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.