Volunteer to take your country back!

It's just over 5 weeks until the November election, and that means we need EVERYBODY'S help to get out the vote for Ned.

This video will give you an idea of what's involved in volunteering for the campaign. It's very simple; you decide how much time you can spend helping take back our country, then you go to nedlamont.com and click on Contact, then you find a local campaign office and talk to the director and let them know you want to help.

Then you get to have all the fun that these people in the video are having!



Or, if you don't have the availability to volunteer but STILL want to help the campaign, go to the website and click on Get Involved (you can click it here). That page has lots of ways you can help without having to leave your home.

Either way, it's time to get involved. Our Constitution NEEDS your help to protect and defend it.

CT Dems for Lieberman

What a week! There's lots of analysis to do, but in the meantime...I put a tip jar up for CTBob so that he can get a new computer. We were working on the Lieberman's Days Off production and I am amazed that he can do such amazing work on his laptop. It's set up under my name KirbyCTB -- but I won't take a penny -- this is all toward a CTBob computer. The link is at the top of the right sidebar here.

Thanks so much for Harriet's comment on Joe for Torture:

This bill is the most egregious act done by our government that has just violated the every moral code of our democracy. It affirms the following:
(1) allowing the President to define torture, (2) stripping the court of judicial review via habeas corpus (even though the Constitution does not allow this except in cases of invasion or Rebellion) and (3) allowing the President to jail American citizens arbitrarily and without court review!

This bill had NOTHING to do with our safety, but EVERYTHING to do with protecting Bush's ass and giving him a free “get out of jail” card!

Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, John McCain(McCave) and the rest of the rubber stamping Republicans are just turning their backs and allowing Bush to turn this country into a police state!

And this follow-up today from newlondondem:

mentioned the bill once out canvassing today. The woman I spoke with didn't really understand it and didn't have much opinion on it. When I spelled out for her what the bill said, you should have seen her eyes widen. "It says what? It allows what? It gives the President that power? No, I don't trust him either. Lieberman voted for that?"
She was leaning Lieberman until I knocked on her door. It was gratifying.

Now, for the Connecticut "Dems" supporting Joe -- you guys know what to do. The people who are not "former" something are in bold.

Jim Amann - Speaker of the House (Co-Chair)
Reggie Beamon - State Representative, Waterbury
Jeff Berger - State Representative, Waterbury
Bert Bosse - Vice Chair Board of Finance, Lebanon
Susan Cable - First Selectwoman, Beacon Falls
Frank Cirillo - Fmr. DTC Chair, Meriden
Tom Conway - Fmr. State Representative, Waterbury
Chuck Coursey, DTC Member, West Hartford
Pat Crowley - City Council, Enfield
Kevin Cunningham - First Selectman, Plainfield
Red Edgar - Town Council, Enfield
Mary Fritz - State Representative, Wallingford
Willie Fritz - First Selectman, Clinton
Joan Hartley - State Senator, Waterbury
Mike Jarjura - Mayor, Waterbury (Co-Chair)
Kevin Knowles - Fmr. State Representative Naugatuck
Ben Lathrop - Mayor, Norwich
Pat Lynes - Deputy Majority Leader, City Council, Meriden Corky Mazurek - State Representative, Wolcott
Tom McCarthy - City Council, Bridgeport
Steve Mikutel - State Representative, Griswold
Jeff Nicholas - Former First Selectman, Bethlehem
Mike Pacowta - DTC Chair, Shelton
Iris Papale - City Council, Wallingford
John Picard - Mayor, West Haven
Rich Roy - State Representative, Milford
Dan Russo - DTC Chair, Middletown
Bill Satti - Former Mayor, New London
Domenique Thornton - Former Mayor, Middletown
Christel Truglia - State Representative, Stamford
Albert Vertefeuille - Former Selectman, Windham & Lebanon
Joe Walkovich - Fmr. State Representative, Danbury

Now, go back and read Harriet's comment, and learn this list -- these are the people who trust George Bush as king, with Joe as his knave

Whistleblower reports Diebold hacking in GA

National news services have finally begun responding to the widespread reports of possible electronic voting fraud that occurred in Georgia when two local Diebold employees complained that they were instructed to add a "patch" to the electronic voting systems in a "last-minute" and "secretive" manner the night before the 2002 elections.

From an article in Political Affairs Magazine:

(APN) ATLANTA – Top Diebold corporation officials ordered workers to install secret files to Georgia's electronic voting machines shortly before the 2002 Elections, at least two whistleblowers are now asserting, Atlanta Progressive News has learned.

Former Diebold official Chris Hood told his story concerning the secret "patch" to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., for Kennedy's second article on electronic voting in this week's Rolling Stone Magazine.

Hood's claims corroborate a second whistleblower who spoke with Black Box Voting and Wired News in 2003.

Whistleblower Accounts

"With the primaries looming, [Chief of Diebold's Election Division] Urosevich was personally distributing a 'patch,' a little piece of software designed to correct glitches in the computer program," Rolling Stone Magazine reported.

"We were told that it was intended to fix the clock in the system, which it didn't do," Hood told Rolling Stone. "The curious thing is the very swift, covert way this was done."

"It was an unauthorized patch, and they were trying to keep it secret from the state," Hood told Rolling Stone.

"We were told not to talk to county personnel about it. I received instructions directly from Urosevich. It was very unusual that a president of the company would give an order like that and be involved at that level," Hood told Rolling Stone.

The "patch" was applied to about 5,000 polling places in Fulton and DeKalb Counties in 2002, Rolling Stone reported.

And another report in the Detroit Free Press disputes the validity of the "paper trail" in voting machine audits.

Keep in mind that both of these stories address the faults of the Accuvote TSX (Touch Screen) voting machine, which only provides a printed receipt of your vote; not the Accuvote OS (Optical Scanner) which is a tabulator that reads and records the paper ballot that the voter fills out manually and THEN inserts it into the machine to be counted.

The paper ballot works as a paper backup, and in fact it IS the vote. The machine simply counts and tabulates the votes.

But there are also major concerns about the hackability of the Optical Scanners; I've reported on this in this article; and links to other previous articles are listed within.

Connecticut will use the Accuvote OS in 25 municipalities this November, and the rest of the state will be equipped with them by mid next year. Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz has ordered random audits of the results of this November's elections.

And just so we know where the Diebold company really stands in it's supposed unbiased position, I'd like to remind you of a quote from CNN/Money:

The company came under fire last year for a letter that Diebold CEO Walden O'Dell wrote as a fundraising pitch to Republicans.

In the letter, O'Dell said he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president." Diebold is based in North Canton, Ohio.

Ohio, of course, turned out to be the crucial swing state for George W. Bush in the 2004 election, and a combination of disenfranchisement and voter fraud led to Bush gaining enough votes to retain his criminal hold on the White House.

And let's not forget who loves good ol' George W. Bush...

A really good Ned Lamont video

I really enjoy this video. It's no major occasion, just Ned speaking to the Stamford DTC meeting last week, along with Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy, candidates Diane Farrell (3rd District) and Mary Glassman (Lt. Governor), Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, and a galaxy of local stars.

Ned looked very much at ease and seemed to be enjoying the energy in the room. It's a longish video at about 7:30, but it goes faster than you'd think. And if you watch closely, you can see when my headphone cable catches on the camera and almost knocks the entire tripod and camera over (which would have sucked).

Make a game of it. Try and guess when it'll happen. It's fun!

Votes For and Against Torture

Read it and weep. There is so much to say about this travesty, but for the moment, let the votes speak for themselves. Simply put, a yay vote is FOR torture (or the GWB amnesty act, making the torture that has already been carried out a do-over "never mind" issue). ** indicates a D seat being voted on this year.

YEAs ---65
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
**Carper (D-DE)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
**Lieberman (D-CT)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
**Menendez (D-NJ)
Murkowski (R-AK)
**Nelson (D-FL)
**Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)Santorum (R-PA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Specter (R-PA)
**Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)

Do these D Senators deserve your vote? Let us know in the comments

NAYs ---34
**Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
**Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
**Byrd (D-WV)
**Cantwell (D-WA)
Chafee (R-RI) -- (the only R to vote nay, up for re-election)
**Clinton (D-NY)
**Conrad (D-ND)
**Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT) at least we have one!
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
**Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
**Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
**Kohl (D-WI)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
**Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Wyden (D-OR)

Gerstein credits Lamont's web supporters

How are you supposed to trash a guy when he's saying such nice things about you?

From Paul Bass in the New Haven Independent:

Gerstein said the Lamont crew "did a brilliant job of using technology to build a support base and organize a campaign" in the primary. The campaign benefited from its own and a nationwide crop of independent blogs, from e-mail fund-raising and volunteer-drafting efforts, as well as from a general Internet buzz that catapulted a political unknown into a contender against an internationally recognized three-term incumbent.

"Ten years from now it will probably be looked at as a model for how campaigns will be run," Gerstein predicted. Soon, he said, voters will receive get-out-to-the-polls text messages on their cell phones on election day.

Damn.

I was getting all set to be riled up, ready to respond to the inevitable slagging that Dan was gonna give us, and here he goes saying something like that.

What's a blogger with a bad attitude to do?

OK Dan, you get a pass today.

Don't get used to it. I'm sure you'll say something really stupid, I'll get pissed off and slam you for it, and balance will be restored to the universe.

The way it ought to be.

Poll Smoking

This Q-Poll is really blowing smoke. (h/t to "The Daily Show")

I try not to pay much attention to the polls. There's way too much variation between polls taken days apart, or even days before an election.

Here's what the Q-poll said just FIVE DAYS before the Primary:

August 3, 2006 - Lamont Leads Lieberman 54 - 41.

In Dem Primary, Quinnipiac University Connecticut Poll Finds; Malloy Gains Some Ground In Governor's; Primary Momentum for Ned Lamont, the anti-war Connecticut U.S. Senate candidate, increases as he rolls to a 54 - 41 percent lead over incumbent Sen. Joseph Lieberman among likely Democratic primary voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Of course, Lamont did win the primary, but by a margin of less than 4 points.

In other words, the Q-Poll was off by 10 points only five days before the election.

The moral is, don't take this stuff too seriously. 10 points more than five WEEKS before the election means absolutely nothing (except it might help Joe's crew become lazy and over confident, which is a good thing).

You KNOW there's a lot less than 10 points difference between the candidate.

"Joe Lieberman's Day Off"

When Joe skips votes in Congress, his absence is noticed. Based on one of the greatest movies of the 1980s.

Ned Lamont makes his point. Repeatedly.

OK, I'm willing to assume that most reporters are intelligent, attentive, and conscientious people who do the very best job of which they're capable.

I just don't know how many of them were at Naples Pizza today.

By my rough count while watching the raw video footage of the talk, the Q&A, and the sidewalk questions, Ned was asked at least 14 times if he supported either an immediate pullout of Iraq or an absolute, unchangable July 1st, 2007 deadline, as Joe Lieberman interprets the Kerry-Feingold Amendment; which was voted upon and defeated months ago.

Ned patiently explained his position. Over and over.

I'm getting the impression that a reporter doesn't think a question is valid unless he or she is the one asking it.

I don't know if I'll ever get used to hanging out with these people.

So, after hearing the same question repeated ad nauseum, I was ready to clunk a few of the reporters heads together like The Three Stooges.

Sheesh. I was SO upset and frustrated at the redundant, insipid questions that I needed to calm myself with a tasty lunch at an Indian restaurant.

And Branford Boy was buying.

(OK, I wasn't that upset...I was just hungry; thanks Kelly!)

Anyway, here's the video. Enjoy.

(And somebody tell Mark Davis that I was just kidding)

Lieberman Hurts Murphy, Farrell and Courtney

While we wait for CTBob's video of Ned from this afternoon, here's an update on how Lieberman is hurting our Dem challengers for Congress in this front page article by Jeff Kurz from Sunday's Meriden Record-Journal

...Democrat Diane Farrell hopes to unseat U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays in the 4th District; Christopher S. Murphy challenges Rep. Nancy L. Johnson in the 5th; Joseph Courtney seeks to unseat Rep. Robert Simmons in the 2nd. These races are all opportunities as Democrats try to win a majority in at least one side of Congress in the mid-term elections. Democrats must gain 15 seats in the House on Nov. 7 to win control. Had Lieberman bowed out after his primary defeat, Lamont likely would have cruised to a win in the general election; Republican Alan Schlesinger has failed to gain the support of even his own party. Then Democrats could have focused resources on the congressional challenges and New Haven Mayor John De Stefano’s bid to unseat Gov. M Jodi Rell. As it is, those races continue to share just a sliver of the media spotlight.

In the best of all possible cases — and this is where Joe Lieberman is hurting Democrats — if Joe had done the right thing and bowed out, Ned would be alone and Democrats could focus on the congressional races,” said George Jepsen, Lamont’s campaign chairman and former state party chairman. “So Joe’s running as an independent is an opportunity lost,” he said. “We’re not getting that opportunity. A lot of the money, time and effort that will go to the senate race would go to the congressionals."

Which all explains why Joe's new party is Connecticut for Lieberman (I'm sure Lieberman for Connecticut never crossed his mind) -- it's all about him and what he can get and how he can hold on to power. Now have you had enough? Vote for Ned Lamont, and give as generously as you can to our other Democratic challengers.

Ned's roundtable at Naples

We're back where it all started. Naples Pizza in New Haven.

Ned delivered his response to Joe Lieberman's "Stay The Course" speech today in an unique and open roundtable style. I videotaped the entire event, and hope to have edited highlights online later this evening.

That's my little camera tucked into the tiny spot between all the big dogs (CNN, WTNH, WFSB, NBC30, etc.) and my mic was on a little tripod off to the right of the others.

I guess I'm going to have to make one of those will microphone signs, so when I place the mic right in front of Ned, all the TV cameras will see "Connecticutbob.com"! (Photo by Tim Tagaris)

It's the Knights Who Say "NI(E)"!

"NIE!" Ah, a Monty Python reference. That might be a first for this blog.

I think the look on Joe Lieberman's face when he saw the National Intelligence Estimate report on Iraq was identical to King Arthur's above.

This morning I'm sure Joe's "major speech" on Iraq has been going through frenzied, last-minute rewrites since the NIE came out. He has an 11:45AM deadline, since that's when he says he'll give the speech.

Funny, although his campaign has said they'd make the speech available in advance, I haven't seen hide nor hair of it.

"Ahh, he said 'IT!'"

UPDATE: Joe finally released his speech to the media, according to this article in the Hartford Courant online posted at 11:26AM, entitled, "Lieberman Says Troop Pullout Timelines 'Doomed To Fail'"

Way to go, Joe. Stay that course until your "daddy" tells you to do otherwise.

A letter to Joe

On the eve of Senator Lieberman's semi-ballyhooed "major speech" on Iraq, the National Intelligence Estimate report is purported to contain significant evidence that our nation has been made LESS SAFE because of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

I repeat: We're LESS SAFE because of Bush and Lieberman's senseless war! And Lieberman DOES own responsibility, because of his continued support of the war. It's one thing if he voted for it and then realized it was a mistake and spoke out against it.

It's quite another to be a relentless apologist for Bush's failed presidency and sucking up to the warmongers.

There's no way to soften this conclusion, regardless of whatever Joe Lieberman says in his carefully prepared and focus-group tested speech.

And somebody please tell my why the headline on Joe's calendar entry say this:

Event - Joe delivers a major speech on the future of Iraq.

But the description of the event says: Senator Lieberman has been proud to stand up for Connecticut's veterans and be a voice for them in Washington for the past 18 years. Please come and show your support for him by enlisting in Vets for Joe and standing with him as he delivers an important speech on the future of Iraq and America's mission there.

To me, it looks like Joe is deliberately confusing the veteran's issues with the ongoing war in Iraq.

Here's a newsflash for ya, Joe - We can ALL see through your bullshit!

Your current War in Iraq has absolutely NOTHING to do with veteran's issues. Stop attempting to fool people into thinking that being against the War equates to being against veteran's issues.

The voters in this state are NOT that stupid, regardless of your adviser's thoughts on the value of "low-information voters" (read: stupid people will vote for Joe).

