Sunday, October 15, 2006

The Alan Schlesinger Interview

Meet Alan Schlesinger, Republican for US Senate in Connecticut. Mr. Schlesinger graciously allowed us an hour to discuss the issues with him. This interview runs about 24 minutes, and covers his views on Iraq, Iran, Social Security, the Republican Party, the Senate race in Connecticut, and the candidates he's running against. Here's his official campaign website: Schlesinger2006.



UPDATE: Spazeboy has a transcript of some of the interview on Spazeboy.net. Thanks, Spaze!

So far, we've interviewed Senate candidates Ned Lamont and Alan Schlesinger; we're still waiting to hear back from Senator Lieberman.

As an aside, this was the first two-camera shoot I've ever done. I used my camera and mic on a mic stand, and I set up my two China lamps to provide additional light, then set up Spazeboy's camera and mic stand, wired both mics into a dual jack then plugged them into my camera, and started both cameras and let Online Journalist Pat Carroll take it away. (And she did a fantastic job!)

I edited the two tapes for a good seven hours last night before uploading it to Youtube. It was a learning experience on how to edit a two camera shoot. The important thing was to run both mics into the same camera, and use the "B-camera" only for video. (I know that nobody except Spazeboy and CT Blogger will give a crap about these technical details, but these are the guys who's opinions matter most to me.)

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

Great Work Pat & CtBob, Thanks for this indepth look. Schlesinger would not be my candidate for several reasons, but he's a darn sight better than Joe. F*ck Lieberman anyway.

s p a z e b o y said...

Great job, CTBob!

I transcribed one of the answers (they're long and transcribing does take awhile) so feel free to swipe it.

selise said...

great job, and an genuine public service. many thanks ctbob!

Anonymous said...

What software did you use to edit the video?

harriet said...

wow, this is pretty powerful stuff and Pat and Bob should feel very proud about this video. This is what democracy looks like!!!

There were so many great comments re. Lieberman that if Schlesinger is really given the opportunity to be heard Joe doesn't have a chance of winning the Republican vote.

I think the following two comments are pivotal in this debate:

"You should vote on the interest of the people you represent" -- which is why Joe had to face a primary!

and

re. Joe's “it’s all about me” voting record: "whatever I do it's so important that I remain in Washington"

I hope Schlesinger was appreciative of your efforts in helping to get out his message!

CT Bob said...

anonymous - I used Pinnacle Studio v9.43 for PC to edit it.

The technique for doing the two camera shoot is to put the main video with audio on the Overlay track, and the B-roll stuff on the Primary track (don't know their official names, that's what I call 'em) then lock the audio on the Overlay track, so when you snip the video out of that track for a cutaway to the B-roll, the audio is maintained.

Once I got the process down, it got easier. The main thing is to have the two cameras running non-stop, and use a clapper board (or clap your hands) to sync up the two tracks. I had to shave frames to get them perfectly aligned.

ctblogger said...

Bob,

I would have handles the audio a bit differently.

If I'm correct, you had to synch up the camera B video with the audio. I would have had both mics go to a small board, level the volume through the board, and plugged in both camera's to the boards audio out. That way, you won't have to dea with synching up the audio (which sucks) as both camera will have the same audio from the board.

Yeah, I'm a geek.

Anonymous said...

Great job here Bob and team. The real deal here is that "every vote Schlesinger picks up will come from Lieberman's column." The Hartford Courant 10/15.

Of the conservative that I know (yes, I know a few) , most tell me they plan on voting for Lieberman. When I ask why Lieberman and not Schlesinger the response I usually get is that they are independent thinkers and Joe has done a fine job. Most have never voted off party lines, ever. I try to explain that Schlesinger is more in line with their way of (odd) thinking to no avail. I fear Joe is going to be elected by Democrats that don't get it, Independents who agree with Bush's War and a landslide of Republican support.

CT Bob said...

anon, keep plugging away at your Republican friends. Have them watch the interview. There's no doubt that CT would be better served by Schlesinger than Lieberman (if Lamont doesn't win.)

