
Someday, and that day may never come, I’ll call on you to do a service for me.
Today, DSCC Chair Chuck Schumer held a conference call with bloggers. He was in a rush, walking and talking on a cell phone on his way to cast a vote. He talked to us about some interesting things Senate Dems are doing about tax breaks for the middle class, and to provide assistance with funding for college education, but we had been told in advance the call would be about senate races. We had our own questions (emphasis added):
Question: I’m curious: Is the DSCC taking a position where it will unconditionally support the eventual nominee of the Connecticut Democratic Party?
Schumer: We haven’t taken a position on that yet. . . (interrupted by crosstalk with staff over timing for a vote). What we do is. . . we are an organization of incumbents, and while we certainly find challengers who go up against incumbents, we support incumbents, so I know I didn’t answer your question, but we are supporting Lieberman at this point. Our general rule, and I don’t think there’s been an exception, is that we support the Democrat against the Republicans. We expect Lieberman will win, but if he doesn’t and Ned wins, my guess is we will support him. We haven’t taken a position on that but we’ve almost never deviated. I do not know of a time that the Democrats have deviated and not supported the Democrat.
Question: Would that hold if Senator Lieberman decided to run as an Independent?
Schumer: I think we’ll have to, you know, cross that bridge when we come to it, because it hasn’t happened. Will Senator Lieberman be pledging to vote for Harry Reid for Leader? Will he be running as a Democrat but on a different line? I don’t know; I’d have to give it. . . If it’s a Democrat versus a Republican, there’s no complicating factor. We’d, you know, almost always vote for the Democrat. In this situation we expect Lieberman to win. I don’t think. . . So, you know, we’ll have to weigh that when we come (sic). Our goal is first and foremost to elect a Democratic Senate. We think there’s a moral imperative there, given everything else, and I suppose that would guide our decision.
Question: So Senator, there’s a possibility that if Senator Lieberman runs as an Independent, and there’s another Democratic nominee, that the DSCC would be supporting the Independent?
Schumer: I’m not saying that there is a possibility. I’m saying we haven’t even begun to look at it yet.
Question: I hate to harp on this, but this is something that is big in the blogosphere. If the race does tighten, and Ned Lamont does make it a race, how committed is the DSCC to committing resources to Senator Lieberman since Senator Lieberman hasn’t committed to running as a Democrat?
Schumer: I think Senator Lieberman has committed to running as a Democrat to us. That’s me, and he has to Senator Reid.
Kind of speaks for itself, doesn’t it?
If you want to fight this sort of thing, help us Crash the Gate by participating in this Action Alert from this morning.
Update: Some people seem less bothered by this exchange than others. Fair enough. That’s why I reported it with minimal editorializing. But I have to ask, what’s so hard about the chair of the DSCC (emphasis on "D") saying the organization will unconditionally support the state’s chosen Democratic nominee? Is the person (the incumbent) bigger than the party? Is getting leadership control more important than respecting the will of the state’s Democratic voters? Winning is critically important, but what is winning for, and for whom?
I’m not stupid: I understand the strategic stakes and potential immediate-term ambiguities. But these kinds of questions tease out values, and we as a party have for too long made tactical, short term calculations at the expense of the Democratic movement in America, and at the expense of the country itself. That’s why we’re in the minority in every branch of the federal government.
Update II: Just to clarify, because some people seem confused. When Senator Schumer describes the DSCC’s overriding goal, he is referring to a Democratic controlled Senate. If the DSCC feels that goal is advanced by backing an Independent over a Democrat, then such matters would at least be considered. That’s the hypothetical calculus he’s describing.



235 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Oh I hope it is Fitzmas soon!
Like before I leave town later in the week! Please Christy bring me some Fitz!
Fitzo! Ahora! Immediamente!
smell the waffles
Oh, Pach…. how hysterical is it that the Amazon ad immediately to my right as I type this is highlighting “In Praise of Public Life” by Joementum? I’m sure all FDLers will want to click over and buy that one! Mwhahaha
Kind of speaks for itself, doesn’t it?
———————————————————-
I think it just means that he really hasn’t thought about it and doesn’t want to commit to a position. The establishment does not think that Lamont’s going to pull off an upset, so they really haven’t considered what they’re going to do if he does.
P.S. Fitz is in town, right? Tomorrow could be an interesting day.
It’s official. I despise Schumer. Before, I just thought he was a putz and not worth despising.
Nuff said. Speaks for itself for sure. They have all the marbles so they decide what to do with them. Well we are coming in to steal your marbles! Support Incumbents: well if they are not really Democrats who needs them. Shumer: you said you are committed to electing Democrats, well s’cuse me sir but Joe Liberman is no Democrat.
Keep up the good work all. I am so proud of your great work!
Hey Pach anymore takers on Roots NOLA? We are all overwhelmed with rebuilding but..I’m just saying…
I don’t like things he’s said in the past, but this doesn’t sound so bad.
…and people are telling me I should give to the party. No. I’ll give to individual candidates. And I have litmus tests. Not being Joe Lieberman is the first one. Not shilling for Joe Lieberman is another. I can of course understand why they have to talk nice about him, but he has earned at the very least some skepticism from his colleagues. Can somebody make Schumer a video of JoMo’s appearances on “Hannity”?
MsAnnaNola:
Email me. We just started one today. Small, but come on in.
I think it means that he has thought about it, is worried, and wants to brush the issue aside so as not to give the Lamont challenge further traction.
watching Abu the Terrible on cnn– he’s still talking like chimpy’s personal attorney, rather than speaking as our AG.
suprise.
What’s so hard about the chair of the DSCC (emphasis in “D”) saying the organization will unconditionally support the state’s chosen Democrat?
what exactly defines ‘Democrat’ ? and who defines it that way? why does it matter?
to the DSCC: it is somebody that will vote to put a ‘Democrat’ into leadership power. Same over at the DCCC: there’s only one supremely important partisan vote: who gets to be Speaker?
All the other votes of a Senator or Representative are secondary to that all-important first vote on the first day of ‘organization’…
I tend to agree with 5, probst. If anything, it just reinforces my own opinion that Schumer is a rather indecisive guy. I’m not reading any sort of “darth vader” type thing from him. Ask Schumer if the sun rises in the east, and he’d tell you he’s “pretty sure it does…as far as he can remember it does…but he hasn’t scientifically studied it”, instead of just saying: yes.
Ghostman
I am annoyed by the Hillarys and Chucks to say the least. They seem to think that electing a democratic congress should mean unconditional support for even traitors like coat-hanger Lieberman. Besides, he knows damn well the only viable republican candidate we got in CT for this race is Lieberman himself. Otherwise, it’s losers all around. Ned is the best man and the best Democrat we got.
Since when does the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee support independents over Democrats? That is some serious incumbency ass-covering that has absolutely nothing to do with what’s best for the party and everything to do with “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine.”
Thanks, Pach. Excellent work.
Rob Zuber @ 4:10 pm (#8) – What Schumer is doing, unless I read this very wrong, is that he’s threatening to not support Lamont if Lieberman loses the Democratic primary and runs as an independent. That’s a signal to the Democratic establishment in CT that they aren’t going to get any help if they move off the reservation by supporting Lamont.
If I were part of that establishment, I suspect my attitude would be “Don’t let the door hit your ass, Chuck”, but I’m clearly not blessed with the instincts of a politician.
kirby (4) that sounds like a fun plan. Heh! Another kossack attack on the deserving.
I understand why Schumer wants to protect Lieberman. After all, the democrats wouldn’t want to go pissing Lieberman off. Who knows what he might do – Start stabbing fellow democrats in the back left and right? Defend bush in the war in Iraq? Take republican positions on family planning? Vote to prevent filibustering of extremist supreme court nominees? Give Bush standing ovations every time he mentions ‘terra’?
Any of these things are possible if we don’t keep Joe firmly in our corner.
So please, for the sake of the party, please back off on Schumer – he just doesn’t want to ruin a good thing. Surely we can all understand that?
“We are an organization of incumbents”????
Fuck him. You are an organization of representatives of the American public you jackass!
OT – CNN/Blitzer’s Beard – why do we care that tony snow “choked up” at his first briefing. He did so much choking to get that job, it shouldn’t be news anymore.
I’m sorry. Did Don Cuccio say he would support Ned Lamont before or after he said he wouldn’t?
And in the picture, is that Hillary asking the Don if he wants Ned to be sleeping with fishes?
MsAnnaNOLA says:
May 16th, 2006 at 4:09 pm
Hey Pach anymore takers on Roots NOLA?
MsAnna, me. School is out and I’m coming home this week.
New Yorkers, please write to your “senators” and correct Chuck and Hillary. Please! Is there a google group for them up yet Pach?
to the DSCC, if Joe Stalin got elected as an Independent Senator from Connecticut, the only important question is whether he would support a Democrat for Senate leadership. The flip of Jeffords away from GOP to Independent (voting for Democrat leadership) flipped the power structure in the Senate temporarily…
Great stuff Pach. I agree with Cujo.
VICHY DemSchmuckie Schumur in New York puts someone like Ben Nelson in Nebraska in a less bad light.I have to believe that Schmuckie is extorting large cash deposits from conservatives for his support of Leibermann. Perhaps a very secondary benefit is that that cash doesn’t go directly to wingnuts.
IMO, Schmuckie’s “We haven’t taken a position on that yet” means, “I hope with all my
heartmight, that Joementum beats Ned in the primary, so I don’t have to dodge that question again.”Hey Schmuckie, go Dick Cheney yourself.