Today Ned Lamont wrote a letter to Joe Lieberman that contains this statement:

Let me put this news in terms that you can clearly understand: Our own intelligence agencies now confirm that the Iraq War is undermining America’s security and credibility at our nation’s peril.

Is THAT plain enough for ya, Joe?

In case you haven't, please read the complete "Letter to Joe" on the official Ned Lamont Blog.

"Crashing the Gate" now in paperback

You've put it off long enough. I know how easy it is to pass on buying a hardcover book. I'm cheap, too.

(But I did buy one; and for full retail, even!)

Now you don't have ANY excuse not to buy the book that fueled the Progressive Revolution!

Right now "Crashing the Gate" is available from Chelsea Green Publishing for a 20% discount (click on link to order or learn more). It only costs a smidgen over ten bucks! You know you want it.

Plus, you get this fine bumper sticker below, "Progressives Haul Ass". Wear it proudly on your car or on your ass; it's a great way to piss off the Neo-Cons!

And here's an added bonus: If you order a book right now, you can watch this exclusive interview below of Jerome and Markos recorded in New Haven the day after Ned Lamont's stunning showing at the State Democratic Convention!

(Well, I guess you can watch it even if you don't buy the book, but you'll feel guilty, so just buy the book. You'll feel better about yourself and you'll erase some of that awful karma you have leftover from the time years ago that you voted for Joe Lieberman.)

Too Many Deaths: 2.973 Americans x2

From ABC News:

Not for the first time, war that was started to answer death has resulted in at least as much death for the country that was first attacked, quite apart from the higher numbers of enemy and civilians killed.

On Friday night, the Pentagon announced another death of a soldier, bringing the Afghanistan/Iraq death total to 2,974. And, to make that even more tragic, 34% of today's soldiers are from the lowest income families, with only 17% from the wealthiest -- so unlike WWII when there was a 25% from the lowest and highest income families.

"Calling in Sick"

This one is awesome!

The newest Ned Lamont radio ad is available here by clicking on this link.

You can't blame Joe for wanting a day off once in a while. Which of us hasn't tried some of these lame excuses on occasion?

Problem is, we're not US Senators. And we did't miss 400 votes in 3 1/2 years.

Joe doesn't care WHERE his money comes from!

Mel Sembler, Republican fundraiser and child-torturer, has been enlisted by Joe Lieberman to help him raise Republican bucks.

From Lindsay Beyerstein in this article at Fire Dog Lake:

This week, Joe Lieberman enlisted a Republican operative with a background in brainwashing and a problem with a penis pump.

Mel Sembler is a former RNC finance chairman and the chair Scooter Libby’s legal defense fund. The Florida real estate tycoon calls Dick Cheney a close friend. No doubt the bond between Sembler and the VP is strengthened by an optimism about the potential for torture to solve problems. If anything Sembler is even more optimistic than Cheney–he believes that torture can cure diseases like addiction.

Any principled Democrat would recoil from Sembler, but it gets worse. Sembler is also a self-styled drug treatment entrepreneur who founded Straight, Incorporated, a residential drug treatment program for teenagers.

Between 1976 and 1993, thousands of youth were routinely subjected to physical, emotional, and sexual abuse as part of Straight’s "confrontational" approach to treatment. Some inmates were held for years against their will. The program has been sued dozens of times for brutalizing inmates and some staff members faced criminal charges for their role in the abuse.

Sembler founded Straight after a congressional investigation determined that the last detox program he oversaw, The Seed, was using mind-control tactics similar to those used by North Koreans during the Cold War.

The Seed was a mind-control cult, but it was positively benign compared to Straight.

Forget the jokes about the "penis pump"; just read this whole article at Fire Dog Lake.

The Story Joe Lieberman doesn't want you to read

OK, this is starting to get a little ridiculous. Don't ask what possessed me to do this.

The truth be told, this article is worth a read. As we've stated below, this cuts straight through the usual media bullshit and goes to the heart of the story. I only wish that all reporting was as honest and hard-hitting as Ken Cain's.

Click on this working link to go to the actual article itself. Or go out an buy a copy; it's on newstands NOW. And if you actually buy the magazine, you'll get all my great fashion tips.

Either way, you win.

The Mary Glassman Interview

Here's the video of my 3 minute interview with Mary right before the start of the Stamford DTC meeting the other night. She's the candidate for Lt. Governor on the ticket with New Haven Mayor John DeStefano.

The "Lieberman Virus" spreads

Apparently there is a serious outbreak of a new computer virus across the Internet, known as the "Lieberman Virus". The latest victim is the website of Minnesota Republican Mark Kennedy. (Click on any image to enlarge it)

From the official Ned Lamont blog:

The front page of Republican Senate candidate Mark Kennedy’s (MN) website now reads … actually, just visit it. You’ll have to wait for some photos to load, but it takes you to a single message from Kennedy’s campaign manager accusing the Klobuchar campaign of compromising the security of their website. Of course, they point out they are certain one page is safe … the contribution page. How funny.

Gotta hand it to the Republican Party; when they see a campaign strategy that works, they waste no time replicating it.

How’s that hack investiation going, btw? What a positive campaign based on the issues… be proud. Very proud.

The best part is, if you click on the link to Kennedy's website above and quickly hit the Stop button, it catches it before it redirects from the original webpage. I captured the code below, and there is an obvious line edited into it from their web designer, which says this:

"...remove refresh when kennedy wants to get site back"!

By the way, this isn't hidden/secret information; ANYONE can view the webpage code of anything that appears on their browser. All you do is click "View" and "Source" or "Page Source" (in Internet Explorer or Firefox, anyway...I don't know about other browsers). Here's an actual screen cap of their website code:

And just to show what they consider too secret to show you, here's a screen cap of their regular webpage:

There's no doubt this is something that Kennedy's campaign did to their own website, on purpose, and then blamed their opposition for it. A detailed overview of the controversy is located on the DFL Senate Blog.

Gee, can you think of anybody else who might stoop to that level?

We Need a Businessman in Washington to Stop This

I am a home care nurse. We deal with the elderly, many of whom are poor, and they are wondering how they are going to get through this winter, paying for medicine, food, and heat for their homes.

Here's an answer from Congress in an e-mail I received today:

From September 22, 2006 through September 30, 2006, a brief hold will be placed on Medicare payments for all claims. These payment delays are mandated by section 5203 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. No interest will be accrued and no late penalties will be paid to an entity or individual by reason of this one-time hold on payments. All claims held during this time will be paid on October 2, 2006. Please note, however, that contractors handling large volumes of paper checks may have some difficulty putting all checks in the mail in a single day. Consequently, delivery of checks to providers may take a few extra days.

So, how will many smaller, non-profit home care agencies, who serve these poor folks, and operate on the edge financially as reimbursements continue to drop (how much more did it just cost in gasoline for nurses to visit their patients this summer?) -- survive with no money for nine days? How will payroll be made? It's not only nurses -- home health aides who help people with hygiene so they can stay at home often live paycheck to paycheck. And, this is for ALL Medicare providers -- clinics, hospitals, doctors -- EVERYBODY! How in God's name could the Congress allow this to happen?

As Joe Lieberman wrote in his book, ("In Praise of Public Life" page 21):

"Of course I'm not saying that our political system should not sometimes be shaken up through the election of a new kind of leader, like Jesse Ventura in our time, or that it should not be open to the fresh perspective of someone from an entirely different proffession, a person who has been successful, say, in business..."

That's the answer, ladies and gentlemen -- vote for a successful businessman to work for US and not his big-money Republican contributors.

Stop the insanity and stop putting the bill on the backs of those with the fewest resources. Elect a successful businessman who knows how to balance a budget, who knows how to support a payroll, and who knows how to help small businesses make health coverage available to workers without going bankrupt. Elect Ned Lamont.

The Diane Farrell interview

Here's the video of my 2 minute interview with Diane right before the start of the Stamford DTC meeting last night. She's in an important battle against Republican (and Bush cheerleader) Chris Shays in the 4th Congressional District.

State to audit new voting machines

A new development in the ongoing story of the new Diebold Optical Scanning voting machines occurred today when Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz's office issued the following press release:

From the Office of Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz
Thursday, September 21, 2006

SECRETARY BYSIEWICZ ANNOUNCES RANDOM AUDITS TO BE PERFORMED FOLLOWING ELECTIONS TO ENSURE RELIABILITY OF NEW VOTING MACHINES

Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz said today that her office and the University of Connecticut’s Department of Computer Science and Engineering will perform random audits following the November 7th election in cities and towns using optical scan voting technology in place of lever machines. The audits will be done to examine how the machines worked and to ensure the reliability of Connecticut’s voting technology.

Secretary Bysiewicz said her office will work with UConn Computer Science Professor Alexander Shvartsman, whose department this year formed a partnership with the Office of the Secretary of the State to assist in certification and acceptance testing of the new voting technology, as well as the citizens’ group TrueVoteCT. These audits will be performed randomly in the twenty-five (25) Connecticut towns that will begin using the optical scan voting machines in place of lever machines this year.

“We are very grateful to TrueVoteCT and UConn for their guidance and expertise. These random audits will ensure that we are using funds wisely to purchase equipment that is reliable and accurate,” Secretary Bysiewicz said. “These audits are also a means for assuring Connecticut voters that each of their votes will be counted properly and that we will continue our tradition in the state of fair, secure elections.”

Dr. Shvartsman, who directs UConn’s efforts in this partnership, said, “Random audits will play a critical role in allowing the state to ensure accurate and secure elections. We look forward to our work with the Secretary’s staff and members of TrueVoteCT to develop procedures that provide necessary safeguards.”

Michael Fischer of TrueVoteCT said, "One of the recommendations that we have made for the responsible use of computerized voting technology is that the correct operation of the equipment on Election Day be verified through suitably designed random audit procedures. We are delighted that Secretary Bysiewicz is taking the initiative in establishing audit procedures for the new optical scan equipment in the upcoming November election."

Christina Spiesel, a board member for TrueVoteCT, added, ‘All over the country people are expressing grave concerns about new voting technologies. Connecticut can set the example for the nation about how to go about ensuring a secure election where everyone's vote is counted. I am very happy to see Secretary Bysiewicz exerting leadership in the proper use of these new technologies."

There's no denying that Connecticut will have to migrate to new voting technology, but it is encouraging to see that proper steps are being taken to ensure the reliability of the machines.

For background on this story, you can read about my previous articles:

September 7th (original post with video)
September 13th
September 17th
September 18th

A great night to be a Democrat

Last night I decided nearly last-minute to attend the Stamford DTC meeting, a decision that was made significantly easier when I heard who was going to be there.

Candidate for Representative in the 4th District Diane Farrell. She graciously agreed to a brief interview before the speeches, as did Mary Glassman, on what was a very busy night for the candidates. If you haven't heard Diane speak, I recommend you go to her website and find out where she's appearing.

Of course, Ned was there, and his remarks were greeted by cheers and wild applause.

Mary Glassman, candidate for Lt. Governor, was warmly received by the crowd. She was introduced with real warmth by Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy, her former running mate for Governor. Visit the DeStefano For Governor website.

State Comptroller Nancy Wyman and Dan Malloy share a light moment.

I shot an hour of video, and it will take a few days to edit it and get the speeches online, but take my word for it...

It was a great night to be a Democrat.

Fashion plates we're not!

Journalist Ken Cain wrote a great article in GQ on the campaign, featuring a mention of Spazeboy and myself.

Unfortunately, as Spazeboy said, they somehow left out this photograph of the two of us, taken at Sullivan's in New Haven around the August primary.

Great job, Ken. Don't worry, I understand. I know you had to edit out the photo because of all your excessive wordiness.

Everyone, please forward the article to everyone you know. For the first time, a member of the Mainstream Media has accurately documented the thuggish tactics and dirty tricks of the Lieberman campaign.

Fun Stuff Today!

Kirby here and proud to say that our very own CTBob and Spazeboy are now men of GQ! If you haven't read the article on the primary campaign between Lieberman and Lamont,here it is. If you want a quick and easy way to send this to your friends and family, click here. And here's updated commentary on the NYTimes political blog about Lieberman and Danger!Stein lying about talking to Al Sharpton.

WE NEED YOUR VOTE -- before November. Russ Feingold's Progressive Patriot's Fund is having a vote to see which Senate challenger they will support with fundraising. Click here and make Ned the winner! You can easily send family and friends the message to vote for Ned here.

Ned's campaign has set a new goal for fundraising by the end of the month, which is the end of the reporting period. Here's what Ned said about financial support for his campaign:

There's another subject I'd like to address in this email: Why am I asking for your small-dollar contributions when I've enjoyed so much success as a small-business guy? It's a fair question. First of all, it's not about the dollar amount ... it's about your voice.

Since May, Senator Lieberman's campaign has attempted to label me as someone trying to buy a Senate seat. But he willfully ignores the tens of thousands of small dollar contributions we've received from retirees, students and the working men and women of America. Your contribution helps us to fight back against their line of attack. More importantly,it signals your desire to change the course from the status quo in Washington D.C. and in Iraq.

That's why your $15, $25 and $50 contributions are so important. Will you add your voice to hundreds of others today?

You can click here to contribute through the campaign site, or better yet, donate through our sailboat on the right side of this page. To invite friends and family to get on board, click here.

Malkin is shocked that terrorists held without due process!

This isn't what you might think.

In what may be the greatest display of unintentional irony that the blogosphere has ever witnessed, shrill right-wing conservative harpie pundit Michelle Malkin discusses the inexcusable actions of the government's policy on terrorists.

Of course, it's not George Bush's government that she's talking about. She is outraged "because three convicted Christian terrorists in Indonesia are going to be executed despite -- in Michelle's words -- "grave doubts raised over the fairness of the trial.""

Hmmm....who would be capable of doing something like THAT?

Via DailyKOS, From this post by Glenn Greenwald on his blog:

According to the article to which Michelle linked, the complaint is that the Terrorists "were convicted by a trial riddled with illegalities, like witnesses who were not listened to and evidence that was rejected by the court." Wow -- a trial where the witnesses are not listened to and improper evidence was used. What kind of country would convict someone of terrorism using procedures like that? And what kind of disgusting barbarians would be opposed to having "the International Criminal Court in Geneva," pursuant to an international "human rights convention," demand greater legal protections for terrorists?

Christ, I'm laughing so hard right now I think I may have ruptured my spleen!

Like Glenn said, this post writes itself. Click on the link above to read it in all it's delicious glory.

CT for Lieberman Says it ALL

It takes me a while to boil, but I am now seriously pissed off. And I want you to help spread the word that Joe Lieberman is not missing the votes out of the goodness of his heart, as his blog would lead you to believe.

Take today’s latest attack from Ned and his non-stop negative campaign, in which he again lashed out at Joe Lieberman for missing votes while the Senator was out trying to help get Al Gore elected in 2000, while he was running for president in 2003-04 to defeat George Bush and change the country’s direction, and while he was with his family following the death of his mother last year.

Don't you just love how he was trying to help Al Gore get elected in 2000? Well, they forget to mention that Joe would have been VP. He was campaigning for Joe. To raise his political status. And not do his job for Connecticut's citizens who elected him.

And, uh, he was running for president to beat Bush and change the country's direction, eh? Nothing in it for him, right? Bullshit. Joe's political ambitions have always trumped any service he has provided to the citizens of Connecticut. Bob Dole resigned from the Senate to run for president. Bill Frist is doing the same.

We are sorry Joe lost his mother, and the only reason I am including that here is so that you have the paragraph in full context, rather than picking and choosing as others might do.

No, where Joe Lieberman is concerned, he always does what's best for Joe -- even deserting his job -- representing the people of CT to feather his own nest. Has anyone asked him if he were, by some accident of the universe, to be re-elected -- if he would serve his entire term in the Senate? Does anyone seriously think he is not eyeing 2008? Get a load of this and note that Lanny Davis got up in Colin's face during an interview last week in his passionate defense of Joe.

