Dennis Kucinich to visit CT next week

THIS JUST IN!

Congressman and Presidential Candidate Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) will visit Connecticut this coming Saturday (Feb. 17th), according to information I just receieved.

The Congressman will make several appearances in the state on his way up to New Hampshire for the remainder of the President's Day weekend. Plans are still being discussed, but there may be a press conference in Westport on Saturday afternoon and a stop in Newtown. I've been told that local bloggers will be given an opportunity to interview Kucinich prior to the press conference.

When the schedule is confirmed I'll post additional details here. Visit Congressman Kucinich's website kucinich.us.

Ned live-blogging at FDL today!

Drop on over to Fire Dog Lake at 2PM (ET) this afternoon to join Ned Lamont in a live-blogging session.

UPDATE: The live session is now over, but you can still read the entire session at this link. Ned raised some good points, but I dunno, he seemed a little swarmed by all the questions coming in at once. I don't know if he had someone typing in his responses, or if he did it all himself. If he did his own typing, it might explain why he didn't get to some of the questions.

Of course, we all wanted to know if he'd run against Congressman Chris Shays (R-4) in '08, but I didn't expect him to answer that today. Hopefully we'll be able to wheedle it out of him during our hard-hitting in-depth interview next month.

And for those who haven't yet seen my video of Ned's "Thank You" party (taped a month ago), here it is:

Amann throws down with Mother

Let me be the first to say, "Wow!"

The day after Governor Rell dropped her little bomblet earlier this week about how she wants to raise our taxes, House Speaker James Amann wasted no time letting us know exactly how he feels. This from today's Hartford Courant:

...the House speaker on Thursday charged she "didn't have the guts to tell people" during last fall's election campaign that she planned to raise taxes.

The allegation by Democratic House Speaker James Amann was part of a sometimes fiery, sometimes condescending exchange of statements between him and the governor over funding her plan for sweeping improvements to the state's public schools.

That was cool, but things heated up when Jodi and Jim started an ugly and extremely public dialogue about their positions:

"Frankly, the speaker is the speaker of the House. He knows better," Rell chided. "That's not how you operate."

Awww, no she didn't!

The ball had been spiked firmly back into Amann's court. God knows, but Jim seems to love this kind of exchange:

Told of that remark, Amann retorted, "I don't need Mother Rell to wag her finger in my face about budgets." Then he assailed her for not talking about tax increases before an election she ultimately won in a landslide.

BTW, who was the little tattletale who "told" Amann of Rell's remark? Seems like someone's being a "busy body" (could it have been the author of the Courant article, Chris Keating? Who knows...no random reporter usually has the uncommon luck to hear both sides comment on the issue without being something of an instigator!)

Jodi rallied when discussing the one billion dollar surplus the state apparently is hoarding for a rainy day with this statement:

"My comment to that is this is exactly the mistake that was made in the early '80s, when people said we have this money, let's go ahead and pay for this new program," Rell said. "And the next year, it wasn't there. The worst thing we could do now is use one-time revenue for any ongoing program."

She added: "It's just not feasible to do that. ... There's some tough decisions to be made."

Amann responded in true "I will CRUSH you!" style with a classy smackdown of the Governor:

"First of all, she's all wet," Amann said of Rell. "We raised too many taxes already or else we wouldn't have a surplus. Somebody's being overtaxed, and I think the governor should understand that. I don't need to be lectured by someone who was part of the Rowland-Rell administration. Give me a break!"

Jesus H. Christ, but I really do love the way Jim talks! Who still says something like "she's all wet"? I can't write shit as good as what he spews out of his mouth in the presence of journalists...or even, for that matter, in the presence of any jackass who happens to be holding a video camera! Jim speaks with the total abandon of someone who just doesn't give a shit what people think!

That's an admirable and extremely rare trait these days. Most politicians will take a moment to compose a politically-advantageous (or at least non-controversial) response, while Jim Amann tends to speak exactly what's on his mind. The only time he uses a filter is when he stops and thinks about the reprecussions of what he's going to say...

...and that's when you have to worry!

Candidate theme songs

In this Daily Show clip from The Raw Story.com, Jon Stewart examines each candidate's middle-of-the-road pop song they're using for a campaign theme. And then there the "humble-off".

Jailed Blogger hits record

Here's what might have happened to Ken Krayeske if he'd been carrying a video camera instead of a Nikon.

From this story in CNet News:

SAN FRANCISCO--Dozens of supporters of jailed freelance video blogger Josh Wolf gathered at City Hall here Tuesday to rally for Wolf's release.

Those attending the demonstration held up signs with the words "Free Josh," and speakers were insistent on the unfairness of his imprisonment. Ross Mirkarimi, a San Francisco supervisor, said he was "angry as hell about this" and called for a "serious outcry, and not just only by us." In a statement, California state Assemblyman Mark Leno, who did not attend the rally, called Wolf's plight a "travesty of justice."

[...]