Cujo – I respond at the end of the last thread. Let’s just say we are in ways on different sides of parts of that debate. I have direct personal experience on the “job” front as an employer in AZ btw.
xyz- did you forget the snark tag? Hope so!
first, we can Liarberman, then we shitcan Screw-you-mer, then maybe we can take our party back.
Organization of incumbents? It sounds like a snooty club I wouldn’t want to belong to. Nice work Chuck.
“Fuck him. You are an organization of representatives of the American public you jackass!”
Bullseye.
xyz 20 — yes.
This is why I don’t support that Tripartate idea of the “new” dynamics of the Dem party: the pols, the “mainstream” and the netroots.
One, I consider myself part of the mainstream, and two, if we are not the mainstream all we can expect is the SOS from the pols – all we’ll be is marginalized.
At the end of the day there are only elected officials and voters. To paraphrase George Carlin: Why are there three?
CNN just showed some more pix of Valerie Whatshername in her Armani — damn, she’s hott ! Dazzling smile . . . Hubba-hubba…
What’s so hard about an 18-year incumbent Senator running in a Democratic primary saying he will unconditionally remain a Democrat?
I think the answers to both questions are the same.
I do like how Chuck is on a first-name basis with “Ned” now.
xyz @20 – That hurt to read!
Sounds like Schumer spells DSCC differently than anyone else: dScc. That might come as a surprise to Howard Dean. I wonder what the DNC thinks of the DSCC possibly not pledging to support the D in CT, whomever that may be?
Anyone heard from Dean on this?
EPU – in case you haven’t seen it already, I left you a post at 4:19 on the prior thread.
What Schumer is doing, unless I read this very wrong, is that he’s threatening to not support Lamont if Lieberman loses the Democratic primary and runs as an independent.
I don’t read it that way. I think he doesn’t want to say anything that could be interpreted to mean he thinks Lieberman can lose the primary, that’s all.
In PA today, I voted for progressive Pennacchio over too-conservative party choice Bob Casey for Senate, so I know how to ignore these guys. :)
Pach — a useful skill is knowing when not to ask the next question, because the answer you have so far is probably better than the next answer you can’t predict. Suppose the callers had stopped with Schumer’s answer about the moral imperative to elect Democrats. Ned may win the primary and he’s clearly a Democrat and would have won the most Democratic votes. So there’s an overwhelming argument to apply the principle: support the Democrat.
Obviously we have the benefit of hindsight, but wouldn’t that outcome be better than getting Schumer to say, twice more, that another option was on the table? The callers had boxed Schumer in, but kept pushing and forced him to keep another door open.
Organization of incumbents. Yeah, right. Conditionally incumbent. Right NYers?
BTW Ned’s Greenwald film looks and sounds great. I think Joe probably spent a lot on his souless diner ‘mercial.
Evil Parallel Universe @ 4:22 pm (#28) – Responded to your response there, as well.
*ilson attention to that kind of detail really does not serve you very well. ;) ;)
it is incumbent upon us to disrupt their cozy little club
Incumbent= S.O.S.
I don’t really care how much you’ve sniffed the wingnut seats of power because you, joey, have more face time than me– count me in, buddyboy. I am right behind you, sniffing your unholy trail. Maybe I’ll grow up to be a DINO too.
What’s so hard about an 18-year incumbent Senator running in a Democratic primary saying he will unconditionally remain a Democrat?
B/c long ago the little shit from CT stopped representing his constituents and decided the only person he needs to represent is the little shit.
We know of too many politicians who act the same way.
It is no different from the idea that we, and I think I can speak for all of us here, have never voted for any candidate so that they could turn their representation of us into a luxury lifestyle for themselves.
Long ago the Lieberman’s and the Schumer’s of the world sold their positions/souls (assuming they ever had one – I don’t think Lieberman ever did; Schumer I’m agnostic about) for their own aggrandizement.
It’s not about you baby; it’s all about them.
Number one: I don’t think he has even thought about it.
Number two: I’m a little hesitant of any blanket statement stating that they will unconditionally support the democratic nominee. Two words: Zell Miller.
So…..I’m curious. Suppose Leiberman wins the nomination over Lamont. But Lamont makes a real strong showing…final vote results are pretty darn close. Still, Lieberman wins the Deomcratic nomination.
A groundswell erupts for LAMONT to run as an independent. Lamont tosses his hat in the ring. Who do you support in the general election?
Ghostman
VG – see, *ilson can get away with that, whereas certain married guys might refrain -
ah, hell, she is awful purdy
Jason Leopold is such a hack. Do you think he will ever out his sources? No, because he has no sources — at best he’ll do what Tom Maguire said — pick three names at random from the White House staff list, accuse them of leaking to him and then when they deny it say “aha!”
He’s an absolute embarassment to anyone and everything he touches. No wonder Raw Story sacked him and every reputable blogger has denounced him. He makes Matt Drudge look like Murrow.
Prior thread, Cujo, I really liked your emphasis on white collar responsibility for illegal immigration.
Atty Gen. Gonzalez was asked about the legal status of his own immigrant parents – he said it was uncertain. UNCERTAIN??? If they were indeed naturalized, there’d be records somewhere and the parents would proudly retain the certificates. Face it: his parents were ‘wetbacks’ . . .
Thanks, Chuckie Headcheese. I just sent another donation to Ned Lamont in your honor.
scarecrow:
Not sure I follow you. His moral imperative is to have Dems in the majority, so if an Independent Lieberman promised to vote for Reid for Majority Leader, that fits his goal. Certainly, that’s not a choice he wants to have to face.
More than one person did the questioning, but the bloggers ask the questions their readers want answered, and in that context, I think the ramp up was entirely appropriate to tease out the DSCC’s position, to the extent it has one.
Jane, thanks – glad we are in agreement.
Seriously, how can the Democratic party consider supporting Lieberman as an independent?
This is a man who consistently crosses party lines to support the worst president in American history. He is not a Democrat. He is not even a traditional conservative.
Lieberman will go down in history as a Republican extremist for the sole reason that he chose the worst moment in history to give aid and comfort to the single worst president, and administration in american history. He chose to throw his support behind the worst and most virulent strain of Republican extremism that this country has ever seen.
It is beyond astonishing that any Democrat would choose this point in time to support this particular administration and this Republican congress. But it is what it is.
Rob Zuber @ 4:31 pm (#39) – If that were Schumer’s objective, he could have just said “We’ll support the Democratic nominee” and left it at that. Unless he’s just the putz I thought he was, there was a message for someone in there. He deliberately avoided saying they’d support the Democratic nominee under all circumstances, and instead made a point of saying fealty to Reid was an important consideration.
Pach – bravo!
The message Schumer is sending to party leaders in CT is “if you back Ned, don’t expect the big bucks for the election” and that can be a very effective tactic given that local parties depend on spillover from the bit senate campaign to help their candidates.
Schumer not committing to support the Dem is astonishing even in this climate and should, I think, be a sign to those who argue for loyalty to the party – it’s not even loyal to itself.
Ghostman: Lamont has promised to run as a Democrat, win or lose, and to support the choice of the state’s Dem voters. Lieberman has not made those promises, and his position on running as a potential Independent has been unclear. Schumer essesntially acknowledges this with his use of the words “I think. . .”
Cujo – from the Jack thread
How can Comey claim to know that there are foreign policy implications to this case? He’s in DoJ, not in the State Dept. I don’t get that. Is it common for a (Deputy) Attorney General to assert such a thing?
In the Arar case, the determinations as to how to handle Arar seem to have been made by FBI and Immigration initially and Immigration and it seems that the ultimate assertions of State Secrets where the originating actor is FBI probably should be the AG – FBI is within DOJ and AG is head of DOJ. (I guess immigration is now withing Dept H.Sec. and that is where Ridge came in – heck if I understand how they have DHS organized) Comey was Acting AG for that matter – Ashcroft was a named defendant and so they lawyered it (right call on this – even if I don’t like any of the rest) by having him recuse himself and Comey as Acting make the determination on State Secrets.
Hope that makes sense.
Rob Zuber @ 4:31 pm (#39) – BTW, great that you voted for Chuck P. Hopefully, many more will as well.
Schummer and Reid (S&R) are imperialisticly consistent. Screw what the people in the state want as a Dem nominee, (S&R), determine who runs, who they will support…Look what happened to a popular ex-marine who wanted to run for senate in Ohio. No wonder the dems keep losing with these losers (S&R) at the helm of the DSSC. They outbush Bush as deciders.
Ghostman 48. I will support the progressive in this case, because we got stabbed by too many coathangers in the back by this dick called Lieberman.
No wonder WE THE PEOPLE do not feel represented – because we aren’t. Political gamemanship vs. real people. Yuch!
————-
“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you”. Friedrich Nietzche
WE NEED A NEW YORK NED!!!
NY progressives couldn’t get it together to run even a symbolic primary challenger against Schumer in 2004 (the year he defended the rectitude of torturing “ticking time bombs” at a hearing where other Democrats were tearing John Ashcroft a new rectitude of his own over Abu Ghraib).
So the door won’t be hitting Schumer in the ass until at least 2010.
Now the same lassitude is preventing NY progressives from getting behind Jonathan Tasini, or someone, to challenge Hillary.
If Connecticut has its Nedrenaline, can New York find its Tastosterone? Or some alternative energizing fluid?
Or to switch metaphors, where’s the asteroid for New York’s lumbering DINOs?
