Login Here
Kirby over at CTBob's place has a fine graph up about Lieberman's less-than-stellar record at getting his Republican friends to help him bring home federal tax dollars to Connecticut. Although with his horrible political tin ear he openly brags about all the "earmarks" he's bagged for the state, according to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation:
Connecticut ranks 49 out of all 50 states in its ratio of federal tax spent in state versus federal tax dollars sent to Washington. In other words, Connecticut is the second to last state in the country in terms of getting a return on its federal tax dollars, getting just 66 cents of federal spending for every $1 dollar Connecticut taxpayers are paying in to the system. [Source: Tax Foundation, 2004 report]
Now, Connecticut State Legislators want to know why Lieberman can't be bothered to show up and vote on the state's behalf:
Joe Lieberman has one of the worst voting records in the U.S. Senate.
Recently, he's explained that it's ok to miss votes if his vote wouldn't make a difference. Unfortunately, Senator Lieberman's absenteeism is a big part of why he has failed to deliver for Connecticut. In all, twenty State Senators and Representatives will release a letter to Senator Lieberman decrying how his record of absenteeism is hurting Connecticut, with the country dangerously on the wrong track and the state now constantly being shortchanged by Congress for its most pressing priorities.
Joe tried to pretend he was a Democrat in the primary, now he's all about being a Republican. But in the end, Joe is just out for Joe.
And for those who have been pining for the opportunity to comment on Joe's blog, well, now you can.
I know. It's going to fill a big void in my life too.
Share This 
Spotlight
Go, Ned! Go, Dems!
In all, twenty State Senators and Representatives will release a letter to Senator Lieberman decrying how his record of absenteeism is hurting Connecticut, with the country dangerously on the wrong track and the state now constantly being shortchanged by Congress for its most pressing priorities.
Now, That’s an endorsement!!
PS: Colbert still has that seat ready for Joe Lieberman. But Joe won’t go on because he is a chickenhawk. He is like someone else we know–he can’t handle direct questions which is why he cannot blog.
New Definitions:
Slog-a blog with no comments
Slogger- a blog owner with no comments (see Joe2006.)
Cheney: a long hard slog
Fitz.
And JUSTICE, damn it.
NYT/CBS: Bush at 34%
http://tinyurl.com/jl4h2
Stopping by briefly between canvassing for Diane Benson for US House and going over to visit Katie Hurley, who is going to take the state house seat from Vic Kohring, whose mug made the cover ot the Anchorage papers this morning next to the words FBI Probe for the second time.
Katie is 84 years old, was the Secretary of the Alaska State Constitutional Convention, later a state legislator. She’s out there every day walking the district. I heard her give a rousing speech two weeks ago. The NASCAR Republcan guys at my favorite auto body shop, who’ve voted for Vic every time in the past, have been converted to Katie.
Thanks to the pups who’ve been donating at Egregious’ favorites page at act blue ( http://www.actblue.com/page/egregious ) for Diane Benson!!! Please help these candidates if you can.
*crickets*
he openly brags about all the “earmarks” he’s bagged for the state
Earmark La Douce
there’s a parallel here somewhere.
Eh @
6
“Hired?”
Please send check. Poodles need to eat.
“Pretend”. That’s the word that seems best suited to describe Lieberman. Lieberman pretends he’s basically a good guy, concerned with the best interests of the American people. Rubbish. At least with guys like Rove, Cheney and Bush, they don’t try to lay claim to niceness. These three are nasty chunks of work, and seem proud of it.
Incumbent Don Young: not so good for Alaska…or the nation.
Ed*ard Teller and I are supporting Diane Benson against the odious Abramoff-tainted Don Young in Alaska. ET and I hae never met, only a meeting of the minds here at fdl.
Until the day, soon I hope, that she can be supported thru BlueAmerica, please throw $$$ love her way via credit cards–NO PAYPAL!–at mcegregious:
http://www.actblue.com/page/egregious
Thank you on behalf of an extremely underfunded candidate, that can potentially defeat a Bush bad guy.
ET has reported a progressive sweep in their recent elections. Let’s carry the momentum forward by supporting Diane Benson for Congress.
PS Yay Webb for his debate victory!
sorry, I meant egregious’s actblue site………
OK Kiddo—If you don’t sustain them, they usually crawl back under their bridge.
