Mr. Lieberman, who during three six-year terms became a Democratic stalwart in Connecticut, acknowledges that his independent campaign has placed him and his former Democratic allies in a predicament," reports Jennifer Medina for the Times.

"Indeed, all three of the Democratic Congressional candidates supported him in the primary but have now endorsed Mr. Lamont," the article continues.

On Friday, Lieberman told reporters that he considered himself a "noncombatant" who "not going to be involved in other campaigns," and would remain focused on his own race.

Two paragraphs enclosed in brackets were apparently added to the article after one of Lieberman's aides phoned the paper.

"On Saturday, a Lieberman campaign aide called to offer a clarification for this article," reports the Times. "The aide, Dan Gerstein, said that the senator had endorsed all the Democratic candidates for the House and still hoped they would win."

"Mr. Gerstein said, however, that in light of their endorsement of Mr. Lamont, the senator did not expect the Democrats to ask him to campaign with them this fall," the article continues.

Alright, Joe's trying to cover his ass on this one and it's painfully obvious to anyone who read my post on Joe's comments in the New Haven Independent piece Friday. Let's go back in time and read the quote as reported by Melinda Tuhus in the Independent.
Declaring himself a "non-combatant," U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, in remarks at a New Haven press event Friday, raised anew the question of whether his "independent" candidacy will help Republicans hold onto three Congressional seats in Connecticut -- and control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Lieberman -- who after losing an Aug. 8 Democratic primary to Ned Lamont has launched a third-party bid to hold onto his seat in the Nov. 7 general election -- was asked whether he still endorses Diane Farrell, Joe Courtney and Chris Murphy, three Democrats looking to unseat endangered Republican incumbents Chris Shays, Rob Simmons and Nancy Johnson.

"I’m a non-combatant," Lieberman declared. "I am not going to be involved in other campaigns. I think it’s better if I just focus on my own race."

Lieberman made the remarks at a Friday morning photo op held in the rain under an I-95 overpass in the Fair Haven neighborhood to tout his role in bringing $50 million to the state to help ease transportation gridlock.

"It's a little awkward for me now" to endorse the Democratic candidates in the general election, he said, "since they all endorsed my opponent," Democratic primary winner Ned Lamont.
Joe not only stated that he's a "non-combatant" when it came to whether or not he still endorses the three Democratic candidates, he clearly stated that IT'S NOW AWKWARD TO ENDORSE THEM NOW BECAUSE THEY NOW ENDORSE LAMONT! He was asked directly if he still endorsed the three Democrats and that was his response (Lieberman NEVER stated that he was misquoted in the New Haven Independent piece and I'm sure someone has audio of him making that statement).

Now, you wouldn't get the impression that Joe threw the Democratic Congressional candidates under a bus if you read the Times piece.
"It's a little awkward for me now,” Mr. Lieberman said on Friday, speaking to reporters in New Haven. “I’m a noncombatant — I am not going to be involved in other campaigns. I think it’s better if I just focus on my own race."
This is not Lieberman's complete quote (if fact, it's not even close). I don't mean to repeat myself but here's his complete quote again from the Independent.
"I'm a non-combatant," Lieberman declared. "I am not going to be involved in other campaigns. I think it’s better if I just focus on my own race."

Lieberman made the remarks at a Friday morning photo op held in the rain under an I-95 overpass in the Fair Haven neighborhood to tout his role in bringing $50 million to the state to help ease transportation gridlock.

"It's a little awkward for me now" to endorse the Democratic candidates in the general election, he said, "since they all endorsed my opponent," Democratic primary winner Ned Lamont.
If you read Lieberman's quote in the Times, you would get a different impression of what Joe actually said which gives room for Lieberman's hitman spokesperson trying to do damage control.
On Saturday, a Lieberman campaign aide called to offer a clarification for this article. The aide, Dan Gerstein, said that the senator had endorsed all the Democratic candidates for the House and still hoped they would win.

Mr. Gerstein said, however, that in light of their endorsement of Mr. Lamont, the senator did not expect the Democrats to ask him to campaign with them this fall.
What?!? Lieberman was asked directly if he still endorsed Diane Farrell, Joe Courtney, and Chris Murphy and what Lieberman said sounded NOTHING like what Gerstein stated on Saturday.

Why is the Lieberman campaign allowed to get away with this B.S.?

How could the Times (knowing about Lieberman's comment Friday) print Gerstein's comment knowing that it's a complete lie. Again, Joe clearly knew what he was talking about when he made the statement Friday...he's washed his hands of any Democrat who is now endorsing Lamont and that includes Courtney, Farrell, and Murphy.

Let's recap:

1. Lieberman has hired Neil Newhouse's polling firm who also worked for Republican Jodi Rell and is currently working for Rob Simmons.

2. Lieberman was with Rob Simmons and Jodi Rell as early as Thursday.

3. Based on Lieberman's OWN WORDS, he's no longer thinking about the three Democratic Congressional candidates BECAUSE they are now endorsing Lamont.

Lieberman is the de facto Republican candidate period. The Times should not have allowed Gerstein off the hook like this NOR should they piece together Lieberman's non-combatant statement. As painful as it is for me to say but The Raw Story let me down also since they should have known about the comment Lieberman made in the Independent versus Joe's quote in the Times and made the connection for themselves.