Local House candidates to speak at UConn

The UCONN Law School Democrats are proud to announce that Lex Paulson, (at left) candidate for State Representative in District 142 (West Norwalk), and Derek Donnelly, candidate for State Representative in District 61 (Suffield), will be joining us to discuss their campaigns on Wednesday, September 20th at 12:15 in Janet M. Blumberg Hall. All are invited and welcome!

Lex, a 3L at the law school, and Derek, a recent graduate, will be discussing their campaigns to unseat entrenched incumbents, issues facing the state, and the experience of running for office as law students. They will also be taking questions from the audience.

Please join us on Wednesday, September 20th at 12:15 in Janet M. Blumberg Hall to meet the candidates!

Submitted by Gabe Rosenberg, Co-Chair, UCONN Law School Democrats

Lieberman lied about Medicare Vote

In 2003 Joe Lieberman spoke in strong terms about his opposition to the Prescription Drug and Medicare Improvement Act.

This is the act that is widely criticized for creating the Medicare "donut hole", in which seniors get benefits up to $2,250 for the year, and then they stop. Seniors must THEN pay the next $2,850 OUT OF POCKET before their benefits kick back in.

As a nation, isn't it tragic that we don't take care of our elders?

How many seniors on fixed income have that kind of cash available to them? Their choices are to sell off whatever possessions they have, or to go without their medications. They're not going to pay for their medications by getting a job as a "greeter" at Wal-mart.

Joe Lieberman made a big thing out of his opposition to the act, and even promised to vote against it in this press release the day of the vote. Here's the Senator's own words:

"I cannot and will not vote for this bill, and I urge my colleagues to do the same."

Nice grandstanding there, Senator. But wait until you see what really happened. Just look at the Senate Voting Record for that bill, and see where Joe actually fit in:

"[...]
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Not Voting
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
[...]"

Just in case you didn't look at the link to Lieberman's press release above, here is the very first line of the statement:

"WASHINGTON - Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) today cast his vote against the Medicare prescription drug bill conference report, charging the President and Republican Congressional leadership with manipulating the bipartisan compromise reached in the Senate in June and inserting provisions that would weaken Medicare and harm America's seniors."

Rather than correct this falsehood, Lieberman allowed it to stand, and he continues to propagate this ruse on unsuspecting seniors who believe him when he says he voted AGAINST the bill.

Rather than use his "leadership" to force a closer vote and perhaps prevent the bill from passing, Lieberman couldn't even be there to cast a vote. Is this what Joe is talking about when he squawks about his "leadership"?

Tell me Senator, why should ANYONE believe ANYTHING you say?

NARAL dumps Rell, backs DeStefano

From ConnecticutBLOG earlier today:

Gov. Rell's decision to support Catholic hospital's refusal to provide the Plan B pill to rape victims results in her losing the support of a major wonen's group.

Traditionally, a leading abortion rights group would endorse a socially tolerant, female governor who supports abortion rights and who is leading in the most prominent poll by 32 percentage points. In fact, the NARAL political action committee endorsed Republican M. Jodi Rell when she ran for lieutenant governor and for the state legislature.

But this year is different.

On Friday, the group endorsed New Haven Mayor John DeStefano after expressing disappointment in Rell and her running mate, former state Rep. Michael Fedele of Stamford.

In one of the most controversial issues at the state Capitol this year, Rell opposed forcing Catholic hospitals to provide emergency contraception to rape victims. The Catholic hospitals opposed a bill to change state law, saying their religious beliefs would be compromised if all state hospitals were required to provide the morning-after contraceptive pill that is known as Plan B. Despite approval by the budget-writing appropriations committee, the full House and Senate never voted on the bill.

(CTBob: And let's never forget that longtime Lieberman toady State House Speaker James Amann blasted the lawmakers who showed more concern for women's health issues than for scoring points with Catholics)

Rell's position on Plan B was a critical factor in causing her to lose NARAL's endorsement.

"That caused us a lot of concern because that was our priority issue this year," said Carolyn Treiss, NARAL's executive director. "She wasn't there for us."

Now if only NARAL will do something about their stupid continued support of conservative-pandering Samual Alito-non-preventing so-called moderate and soon-to-be-former Senator Joe Lieberman.

Woo-hoooo!

Let's Go Mets! The New York Mets just clinched the NL East crown! Woo-hoooo!

And now back to your regularly scheduled blog.

Joe's place on the ballot

Some people call Lieberman a "third-party" candidate.

But according to Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz, Joe Lieberman's single-person occupancy "Connecticut For Lieberman" Party will appear on the FIFTH line of the ballot, beneath the "Concerned Citizen's Party" candidate Timothy Knibbs and "Green Party" candidate Ralph Ferrucci. (...and I may be the only blog on the planet to mention those candidates!)

So, technically Joe isn't a "third party candidate".

He's a FIFTH PARTY CANDIDATE.

But, he can always claim that he finished in "a three way tie for third PARTY."

Diebold "security" update

OK, now I'm sure they're just messing with me!

From a post at Freedom To Tinker, via DailyKos:

The access panel door on a Diebold AccuVote-TS voting machine — the door that protects the memory card that stores the votes, and is the main barrier to the injection of a virus — can be opened with a standard key that is widely available on the Internet.

Chris Tengi, a technical staff member, asked to look at the key that came with the voting machine. He noticed an alphanumeric code printed on the key, and remarked that he had a key at home with the same code on it. The next day he brought in his key and sure enough it opened the voting machine.

This seemed like a freakish coincidence — until we learned how common these keys are.

Chris’s key was left over from a previous job, maybe fifteen years ago. He said the key had opened either a file cabinet or the access panel on an old VAX computer. A little research revealed that the exact same key is used widely in office furniture, electronic equipment, jukeboxes, and hotel minibars. It’s a standard part, and like most standard parts it’s easily purchased on the Internet. We bought several keys from an office furniture key shop — they open the voting machine too. We ordered another key on eBay from a jukebox supply shop. The keys can be purchased from many online merchants.

Now, this refers to the Diebold Touch Screen voting machine, not the Optical Scanning machines that Connecticut is going to get. I've already shown how those can be opened via this post.

In a way, I can understand the reasoning behind this. The Diebold sales and technical staffs have been criss-crossing the nation peddling these machines. They often stay in the finer hotels. Designing a voting machine that uses the identical key to their suite's mini-bar can be very useful in avoiding an unpleasant billing situation when they check out in the morning.

But the idea that a fucking mini-bar key can open up a voting machine and make it available for hacking is completely outrageous! Jesus, if they made ATM machines 1% as easy to hack, there'd be no bank anywhere that would use them.

"You're all so mean to me!"

In an AP article in yesterday's Hartford Courant, Joe Lieberman accuses Democrats of going beyond normal politics, and that they are basically mean people who don't like him.

I guess Joe Lieberman is now going after the "whiney mama's boy" vote.

Joe, here's a clue - we don't really hate you. Just your politics.

We hate the way you support Bush's policies, especially with respect to the war in Iraq.

You know what troubled me throughout this is the number of people that I found...who approach politics with an emotion that really comes close to hate," he said. "They don't just disagree with the other side. They hate the other side."

"Waa-waa-waa! They're being mean to me!" Joe, the reason emotions run so high is because we are 100% convinced that you are dead wrong about these major issues, and the fact that you refuse to consider that you might be wrong is infuriating.

In the meantime, every single day Americans are being slaughtered in a war we can't "win", and our nation is inching closer to economic ruin. What you perceive as hatred is actually anger at your complete abdication of responsibility to the good of the nation.

"The fact that Lamont was making a big deal out of the fact that George Bush gave me a hug after one State of the Union speech, you know maybe we'd better in this country if there was more hugging and less hating," he said. "I mean it."

You have GOT to be kidding me!

Joe, have you gone completely round the bend? Hugging isn't going to solve the problems facing us.

We need good leadership. We need a senator who considers the "common good" over his desire to reach "common ground" with the Republicans. We need someone who will stand up to George Bush and his ruinous and corrupt policies.

There's nothing partisen about wanting our nation to regain the high moral ground we've lost due to Bush's failure to lead us. There's nothing partisen about wanting sane and effective leadership. And there's certainly nothing partisen about wanting to see us become a stronger and safer nation.

Not a single thing about our foreign policy has enabled us to come any closer to achieving those goals.

Hugs ain't gonna cut it, Joe. You want to hug the President? Do it on your own time; there's a war that needs to be ended and you're worrying about hugs.

You think there's too much "hatred" in politics? Funny, it didn't bother you 18 years ago when you mocked and teased Senator Weicker about him missing some votes. Suddenly, it's become a hateful thing to make fun of someone for stuff like that. Someone who has MISSED MORE VOTES than Weicker in the same 7 year time frame.

We don't hate you, Joe. Not at all.

We just want you to go away.

Bush celebrates "Constitution Day"...

...in his own special way.

For details on what "Constitution Day" really stands for, read the preceeding article by Kirby.

Constitution Day

Sunday, September 17 is Constitution Day. All public schools must address this amazing document in curriculum, as of last year. Perhaps we can send Bush, Cheney, Gonzalez, Myers, et al to the DC public schools this week to review the Constitution they clearly skipped in school themselves.

Here are some great educational sites:

C-SPAN has a 16 minute video accessible from their home page.
The National Archives has an "interactive" Constitution page.
National Constitution Center has a number of resources, including lesson plans for teachers and one online exhibit that caught my eye --

What is the difference between "separation of powers" and "popular sovereignty"? Visit Basic Governing Principles and learn about the central governing theories that form the basis of the U.S. Constitution

Justice Learning for analysis and discussion.
Hug your Constitution today -- we must protect it at all costs.

Weekend Videos

Videos on a Saturday night -- sounds good to me! Pop up the popcorn, and dig in. First, a big hat tip to Connecticut's own Amazing Spazeboy, who covered the College Democrats meeting at the University of Hartford this afternoon -- he's got full speeches by Joe Courtney (CT-2nd) and Chris Murphy (CT-5th)Democratic state office holders were there, too.

For all you baseball fans, be sure to check out Ned's new ad

And, finally, NOW from PBS aired a program on political blogging last night; you can see it online with Web extras here

More on the new voting machines

I'm following up on the new Diebold (pronounced "DEE-bald" not "DIE-bold", although I do continue to pronounce it that way because I'm a phonetic dogmatist) optical scan technology which is to be implemented in 25 Connececticut towns and cities (link for list) for the November election, and throughout the state in 2007.

I've been going through Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz's press releases about the new technology, and there is something a little odd about them. I'll admit that I haven't perused each and every one of them, but the five or six I've read didn't mention the name "Diebold" even once. She refers to LHS Associates, the company that is selling the optical scanning machines, and IVS LLC which sells the machine for people with disabilities.

But nowhere is any mention made of Diebold.

Sure, there are links to the company websites at the very end of SOME press releases, and if you go to them they have detailed information on the Diebold machines easily available. But it's an unnecessary extra step that shouldn't be required to find out the manufacturer of the machines.

I'm not sure how the State normally deals with dispensing information about how their contracts are awarded, but wouldn't it be considered "press release-worthy" information to mention the name of the manufacturer of a single machine type that is essentially the entire budget of a $15 million state contract?

I'm also going to pursue information about the security testing of the system at the UConn Computer Sciences department. I found details of the study via TrueVoteCT, which is a non-partisian group of Connecticut voters dedicated to bringing accessible and verifiable voting to Connecticut. I'll try to contact the people running the testing and see what sort of results they're getting.

BlackBoxVoting.Org has a detailed report on the hackability of these machines, with step-by-step illustrated instructions on how to open the machines and replace/hack/copy the memory cards without breaking the official security seal on the unit.

More to come next week. This is an ongoing story.

Article 3

Since the Bush administration, Gonzales, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest believe that Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions is hopelessly confusing, I thought I would post it so you folks can help us come up with a way to explain it to them.

Article 3

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.

The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.

What is so confusing????? What's Joe's latest take on this? And, what did he think about this before this evening? Who's he aligning with -- McCain or Bush? Decisions, decisions....

Joe and the big F.U.

"F.U." stands for "Fairfield University".

But in Joe Lieberman's case, it might also be what he is saying to the handicapped by parking in a clearly marked handicapped parking space this morning.

Apparently Joe has caught a case of George Bush's "Above-the-law-itis".

Dear God, Senator, have you no shame? (photo from LamontBlog.)

UPDATE: Of course, those evil lefty photoshoppers are getting in on the act. Here's a photo on DailyKos's comments.

"Liar, Liar..."

...and you know the rest.

This is an exclusive image of Dan Gerstain's pants after he made a public statement about Ned Lamont. Sources say that his pants sponteneously combusted due to the explosive pressure of his outrageous lies.

Watch and see. (h/t to Scarce)

New Rasmussen poll?

This just in, and I can't verify it's accuracy, but I'm putting it up anyway, (h/t to *xyz) from a post over at DailyKos:

Rasmussen has just come out with a new poll behind the subscription wall, but since these polls are put out there i figure it`s ok to give the results.

Rasmussen has this race a dead heat

LIEBERMAN 45
LAMONT 43

Now all other polls show Lieberman with a double digit lead so it`s a question who to believe. I think Rasmussen has a pretty good record with state polls.

Joe's "war of words"

Joe Lieberman is flailing about like a landed flounder, desperately trying to find anything that will stick to Ned's campaign.

It just looks sad.

In the same week that Joe says Ned is going "negative", Lieberman's campaign has launched personal attacks against Ned's wife, Ned's personal finances, and Ned's experience as a volunteer teacher.

In the same time period, Ned Lamont has outlined his national security policy, put forward an educational proposal (pdf), and pointed out Sen. Lieberman's miserable voting record.

He hasn't gone after his opponent's personal finances, or his family, or his volunteer experience (wait, does he have any?). (h/t to LamontBlog)

Not to mention Dan Gerstain's incessant use of mocking names like "The Nedster", "The Full Lamonty" and "Lamonsters" when referring to Ned and his campaign. It's unseemly for a sitting US Senator to allow that sort of language on his official website.

Joe is starting to look pathetic. Which begs the question:

"What kind of legacy is Lieberman going to leave behind when he's gone?"

As a senator of 18 years who led a somewhat distinguished career?

Or as an obsolete hack who overstayed his usefulness, and whose final appearance on the national stage was that of a self-serving career politico who just couldn't let it go?

Is that how you want the nation to remember you, Joe?

Where IS Joe Lieberman?

Jimmy, I only wish I knew.

I can tell you where Joe Lieberman AIN'T most of the time.

He AIN'T in the Senate during critical votes about the war in Iraq.

OK, well, he IS there occasionally. But since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, he AIN'T been there over HALF THE TIME!

Out of 61 bills related to the conduct of the war, Joe hasn't been able to bring himself into the Senate chambers to cast his VOTE on 31 of them.

Think about that for a minute. Our nation is involved in the single most costly foreign policy situation in our history, and Joe can't even make it into work half the time!

Well, Joe doesn't vote often, but YOU can vote just one time and make a difference.

November 7th.

Make THAT vote count!

(graphic updated and properly Photoshopped by imajoebob)

Nancy Johnson feeds the Fear Machine

The Republican Fear Machine is grinding out more untruths.

This morning while watching the Channel 8 news, a Nancy Johnson commercial appeared. I watched it with disbelief...how stupid does she think people are? Apparently she's trying to tap into that vast reservoir of "low-information voters" that former Lieberman campaign operative Sean Smith was referring to.

Here's the text of the ad:

A call is placed from New York to a known terrorist in Pakistan. A terrorist plot may be unfolding. Should the government intercept that call, or wait until the paperwork is filed? Nancy Johnson says act immediately, lives may be at stake.

Fair enough. Of course we should act immediately. We don't want this guy to get away. So far I'm following you, Nancy.

Liberal Chris Murphy says No, apply for a court warrant even if valuable time is lost.

Here is where Nancy misleads the people. The FISA law clearly states that the government can tap communications between a person in the United States and a foreign nation for up to 72 hours before applying for an order to continue surveillance.

In the entire time the law has been in effect, there have been only FOUR instances of the order being denied, out of THOUSANDS. If you show up with a tape that has a known terrorist in Pakistan on it, your application WILL be approved.

Immediately.