And quoting their comments just creates an echo effect.
jane thanks for all you do. it seems like the volume is geting turned back up here in connecticut on this race.
Minnesota Firedogs,
Thanks for the suggestions. I live in ND , but my heart is in Minneapolis.
That’s right, Eh. I’ll bet Jane’s making 2x what I’m making on campaign 2006, which is 0×2. And she’s probably spending 20x what I’m spending, so she’s WAY out ahead.
How much is Joe paying you?
Heckuva job, Joey.
Ed*ard Teller @ 7
Proof positive that ET and I work together but don’t know each other: he thinks the actblue site is RGB’s favorites LOL!!! I hope RGB will join us at egregious’ favorite candidates and help Diane Benson kick Don Young’s butt out of Congress.
ET posted a killer analysis on the previous post or possibly 2 back, near the bottom, of how Young has supported Abramoff scandals over the years especially the hideous conditions in the Mariannas.
Begging all fdl folk for their support for Diane Benson!
http://www.actblue.com/page/egregious
Thank you. Apparently my fasting from all things political has collapsed into a small heap. O well. Some day I will tell what DIDN’T happen this week because of that fast, it is a sad missed opportunity. Yay mental health. Hope it was worth it.
Dont feed the fucking trolls … we are swatting them as fast as we can!
http://www.Joe2006Blog.com - you’ll like it!
Jane Hamsher @ 9
Eh @ 6, if you are still out there, Jane is a Patriot. You are a moron.
Jane - you mentioned earlier that it feels like things are heating back up in CT.
I couldn’t agree more. I could sense it when I went up to volunteer for Lamont last weekend. The passion is ALL on Ned’s side. And it is building.
And Joe’s people can sense the shift in joementum too.
You can tell by all the Joe-trolls that are popping up tonight.
When the Joe-trolls come-a-knocking, you damn sure know you must be doing something right.
RBG @ 15
Yes I understand perfectly what you say. Sometimes I get angry. Innuendo, not ground in fact, and rudeness, is very off-putting in my view. My naughty.
B-b-but. . . BIPARTISAN!! EXPERIENCE!! Ned is NEGATIVE!
(Translation: please don’t make this about my record!)
Pachacutec @ 26
The longer Ned takes to learn to do what Lieberman does, the better.
seems like an excellent post to SPOTLIGHT (especially for those you with connections to CT who might want to let the local papers know).
I’ll get some of the national ones…
Jane - I never get tired of seeing you take Joe down. Not that I’ll miss Joe when he is just a whine in the wind…
The comedy of all this is Lieberman ran against Wiecker’s absenteeism in the Senate, and Joe has been absent much more.
Pachacutec @ 30
Hypocrisy is a big part of Joe’s charm.
By the way, Joe’s soft underbelly remains his love for Bush and the Iraq war.
All Lamont’s campaign and his supporters have to do is keep hammering on two facts: (1)Lieberman loves Bush and his war in Iraq and (2)Lamont will stand up to Bush and bring our troops home.
No need to get fancy. Just keep punching at the same spot.
Like a boxer who opens a cut on his opponent’s forehead. Just keep jabbing at that cut. That’s how you end the fight. Bush, Iraq, Bush, Iraq. Left, right, left, right. KO
Eli @ 29
… and Eli has exquisitely piquant wit. A joy!
I think it’s worth attacking what Joe thinks is his strength, dead on, because it’s so easy to puncture with a little repetition and a sustained attack. Plus, it also makes Joe shriek like a harpy, which makes him implode. And that just kills Joe’s numbers.
is it wrong to start out a spotlight letter with, “Once again, Joe Lieberman, full of poo…”?
*ilson46201 @ 32
fortunately, he is not a pecan twit.
Has anyone asked RGJoe about his support for W’s Magnificent Mess-opotamia now that NK’s got a nuke? The neocon’s Iraq hardon yielded this new hell, as well.
Gotta comment, Joe?
Joe wants to be snateur inamovible, but Joe…it’s too late for you.
snip
A senator for life is a member of the senate elected or appointed for lifetime. As of 2006, a few members of the Italian Senate are lifetime senators.
In France, during the Third Republic, the Senate was composed of 300 members, 75 of which were inamovible (”unremovable”). Introduced in 1875, the status was suppressed for new senators in 1884, but maintained for those in office. mile Deshayes de Marcre, the last surviving snateur inamovible, died in 1918.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senator_for_life
By the way, let’s hear it for KIRBY!!!
