Right Partisan Thoughts on Dodd

As you listen to JimK talk about Kerry and Dodd's planned visits to the Middle East:

Right Thoughts - Dodd Plans Trip To Middle East:
"I’m far more concerned with the idea of two Senators from an opposing party blatantly and openly undermining the sitting President in matters of foreign policy. This kind of behavior has consequences that go well beyond the next two years of Bush’s term.

It’s time to get past this cheerleading for the Dems or the GOP and start thinking about how this dirty political pool is affecting the way we can govern this nation going forward."

Well JimK, when are you going to get past the partisan political cheerleading? You are real quick to paint Kerry and Dodd as having undermined the president and even suggested they are breaking laws, even though the fact is they have not and will not break any laws on their trips.

But if you were really being honest about the paritsan cheerleading your diary would have mentioned the treacherous and traitorous Republican Specter:

Nelson said he reported the information to embassy officials and will brief his congressional committees on the trip. Also expected to visit Syria is Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., and Arlen Specter, R-Pa..

"We don't think that members of Congress ought to be going there," White House press secretary Tony Snow said, adding that the United States continues to denounce Syria's meddling in Lebanon and its ties to terrorist groups.

It is highly appropriate that Tony Snow starts off the sentence there with "We don't think...", obviously a common problem on the right side of the aisle. If you are going to make a big stink about the Democratic politicians supposedly undermining the president then you show absolutely no bi-partisan spirit by ignoring Arlen Specter. You are just cheerleading against Democratic politicians, and are far more partisan than the people you complain about.

About the only thing that hits the mark in JimK's post:

As I also stated, Bush clearly allowed this (via the State Department) because he’s afraid to tell two Democrats they can’t go. Congress and the press would descend like vultures on a corpse. It’s more evidence that his status as a lame duck is pretty much confirmed…

Yes! Mr. Bush is a lame duck... But he is happy they went, though he is too much of a wimp to admit it in public, and Mr. Bush is praying that those bi-partisan politicians can save his sorry little partisan-GOP-ass.

heh

The Cover Up of Rell's Moody Period

Garfield only released part of the story:

Report: Top Rell Aide `Misled' Committee:
"Gov. M. Jodi Rell's chief of staff, M. Lisa Moody, 'misled' a legislative committee by giving sworn testimony that was 'not credible' regarding a Rell fundraiser last year, according to a draft copy of a new legislative report.

The report, obtained Wednesday by The Courant, also says that state elections enforcement chief Jeffrey Garfield should face 'some form of reprimand or censure' because he deleted important information from an investigative report and released the unedited version only after hearings were completed last spring."

Just in case you follow the FIC line of thought and didn't know, misled is another word for LIED, as for Rell's original reaction to her Moody Period:

Moody was suspended by Rell for two weeks after admitting that she handed out invitations to commissioners on state time. Her actions led to seven days of often-contentious legislative hearings in May. Sixteen of Rell's commissioners or deputies were fined $500 each to settle a case under a state law that prohibits those officials from soliciting campaign contributions from their subordinates.

The 14-page report quotes Moody as telling at least one senior staff member, "I am not twisting your arm, but I am," regarding the fundraiser.

The report also states that Moody told one deputy commissioner that "this meeting isn't happening" and another that "it's after 5" - meaning that the workday was officially over for state employees.

Also, we all know that "she testified at a legislative hearing that she did not fully read an ethics memo that it turned out she had edited." But I am betting there are alot more juicy details in the full unedited report that was released in a redacted (lying) version.

Go over and read it at the courant to see some of the reccommendations to stop this sort of waste of our government employees time. As for now I'll leave you with this last little snippet:

The report calls for Garfield's censure or reprimand because his investigation report deleted certain facts that the committee never knew about until after the hearings were closed. That included deleting the chief state's attorney's "interview notes" from two investigators who had spoken to Rell late last year, and deleting all references to DPUC Commissioner Anne George, "who kiddingly referred to Ms. Moody as `John Rowland.'" [...] Dan Moreland was said to have told investigators that when Moody handed George the fundraiser invitations, George responded, "Are you nuts?" George then told Moody, "OK, John Rowland" - a reference to the former governor who served a federal prison sentence on a corruption-related charge.

Goes to show that even the insiders know that Rowland politics are alive and kicking in the Governor Rell's office. As for Garfield, if he absorbs the bulk of the blame in the cover up of Rell's Moody period, wouldn't that make him the political equivalent of a used tampon? Time to trash him...

