<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Late Nite FDL: Yes, We Have No House of Lords</title>
	<atom:link href="http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/</link>
	<description>Firedoglake weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:54:27 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: mui</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173545</link>
		<dc:creator>mui</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:37:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173545</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;(230) I am not giving *any* money to the Democratic party, as I formerly did, until we see some more statements that pledge to support the winner of the CT primary. After seeing the union video . . . all I can say is that Clinton, Schumer, etc. should let the democratic process run its course.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(230) I am not giving *any* money to the Democratic party, as I formerly did, until we see some more statements that pledge to support the winner of the CT primary. After seeing the union video . . . all I can say is that Clinton, Schumer, etc. should let the democratic process run its course.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amike</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173533</link>
		<dc:creator>Amike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:27:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173533</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Thirty minutes or so, I received a solicitation call from the Democratic Senatorial Election’s Committee (I should have the initials memorized by now, but I’m acronym impaired).  When the solicitor (sounded like a young lady to these old ears) paused for breath between selling points I &lt;i&gt;&lt;b&gt;politely&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/i&gt; told her I preferred to give my money to senatorial candidates directly because I was not satisfied with the behavior of her organization in the primary season, &lt;i&gt;specifically&lt;/i&gt; with regard to the campaign in Connecticut.  She, also politely, thanked me for my time, and we parted on pleasant terms.  I didn’t demand to have my name taken off the calling list.  I suspect I’ll get another call in a few days.  When I do, I plan to repeat the performance.  Eventually, perhaps the Committee will “get it”.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thirty minutes or so, I received a solicitation call from the Democratic Senatorial Election’s Committee (I should have the initials memorized by now, but I’m acronym impaired).  When the solicitor (sounded like a young lady to these old ears) paused for breath between selling points I <i><b>politely</b></i> told her I preferred to give my money to senatorial candidates directly because I was not satisfied with the behavior of her organization in the primary season, <i>specifically</i> with regard to the campaign in Connecticut.  She, also politely, thanked me for my time, and we parted on pleasant terms.  I didn’t demand to have my name taken off the calling list.  I suspect I’ll get another call in a few days.  When I do, I plan to repeat the performance.  Eventually, perhaps the Committee will “get it”.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jayackroyd</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173522</link>
		<dc:creator>jayackroyd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:15:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173522</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;caoimhin laochdha &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Moreover, the weekend’s brouhaha is gonna raise Lamont’s name recognition.  It’s been very peculiar. For this entire race, Lieberman’s been running like a challenger, effectively raising Lamont’s name recognition. His internal polls must be really, really bad.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In which case, I don’t understand why he didn’t just go for the Independent line earlier. I think there’s a good chance that he’ll withdraw from the primary, and just focus on the Independent candidacy. (I think the equivocating senators are going to realize they have to follow Hillary’s lead, and that will take out his only argument–that he’s widely supported by other Democratic leaders.)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Strategically, I think it’s better for Lamont if he doesn’t withdraw–every day that passes in these weird dual party mode, Lieberman reinforces Lamont’s messages about Bush’s favorite democrat and his abandoning of the party (and CT citizens) on key votes, while at the same making him look like a self-serving weasel to independent voters.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>caoimhin laochdha </p>
<p>Moreover, the weekend’s brouhaha is gonna raise Lamont’s name recognition.  It’s been very peculiar. For this entire race, Lieberman’s been running like a challenger, effectively raising Lamont’s name recognition. His internal polls must be really, really bad.</p>
<p>In which case, I don’t understand why he didn’t just go for the Independent line earlier. I think there’s a good chance that he’ll withdraw from the primary, and just focus on the Independent candidacy. (I think the equivocating senators are going to realize they have to follow Hillary’s lead, and that will take out his only argument–that he’s widely supported by other Democratic leaders.)</p>
<p>Strategically, I think it’s better for Lamont if he doesn’t withdraw–every day that passes in these weird dual party mode, Lieberman reinforces Lamont’s messages about Bush’s favorite democrat and his abandoning of the party (and CT citizens) on key votes, while at the same making him look like a self-serving weasel to independent voters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gleex</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173517</link>
