I'm packing up my things now and heading off to the Murphy-Johnson debate. As usual, I'll bring you all the information your brain can handle so check back later.
Oh, this is going to be good!
I'm packing up my things now and heading off to the Murphy-Johnson debate. As usual, I'll bring you all the information your brain can handle so check back later.
it's just another typical day.
The bodies of 14 construction workers, their throats slit and their hands and legs bound, were found in a rural area near Baghdad, police said on Friday.Remember, Republicans like Lieberman, Shays, Simmons and Johnson want to stay the course.
A police source said most of the victims were from the mainly Shi'ite town of Balad, north of Baghdad. They had been snatched from their vehicle at dawn and killed by unidentified gunmen, police said.
The motive was not clear but Iraq has been gripped by sectarian killings pitching Shi'ites against Sunni Arabs since the bombing of a Shi'ite shrine in Samarra in February.
Oh man, this man has really gone off the deep end now.
Shays: Then the next question is, well what has the US done? Well it has been accused of doing torture. That's what it's been accused of. Now I've seen what happened in Abu Ghraib, and Abu Ghraib was not torture, it was outrageous, outrageous involvement of National Guard troops from Maryland who were involved in a sex ring and they took pictures of soldiers who were naked. And they did other things that were just outrageous. But it wasn't torture.Matthew Gertz of MLN posted that the Stamford Advocate ripped Shays apart over this utterly idiotic comment.
It's difficult though how the dialogue in the rest of the world about that when you have news media all around the world saying we're torturing people. The bottom line for me is this. We follow the Geneva Convention period. That's what we do.
Amnesty International officials and Shays' challengers in the 4th District said it was absurd for the Republican incumbent to call the acts at the Iraqi prison anything but torture.
"This is outrageous for a sitting congressman who was shown pictures (of Abu Ghraib) that were not even available to the public because they were supposed to be more provocative," said Joshua Rubenstein, Northeast regional director for Amnesty International. "The photographs did not only depict humiliating and degrading treatment of prisoners. They showed prisoners who were killed."
Shays defended his comments yesterday, saying he doesn't doubt that there has been torture at other prisons, but not at Abu Ghraib.
"I saw probably 600 pictures of really gross, perverted stuff," Shays said. "The bottom line was it was sex. . . . It wasn't primarily about torture."
Shays defined torture as anything that could cause mental or physical pain or sleep depravation.
Asked about pictures showing mistreatment of detainees mentioned by Amnesty International, Shays said he did not see those images and "we also don't know where those could have been from."
Chris Dodd sees the writing on the wall.
U.S. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd Thursday altered his course on Iraq, calling for a goal of repositioning U.S. troops from current Iraqi positions beginning immediately and finishing within 12 to 18 months.Dodd is joining an evergrowing list of senators, Congressmen, and retired military leaders who want to see American forces out of this bloddy civil war in Iraq while, neo-conservatives like Joe Lieberman want to stay the course.
"We must begin immediately to reposition our troops from Baghdad, Fallujah and other large urban centers," he said, to Kurdistan and other less populated areas of Iraq.
That way, Dodd said, "training of Iraqi forces could continue."
He would also move troops to border areas, "where they can protect the territorial integrity of Iraq until Iraqi forces can do so themselves."
Other forces would head for military bases in Kuwait and Qatar, "where they could be available to protect our national security interests-and to Afghanistan, where we must redouble our efforts to capture Osama bin Laden, dismantle al-Qaida and neutralize the Taliban.
"These movements must begin immediately," Dodd said, "with the goal of completing them within the next 12 to 18 months."
Good God! When will people wake up and realize that Joe Lieberman is nothing more than a neo-conservative Republican masking as a Democrat.
On Monday of this week Sen. Joe Lieberman appeared at a well-attended luncheon at La Renaissance restaurant in East Windsor, hosted by the radio host Brad Davis.