Rangel Did Not Say That?

Oh! Yes he did...

NYO - News Story 1:
"“I never understand that question,” answered Charlie Rangel, the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. “You have a President that’s in deep shit. He got us into the war, and all the reasons he gave have been proven invalid, and the whole electorate was so pissed off that they got rid of anyone they could have, and then they ask, ‘What is the Democrats’ solution?’”"

Yes, it is sad that they only gets around to asking the Democratic party members their opinions AFTER they have just completely and totally handed the GOP the biggest political ass-whooping in the last half-a-century... And, yes, it is sad about the fact that those same Democratic members couldn't even get air time to be asked those questions until Mr. Bush was wading in "IT" up to his neck. This is what exemplifies the pitiful state of the MSM today.

McCain has Gone COMPLETELY OFF THE DEEP END!

This isn't about child porn... This is about shutting down the Blogosphere. That's it in a right-wingnut-shell. That is all there is to say. McCain has completely and totaly lost his effin' mind.

"Because "social-networking site" isn't defined, it could encompass far more than just MySpace.com, Friendster and similar sites. The list could include: Slashdot, which permits public profiles; Amazon.com, which permits author profiles and personal lists; and blogs like RedState that show public profiles. In addition, media companies like News.com publisher CNET Networks permit users to create profiles of favorite games, gadgets and music.

"This constitutionally dubious proposal is being made apparently mostly based on fear or political considerations rather than on the facts," said EFF's Bankston. Studies by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children show the online sexual solicitation of minors has dropped in the past five years, despite the growth of social-networking services, he said."

Not only will the left blogosphere start pounding him on this BUT the right-wingnuts will spazz out on this in their typical fanatical fashion. CT Bob has already found some signs of the twitching in right-wingnutosphere.

Think Progress has more on this:

– Commercial websites and personal blogs “would be required to report illegal images or videos posted by their users or pay fines of up to $300,000.”

– Internet service providers (ISPs) are already required to issue such reports, but under McCain’s legislation, bloggers with comment sections may face “even stiffer penalties” than ISPs.

— Social networking sites will be forced to take “effective measures” — such as deleting user profiles — to remove any website that is “associated” with a sex offender. Sites may include not only Facebook and MySpace, but also Amazon.com, which permits author profiles and personal lists, and blogs like DailyKos, which allows users to sign up for personal diaries.

This could wreak havoc on sites like MLN, dKOs and other big communities. Nevermind the fact that little Blogs like your Blogspot could end up shutting down completely. How many of us can afford a $300,000 dollar fine?

Imagine MLN or dKos if they had to turn off the comments features for fear of one person adding a link to the wrong address? The entire freeflow of thought that has built the left's internet think tank would effectively be muzzled. And how the hell do they stop this in other countries? They can't enforce this here unless they cut the American internet off from the rest of the world.

The moronic McCain has just surpassed Kerry by a longshot as the biggest joke in the Blogosphere. Unlike Kerry's botched joke, McCain has willfully chosen to commit political suicide. I guess that will makes him the punchline too!

And if that isn't enough they are also attacking us from everywhere on other Blogging issues! Kidspeak has an excellent piece on how the politicians (on both sides) will be taking the failed federal attempts at muzzling us down to a state level in "Net Neutrality: Strangling netroots state by state." Figure the odds that "we see the political power of the netroots begin to be strangled, with the fine help of a DLC-approved Democratic governor."

We have to pay close attention to these issues. We will only get one shot at stopping all of this madness and after that the Blogosphere as we know may cease to exist.

{Edited to reflect 2 previous updates from CT Bob and Kidspeak for readability]

Al Qaeda in Space

Break out your light sabers, hop into your X-Wing fighters, and put on your tinfoil helmets because Galactic Al Qaeda warriors in outer space are the next big threat that is supposed to scare the pants off of you!

"The Bush administration warned Wednesday against threats by terrorist groups and other nations against U.S. commercial and military satellites, and discounted the need for a treaty aimed at preventing an arms race in space.

Undersecretary of State Robert G. Joseph also reasserted U.S. policy that it has a right to use force against hostile nations or terror groups that might try to attack American satellites or ground installations that support space programs.
President Bush adopted a new U.S. space policy earlier this year.

"We reserve the right to defend ourselves against hostile attacks and interference with our space assets," Joseph said in prepared remarks to the George C. Marshall Institute."

Space: The distance between bush's big floppy ears... Who is the conspiracy nut now?