I’m in. If we can make requests, I’d like my copy to go to Ken Salazar. I’ll refrain from asking you to bounce it off his noggin.
he could have just said “We’ll support the Democratic nominee†and left it at that.
I disagree. I think the press would run the headline, “Schumer thinks Lamont can win!”.
And, oh yuck, I just discovered that man-on-dog boy himself votes only a few miles away from me. He did have a little trouble today, though. :)
58, Pach: got it. I prefer that Lamont have that attitude. Good for him. Now….last I read anything about this race, Lamont seems to be pretty far behind? I guess….well, I always considered Connecticut to be pretty liberal, and thus Lieberman’s many tilts towards Bush would put him in disfavor there.
Why aren’t the voters of that state feeling more negative towards ole Joe?
Ghostman
us Hoosier Democrats know about Conservative Democrats! The last Senator ever expelled from the Senate was Indiana’s Jesse Bright in 1862. A gun smuggler to the Confederates was caught with a letter of recommendation from Senator Bright addressed to Pres. Jefferson Davis. Now that’s conservative to the point of being actively traitorous in time of war…
Let Lieberman top that !
No, that’s clearly a situation where he should say of course we support whoever wins the primary, because this is a democracy, and the voters decide, not us powerful senators.
Helps to explain their approach to Ohio, pulling the rug out from under Hackett before he could even get going.
sorry, clicked on the wrong thread–I was having trouble with the comments section on the Action Alert thread so I had to reopen FDL.
Sure, Schumer is a mealy-mouthed corporate brownie-hound, and Lieberman is repug lite. But it’s unrealistic to expect the party to not favor incumbents. Dance with the one wot brung ya, the value of known versus unknown commodities, and all that.
Yo *ilson,
I’m sure you meant no offense, but we don’t tolerate racist monikers at the lake. Not for nationality, sexuality or parents of republicronies. Now say you’re sorry.
T-
Mary @ 4:39 pm (#59) – As much as any of this makes sense, I suppose. It’s hard to believe that the decision to send an innocent foreign national (from Canada, no less) off to some Third World dictatorship to be tortured could be construed as a national secret.
If I were Canada right now, I’d be trying to figure out how to flood America with unpasteurized cheese and extra-strong Labatt’s.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/sec…..Ntcm5ld3M-
Bush agrees to full NSA oversight by Congress
Color me jaded. IMO, this is so that people like Russ Feingold now get the “you can’t talk or speculate about classified information like the Fourth Amendment anymore” treatment. And Hoekstra and Roberts can take their martyrdom of, “gosh, after 5 years we may have to follow small tidbits of the law re: the things we decide to discuss because people are so PARTISAN” and saute it with liver and serve it up at the next RNC polkafest.
punaise #49 actually my comment had a bit more obscure intent, which I thought *ilson might get. So, you have my blessing to call Valerie whatshername a hottie, should you wish to do so. And so does *ilson, BTW. Not that any of you need my blessing!!
Yeah, I gotta say I don’t see that exchange as being so bad, either. He’s covering for his Senate colleague, but if Lamont wins, I will be shocked if the DSCC doesn’t support Lamont.
Of course, I’m shocked by stuff almost on a daily basis now, but still… To back an independent instead of the Dem nominee would be insane. And suicidal for the party. Unless the Dem nominee was, like, maybe a neo-Nazi or something, of course.
Cujo and D Mason – I respond back. But I think we should await the next immigration thread to continue the debate.
Ghostman, I don’t know if it is accurate to say Lamont is far behind. But I feel Lamont needs more major exposure: like a primetime commercial to combat Lieberman’s diner ‘mercial.
Tony choked? I thought sure he’d be an expert at sucking Karl Rove’s cock by now.
T- that’s being way too hard on *ilson. I appreciated the irony in his comment about Gonzales.
VG 75 – that is indeed a blessing, in dis guy’s
opinion
Pach – perhaps I’ve misuderstood something, but I thought what the callers really wanted was for Schumer to commit to support Ned Lamont if Ned Lamont won the primary. Since Schumer acknowledged that they basically support incumbents first — i.e., Lieberman — he couldn’t undermine Lieberman by saying, “but if Lamont wins the primary, he becomes the Democrat that we will support.” Such a statement would be interpreted as a boost for Lamont, and Schumer wasn’t going to do that.
So given that the callers couldn’t get what they really wanted, what’s the next best thing? I’m suggesting they might have settled for a statement that sounds like DCCC will support the Democrat as a moral imperative. Then leave it there and use that statement later, when/if Lamont wins. If that occurs, you can point to the moral imperative argument as a reason DCCC should support Lamont.
Pressing the issue wasn’t going to get Schumer to say what you wanted — he’d already made that clear – so perhaps it would have been best to let it drop at that point and take what you got, rather than risk opportunities to make the ambiguity worse. The next two answers open the door for the bad scenario you fear.
I’m just wondering out loud; I can’t really criticize the callers, who had to think/ask in real time. As I said, hindsight is great.
SP CPA – Yes, ChimpCo (Chimp & Associates Company, Inc.) just takes too long to type out) includes Cheney and any and all present and past (and future) members of the chimpministration.
As a proud Kinsey 6.1, I can abstractly admire the beauty of females. Valerie is stunningly good-looking!
And yes, “T-”, I thought for a while about using that word to describe Gonzalez’s parents – I put it in single quotes to delimit it. I just love the irony of Bush’s base knowing the parents of the Attorney General are “illegal aliens” aka undocumented workers.
78, mui…..somehow, I had it in my mind that Lamont was around 40 points or so behind. But I don’t know for sure. I hope he’s closer.
Tv time is what he needs? Hopefully he’ll get something lined up.
Ghostman
punaise- not that anyone needs my blessing!
I think Chuckie just added fuel to the fire to support Ned Lamont. After he was on a call with bloggers who are leading the charge against Liberman. One of the many things that bloggers do is call the establishment on their crap, and encourage people to follow up and take action.
Mary @ 4:47 pm (#74) Cynic that I am, I suspect that this promise will evaporate the moment that Hayden is confirmed. I really don’t think Bush cares what Feingold says, not enough people will listen. He may care about what his own base wants, and even they don’t want their phone calls monitored (they probably just want the press’ phone calls monitored). Let’s just say that Arlen Specter isn’t the only one who’s been inexplicably changing his mind lately.
We’ve seen plenty of promises from the various Republican leaders about full and complete hearings, and we have yet to see one materialize. Until that day dawns, I remain, shall we say, a bit skeptical.
scarecrow:
I can’t speak for everyone on the call, but I think the goal was to find out the DSCC’s position, and not to engineer a particular response, like an attorney trying to get a certain result into the record.
Scarecrow at #40 above:
This is SO true.
Know when to accept the answer you have when you have an agenda for asking the question.
If you don’t have an agenda, then go ahead and push. But obviously that wasn’t the case here.
The questioner had a good answer. “We have never not supported the Democrat.” That’s your sound byte. That’s when you say “OK, great. Thanks much. That’s all we need to know.”
Then you walk away.
I’m sure Schumer feels he has nothing to lose by backing lieberman and nothing to gain by acknowleging Lamont.At this time.I’m also sure that Schumer has felt the rumblings of the netroots concerning Lamont. my take on this exchange is, When have you ever heard any politician give a straight answer to anything?That’s their trade! Bullshit,vague answers to everything.God forbid they should take a stand on anything that could change and then make them look bad. Narcistic egomaniacs do not like sunshine,just like vampires.
Hey you guys, I now Plame is a lot cuter than Lieberman, but . . .Isn’t Ned the cutest of all?
Ghostman, dunno about polls, because the Lamont race is gathering speed I think. Check out the press on his campaign site.
Yes, we need a primetime slot, or something like “Nancy Johnson caught redhanded,†but starring Joe as the bad guy, and Ned as our good guy.
Fair enough.
To put it another way, our agenda was to discover the truth related to the question.
I can’t speak for everyone on the call, but I think the goal was to find out the DSCC’s position, and not to engineer a particular response, like an attorney trying to get a certain result into the record.
But that is exactly the opposite of what happened.
I have to say, no disrespect intended, that it sounds exactly like someone was trying to engineer a particular response. And that’s where the trouble started.
Always remember the wise words of Bob Ross (may he rest in peace): Don’t overmix the colors, or you’ll get mud.
The questioner overmixed the colors. Got mud.
*ilson- oh dear, I hope you have figured out that I was kidding, and what I was kidding about. Sometimes I am way too obscure. Certain people do have a kind of compelling natural charisma, that works for both sexes. Valerie. Fitz.
VG – no apologies needed. I caught the humor … others might not. Sometimes its important to let others know I am one of those self-avowed homosexuals!
VG- the pejorative does not add to the irony.
Peace.
T-
OT- WOW, I’m just now catching up on the day’s news and am absolutely hyperventilating at the news from Gore. Could it be true??? Do we have a ray of hope???? YEOW!!!!!
*ilson- thanks. I am glad to know. BTW, my absolutely favorite game growing was “Clue”.
*ilson:
But are you “practicing?”
I am choosing to clutch that ray of hope, meta!
don’t blog, don’t tell
angie, ange, where are you?
This Schumer/Clinton business is really disturbing me. But we got NOW.
Nice caption, Pach. From the same film, “I don’t want my brother coming out of that toilet with just his dick in his hand.” Dammit, we don’t want Ned coming out of that primary with just his dick in his hand.