Simple point: Alan is in favor of getting out of Iraq, and even 50% in one year is way better than "stay the course" Joe.

CT Blogger, yes that would work, but I don't have a board, all the cables you'd need, and you STILL have to sync up the sound, or you might have one person speaking then cutaway to the other person for a reaction and you want them to be reacting in "real time". Syncing it up wasn't that hard, it took me about 5 minutes.

It helped that once I started both cameras, I let them both run non-stop for 55 minutes. Once it was synced on the editor, it stayed synced for the entire length.

Anonymous said...

I already voted for Lamont on my absentee ballot, but Alan Schlesinger talks a lot more common sense than Joe.

In my opinion, Schlesinger is going to expose Lieberman for being the Bush tool he is right now. Alan makes it clear that Joe has been in Washington way too long to be an effective senator. Go Allen for hammering one of the Lamont's major points.

This race should be between Schlesinger and Lamont because Lieberman looks like an angry-desperate politican.

SecretAgentDude said...

Beautiful!

Anonymous said...

Congrats to everyone involved in this vodeo.I don't agree with Mr.Schlesinger on almost any issue but this was the first interview in which he was given an oportunity to express his views. He is,without a doubt,more genuine than Joe Lieberman and proved throughout his carreer he is a better Republican than Jodi (see,hear and speek no evil)Rell.


You've shown your brand of citizen journalism far superior to the garbage we got from Chris Mathews on MSNBC when he interviewed Mr. Schlesinger.

Schlesingers answers and the way he handled himself in this innterview proved beyond any doubt that he's brighter than the woman the Republicans chose as their candidate for Governor.

Unlike the debate I attended for Governor last week it should be fun to attend tomorrows Senatorial Debate where the Republican candidate isn't an idiot.

277fia said...

O.T. but I don't have a lot of time.

I usually post at the TPM Cafe as Mrs Panstreppon and one of the members suggested that I give you folks some info about Lieberman.

I can be reached at mrspanstreppon@hotmail.com if you need more info about my posts.

Here is one TPM Cafe post about Lieberman:

"Ask Senator Joe Lieberman why he devoted five hours per week of his valuable time to a rinky-dink foundation rather than the nation's business in 2001 and every year thereafter.

According to his personal financial disclosure reports, Lieberman is the executor of the Bernard L. Manger Estate, a trustee of the Manger Family Trust and the president of the B. L. Manger Foundation.

I reviewed the 990s filed by the B. L. Manger Foundation which are available online at the Foundation Center's 990 Finder. President Joe Lieberman reports year after year that he spends five hours weekly on the Manger Foundation's business.

The Manger Foundation disburses approximately $500k annually to Jewish organizations, many of which receive grants every year from the foundation. All of the foundation's income between 2001 and 2005 came from the Bernard L. Manger Estate.

Contributions from the Bernard L. Manger Estate in the period 2001 to 2005 totaled $1.2 million. In the same period, the Manger Foundation incurred $1.1 million in losses.

If I were running Joe Lamont's campaign, I would check to whether Executor Joe Lieberman transferred $1.2 million in stock to the Manger Foundation at an inflated price to satisfy the terms of the Manger will. By inflated price, I mean the purchase price and not the value of the stock at the time of transfer.

Remember how stocks, especially technology ones, took a nosedive after 2000?

I have neither the time nor the resources to check myself but if I was running against someone like Joe Lieberman who is financed by crooked Republicans, I'd find the time and the resources to check out the stock transfers. All of the stock transferred is listed by name in the 990s.

I suspect that Executor Joe Lieberman and President Joe Lieberman conspired to defraud the Manger Foundation for Joe Lieberman's personal enrichment.

If Joe Lieberman cheated a charitable organization, how could we trust him to look after our national interests? Besides, the people in Conecticut deserve a senator who spends all of his time on the job."

277fia said...

Mrs Panstreppon here again. I am going to link to another TPM Cafe post that indirectly has to do with Lieberman rather than take up a lot of space here.

