Friday, February 10, 2006

Weekend Open Forum

...Because the other one was full.

The New Haven Independent says that some Democrats aren't going for the estate tax cut. Actually, most Democrats won't go for it. Really, the estate tax cut isn't going to pass this session--if ever.

Speaking of tax cuts, the Courant today explored the governor's plan to eliminate the car tax--and finds that it may not be all it's cracked up to be. The Connecticut Conference of Municipalities is also unhappy, although they've stopped short of dismissing the entire plan. I wonder if it would be better received if it wasn't going to trade the $350 homeowners' credit for the car tax cut? Is there a better way?

John Rowland released this statement about his release today. Amazing to think that if he hadn't been caught, he'd be winding down his third term right now, and no one would particularly care about Jodi Rell.

DeStefano/Sullivan? ...Nah.

Please check out the Researching Connecticut post below. Also note that there is a link to that post on the menu at the top right, as well. I hope people make use of it.

What else is going on?

43 comments:

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

GC:

Thanks again for maintaining this great site, and for efforts -- such as the research guide -- to kindle and foster thoughtful discussion.

I'm still too revolted by last night to say much more. But you deserve the cheer.

Proud Moderate Dem said...

there really is no place for the personal venom that was spewed last night by deanfan and ctkeith. every comment they make about blaming others of being intolerant and of causing divide drips of irony. i enjoy debate and certainly enjoy it more amomg dems but ctkeith and deanfan seem to disqualify themselves from productive debate. i will continue to search for common round, consensus through debate and agreeing to disagree but after seeing last nights comments i wish we could play a round of survivor and vote a couple posters off. on another note, this research stuff is great, thanks GC.

Anonymous said...

Connecticut's (Inter-) National Guard.

"HARTFORD -- Two Connecticut National Guard units, including a military police unit from Norwich, will be deployed to Iraq this spring, Maj. Gen. Thaddeus J. Martin announced Wednesday.

Martin said approximately 300 soldiers from the 1048th Transportation Company of Stamford and the 134th Military Police Company of Norwich will be deployed as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

In addition, 500 soldiers from the 102nd Infantry Battalion of New Haven are training at Fort Bragg, N.C., before shipping out to Afghanistan."

Luckily for PMD's conscience, these citizen soldiers knew they were signing up for "nation-building" when they enlisted in the International Guard.

And I can't speak for Keith, but from me it's not venom. It's disgust and despair.

Anonymous said...

Brutal-- Quinn, as a regular reader of this site-- that is how I would describe the dialogue of yesterday.

I support Joe Lieberman despite my unhappiness with his Iraq position. I suppose that should subject me to an attack on my character based on the CtKeith and DeanFan84 purity test.

DeanFan84 said...

From Mindprod.com:

Iraq war photos.

Thankfully the Pope defined this as a just war.

No, wait a minute, that was Gulf War I, the one in which Iraq was the aggressor, and we had Arab allies.

DeanFan84 said...

A more sanitized website.

Oh, and I forgot to warn everyone, these pictures don't go well with food.

Anonymous said...

For the record, Quinn launched the first attack, against a high school student, no less.

ct_guy said...

DeanFan - it's considered good internet etiquette to warn people when you're linking to something absolutely horrifying.

Over the last few days you're really making me wish this website had an ignore feature.

Proud Moderate Dem said...

anon 3:04, you really cant compare what quinn said about the high school kid to what deanfan and ctkeith spewed. also, how was quinn supposed to know the kid was in high school, after all he talked about having pizza and beer parties.

Aldon Hynes said...

From the Olympic Website:

Un appeal for the Olympic Truce

Feb 9 2006 The United Nations (UN) Secretary General, Kofi Annan, and the President of the UN General Assembly, Jan Eliasson, have called on all UN Member States to observe the Olympic Truce during the period of the XX Olympic Winter Games in Turin.

The same ideals
In his message, Kofi Annan recalled that “the Olympic Movement and the United Nations share fundamental ideals: tolerance and understanding; equal opportunities and fair play; and, most of all, peace. In a world growing ever closer and more interconnected, and yet still riven by brutal conflict, dire poverty and cruel injustice, it is more important than ever that we all join forces to give life to those ideals.”