On August 1 (2006), Wolf, 24, was jailed for contempt of court for refusing to cooperate with a federal grand jury seeking unpublished footage he shot during a 2005 protest that turned violent. Wolf was released on bail a month later while his appeal was being considered. But a three-judge panel rejected the appeal and revoked bail.

Wolf might normally be protected by California's Shield Law. But federal prosecutors, who want to see if Wolf's footage shows a San Francisco police car being set on fire at the protest, say they have jurisdiction over the case because the car was paid for in part by federal dollars. While many states have enacted shield laws to protect journalists from revealing confidential sources, notes and unpublished materials, there is no federal shield law to protect Wolf.

Josh Wolf has set the record for the longest-held journalist under contempt, for not turning over his tapes.

Obviously, this story has major implications for anybody with a video camera and a blog. Here in Connecticut, I thought this kind of thing was unlikely to ever happen.

And then Governor Rell's parade happened.

So now, it's apparent that we live in a state where our leaders can target specific "troublemakers", and the police are given lists and photos of those targeted individuals, who haven't committed any crime other than exercising their right to dissent.

And they may be thrown in jail for just showing up!

Click this video link to see Josh explain his stance at a press conference.

And if you see me at a public event with my video camera, please DON'T break the law right in front of me.

Because if you do, I'll roll over on you so fast it'll make your head spin!

Hey, summer is coming and I refuse to spend ANY of it in jail to protect your dumb ass!

Even more like being there

Because now, you can actually WATCH people talking about the Scooter Libby trial.



Jane from Fire Dog Lake (looking fabulous, I'm happy to say) and the always spot-on Swopa from Needlenose take a few minutes to summarize yesterday's trial events on PoliticsTV.

I'm really enjoying the many videos by PoliticsTV available both from their website and on Youtube (search "Politicstv"). These guys are doing the kind of journalism that I truly think is going to be an integral part of the political landscape.

The biggest question of the trial is whether Dick Cheney will be called to testify or not. My guess is he won't; Libby's boat is so full of holes that Cheney stepping aboard with a caulking gun ain't gonna make much difference, except that Dick might end up going down with the boat. I'd be amazed if he was called.

And will Lewis "Scooter" Libby testify in his own behalf? It looks like the replayed Grand Jury testimony is hurting his chances, but there might not be much to be gained by his testifying except perhaps additional perjury charges in the future.

Take some time and read Fire Dog Lake for their phenomenal coverage of this crucial trail. We might be seeing the first step in bringing this administration to accounts.

Just like being there

For many years, I've been a huge fan of political intrigue.

Ever since I was 14 and watched the Watergate hearings televised during the dismal summer of 1973 on my 13" black and white TV, I've been interested in political trials and hearings.

I watched the Iran-Contra hearings, the Clinton impeachment, the Iraqi War Crimes trials (OK, that last one won't happen for several years, but we'll see W finally have to answer for his atrocities).

Sadly, the Scooter Libby trial isn't being televised.

But the amazing folks over at Fire Dog Lake are taking the initiative in covering this trial. They've put together a team of some of the most talented bloggers and commentators on the internet.

They're live-blogging from the courtroom and the media room, providing fascinating summaries of the action and testimony with informed commentary. For someone like me who's working full-time during the day, it's become a daily fix for me to read the latest FDL coverage of this significant trial.

Visit FDL and check out the articles, like this one from earlier today that covered Libby's Grand Jury testimony.

The 47 Second Flip-flop

Repost from My Left Nutmeg (article by Scarce):

From this morning's This Week with George Stephanopoulos. Are these statements made by John McCain within 47 seconds of one another contradictory or not? We report, you decide. [Video from Think Progress]

MCCAIN: Took us a long time to get in the situation we're in, and to say that - and somehow assume that in a few months, that things are going to get all better I think is not realistic.

...and then there's this:

  STEPHANOPOULOS: You say it's all in. How long are you going to give it to work?

  MCCAIN: I think in the case of the Iraqi government cooperating and doing what's necessary, we can know fairly well in a few months.

Lieberman says No to VP run

In this story in the Hartford Courant (h/t to TParty), Joe Lieberman is asked about his future plans, vis a vis running for VP (or even P).

He calls himself an independent, though he remains a member of the Senate Democratic caucus, giving it a one-vote majority. He publicly flirts with voting Republican for president in '08 - prompting speculation he might join Republican Sen. John McCain on a fusion ticket.

"No, that's not going to happen," Lieberman said Friday on his way into Ollie's. "My days of seeking national office are over. I'm very happy, particularly after what I went through last year to be the senator from Connecticut. I want to do the best job I can at that."

Now, we all know Joe's track record when it comes to him keeping promises. "Dismal" is a word that springs to mind.

But I think we need to look deeper into Joe's psyche and examine what he's really saying here.

First, Joe usually doesn't tell an obvious lie on purpose. What I mean is that Joe has always been a lawyer at heart, and he retains the sharp mind of an experienced litigator. He knows how to phrase his words so that they sound like one thing, but really mean something else. Or he crafts his statements to give him an "out", should he need it.

