The Courant's Premature Ejaculatory Ignorance

Bob Adams over at Connecticut Bob has a nice "screenshot" pic up from the Doh! biased Hartford Courant's Website supposedly testing their announcement of "Joe Liberman's win" in the Connecticut Senate race.

"TEST BULLETIN -- The following is a TEST. Joe Lieberman, CTL, elected U.S. Senate, Connecticut."

Take note of the tha name of the party they say backs Lieberman:

"CTL"

For the record: The name of the party that backs Lieberman is "CFL". (Connecticut For Lieberman)

Not only Does the Courant exhibit bad judgement in their choice of backing Lieberman, they exhibit extreme ignorance in their premature ejaculations as they gush over Lieberman. Someone please pass the Courant staff a tissue to clean the mess off of their faces...

Lieberman Campaign Finance Lies

Scarce at My Left Nutmeg took a hard look at the $$$ numbers in this campaign:

-----------------------------

LIEBERMAN, JOSEPH I
Total Receipts: $15,599,455
Individual Contributions: $13,445,844
Non-Party (e.g. PACs) or Other Committees: $2,063,734
Contributions from Party Committees: $3,000
Candidate Contribution: $0
Candidate Loans: $0[Through: 10/18/2006]

LAMONT, EDWARD M
Total Receipts: $9,045,679
Individual Contributions: $2,754,554
Non-Party (e.g. PACs) or Other Committees: $37,595
Contributions from Party Committees: $650
Candidate Contribution: $6,252,878
Candidate Loans: $0[Through: 09/30/2006]

SCHLESINGER, ALANTotal Receipts: $194,959
Individual Contributions: $88,259
Non-Party (e.g. PACs) or Other Committees: $5,200
Contributions from Party Committees $1,500
Candidate Contribution: $0
Candidate Loans: $100,000[Through: 09/30/2006]

(source: Federal Election Commission, http://www.fec.gov/ )

-----------------------------

For those of you that say that Lieberman is just trying to level the playing field, the numbers expose that lie. Also, you have to consider the source of Lieberman's caqmpaign funding. Nevermind the fact that Lieberman is using his money illegally in this campaign.

If you really want to vote for a continued conservative agenda I suggest you look at the more honest conservative candidate Alan Schlesinger. But if you truely want to change the course and fix what is wrong in Washington there is only one real choice:

Vote For Ned Lamont

As a side note: ctblogger over at ConnecticutBlog has a great summary of the $387,000 Petty Cash Scandal that the Lieberman campaign is trying to run and hide from...

Lieberman, Johnson, Shays , Simmons: "We are against you!"

"Are you with us or against us?"

Last night on the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, columnist Mark Shields dropped this little bombshell:

MARK SHIELDS: The highest ranking or certainly one of the highest ranking men in the United States military today has recommended that we remove all troops from Baghdad

...snip...

JIM LEHRER: So who did he make this recommendation to?

MARK SHIELDS: He made it to the civilian leadership of the United States.

Of course there is no doubt that the Bush administration will follow the soldiers suggestion since Bush claims that he always takes their advice... So that there is no question concerning the Bush's intentions for winning the hearts and minds of Iraqis the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Karen Hughes headed off to the Middle East, to deliver "news" of the newest Bush plan:

• Substantially expand…[the] “Micro scholarship” program…targeted at youth in key disadvantaged areas in Iraq, such as Sadr City or Anbar Governorate.”



• Create a fund to support media projects by Iraqis, such as documentaries, short films, animation, audio-visual productions and other material that would show Iraq’s reality to pan-Arab and pan-Islamic audiences.



• Revive book publishing in Iraq to fill the intellectual vacuum…and support…Iraq’s hard-pressed intellectuals.

Hey wait a second? That sounds suspiciously more like "RE-EDUCATION" AND PROPAGANDA PROGRAMS, like the previous propaganda programs run by the Lincoln Group in Iraq, than it does like pulling out of Baghdad.

• “Donald Rumsfeld is backing off his claim last week that the Pentagon had stopped paying to plant stories in the Iraqi news media,” the AP reports.



• On Sunday’s ABC This Week, Stephen Hadley acknowledged that President Bush has not yet ordered the shut-down of the Pentagon’s propaganda campaign in Iraq.



• The UK Independent presents examples of the Lincoln Group’s propaganda work in Iraq, which one military specialist described as “comical.” One exaggerated headline: ‘IRAQI ARMY DEFEATS TERRORISM.’

