I know I know, but hey: language matters too.

love & kisses,

Nick in Florida

Go Ned!

[ Moderator: correction just made … thank you ! ]

well, maybe Christy is as well …

Seems like that guy looked down his nose at whomever he was talking to like HoJo does.

Conrad Somebody?

To the Editor:

Sen. Joe Lieberman’s recent ad attacking challenger Ned Lamont provides just one more reason why Lieberman should retire: He needs more time to brush up on his math. According to Lieberman, you would think that Lamont’s votes as a Greenwich Selectman involved cutting health care and education budgets, and slashing funds designed to eliminate asbestos in the high school. This could not be further from the truth. Lieberman is guilty of playing the “fuzzy math” game deliberately attacking one of Ned Lamont’s greatest strengths.

As a successful businessman, Ned understands the importance (which Lieberman and his friends in the administration do not) of prudent resource allocation. In the cases Lieberman cites, Ned actually voted to increase budget allocations over the prior years. The “cuts” that Lieberman alleges Ned endorsed actually reflect consensus arrived at through a careful review process in which sensible reductions were made to proposed increases.

Any experienced professional whether businessman or politician understands that early proposals often are inflated to ensure that such reviews produce appropriate results; more to the point, increases over a prior year cannot reasonably be described as “cuts.” A few examples of decisions Ned Lamont supported: The Health Department requested a budget increase of nearly 12 percent over its 1989-90 budget of $2.8M. The Board of Estimate & Taxation approved a budget increase of more than 6 percent. Lieberman charged that Lamont voted in 1993 to cut the town’s education budget by $150K. In fact, Lamont supported increased school spending by 4.2 percent adding 17 teaching positions and maintaining the town’s top ranking in the state for per-pupil spending.

Lieberman claims that Lamont voted against cleaning up asbestos at Greenwich High School. Actually, Lamont wanted a second opinion, as he believed the proposed costs were too high. While competitive bidding seems to have become passé in this Bush-Cheney era of no-bid contracts, it nevertheless remains the fiscally responsible approach. In Bush’s world of record deficits, the country could use a Connecticut senator who knows how to add, subtract and manage fiscally responsible budgets. Ned Lamont is that man.

Ann Galloway

Stamford
http://64.233.161.104/search?q…..k&cd=1

This letter is no longer available at the website.

This page, http://home.comcast.net/~ctblogger/Tally.htm , leads to a page from the Connecticutt Blog, with a run down of answers to this question posed to elected officials: “Will you support the Democratic nominee for Senate?
http://home.comcast.net/~ctblogger/Tally.htm

And this guy, http://zengerite.blogspot.com/ , sure has a blog ax to grind regarding Lamont.

In state courts and gang prosecutions, once one member of the gang tells someone to “take care” of someone not connected with the gang and the third party dies the person who said to “take care” of the third party is generally criminally liable for the “natural and probable consequeses” of the other gang member’s actions. Following that logic, both Bush and Cheney are guilty of outing an undercover CIA agent. If either was black or Hispanic, a member of the Crips, Bloods, or 13th Street, they would be convicted in two seconds by any jury in America.

And similarly, when the claim is made that a report or a methodology is “flawed,” reporters never seem to ask for a list of the flaws.

How in the world do you folks that work keep up? I’m retired and still can’t seem to get everything read. Kudos to you.

If something ever deprived me of my eating apparatus, I’d be to bury.

Thanks again — you made my day.