Poll out of Iraq & The GOP's Failure

32%
want out in less than 6 months

25%
want out in less than a year

57%
of Americans
don't even want to wait as long
as the Iraq Study Group proposes.

Fifty-three percent of Americans think the Iraq war was a mistake. Is anyone surprised that bush has put off any decisions about what to do next when the incompetent one's support has just dropped to an all-time low:

"Just 21 percent approve of President Bush's handling of the war, the lowest number he's ever received, and an 8-point drop from just a month ago. Most of that drop has been among Republicans and conservatives."

Yep! even his base is rejecting his politics.

And all of this hot on the heels of the realization that not only did the Democratic party sweep the corrupt GOP out, but the Democratic party did it on a grander scale than the GOP ever managed to do during the entire "Republican Revolution":

I don't think it's sinking in enough with the Beltway pundits, how large a victory the Democrats have achieved. So, here's a fact that everyone should know, use, spread, and just generally internalize:

The Democrats have more seats in the House right now than the GOP has had since the "do-nothing" Congress of 1947-1948, more than at any point in the Gingrich years that are seen as such a dominant GOP era.

snip

Now, the numbers ... the Democrats, after Ciro's surprise thumpin' of Bonilla last night, now have 233 seats in the House. After the 1994 election, the GOP had 230, which drifted down before rebounding some in the last couple years and peaking after the Texas redistricting in the 232 they had last Congress. But the Democrats overcame all that redistricting shenanigans to post a larger majority than the Republicans had during all that time of the "Republican Revolution."

The great conservative experiment called the Republican Revolution failed miserably. We all have to be vigilant in ensuring that the Democratic party does not fall into the traps and temptations that spurred on the GOP's miserable demise. A demise that they show no signs of recovering from anytime soon.

We need to drive on pushing harder for the Progressive agenda that has transformed American politics in this Liberal Evolution.

NewsTimes Poll on Iraq

I want U.S. troops out of Iraq . . .

Immediately - 44.75 % (401)

When Iraq is a stable democracy - 25.67 % (230)

Within two years - 20.20 % (181)

I do not want U.S. troops out - 9.38 % (84)

Total votes: 896

Go ahead and look for the poll so you can vote on this and other issues of importance!

TheTour

Figuring that there are alot of good Blogs in Connecticut and across the nation that are alrready discussing many of the issues, and lord knows I don't have time to wite about everything, I thought that I would start doing a quick daily Tour of SOME of the must read posts, and also some of the more humorous ones, that are out there already. This will be the first installment of what I hope will be a useful and fun way to start your Blogging day.

From the BooTrib News Bucket:

Size does matter: Reuters/MSNBC

Condoms designed to meet international size specifications are too big for many Indian men as their penises fall short of what manufacturers had anticipated, an Indian study has found.

The Indian Council of Medical Research, a leading state-run center, said its initial findings from a two-year study showed 60 percent of men in the financial capital Mumbai had penises about 1 inch shorter than those condoms catered for.

For a further 30 percent, the difference was at least 2 inches. A poor fit meant the prophylactics often didn't do the job they were bought for, and led to some tearing or slipping off during use.

From MLN:

Senator Brack Obama Announces...

Kucinich to Declare for Prez...

HatCity Blog

Seems like head national xenophobe and Minuteman founder Jim Gilchrist backed out on speaking in Danbury.

Charlie Brown Scrubs Shrubs:


Spazeboy on Obama and Franken:

Alexander Cockburn pretty much sums up why Barack Obama won’t get my vote in a Presidential primary:

Media Matters:

Russert and panel failed to challenge claim that "no one knew" intel on Iraq WMDs was flawed.

CT Newsjunkie on Executive Order #1:

Gov.'s Ethics Counsel Job Not Really Full-time more...

CT Bob admits:

...I'm becoming obsessed with Tom DeLay's blog.

Who would've known CT Bob is really obseessed with Tom DeLay's Blog? lol

TPM Muckraker on Curt Weldon:

Weldon: Reyes Not as Crazy as Me

CLP on surplusses and deficits:

Those expecting the new supermajority in the General Assembly to raise taxes on the rich, as they've been threatening to do for years, may be in for a disappointment:

Jesus Genereal asks:
Isn't it time your town adopted a Jesus-only ordinance?

CT Blue on ISG:

We are to believe that these folks, who favored the war at the start, and busily interviewed other war supporters to find a solution to our problems, must have found the answer.