She is uber-smart, dedicated, and has a razor-sharp focus on issues that I can’t even begin to comprehend.
I fool around with video, but Kirby does some frickin’ HEAVY LIFTING!
Woo-hoo!!! Kirby ROCKS!
A toast to Kirby!
cross-commented at bob’s:
Gee, thanks Bob @36! You see, that’s what makes blogging in CT so much fun — we are each others’ biggest fans!
In response to many comments today, I have posted a revised chart, noting when the Rs holding our contested Congressional seats were elected, when ex-con Rowland was elected governor (to R hands) and when we lost a D Congressional seat because of a drop in population in the 2000 census.
It was a nice way to spend an afternoon while I watched football. I’m hoping to have time to do health care next, being a nurse and all…
punaise @ 36
I’m not much of an academia nut either, though.
CT Bob @ 36
It’s a great chart. Bob, has this been physically distributed to press, or just posted?
Joe’s blog requests help!
There’s a long list of events like this:
No photos! Bwahahaha! What a joke!
scarecrow @ 41
Great question scarecrow. I think this would make a great color flier. Especially with some commentary included at the top of the sheet.
And on the back you could photocopy Lieberman’s op-ed “Our Troops Must Stay”.
The title on one side could be “Lieberman: Wrong on the Iraq War” and on the other side “Lieberman, Wrong For Connecticut’s Economy“.
I see Karl won’t let Joe borrow any of the good trolls (I guess maybe there are some more urgent matters that require their attention at the moment), assuming there are even any of them left…
Can I just say that I love the Joe-Trolls!
Every time I see one I know his team is getting scared.
Drive by Fitz!
Joe Blows Donkey Ass!
Will catch up with you pooches in a bit!
1,298 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Firepups:
Can someone out there please tell me how Wedd did against the Grand Wizard?
I was too busy tryin’ ta play Ann Landers to a lovesick college freshman who is tryin’ ta write her first major paper.
Did Webb pull the sheet offa Allen’s head?
KEEP THE FAITH AND BECAREFUL WHERE YOU STEP…REPUBLICAN’S HAVE BEEN EVERYWHERE!!!
Went to Joe’s blog for the first time. Couldn’t handle it.
Eli @ 42
tell it to the right wing goobers; they’ve got no exit strategy for Arach.
This will be irrelevant when NED Wins but here’s an article about another Lieberman lie. Apologies if this article has already been posted…
In the article Lieberman falsely claims he will keep his seniority if he returns to the Senate, so he would head the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the Committee that should investigate the enormous pile of BushCo corruptions.
There’s also interesting info about Sen. Frank Lautenberg trying to reclaim his seniority of 22 years. Then Lautenberg would head the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee instead of Lieberman.
http://www.hillnews.com/thehil.....news3.html
Lieberman says he has been promised seniority
By Alexander Bolton
The article says Reid “denies making a decision” about Lieberman’s seniority and Reid’s spokesman, Jim Manley, says “The caucus won’t make any decisions until after the elections in November”.
The article also says…
Lieberman heading the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee “could create big problems with Democrats in Congress and around the country if their party takes over the Senate. The governmental affairs panel is primarily responsible for oversight and investigations of the executive branch.”
“If Democrats take over either the Senate or the House, it is expected they will pour much time and effort into investigating the Bush administration. And many Democrats think Lieberman, who lost the primary race because of his perceived closeness to the Bush administration, is not the right person for that job.”
I have a question about EmptyWheel’s book fund drive.
First of all let me say I’m one of the first contributors to the cause, so I’m not just blowing smoke out of my Buttrog.
I worry that the pace of donations has slowed to the point of stalling out. I understand that non-Fitz news has dominated lately, and luckily it is to our great benefit.
My concern is this. At what point do we throw in the towel and use this money for a 1 minute spot for a close race that will benefit everyone? I’ll be the first to re-up after we take back the Senate and the House, in fact I’ll double my pledge. But is this the best use of this money at this time?
The thermometer shows us as being 1/3 to the goal. But $23,000 would be huge for any number of candidates in this last month.
Someone may have found this earlier, but Matt Stoler has a pretty thoughtful article up on MyDD regarding the Lamont/Liarman race.
We call that a fart.