The dem party should certainly be supporting Bernie Sanders in Vermont even if some obscure registered dem filed the paperwork to run as a democrat. Of course Lieberman is no Sanders.
fuck the “practicing”. At 64 years old, if I don’t have down pretty good by now, all the practice in the world won’t help …
I think what’s “hard” about Schumer saying what you want him to say is that he’s just the chair and not inclined to get out in front of the whole organization and take a position that they haven’t discussed. Now, if you think they actually have discussed it and he’s just lying about it, that’s a different issue.
Maybe it seems obvious that the DSCC should automatically support every D nominee but there’s always the possibility of some David Duke type winning a nomination where I wouldn’t want the party to be automatically throwing support around. Now, obviously that has zero applicability to Lamont, but maybe it helps explain why there isn’t a policy to that effect.
Lisa 95 — that was quite gifted. “Engineer a response” — is that newspeak for “get a straight answer?” Because that’s all I saw.
Hi mui– It’s unfortunately looking like a triad. Unfortunately, tripods and triangles and triads are fairly sturdy; that is, until the cow kicks the milk stool right over. We gotta get a moooove on. Keep the faith– we are helping Lamont out here!
T- thanks for the response. I don’t endorse use of demeaning phrases, and I apologize if that is how it came out. Oddly the term conjures up a double meaning to me. Growing up in SoCal I am well aware of the insulting nature. But, because I also know some stories first hand, to me it also conjures up a certain kind of heroism and faith in the future. Over and out. Peace.
I think we should get Randi to yell at Schumer. I heard she’s good at that.
Thanks for organizing the book project. I came late. I missed to whom and what address to ship the book?
Watson:
The RP volunteers are picking up the books at the store, so just select “In store pickup.”
Thanks!
Does anyone know who among Air America supports Lamont, besides Seder. I love Sam Seder, but women to talk women’s issues are best in my opinion.
Jane @ 109:
I was using someone else’s phrase (Pach’s, maybe?). “Engineer a response” was in his/her comment. I just repeated the phrase.
I think the questioner got a straight answer when Schumer said they’ve always supported the Dem nominee. That’s the answer.
As mentioned by someone else above, Schumer doesn’t want to sound like he’s doubting an incumbent Dem’s ability to win a primary. That’s understandable. So he doesn’t want to come out and say, “Sure, if Lieberman loses, we’ll support Lamont.”
So he said it without saying it. That’s my take on the exchange. And I personally would have left it at that and not continued asking, because it seems to me that is where it went off the beam.
That’s all I’m saying.
CTG book project info: http://www.firedoglake.com/200…..%e2%80%99/
New Bush strategy:
Deny reality.
Witness the Pickles Bush and Turdblossom Rolling Poll Show.
“I don’t believe the polls”
-Pickles Bush
“I only believe the RNC polls”
-Turdblossom Damocles
-GSD
Pach – I think the questioning was handled quite well – as a Dem leader, he is expected and supposed to say “We will support the Democratic candidate” followed by an enormous period. That’s the way pols play – and this quibbling by Schumer is very unusual and very telling.
not good news re Iran:
http://www.informationclearing…..e13066.htm
Mary #74
Re NSA
I don’t take at face value any statement this Administration makes. From the story, it appears that the WH has said it will allow briefings to more members of Congress but how often, over what, how deeply, or what members can do about aspects that they disagree with or think break the law is not clear.
GSD– it’s the Stepford Administration.
Besides, all the other polls have been surveilled by the NSA…they take that data and confabulate; filling in the gaps with fabrication. easy.
KO playing Al Gore’s SNL and led with excerpts of his movie on global warming… YAY!
tryggth – 87 & 111 below. I keep thinking that I saw something about a DOD Undersecretary about to resign when the stories about Goss came out.
I was so hoping.
BTW – from your links to:
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1066
This was, in my admittedly biased view, hilarious. So it seems Cambone worked for George the elder, but before joining his administration, Cambone worked for SRS. They had a 6M K with the Missile Defense Agency, but the work that caught people’s attention was its work on the controversial military effort to mine the passenger records of JetBlue.
Here’s the part that cracked me up. The job was to work with the Army to ferret information out of data stream [to find the] abnormal behavior of secretive people emph added.
Midnight in the Garden of Moe and Curly.
(Attack on the prosecution of Patrick Fitzgerald.)
An American Pud in Queen Elizabeths Queef.
(NH opinion writer for a Canadian paper)
http://www.canadafreepress.com…..051606.htm
-GSD
frankly this is silly use of everyones energy. If Lamont wins they will support him…if he wins. Its time the democrats of CT make there choice and the rest of us suck it in! I cannot abide Joe putz…didn’t vote for Gore because he was on the ticket…but at the end of the day…the people of CT speak louder than our opinions and pontifications.
Angie,
Re: Stepfords.
To be sure, Laura was shown the Queen of Hearts before launching into her robotic support of the Authoritarian Chimp.
-GSD
so what did cafferty have to say this evening?
Hello, friends, remember me?
Lots of stuff flying around in this thread. A little information, a little quibbling, a little sexual innuendo and a lot of outrage. I’m kind of caught up and think Schumer deserves to have his feet held to the fire, I’m tired of worrying about how “they”communicate and think they need to recognize that it’s time to look at communicating with those who elected them.
Fabulous Roots Project Action, is the tally updated? I might be too late, but will certainly do my part.
Schmoe-mentum.
-GSD
D Mason – And OT, but I feel compelled
People like you help the dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by aiming your insane rhetoric at Average voters who just want to feed their kids, thanks alot.
You’re welcome!
And people like you elect ChimpCo?
As for being insane, there is that fine line between genius and madness, and although I don’t doubt my genious at some things, I am sure that neither I nor my rhetoric are “insane.”
If you can’t accept a point of view that differs from yours, that’s your issue, not mine. I don’t believe that illegal Mexican (or other) immigrants keep you or anyone else, whether average, below average or above average, from feeding your kids. Live with it.
I don’t have an updated book count, but last I heard they still had quota to fill.
I have to disagree with you larry. Each and every race is important and yes, it is up to each state’s voters but we can surely help with donations and spreading the word. Lieberman is a complete and utter traitor to the democrats and is a parasitic opportunist. This is a very important race for the future of the party and the country. It is one of those many accountability moments that the American people have to have. Are you a democratic patriot or not?
My last question in 132 was directed at Joey, not you larry.
Freedom is on the march.
Saudi King Ab-dullard proposes a ban of pictures of females in the media.
I can’t wait to see the pictures of Kinda-Cheesy Rice on her next tour with the amatuer porn black bar across her eyes.
http://english.aljazeera.net/N…..FAFA72.htm
-GSD
OT and probably old – apologize if so, but WSJ apparently accepts online comments – I think Judy would love hearing everyone’s opinion of her newest BushCo propagandapalooza 2-part “essay”
http://www.opinionjournal.com/…..=110008381
(scroll down to the bottom and click on “respond to this article”)
Here’s just the tastiest of tastes…
“In fact, the still largely secret talks that helped prompt Libya’s decision, and the joint American-British dismantlement of its weapons programs in the first four months of 2004, remain the administration’s sole undeniable–if largely unheralded–intelligence and nonproliferation success. And a key figure in that effort, Stephen Kappes, is now slated to be the next deputy director of the demoralized Central Intelligence Agency.”
siun, as expected as that information is about Iran, it is just chilling to read it. Why is it that this administration only knows how to have wars and attacks and threats and alerts? They have turned us into a nation of offense and anger, hateful rhetoric and ugly plans. I can’t believe how much my country has changed in the last 6 years, and how we literally have nothing positive to say about how things are with our government. As grateful as I am to live in a Western country where there is food and shelter and relative safety, I increasingly think about how emotionally complicated it is to be a thinking person in America today. For those who don’t know and don’t care that they don’t know, I’m sure life is comparatively ok. I just can’t be that person.
What is wrong with these people? They support Lieberman??? I just bought a copy of CtG for these idiots. Does anyone know if they can read?
I have some sympathy with siun, here. He is the head of a Democratic political organization whose goal is to win the Senate. Seems like it would be natural to heavily favor an incumbant who would have a good chance of winning. Lieberman is like Nelson, I think, they will be attracted to the center of power and will shift balance if Dems can pet them and scratch there bellies and give them some glory.
Except that it is too bad he has to be so pompous and shifty about it. But one could see that he is a Very Important Man. Probably talking into two cellphones at once, barking orders to an endless stream of flunkies who were running back and forth, and all the while thinking deftly on his feet. Sorta like a TV show. Losing elections is hard work, you can tell. How dare some pimply teen blogger emerge from Mom and Dad’s basement and disturb such an Important Man at work? What would Ol Tip have said?
I guess he is too Important and Busy to answer the question straighforwardly and with good humor, like a good old pol’ should, and emphasizing that it is important to have a good contest in the primary so the people can decide who they want in the Fall contest.
I read about Beluga’s, or DeLoser’s (or whatever his name is) comments about Democratic party workers picking their noses in MS, and wherever. That really made me angry. How can anyone who has a shred of conviction about what the Democrat’s stand for write off a whole state?
I sincerely hope these high class wardheelers do a better job this time, but I think they have totally wrong attitude about what an average everyday peoples’ party is all about.
siun at 120………I hate reading stuff like that. In my book the use of bunker busters is NOT a non-nuclear option. They are DU tipped warheads and yield radioactive as well as heavy metal damage in addition to blasting the hell out of whatever they burn into. T here are maps that project where the fallout will fall out. Not a pretty picture. Not a good solution to Bushco’s problems with Iran.
judyjudyjudy:
“But a review of confidential government records and interviews with current and former officials in London, Tripoli, Vienna and Washington suggest that other factors were involved.”