Everybody needs to remember that the REASON the Bush administration DOESN'T want any oversight on surveillance is so they can watch ANYONE they want! Something tells me it ain't just the big bad terrists they're keeping an eye on!

Smarten up, Nancy....stop with the LIES.

Support Chris Murphy for Congress, Democrat in the 5th District.

UPDATE: The anti-Nancy blog No More Nancy has an even MORE detailed deconstruction of the ad. It's "Must See TV!".

And you can watch Nancy Johnson's vile ad in it's entirety right here.

List of towns with new voting machines

Today Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz's office released the final list of 25 towns and cities that will utilize the new optical voting machines that I discussed in this post from last week.

Below is the list, with the number of registered voters; the complete press release can be found on this link to the Secretary of State's official website.

I looked at a few of the links that some of you posted in response to my article linked above, and I admit that it is fairly easy to gain access to the inside of the machine without breaking the official seal. Whether or not this means it can be hacked isn't certain, but it does underscore the necessity of having a percentage of ballots manually counted and checked against the results the machine reports.

Ashford 2,800
Bethlehem 2,700
Bolton 5,200
Durham 4,900
East Hartford 25,000
East Haven 15,000
East Lyme 11,200
Hartford (4 precincts) 46,000
Litchfield 6,100
Mansfield 10,000
Middletown 24,000
Monroe 12,500
Montville 9,300
Newington 18,500
Newtown 15,500
Old Lyme 5,800
Salisbury 2,900
Southington 26,700
South Windsor 15,500
Tolland 9,400
Vernon 16,000
Westbrook 4,200
Wethersfield 17,500
Wilton 11,200
Wolcott 10,300

TOTAL 328,000

Thanks, Joe

This is a chummy photo of Iran's president, Ahmadinejad and the Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al Maliki. WTF? Joe, is this what our precious young men and women are dying for?

(This photo was displayed last night during floor speech time when Congressmen Meek (D-FL)& Delahunt (D-MA) and the gentlelady Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL) had an amazing discussion by yielding to one another. They do this regularly and are right on target. These are also the first three to take up the rubber stamp Republicans theme, and run with it.)

ABC/Disney's take on other historic events

RI: Chaffee hangs on; Whitehouse landslide

With 97% of precincts reporting in the Rhode Island senate primaries, Senator Lincoln Chaffee (RI-R) won the right to try to keep his seat against overwhelmingly popular Democratic primary winner Sheldon Whitehouse.

Hadassah doesn't get it either

Hadassah Lieberman, who this summer morphed from Hill and Knowlton high-power PR firm member to senator's wife, spoke to a group of nursing executives last night in CT. Here's about H&N

Hill & Knowlton brings to this challenge a global team of more than 200 healthcare professionals who understand everything from pharmaceutical R&D right through to consumer marketing and influencing public policy. The healthcare group is comprised of specialists in pharmaceuticals and biotechnology; consumer health; issues and crisis; payors and providers; medical education; health policy;and clinical trial recruitment

Since Dan Gerstein says that Mrs. Lieberman has never worked as a lobbyist, we can, of course, discount that she had anything to do with influencing public policy, so perhaps she would talk to these high power executives about consumer marketing in healthcare? Biotechnology? Uh, not quite. Here's the report I got...

I am unclear as to your political position, but...if I were to vote now - or at any given time for any election for any office in any state or federal election, including the EU and Asia I would have to tell you that I would never vote for Leiberman. His wife had the gall to stand before a group of nurses, leaders, attorneys VPs and CEOs and say that if we have suggestions, like the fact that children need health insurance or that "the guy who loses his job should have some health insurance" then we should call her husband's office and let them know. We need to speak together rather than as individuals because individuals do not get heard. Then she went on to tell us all about life as a Senator's wife and the dinners she has attended... I thought it was a spoof. But then I realized that there weren't going to be speakers "for" the other parties. She was her own caricature.

What else is there to say?

Condolences

Just to let you know, Colin McEnroe's mom died last night after a horrific last few months, punctuated by a fall in which she broke her neck. Condolences can be offered here. Colin, we are so very sorry for your loss.

CT Keith stars in "Breakfast with Joe..."

CT Keith and TrueBlueCT teamed up to ask Joe a few questions outside one of his "diner stops" that his campaign kept secret until the last minute.

Keith is waiting for Joe, holding a sign that says:

"Bottom Line? I think Bush has it Right!"
- Joe Lieberman



This fascinating video can really use subtitles, because the audio quality is unreadable in places. But it's interesting all the same.

And CT Keith's promise to Joe that he's going to file a FOI action to force Lieberman to release ALL his constituent emails, and his question about possible email evidence of fundraising for Rowland, elicited a clearly audible response:

"You know...you've got a very rich fantasy life!"

No, Joe, YOU do; especially if you think we're going to go away.

Ned Lamont speaks on 9/11 anniversary

On the 5th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, Democratic Nominee for Senate Ned Lamont issued the following statement:

Five years ago today, our nation was brutally attacked by enemies that seek to destroy our country and the democratic principles that make us strong. We will never forget the Americans that died that day, including 152 from Connecticut. Throughout our state and country, we were all touched by the great loss of life and enormous tragedy.

In the days that followed, we came together as Americans in unity and purpose to help the families, and the nation, heal and recover. America was never stronger or more unified.

On the fifth anniversary of that tragic day, we must remember those we lost with great sadness and resolve. We must also renew our sense of unity and purpose in supporting each other, defeating our enemies and saluting our brave men and women who fight for our freedoms and security abroad.

9/11 Tribute: The City of the Sky

Kirby here. When I couldn't sleep in the week leading up to the first anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, I got out of bed one night and wrote this in about 15 minutes. This is what it felt like four years ago. At the end, I'll offer some thoughts on this fifth anniversary.

The City of the Sky

The sky today was blue. Too blue. Too achingly, beautifully blue. In this post-Labor Day September when the haze and humidity and smog of summer are gone, you can look at the sky and see a palette of shades of blue visible only a few days a year.

I looked at the sky a lot this summer. My summer was filled with markers – the next thing to do. First, it was finishing a manuscript. Then a major bout of dental work. Then Fourth of July fireworks that filled the night sky as I sat in the backyard holding hands with my husband. Then our first vacation on idyllic Nantucket island. Then the Labor Day weekend. Then -- nothing. Nothing to block that inexorable march to September 11, 2002. I am looking down a long tunnel toward that day at the end and nothing between now and then any more.

When I took the train from Connecticut to the city (and when you grow up in the New York suburbs, it is always just "the city") two days after Labor Day, it was a rainy, misty morning. I was incredibly grateful for that gray sky. I didn’t think I could bear looking out the window expectantly as the train winds through Queens and the skyline comes into view if it was another beautifully blue September morning.

When I was a young girl from the suburbs, the Empire State Building was the focus of the dreams and excitement that the city represented. When we took school field trips to the city, we craned our necks until we saw it. That art deco landmark was New York. When I returned as an adult after being away at college and moving to Connecticut, instead of a school bus, I took the train. And, with my maturity, the focus on the skyline shifted downtown to the two pillars. They weren’t charming, they weren’t part of a child’s dream. They meant business, opportunity, and instead, represented the thoughts, hopes and dreams of adults.

But it was still all about the sky. For New York is about the sky. Skyline. Skyscrapers. Tourists peering skyward and bumping into you as you walk down the street to get to an appointment. And so, perhaps, the greatest attack on American soil was appropriately all about the sky in the city that is all about the sky.

The attacks came from the sky. Everyone looked skyward to see what happened. And when the unspeakable occurred, the sky was obliterated as a reflection of our horror and disbelief. The events of the morning were so unbelievable that it was as if the beautiful post-Labor Day blue of the sky had to be erased. It didn’t belong anymore.

The sky continued to change that day. It was incredibly blue at 8:30. By 9:00 it was punctuated with black smoke as you looked south. By 10:30, it was black – for those who were downtown, there was no sky, no up, no down. It was just blackness. Then, it became lighter but the sky was replaced with the smoky haze we all moved through that day, wherever we were.

I first took the train back into the city the first week of October last year. As we came around the bend, and I scanned the skyline, the cleft downtown was unbearable to see. Tears filled my eyes. I saw the thoughts, hopes and dreams that were dashed. My trip to Ground Zero was in March. I wanted to go when the lights were on – the lights that replicated the towers and, yes, stretched into the night sky as far as the sky was high. I went near midnight, when it would be quiet, and empty of street merchants and tourists. While I was there, it was time to turn the lights off. All work stopped. The workers paused, turned toward the lights and reflected for a moment as the sky became black again. I cried again for the loss of those eternal towers that reached through the sky, all the way to heaven.

It is all about the sky. And when I heard Bruce Springsteen’s tribute to that day, The Rising, I sat completely mesmerized. For he, too, knew about the sky. His lyrics represent the amazing progression we have been through:

Sky of blackness and sorrow
Sky of love, sky of tears
Sky of glory and sadness
Sky of mercy, sky of fear
Sky of memory and shadow
Sky of longing and emptiness
Sky of fullness, sky of blessed life

Elisabeth Kubler-Ross talked about stages of grief in concrete terms. In New York, the stages of grief, horror, loss, and eventually understanding are in the language of the sky. When I was in New York this week, I saw a sky of longing and emptiness. May we all one day be able to see a sky of fullness and blessed life. Then, the sky will not be too blue. It will not be achingly blue as it is this year. It will be a rich, blue palette of hope and joy as we fondly remember the ebbing summer and look forward to all the new beginnings September has represented since we started a new grade at school… before the steel gray sky of winter returns.

And this September, I can say that I see a sky full of fullness and blessed life. I will never be able to look at a stunningly beautifully blue sky and not think of that morning in September 2001. But, today I am filled with so much more hope. Today, a day just like that day, there is a crisp feel in the air with that sky -- but the hope comes from the patriotic Americans who are serving in our Armed Services, and those of us on the home front who have decided we are not going to be spectators in our democracy, but active participants who believe we can change America and restore its greatness worldwide. And, that's how to honor the memory of the people who died on that day -- get off the sidelines and get involved in what matters to you.

UPDATE: For an amazing timeline/chronology of events leading up to and after the 9/11 attacks, listing 2202 items beginning in Nov 1979, click here

More on this tomorrow -- but read a preview of Olbermann's commentary for tonight.

The Chris Murphy Interview

Recently, CT Blogger sat down with 5th Congressional District Democrat Chris Murphy and taped a great interview.

The video is below, but take a few minutes and read CT Blogger's detailed article about Chris Murphy at ConnecticutBLOG.

Lieberman's double-talking Dan

I can't tell if Lieberman mouthpiece Dan Gerstein is trying to be ironic, or if he really doesn't know how much he's lying here.

This is from a post by Dan Gerstein made earlier today on the Joe2006 website:

State of the Blog, Part 2

We wanted to alert our readers that as of this morning we are removing the comment feature from our blog.

The reason behind this decision will be obvious to any one who has spent time reading the barrage of ugly, insulting and hateful comments that some Lamont supporters have been posting by the hundreds.

CORRECTION: You don't know they are Lamont supporters, do you Dan?

You don't have to be a Lamont supporter to hate Joe Lieberman's stupid and destructive politics.

We knew we were taking a risk by not moderating or censoring the comments section. But it was our hope to provide an open, engaging forum, even if it meant tolerating a fair amount of criticism from our opponents.

When we saw the disturbing direction most of the Lamont supporters were heading after the first two days, we posted an appeal for them to tone it down -- to show some respect for the fact that we were allowing them to make their voice heard on our site, to stop with the personal attacks on Senator Lieberman and our staff, and to stop posting under our staff member's names.

AGAIN, do you realize that hating Joe's wasteful policies doesn't a Lamont supporter make? When are you going to get that through your head, Dan?

Then again...all your constant harping on that lie makes me wonder if perhaps some, if not most, of those comments weren't posted by Lieberman operatives in order to allow you to play the "hate card"? Your refusal to use the most basic requirement to register to comment on your blog eliminates any pesky "net tracks" that may embarrass the people commenting.

Karl Rove has contacted Joe's people. That's a fact. I guess it's possible he faxed you guys a few pages out of his vile playbook.

[...]

As a result, we felt we had no choice but to end this experiment and remove what had become nothing more than a destructive distraction.

We in no way blame the Lamont campaign itself for this turn of events. The Lamont campaign blog did discourage its supporters from posting insulting or hateful comments when our blog went live. And just last night we received a thoughtful email from Lamont’s Internet communications director, Tim Tagaris, condemning the personal attacks littering our comments section and expressing his disappointment at the behavior of some of the people doing the posting. reiterating that the Lamont campaign had nothing to do with the offensive and personal comments. [Note: We misunderstood Tim's email and we apologize for this misunderstanding.]

That is much appreciated, and we certainly take Tim at his word.

Fine. I'm sure Tim accepts your apology. Or, maybe he doesn't, if he reads the following:

Speaking of taking people at their words, here is a representative sampling (UPDATE 2:12 PM: Added disclaimer to pdf) of the offensive comments that were posted this week. We will leave it to our readers to judge for themselves what they say about Lamont's supporters and the Lamont campaign itself.

Are you JOKING? Just two paragraphs above, you said, "We in no way blame the Lamont campaign itself for this turn of events."

And THEN you follow that with: "We will leave it to our readers to judge for themselves what they say about Lamont's supporters and the Lamont campaign itself."

So Dan, which is it? Are you saying the Lamont campaign is responsible for this, or not?

Because, to me, it sounds like you're talking out of both sides of your mouth.

...and we're not going to let you get away with that.

UPDATE: Holy shit! Dan's "Greatest Hits from Joe's Blog" .pdf file may be the most insightful glimpse into the mind of Gerstein that has ever been posted anywhere!

This is a virtual gold mine of funny (and sometimes scatological) anti-Joe posts; a few pro-Joe comments labeled "naughty"; and several pages of explicit services performed by...er, "companionship consultants", some might consider them, that are informative and completely apropos of nothing.

While Dan tries to make a point with this 15-page .pdf file, after a couple of pages it just gets funny...and then funnier!

Dan, while I mourn the loss of the blog's comments (and I correctly predicted their demise as taking between 5 and 6 days; I only wish I'd started a betting pool!), your preservation of the best of the Joe's blog comments is admirable.

I thank you, Dan...and posterity thanks you.

Connecticut Bob at the movies

Tonight, I'd like to review a short film, which debuted over at Joe2006.com, called "Peek-A-Boo Ned".

This direct-to-video effort by fledgling filmmaker JoeLieberman2006 has true star power, spotlighting future senator Ned Lamont's photogenic public appearances.

But the movie falls flat soon after it starts, due to poor pacing, extended periods of a blank screen, and the lack of a coherent narrative. Other factors conspire to keep this creation from attaining anything higher than sub-standard mediocrity.


The film was released sans any screenwriting credits, which is understandable. No self-respecting writer would want his name associated with this lackluster effort.

The cinematography is, in a word, deplorable. With so many gifted documentary camera operators out there, it's nearly inconceivable that the person holding this camera was actually TRYING to film the subject of the movie. There wasn't a single frame that conveyed any attempt to perhaps MOVE to get a better angle. Certainly, there have been similar films by other, much more gifted filmmakers, who have made a more honest effort to deliver the goods.

This brings into question the validity of the entire film's premise.

However, the film does have some redeeming characteristics. The star of the movie, Democratic Nominee for Senate Ned Lamont, is charismatic and compelling (whenever the cinematographer decided to perform his job properly); and the expertly designed campaign signs, which were prominently displayed, showed the word "Democrat" in proud, bold letters.

Even these helpful details aren't enough to justify this waste of viewing time. If you've already watched the movie, this reviewer would like to send his condolences.

Take a look at a similar film, made by the gifted and tenacious Spazeboy. In this much more lyrical effort, Spazeboy is continually thwarted from taping outgoing senator Joe Lieberman by recently fired Lieberman Communications Director (so much for Joe's loyalty to his troops) Marion Steinfels.

Enjoy!