It was a remarkable performance for two reasons. First, it showed, again, that Lieberman is possessed of great political skills. During the primary campaign, the senator seemed to have lost those skills. But now he has been freed to be who he really is. He's comfortable and effective again. Second, the person Lieberman really is, is a Bush Republican.
At the Monday luncheon he:
- Said House Speaker Dennis Hastert should not resign.
- Introduced two Republican candidates for state office - for comptroller and state treasurer. He didn't introduce any Democrats, who have previously been told not to campaign at these luncheons.
- Thanked his Republican "friends" for their support, and he said he would never forget them.
Last week Lieberman told a Washington, D.C., newspaper that:
- He would also never forget the Democrats, like Chris Dodd, who moved to support Ned Lamont after he won the Democratic Senate nomination.
- If re-elected, Lieberman expects to retain his seniority. Otherwise, he said, he would have to consider not caucusing with the Democrats.
Democrats who think Lieberman is still one of them need to wake up and smell the coffee.
Why did we start Whose Side Are You On?You gotta respect that type of attitude.
We started whosesideareyouon.org as a direct response to the White House's abandonment of Connecticut Republican Alan Schlesinger. You can learn more about Alan on his own website.
It wasn't just that Republicans in Washington - led by Karl Rove - made a conscious effort to distance themselves from Alan, but that they did it in order to support Democrat Joe Lieberman, a childish career politician for whom his own primary's results weren't good enough. Lieberman is the guy who said that he wouldn't let his own party's primary results stand - that, in essence, the people's collective voice was a trivial annoyance to be swatted aside like so many bees.
Why aren't we getting involved in the U.S. House of Representatives races?
Mainly because all three of those candidates - Shays, Simmons and Johnson have plenty of money and national support. We made a conscious decision to talk about the one guy who has given his life to the party and was left twisting in the wind by Washington insiders who unflinchingly back a life-long Democrat who really only supports them on a few issues.
With such low poll numbers, why would we bother supporting Alan Schlesinger?
* Because it's the right thing to do.
* Because it sends a message to Connecticut and Washington that loyalty does matter.
* Because we like to sleep at night.
On November 8th, we'd rather wake up feeling we did the right thing. As opposed to, say, selling our souls to benefit a guy like Lieberman, who's cherry-picked a couple of Republican ideas and passed himself off as a moderate. Frankly, as much as we might dislike what he stands for, we'd rather see a guy like Lamont elected - simply because he doesn't try to pass himself off as something he's not. He's on the other side of the aisle, but, at least he's honest about it.
The DeStefano gubernatorial campaign filed a complaint today with the Elections Enforcement Commission concerning the October 10th filing of the "Jodi Rell 06" campaign finance report. Reviewing the report, it's clear that Gov. Rell accepted money from state contractors, but broke the law by not reporting it.
"Since starting her campaign Gov. Rell has maintained that she will not take money from state contractors," said Derek Slap – Director of Communications for the DeStefano campaign. "Gov. Rell has consistently broken that promise. Now, with her recent filing, it's apparent the governor has crossed a line: she and her campaign are breaking the law by hiding the fact that she is taking money from state contractors."
Chapter 150 sec. 9-333j of Connecticut 's campaign financing laws specifies: "Each statement filed under subsection (a), (e) or (f) of this section shall include.... for each individual who contributes in excess of one thousand dollars in the aggregate... a statement including whether the business with which he is associated has a contract with the state which is valued at more than five thousand dollars."
In at least three instances Rell's campaign failed to identify state contractors on its October filing, a direct violation of the aforementioned law. The Department of Administrative Services shows contracts for several companies whose employees gave more than $1000 to Rell in the aggregate.
(1) William J. J McGrath's $2,500 contribution on 9/19/06 is not marked as a state contractor contribution. His employer, Halloran & Sage has at least a $50,000 contract with the state.
(2) Deborah Poerio's $2,500 contribution on7/11/06 is not marked as a state-contractor contribution. Her employer, Manchester Memorial hospital has at least a $40,000 contract with the state.