Were these US confidential government records?
Who? What? Why? How? When?
It looks like David Horowitz has taken his campaign against college faculty to Baghdad.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/engl…..555613.htm
Maybe John Cornyn can chime in: “A purple finger doesn’t mean much when you are dead.”
-GSD
Dang – I have a moderation comment but it is mostly for tryggth (Cambone).
Cujo and Hugh – Amen. There is no way that suddenly there is some full briefing of all programs (Snow’s already “neither confirming nor denying†that the AT&T program even exists) to the Intel committee as required. I hope they forget to ice it while saving it for the Polkafest.
I am also INCREDIBLY frustrated that no one is just asking the very basic: How do you classify illegal activity?
Bc I don’t think you can. Breaking the law and stamping it “classified†is not supposed to be an option under the Executive Order or any other theory of govt that I have ever seen.
And Specter needs to go back to law school and spend some time with the concept that a) we already have Sup. Ct. caselaw from the Civil War that states that as long as courts are open and operating, the Bill of Rights is not suspended and the CIC has NO INHERENT POWERS TO DISREGARD the Constitution or laws of the country, due to a state of war, unless courts are shut down and inoperable, and b) a legal theory that says it is an ‘inherent power’ of the chief officer in charge of enforcement of the law of the land to BREAK the law of the land — well, that’s the kind of doozy that takes you below C=JD territory and into heckuva job Arlen territory.
Those are the only functions (well, add in administration of the law and foreign diplomacy) from which the President can derive any “inherent†powers. Not one can conceivably get an “inherent right to break the law” absent the state of lawlessness that is associated with closure of the courts. The Supreme Court said it during the Civil War re: CIC status, Keith’s case said it in more recent times re: intelligence surveillance activities. Specter’s concept that inherent Presidential powers “trump†statutes is NONSENSE.
“didn’t vote for Gore because he was on the ticket…”
larry, I’m trying to understand this.
You voted for Bush, because Gore chose Leibermann?
siun #120:
If Bush does that without congressional authorization, then impeachment and conviction and trial at the Hague would be warranted (maybe should put in word “again” here). I liked this line:
“UK sources say contingency plans have also been drawn up to cope with the inevitable backlash against the Basra garrison in neighbouring Iraq.”
I would like to see those contingency plans. I guess fleeing would be one, bombing and straffing the holy whatever out the place to keep the Iraqis at bay would be another, retreat into bunkers might be another.
Terry Gross is interviewing the reporter and exec editor of Ms about the Marianna’s story if anyone’s interested:
http://www.wbur.org/
FYI OT: New Orleans Mayoral Debate with Tweety right now.
Schumer said the right things in my opinion. He can’t speak for the whole party and he didn’t. Personally, I think this is a non issue anyway. Ned seems like a good guy- but I can’t see him winning. The primary isn’t until September as I recall- and there will be lots of passion spent between now and then- but I don’t think that the outcome is seriously in doubt.
Arlen Specter needs to change his name to “Spectre,” don a black trenchcoat and fedora and wear sunglases. Needs a portable Cone of Silence and a some kind of high tech “death pen” he can wave around if people ask hm why he is not doing his job. Might fool people into believing he is in the loop for awhile, and put the humilation of complete impotence off for a few days.
My comments to the WSJ regarding Jusy Shillers’ newest pap.
(Snip)
It is nice to see that Ms. Miller has been taken of the bric-a-brac shelf and has resumed her inveterate shilling for the Bush administration.
After six years the Bush Administrations sole foreign policy success is the resuscitation of one of the worlds longest reigning dictators with a history of political oppression at home and of exporting terrorist activities abroad.
Heckuva job Judith and the WSJ
Re: Iran, and the UK position, are they saying NO WAR IN IRAN, or are they saying, don’t do it yet? I know the poodle is in a heap o’ trouble and it’s unpopular, but will they change their minds if Bush starts sputtering about diplomacy not working? I can’t read this at all.
rwcole #147: I kind of agree, but don’t like his style, don’t like his manner and attitude, and don’t like his divisive arrogant shifty manner. And in politics, those are important for keeping up unity and morale. I think it could have been handled beter. But not any big outrage or surprising news.
Top post as usual, Pach. When a guy like Schumer leaves himself an out it behooves everyone to be VERY suspicious of his intentions.
On topic from Scott Ritter -
http://www.informationclearing…..e13063.htm
“If the Republican Party won’t seek to heal itself by reigning in the abuses of power conducted by the Bush administration, then it clearly demonstrates that it, as an institution, places partisan politics above constitutionally mandated checks and balances between the executive and legislative branches of government. And if the Democrats who are in power aren’t willing to step into the void, then perhaps it’s time a new generation of Democrats was elected in their stead.”
(snip)
“The only hope to break this “imperial presidency” is to create friction within Congress, and in all likelihood it will happen only if a Democratic majority in the House of Representatives is elected this November. But if the Democrats achieve a majority with people who are too often in lockstep with the Republicans, then it will all be for naught.”
zennurse @136
“food, shelter, and relative safety?” y’all come on down and spend hurricane season in New Orleans with us! (I’m sure we still have some MREs around here somewhere …
Wsgpc,
The Strategy has been dubbed Operation (Monty)Python:
“Run away, run away”
-GSD
wesgpc @ 148
Hopefully, Dru won’t mind my re- posting of what I thought was a brilliant bit today:
>>>>>>>
Dru says:
May 16th, 2006 at 11:25 am
Arlen SPecial Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion (S.P.E.C.T.R.E.)Lousy Creep.
People like Schumer need to be assessed more on what they DON’T say which, I think, is Pach’s point.
It comes down to whether you have an ear for snake oil or not.
There hasn’t been much chatter about Fitz tonight. Has anyone heard any news about the proceedings in the Libby case that apparently occurred today with Fitzgerald present?
It is my understanding that there was some reporting on CNN today indicating that it came up during the proceedings today that there was a source of information for Woodward and Novak that was outside of the administration (although there was some ambiguity in the reporting on this).
I’m very curious as to Christy and Jane’s and the rest of FDL’s thoughts on the story.
Mary @ 6:00 pm (#142) – I am also INCREDIBLY frustrated that no one is just asking the very basic: How do you classify illegal activity?
I share that frustration. Might even have mentioned it a time or two ;)
As for your question, I suspect the response would be “We weren’t classifying it because it was illegal”. I don’t find that a compelling argument, but I suspect that’s what they’d say. It seems obvious that if there’s some serious high-level criminal activity going on here, our long term national security is better served by exposing this to the light of day even if it embarasses some of our “friends” by showing their role in this.
Specter’s concept that inherent Presidential powers “trump†statutes is NONSENSE.
Looks like court precedents say what you’d think they ought to say if we’re to stay a free society. I’m rather thankful, but that doesn’t seem to mean much to many folks in Washington.
Abandoning Lamont during the primary is, in my opinion, foolish. When, if not during a primary, are Democrats to sort out their future directions? Must everything wait until the presidential year?
The primary is in August. The first chance for Ned to get on the ballot is coming up in a week or two, iirc. He just got endorsed by NOW in CT. He has low name recognition – so far – against an incumbent, but has not yet ramped up his full “This is who I am” machine.
Lamont gains support wherever people come to know him, and Lieberman has a history of losing support as his campaigns continue. Do you recall that he was the early, early frontrunner for the ‘04 nomination?
If we can’t get behind Lamont now, and I mean with some vigor, then it’s hard for me to see how we can ever claim to have an interest in the future direction of the party against the status quo. Lamont can win, and even if he doesn’t, if he makes it a real race, that sends a message and shapes the future direction of the party. He also happens to be the person who stands for the principles we write about and discuss around here every day.
I just don’t comprehend the sidelines posture on this.
Re the Jason Leopold/Truthout.org indictment report on Saturday, and the subsequent blanket denials (to Jeralyn at talkleft.com) by Rove’s attorney Luskin and spokesman Corallo:
1. I believe Leopold and his sources when they state that an ‘Information’ (in lieu of indictment) plea bargain session took place Friday at Luskin’s law firm (locked-down fourth floor, etc.). Since the negotiations are alleged to have broken down, and no plea bargain was reached, Luskin and Corallo can publicly deny this to their hearts’ content with impunity – the Office of Special Counsel will have no reason to publicly reveal this session, and no public record will be made of it. Luskin and Rove may have worked on the details until 2 a.m. Saturday, but I assume Fitzgerald left by late afternoon or so.
2. I don’t believe that an indictment of Karl Rove has yet been obtained – because that would have been submitted to a judge in open court, and if no Washington-based media monitored for that possibility last Wednesday and last Friday, we don’t HAVE any Washington-based media. I do believe that a target letter specifying the charges to be addressed by the grand jury has been given to Karl Rove via his attorneys, based on the Leopold details. And that Rove was thereby also given the customary 3-weekday advance notice (just as Scooter Libby was) to get his affairs in order before Rove’s arraignment, provided that the grand jury follows up with an indictment this Wednesday, which would be immediately submitted to a judge, and then made public by Special Counsel Fitzgerald the same day.
3. Wayne Madsen’s shoe-leather eyewitness reporting of an SUV convoy with police escort last Friday, fits with the timing of a similar, brief (half hour) visit from someone the Friday before Scooter Libby was indicted (Libby’s indictment last fall was apparently pushed from Wednesday to Friday because of last minute Luskin et al negotiations and developments, wasn’t it?).