He's a clever S.O.B., but we all know that. How else could a politician recover from contradicting every single statement he made when he first ran for the Senate, like his claims that "three terms is plenty" and "my opponent missed 400 votes" when Joe himself easily missed MORE than that in less time? How can a guy in a blue state like Connecticut recover from being the only senator ever kissed by the singularly least-popular world leader since Czar Nicholas?

Because he's clever. Devious, too.

But hey, it's served him well all these years. He's got the survival instincts of a sewer rat, which is an animal that will viciously and irrevocably turn on its friends if threatened at all. 2006 will be remembered as the year that Joe lost while winning. His pyrrhic victory will forever brand his legacy as a turncoat and a grasping, ambitious politician who cares only for himself.

Getting back to his statement, Joe said his "...days of seeking national office are over." What's interesting is what he doesn't say. Partly because nobody asked him.

The question I'd like to hear him answer is this:

"Will you serve out your full term in the Senate?"

Because that's the question that really matters. Will Joe forego a VP run on the doomed "Unity 08" ticket because he's hoping to catch a prestigious appointment as Sec. of State or maybe UN Ambassador?

Think about this for a minute. If Joe quietly serves his 6 years and retires, he'll be remembered as the sorest loser of all time. He'll be considered a Bush lackey and cheerleader, a lapdog to the man who stole his ambitions. I doubt that his ego could accept such an ignominious legacy.

So maybe he'll parlay his continued support of Bush into a final couple years in a high profile post, and simultaneously give the Senate back to the Republicans by resigning and letting Gov. Jodi "You're gonna be on my list too, CT Bob" Rell appoint his replacement.

That would be the ultimate "fuck you!" to the Democrats, who so brutally humiliated him in the primary and who now deserves to suffer all the pain that they inflicted upon his fragile self-image.

Only then would Joe Lieberman feel vindicated.

Never doubt for a minute the motivating power of pure vengence.

Our Lame-assed Senate

OK, I'm starting to get a little fed up with our new Democratic Senate "majority". As a result of some amazing victories in the recent election, the Democrats came roaring into power this year amid much fanfare and ballyhoo.

I wasn't even completely sure what "ballyhoo" meant, so I looked it up on Dictionary.com and found out that it can mean a "sensational or clamorous advertising or publicity" or a "noisy shouting or uproar".

Great, so we ballyhooed a bunch of Democrats into former Republican seats in the Senate, and now we'll finally get to work on ending our direct involvement in that stupid, bloody, wasteful war in Iraq.

Except...they don't seem to actually WANT to do that.

These idiots, and I use the term "idiots" equally and without political prejudice because I'm waiting to see if the Senate manages to accomplish ANYTHING AT ALL with their newfound political power...these idiots somehow seem to think that voting on a NON-GODDAMNED-BINDING resolution to call for reducing US involvement in Iraq is a lot better than Senator Dodd's plan for REAL change in our Iraq policy that was unceremoniously tossed out like a used Kleenex by our elected officials.

Jesus, are they completely brain dead?

Chris Dodd and Senator Feingold have come out and said they weren't going to support the weak-assed Warner-Levin resolution, which is about as useful as teats on a boar hog. Good on them. Let it fail miserably and maybe the rest of the Senate will see that the ONLY good resolution is a resolution that actually DOES SOMETHING!

Now THAT would be reason for some ballyhooing.

Markos has a nice overview at DailyKOS, reposted here in it's entirety:

Is there anything more pathetic than Senators fighting tooth and nail over wording over a non-binding resolution that does absolutely nothing?

Well, Feingold is done playing that silly game.

I oppose the weak Warner-Levin resolution as currently written because it misunderstands the situation in Iraq and shortchanges our national security interests. The resolution rejects redeploying U.S. troops and supports moving a misguided military strategy from one part of Iraq to another. The American people have rejected the President’s Iraq strategy and it’s time for Congress to end our military involvement in this war. We must redeploy our troops from Iraq so that we can focus on the global threats that face us.

Yesterday, Feingold introduced the Iraq Redeployment Act of 2007. Feingold’s bill would force the President to safely redeploy U.S. troops out of Iraq by prohibiting further funding of military operations in Iraq six months after enactment.

Dodd will also oppose the useless Warner-Levin amendment.

Dodd, D-Conn., became the second Democrat to say he would vote against the measure. Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wisc., is also against the bill, which is expected to be debated in the Senate next week.

Dodd's central argument was that a non-binding resolution is meaningless.

This complicates Reid's efforts to get to 60 votes, and it's a good thing. Kill this piece of crap dead.

What's the point of a useless amendment? Is Reid really that desperate to give Jon Stewart more material for the Daily Show.

Reid should introduce BINDING legislation. Let the Republicans vote against it. It'll give us grist to use in the 2008 elections. The American people didn't elect a Democratic Congress to waste time passing useless, non-binding resolutions that Bush can easily (and gleefully) ignore.

A successful non-binding resolution will be no more useful in ending this disastrous war than a failed binding one. So let's make a real statement on the war, not empty platitudes and rhetoric.