*xyz @ 43
I checked Ct Bob’s site and he’s posted an Updated version of Kirby’s chart — a little more information. When I spotlighted from fdl, I couldn’t tell whether the chart went through with Jane’s text. So I’m hoping Kirby has distributed directly, using the updated chart.
*xyz @ 43
The original chart (the one Jane posted) has gotten a lot play on the local blogs, but so far it hasn’t been picked up by the media.
Maybe we should email it to the local papers.
And Kirby, I think the original chart was best; run with that one please. Great work!
Hey Eli,
I see on your blogroll you have www.tatteredcoat.com I love that blog, along with the republicoft, and attytood, and of course multimedium
Just want to say Pennsylvania rawks!
I spotlighted this to about 25 in the national media (TV/radio)… I’m thinking the local media should be handled by CT locals.
How can we get the graphic out to the media? I don’t think it goes through via the spotlight function (which I believe is text-only).
NYT: “Seventy-nine percent of respondents said House Republican leaders were more concerned about their political standing than about the safety of teenage Congressional pages.”…
john in sacramento @ 60
Hee. Thanks, john. We’re on opposite ends of the state, but I did meet him briefly at EschaCon last year. Very nice guy, and a pretty good softball player.
The most stomach-turning thing Lieberman has said recently was his comment that outrage over Republican pedophilia was “partisan”. Did he mean that Republicans can do anything they want? And that we should all just shut up and take it?
Oh, wait…he calls that “bipartisanship”.
I haven’t been paying much attention to the Connecticut senate race, but here’s a pretty good source for the latest polls. Looks like Joe is up by nine and has been for the last 10 polls (on average).
SusanD @ 65
I’m sure that the Republicans had our best interests at heart when they were covering up for Foley.
After all, if they lost their majority, they wouldn’t be able to protect us from Teh Scary Terrorists anymore.
http://www.pollster.com/polls/.....enate_race
Oops- forgot to past the site info- see above.
Another great post at DWT:
http://downwithtyranny.blogspo.....-wing.html
~~Congresswoman Cathy McMorris, who represents Washington’s 5th District, is an old hand at the pedophile protection racket, having worked closely with Jim West for 20 years in the Legislature. Cathy also has one of the most disgusting voting records in Congress. She has spent her entire life in the pocket of her father and his corrupt political cronies, and they have led her down a sorry path.~~
CT Bob,
Excellent. The chart shows Connecticut voters the bottom line. It’s also a subset of the Blue State/Red State financial divide. The Red States are the poor cousins of the Blue States, and keep asking for (and getting) handouts from the Federal Government. Red States = Welfare States.
Oh, thank God! I had SO missed the Joe bloggy-type-thingy. It’s so cute that they inquire in the comments when the “Hamsher anti-semites” are going to show up. I feel so ashamed, though. I’ll have to admit I did leave a few thoughtful comments here and there…. As A Real Democrat it sort of seemed like the thing to do… Was that too naughty???
okay, this time in response to rwcole, let me post this *once* again–
Lamont polls- I went and checked out the polls at pollster.com. Statistically, there is no point in including polls that only have a single point, because there is no way to compare these data, over time, and each poll has a unique bias/audience. The only three polls that have multiple data points are- Rassmusen, Zogby Interactive, and Quinnipiac.
Percentages are Lieberman adv. over Lamont.
In the 4 R polls after primary 5% > 2% > 2% > 10%
In the 3 ZI polls after primary 10% > 4% > 2%
In the 2 Q polls after the primary 12% > 10%, but Q poll data 1st was random voters, 2nd likely voters. Hard to interpret these two points, thus.
Most of the alarm seems to have been created by the entry of the Zogby Poll (not the interactive one)- first entry, no data points to compare; and the Rassumsen poll change from 2% adv to 10% adv Lieberman.
Disclaimer- I am not a statistician. Wish Bobby G were here. But, I do look at data a lot in my job. At this point, I just don’t see any evidence, based on these data, that Ned is falling behind. And, he has clearly gained in name recognition. If anything, my own look at the polls says it’s 50/50 L/L at this point- though I wish Lamont had already moved ahead. As Jane has said, 4 weeks is a long time, in the current environment. And, the more people know about Lamont, the more they will like him. The more people know more about Lieberman, the less they will like him. I am feeling much more optimistic having looked more closely at the polling data, rather than just responding to the cries of alarm.