I suspect that Joe Lieberman's relationship with Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein goes beyond just friendship but I don't have any evidence of that yet.

Tell me again why we should have trusted Joe Lieberman in 2000.

CT Bob said...

Um...I don't really understand what it is you're saying here 227fia, or what I'm supposed to do about it. Obviously you're kind of wound up about something, but using TPM Cafe as a source of info on Lieberman confuses me in light of the hatchet job they just performed on Lamont a few days ago.

I don't even know who Rabbi Eckstein is or what you may be implying here. My tendency is to delete your comments, but I'm willing to leave them up for now, and maybe someone can explain them to me.

Please do try to stay on-topic here.

And I didn't trust or vote for Joe Lieberman in 2000, and I don't trust him today.

Anonymous said...

id like to point out the shelesinger called lieberman a liberal

CT Bob said...

I wasn't going to argue with him. :)

277fia said...

b.a., Please do not hesitate to delete my comments if you consider them inappropriate. As I said, another member of the TPM Cafe suggested that someone here might be interested in them after I posted the info for about the third time at the TPM Cafe.

LOL - The guest host at the TM Cafe posted about the TPM Cafe's equivocation on Lieberman today. I don't pay much attention to Josh Marshall on issues involving Israel because I think his wife and in-laws lean heavily on him there. I suspect that Lieberman might fit into that scenario but that is pure speculation on my part.

The info in my posts here came from my own research. I checked Lieberman's official personal financial statements which are available at Open Secrets.

I was curious about the B. L. Manger Foundation and looked up the 990s at the Foundation Center's 990 Finder.

Do you happen to know if Manger was Lieberman's wife's maiden name? I was wondering if Bernard Manger may have been her father.

What I am saying is that Joe Lieberman breached his fiduciary responsibility if he knowingly transferred worthless stock to the Manger Foundation to satisfy a requirement of Manger's will.

I don't think the question is out of line for the Lamont campaign to ask but I would have no idea about who at the Lamont campaign would even make that decision. hense, my posting here.

Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein is a sleazebag who has taken about $260 million form Evangelical Christians purportedly to help poor and starving Israelis, i.e. Eckstein is running a scam.

Rabbi Eckstein is the president of the International Fellowship of Christian and Jews(IFCJ)and he virtually runs the show singlehandedly without being accountable to anyone for how the money raised is spent.

Eckstein hooked up with Ralph Reed in 2002 and paid Reed's firm more than $500k between 2002 and 2003. At the same time, the IFCJ laid out more than $20 million to two firms connected to far right wing Republican causes.

One of the firms, the Bigham Agency, was not even registered as a corporation until 2004. The owner, E. (Edward) Paul Bigham, is a member of the Council for National Policy which includes Dr. Dobson, Bunker Hunt, Tom DeLay, Dick Armey and other ultra right wingers among its members.

$14 of the $20 million went to Krieger Associates of Pennsylvania for media . The IFCJ appears to have been Krieger's biggest client followed by the Weekly Standard.

I suspect that Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein funneled more than $20 million to the Republican Party for a few reasons.

Here is an excerpt from a story in the Forward about Rabbi Eckstein and the IFCJ:

"Few political operatives have as much access to the White House these days as Reed, chairman of the Georgia Republican Party and former executive director of the Christian Coalition. But when Senator Joseph Lieberman phoned on the other line, Eckstein, 51, was happy to take the call from an old friend.

Old allies and pioneers in the push to build bridges with conservative Christians, Eckstein and Lieberman had not spoken since the senator's ascension to the Democratic presidential ticket in August 2000.

"He said that he had just seen The New York Times piece about Stand for Israel, wanted to tell me how proud he was, and encouraged me to do more," Eckstein told the Forward, recounting his conversation with Lieberman. "He also told me that, finally, after 25 years, my work has been vindicated.""

Rabbi Eckstein is a con artist and Joe Lieberman is encouragin him to do more? More what?

I did a lengthy and somewhat convoluted post about Rabbi Eckstein, Ralph Reed and other right wing Americans and Israelis at the TPM Cafe if you are interested in this sort of stuff.