If my semi-wild stab at an interpretation of his story happens to be accurate, Leopold’s story would be half right, and half wrong. Probing for more pinned-down detail from his sources, and using more precise (or less specific where details are unclear) language in his article would have served everyone better, in any event.
AirportCat-
Honey, I went through Donna, Betsy, Cleo and a number of others in my youth So Fla, eaten many a Sterno bean. And I remember. If I were a healthy person, I would be there with you all now, offering my services, no question.
I was meaning as compared to Darfur, Iraq and Subsaharan Africa, for example.
I know I just appeared for you, maybe, but I really am a zennurse, and my heart is good.
We are an organization of incumbents (Schumer)
Doesn’t that say it all? They’re 46 individuals watching out for themselves. They don’t give a shit for Democrats, the Democratic Party, or 280 million Americans.
angie says:
May 16th, 2006 at 5:47 pm
I have to disagree with you larry.
I’m with you, Angie. It makes no sense to say that it’s up to each state. Every incumbent in the current setup has national backers…corporations, foundations, wealthy party members. What’s different is the net roots backers make modest donations rather than big money…lots of them. :0) And we’re trying to root out DINOs.
zennurse
no slight meant, just that we’re feeling a lttle insecure here … but yes, we are a lot better off than those in the places you mention
P.S. the jambalya MRE is actually pretty good
Pacha,,I know that a lot of people are filled with passion about Lamont. I’m not one of em. I care about winning either the house or the senate. I take no sides in primary battles (although, of course, I will vote for the dem candidate who I think has the best chance to win on my own local ballot.
Two more years of a rubber stamp congress and GW Clusterfuck in the White House is way too dangerous for me to have any other priorities than winning.
I expect all politicians to be assholes- but right now- it’s very important to have the dem assholes in charge.
AirportCat @ 6:21 pm (#164) – There’s a jambalaya MRE?
zennurse,
My understanding is that Europe is strongly opposed to Iraq, let alone Iran. The European people are firmly against Bush and his pre-emptive, resource-grabbing death machine, as they should be. Since most of the major European players exist as some degree of social democracy (where all the votes actually count and people give a shit about their civic duties), the leadership cannot function if it deviates too dramatically from the will of the people. This is why Blair is a dead duck, Spain and Italy et al. have thrown out their Bush supporting regimes and the rest of the Europeans are disassociating themselves with Iraq, pronto.
It’s quite possible that Europe unites against Bush by drawing the line on Iran, and I don’t mean in a “just remember we’re all friends here” way.
Pach 160– I agree. We should strongly support Lamont now, both because he’s far preferable to Lieberman and because primaries are the means for defining what the party stands for. I see not justification for holding back. The DSCC will support the party nominee when that happens, because that’s their job.
Pow Wow- Bingo- I think you nailed it.
Word is whipping around the White House that Rove is about to be indicted and that he met with the prosecutor. Somehow that got jumbled into “he’s already BEEN indicted” at some lower level- and that’s what the reporter who cannot be named heard.
Seems about right.
rwcole: ok, but does that not imply you are abdicating having a voice in the future of the party? And if so, are you implicitly recommending through your comments that others do the same?
yes, there is a jambalaya MRE, and also some vegetarian MREs (my wife is a vegetarian, so this is important)
scarecrow @ 6:25 pm (#169) Ditto. This is the time when we can have influence on what sort of candidates the Democratic party chooses. I always make it a point to choose the best person anyway, but there’s little harm in doing that in a primary. If you want to vote straight Democrat in the general election, you can certainly do that.
Judy Miller – I’m sorry, this woman won a Pulitzer ? (well of course so did Janice CooK) and in her first article ‘back’, she takes up lots of column inches on Libya’s diarmament and fails to mention – NOT ONCE, the role played by El Bharedi and IAEA ???. I can’t believe she isn’t on the teevee
C’mon gal,
Who, What, When, Where,
Amen Pach ~#160. The Lamont Lieberman primary will prove to be pivotal. rwcole, I just don’t understand why you are being so obtuse on this one. This is a really important battle that could have (does have) much wider implications.
Pacha,
To answer your last question first:
No- I’m not advocating that others do what I do. We are all adults and will make up our own minds.
As far as abdicating responsibility for the future of the party- hell no! I have opinions and I will express them forcefully to my elected representatives and to whoever will listen.
I think that medical costs, energy conservation, fiscal discipline, and the constitutional balance between the three parts of government are crucial to the future of the country. If we don’t fix those things we are screwed.
AirportCat @ 6:27 pm (#172) – I remember they put some “kosher” MREs together so they could airdrop them into Muslim countries like Afghanistan. I gather that the Afghans mostly gave them to their farm animals.
I think that many of you have somewhat misunderstood Schumer. If Lamont wins the primary, I’m willing to bet that Schumer will forget Joe Lieberman ever existed. He’s just not willing to say that today. It is possible for both Chuck and many of us to over-think this, IMHO.
cujo359 @ 177– huh?
Woodward/Miller revisited:
http://www.eyewitnessmuse.com/musings.php?p=187
-GSD
Zenn …hi! I keep missing you.
wesgpc – that sentence jumped out at me too – no matter that Tony says (for public consumption) that UK opposes military action – this looks like they have assumed its happening.
angie (133): word. Lieberman thought he could throw us women to the curb IMHO.
Airport, this is about 1 mile from my home after the storms up here in lovely NEngland.
Not a hurricane, no wind to speak of, but a TON of rain. If it had been snow, I just hate to think….
Yours in minor solidarity, no offense taken.
flooding in Gloucester
Cujo,
If I remember correctly from my days of working at JFK airport some years ago, many Arabs ordered kosher meals on international flights because they were prepared more in keeping with their traditional cuisine.
Valley- If the dems has a sold majority and were going to cruise to victory- I might be more interested in this primary battle. As it is- I don’t feel like wasting my money on it. I don’t feel that I am being obtuse- just a matter of prioritizing- but perhaps I am-
Jay,
Russia and China already have the stick out and have drawn a pretty deep line in the sand around Iran.
Methinks they don’t want nukes and bunker busters and massive retaliation on their respective doorsteps.
We may see a Kruschev moment where someone from Russia beats John Bolton about the face with a shoe.
-GSD
larry (126). The lefty blogosphere gives us progressives in CT good mojo. It’s important to continue, I think. Besides Chimp-lite is all for attacking countries.
“Winning is critically important, but what is winning for, and for whom?” – Pachacutec
That one question pretty much says it all. The country is still waiting for the Congressional Democrats to clearly answer it.
Thanks, Jay, so very helpful.
Hi, Miss Siun, good to see you, haven’t been around. Work in the deluge has me sleepin and achin to beat the band. Hoping for an hour here tonight, but not so sure. Should be a little better tomorrow.
I saw this article on Gitmo and marveled at the things not said:
http://tinyurl.com/n7vgp
Among those who had left were Yaser Hamdi, who was captured in Afghanistan in 2001 and taken to Guantanamo, where U.S. authorities discovered he was born in Louisiana and was therefore an American citizen. He was transferred to a military brig in South Carolina.
Hamdi was released to his family in Saudi Arabia in October 2004 after the Justice Department said he no longer posed a threat to the United States and no longer had any intelligence value.
Wow. SO after 3 years he gets released in Oct of 2004. Well gosh, I guess Justice runs slow, but sure – right? Or could it maybe have had something to do with, oh, I dunnot, the June 2004 Sup. Ct. decision that he could no longer be held indefinitely with no habeas? And leaving open just what kind of treatment he might be entitled to receive if he were entitled to habeas? So that the case of what kind of treatment would be afforded him could become Hamdi II very very very easily?
Nah – I’m sure the Sup Ct decision had nothing to do with it. Just like the progress of the case re: the Chinese dissidents that got tossed in Gitmo had nothing to do with the eleventh hour ability to find someone who would take them after years. The progress of the Padilla case had nothing to do with the transfer to civil courts. The underlying liability to Arar and el-Masri and the AT&T customers, etc. that would be judicially determined have nothing to do with the invocation of state secrets to sidestep illegal govt activity. The attempts to argue that the Sup Ct has no jurisdiction to review items like torture at Gitmo, etc. are not bc they are worried about what a court with jurisdiction might have to say.
I’m so glad Joe didn’t worry about Alito. What’s to worry?
Find me the heros.
Question: I’m curious: Is the DSCC taking a position where it will unconditionally support the eventual nominee of the Connecticut Democratic Party?
Schumer: We haven’t taken a position on that yet.
Jim Preston- the simple anwser would have been “of course we will unconditionally support…”. Any thing less is not a good message. I don’t think there is “over analysis” going on. Seems pretty clear to me.
rwcole:
You stated that “Word is whipping around the White House that Rove is about to be indicted and that he met with the prosecutor.”
Are you making this statement based on what we all know about the indictment buzz that began to build late last week, or are you in possession of some other information about a new rumor? Thanks!
We are an organization of incumbents — Schumer
That is absolutely correct — the DSCC is the organization of Democratic Senators, whose mission is to elect Democratic Senators — stabbing their members in the back is NOT part of the mission.
Schumer could have been a little more diplomatic in talking to the bloggers on a conference call, but this is truly a tempest in a teapot. By the end of the conversation, Schumer was coming around — and there is NO WAY the DSCC will be sending money to Lieberman if Lamont wins the primary.
A little perspective is in order — this was an off the cuff comment, that is being parsed six ways to Sunday. Schumer doesn’t want to antagonize Lieberman or Lamont or the netroots rabble; the Democrats of Connecticut will decide who they want for their nominee.