Marion in Savannah @ 72
Wow. It sounds like Lieber Green Footballs or something over there.
1,298 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Help me out here hot canines, how did Webb do against the nazi? Was it a decision or a knockout?
KEEP THE FAITH, ALL THEY GOT IS THE MONEY!!
rwcole @ 64
Yeah, but keep in mind these two things:
Joe is peaking RIGHT NOW. He can only drop off for the next four weeks.
And Ned is going to get a huge boost when we step up ALL OUR EFFORTS, and we get serious support from all over.
Just watch; the trends are going to be Ned-Ned-Ned, and in the last 10 days before the election, we’re going to see Joe self-destruct with the sudden finalness of a hydrogen-filled zeppelin.
Mark my words.
Troll @67. this site’s cleaner uppers are so good, that this is the first troll I have seen here. Makes me want to write Fitz! (sort of like getting a zero at the beginning of a post!). Thanks everyone for keeping the place neat.
Valley– Don’t know- all I noticed that the avg. of the last five polls is Joe up by 9 and the last ten polls show the same thing- which would indicate a prettys stable situation. It ain’t over - but that’s a pretty big deficit.
SusanD @ 61
What Lieberman is saying is that voters should not hold the Republican Party, the party in charge of Congress, accountable for its failure to monitor member contacts with pages, nor should voters hold the Republican Party responsible for its failure to deal honestly and responsibly with the information it was given about Foley’s behavior. He’s arguing against accountability. On its face, that is not a position that can be categorized as “partisan” or “non-partisan.” Arguing that the responsible party should not be held accountable is a position that can only be defined as “irresponsible.”
But in Lieberman’s case, it is worse, because he is claiming to be a Democrat, and Democrats are trying to end one-party rule in goverment. Lieberman is in fact taking a position that the Republican Party, which was responsible, should not be held accountable. In his case, it is a “partisan” i.e., Republican position.
So not only has Lieberman taken an irresponsible position by arguing against a “partisan” position, in this context he is hypocritical by taking a partisan position that is calculated to help the Republican Party maintain its control of Congress, when the responsible thing to do would be to hold them accountable and throw the bums out.
rwcole- reread what I said above, please, and look more closely at the data and the source of the various polls- you’ll see what I mean.
Sowing the Seeds of Fascism in America
http://www.truthdig.com/dig/it.....ilitarism/
Valley– I did. I think you were saying that when you look at the same polls over time, there is no clear trend–that’s what the other data shows too- a pretty stable data set. (unless I misunderstood you).
Amidst the glee (tempered by worry) of the latest polls on the Congressional races, no one wants to say aloud what should be obvious: we need one more Senate seat. Lieberman, should he win, will not caucus with the Democrats — certainly not in spirit, and probably not nominally. So, if a Webb win gives us some breathing room in the event of a loss in MO or NJ — not so fast, a loss there can only be suffered if Ned wins.
TheOtherWA @
42
Well, actually you can see the pix if you click on the link up at the top of the story. It’s REALLY worth checking them out. I was impressed! In some of those pictures there were actually maybe close to 10 people….
Pitiful.
Seems Kim Jong Il’s (sp?) nuke test was dud
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002832.html
uncle toby @ 79
I think I’m actually more optimistic about Webb than Lamont, for two reasons:
1) Joe doesn’t have any actual scandals of his own (macaca, mastocka), although he *has* foolishly waded in on the Republican side of the Foliasco.
2) Allen isn’t going to pick up any misguided Democratic (or Independent) votes. Everyone knows Allen’s a Republican, and will vote accordingly.
Oklahoma kiddo @
48
I understand. It’s one of those things that you do late at night, alone, and feel VERY ashamed about the next morning… On the positive side, there’s no hangover and no reason to go to the doctor…
May God punish you all for daring to question Joe Lieberman.
-GSD
GSD @ 85
That was the lamest troll imitation I’ve seen in a long, long time! Pitiful!
OldCoastie @25,
You are absolutely right, that graph should be posted in each of Connecticut’s newspapers, the daily and weekly variety.
It is an awesome graph Jane. Kinda takes away all the Joey BS about all he is doing for Connecticut.
Someone asked last week if Jane was going back to Conn. for the election. Does anyone know?