(3) Norman Marieb's $2,500 contribution on 7/19/06 is not marked as a state-contractor contribution. Her employer, Hospital of St. Raphael , has at least a $40,000 contract with the state.
It is likely that these examples represent only a small portion of state contractors that have not been reported in the October filing. This is because DAS does not record all state contracts. There are good reasons to believe that the following also have state contracts:
(1) Rupesh R. Shah's $1,500 and Jane M. Swift's $2,000 contribution on 9/19/06 are both not marked as state contractor contributions. They are both directors at WellCare.
(2) Steven H. Kaplan's $1,250 contribution on 9/7/06 is not marked as a state-contractor contribution. He is the president of the University of New Haven.
(3) Dijuana K. Lewis' $1,500 contribution on 8/30/06 is not marked as a state-contractor contribution. She is the president of Anthem Blue Cross & Blue Shield.
During Monday night's debate the Garde theatre in New London , Gov. Rell said, "I pride myself on being the only governor to not take special interest money to fund my campaign."
It's now clear that the Rell campaign is willing to break the law to perpetuate that myth.
"We believe the Elections Enforcement Commission should immediately launch an investigation so this matter can be resolved before Election Day. Voters deserve to know the truth," said Slap.
Gov. M. Jodi Rell - whose office only last weekend issued a statement declaring that she wasn't accepting campaign contributions from state contractors and lobbyists - has received a total of at least $175,000 from more than 200 individuals employed by state contractors and two others identified themselves as lobbyists, state records show.
The reports filed by the governor's campaign committee with the secretary of the state's office reveal that dozens of her biggest benefactors between November 2005 and June 2006 weren't low-level employees at companies that hold state contracts, but high-ranking executives.
Those who filled out a space on Rell's campaign contribution forms identifying themselves as employees of a state contractor, each of whom gave $2,500 to the governor, include:
* Five top officials at three of the biggest insurance companies in Connecticut: Ronald A. Williams of Farmington, president of Aetna; Alan M. Bennett of Madison, chief financial officer at Aetna; Craig R. Callen of Hartford, an Aetna senior vice president; David Johnson of West Hartford, chief financial officer of The Hartford; and Jay S. Fishman of Englewood, N.J., the chief executive officer, chairman, and president of St Paul Travelers.
* Three senior officials at Fairfield-based General Electric: Chairman Michael Neal of Weston, Chief Financial Officer Keith Sherin of Weston, and Vice President and Senior Tax Counsel John Samuels of Greenwich.
* Three principals in MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings Inc., a New York firm that invests in both public and private companies: Ronald Perelman, the financier who serves as the firm's chairman; Howard Gittis, its vice chairman and chief accounting officer; and Barry Schwartz, its executive vice president and general counsel.
* Key executives at various other companies, including: George David of Avon, chief executive officer of United Technologies Corp.; Nathaniel D. Woodson of North Haven, chief executive office of the New Haven-based utility United Illuminating Co.; Michael J. Critelli of Darien, chief executive officer of Stamford-based Pitney Bowes; Larry R. Gottesdiner, chief executive officer of Northland Investment Corp., which owns the Goodwin Hotel and other Hartford properties; and Diane P. Wilson of Berlin, chief financial officer of Vertex Inc., a New Britain-based software and development firm.
Similarly, 59 individuals associated with firms with state contracts also have contributed $1,000 each to Rell.
They included Carl Johnson of Farmington, a partner Blum, Shapiro & Co. P.C.; James S. Ciarcia of Rocky Hill, a financial analyst at Northeast Utilities; William M. Samuelson of Cheshire, director of business and professional banking at Webster Bank; William Huntley, president of racing, sports, and gaming technology at New York-based Scientific Games Corp.; and Charles DiBona of Stamford, a broker at Marsh & McLennan.
The chief spokesman in the governor's office, Judd Everhart, trumpeted Rell's support for tough campaign finance laws in a statement issued last Saturday, when Rell and several legislative leaders were honored by three national watchdog groups.