And a quick look at the the top spot in the HuffPo Contagious Festival:

The Atheist Delusion

Feel free to drop a link in the comments of anything that you have read OR written that you think may have been missed or overlooked in Connecticut's Blogosphere. I aim to try and update this as the day goes on. Why? Because there is nothing worse than a good diary scrolling off of the screen without a comment or a link! lol (Some will call The Tour a link factory... And I whole-heartedly agree! How do you think the right-wingnuts built their whacky side of the blogosphere? lol)

Has Israel gone NUCLEAR?

I had been trying to find a blog post out on the internet somewhere (I couldn't remember where I had read it and I had promised to try and find it for someone's research purposes!) about an Israeli newspaper article, that someone had translated from Hebrew, supposedly discussing Israel's nuclear arsenal. I could never find it again BUT I guess I don't need to now beacuse Rawstory has a new clue:

RawStory:
In an unprecedented move at odds with 40 years of deliberate ambiguity, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert appeared to admit Monday that Israel possesses nuclear weapons, when he included the country in a list of nuclear states. In an interview with Germany's Sat 1 television, an excerpt of which was broadcast in Israel, the prime minister was asked whether Israel's nuclear arsenal - which until now it has never publicly admitted to having - undermined the West's objections to a nuclear Iran.

"Israel is a democracy and does not threaten anyone ... Iran explicitly, openly and publicly threatens to wipe Israel off the map," an agitated Olmert replied.

This isn't the article I was looking for, but it still points in the direction of what many have thought to be true already.

Israel is, very likely, NUKULAR already.

Note: The only thing harder than trying to find than a particular article is trying to find one originally written in a language you can't read! lol

For the Official Record: Impeachment

For the official record, and just so you know... Someone did enter articles of impeachment against George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Condoleezza Rice in the 109th congress. Here is a teaser from a word (.PDF) copy of the articles of impeachment:

109TH CONGRESS
2ND SESSION
H. Res. 1106
Articles of Impeachment against George Walker Bush,
President of the United States of America, and other
officials, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
_____________________________
IN THE HOUSE OF
REPESENTATIVES
DECEMBER 8, 2006

There is more on it here at Afterdowningstreet.org, where you can also go if you want to say a patriotic "Thank you!"

Anyone else smiling?
:)

Foley Muck!

A little more on the Foley Muck:

TPMmuckraker: "It's Official: Foley Report Sucked"

"[A] 91-page exercise in cowardice," a New York Times editorial thundered."The report’s authors were clearly more concerned about protecting the members of the House than the young men and women under their charge in the page program."

"What, one has to wonder, would it take for the House ethics committee to hold a lawmaker or a staff member accountable?" asked the Washington Post in its editorial, "The Buck Just Stopped." (The Wall Street Journal, however, pronounced the report "fair and sensible.")

Figure the odds that the "Money Party Daily Doh!" (AKA: The WSJ) would be giddy over this report. "Fair and sensible"??? Sure, it's fair and sensible just like McCain and Lieberman are "moderate and bipartisan"...

This sure isn't a Peace Wreath BUT

(h/t to The Nutmeg Grater)



Note to wife for the Christmas shopping list...

I like that projector toy. heh

Emanuel: We may now know why he took the demotion after the election

Remember Emanuel just after the election? Remember how Emanuel had offered to take a less powerful position in the new Congress for reasons really unknown? Now we may know why:

Unclaimed Territory - by Glenn Greenwald: Did Rahm Emanuel lie about his knowledge of Mark Foley? Yes.

Stephanopoulos explicitly asked Emanuel: "I just want to ask you plainly -- did you or your staff know anything about these emails or instant messages before they came out?"

Emanuel interrupted the question with an emphatic "no." Then, once Stephanopoulos was done with the question, this is what Emanuel replied: "George, never saw 'em . . . . "

After that answer, Putnam interjected this question: "Were you aware of them?" Emanuel replied: "Never saw them." A moment later, Stephanopoulos said to Emanuel: "So you were not aware of them, had no involvement?" Emanuel replied: "No. Never saw them. No involvement. . . ." Putnam again asked: "Was there an awareness?" Emanuel replied: "No. Never saw them. The first time I ever saw these things, right here was when Brian Ross broke the story."

When summarizing the reasons why he believed that the GOP House Leadership was guilty of poor judgment and a cover-up in the Foley scandal, this is what Emanuel said:

"As far back as 2002, 2003, there were warning signs . . . . What happened since that time? . . . . In 2005, he's appointed to head the Missing and Abused Children Caucus for the Congress. When he wants to retire, they ask him to run for re-election in 2006, even knowing -- clearly -- that there is something amiss and wrong here. The whole point here -- let's just take one analogy -- if a high school teacher was found doing this with a child, and the principal knew . . . the community and parents would have that principal and teacher out."