		<dc:creator>gleex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:10:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173517</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Didn’t care before, but now he has sent me in the opposite direction. He has no respect and I can see him pouting now (after he and his old party lose a seat and he gets a Bush appointment but wonders why people stare at him, or laugh at his pathetic historic persona).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If Gore could choose someone better than this loser we might have a party. This is all showing me how bad a decision maker Gore was. Also how this center right Democratic movement doesn’t know their A from their E.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Didn’t care before, but now he has sent me in the opposite direction. He has no respect and I can see him pouting now (after he and his old party lose a seat and he gets a Bush appointment but wonders why people stare at him, or laugh at his pathetic historic persona).</p>
<p>If Gore could choose someone better than this loser we might have a party. This is all showing me how bad a decision maker Gore was. Also how this center right Democratic movement doesn’t know their A from their E.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RT</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173491</link>
		<dc:creator>RT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 13:45:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173491</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;“what do we mean by political parties?”&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
- Joe Lieberman&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;What a card.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>“what do we mean by political parties?”</i><br />
- Joe Lieberman</p>
<p>What a card.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: caoimhin laochdha</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173482</link>
		<dc:creator>caoimhin laochdha</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 13:34:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173482</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Jane # 5&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The way I read the polls in blue Connecticut, a Holy Joe third party run cuts both ways for Dems and the GOP and could, as the campaign unfolds, hurt the GOP equally.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To skeptical Democrats and deaf pundits, Ned Lamont can fairly argue that when he wins the Democratic primary, Lieberman’s continued presence in the race as an independent will ultimately split the GOP vote more than the Democratic vote since the overwhelming Democratic majority vote is moving inexorably toward the Lamont campaign.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lieberman’s high poll numbers in a general election, at this early stage, only reflect name recognition. Remember, Lieberman was at 50% in California in 2003 leading up to the 2004 presidential campaign based only on name recognition. The same phenomena are in play in Connecticut right now.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The GOP candidate in the general election will have to seriously worry about being marginalized by Lieberman as the GOP voters worry about losing their reliable Lieberman vote and someone who is generally popular, albeit a lapdog, among moderate CT Republicans.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Democratics in the House races, in contrast, can count on a Lamont campaign exciting the electorate &amp; Democratic base to get out and vote for them, which is something Lieberman CANNOT offer them.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The polling and vote splitting dynamics are and will continue trending toward Ned Lamont.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;slinte,&lt;br /&gt;
cl&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jane # 5</p>
<p>The way I read the polls in blue Connecticut, a Holy Joe third party run cuts both ways for Dems and the GOP and could, as the campaign unfolds, hurt the GOP equally.</p>
<p>To skeptical Democrats and deaf pundits, Ned Lamont can fairly argue that when he wins the Democratic primary, Lieberman’s continued presence in the race as an independent will ultimately split the GOP vote more than the Democratic vote since the overwhelming Democratic majority vote is moving inexorably toward the Lamont campaign.</p>
<p>Lieberman’s high poll numbers in a general election, at this early stage, only reflect name recognition. Remember, Lieberman was at 50% in California in 2003 leading up to the 2004 presidential campaign based only on name recognition. The same phenomena are in play in Connecticut right now.</p>
<p>The GOP candidate in the general election will have to seriously worry about being marginalized by Lieberman as the GOP voters worry about losing their reliable Lieberman vote and someone who is generally popular, albeit a lapdog, among moderate CT Republicans.</p>
<p>The Democratics in the House races, in contrast, can count on a Lamont campaign exciting the electorate &amp; Democratic base to get out and vote for them, which is something Lieberman CANNOT offer them.</p>
<p>The polling and vote splitting dynamics are and will continue trending toward Ned Lamont.</p>
<p>slinte,<br />
cl</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lotus</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173479</link>
		<dc:creator>lotus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 13:27:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173479</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Is it any wonder that many Muslims hate the West?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;From today’s &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,200-2257021,00.html&quot;&gt;ToL&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Lords reject Bangladesh poison claim&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