The statement said the governor was "setting the tone for Connecticut's reforms" by following the requirements of legislation that has not yet taken effect, adding that "her campaign is not accepting contributions from contractors, lobbyists, and other sources banned from gubernatorial campaigns beginning in 2010."
Man, is he an idiot. Now DANGERstein is accusing Lieberman's veteran supporters of outright lying.
Dan Gerstein, communications director for Lieberman’s campaign, said it was an "out-and-out lie" to say that Lieberman favors a stay-the-course policy in Iraq.
The same day his challenger Ned Lamont laid out his plan for how to deal with the War in Iraq at Yale University in New Haven, a group of veterans praised U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman for his support in the war effort outside the state armory in Hartford.Insert foot to mouth.
Staff Sgt. James Liska said Lamont's position on the war changes with his audience. Whereas, "Joe Lieberman has consistently said we're going to stay the course," he said.
Liska said Lieberman's unwavering support is important to him as a soldier. "We started something, we need to finish it," Liska said.
In case you thought the U.S. military would be out of Iraq soon (like in the next year of two).
The U.S. Army has plans to keep the current level of soldiers in Iraq through 2010, the top Army officer said Wednesday, a later date than Bush administration or Pentagon officials have mentioned thus far.2010...well that's no problem for "stay the course" Joe Lieberman.
Have you had enough?
When the congressional page scandal broke last month, Democrats across the country saw a chance to lambaste Republican leadership - including Diane Farrell, who called on House Speaker Dennis Hastert to step down.Desperate, desperate politician.
But when Sen. Edward M. Kennedy came to Connecticut last week to help her campaign, Rep. Christopher Shays hit back.
"I know the speaker didn't go over a bridge and leave a young person in the water, and then have a press conference the next day," said Shays, R-4th District, referring to the 1969 incident in which the Massachusetts Democrat drove a car that plunged into the water and a young campaign worker died.
"Dennis Hastert didn't kill anybody," he added.
This just happened.
A small plane crashed into a high-rise on the Upper East Side, setting off a fire and startling New Yorkers, police said.No time to upload any video right now. Turn on CNN or MSNBC now.
Fire Department spokeswoman Emily Rahimi said an aircraft struck struck the 20th floor of a building on East 72nd Street. Witnesses said the crash caused a loud noise, and burning and falling debris was seen. Flames were seen shooting out of the windows. Video from the scene showed at least three apartments in the high rise fully engulfed in flames.
There was no immediate word on any deaths or injuries.
It was not immediately known if it was a terrorist act.
I know, I know, this doesn't have anything to do with Connecticut but I can't stop watching Katherine Harris' train wreck of a campaign.
Here's more feedback from people who were either watched or attendedMonday night's DeStefano-Rell debate.
My wife has always held Jodi Rell in disdain for two reasons; she's a Republican and that she never finished her education. That lack of education was laid bare for all to see last night.
Her car tax proposal is proof positive that she just doesn't get it. We have a 1987 Jeep Cherokee that costs us 40 bucks. Big Deal! What's 40 bucks in the grand scheme of things. We pay over 4,000 for our house and really don't get much in the way of services. Show me Real relief, not this bait and swith BS, and I will be eternally grateful. If some bozo wants to buy a 50,000 dollar BMW that they really don't need, then they can afford to pay the property taxes on it. Also under her plan, any vehicle with commercial and combination plates would not qualify for the rebate. So everybody with a pick-up truck would be ineligible. Nice way to stick it to working people. Are you comprehending this "hard working man" (our newest troll)?
I was frankly embarassed for her. Her claim to not have made any mistakes and her bungled Senate endorsement were absolutely painful. I actually cringed. She is truly the Accidental Governor.
Who actually called her Granny Clean? I read it here about a month ago and can't get it out of my head. It's the best one I've ever heard.