Campaign Web Sites 101

This illustration is prominently positioned on Joe Lieberman's campaign home page. I ask you -- is this respectful political discourse? Is this reaching across the aisle? Is this rising above nasty partisan attacks? That's your call. Look again at that page -- is there anything there that invites you to vote for Lieberman? I can't find it. It looks like someone who feels he shouldn't have to explain himself to voters.
This is the prominent illustration on the Lamont campaign home page. This is followed by an explanation of Lamont's candidacy. Do the candidates disagree? You bet. But does the Lamont official Web site make plays on the Senator's name? If so, I can't find it.

Let's take a look at the official campaign blogs -- I'm not talking about comments, that are out of control of the campaigns -- but what is posted by staffers. I cannot find a post on the Lamont Blog that does not refer to one of the opponents in the race as "Senator Lieberman." On the other hand, here are some snippets from the offical posts at the Lieberman offical blog. First is from their "our first post"

Beyond being a central source of useful information and commentary from our campaign, we hope this will become a gathering place for lively and thoughtful conversation for our supporters – and even our opponents.

>Negative Ned is at it again...According to the Hotline, the Nedster told his latest whopper...maybe the Nedster can find another excuse for his hypocrisy...Lets see how the Lamonsters find a way to spin that into a negative.... We are lucky the Lamonsters are such tolerant people. ...it’s exactly the same excuse the Nedster used

I guess "useful information and commentary" is in the eye of the beholder.

Memo to NYT: Why didn't you read the WHOLE e-mail?

Earlier today, a commenter linked to a supposed Lamont flip-flop reported in the NY Times. The gist was that Ned supported Joe's Mr. Moral Arbiter role when Joe spoke out on the Senate floor about Clinton's sexual behavior, and now Ned isn't supportive of Joe's position any longer.

Well, boys and girls, here is the entire e-mail message and keep reading because this gets even more outrageous:[emphasis mine]

"I reluctantly supported the moral outrage you expressed on September 3. I was reluctant because I thought it might make matters worse; I was reluctant because no one expressed moral outrage over how Reagan treated his kids or how Gingrich lied about supporting term limits (in other words, it was selective outrage); I was reluctant because the Starr inquisition is much more threatening to our civil liberties and national interest than Clinton's misbehavior." I supported your statement because Clinton's behavior was outrageous: a Democrat had to stand up and state as much, and I hoped that your statement was the beginning of the end.
Unfortunately, the statement was the beginning of a process that has turned more political and morally offensive. I'm the father of three and the though that Clinton testifying about oral sex before a grand jury may be broadcast into my living room is outrageous. The Starr report read like a tabloid, not a legal recitation, and that streamed into my home via every mediun avavilable.
This sorry episode is an embarrassment to me as a father and to us as a nation. If Clinton has a sex problem, mature adults would have handled this privately, not turned it into a political crusade and legal entanglement with no end in sight.
You have expressed your outrage about the president's conduct; now stand u p and use your moral authority to put an end to this snowballing mess. We all know the facts, alot more than any of us care to know and should know. We've made up our minds that Clinton did wrong, confessed to his sin, maybe should be censured for lying --and let's move on.
It's time for you to make up your mind and speak your mind as you did so eloquently last Thursday.

Sincerely,

Ned Lamont
Greenwich Connecticut

cc Sen. Dodd, Rep. Shays

OK, so that's bad enough that the newspaper got it so fuzzy. But, there's this little thing called Joe's privacy policy that applies to correspondence from a constituent.

Sending Me E-Mail Or Personal Casework Information
My personal Web site is not set up to collect any personal information about you when you visit the site unless you choose to provide that information. My Web site has an online form that you can use to send me an electronic mail message expressing your views or concerns. To send me an e-mail, the online form asks you for your name, address, and e-mail address. I use this information, if you choose to provide it, to contact you about your issues of interest and/or to provide any casework assistance I can regarding problems you may be experiencing in dealing with a government agency. This information will be available to members of my staff so they can help me in responding to your message or request.

If you are requesting help with a casework matter, it also may be necessary for my office to share the information you provide with the government agency from which you are requesting assistance, in order to respond to your request. My office will not share any personal information communicated through my Web site with any outside organization or individual, except in the following situations: (1) when needed to perform constituent casework at your request; (2) in the course of an authorized law enforcement investigation or emergency posing an imminent risk to public safety; or (3) if you choose to participate in my interactive online E-Government comment page, and authorize me to publish your comment, your name, and the organization you represent.

So, what about the Connecticut residents that have written to Senator Lieberman, sharing highly personal information in inquiries about Medicare, Medicaid, Veteran's Benefits and Social Security that now have to worry about their e-mails being faxed from Joe's Senate office to a reporter who asks for it?

Or, does Joe use his Senate staff to violate his own privacy policy only when it serves a political purpose in his sorry campaign to hang on to a seat for which the Democrat voters of Connecticut rejected him?

H/T and must reads:
Spazeboy
LamontBlog
My Left Nutmeg
ConnecticutBLOG

Golly, Gee -- No Link Between Saddam & al-Qa'ida!

The Senate Intelligence Committee released a report today on Iraq and intelligence leading up to the war. Some brief quotes...

Postwar findings indicate that Hussein was distrustful of al-Qa'ida and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qa'ida to provide material or operational support. Debriefings of key leaders of the former Iraqi regime indicate that Saddam distrusted Islamic radicals in general, and al-Qa'ida in particular. (p.105)

Postwar findings have identified two occasions, not reported prior to the war, in which Saddam Hussein rebuffed meeting requests from an al-Qa'ida operative. (p.105)

Prewar Intelligence Community assessments were inconsistent regarding the likelihood that Hussein provided chemical and biological weapons (CBW) training to al-Qa'ida. Postwar findings support the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) February 2002 assessment that Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi was likely intentionally misleading his debriefers when he said that Iraq provided two al-Qa'ida associates with chemical and biological weapons (CBW) training in 2000. The Central Intelligence Agency's January 2003 assessment said the al-Libi claim was credible, but included the statement that al-Libi was not in a position to know whether the training had taken place. Postwar findings do not support the assessment that his reporting was credible. (p. 106)

Postwar information supports prewar Intelligence Community assessments that there was no credible information that Iraq was complicit in or had foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks or any other al-Qa'ida strike. (p.110)

Conclusion 8: No postwar information indicates that Iraq intended to use al-Qa'ida or any other terrorist group to strike the United States homeland before or during Operation Iraqi Freedom. (p.111)

Quite a start, eh? For the moment, we need to thank Olympia Snowe and Chuck Hagel for voting with the Ds to make this report as strong as it is.

"Big Time" Cheney will be on MTP for the whole hour on Sunday. This should be something to watch. Will Timmeh nail him or not? On NBC Nightly this evening, they showed the clip of Big Time assuring America that Saddam was intimately involved in 9/11. The clip is racked and ready to go on Sunday. We'll see....

THIS is why it's all about electing true Democrats this year. The only way this administration will be held accountable for misleading this nation into war is to elect:
Ned Lamont
Chris Murphy
Diane Farrell
Joe Courtney
And, of course, re-elect Rosa DeLauro and John Larson.

Score 1 for Scholastic! WTNH, Are You Listening?

This afternoon, Scholastic announced that they are pulling the original "guide" to the ABC GOP-U-Drama (thanks, KO) The Path to 9-11 that was not at all objective or accurately reflecting the FACTS of the 9/11 Commission Report. The company was evidently, overwhelmed by the calls and e-mails generated by bloggers like us.

But, we need to keep smacking ABC/Disney upside the head. Here is a list of ABC affiliates nationally. If it says O&O next to the station name, that means the station is owned by ABC, and can't decide not to air the program. All others are fair game -- they can pull the 9/11 crock-u-drama if they want, just like stations pre-empt for local events and sporting broadcasts all the time.

Here's the WTNH contact info:
Click here to go to the online comments page
Jon Hitchcock
President and General Manager, WTNH-TV & WCTX
Carl Miller
Station Manager/General Sales Manager WCTX
Kirk Varner
Vice President/News WTNH/WCTX

WTNH / WCTX
8 Elm Street
New Haven, CT 06510

WTNH Main Number: (203) 784.8888
WTNH Main FAX: (203) 789.2010
Newsroom FAX: (203) 787.9698

While I think Geoff Fox and Dr. Mel are the most accurate weather people in the market, if WTNH doesn't step up on this one, I'll be watching elsewhere --- I never liked Desperate Housewives, anyway.

Susan Bysiewicz demonstrates new Voting Machines

This morning at the Bridgeport City Hall Annex, Connecticut Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz introduced the new optical voting machine that Connecticut will be using.

The Secretary discussed the machines with voting officials from neighboring towns. A complete list of the towns where the demonstrations are scheduled is available HERE.

This video clip is a short demonstration of the machine:



I like the system because it has a very simple paper trail. Tampering will be almost impossible, and if there is a large descrepancy all you need to do is count the paper ballots. It seems fairly hack-proof compared to the Diebold machines (Diebold ATM-style machines; see UPDATE at bottom).

The machines will be implemented in 20 municipalites for the November election, and the remaining towns and cities will be up and running by late SprinG (happy, Eric?) 2007 most likely, and definitely by the following Novemeber. The 20 towns have not be released yet.

A handicapped-accessable phone voting system will be implemented in all 169 towns in Connecticut by November. That means vision-impaired or otherwise handicapped individuals can vote using a touch-tone voice menu, which then automatically generates a fax version of the ballot with the candidates that the persone selected.

This is what the paper ballot looks like. The process goes like this:

Each voter is given a paper ballot. They take it to a "privacy booth" to vote for their candidates. Then they take it over to the voting machine and insert it in any direction. The machine reads the ballot, tabulates the vote, and then drops the ballot into a lock box. The ballots provide a foolproof paper trail in the event a recount is needed.

If there is an "over-vote" on the ballot (more than one person selected for a position) or no votes at all (and only ONE vote is needed anywhere on the ballot; you don't HAVE to vote for every office), the machine spits the ballot back out. A volunteer will assist you in correcting your mistake by issueing you a new ballot.

If the voter desires absolute privacy, a privacy envelope is provided, which slips over the ballot like a sleeve, and you can insert it into the voting machine so the ballot isn't exposed at all once you leave the privacy booth.

We appreciate Secretary Bysiewicz's assistance in helping people understand this new technology.

UPDATE: I found more information about the tabulating machine. It is a Diebold manufactured machine, which normally would set off alarm bells in a blue state like Connecticut. But again, the thing I like is that there IS a voter-verified paper trail (the ballot that the voter had personally filled out and placed in the tabulator) as opposed to those ATM-style fully electronic voting machines.

Here's an overview of the optical voting machine.

Here's a more detailed pdf file.

And finally, a commenter remarked on how much the new voting machine looks like a paper shredder.

Well, I hacked into the secret master computer server at Diebold, where they keep all their proprietary technical infomation, and found this inside-the-box image of the new voting machine:



(note: image may actually be something other than a Diebold machine. please don't sue me.)

Message of hope

Lamont supporter David Stevenson lends a positive message to the Labor Day parade.

Maura Keaney (Joe Lieberman's favorite Irish-American) waits for the parade to begin.

Gerstein discusses Lieberman wife beating on blog

BREAKING NEWS!

On the Joe2006 blog tonight, millionaire-lawyer non-combatant successful-draft-deferrer Joe Lieberman's campaign director, Dan Gerstein, brought up the topic of wife beating in relation to his discussion of the Senator's possible campaign contributions.

While addressing the questionable validity of a story about GOP fundraising efforts for Lieberman that was posted by their OWN CAMPAIGN STAFF on their OWN BLOG, Gerstein asked if it was possible to prove the Senator doesn't beat his wife.

After several messages questioning Gerstein about the wife-beating topic, the Lieberman spokesman said "Joe Lieberman does not beat his wife."

Keeping in mind the "sunrise-sunset flap" of last week, where Dan Gerstein immediately denied the stock video used in a campaign ad was a sunrise, rather than the sunset it was later confirmed to be, in the interest of safety we may want to have the authorities investigate the Senator's alleged penchant for spousal abuse.

The pertinent comments from the exchange are quoted here:

Let me get this straight. You are asking us to disprove an anonymous, single-sourced story from a magazine of questionable credibility that not one respectable news outlet has even come close to picking up on? What's next, you want us to provide evidence that Joe Lieberman doesn't beat his wife?

Seriously, folks, I am more than happy to answer legitimate questions raised on the blog, and I apologize for not doing more of it yet (been a little busy doing a few other things), but can we please have a little perspective? Thanks.
Dan Gerstein | 09.06.06 - 8:23 pm | #

Joe Lieberman beats his wife?
Mike | 09.06.06 - 8:28 pm | #

Why does Joe beat his wife? Is it because she's a pharmaceutical lobbyist?
BluetooththeGreat | 09.06.06 - 8:31 pm | #

I don't know, blue... I just heard about it from Dan Gerstein himself.
Mike | 09.06.06 - 8:33 pm | #

Now, we have someone who, posting as Dan Gerstein, hopefully it is and not a namestealer, wants to tell us that it is the equivalent of "when did you quit beating your wife"?

If this is as untrue, or "conspiracy theory" as you want us to believe, why even address it at all?

Either it is true, or it is not. To address it in this manner only serves to fuel the fire that Lieberman's campaign is actually hiding a significant amount of support (maybe not financial) from the RNC.
David (Austin Tx) | Homepage | 09.06.06 - 8:39 pm | #

What's next, you want us to provide evidence that Joe Lieberman doesn't beat his wife?

Actually, that would be great.
NTodd, Blogsatz Eliterach | Homepage | 09.06.06 - 8:40 pm | #

Are you really suggesting that if Joe took money from Republicans then he also beats his wife? Because you know it's possible that he took money from Republicans and does not beat his wife. I don't know why this Dan Gerstein is making baseless accusations like that against Joe. Doesn't Joe have enough to worry about in this campaign (his voting record, his flip-flopping, his self-righteous personality) without jerks like Dan Gerstein making false accusations?
winklife | 09.06.06 - 8:48 pm | #

First, Joe Lieberman does NOT beat his wife. Second, I will personally look into whether or not Joe's campaign has taken a significant amount of money from registered Republicans. I don't think so. But I can make sure. How's that for transparency?
Dan Gerstein | 09.06.06 - 8:55 pm | #

First, Joe Lieberman does NOT beat his wife.

I demand proof.
NTodd, Blogsatz Eliterach | Homepage | 09.06.06 - 8:56 pm | #

Joe did not beat his wife to the lobbyist trough. My understanding is that she worked for a PR firm that represented clients with pending legislation before Congress well before Joe is being forcably retired from the Senate so that he can pursue his next career as a defense lobbyist.
JoeBlow | 09.06.06 - 9:00 pm | #

And when did Joe stop beating his wife, anyway?
NTodd, Blogsatz Eliterach | Homepage | 09.06.06 - 9:01 pm | #

As I've said, we will look into whether or not serious Republican contributions have been made to Joe's campaign. I don't think so. It may take a few days (I'm very busy), but we will post our findings on the blog. I promise.
Dan Gerstein | 09.06.06 - 9:10 pm | #

Dan, did you really claim the story to be false despite not knowing for sure whether or not there is any truth to the claim?

wow, DANGERstein strikes again...
steve | Homepage | 09.06.06 - 9:15 pm | #

As I've said, we will look into whether or not serious Republican contributions have been made to Joe's campaign. I don't think so. It may take a few days (I'm very busy), but we will post our findings on the blog. I promise.

We all wait with bated breath.

I also want to know if Joe has accepted any contributions from kitten-eating cyborgs.
NTodd, Blogsatz Eliterach | Homepage | 09.06.06 - 9:16 pm | #

That was not funny. You can disagree with Joe on issues, but it is ludicrous (and imature) to continue in this vein. To keep this up, is to stoop to the level of ridiculousness to which Dan himself has sunk.

Dan brought it up. I was merely picking up the ball and running with it. And I never, ever claimed to be mature. I'm actually here because I heard there would be better snacks than over at Eschaton. I was misinformed.