We need to focus on the real enemy — Fitzmas presents that haven’t been delivered!!!
Why do the GOP wing nuts hate Fitzmas?
re recole’s pragmatism. I respect the importance of defeating Bush. Suppose we had a reddish state (e.g., Colorado) with a conservative Dem incumbent Senator. In that case, supporting a progressive opponent to the Dem incumbent would be our preference, but rw would argue there’s real risk of losing that seat.
In Connecticut, however, that argument has much less weight. In this bluish state, supporting a progressive who’s running against Bush and against a Bush supporter/incumbent is smart. This is the perhaps the best year ever for progressive challengers like Lamont to run against Bush supporting Dem incumbents in states that are fed up with Bush. So, rw, I think we’re suggesting your inherent pragmatism should lead you to support Lamont enthusiasitically. That’s just my take.
GSD,
Let me be the first to offer my shoe.
cujo359-88
There’s no doubt in my mind that Hayden will be confirmed after some weak questioning with non-answers.
The spying on Americans will also continue. The Rubber Stamp Republican congress will block and stall on any type of real oversight.
The question is would the Dems really investigate and hold accountable this diabolical administration.
got a new liebersweater upstairs ^^^^
If Schumer were to take a look at polls, which I know is a bad thing to do, he would realize that the only thing that polls worse than GWB would be all the ‘incumbents’ in Congress.
pow wow – do you really think Fitzgerald could get in and out of DC for that plea negotiation without anyone other than Leopold knowing? I don’t think the press is good, but I just don’t see how they are so bad they miss him leaving Chicago and going into Luskin’s firm. ?
Crap: Pennachio is tanking, dramatically. Guess we Pennsylvanian’s get our own version of Leiberman soon, with Casey.
In any case, I smell a slogan in Schumer’s comments: “The Democratic Party: We almost always vote for the Democrat.” A moral imperative, after all. It’ll kill in DC.
Perhaps some Republicans can offer their flip-flops.
-GSD
Sorry, I meant “rwcole’s pragmatism . . .” in 193.
pow wow – nice theory – it (i) makes sense of the Leopold story by properly assuming that a few details got confused in the telling and retelling, (ii) dovetails nicely with the Madsen report, (iii) fits with Fitzgerald’s standard operating procedures, and (iv) pinpoints the details that Leopold probably got wrong.
On another note – a funny story about Leopold. On the radio today he vowed to call every veterinarian in Luskin’s vicinity to see if his cat really was sick. Hard to tell if Leopold was kidding.
xyz–No new information. I was just trying to come up with a logical explanation for the story from the reporter who can’t be named.
scarecrow 193, you’re right. If it’s not Lamont, it would be Weicker. That’s how pissed off progressives are in CT. There is no Rethuglican challenger, that’s not a compelte loser. The only Refublican the rethuglicans have in CT is Lieberman. I think the Repubs want to throw Shays to the curb.
IMHO rwcole, there will be a lefty challenger to Lieberman one way or another. But it should be Lamont.
rwcole,
Thanks – that is what I thought, although not what I hoped…
Scarecrow 193 –
I think rwcole’s call for pragmatism is not about supporting Lieberman over Lamont — it’s about not getting bent out of shape because the DSCC is more incumbent centric than netroots centric.
I’ve donated money to Lamont, and I’ll be disappointed if he loses. That said, he’s still a longshot — and the DSCC has not (overtly) taken sides in the primary. Good for them — the should be more neutral more often.
But this (Schumer’s comments) is just not that big of a deal . . .
Valley Girl #11 has it… but I believe there’s more…
Schumer is 95% sure Lamont won’t be a problem, but… if perchance that 5% kicks in and Lamont does nail it, he’s got (he thinks) an “out”.
Read Schumer’s words. All Joe has to do is say, “I’m a Democrat, running as an independent! And boom, DSCC supports the “incumbent”. It’s all right there, in Chuckie’s finely-parsed text.
Someone above was miffed that the DSCC’s strategy to take the Senate is to support incumbents, blindly, and not to build a progressive, populist party. Damned right, you should be pissed. Because there is no guarantee in the world that an incumbent can’t lose to a Republican. Honest… I’ve actually seen it happen!
Which means, if you go by Schumer’s philosophy, there’s even less of a reason to support an incumbent Senator who is not the primary winner. Because it means the incumbent’s candidacy will have been weakened by a primary loss.
What it also means is that these assholes are committed to keeping the old boy crowd in power… yep, your worst fears about ‘em.
This is especially frustrating for me, in that the political friends I work with locally in NYC are all allied with Chuckie. If I ever have to meet him again, it’s gonna be hard, nay, impossible not to hold my nose (and my tongue), after this. The best thing that could happen to Schumer, as far as the netroots go, is for Joe to win the primary… then, he’s off the hook, because after all, all he did, see, was to support the winner of the primary…
Schmuck.
… and finally… WTF is the deal with the Rove indictment? Is Jason Leopold full of shit, or what? Somebody, please… I’ve been watching this space since Monday morning, dammit.
Jay @ 194, I second the shoe
ZN and all New Englanders, time for some more CCR lyrics (”who’ll stop the rain”) … I hate to see it happen to anyone, but take heart, at least Mike Brown is no longer at FEMA
all the MREs we got down here came with a miniature bottle of kajun ketchup (Tabasco Sauce … McIlhenny’s), does anyone know are they all like that or was that just a little “lagniappe” they threw us?
angie @ 6:36 pm (#179) – Jay has it right in (#184) Jewish dietary laws are close to those of Muslims. That’s why I put “kosher” in quotes. I suspect they could also have been airdropped into Israel.
The problem, I think is that the instructions on the MREs were written in English and Arabic (I’m going from memory here, always a bad thing). Anyhow, the Afghans couldn’t understand that the food was for people, or else they weren’t familiar with it (not everyone likes peanut butter, apparently). They gave it to their goats, who reportedly loved them.
Don’t know if they have goats in Israel, but they’d probably make use of them.
Scarecrow,
Well maybe- but here’s my reasoning for what it’s worth:
1) I don’t think Lamont can win- so I’d rather spend my efforts and money supporting- for example- Francine Busby who has a good chance.
2) In the outside chance that he DOES win- Lamont would possibly face Uncle Joe as an independent- as well as a gooper candidate. In a three way race- three things can happen and two of em are bad.
Can’t see any reason to take that chance.
Schumer is 95% sure Lamont won’t be a problem, but… if perchance that 5% kicks in and Lamont does nail it, he’s got (he thinks) an “outâ€.
I don’t know where Schumer gets his info if he’s thinking that. Lieberman is scared I think enough to behave like a weenie. So are Schumer/clinton I think.
cbl # 174
Agreed. The US came late to the Libya game. To believe Judy they were instrumental. And the atmospherics! Gadhafi can’t make a phone call apparently unless he’s agitated or in a panic. I love the big deal she makes concerning the centrifuges and how close that put them to a bomb only to say later that well they were pretty much unusable because they lacked rotors. BWAAHAAA! Oh, and the IAEA that you’re right she doesn’t mention said that Libya was just at the beginning of the process. She says too that Libya spent $300 million on its program but sort of fails to remark that this is peanuts with what it would have cost the Libyans with little infrastructure to build a bomb. It’s all more of that Judy brand of breathless credulity and long winded inanity.
ck:
A neutral response would be a clear statement of support for the eventual CT Dem nominee.
EPU (#46): Exactly.
You can say Schumer is “indecisive” (like Ghostman and others) but I think it’s pure Machiavelli. Chucky “supports” Jomentum now. What’s to lose? If Jomentum loses to Lamont, Chucky can welcome Lamont into the fold, or, see what Jomentum does next. If Jomentum loses badly, no problem. He’s toast. Chucky can give him a hug and wave bye bye.
If Jomentum’s loss is razor thin he may go “Independent” and negotiations will ensue. Politics really is like making sausage. We should always remember that. Always. We can be idealists. Politicians rarely, rarely survive that way.
& Don’t forget the Weicker factor. In the past, he apparently made toast out of his righty political opponents.
Fitz is in town, GJ scheduled to meet Wednesday, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say they indict tomorrow – only kidding about the “out on a limb” part – but I got a big hope and a bigger prayer…
Mary -
Yes, for a meeting this sensitive and potentially fruitful, I think Fitzgerald could very well have managed to slip into Luskin’s law firm unseen [in large part due to the lack of on-the-scene reporters today, thanks to their modern reliance on “sources” instead]. Especially with the possible assistance of the Rove-directed White House style security routine. Perhaps he was escorted by way of the Justice Department, with the assistance of the Secret Service, at Rove’s behest. But no one spotted Fitzgerald in the airport today, or elsewhere before he showed up in the court room during the Libby hearing, did they? He may be learning a few more tricks of the media trade himself, of late…
rwcole and xyz — Well, we’ll be finding out soon at any rate, eh?
ever
Seems like we’re getting close. Could still be some bargaining going on- which might be the only thing that could hold up the train.
I’d say this week- or next at the latest.
Ripley @ 6:48 pm (#198) – According to the WCAU website, Casey got 57%, Sandals 25%, and Pennacchio 18%. Crap is right.
My slogan is fast becoming “Canada – not as cold as you’d think”.
Cujo359– I do remember the peanut butter being included… the instructions were written in English, Spanish and French and were dropped amidst the bombs…and into the minefields. ;(
they were actually vegetarian meals.