I wasn't there, but watching the videos I was really impressed with John DeStefano and believe he won the debate hands down!!!! There he was discussing the real facts that most people are feeling, like high energy prices, like health care costs, transportation problems, and giving solutions to these problems. He was definitely in command of the facts. All Jodi Rell could offer was a rosy fake picture stating everything was okay and don't let any one try and confuse you with the facts! She looked like she should have been giving a speech at the women's Auxiliary Club for their next bake sale, instead of a Governor's debate, for which she was totally unprepared!
She came across as someone who was just filling the office until they could find someone more qualified. And the debate proved without doubt that John DeStefano is more than qualified and should be our next governor!
His response, "I pray I'll never be in politics so long as to give an answer like that." was priceless and will go down as one of the greatest comments in the debate!!!
Michael Rell was very very upset by the signs that read
Brains are over-rated , Vote for Rell
Bush and Rell,C Students All the Way
College Drop-outs for Rell
I Never Finished Either.
I must give him credit though. He left New London without stealing an automobile or committing a felony. Must be that good clean upbringing.
Here's the details.
I've heard from at least seven people who were at the debate last night that the Rell supporters left the auditorium looking downright depressed. Who can blame them, their champion Jodi Rell took a nose dive during the second half of that debate and, like Joe Lieberman, will forever be linked to President Bush for saying that she can't think of one mistake she made as governor.
What I saw Monday night was an inspirational effort by DeStefano. Clearly, his best debate performance, he outclassed Rell, articulated more clearly his points and showed a solid grasp of the problems facing this state. You should of seen the look on Rell supporters' faces as they walked out of the theater to chants of "Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Jodi Rell has got to go!" You would of thought they were 30 points down. I was worried they were going to start crying. It's obvious to anyone who watched this debate, that DeStefano is the better candidate. As I watched I could almost feel Rell's lead slipping away. DeStefano won this debate hands down and showed why he will be a great governor.Again, this is just one of many reports I've read and received from last night. Although the Courant showed a glimpse of Rell falling apart when questioned about her claim that she made no mistakes, that's only part of the story.
Well, the people finally had a chance to see Governor Rell's battle plan.
The final question of the night for each candidate was: What was your biggest mistake? Rell simply could not provide an answer.Classic Rell. When caught in a jam, our governor clams up and just walks away.
"I don't see it," said Rell, who had a chance to think of her response while DeStefano was answering. "Instead, I see the good things we've done over the past two years. ... If there is only one regret, it's that we can't do more."
DeStefano seemed surprised by Rell's response, saying, "The second answer that I hope I never make as long as I'm in politics - that I've never made a mistake."
After the debate, as Rell greeted supporters in the audience, a reporter asked about that response.
"I didn't say I made no mistakes. I said I didn't want to discuss ..." Rell's voice trailed off. When the reporter pressed the governor, she said she had to leave to find her husband, Lou.
DeStefano has complained repeatedly that Rell has been avoiding him at forums and joint appearances in a "Rose Garden" strategy that consists largely of ribbon-cuttings and feel-good announcements in communities statewide that receive state money for local projects. Rell, though, has countered that she is busy in her full-time job as governor and has not been avoiding her rival intentionally.The sad part is in the end, the voters will lose because we have a governor who seems to be pulling out all the tricks in ride herhigh approval numebrs to election day.
"I pray I'll never be in politics so long as to give an answer like that."
John DeStefano's response to Jodi Rell's wishy-washy answer to which candidate she supports for senate. By far the funniest thing I've seen in this campaign.
Food for thought.
George W. pulled Bandar aside.Nuff said.
"Bandar, I guess you're the best asshole who knows about the world. Explain to me one thing."
"Governor, what is it?"
"Why should I care about North Korea?"
Bandar said he didn't really know. It was one of the few countries that he did not work on for King Fahd.
"I get these briefings on all parts of the world," Bush said, "and everybody is talking to me about North Korea."