And for the record, I don't beat my wife (well, she's now my ex, but we're still friends and my claim stands!).
NTodd, Blogsatz Eliterach | Homepage | 09.06.06 - 9:20 pm | #

They Will Stop at Nothing

I am sick to my stomach about this one. Just when you thought the minions of this administration couldn't rewrite more history, they take on 9-11. In case you haven't heard, ABC is showing a 2-part special on 9-11 on Sunday and Monday night. Originally pitched as a documentary culled from the 9-11 report, it is now "docudrama" being shown without commercial interruption (as in, too hot for a sponsor to go near).

The problem is the blame is all on the Clinton administration, and Sandy Berger, Richard Clarke, and Madeline Albright, who are all depicted in the, um, show -- say that scenes depicted never happened, and 9-11 co-chair Tom Kean said that composite characters had to be created to cover all the info in the short time.

Since it seems that not all members of the press can get a review copy, Editor and Publisher does a nice summary here We have not heard from co-chair Lee Hamilton about this whitewash, but Richard BenVeniste is due on Olbermann any minute. Transcript will appear here and you can always check for video at Crooks & Liars ThinkProgress has more

Even worse, Scholastic is distributing curriculum guides with right-wing talking points, and copies of this show will also be distributed, so this false version may very well become a staple to teach kids about 9-11. Curiously, tonight, you can't get to that through the regular link to the Scholastic Web site, or find it when searching the site. Could it be that they have changed their minds? Let's hope so. Here's an analysis of those tools

I am out of my mind with anger. For the REAL story of 9-11, watch the original CBS documentary made by the French photojournalists who just happened to be working with the first FDNY unit to respond that horrible day. Sunday night at 8 Eastern

I'm starting to see a pattern here!

For the last 22 hours I've been checking in regularly to read the comments on the new and long-awaited Joe2006 blog.

It's worse than CRACK! It's like watching a slow-motion car wreck, or the Hindenberg crashing in flames. I just can't take my eyes off it!

And I've come to a troubling conclusion:

"IT'S A TRAP!"

(Trust me, Star Wars nerds and Farkers are laughing their asses off right now!)

Yes, the Lieberman masterminds have come up with a sure-fire way to distract us bloggers and netizens from concentrating on the real problems facing Joe's policies. By putting up a blog that promises healthy and informative debate, they draw in people by the hundreds.

But soon, it becomes apparent that there IS no discussion. The pattern is for them to post a rude article and sit back and watch all the righteous liberals work themselves into a frenzied state of indignation.

My god, it's BRILLIANT!

By keeping all these people outraged and frustrated, the masterminds (hiding behind an obvious pseudonym "Eric Blankenbaker") have managed to suck a huge amount of energy out of the lefty blogosphere, and concentrate it within their own website.

Where they will doubtless find a way to harness it and use it for their own neferious purposes.

Oh, what will these evil masterminds come up with next?

(Besides calling the Democratic Nominee for Senate the "Nedster", that is?)

Here's some actual blog comments from Joe's wonderfully enticing blog. Keep in mind that I intend to stick with my pledge to not directly involve myself over on Joe's blog, and will only comment upon it here.

I'm starting to get irked. We were promised debate. In this thread only we have made excellent, articulate, rebuttals to your ridiculous Republicanesque spinning. WHy aren't you coming down into the comments section, Eric, and giving your side some substance?

Oh that's right. You've got nothing.
John | 09.06.06 - 5:17 pm | #

I'm assuming these comments have been set up as a deliberate troll for anti-lieberman commentary, and in that they are succeeding beyond expectations.

But wouldn't you think that if joe had *any* legitimate supporters, they, too, would take advantage and come to the defense of their chosen candidate?

These comment sections seem to belie the claims of the lieberman campaign to widespread support in Connecticut--at least among the computer literate. Maybe there aren't that many such folks in Connecticut...
mongo | 09.06.06 - 5:17 pm | #

And another thing of note in Joe's new website...the calandar.

Lieberman's staff only releases information on public events where the Senator might come in actual contact with voters (and by "contact", I mean within a reasonable radius for a conversation to occur) just a day in advance.

Not much time for a Lieberman fan like myself to arrange to stop by and say "Hello" to my favorite "non-combatant" (Joe's own words) Junior Senator.

I wonder why that is?

Great parade photos

Kathryn in MA has a blog that features pictures from YearlyKOS and FireDogLake, and she put up a crapload of pictures from Monday's Labor Day parade in Newtown. Visit ykosfdl.blogspot.com to scroll through all those fun shots.

That's me with RevDeb below just before the start of the parade. And I don't care WHAT Joe Lieberman says, the only "Team Connecticut" that matters is the one on my shirt!

"Vets for Freedom" Fight for Rove and Lieberman

2,600 dead American soldiers and $300 billion wasted

Yes, thank you so VERY much, Senator Lieberman

At 10:15 a.m. today, Connecticut veterans will ask Senator Joseph Lieberman to denounce "Swift Boat" style ads being run on his behalf by a 527 group. The veterans will make an announcement and sign an oversized letter to Leiberman on the north Capitol steps.

An organization with ties to Washington lobbyists, the Bush administration, and the Swift Boat campaign is coming to Connecticut with massive television ad buys for incumbent Senator Joseph Lieberman, prompting Democratic US Senate nominee Ned Lamont's campaign and supporters to call on Lieberman to ask the group to remove themselves from Connecticut politics.

Vets for Freedom, which will spend between $75,000 and $100,000 in two days this week, has ties to the Swift Boat campaign and is receiving advice from Republican lobbyists and strategists, including a former Bush spokesperson. They have said they plant to air more commercials and to continue until the election.

Several Connecticut Veterans today, joined by Campagin Chairman George Jepson, called on Lieberman to denounce the current ad, and any future ads but the group, signing a letter on the steps of the Capitol.

"These operatives have been shown to use the lowest kind of Rovian campaign tactics, and their disregard for the truth should give Connecticut citizens great cause for concern," said Lamont spokesman Liz Dupont-Diehl. "We call on Senator Lieberman to urge them to get out of Connecticut politics - and to pledge to run a campaign based on the facts."

The New York Times reports that "Vets for Freedom" is receiving advice from Taylor Gross, a former White House official; Bill Kristol, the editor of The Weekly Standard; Republican strategist Dan Senor [and] Mr. Lieberman's former chief of staff, Bill Andresen. (9/2/06) Most of these men are corporate lobbyists and Republican Party operatives.

(CTBob: I wonder how many of these guys are veterans? I think I can guess...)

Here's more on this group, submitted by John Stauber on Fri, 08/11/2006 at prwatch.com:

The Republican lobby group Vets for Freedom is the 2006 equivalent of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the Republican 527 committee whose attack advertisements in battleground states helped sink John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race by smearing him as a phony war hero and a traitor to his country.

Vets for Freedom (VFF) made lame claims to be "non-partisan" when in early 2006 it first appeared out of the blue online and in op-ed pieces in the New York Times and other major papers and in TV interviews. An investigation of the group by citizen journalists at SourceWatch and by the Buffalo News blew the VFF claim of non-partisanship out of the water. For instance, the Buffalo News revealed in June that former White House flack Taylor Gross, who left Scott McClellan's office in 2005 to start his own PR firm, represented VFF and pitched them to papers as non-partisan journalists who would embed for these newspapers and report accurately and cheaply for them from Iraq. Now the camouflage has fallen completely off. Vets for Freedom has registered itself as a 527 committee and is going to run a full page advertisement in Connecticut's Hartford Courant on behalf of Joe Lieberman's renegade run for re-election to the US Senate as a 'stay the course in Iraq' candidate.

The Wall Street Journal reports that VFF is being handled now by Republican strategist Dan Senor and that it "hopes to run other print and radio ads in the fall, and is also planning on campaign door-to-door for Mr. Lieberman and holding a rally on his behalf."

Connecticut is a heavily Democratic state, and normally any Democrat who wins the nomination would be expected to cruise to victory in the general election this November. However, Lieberman's refusal to bow out after losing to Ned Lamont in last Tuesday's primary creates a window of opportunity for a Republican victory. By supporting Lieberman, the Republicans hope to split the Democratic vote so that their candidate can get elected. This strategy is bound to produce an ugly and divisive political campaign, another advantage for the Republican cause nationally as Tony Snow and others in the White House paint pro-peace Democrats as a party of appeasement in the war on terror.

White House strategist Karl Rove has made clear his strategy for Republican victory in November is to run on the war in Iraq. For him VFF and similar groups such as Melanie Morgan's PR creation Move America Forward, are weapons on his political chessboard. Rove phoned Lieberman on Tuesday as Democrat voters were turning thumbs down on Lieberman for his pro-Bush cheerleading on Iraq. Karl Rove denies he offered help to Lieberman, but the battlefield arrival of VFF shows that Republican troops for Lieberman are already on the ground and firing at will.

Joe on THE issue

After all the comments here and elsewhere about Joe's glaring lack of addressing that minor little scrap over in Mesopotamia, I guess somebody nudged Joe and whispered that he should add something to his website.

It's stuck wayyy down the list, between Global Warming and the Environment (two issues that are so unlike each other that they require separate topics).

And the text of the Iraq topic is somewhat mind boggling. (Speaking of which, try typing "boggling" at five AM and see if it doesn't at first come out as "blogging"!)

Here's what non-combatant Joe Lieberman has to say about Iraq:

As most people know, I supported the resolution giving the President the authority to use force to replace Saddam Hussein’s brutal government, as did most Senate Democrats. I still believe that was right.

We all know you tend to stand by your decisions long after they've been proven wrong and disastrous. There are brutal governments all over the world right now, Senator. Do you advocate us bombing the shit out of all those rogue nations?

What I don’t think is right, as I have said over and over again, are many of the Bush Administration’s decisions regarding the planning for and execution of the war. The fact is, I have openly and clearly disagreed with and criticized the President for, among other things:

* not winning the support of our allies in the run-up to the war;

Yeah, that was a major screw up. I guess some nation's leaders DIDN'T betray their people

* not having a plan to win the peace;

We still don't have one. I'd really love to hear YOUR plan for an eventual end to this mess, Senator

* not putting enough troops on the ground;

You're saying that calling up nearly every reservist, extending rotations, and depleting our nation's military readiness WASN'T enough. Maybe we should start up a draft. You know what a draft is, don't you Senator? It's that thing you managed to avoid repeatedly while other people were fighting and dying in Vietnam

* putting an American in charge of the Iraqi oil supply.

Ah, so THAT'S the REAL reason for this war, eh Senator?

And I have said that if I were President, I would ask Secretary Rumsfeld to resign. I first said that in October 2003.

Wow, talk about taking a major step to end this ongoing disaster! Something tells me Rummy's replacement won't suddenly wave a magic wand and fix all the problems associated with that quagmire.

But I do LIKE the idea of someone with a magic wand waving it and having 2,600 dead American soldiers come back to life, and $300 billion magically reappear in our treasury. And I'm sure there are some Iraqi families who'd enjoy seeing their dead relatives, their nation's infrastructure, and their civil war magically revert to where it was four years ago.

[...]

The last thing I want to do is needlessly add to that kind of heartbreak. I want to get our troops home as fast as anyone, probably more than most.

I don't believe that statement for a second.

But if we simply give up and pull out now, like my opponent wants to do, then it would be a disaster to Iraq and to us. We would run a high risk that Iraq would become like Afghanistan when the Taliban were in charge, and Al Qaeda had safe haven from which to strike us. And we would run a high risk that the chaos and violence would spread and engulf Iraq’s neighbors.

That won't happen unless we let it. Think about Iraq during the period between the wars. The country was effectively blocked from indulging in terrorism. We ruled the skies over Iraq, with no-fly zones and boarder security. That's what we need to go back to. If we took all of our assets out of harms way and kept them on the boarders, we'd be safer and the Iraqis can get back to rebuilding their country

Now I understand that many voters in Connecticut disagree with me and are very angry about the war. I don’t think there is anything I can say to change your mind about whether we should have gone to war or when we should bring the troops home.

Our mind isn't the one that needs changing.

What I will say is this: I not only respect your right to disagree or question the President or me, I value it. I was part of the anti-war movement in the late 1960s, so I don’t need to be lectured by my opponent or anyone else about the place of dissent in our democracy.

Aren't you the guy who said that if we criticize the President we do it at our nation's peril? And as far as your anti-war position in the '60's, didn't you try to block students from protesting at Yale? I know I have an article here someplace...

You also need to know that I have never suggested that the President or anyone else – including me – should be immune from criticism. The best proof of that is I myself have challenged the President’s policies on many occasions.

Well, that's a lie. Unless you're saying that you've never spoken those EXACT words in that EXACT order. Then you might be telling the truth.

But I believe it is important how we disagree. My concern was, and remains, that if opponents or supporters of the war go beyond disagreeing to exploiting the war for partisan political purposes, much like Republicans did to Max Cleland on homeland security, we could lose more than an election. We could put our mission in Iraq, the lives of thousands of American soldiers carrying it out, and our national security at risk. That is what I care about. That is what I will not let happen.

I can never adequately understand your "partisan politics" claim. This isn't about parties, it's not about Democrats and Republicans, it's about RIGHT vs. WRONG. What's partisan about wanting to see our leaders do the RIGHT thing?

[...]

What we are doing is clearly not working. That is why I have called for new leadership and direction from the Pentagon. We also have to demand that the new Iraqi unity government do a better job of containing the sectarian violence, and working with our allies, the British in particular, we should convene an international crisis conference on Iraq, bringing in the Europeans and particularly the other Arab countries that are now worrying about what happens if Iraq collapses.

Joe, it AIN'T the Pentagon's fault! Take a look in the friggin' mirror if you want to see who's responsible for this ongoing disaster! And it's way too late to ask for international counsel about Iraq. We didn't listen to them BEFORE attacking that nation!

Going forward, we must not be trapped in the false choice between setting political deadlines for withdrawal or “staying the course,” when both options will lead to failure. Instead, we should turn our passions, however much we may disagree with each other, into a common energy to bring about the best result for our national security and for the troops who are in harms way.

How about coming up with a PLAN, Senator? If neither option is good, please GIVE US ANOTHER OPTION!

I am opposed to an indefinite, unconditional deployment of American troops.

Which is exactly what you are supporting right now.

The fact is that the sooner that the Iraqis can take control of their own destiny, the better off it will be for them and for us.

So let's give them a reason to self-police and govern their nation.

But if we rush to meet some arbitrary, pre-set political deadline, as bad as things are now they will definitely get much worse. There will be an all-out civil war in Iraq, Iran will surge in to control large parts of that country, there’ll be a wider, regional war, and al-Qaeda and other jihadist terrorists will use Iraq as a safe haven from which to attack us and others.

There is already a civil war in Iraq, we're already breeding terrorists by our continued occupation of that country, and our invading Iraq has made the entire region unstable. Iran feels threatened by our hawkish actions in that part of the world. By allowing the Iraqis to govern themselves, we'll send a message that we aren't planning to attack them.

My goal is to work with both sides to bring our troops home from Iraq in a responsible way that does not lead to more terrorism in the region and less security for us here at home.

You keep working on that, Joe. Take your time.

This week three more kids from our state were killed in Iraq.

Joe on the issues

Boy, I'm loving the new Joe2006 website.

If I was a chick, I'd swear it was ribbed for my pleasure!

These are actual screen-caps from Joe's website; it's the section where he talks about the "important issues". Take a close look at the "issues" in the pictures, and tell me if there are any issues of note that might be absent:



Yes, you guessed correctly.

Joe didn't take a stand either way on whether we should bring back the tolls on I-95!

No, of course what I'm referring to the war in Iraq.

So that makes one of us who has addressed it.

Senator, would YOU care to comment on that minor issue?

UPDATE: There's been over 200 comments posted on the three lame-o topics that were there when the website re-debuted, and so far NOBODY from the campaign has replied to a single comment.

"Joe's Blog will be a place you can actively participate in the campaign debate and make your voice heard.

Joe's website is finally up!

(Check for "Comments" UPDATE below!)

I'm sure the net wizards that Joe hired were hearing the clock ticking like thunder as they let over 3/4 of the day slip away, but they managed to get their website up just under the wire. Congrats, people. Well done!

As I mentioned earlier, Kirby and I are going to refrain from posting on Joe's new blog, but we'll be commenting right here on the content and comments there.