We all know how successful those PROPAGANDA PROGRAMS were. Just look at where we are now, eh?

In a freaking vicious cycle of "Stay the course!", even while this BOZO administration and their supporters like Lieberman, Johnson, Shays, and Simmons, are denying that fact. And all because of the Bush administrations refusal to do what everyone in America knows they should do.

Listen to the military that is telling you that we need to get out of this mess. Listen to the American people, that obviously know better than you OR any of your supposed "Foreign Policy Experts". Propaganda will not win anything in Iraq.

"Change the Course!"

Those of you that support the failed Bush administration's policies - Lieberman, Simmons, Shays and Johnson - are going to get a rude awakening on November 7th.

Because "We, the outraged people", are changing the course whether you like it or not! For all of you propaganda spouting turds on the failed GOP side, I have only one question for you:

"Are you with us or against us?"

Joe Rakes in the Doh!

$639,892 on Monday October 23

One day of "Pay To Play" with Joe costs you, the citizens of Connecticut, $639,892 worth of votes against your interests. $639,892 worth of influence to get votes that are only going to be in the interests of the BIG MONEY lobbyists, PACs and corporations that are bankrolling his campaign...

If you aren't outraged,
then you haven't been paying attention!

Ned Lamonts position on influence peddling?

He doesn't take money from Lobbyists or PACs. They can't buy him off and make him vote against our interests.

Ned believes that government must respect its citizens and tell them the truth. He will challenge the culture of “Inside the Beltway” corruption and demand that qualified people are appointed to critical government and public service positions.

The war, and Bush and Lieberman priorities, are cutting funds from programs that invest in our future. Student loans, Social Security, health care that everyone can afford – these are the issues that Ned will fight for, bringing a businessman’s ability to reach consensus without sacrificing the bottom line.

Ned will be a fresh voice in the Senate, working to build coalitions and accomplish change, and speaking out against the destructive Bush administration policies that directly threaten our moral and economic future, our civil liberties, and our nation’s security.

And now we get to the $387,000 question:

What does Lieberman do with all of his cash?

ILLEGAL THINGS, OF COURSE!

Lieberman’s FEC filings list over $387,000 in unexplained expenditures – listed only as “petty cash” – during just 12 days near the August 8th primary. These suspect, and unaccounted for payments, represent one out of every twelve dollars spent during the entire reporting period.

“These questions are critical for the people of Connecticut to know and that is why these laws exist and why we’re taking legal action,” Swan continued. “Only an 18 year career politician could dump almost $400,000 in cash into an election and try to call it petty cash.”

Under FEC regulation 11 CFR 102.11 a log must be kept of all petty cash expenditures. On Sunday, Lieberman Campaign Spokesperson Tammy Sun said she would attempt to locate the log by Monday. [New Haven Register, 10/22/06]

In sharp contrast to Lieberman’s massive, lobbyist funded slush fund, the Lamont Campaign only used $500 of petty cash. Lieberman has raised and spent millions over his career form lobbyists attempting to influence his votes. Lamont does not accept lobbyist, corporate or labor PAC money and has already vowed to disclose all meetings with lobbyists on his Senate web site.

Nuff said...

Got a few minutes of downtime in your busy day? Do yourselves and Connecticut a favor. Spend a few minutes telling people you know why you support Ned Lamont.

Here's what you can do:

• Use our "family, friends and neighbor" tool to send a physical postcard to your personal networks (link)
• Invite your personal networks, via email, you use the "family, friends and neighbor" tool (link)
• Invite your friends, via email, to check out NedLamont.com (link)
• Write a letter to the editor (link)

Why Is There So Much Grassroots Support For Lamont?

The Democratic establishment in Washington isn't doing much for Ned Lamont:

Ned Lamont got little financial support from congressional Democrats - and none from Connecticut Sen. Christopher J. Dodd and key Senate veterans - in the crucial weeks after he won the party's Senate nomination Aug. 8, according to new campaign finance data.

Lamont has alot of money, money that he has ponied up on his own, and money from the grassroots. Lamont doesn't get much from the entrenched establishment because they are afraid of him. But having the largest base of grassroot support in Connecticut is a good thing if you are looking to fix what is broken on Capitol Hill. Lamont hasn't taken anything from corporate lobbyists, and nothing from any PACs.

Ned Lamont's support is people powered.

Joe Lieberman has alot of money. He had a HUGE war che$t. But where does all of that money come from? Lobbyists and PACs and from republican supporters that want to see the Connecticut-bush-clone "Stay the course!"

