Schiff supporters disrespect Memorial Day ceremony

Okay, I understand that the tea baggers simply love to debate issues like the national debt with any congressman they can corner, but to do so at a ceremony observing Memorial Day is disrespectful to the memory of those brave military men and women who gave their lives to defend our nation.

From Capitol Watch Blog:

U.S. Rep. John Larson and some supporters of Republican U.S. Senate candidate Peter Schiff reportedly tangled at the Memorial Day commemoration in Newington yesterday.

Here's Larson spokesman Paul Mounds' assessment: "To summarize it- Congressman Larson, an invited attendee to Newington Memorial Day Parade, was aggressively approached by an individual who appeared to be associated with the Schiff Campaign,'' Mounds wrote in an email. "They had a spirited exchange, however it is unfortuate that these tea party tactics were being used at a time in which Congressman Larson, fellow parade participants and attendees were honoring and thanking our veterans."

And here's the take of a Schiff supporter who was there (via an email from Schiff campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Millikin):

"Schiff campaign staffer and volunteers get in heated debate with Congressman John Larson over responsibility for the national debt. During argument Larson claimed that the military was a social program which has increased the national debt.

"He then accused [a] staffer...of making the statement regarding the military. [The staffer] pointed out that the congressman was being untruthful as he made the statement. Larson went on to claim that he was not responsible for the deficit growth as he voted against entering Iraq and Afghanistan and that he was not responsible for our largest social program, the military."

Listen, it's rude enough for campaign employees to set up a table and collect signatures at a Memorial Day ceremony so your loser candidate can slither his way onto the Republican ballot come August, but to then lose control of yourself and "aggressively approach" a congressman in order to shout your stupid opinions into his face at a somber event like that is absolutely repulsive and disrespectful!

It's the one day during the year that extremist politics should be kept out of the discussion. Someone should teach those idiots some manners; their parents obviously failed miserably at it.

Memorial Day: Ways to get involved

(reposted from The Huffington Post)

The meaning behind Memorial Day is often overshadowed by excitement for weekend vacations, barbecues and beach days. This year, take time to honor the men and women that have lost their lives serving in the armed forces.

Tune in for the National Memorial Day Concert, which will be broadcast Sunday, May 30. You can check local listings by searching your zip code on the PBS website.

Ways to get involved:

• Honor fallen heroes by volunteering at a veterans cemetery on Memorial Day or any time of year. Volunteers can give cemetery tours, help with maintenance, raise and lower flags and more. Use the National Cemetery Administration website to find a volunteer opportunity near you.

• Attend a Memorial Day parade. Search the U.S. Memorial Day Parade Directory to find an event in your community.

• The American Red Cross is asking volunteers to honor Memorial Day by giving blood to save American lives. Call 1-800-RED CROSS or visit the Red Cross website to make an appointment to donate.

• Bring a smile to the faces of deployed troops around the world by sending them a USO Care Package. Each care package is $25.

• Make a contribution to Cell Phones For Soldiers, an organization collecting donated cell phones to help troops abroad call home. Donors can give their old cell phones or make a financial contribution to the program.

• Support veterans in your community by volunteering at a local VA hospital. The easiest way to get started is to fill out a volunteer form with the VA Volunteer Service and a representative will help you find the right volunteer opportunity for you. Read Causecast's How To Support Veterans guide for more suggestions on how to make a difference for local veterans.

Kevin Lembo's acceptance speech

Kevin Lembo's acceptance speech for State Comptroller at the 2010 State Democratic Convention.

Nancy Wyman's acceptance speech

Nancy Wyman accepts the endorsement of the party at the 2010 State Democratic Convention for Lt. Governor.

Denise Merrill's Acceptance Speech

House Majority Leader Denise Merrill accepts the endorsement of the party at the 2010 Democratic State Convention for Secretary of State.

George Jepsen's acceptance speech

Attorney General candidate George Jepsen accepts the party endorsement during the 2010 Democratic State Convention.

Malloy's response to Q-Poll

Today Dan Malloy's campaign manager Dan Kelly released a statement about the latest Quinnipiac Poll:

So much for Ned’s poll in which he claimed to be leading by 35 points; if his poll was right and the Q-poll is right that’s an 18-point drop for him. Not great. As for the Q-Poll, in January Dan was at 11 and Ned was at 27. Today Dan’s at 24 and Ned’s at 41. That means they’ve each moved by almost the same amount. But Ned’s spent a million dollars on TV and Dan hasn’t spent a dime.

Dan's use of the January poll conveniently neglects the results of the March Q-Poll, which showed Malloy only trailing by 10 points. Since then, Malloy won the party endorsement at the state convention, and he somehow lost 7 points! This does not bode well for the Malloy camp.