But don't let us stop you from engaging in COURTEOUS, POLITE, and RESPECTFUL discussion over on Joe's Blog. Some of the comments are pure gold.

And keep in mind Dan Gerstein's promise to the people of Connecticut:

We are not going to censor comments from our opponents, unless they post obscene material.

You can see it here and on Joe's blog. No censoring unless it's obscene! Dan, I admire you for that.

Instead, we are going to use our free speech to point out any of the blatant lies or crude insults the Lamonsters post to call attention to the kind of negative, destructive politics that Ned and his followers like to practice.

"Lamonsters!" So, immediately Dan throws out the insults.

He does this in the SAME SENTENCE in which he decries INSULTS!

We're all about healthy discussion. But we do appreciate your sense of irony, Dan; no matter how unintentional it is.

Healthy discussion is something Joe wasn't that interested in until a valid candidate challenged what he sees as his God-given seat in the Senate.

So already we're seeing low-class plays on Ned Lamont's name. "The Full Lamonty", and "Lamonsters", appearing all over Joe's website. I was seriously hoping they wouldn't stoop to that level, and in fact, Ned Lamont's website has always given the opposition the courtesy they deserved.

But, just as Joe's grimace and stiff nod at Ned's polite greeting at yesterday's parade indicated, it looks like Joe Lieberman has let his Yale polish get scrubbed off by the friction of his relentless ambition to retain his Senate seat.

I fear that Dan Gerstein and Lieberman's "Rove-inspired" campaign staff will stoop to even lower depths before this is over. The "527 groups" are already making their presence known, and their agenda is "GET JOE ELECTED", no matter what.

I worry about how ugly they're going to make it.

And then there's Jim and this thing. Tony Soprano would be proud of you, Jim Amann!

But you're an embarrassment to the entire Democratic Party and everyone who believes in the value of a vote. JOE LOST THE PRIMARY! Get it through your thick skull, Jim! He lost. It's over. Only through a loophole in the law can Joe even mount a campaign like this.

Why wasn't Al Gore given a do-over 3 months after the 2000 election? How about John Kerry getting a mulligan and having a new election in February 2005? Is THAT the kind of democracy you want, Jim?

Jim, do you realize that you're telling the majority of VOTING DEMOCRATS that you care NOTHING ABOUT THEIR OPINIONS?

Two people who have been around WAY too long...

Joe Lieberman and Jim Amann

It's time to elect officials who are in tune with the voters.

Anyway, you should all let Joe know what you think. But play nice.

COMMENTS UPDATE: So, now that Joe's blog has been up for a couple of hours, I've grabbed a few of the comments and posted them below, for your snarking pleasure.

(I just knew this was gonna be funny)

Nice website - did you guys pay the bill for the web server this time around?
reality-based educator

Congrats on the new blog Joe. Now go out there and beat those godless liberals senseless.
A Coulter

Yes, the new site and the new blog are just like joe-mentum. They're joe-notonous.
purplemountain

Don't you Kos-cousins know the word "joe-notonous" is a vicious anti-semitic slur?
ykcir

It's gonna be hard to take this website seriously when the "On the Issues" page has nothing about Joe's position on the Iraq War.
Dr. Dobro

"Lamonsters??"
Quelle Rove.
Sad.
John deVille

Good job with the name calling Eric. You must be getting tips from my radio show. Keep up the good work and I can't wait to get my favorite "Democrat" back on my show.
S Hannity

sigh. i suppose no one will see this post either.
steve banks

Steve Banks, the word "sigh" is a well-known anti-semitic slur. You should be banned.
ykcir

And the spurious claims of anti-semitism are the most despicable elements of his painful performance. He has shown a real lack of class.
Pope Ratzo

Giuliani, McCain and Rice... terrific company to be in Joe. Welcome to the Republican Party, we're damn glad to have you.
John Gibson

Liebermanforliberman, the word "Lieberzombies" is a well-known anti-semitic slur. Shame on you.
ykcir

I simply must commend Team Lieberman for the "Sunset" ad. It's worked better than any laxative I've tried, and I feel so calm now. Serene, really.
LiebermanForLieberman

More awful news

And, yet a third son of Connecticut has given his life in Iraq, this time from Wilton. We don't have a photo yet, but please keep Nicholas Madaras and his family in your thoughts and prayers. Just 19, he died when an IED blew up in Baqubah, Iraq.

Joe can't blame us for THIS one!

UPDATE: GAME ON!

And while I'm at it, I'd like to announce that the editorial staff here at "Connecticut Bob", which currently consists of Kirby and myself, urge each and every one of you to refrain from anything but polite discussion on Joe's new blog.

We believe we can have the following:

Discourse without Disrespect,

Dissent without Detestation,

Debate without another "D"-word that I can't think of right now to stay within my not-so-clever alliteration scheme!

(I never said I was a brilliant writer!)

So everyone, please be nice, respectful, and courteous.

As for us, we choose to comment on Joe's blog right here at Connecticut Bob, and we'll refrain from posting on Joe2006.com; but we will read it.

I'm sure there are plenty of voters who will cover the issues there, and we don't need to add to the chorus. (UPDATE COMPLETE)

It's 6:00 PM on the day of the long-awaited unveiling of the new and improved JOE 2006 web site!

And it doesn't work!

...I'm shocked.

Joe, maybe you should spend a few hundred thousand of those lobbyist's millions you have, and hire someone who KNOWS how to set up a website.

Because whoever you hired, they failed you on Primary Day; they failed you today; and you know that a policy of failure breeds MORE failure.

Just look at your costly and inept War in Iraq if you need an example.

I think I'm seeing a pattern here.

Just When on Tuesday?

Because along with our new tour, we will be launching our new and improved website (www.Joe2006.com) on Tuesday as well.

On Saturday, the 2nd, the Lieberman campaign sent out an e-mail announcing their new Web site would debut today, Tuesday, September 5. Well, the day is 11.5 hours long, and I can't see any changes.

UPDATE 4:30pm, still no new Web site. Seven hours of Tuesday left.

It's All About Our Service Members

We've lost another. Remember the name Philip Johnson (L) who died Sunday in Iraq. We learned of his death yesterday, while friends, family and a grateful state mourned the loss of Jordan Pierson (R), Milford's son who also died in Iraq and will be buried at Arlington tomorrow. Philip was just 19 -- he had finished boot camp this summer, and deployed to Iraq. We mourn their loss and pray for their families and loved ones. Through August 29, these two young men join 2.945 men and women who have given their lives in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Look at Philip's face. This is why I am opposed to the war. He should be having fun back here in CT being a kid, learning about life and love, and feeling the beginning of the crisp nights that welcome autumn, the most beautiful time in New England. He should have the chance to fall in love, build a family and be the best dad in Enfield. But no.

One of my former students graduated from high school in June and went off to basic training in the Air Force a few weeks later. He is a wonderful young man, with incredible gifts. Every time I read about another service member who died, I think of that student, because every one of these men and women leave a gaping hole in the community they will never return to.

Clearly, there are good men and women who believe the war in Iraq is essential to keeping America safe, and there are those of us who don't. We can still respect each other and agree to disagree civilly. However, no one can accuse us of not caring about or supporting the troops. Wanting the Guard back home where they can protect their neighbors and help disaster relief is our goal -- to strengthen the homeland.

We are furious when we learn that Iraq vets are homeless because their benefits are so poor. It outrages us when we hear about families buying protective gear for their soldiers because our government does not provide it. Our fighting men and women are the best, and they deserve the best possible equipment, supplies and support from this government. How dare Rumsfeld say about our troops that he went to war with the soldiers he had, not the ones he wanted!

Veterans of Iraq and other wars are on different sides of the debate. That's a healthy thing for our democracy. But, to suggest that people who oppose this war and this administration's policies are somehow not patriotic is beyond the pale. For, in fact, it is our patriotism that drives us.

Parade video online!

Ned and Joe at the Newtown Labor Day parade. Fun times were had by all, except those Lamont supporters who got roughed up during the Lieberman interviews.

But CNN is all over that, and I don't want to have to get subpeonaed if this becomes a civil action. In fact, I'm erasing the tape as I type this. j/k

The video is just over 4 minutes long, but it's chock full of fun and hijinks. Enjoy!

Proud Americans!

Photo taken by David Stevenson at the Danbury DTC today, of the crowd raptly listening to Ned Lamont speak. This is a true Norman Rockwell moment.

(Yes, frickin' Youtube is taking forever to put my video online...grrrrrr!)

UPDATE: Youtube just put the icon image up for the video. Oh man, is it AWESOME! We're minutes away from this being live (I hope!)

Back from the Parade and Danbury DTC

I'm just finishing up copying my video to my PC, so I'm gonna make this short.

The parade was interesting, and I had a lot of great footage of Ned, his family, and hundreds of Lamont supporters marching.

The mounted police or some other horse troops led off the parade. I can tell they've been feeding the horses exceptionally well, because the parade route was decorated with impressive piles of bio-degradable "exhaust"; you really had to watch where you were going, which isn't easy when you are walking backwards to video the candidate and his supporters marching!

Joe Lieberman also marched, although oddly, he lagged WAY behind the rest of the parade. After Ned and the Newtown Democrats marched, by parade's end there was a gap of nearly 20 minutes before Joe and his few supporters came by.

For the record, I have absolutely nothing to do with this person. But it WAS funny the way Joe shook his offered hand, and then got a good look at him and recoiled like something that smelled really awful assaulted his nostrels.

The media was well-represented, and I even got my mic pushed away by the CNN camera guy when I was holding it up to Joe to hear what he had to say during their interview. I did get to ask Joe a respectful question, and I think Tammy Sun (Joe's new press secretary) was captured on tape squawking that the Senator had to get going NOW. He still answered my question, even though it was my usual on-the-run interview. Fun.

"*xyz" (from FDL, who came up from NYC to support Ned) and I got stuck in parade traffic, so I got to the Danbury DTC as Ned was finishing up his statements. But I got some good video of him speaking directly to everyone who wanted to talk to him.

All in all, it was a fun day. Video clips should be up in an hour or two.

First Newtown Report

It's great to be holding down the fort here while CTBob is with Ned today, shooting video to post later this afternoon. Bob reports that Ned's supporters turned out big, with an estimated 200 people in and around the parade for Ned. Lieberman marched separately, and there are about 50 people in Lieberman attire, but "very vocal" as if to create noise to hide the low turnout. Certainly fewer than the other time he marched, in 2000, needing a nice hometown backdrop for pictures -- despite being invited at least nine times to particiate in this annual event.

And the best sign of the day award so far goes to the man dressed in the GWB mask, holding a sign that reads, "Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity and I love Lieberman"

We all got e-mails and press releases from the Lieberman campaign announcing the launch of his new Web site tomorrow, Tuesday. They will have a blog so the people of CT "can actively participate in the campaign debate and make your voice heard. So starting Tuesday, we invite you to log-in at www.Joe2006.com and sound off any time you want."

On behalf of CTBob blog, and many of the other CT Bloggers, we welcome the Lieberman campaign to the blog world. We think that there should be a free-flowing exchange of ideas so voters can judge for themselves.

But let's get one thing straight. Lieberman's site was never hacked. It fell under its own weight on primary day and was overwhelmed with traffic it couldn't handle. There was no hacking. There were no dirty tricks. There was no action from outside forces. Bob and I are way too busy to waste our time messing with somebody else's site as we keep up our own, and I would bet that the rest of the CT Bloggers would say the same. So, if they get comments they don't like, or the site crashes again, or there are any technical mishaps, don't go looking at us.

Joe vs. the Newtown Labor Day Parade

"Joe Lieberman is going to march in the parade, and that's final, dammit!"

This is what I imagine the senator barked at his staff after he found out the Newtown Democratic Town Committee "dis-invited" him to their yearly Labor Day parade. Joe couldn't have been very happy to see the local news media pick up on the story; had it not been publicized, he most likely would have quietly stayed home on Labor Day.

But now that the snub has become widely known, it's almost physically impossible for the egomaniacal politician to miss the parade. Lieberman would rather chop off a finger than let it seem that he was sent away like a petulant child for behaving in an annoying manner.

And the mass-mailing Joe sent out a few days ago seems to indicate he's ready for a "fight". I'm anxious to see how this will play out later this morning.

From the Newtown Bee (yes, I agree that a newspaper called the "Bee" sounds silly, but keep in mind that Newtown is still in many ways the small town it's always been):

Lieberman Controversy Attends Labor Day Parade Preparations
By John Voket

If US Senator Joseph Lieberman chooses to march in this year's Newtown Labor Day parade, he will likely do so as a true independent. Local members of the Democratic Town Committee, including First Selectman Herb Rosenthal and former staunch Lieberman supporter Jim Juliano, agree that the Senator has no reason to believe he is welcome to march beside other endorsed party candidates.

"By marching with members of the DTC and invited Democratic candidates and state leaders, it would give the impression that we support his candidacy," said Mr Rosenthal when asked about the issue late Wednesday.

"I told him through his office, that as a duly elected Democratic official, he's putting me in an uncomfortable, almost embarrassing position. We have a duly elected candidate, who was endorsed by a historic turnout of state Democrats in the recent primary. I don't have to march with [Sen Lieberman], the DTC doesn't have to march with him, so why would he want to make it look like he's in good graces with the Democratic Party?" Mr Rosenthal continued. "He is not in good graces with state Democrats."

It's rare in politics to see someone stand up like Mr. Rosenthal and give solid, indisputable reasons why he believes in something. I hope I get to interview him later today.

[...]

In fact, Mr Rosenthal pointed out that since he was elected first selectman, Mr Lieberman only opted to march in the town's Labor Day Parade once, prior to the 2000 election.

"He's only come to the parade once before. He's not coming here this year as the sitting US Senator, he's coming because he's a candidate in the fall election," Mr Rosenthal said.

Mr Rosenthal said he would take issue with any candidate who failed to be endorsed at the statewide convention, who opted to force a primary, and then upon losing, continued to mount a full-scale campaign by petition for the general election.

"He was privately and publicly asked not to run by many state Democrats, and decided to run anyway even after he lost the primary. Philosophically, I have a problem with that," Mr Rosenthal said. "And I'm not going to reward that behavior by marching beside him on Labor Day."

A spokesman for the Lieberman campaign said the Senator takes marching in the Newtown parade very seriously, and that he works very hard for the people of Newtown.

What the Senator means is that he takes marching in the parade ONCE EVERY NINE YEARS very seriously.

Those other eight years...eh, not so much.

[...]

Mr Gerstein said he spoke with the Senator's scheduling aide Thursday morning, and confirmed that Mr Rosenthal had called personally to say Mr Lieberman was not welcome to march with the DTC, and that the first selectman would not march beside the Senator.

"This infers that Senator Lieberman is not welcome at the parade," Mr Gerstein said.

Dan, you missed your true calling. I think you should have been a rocket scientist. Nice deduction there, Professor Obvious!

"But the Senator believes there is too much at stake to walk away [following the primary], and he wants to give all Connecticut voters a real choice in November."

Mr Juliano said that as the local DTC vice chair, he agrees that the Senator should march in a separate unit, if he opts to join the parade September 4, adding that he supported Mr Lieberman up to the primary but remains undecided about his endorsement going forward. As a former officer for the statewide Plumbers and Fitters Local 777, Mr Juliano admitted that the Senator may have single-handedly headed off a small scale depression in Connecticut and Rhode Island when he crossed party lines to oppose the closing of the Groton submarine base earlier this year.

"Mr Lieberman was able to save 600 ship-fitter's jobs at Electric Boat, and 3,200 other jobs at that facility. I understand that a lot of people are sore about [his support of] the war, but closing that sub base would have triggered an economic depression that would have affected all of Connecticut and Rhode Island," Mr Juliano said. "I don't support the war...never did, but as a member of the executive board of the state Building Trades Association, I can't ignore the fact that he saved a lot of jobs."

Keep in mind that Joe didn't do this single-handedly. It's his job to keep the military base open, along with Dodd and all our Representatives; also, EB announced a buttload of layoffs starting next year. So Joe, are you going to take credit for THAT, too?