Joe Lieberman's support is the problem that needs to be fixed.

Face the facts... Influence for votes on Capitol Hill is a bought and sold commodity to the entrenched establishment. Lobbyists for special interests, PACs, and corporations are buying the old guard establishment on a daily basis, and we are the ones that are losing out.

Voting for Ned Lamont is one little step that can help stem the tide of corruption. It can help take back one of those votes in the Senate and make it ours. It can help make that one vote beholden to us Nutmeggers and NOT to the entrenched establishment that is afraid of what the Lamont campaign means to them.

Can we afford to miss this opportunity to take back that one Seanate vote for ourselves? Not if we truely want to fix what is wrong with our government.

Change the course!
Vote for Ned Lamont

Vote for Ned Lamont!

There is no doubt that
JOE HAS GOT TO GO!

Democratic candidate Ned Lamont will
"CHANGE THE COURSE!"

Hastert Lies AGAIN...

Hastert Just can't seem to stop getting caught lying. Tuesday the man behind the Foley cover-up released a statement that was... Well? An outright lie. To put it mildly.

Democrat Leader Pelosi’s plan is to leave our borders open, grant blanket amnesty and provide Social Security benefits to illegal immigrants. Is THAT their plan? Democrat Leader Nancy Pelosi has NEVER visited the border. She claims to understand the needs of those on the front lines but has never visited those agents and offers no solutions.

How do we know it was another Hastert lie?

Here is a snippet from the Pelosi response:

“I visited the southern border in March with Congressman Silvestre Reyes, who had a distinguished career of leadership in the Border Patrol. I was able to see firsthand the Republicans’ record of failure on border security.

“This morning, the President plans to sign legislation authorizing a 700-mile border fence that his own Administration does not plan to build and for which the Republican Congress has not provided construction money.

“This fence that will not actually be built is a perfect symbol of the Republicans’ unwillingness to make controlling our borders a priority."

The Texas Congressman Reyes, after confirming Pelosi's visit to the border, had this to say about it all:

Perhaps that is why after six years of controlling the White House, the Senate, and the House, their ‘signature achievement’ on border security is a 700 mile fence along a 2,000 mile border. This fence doesn’t come close to solving our problem.

Unfortunately, no amount of photo-ops or signing ceremonies is going to take the place of real leadership on this vitally important issue.

I am certain the planned 12 foot high fence will increase the sales in Mexico of 13 foot ladders to get over it and shovels to dig under it, but I doubt it will stop many illegal border crossings. I also think that Hastert doesn't understand the real needs concerning securing our borders and hasn't offered any real solution at all.

Now that Hasterts latest lie has been exposed, I wonder how long it will be before he addresses his earlier lies about the Foley cover-up? Brian Ross at ABC news' The Blotter has an update on another Republican being investigated:

A source close to former House Clerk Jeff Trandahl told ABC News that Arizona Congressman Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) was one of a small number of "problem members"

...snip...

Kolbe was also asked by reporters to respond to reports that the U.S. Attorney in Phoenix has opened a preliminary inquiry into a 1996 camping trip Kolbe took with two high school boys, both former pages, following a report by MSNBC that one adult member of the trip was "creeped out" by "fawning, petting and touching" on the arms, shoulders and back of one of the teenagers by Kolbe.

"I know there are a number of inquiries underway, and we're cooperating fully with all those inquiries, and I'm sure at the end of the time it will show that we acted appropriately and did exactly the right thing," Kolbe said.

"A small number of "problem members""?
"A number of inquiries"?
"All those inquiries"?

IS ANYONE ELSE SEEING A LOT BIGGER PROBLEM HERE?

Just how many Republicans are being investigated? I am starting to think that I will have to keep my kids locked inside my home, at least until the elections are over, just in case a Republican comes to the neighborhood campaigning... Because you never know if they are one of the ones being investigated... Because Hastert and the rest of the GOP leadership covers up for all of them.

NANCY JOHNSON is WRONG

Fuzzy Turtle pointed me to an online paper called The Corner Report:

Tuesday was a bad day for Republican Congresswoman Nancy Johnson.

First, the AFL-CIO issued a “report card” on the congresswoman’s record on working family issues during her 24 years as the Republican representative in the state’s Fifth Congressional District – a report card with a failing grade.

Next, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee distributed a list of Johnson’s record on health care, including the $739,000 she’s taken from pharmaceutical companies.