A window of time to open a dialogue
“One way we can do that is to observe the Olympic Truce - the call for warring parties to lay down their arms while athletes from the community of nations meet under the noble flame of the Olympic torch”, the UN Secretary General added, pointing out that “While limited in duration and scope, the Olympic Truce can offer a neutral point of consensus, a window of time to open a dialogue, a pause to provide relief to a suffering population.

Somehow, this seems particularly relevant here right now.

Anyway, in this spirit, and in response to sanity, I appreciate your comments and your willingness to engage in ‘open, meaningful discussion of often differing opinions’. I like your blog as well, although I do wish it had RSS and allowed comments. We clearly have different opinions. We may not find agreement on certain areas, but on others we can, and it would be great if we could get more elected leaders and members of the media approach civic dialog this way.

Franks said...

Editorial writers in the The Day and The Courant have commented on the decision not bring a criminal actions against the commissioner or deputy commissioner involved with Lisa Moddy fundraising adventure.

Rep. Caruso has indicated he will question the decision as well.

The Day's editorial noted “That's what I struggled with the most,” said Mr. Morano. “They (commissioners) know ... all they have to do is pass them (the invitations). Yet the criminal statute requires me to show a specific intent. What is required for criminal prosecution is a greater intention to solicit. An aggressive attempt to solicit is what's required as a felony. I need to show active, aggressive soliciting to bring it to the level of a felony.”

Is Mr. Morano being judge and jury here. Probate cause is what gets most people arrested, warrants signed and criminal prosecutions begun every day in CT courts.

mod.dem.like.jfk said...

GC- Great stuff on the research and a excellent reminder for the masses that this can and should be a place of heightened intellectual debate.

On the Johnny Rowl's peice: He could not run for office in Connecticut. In CT to run you must be 18 years old and a registered elector in the municipality in which you register. In CT, we strip prisoners of the ability to vote, thus making Rowland ineligible to register.

Aldon Hynes said...

mod.dem

In 2001, Gov. Rowland signed Public Act No. 01-11 - AN ACT RESTORING VOTING RIGHTS OF CONVICTED FELONS WHO ARE ON PROBATION.

It states

Sec. 3. Section 9-46a of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof:

(a) A person who has been convicted of a felony and committed to confinement in a federal or other state correctional institution or facility or community residence shall have [his] such person's electoral privileges restored upon submission of written or other satisfactory proof to the admitting official before whom [he] such person presents his or her qualifications to be admitted as an elector, that all fines in conjunction with the conviction have been paid and that [he] such person has been discharged from confinement, and, if applicable, parole. [or probation, as the case may be.]


I do not know the details about whether Rowland is now eligible to register to vote again, or if there are som parole or probation issues. However, it is important to know that people who have been convicted of felonies do have the ability to have their voting rights re-instated.

I do wonder what Rowland's community service will be. Perhaps helping ex-felons get their voting rights back would be a good community service.

mod.dem.like.jfk said...

Aldon-

Thanks, I was unaware of that peice of legislation. I was looking at the older repealed statute.

Anonymous said...

Thanks to the Democrats, ex-felons can vote or run for elected office.

Anonymous said...

Ghengis - Don't be so sure about the DeStefano/Sullivan thing. I would only consider myself fairly well "plugged in" and I've heard that rumor a lot over the last few days. Just a rumor? Maybe... but maybe not.

Anonymous said...

Rowland/Rell -1994
Rowland/Rell -1998
Rowland/Rell -2002

Prediction:

Rell/Rowland -2006

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Anonymous said...

My Prediction:

DeStefano-Newton 2006

nedweenie said...

Not all ex-felons are created equal. I'm glad to see they can petition to vote if they want to.

It's too bad Rowland didn't spend some time at Somers or in New Haven's facility. And that he probably won't fade into the background as he should.

And I too was disappointed at the nastiness and rudeness that has been displayed here lately. I value this blog as a civilized place where both sides can discuss issues in a mature fashion. If you can't be courteous, to GC or to others posting here, take it someplace else.