"I'll tell you what, Governor," Bandar said. "One reason should make you care about North Korea."
"All right, smart alek," Bush said, "tell me."
"The 38,000 American troops right on the border." ..."If nothing else counts, this counts. One shot across the border and you lose half these people immediately. You lose 15,000 Americans in a chemical or biological or even regular attack. The United State of America is at war instantly."
"Hmmm," Bush said. "I wish those assholes would put things just point-blank to me. I get half a book telling me about the history of North Korea."
"Now I tell you another answer to that. You don't want to care about North Korea anymore?" Bandar asked. The Saudis wanted America to focus on the Middle East and not get drawn into a conflict in East Asia.
"I didn't say that," Bush replied.
"But if you don't, you withdrawl those troops back. Then it becomes a local conflict. Then you have the whole time to decide, 'Should I get involved? Not involved?' Etc."
At that moment, Colin Powell approached.
"Colin," Bush said, "come here. Bandar and I were shooting the bull, just two fighter pilots shooting the bull." He didn't mention the topic.
"Mr. Governor," Bandar said, "General Powell is almost a fighter pilot. He can shoot the bull almost as good as us."
State of Denial
Take a look at Nancy Johnson's statement regarding the Mark Foley scandal. Pay particular attention to the item in bold.
If any leader from either party tried to cover up this information at the expense of the safety of our children, then they should resign their position immediately.Without citing ANY evidence, Johnson wants to inject in voters minds her baseless conspiracy theory that Democratic leaders used the release of the Foley messages as a politcal ploy.
It would be reprehensible if any Republican leader intentionally covered up the full facts of the case, and it would be equally reprehensible if Democrat leaders sat on this information for a year in order to release it 30 days before an election.
I want an investigation to go forward to find out answers to these questions.
Johnson's statement echoes those of other Republicans who've been making the rounds on the various talk shows. The most outspoken has been Freshman Rep. Patrick McHenry and when the Congressman was grilled by Wolf Blitzer about his accusatons and asked to provide evidence to support his claim (A TOTAL OF FIVE TIMES), McHenry was rendered speechless.
Watch the video clip here. Transcript is below.
MCHENRY: The question remains, though: What person, group or political entity had these nasty instant messages and possessed the e-mails in order to solicit this story? And in a partisan environment like we're in right now in Washington, four weeks out from a national election, that question must be asked.Caught red-handed.
BLITZER: So what you're suggesting - and correct me if I'm wrong, because you've been doing this for the last few days - that Democrats are behind the timing of the release of this information? Is that your accusation?
MCHENRY: Well, look, all the fact points lead to one question: Did Rahm Emanuel or Nancy Pelosi have any involvement on the strategic or tactical level? This morning on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," the question was asked of Rahm Emanuel. His reaction was he did not see the instant messages or e-mails. He repeatedly said, he did not see. I've asked him to testify under oath to assure the American people that he was not involved in this issue in any way, shape or form.
BLITZER: Do you have any evidence at all that Democrats or others might have been behind the timing of this scandal?
MCHENRY: Look, let's be honest...
BLITZER: Do you have any evidence to back that charge up?
MCHENRY: No, no, actually, if the Democrats had any issue with saying this, putting all the facts out on the table, they would say, certainly, I'll testify under oath that I had no involvement in it. They've said no.
BLITZER: Well, you don't have any evidence, though, right?
MCHENRY: Well, look at the fact points.
BLITZER: Yes or no, do you have any evidence, Congressman?
MCHENRY: Do you have any evidence that they weren’t involved?
BLITZER: I'm just asking if you're just throwing out an accusation or if you have any hard evidence.
MCHENRY: No. It's a question, Wolf. The question remains, were they involved? And if they were not involved, they need to say clearly. And it's a question. It's not an accusation.
Oh, this interview is sweet. Nancy Johnson talks like she has a handful of marbles in her mouth as she can't think of a lie fast enough when asked if she ever challenged the Presiden't policy in Iraq.