On Friday, the House Ethics Committee released its Report (.pdf) on this matter, and it was extremely critical of the Republican Leadership -- including just-elected GOP Minority Leader John Boehner -- for their "negligence" in failing to take steps to investigate Foley's conduct despite having ample signs that something was amiss (in particular, the e-mails Foley sent to pages).

Yes... It appears that Emanuel may have lied. BUT Remember this:

Rep. Emanuel, as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, was architect of the 2006 victory. He coveted the third-ranking post of majority whip, but that put Emanuel on a collision course with the Congressional Black Caucus's candidate, Rep. James Clyburn. A ruinous competition was averted when Pelosi brokered a deal whereby Emanuel agreed to replace Clyburn as House Democratic Caucus chairman.

Why did he back off? Do you wonder if maybe, just maybe, Emanuel knew this day of reckoning was coming? He wanted to distance himself from the DCCC. Take the demotion and get the fuck out of there. Regardless, this sort of political hackery cannot be tollerated from the Democratic party anymore than from the Republicans.

I take solace in the fact that he is just another one of those the MSM tout as being supposedly moderate and bipartisan. That is how he raises all of that money from lobbyists. Now we know the definition of "moderate" and "bipartisan"... IMMORAL and INCOMPETENT.

Remember that Rahm Emanuel is one of those mythical moderate bipartisans, and that he is part of the money party that Sirota was talking about.

MONEY PARTY LEADERS
Sen. Chuck Schumer and Reps. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) and Steny Hoyer (D-MD): All three of these men, now in leadership positions, have made very little effort to conceal that they answer to Big Money interests. Schumer, for instance, recently trumpeted a new report calling for post-Enron corporate reforms to be gutted. Emanuel was the architect of NAFTA who used the prospect of his being in the majority on the Ways and Means Committee to suck corporate cash out of Wall Street. Hoyer bragged on his website about starting his own K Street Project, and, as I documented in Hostile Takeover, one of his top legislative staffers serves simultaneously as an official for his corporate fundraising operation - 'nuff said.

Keep that in mind as you decide wether or not this guy should be punished, I mean seriously punished, for his inactions if these allegations are true. He represents the elite, the rich, the lobbyist fueled greedy politics that are against the workers, the little guys, the poor.

If the allegations are true and Emanuel goes down, as any politician that knew about Foley and did nothing should, I will not shed one tear. If the allegations are true than Emanuel should have acted, and I will be cheerleading as he is chased out the door.

ISG Concludes that IRAQ = OIL

What can you say about an article like this?

It's still about oil in Iraq - Los Angeles Times:

A centerpiece of the Iraq Study Group's report is its advocacy for securing foreign companies' long-term access to Iraqi oil fields.

WHILE THE Bush administration, the media and nearly all the Democrats still refuse to explain the war in Iraq in terms of oil, the ever-pragmatic members of the Iraq Study Group share no such reticence.

Page 1, Chapter 1 of the Iraq Study Group report lays out Iraq's importance to its region, the U.S. and the world with this reminder: "It has the world's second-largest known oil reserves." The group then proceeds to give very specific and radical recommendations as to what the United States should do to secure those reserves. If the proposals are followed, Iraq's national oil industry will be commercialized and opened to foreign firms.

The report makes visible to everyone the elephant in the room: that we are fighting, killing and dying in a war for oil. It states in plain language that the U.S. government should use every tool at its disposal to ensure that American oil interests and those of its corporations are met.

It's spelled out in Recommendation No. 63, which calls on the U.S. to "assist Iraqi leaders to reorganize the national oil industry as a commercial enterprise" and to "encourage investment in Iraq's oil sector by the international community and by international energy companies." This recommendation would turn Iraq's nationalized oil industry into a commercial entity that could be partly or fully privatized by foreign firms."

I guess that is what they mean when they say the ISG was made up of "moderate and bipartisan" elderly statesmen. It means they will shill for the oil industries too.

The U.S. State Department's Oil and Energy Working Group, meeting between December 2002 and April 2003, also said that Iraq "should be opened to international oil companies as quickly as possible after the war." Its preferred method of privatization was a form of oil contract called a production-sharing agreement. These agreements are preferred by the oil industry but rejected by all the top oil producers in the Middle East because they grant greater control and more profits to the companies than the governments. The Heritage Foundation also released a report in March 2003 calling for the full privatization of Iraq's oil sector. One representative of the foundation, Edwin Meese III, is a member of the Iraq Study Group. Another, James J. Carafano, assisted in the study group's work.