Jane brings so much vim and vigor not only to this site, but look what happened when she took the time to spotlight a little known challenger to the Great Joe Lieberman (gag)and Ned knocked him off. He gained a nationwide following in the process. A credit to Ned, Jane, and all the firepups that were up there helping out.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 76
I’ve been trying to think of a definition of fascism that would be meaningful for us, now.
* Part of it is a state’s desire for resource acquisition.
* Part of it is a state’s populace’s sense of order and fairness.
* Part of it is the state policies which supress the later in pursuit of the former.
So, in the end I come up with merely fascist policies. Thoes which tend to surpress a state’s populace in their natural tendency to extend an orderly economic order to the world beyond the state.
In other words, the things you tell your people to make them support theft.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/w.....poll_x.htm
Link to latest gallup poll. Nothin looks good for goopers.
rwcole- there are actually only 2 polls that have similar points (not Q)- one has Lieberman up by 10% -change, the other up by 2% change- people have been interpreting the data as a whole as Lieberman uptrend, Lamont downtrend and/or “it’s over”. I don’t buy either point. I agree that the past few have been “stable”. But too many people just seem to glance at the numbers, and get discouraged- given the margin of error, I still say 50/50 right now.
I messed up. Kirby deserves credit for the graph that Jane highlighted. Sorry Kirby, what a great job!
Oklahoma kiddo @ 77
Woof. I can’t say I’m surprised at all, because I’ve sort of been sniffing this in the wind here and there, but to have it all laid out is chilling in the extreme. Should make us all want to redouble our efforts on all fronts.
Spotted on ebay: Vintage Hansen posters from Mark Foley to help beef up his legal defense fund.
Marion in Savannah @ 83
The reason I started the mirror blog is so you can read Joe’s bullshit, and then cleanse your palate with all the funny, snarky comments that make it all better.
People have been upset with Joe’s bullshit for too long now. They finally have a way to talk back.
tryggth @ 86
14 points of Fascism
I think that everyone knocking on doors for Lamont in CT should have a copy of that graph with them- preferably *many* copies to distribute widely.
Jane,
I feel like a voice crying in the wilderness here, but could I point out that there are 49 other states in the Union besides Connecticut, and some of us are a little tired of hearing of nothing but the evil of Joe Lieberman?
Of course, if you want to restrict your readership to the Nutmeg State, go for it.
Phil
Valley
Well there are two questions.
1) Who’s ahead and by how much
2) What’s the trend- is either guy gaining.
The anwer to the first seems to be- Joe by nine.
The answer to the other seems to be- “there is no measurable trend one way or the other.
I see no way of getting a fifty-fifty tie out of this- unless you adopt the gooper strategy of throwing out the polls you don’t like.
CTBob- are you having to do “troll” patrol there?
Joe And The Jewish Vote
If You’re Jewish, Should You Feel Guilty If You Don’t Vote For Lieberman?
October 1, 2006
By Leonard Felson
snip
Even on Israel, though it may seem counterintuitive, many Jews who support Lamont say they believe the war in Iraq has left Israel less secure, not more so. As evidence they point to the ease with which Iran shipped missiles to Hezbollah, in part, so the argument goes, because Iran bet that the U.S., distracted in Iraq, would not or could not react. “The question is this: Is Israel in a better situation today than it was five years ago and is the general state of unrest in the region to Israel’s advantage?” asks David Pudlin, a Lamont strategist, former state House Majority Leader and active member of Temple Sinai in Newington.
http://www.courant.com/news/lo.....theast-top
Phil Stanhope @ 95
You are cordially invited to read another blog. Or start your own.
PS - Our readership is quite broad. When you talk out of your butt, your breath stinks.
It seems I read somewhere, perhaps here, that if Lamont gets to within 4 or five points he will win. Did I dream this?
You can already see the pre-election spin prep in the event the GOP tanks.
“We would have won if it wasn’t for San Francisco liberal Nancy Pelosi and her evil bag of media tricks cooked up on the tubes and internets with George Soros that snared poor weak and almost Democrat Mark Foley.”
-GSD
CT Bob @ 94
the mirror site - its fun! www.Joe2006Blog.com
Balrog @
51
Class? Anyone?
Pachacutec @ 100
Well, I can’t improve on a take-down by Pachacutec, but if you bothered to look at other posts you’d realize it’s not “All Joe, All The Time.” So perhaps you should put your brain in gear before you pop the clutch on