Mr Juliano said he is supporting the DTC in refusing to march beside the Senator.

"He's not the Democratic candidate, he didn't carry Newtown in the primary, and he didn't receive Newtown's endorsement in the state convention. He's an independent and he should march as an independent," Mr Juliano said.

Is Lieberman "push polling"?

Via a comment by Sue at ConnecticutBLOG

And I'm sure CT Blogger won't mind me stealing this, seeing as he's off watching tennis at the U.S. Open this weekend while the rest of us bloggers are slaving away, trying to you know, save democracy and stuff...yeah, you go and enjoy your tennis!

(...and this coming from a guy who will drop everything at a moment's notice to go sailing! LOL!)

Anyway, it appears that supporters of Joe Lieberman are engaging in a despicable and unethical practice known as "push polling". Read this Letter to the Editor at the Stamford Advocate and see what I mean:

Poll was attempt at sneak attack on Lamont candidacy
Published August 31 2006
To the editor:

On Tuesday night, I participated in a seemingly innocent political survey, answering questions about candidates Rell, DeStefano, Schlesinger, Lieberman and Lamont.

After about 15 minutes of what seemed to be legitimate questions about my voting intentions, the questioning veered into "if you knew this about Ned Lamont, would it make you more or less likely to vote for him," followed by various insidious accusations about his business practices.

Clearly, I was now on the receiving end of a push poll designed to create a negative image of Mr. Lamont. Throughout the previous questioning, I had expressed my firm intention to vote for Mr. Lamont. My eventual realization -- that I was the victim of a push poll -- caused me to angrily cut off the interviewer and finally hang up on him. (CTBob: "Bravo!")

I hope Sen. Lieberman is not involved in using this reprehensible tactic. I urge voters to do what I failed to do: Ask the caller to identify the name and address of the research firm he or she is working for before agreeing to participate in any phone survey.

Incidentally, my intention is even stronger now to vote for Ned Lamont.

Peter Weinberg
Stamford

Team Connecticut or Team Incumbent Protection?

The morphing of Lieberman to Republican becoming more evident with each passing day...from the NY Times

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.”

[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.]

Mr. Lieberman has shown that he is more than willing to speak to Republican and Democratic constituencies, and to retain advisers who can help him reach both. He recently hired, for instance, the same polling firm as Representative Simmons, the Republican whom Mr. Courtney is challenging in the Second Congressional District.

On Thursday, Mr. Simmons and Mr. Lieberman stood side by side at an event commemorating the anniversary of saving the Naval Submarine Base at Groton, which the Pentagon had recommended closing.

There, Mr. Simmons spoke of the importance of “Team Connecticut,” a term Mr. Lieberman often uses in suggesting that bipartisanship can bring more money to the state

Note how Gerstein tries to change what Lieberman said, as usual. And this from WABC television in NYC

"As I see it, in this campaign we just finished the first half and the Lamont team is ahead. But, in the second half, our team, Team Connecticut, is going to surge forward to victory in November," Lieberman said.

And look for Jodi Rell to be rolling out her membership in Team Connecticut in the coming weeks. What was a term used for all of CT's elected office holders to come together to save the Sub Base has now be co-opted for the cynical incumbent protection racket. Why am I not surprised?

Now Joe Gets His Own Ad...

This morning on the Sunday talk shows I've seen the Lieberman is great ad from the US Chamber of commerce 5 times. Yes, the same US Chamber of Commerce that is running ads for Nancy Johnson and Rob Simmons. Read more here and here

And, for you political junkies, MSNBC is going wall-to-wall politics on Wed, Sept 6 for the day.

Joe's "Call To Fight"

A friend of mine is on the Joe2006 email list, and today they sent him this happy little missive. Read and enjoy:

Dear Lieberman Supporter (actually, they used his real first name, but I don't want to reveal it here...

...oh, alright; it's Sean Smith. LOL!),

This coming week Round Two of our campaign begins. We hope you have your gloves on, because our Team Connecticut has a tough fight ahead of us, and we need your help more than ever.

Holy shit, Joe's people are getting mighty belligerent. I hope the Lieberkids don't take those words too seriously; I have visions of gangs full of paid teenaged hooligans showing up at public campaign events with nun-chucks and ninja masks!

Here are a just a few ways you can make a difference right from the get-go.

On Monday, September 4th I will be marching in the state's biggest Labor Day parade in Newtown with a group of local supporters. If you are free that day, we invite you to stand with us and show everyone that this campaign is about people, not politics.

We will begin marching at 10:00am. If you are interested, please call (860) 983-9035 or email events@joe2006.com for more information about where we'll be assembling. I look forward to seeing you out there.

Joe Lieberman was invited every year for the last nine years, yet he's only bothered to go to the parade ONE TIME; and that was when he was involved in his doomed run for the White House.

Only after he is disinvited by the Newtown DTC, who think he's being disingenuous by not abiding by the will of the voters in the primary, suddenly it's the most important thing in the world for him to attend.

Oh yeah, this is all about "people, not politics." Right!

On Tuesday, September 5th we will be officially kicking off the fall campaign with the launch of 'Joe's Doors and Diners Tour' in Waterbury. We welcome you to join us for this exciting event at the Bank Street Grille (70 Bank Street) at 12 noon.

Wow, that SOUNDS real exciting. Remind me to take a day off from work for THAT.

[...]

To reach as many people as possible, we will be organizing an army of volunteers to knock on doors in your own neighborhoods. If you would like to join 'Joe's Door to Door Corps', please visit www.Joe2006.com on Tuesday, September 5th to sign up.

Listen to those words, "army of volunteers", "Corps"...the brave terminology of the true Chickenhawk.

Because along with our new tour, we will be launching our new and improved website (www.Joe2006.com) on Tuesday as well.

We appreciate your patience as we substantially upgraded the site's security and functionality. And we are confident you will find the un-hacked version worth the wait.

The cavalcade of lies and slander continues to pour out of the Lieberman Campaign! How long are they going to stick with that lame fiction? Maybe you people should own up to the fact that your campaign has always been egregiously incompetent when it comes to utilizing the Internet, and you were using a cheap webspace provider that was quickly swamped on Primary Day and cut you off for overuse.

Joe Lieberman: Stop the Lies!

One of the first things you will notice is that we have added our own blog. That's a place you can find out the latest scoop on the campaign, in real time. Joe's Blog will also be a place you can actively participate in the campaign debate and make your voice heard. So starting Tuesday, we invite you to log-in at www.Joe2006.com and sound off any time you want.

Golly, that sounds like fun! I can't wait to "actively participate in the campaign debate and make my voice heard."

We expect our opponents to pull more than a few dirty punches in the coming months.

More Lies! You're lying. You're a big fat Liar! Hey everybody, look at the LIAR! Stop Lying, you Lying Liars!!!

Nah nah-nah nah-nah nah! (...yes, I'm obviously a fan of intelligent debate)

Help us fight back by making any kind of contribution you can. In the meantime, thanks again for your continued support. We are off to a great start for Round Two and with your help, we are going to have a knockout November.

Again with the fighting references! I guess when you abandon the Democratic process and ignore the will of the voters, the next logical step is to threaten to beat up your opposition. The implication is very clear.

And I wouldn't doubt that some of your weaker-minded supporters will take those words to heart.

Sincerely,
Joe Lieberman
Lieberman for Senate 2006

Since Joe's name appears on the bottom of this campaign email, we have to assume these are his words.

Actually, there's no doubt in my mind that the guy who skated on Vietnam with 5 draft deferments yet voted to send America's youth to a wrongful war absolutely wrote these words.

David Sirota to join Lamont team

Political strategist and NY Times bestselling author David Sirota has been hired by the Ned Lamont for Senate campaign to assist with research, rapid response, and strategy.

David appeared in New Haven last June for a book signing at Atticus Books on Chapel Street. His book "Hostile Takeover", about corruption in the government and what you can do to stop it, is a New York Times bestseller.

I taped David's discussion of his book, in a segment that's just over 4 minutes long.



Ned Lamont was at the book talk, and they both spoke about the campaign and related topics. About 11 minutes long.

Cool Link of the Day

Here's a really cool website that I just found via Fire Dog Lake.

It's called Pollster.Com, and it features graphs detailing the latest polling trends in many different races. They compile all recent polls for a particular contest so you can get a consensus view. It's a very handy tool, and I'm sure I'll be visiting this site many times in the future.

A lot can change in eighteen years

UptownNY Chick found this NY Times article from the 1988 Lieberman-Weicker Senate battle, and it contain some interesting observations and statements by Senator Lieberman.

The New York Times - September 17, 1988
Lieberman and Weicker Start Series of Debates
By NICK RAVO, Special to the New York Times

Attorney General Joseph I. Lieberman, running a clear second in his campaign for the United States Senate, took the offensive today in his first debate with Senator Lowell P. Weicker Jr., characterizing the three-term incumbent as a political misfit masquerading as a maverick.

[...]

Mr. Lieberman, who dismissed the assaults on his voting record as misrepresentations, attacked the Senator's record and criticized the liberal Republican's reputation as a political maverick.

''For 18 years, my opponent has gotten away with saying he's a maverick,'' the Attorney General said. ''Well, it's about time the people really understood what a maverick is. It means you're not ultimately accountable to anybody.

Yes, we know exactly how you feel. Hmmm...Joe mentions 18 years; you can almost cut the irony with a knife.

''You don't even have to make commitments, even to the voters you represent. You just do whatever suits you personally whenever you want to do it. I look at his record and see a pattern of incredible inconsistency.''

I can see how not making commitments to the voters, or doing whatever suits you personally can lead to a pattern of inconsistency. Believe me Senator, we're all very aware of that now.

He added that Mr. Weicker had voted against interests he professed to support, particularly on environmental issues.

[...]

Mr. Lieberman, of New Haven, who is known as a liberal Democrat and consumer advocate, also attacked Mr. Weicker, who lives in Greenwich, for misrepresenting the support Mr. Lieberman has received from William F. Buckley Jr., the conservative columnist, and his family. ''Bill Buckley endorsed me not because he loves me,'' Mr. Lieberman said, ''but because he and tens and thousands of other Connecticut Republicans can't stand Lowell Weicker's grandstanding.''

Exploring the Differences

The issues included the Pledge of Allegiance and abortions paid by Medicaid. Both candidates said they supported the Pledge, but did not think anyone should be forced to lead it. They also supported the right of poor women to abortions financed by Medicaid.

Wow, times have changed, haven't they? 18 years ago Joe supported publicly-funded access to abortion. Today, Joe is agreeable to publicly-funded Catholic hospitals denying victims of sexual assault access to Plan B emergency contraception.

The sole wide difference was on school prayer. Mr. Weicker said he was opposed to time being set aside for prayer. Mr. Lieberman said he supported a moment of silent meditation, but not a moment of organized prayer.

[...]

Mr. Lieberman, who said he had long expected to lose the labor endorsement, pressed on. ''It's time for a change,'' he said. ''It's time for somebody fresh.''

Indeed.

Talk About Trying to Hide...

This evening, the Friday before a holiday weekend, surprise, surprise, the Pentagon released the bad news about Iraq. Here's the AP story, there you can link to the entire sad report.

Just to be complete, the Pentagon is now going to monitor media

...seeking bidders for a two-year, $20 million public relations contract that calls for monitoring the tone of Iraq news stories filed by U.S. and foreign media.

Labor Day Kickoff

Our dear Spazeboy was at Ned's Labor Day kickoff today --

If it's going to rain anyway....

Make a note to watch Meet the Press on Sunday -- an hour-long debate between Bob Casey and Rick Santorum. I know it's like watching a NASCAR race, waiting for the crash...but the tantalizing thrill of seeing a really big one is part of the lure.

...And counting...

Friday, September 1. The 24th day since there has been a Web site with information on issues at joe2006.com. By contrast, look at Alan Schlesinger's site!

Who's the Real Clown in the Newtown Parade?

OK, let's get this straight. Joe Lieberman thinks he should march with the Democratic Town Committee in the big Newtown Labor Day parade. Our hero, Herb Rosenthal got to call Gerstein/Lieberman and tell him no, he is not welcome to march with the Democrats. Gerstein decided to make this public, why? Here's the article Now, I'm not a betting woman, but how comfortable would you be putting money on this?

Deweese said she has had to be "forceful" with Lieberman's office to make it clear that there will be no large distance separating Lieberman's cadre and the Democrats marching in the parade."Senator Lieberman is a good man," Deweese said. "But I told him the tasteful thing is to come and line up where I tell him to. And he was OK with that."

Oh, yeah, right, and the check's in the mail too.
Click here to thank Herb for being a stand-up Democrat. (H/T My Left Nutmeg)

Block the Vote Special Tonight

This week NOW [on PBS] looks at several states where these new rules may keep voters away from the polls in November.

Critics charge that the Bush administration is part of the problem as the U.S. Department of Justice, which is charged with protecting the rights of all voters, has signed off on a number of the new regulations.

In Florida, new penalties that can reach up to $5,000 for registration delays or problems, which forced traditional registration advocacy groups, like the League of Women Voters, to avoid registering voters for a crucial primary.

"The law has done harm because the League of Women Voters, as well as other organizations, were not able to register voters before the primary," said Dianne Wheatley-Giliotti, the president of the LWV in Florida.

More on the show plus streaming video after it airs. Here is where to get broadcast times in your area.

Another example of how Lieberman has changed

From an appearance on CNN'S Larry King on October 31, 2000, immediately before the 2000 election. Hat tip to UptownNYChick on FDL.

Larry asked Joe about the fact that he was running for Senate reelection and VP simultaneously. Here's the transcript:

KING: Any second thoughts on staying on the ballot in Connecticut for the Senate?

LIEBERMAN: No, it's over. I did what the folks in the Connecticut Democratic Party who nominated me asked me to do. I will abide by the decision of the people of Connecticut.

Not anymore, huh, Joe?

And somebody explain this exchange:

KING: Help us. What happens if you win on next Tuesday, the vice presidency? What happens to the Senate seat in Connecticut?

LIEBERMAN: Well I think the legislature will try to have a special election next year. The governor is not so sure he wants that to happen. There will be a push and pull. At worst, there will be a special election two years from now, when everybody who wants to participate can. A lot of them who wanted to run for the Senate were running for other offices this year couldn't, and the voters can participate as they couldn't fully this year, because there was no time to have primaries.

So I think it's in the best interests of the people of the state. But a seat in the Senate shouldn't be filled on the run.

I mean, holy shit! Lieberman knew perfectly well that Rowland would appoint a replacement Senator, who would absolutely be a REPUBLICAN.

At the time, there was a 50-50 split in the Senate, so if all things remained the same and Gore/Lieberman won the White House, Rowland would have appointed a Republican and have given them a one-seat majority.

And Joe is acting like that wouldn't happen. Sheesh!

At the time I was so pissed at Lieberman, I voted FOR Gore/Lieberman, but AGAINST Lieberman for Senate.

And I'm proud to say that I voted against Joe Lieberman before I voted against him.

Yeah, NOW Joe is begging for a debate!

Remember months ago when Lieberman was sitting pretty with a huge lead in the polls? Ned Lamont had been challenging Lieberman to debate him for MONTHS, and Joe couldn't be bothered.

Finally, after Joe read the writing on the wall and committed to a debate, he'd already decided to flee the Democratic party and form his own vanity party.

Then he lost the primary.

Now this is the same guy who's pleading with Ned to have a debate.


See what I mean? Joe was dead set against a debate. He finally realized that he'd look like a total coward if he didn't meet Ned on TV, so a short while later he agreed to the debate.

(As an aside, I did ask Ned a week or so later if he thought this video convinced Joe to agree to the debate. Ned laughed and said, "In all honesty Bob...No!" LOL!)

From ConnecticutBLOG:

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.

(UPDATE: I was wondering why Lieberman didn't mention John Mertens, the Independent Party candidate; well, it turns out that so far Mertens hasn't had enough validated signatures to get on the ballot, so that's probably why he wasn't mentioned. My mistake; and unlike Dan Gerstain, I will admit when I make a mistake BEFORE everyone points it out!)

"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.