What follows is an excerpt of an article I have archived by Arundhati Roy– it is a good read, imho.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
‘Brutality smeared in peanut butter’
Reports have begun to trickle in about civilian casualties, about cities emptying out as Afghan civilians flock to the borders which have been closed. Main arterial roads have been blown up or sealed off. Those who have experience of working in Afghanistan say that by early November, food convoys will not be able to reach the millions of Afghans (7.5m, according to the UN) who run the very real risk of starving to death during the course of this winter. They say that in the days that are left before winter sets in, there can either be a war, or an attempt to reach food to the hungry. Not both.
As a gesture of humanitarian support, the US government air-dropped 37,000 packets of emergency rations into Afghanistan. It says it plans to drop a total of 500,000 packets. That will still only add up to a single meal for half a million people out of the several million in dire need of food.
Aid workers have condemned it as a cynical, dangerous, public-relations exercise. They say that air-dropping food packets is worse than futile.
First, because the food will never get to those who really need it. More dangerously, those who run out to retrieve the packets risk being blown up by landmines. A tragic alms race.
Nevertheless, the food packets had a photo-op all to themselves. Their contents were listed in major newspapers. They were vegetarian, we’re told, as per Muslim dietary law (!) Each yellow packet, decorated with the American flag, contained: rice, peanut butter, bean salad, strawberry jam, crackers, raisins, flat bread, an apple fruit bar, seasoning, matches, a set of plastic cutlery, a serviette and illustrated user instructions.
After three years of unremitting drought, an air-dropped airline meal in Jalalabad! The level of cultural ineptitude, the failure to understand what months of relentless hunger and grinding poverty really mean, the US government¹s attempt to use even this abject misery to boost its self-image, beggars description.
Reverse the scenario for a moment. Imagine if the Taliban government was to bomb New York City, saying all the while that its real target was the US government and its policies. And suppose, during breaks between the bombing, the Taliban dropped a few thousand packets containing nan and kebabs impaled on an Afghan flag. Would the good people of New York ever find it in themselves to forgive the Afghan government? Even if they were hungry, even if they needed the food, even if they ate it, how would they ever forget the insult, the condescension? Rudi Guiliani, Mayor of New York City, returned a gift of $10m from a Saudi prince because it came with a few words of friendly advice about American policy in the Middle East. Is pride a luxury that only the rich are entitled to?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Arch…..81,00.html
fahrender and others:
I suggest you have a good read through Rick Perlstein’s Before the Storm.
It was discussed here last Sunday and will be discussed here again this coming Sunday.
http://www.firedoglake.com/200…..torm-pt-1/
http://tinyurl.com/a6erq
^^^ HELP IMPEACH TODAY
Keep the pressure on Congress… Talking about impeachment wakes people up… They question, it’s a strong motivator to get people thinking. It also lets Congress know how intense the dissapproval is for this President… They seem to be a little slow on the uptake. So please:
1) Sign petitions if you have not done so
2) Send a letter to Congress (both Senators & House rep)
3) Send a copy to the media
4) Enlist friends and family to help, ask them to chip in time
5) Spread the link around, email it (with a request to forward) post it on a blog, or in the comments of a news story.
Help out!!!
Thanks :)
fahrender,214:
I agree, it’s politics. If Ned Lamont is smart he should waste no time cultivating Shumer and his cohorts even before the primary (If he hasn’t already done so. Shumer refers to him as “Ned.”) Nothing wrong with dropping in on the Senator (hat in hand) to explain your position on the issues, give broad hints that you will be a good little junior senator for the first 6 years, and so on. You think Shumer will not be impressed to be visited by a scion of the House of J.P. Morgan?
We have to remember that the Senate, above all else, is a club, and like most clubs you gotta pay your dues. As a three-term senator, Joementum has obviously paid some dues, and this explains to some extent Shumer’s deference to Joe (a senior to Shumer in terms of service in the Senate).
If Lamont proves to be as good a politician and vote getter as we hope he is, Shumer will be cultivating Ned in due time.
Patience, my friends. Let’s first help Ned knock Joe off his comfortable perch.
Schumer’s “we back the incumbents” stance would be more palatable if I had any iota of trust that he’d ever given Lieberman flack for voting like a Rethuglican. I’m happy if the DSCC works to advance its existing members *IF* it exerts some influence on its members to act like DEMOCRATS. Would it be that hard to expect Lieberman to earn the support with something more than having won the last election?
Pachacutec,
Put me in the ‘more bothered’ column, or more correctly, the ’seriously bothered.’
A Lamont win, would be a curative tonic for Democrat leadership gone amok. It would correct a serious usurption of what our votes are meant to represents, the purpose of a primary and voter apathy.
If we have to force our Democratic leaders to respect us, then so be it.
Specter’s concept that inherent Presidential powers “trump” statutes is NONSENSE. – Mary at #143
Mary – I totally agree. WHY can’t any Democrat say this clearly to Specter’s face, on the Senate floor, or somewhere else publicly… Every time I hear Specter play this utterly misleading “trump” card, I hear him claim (with a straight face, no less) that an unenumerated power allegedly derived from the Constitution, and unilaterally controlled by the Civilian Chief of our Armed Forces, “trumps” the privacy rights of EVERY American citizen as enumerated in and safeguarded by the Fourth Amendment to our Constitution. Or, in short, that “the unenumerated Constitution ‘trumps’ the enumerated Constitution.” HUH?! Cut it out, already, Arlen Specter.
[And note my #217, if you missed it.]
Wow. I hope I’m not repeating anything said upthread (as I recognize that I probably am), but with due respect to the notion of supporting both Democratic incumbents and a Democratically controlled Senate, in what way would Lamont getting the nomination be outside the party structure?
That is, even if the Senate Dems love Joe and Joe promises to vote as a Dem on leadership matters, what about the State of Connecticut’s senatorial primary is so foul that the DSCC wouldn’t support its winner? What credibility to the Democratic Party would Ned Lamont lack if he were to win the nomination?
I’m sorry, but I am a registered CT voter and Lamont supporter and I don’t appreciate being told by Schumer, a senator from the state in which I work, telling me that the duly established electoral structure of Connecticut isn’t good enough for the DSCC if it doesn’t keep Joe Lieberman’s head nice and anointed through the election season. That’s not democracy, that’s oligarchy. And it’s not what I deserve as a Democratic voter in Connecticut…
orangejumpsuit (222). Lamont has some pretty competent people working with him. How the campaign is run is not the issue. Lamont has proved to be quite sensitive on many touchy issues for CT folks. It takes local knowledge here. Schumer is acting like a sledgehammer, and CT dems just need good mojo and progressives need to get the word out IMHO.
Backing encumbents because they are encumbent is a terrible idea. The party will thrive only if more new faces are encouraged to run. I’m fed up with the manipulations of Schumer, Reid, et al. They have been unsupportive, or worse, of good candidates like Chuck Pennacchio, Ned Lamont, and Paul Hackett. Let the people decide who the candidates should be, for goodness sake! I have great respect for Schumer, but he’s doing a lousy job on this campaign stuff.
OK. So if Lieberman runs as an Independent, then Schumer (DSCC) will decide who has the better chance in the general election, the Independent or the Democrat. To organize the Senate the worst thing that can happen is the election of the Republican candidate. Actually a good point. So Schumer should have stated that unequivocally upfront.
Still, if you’re the DSCC then you should be pissed at Lieberman for putting the Democratic party at such a risk. It would be best for the Democratic party (and the country) if Lieberman, should he lose the Democratic primary, dropped out of the election.
So if this scenario played out, that is – Lamont wins primary, Lieberman runs as an Independent, the DSCC backs Lieberman – then they’ve invited the first shot in a revolution that would destroy the Democratic party.
When Schumer said that the DSCC is an incumbent’s organization he spoke volumes about our problems. The kind of timidity that’s kept us not just in the back seat but in the trunk and shrinking. This has been in the dark recesses of my mind since 2002. The problem is in our stars …
God, the Whigs just flashed through my mind again.
I am going to say this again because Schumer t-‘s me off. A party of incumbents sounds waaay to snooty and country club for my tastes. It’s also undemocratic. Lieberman thought he could throw women to the curb and get away with it. Now it’s payday.
I agree with Schumer. Any rating I’ve seen
shows Joe’s votes as more liberal than at least those of Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu and of all republicans. And his position on abortion is certainly more liberal than Casey’s . Given Gov Rell’s popularity which she will put behind their Candidate I think a Lieberman primary loss could lead to a Republican victory in
November. Dumb.
R Flanagan (232). Lieberman is the only viable republican we have in CT for this seat. The rest are sure losers. In other words it’s *not* “dumb.”
If you think Lieberman is “liberal” on women’s rights, you are not following closely enough. Think Clarence Thomas, then Alito etc. etc. ad nauseum. There is a pattern of screwing Dems up here. Then combine that with statements made, e.g.not the cherry-picked ones. & ta da! We have a right-winger in our midst who acts as a spoiler for every congressional vote that matters.
Schumer is being undemocratic and selfishly protecting the members of his money-bagging exclusive incumbent “club.”
Besides Gov Rell is *weak*. Her “popularity” runs very shallow.
Gov. rell’s popularity! Omigod, that’s a good one. Given all the revelations about Rowland . . . Mwahaha ;))
Maybe this will finally wake people up to the fact that part of the republican strategy has been to infiltrate the democratic party. Hillary Clinton and Bill have been business partners with the Bushies since Bill was gov. of Arkansas. Joe Lie-berman is nothing more than a republican posing as a dem as is Chukie. Time to wake up and stop voting for these pieces of shit just because they claim to be a democrat. And if Hillary runs for president that will be the end of the democratic party.