If you delete this comment and my other ones, I won't mind but all I am trying to do is help the Lamont campaign.

Anonymous said...

Manger is not Mrs. Lieberman's maiden name. Manger Electric was (and maybe still is) an electrical company in Stamford. I think my grandfather might have worked there... I know lots of people were employed at Manger Electric when I was a kid, and I can still see the building in my mind's eye.

The Lieberman family probably knew the Manger family back in the day in Stamford. It wouldn't be odd for Bernard Manger to give Joe the position of executor (or whatever he is) because he probably knew Joe when he was a kid.

I don't know whether Joe's involvement with the Manger Foundation has been ethical -- but I wonder exactly what's driving 277fia here. I dislike Joe with the best of them, but something about 277fia's rant smells bad to me.

CT Bob said...

I tend to agree, because this story is so complex and I'm not entirely sure what it is she's getting at. I'll leave it for now.

But I'm not a fan of rants in general, and bizarre, convoluted, elaborate rants in particular.

Anonymous said...

financial malfeasance tends to be rather complex. If Lamont is looking for dirt on Joe, they should take a look.

Maybe this would be more along Schlesinger's line, this wouldn't likely seem too comples to him.

277fia said...

Knock yourselves out and delete my posts if they make you uncomfortable. If you think I am ranting here, you should read some of my other posts at the TPM Cafe.

I'm just pointing out that Joe Lieberman may have conducted himself in an unethical fashion in his role as executor and trustee of the Bernard Manger Estate and the B. L. Manger Foundation.

Apparently, Bernard Manger trusted Joe Lieberman enough to carry out his wishes. If Joe Lieberman transferred worthless stock to Mr. Manger's foundation, I don't think Joe Lieberman was carrying out Mr. Manger's wishes.

To me, that raises the question of how trustworthy is Joe Lieberman if he swindled the Manger Foundation out of a million bucks.

I never even raised the issue of why an estate or a foundation engaged in somewhat high risk investing in the first place. Nor did I note that a lot of the investing in high risk stocks was with one broker in particular.

What I think smells bad is Lieberman's association with Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein. Maybe me calling a rabbi a crook makes you uncomfortable. Not my problem.

Again, I think Rabbi Eckstein laundered more than $20 million for the Republican Party. His association with Ralph Reed and Gary Bauer should give liberals, progressives or whatever you folks are here cause for thought.

What I am writing about is not rocket science or particularly complex.

What I am saying is that I think Joe Lieberman, estate executor, was required to transfer $1 million or so to the Manger Foundation, according ot the terms of Bernard Manger's will.

What I think Joe Lieberman did was transfer worthless stock originally purchased for $1 million from the Manger estate to the Manger foundation. I suspect that the $1 millon of stock had already lost its value at the time of the transfer and Lieberman knew it.

I'm sure you all remember how the stock market, particularly NASDQ, took a dive in 2000 and 2001.

277fia said...

BTW, If you ever figure out what I am talking about, you might want to take a look at the Manger Foundation's 990s, available online at the Foundation Center's 990 Finder. The foundation contributes to a number of Jewish organizations in Connecticut.

You think Joe Lieberman kept it to himself that he is the president of the Manger Foundation and responsible for making the donations? Weak but there is an argument that Lieberman used his position as president of the foundation to promote himself politically.

If I were you, I'd be asking how Lieberman benefits as executor of the manger estate and trustee of the Manger trust.

I think executors in NYS are entitled to 10% of the estate's value.

I don't live in CT and I can't vote against Lieberman so this is about all I am going to do with the Lieberman-Manger story.

CT Bob said...

277fia, I don't have time to look into all of this right now.

I'd really prefer for you to write up a simple paragraph introducing what you want to say, and then put up a link for people to go and read the rest.

Otherwise, you're just thread-jacking and detracting from the topic at hand.

kirby said...

Here at CTBob, we don't believe in censorship of comments unless they are way over the line. We don't censor ideas.