Anonymous said...

Yep, a Dem leaning blog gets nasty and uncivil....must be trying to out Kos Kos.....

Two points. The Dem Governor of VA just signed an estate tax repeal into law. So if you want the rich to move south (and the NY Times reports NO VA is their fastest growing destination) , then leave the estate tax in place.

People who move away stop paying CT taxes while their alive. Duh.

RE: Caruso and Morano. Did he demand an explantion for Morano not charging Dannel Malloy?

Caruso is the biggest tool this side of Black & Decker

MVD said...

For a good analysis of the Rell car tax issue, see CT Blue.

Anonymous said...

So really, what you're saying, is that we can't trust the Democrats in the legislature to follow through with the law, if it passes the car tax repeal.

Anonymous said...

Anon,

Can you tell me the last time a Governors Veto was overridden on a budget bill?

Don Pesci said...

The news today that Democrats have caved into Rell on the Clean Contracting Bill, twice vetoed by the governor because of its punitive provisons on private services, suggests that they intend collectively to open a front elsewhere -- probably on the issue of the elimination of car taxes. My quess is: If they can't kill the provision outright, they may attempt to mitigate its horrors by providing either a rebate or cutting the tax, rather than eliminating it. What does everybody else think?

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:45

You're right, I should have said politicians in general. Remember the Lotto was going to be for education, casino money for the towns, etc, etc, etc. Which really demonstrates that 'property tax reform' is really only a shifting of the tax burden to income, rather than wealth (see the Courant's story last Sunday about the poor multi-millionaire having to sell his waterfront cottage for $9M and move inland). Even with increasing tax rates on the highest income earners, there is no guarantee that the money will actually get distributed to the towns. At least with Rell's proposal, it goes back to the taxpayers themselves.

Anonymous said...

If you cant afford a waterfront estate or a Lexus, don;t own them

I think renters ought to pay some tax to their towns. Eliminating the car tax takes them off the rolls

MikeCT said...

Right wing talk show host Sean Hannity offered his endorsement to Joe Lieberman on his show yesterday and to do a CT fundraiser. My Left Nutmeg comments on Joe Lieberman's appearance. You can download the mp3 of the interview. He slams Dems as weak on defense and basically agrees with Hannity that the Dems are ruled by the "hard left." When Hannity invites him to join the conservative movement, Lieberman says "America may be ready for a third party, an independent party." Let him sell a right wing third party bid in a Democratic primary. Go Joe!

Lieberman is getting generous support from other Republicans, including Reagan & Bush officials. He is determined to alienate local Dems.

In unrelated news:
William Tong is running for state rep in Stamford & New Canaan against a Republican incumbent. As far as I know, if elected, he would be the only Asian American in the CT General Assembly.

Nancy Wyman's campaign page is up and running, if primitive.

Anonymous said...

Why would any Democrat vote for Lieberman. If the role was reversed and he was a Republican acting like a liberal, the conservatives would boot him out of office in a heartbeat.

the wandererrr said...

to ct_guy who said...
DeanFan - it's considered good internet etiquette to warn people when you're linking to something absolutely horrifying.

Over the last few days you're really making me wish this website had an ignore feature.
there actually is a warning and it is DF's heading - if he says anything about Iraq i just move to the next post. I understand he doesn't like the war and neither do I but he can't even correctly interpret what General Odom has said because he's deaf on this - that's what happens whn your leader is a screamer.

Anonymous said...

re: Anon 10:13

It will be intersting to see how that scenario plays out in RI with the conservative Laffee challenging Chafee.

Chafee is still a slight favorite because blue state R's aren;t irrational about needing moderates to hold senate and house seats

I wonder what would happen if a self funding R like Jack Welch announced for senate and threatened to whip Lamont like a rented mule after the primary?.....ranks might close pretty fast

Gabe said...

Ex-felons can vote in Ct if they are on probation, but not if they are on parole. That being said, I have no idea which one rowland is on.

the wandererrr said...