Then, signs began sprouting on trees on Rt. 7 and elsewhere in the Northwest Corner that say “Nancy Johnson is WRONG.” But the word “is” is written in such small letters that drivers passing by see only the words “Nancy Johnson WRONG.”

--- Read the rest at The Corner Report

Apparently there are alot of people that think NANCY JOHNSON is WRONG. Welcome to the club that seems to grow exponentially as the campaign season progresses towards

"NATIONAL KICK THE CORRUPT REPUBLICAN BUMS OUT DAY"

The Corner Report is a pretty good read. It has the look and feel of a typical Blog, but the writing style of a hometown paper. I couldn't help but stop and check out a few of the articles while I was there. Definately worth repeat visits.

The article also reminded me of a little sign problem we have in our town:

There is an empty house for sale a couple of streets over from where I live. I noticed a "Vote Johnson" sign up there a few times but it kept disappearing. There one day, gone the next. A couple of weeks ago I saw the people that used to live there and as I watched they removed the sign and tossed it in the garbage. The sign still keeps popping up on that empty for sale house.

And it keeps *POOF* vanishing.

It is obvious that someone keeps putting the sign there against the owners will in the hopes of "creating" a view of alot more local support for Johnson than there really is.

It's like Joe Lieberman's $387,000 illegal slush fund that was apparently used to pay for out of state people, from NJ and elsewheres, to campaign for him here because he doesn't have that sort of volunteer base in Connecticut like Ned Lamont does. Joe's support is strictly lobbyists' and other Republican money sources funneled through back-channels that pays for campign muscle. Some call them the "Liebergoons". lol

I guess Lieberman and Johnson are both pretty darn pathetic! That is what happens to career politicians when they sell their souls to corporate lobbyists and continue to cling to the failed policies of the Bush administration...

They lose touch with the people, and they lose all of their local support.

Certainly there are still some hardcore right-wing-nuts that will support any republican candidate regardless of their corruption and incompetence. But, thankfully, their numbers are obviously dwindling.

Rumsfeld Puts Bush and Lieberman in Hot Water

"Stay the course!"
That is all you will get from both Bush and Lieberman.

Despite President Bush's recent denials that "We've never been stay the course" and the NY Times' FALSE assertions to counter Ned Lamont's caqmpaign charges that Joe Lieberman has been a consistent cheerleader for Bush's failed "Stay the course!" policy, the fact remains that this is a bold face lie that exposes BOTH Bush and Lieberman's penchant for polticizing this war by telling people whatever they have to in order to cover their political asses and get more votes. It also doesn't say much about the researchers and writers at the "Post Judy Miller" NY Times.

In Bush's and Lieberman's own words:

BUSH: We will stay the course. [8/30/06]

LIEBERMAN: We have to stay the course in Iraq now and continue to build a stable, modernizing, democratizing country there. [01/04/04]

BUSH: We will stay the course, we will complete the job in Iraq. [8/4/05]

LIEBERMAN: We can do better. I will do better. I will make it international. I will stay the course, and I'll create a stable, democratizing, modernizing Iraq, which would be a tremendous step forward in the Middle East and the Islamic world and in our war against terrorism. [01/11/2004]

BUSH: We will stay the course until the job is done, Steve. And the temptation is to try to get the President or somebody to put a timetable on the definition of getting the job done. We’re just going to stay the course. [12/15/03

LIEBERMAN: Well, let's put it this way. What I'm most happy about is that he said that he will stay the course in Iraq until we finish the job, and the Iraqis are in control of their own destiny. [07/28/04]

BUSH: And my message today to those in Iraq is: We’ll stay the course. [4/13/04]

LIEBERMAN: We want to not only stay the course: we want to achieve victory. [04/26/04]

BUSH: And that’s why we’re going to stay the course in Iraq. And that’s why when we say something in Iraq, we’re going to do it. [4/16/04]

LIEBERMAN: "I thought the president gave the strongest case that I can remember him giving about why we went in and why we have to stay the course," Lieberman said, adding, "We've got to adopt a strategy of success. A defeat will create chaos in Iraq, chaos in the Middle East, and will embolden the terrorists in a way that will endanger our future and our children's future." [04/15/04]

Here is over 30 examples of Bush saying we must "Stay the course!" in some form or another. Media Matters has the goods on more of Lieberman's "Bush enabling" statements that mirror Bush administration talking points as perfectly as if they had come straight out of Karl Rove's mouth, even emulating the GOP talking point that defeat will create chaos "and will embolden the terrorists" that we have heard so often from every mouthpiece for the Bush administration.