For any degree of oil privatization to take place, and for it to apply to all the country's oil fields, Iraq has to amend its constitution and pass a new national oil law. The constitution is ambiguous as to whether control over future revenues from as-yet-undeveloped oil fields should be shared among its provinces or held and distributed by the central government.

This is a crucial issue, with trillions of dollars at stake, because only 17 of Iraq's 80 known oil fields have been developed. Recommendation No. 26 of the Iraq Study Group calls for a review of the constitution to be "pursued on an urgent basis." Recommendation No. 28 calls for putting control of Iraq's oil revenues in the hands of the central government. Recommendation No. 63 also calls on the U.S. government to "provide technical assistance to the Iraqi government to prepare a draft oil law."

Go read the entire article and then be sick to your stomachs...

FIC and their UNREASONABLE answers

Brian in comments at the FIC Blog:

Spazeboy disagrees with us on broad issues, but on the particular issue we were debating he was the only one who offered a clear solution. Post a screenshot of our statistics. We did that, and it shows clearly that we were not lying about anything.

What you posted proved clearly that you had deceived your readers. Whether through deliberate attempts or ignorance, a deception is a lie. Also, I told you in the comments to put up a public sitemeter to prove me wrong.

If you are not getting page views even close to the 350,000 number it is impossible for you to be getting the hits. Put your sitemeter on the net and let it tell the truth. As For now, the graphics I linked out speak the obvious truth. You don’t have the traffic to support claims of those numbers. In fact the stats suggest your site is in decline. But your post says you are growing? Mighty confusing, eh? Also much of the traffic to your site is the same/similar traffic that goes to all of the “Family Institute” sister sites in other states. Suggesting that much of your traffic is likely from out of State.

I linked out to unbiased Blog tracking sites. Just because you say something does not make it true. Prove me wrong and I will amend or retract the post.

That was a most reasonable answer to your problem. I was correct in everything that I wrote, and yet you don’t consider that reasonable enough for your site?

In that diary you wite after realizing that what I pointed out about your hit counts was correct:

An apology may be in order here. Perhaps he thinks that hits are not the best indicator of readership. The more I learn, the more I agree with that.

Yet, instead of actually making an apology you go into a HUGE BUT BUT BUT:

But, please, don’t accuse someone of lying without taking some basic steps to get your facts straight.

P.S. Drinking Liberally still can’t admit to the fact that he was wrong, plain and simple.

I am therefore including a link to a screenshot of our statistics (following Spazeboy’s advice, who has been the most civil in this discussion) that shows clearly we were not lying. Period. We never lied, attempted to deceive, or distorted the numbers. Drinking Liberally got it completely wrong.

I had my facts straight. Even you had to admit that. I was correct, plain and simple.

I am tempted to say that your embarrassment at having been called out BIG TIME, not just by me but here and here by ConnecticutBLOG and MLN as well by those pesky LIBERAL FACTS, may be what is holding you back from actually making an apology to your readers, and from acknowledging that not only am I an opponent, but in fact a reasonable one. Reasonable enough that I even forewarned you that I would be calling you out on your claimed readership.

This vanity you are exhibiting only further exemplifies the points of what I wrote about your being a pious fraud, etc., something that I told you in the comments I was quite reasonably willing to retract or amend if you could prove me wrong. Something I am still willing to do IF you actually ever make an apology to your readers for the deceptions, and IF you consider ammending the posts that label me as drunk and unreasonable for pointing out these facts about your deceptions.

As ctblogger noted in his update:

Oh man, these guys just don't get it. These guys are opening up a can of worms and I don't think they know how big of a hole they're making for themselves.

Are they aware that they're messing around with the big boys? FIC, I appeal to you to stop before you embarrass yourselves even more.

Now, I know I am not one of the "big boys" of Connecticut political Blogging, but I also know that FIC is digging the hole deeper. Clearly they have not proven me wrong in any of my charges. BUT I am willing to give FIC a SECOND CHANCE to prove me wrong on the points about their character.

It won’t change the fact that I disagree with you on almost every topic you write about - since I am for Marriage Equality, politically Pro-Choice, against public money for private schools, believe strongly in The Wall of Seperation, etc. etc. - but that is a different story…