Given that he has this lead and all this money, I can’t understand why he has yet to accept Dan’s invitation to debate in every community in Connecticut where there’s a daily newspaper. What’s he afraid of?

"What's he afraid of?" Uh-oh! I'm getting the uncomfortably feeling that the Malloy campaign will soon resort to some Merrick Alpert-style taunting. I sincerely hope we don't descend to that level; how soon before we start receiving something like this in the mail?

My concern is that Dan Malloy's campaign is making a huge error by attacking Ned Lamont, rather than the Republican candidate. And Malloy hasn't been talking about the issues, whereas Lamont has been pushing his agenda for job growth and economic stability. I wonder how much of this is the result of several key former Lieberman staffers now employed by Malloy, since they spent much of 2006 talking about Lamont's wealth and not the issues.

As a reminder to everyone, in 2006 Lieberman won solely because the GOP refused to back their own candidate (what a great party!) and Joe Lieberman became their de facto nominee. With the backing of Karl Rove and all the money the Republican Party could raise (Mel Sembler anyone?) Lieberman was able to eke out a plurality, not a majority, of votes to hang on one more term.

And now we have guys who crafted Lieberman's attacks on Ned Lamont working for Dan Malloy.

I fear this is going to be a long, hot summer.

UPDATE: More on Dan Kelly's comments.

Dan quoted Lamont's internal poll, which placed him 35 points ahead of Malloy, and compared it to today's Q-Poll which showed him leading by 17. Kelly claims it was an 18-point drop.

But what Dan Kelly doesn't admit is that an experienced campaign manager like himself would absolutely know that comparing two different polls, with different sets of parameters, isn't like comparing apples and oranges; it's more like comparing apples to Buicks.

The Q-Poll merely questioned "registered Democrats", even those who haven't voted in the last several elections. Lamont's GHY poll questioned "likely" Democratic voters. It's a much more targeted segment of the population and, let's face it, the Democrats who are much more likely to drag themselves out of bed on August 10th and VOTE. Those voters are overwhelmingly going for Lamont.

So if you're going to compare two or more polls, I think it would be best to find several that use the same parameters. Like the last several Q-Polls, which show Lamont trending upward when compared to Dan Malloy, and gives Ned his largest lead yet.

Blumenthal, Lamont enjoy huge leads

According to a Quinnipiac poll due to be released this morning, Richard Blumenthal and Ned Lamont have significant leads in their respective races over their opponents.

As we head toward the August primary in the governor's race, Ned Lamont leads Dan Malloy 41% to 24% among registered Democrats, with 30% undecided. Lamont maintains his significant lead despite the fact that the poll was conducted after the state Democratic convention, which typically favors the party-endorsed candidate. Strangely enough, the poll didn't put either candidate head to head with GOP front runner Tom Foley.

Yesterday Dan Malloy issued a public call to Ned Lamont for 17 weekly debates leading into the primary. Lamont spokesperson Justine Sessions stated:

"Ned and Dan have appeared together more than 20 times already this year, and they'll do so again before the primary. But even after 20 joint appearances, we still haven't heard Dan offer a single idea for how to create jobs. If he wants to try a 'different kind of campaign,' that's where he should start.''

In the Senate race Dick Blumenthal continues to enjoy a huge lead over GOP favorite Linda McMahon 56% to 31% with 10% undecided. Blumenthal maintains his high favorable ratings despite a recent flap regarding his military service.

As an aside, Gene Lyons in Salon.com has called out the New York Times for deceptive journalism in the way it handled the "Vietnam" story. I like the fact that the author accuses the Times of "tactical omission", where they leave out or deeply bury facts that are important to the story on purpose. As Lyons says when talking about the Times "...the art of tactical omission can turn a relatively understandable overstatement like Blumenthal's into an indictment."

Dan Malloy's acceptance speech

Former Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy accepts the Democratic party endorsement at the 2010 State Convention on Saturday.

Simmons Out -- Pretty Much

Rob Simmons announced today that he is pretty much out of the campaign. This from the Courant:

Simmons is releasing his campaign staff and curtailing fundraising efforts, but his name will remain on the primary ballot. He did not say whether he would endorse McMahon or vote for her in November.

He seems to want to keep his options open...waiting for McMahon to implode, perhaps? More likely, I would think, would be his resurfacing in the 2nd CD race.

Here is the careful analysis [ahem] of the DSCC:

“We now likely have a race in Connecticut between a crusading attorney general with a long record of delivering for Connecticut families and a wrestling mogul who made her millions peddling violence to kids, hiding widespread steroid abuse, and sending her employees into dangerous situations in exchange for their glory and her profit."

Let the games begin.