Gabe: I don't think he is actually an ex-felon or on parole or probation yet since he will be bound to stay at home for four months to finsh his sentence but I'm not sure. I guess you are not studying criminal law.

And as for the Morano/Comissioners thing; what does Morano know about white collar crime except that he was appointed to his job by a white collar criminal and served him faithfully even after he was in a federal lockup.?

ctkeith said...

hey wanderer,

When you sit down for over an hour with General Odem like Deanfan and a few other did then you can critcize.

Deanfan just about nailed what the General said less than 2 weeks ago in that meeting.

PS.The General also said Irans getting the Bomb is no big deal and surely not worth going to war over.

Gabe said...

You would be surprised on how much of Criminal Law is actually theoretical discussions about various states of mind. I can talk at length about Rowland's mens rea when he got into bed with Tomasso.

The class that would cover what someone's status is under house arrest is actually Criminal Procedure (and it would probably cover it in only a very general way under the Model Penal Code, not specifically to CT).

But whether he can vote or not is less Criminal and more Election law - If he can vote while on probabtion, but not on parole, its safe to say that he can't vote while on house arrest.

the wandererr said...

Not only do I ignore DF on Iran, I'm going to ignore ctketih on Iran and Iraq too

DeanFan84 said...

For those of you who also care about our troops, I recommend a donation to The Fallen Heroes Fund.

I just gave $50 after watching Imus plug the project earlier this week. In short, the fund is for building a state-of-the-art rehab center for catastrophically wounded troops. I'm not always impressed by these type of efforts, but this group is, indeed, highly impressive. I encourage everyone to browse the Fallen Heroes Fund website.
------------------------------------------
Hey wandererr,

The Mid-East mess that the Neo-Cons have gotten into isn't going away. Put your head in the sand, cross your fingers, and dream of a fairy tale ending.

Sadly, it ain't happening.

Anonymous said...

you mean Jimmy Carter was a neo con, jeez, had we done something serious about the hostage crisis in '79 none of this probably would have happened.

You lefties really believe the spin in the 1990's that "history was over". And you think conservatives are delusional?

DeanFan84 said...

No, I think conservatives are lazy. Why don't you go read up about PNAC and the neo-Con movement before you come out with the stupid statement that Carter was one of them.

There are facts and history to America's involvement in the Middle East. In ignorance one could blame Jimmy Carter for the Iranian Revolution, but personally, I'd go read up about Mossadegh, the CIA, and the Shah's regime.

In terms of "history being over", the 1990's was a wonderful period of not having an enemy. Maybe you are right, maybe America needs to be in a state of "perpetual war"...

Anonymous said...

DF, "America not having an enemy".

I suppose the USS Cole blew itself up,right?

Anonymous said...

WARNING: Truth about the Iraq war..These are very graphic Photo's...View at your won risk!

http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/~jeff/misc2/iraq/shocking_iraq_photos.html

Quinn said...

Well, I'm fine with putting this behind us.

Regarding Rowland... is the ankle tracker really necessary? I mean, what is he going to do, flee the country? Rob a bank? He's not really in a position to be receiving hottubs anymore, and even if he was the tracking wouldn't help.

Anonymous said...

if Rowland happened to be black, (say like Ernie Newton), would you be so charitable, Quinn?

just a wee bit curious. And do you believe in the death penalty?

I mean if your party wants to be a bunch of collective hard-asses about crime, you might apply some principle to the ex-Crook in chief.

Quinn said...

I would be precisely as chartiable. The punishment should always fit the crime - to expect that a public figure and former governor would have to be so closely monitored is highly illogical.

And honestly, what, do you think all Republicans are sitting out on their porch with their shotguns? We're not all uneducated and insensitive. Mostly, I'm a Republican for economic reasons. Indeed, there are few Republicans in the state of Connecticut that could be much distinguished from the high-and-mighty Democrats when it comes to tolerance. You only have the right to act superior to Republicans in other regions :).

And while I do support the death penalty, I don't particularly believe that recieving - or even stealing - a hot tub should be worthy of capital punishment. Killing people in a ghastly fashion, more like.

You'll get me to admit that one year was relatively, and probably unnecessarily, lenient.