By Times Online and Agencies &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A lawsuit that could have cost British taxpayers millions of pounds in compensation to victims of arsenic poisoning in Bangladesh was dismissed by the House of Lords today. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The law lords upheld an earlier ruling by the Court of Appeal that a claim brought by Binod Sutradhar, a 59-year-old Bangladeshi man, against the Natural Environmental Research Council was “hopeless”.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The British Geographical Survey, a branch of the research council, had failed to detect naturally occurring arsenic in Bangladeshi aquifiers while involved in a major irrigation project from 1984 to 1988. The wells were later used as a source of drinking water, resulting in what has been described as the largest mass poisoning in history. As many as 80 million people are believed to have been affected.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;. . .&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it any wonder that many Muslims hate the West?</p>
<p>From today’s <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,200-2257021,00.html">ToL</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p><b>Lords reject Bangladesh poison claim</b><br />
By Times Online and Agencies </p>
<p>A lawsuit that could have cost British taxpayers millions of pounds in compensation to victims of arsenic poisoning in Bangladesh was dismissed by the House of Lords today. </p>
<p>The law lords upheld an earlier ruling by the Court of Appeal that a claim brought by Binod Sutradhar, a 59-year-old Bangladeshi man, against the Natural Environmental Research Council was “hopeless”.</p>
<p>The British Geographical Survey, a branch of the research council, had failed to detect naturally occurring arsenic in Bangladeshi aquifiers while involved in a major irrigation project from 1984 to 1988. The wells were later used as a source of drinking water, resulting in what has been described as the largest mass poisoning in history. As many as 80 million people are believed to have been affected.</p>
<p>. . .</p>
</blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lotus</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173474</link>
		<dc:creator>lotus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 13:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173474</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Via Raw Story, here’s a CSM story that’s well worth reading in full: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0705/p01s03-ussc.htm&quot;&gt;After 9/11 highs, America’s back to good ol’ patriotism&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;. . .&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A Gallup poll released July 3 finds that American national pride has sunk back to pre-9/11 levels, with 57 percent of Americans saying they are “extremely proud” to be American, compared with 55 percent in January 2001. Among the seven subsequent Gallup surveys asking that question, the high point for “extremely proud” was 70 percent in June 2003.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;. . .&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The numbers have declined among all political subgroups: Conservatives have declined from an average of 79 percent “extremely proud” in the 2002-2004 period to 71 percent today. Moderates are 56 percent “extremely proud” today versus 68 percent in ‘02-’04. And liberals are down to 40 percent “extremely proud” today, from 55 percent before.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;. . .&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Via Raw Story, here’s a CSM story that’s well worth reading in full: <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0705/p01s03-ussc.htm">After 9/11 highs, America’s back to good ol’ patriotism</a>. </p>
<blockquote><p>. . .</p>
<p>A Gallup poll released July 3 finds that American national pride has sunk back to pre-9/11 levels, with 57 percent of Americans saying they are “extremely proud” to be American, compared with 55 percent in January 2001. Among the seven subsequent Gallup surveys asking that question, the high point for “extremely proud” was 70 percent in June 2003.</p>
<p>. . .</p>
<p>The numbers have declined among all political subgroups: Conservatives have declined from an average of 79 percent “extremely proud” in the 2002-2004 period to 71 percent today. Moderates are 56 percent “extremely proud” today versus 68 percent in ‘02-’04. And liberals are down to 40 percent “extremely proud” today, from 55 percent before.</p>
<p>. . .</p>
</blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mui</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173472</link>
		<dc:creator>mui</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 13:15:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173472</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;J., last time I heard (that tricky word of mouth), Howard Dean was a little p.o.’d at certain unnamed persons. Any word on that? Still no apology from Schumer. That’s frustrating. So frustrating, I have two words for Schumer: Bite me.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>J., last time I heard (that tricky word of mouth), Howard Dean was a little p.o.’d at certain unnamed persons. Any word on that? Still no apology from Schumer. That’s frustrating. So frustrating, I have two words for Schumer: Bite me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lotus</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173471</link>
		<dc:creator>lotus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 13:10:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/07/04/late-nite-fdl-yes-we-have-no-house-of-lords/#comment-173471</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;AP: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Iraq.html&quot;&gt;Iraqi PM Wants Rape - Slay Investigation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AP: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Iraq.html">Iraqi PM Wants Rape &#8211; Slay Investigation</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