If defeat will create chaos then we must be losing pretty badly since those terrorists are getting pretty emboldened according to defeatist Republican Senator Lindsey Graham:

"We're on the verge of chaos, and the current plan is not working," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said in an Associated Press interview. U.S. and Iraqi officials should be held accountable for the lack of progress, said Graham, a Republican who is a frequent critic of the administration's policies.

Asked who in particular should be held accountable Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, perhaps, or the generals leading the war Graham said: "All of them. It's their job to come up with a game plan" to end the violence

Bush and Liberman clearly say stay the course over and over. Because you never know who you might embolden in defeat. Now BOTH Bush and Lieberman are trying to hide from their mutual love of staying the course. It's almost like they are freaking flip-flopping clones.

This is why Ned Lamont is correct in attacking Lieberman's support of the failed Bush policy of staying the course. And Lieberman hates that.

And Senator Graham is right in laying alot of blame on Donald Rumsfeld. Here is what Rumsfeld has to say about Bush cutting and running from his "Stay the course!" policy:

Rumsfeld called media reports about Bush’s reversal “nonsense,” and said “of course” Bush is “not backing away from staying the course.”
---CLICK HERE TO LISTEN

The ever-incompetent Rumsfeld says that "Stay the course!" is still the Bush plan, regardless of the Bush "cut and run" posturing.

Lieberman and Bush are both in some hot water over their attempts to hide from their "Stay the course!" whitewash. If you vote for Joe Lieberman you are clearly voting for more of the same CHAOS. And all of the Bush backpeddling and NY Times' lies can't hide Lieberman from his own public record of support for the failed "Stay the course" Bush policy.

Vote For the Democratic candidate Ned Lamont, because he will work to "CHANGE THE COURSE!" of Lieberman's and the Bush administration's failed policies.

Changing the Looks!

Just doing a little messing around with that darned HTML around here, so please don't get too uppity if this page doesn't load right! It should load left anyways since I am a liberal, ya know? :)

If you look over there on the right>>> sidebar you should notice that I have joined up with a local (Connecticut) "Lefty Blogs" news feed. In a perfect world the liberal side would be on the left, and the left side would be on the right, thus eliminating the right-wing-nut-GOP-talking-point-crack-pipe-smoking-idiots completely. I know, I KNOW! You can't eliminate all of the evil in this world. It's a "Ying-Yang" thing.

Anyways...

I don't like the generic look of the Blogspot templates.

So I will be trying different things with this Blogger template, and I might even just trash it and design my own from scratch. (Yep... I am somewhat computer literate, I was just too busy to do this before! lol)

You would think that Google would already be on top of this issue. I see a lot of blogs that complain about the generic look and even some that offer free templates. BUT All Google would have to do is to integrate a basic "web designing tool" geared towards building Blogs into Blogspot (Like Geocities did with their "basic design tools for web-dummies") and they could eliminate much of the generic feces that you see on blogspot.

It would take a little time and money, but we all know Google has plenty of both. I haven't even looked at the Beta version of Blogspot yet. They might have these kind of features in there already?

How Many Ways Does Johnson Suck?

Let CT Progressive at No More Nancy! count the ways:

In the race, Ms. Johnson has used fearmongering commercials that try to paint Mr. Murphy as soft on terrorism and, most curiously of all, a big spender. It is unconvincing. Ms. Johnson is the senior member of an important committee. She has served longer in the House than any other Connecticut representative. Yet she has not been able to change significantly the House GOP leaders' reckless fiscal policy or its radical agenda.

Mr. Murphy, a lawyer, is impressive. He has spent eight years in the Connecticut House and Senate. He pushed for the state to adopt a system of campaign finance reform when he first entered the House, long before this was considered an important issue. He helped pass legislation that made it easier for uninsured to obtain health insurance. He wants to work on the same issue in Congress.

...snip...

Mr. Murphy would be a strong candidate in any race, and even against a seasoned incumbent, is impressive. He would make a superb addition to Congress. We strongly endorse his candidacy.

--- NY Times

OK! So CT PROGRESSIVE just cut and pasted from the NY Times endorsemnet of Murphy. At least the Times can still count, even though they employed Judy Miller at one time and have yet to find one her Iraqi WMDs.

But let us not forget Johnson's signature legislation:

Medicare D(isaster)

Johnson was counting on you to remember that for the election!

It sucks to be anything GOP these days... Even the right wing corporate owned media is "cutting and running" from anything GOP.