Thursday, July 06, 2006

Welcome to Connecticut, Senators!

The Courant, in an article about the debate tonight, reports that Senators Biden, Boxer, and Salazar will be campaigning with Senator Lieberman in advance of the primary. In fact, Senator Salazar has gone so far as to declare his support for Lieberman even if he loses the primary.

In welcoming our guests, I thought it would be fun to use their visit to highlight how Lamont's support (and conversely the opposition to Senator Lieberman) is all about the war and only the war. Oh. And some other stuff. [Ed. - If you are fully committed to the idea that the only reason the left-wing liberal loonies support Lamont is because they hate the war (and by extension - America), CTLP asks you to please stop reading now. Exploding heads are extremely difficult to clean out of keyboards.]

Welcome Senator Barbara Boxer!

Senator Boxer recently "...expressed her support of her esteemed colleague with whom she had worked many times over the years, and said all of the opposition to Joe was based on his support of the war. She said other groups, like women, were backing Joe because he was so good on their issues."

Interesting. Now (PAC and CT) and Connecticut Choice Voice tend to disagree. Click through the CCV link to read 5 compelling reasons why.

Also, lets not forget the infamous Plan B quote, "In Connecticut, it shouldn't take more than a short ride to get to another hospital". I wonder if Senator Boxer thinks that rape victims having to find their way to another hospital to get Plan B is a women's issue that the Senator is "good" on? Hat tip to CT Bob for covering this extensively, but especially for the maps.

Welcome Senator Ken Salazar!

Senator Salazar, along with Senator Lieberman, is one of the 7 Democrats in the gang of fourteen, a group whose purpose is to make sure that only nut-jobs are filibustered. Or something.

As it turns out, one of the Republican members (Senator Graham) coached Justice Alito in his preparation for the confirmation hearings. I am sure that he did not coach him on how to avoid the wrath of the gang of fourteen though. Also, should a Senator who will later sit in judgment on a judicial nominee coach the nominee in preparation for the hearings? Yeah, bipartisanship!

I would like to take this opportunity to formally invite Senator Salazar over for poker while he is visiting Connecticut. Before we play, I may help the decks "prepare" for the game. That's okay, right?

Welcome Senator Joe Biden!

I saved this one for last, because the bankruptcy bill fiasco is when I started contemplating not supporting the sitting Senator from my party.

I am glad that Senator Biden is coming all the way from MBNA, er, I mean, from Delaware to support Senator Lieberman, even though they voted differently on the bankruptcy bill.

Stop laughing. Senator Biden voted in favor of the bill and Senator Lieberman voted against it. Seriously, what's so funny? What the heck is a cloture vote anyway? Why are you crying?

All kidding aside, in my humble opinion, the bankruptcy bill will go down in history as one of the worst pieces of legislation ever bought by an industry (FYI, Senator Salazar voted for it too). But don't take my word for it. I introduce Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren, her brief summary on why the law will be a disaster, and her longer study on the same topic. For the attention span deficient: Most of the people declaring bankruptcy are doing so because of a catastrophic medical disaster.

Welcome Senator - Wait, who are you?!?

We are all political junkies, right? Hold that aside for a second and ask yourself if the average nutmegger cares who Senators Biden, Boxer, and Salazar are supporting in the Connecticut primary. I am getting a big no.

But at least the Lieberman folks can still hammer Lamont for having all of his support from out of state. Right?

Hartford, Courant, Mark Pazniokas, Faceoff For Heart Of Party, July 6, 2006.
Dnver Post, Mike Soraghan, Salazar to stump for embattled Democrat, July 5, 2006.
Fire Dog Lake, Jane Hamsher, Clueless, June 10, 2006.
NOW Press Release, NOW PAC Endorses Ned Lamont for U.S. Senate in Connecticut, May 16, 2006.
Connecitcut Choice Voice website, Five Reasons Why We Cannot
Support Senator Lieberman
CT Bob, Lieberman vs. the Day After Pill, May 4, 2006.
Wikipedia, Gang of 14.
Village Voice, James Ridgeway, Alito and His Coaches, January 10, 2006.
Talking Points Memo, Michael Negron, No Title (2 Posts), March 11, 2005.
Talking Points Memo, Elizabeth Warren, No Title, March 19, 2005.
Health Affairs, David U. Himmelstein, Elizabeth Warren, Deborah Thorne, and
Steffie Woolhandler, MarketWatch:
Illness And Injury As
Contributors To Bankruptcy
, February 2, 2005.


Top-n-Center said...

Wow - someone's had their thinking cap on.... Nice piece, Gabe. Enjoy the debate tonight.

BRubenstein said...

Gabe...great post..i read everything...enjoy the debate tonight !!!!!!

turfgrrl said...

Nice post but, you mischaracterized the real issue with plan B. Whether the government should force a private institution to distribute contraceptives is one aspect. But lets not forget that its the Bush administration that played politics with plan B. The Bush administration has held up the release of Plan B as an over the counter drug. argument here and latest news here..

BRubenstein said...

Gabe didnt mischaracterize anything..his comment shows us all how callous Joementum is when he said " a short ride...etc"

Patricia Rice said...

I predict tonight you will see the difference between a Senator who has command of all the issues VS a Millionaire brat that will only focus on negative campaigning.

Ned has no vision...and Connectciut Democrats are starting to see it. People are tired of Negative campaigns and that is what Millionaire Ned is all about.

Genghis Conn said...

Well, you have to admit that Lieberman's been pretty negative, too. I'd say he's actually been a lot more negative than Lamont.

Patricia Rice said...

GC: Negative Ned began is campaign on a sour note and Lieberman is fighting back. But, even if Senator Lieberman is negative are the people really going to replace him with a negative campaigner that offers no solutions? We know Joe Lieberman…Why would we replace him with a negative campaigner? People are tired of all the Negative Ned’s in politics.

Genghis Conn said...

In this environment? I think voters in 2006 want change. Neither the current crop of Democrats or the Republican majority in Congress has been able to deliver it.

Dangerous for incumbents, including Lieberman.

BRubenstein said...

Pat Rice and the truth are miles apart...anyone can go to Lamont's webpage and see the many positions and issues he has taken a stand on...He has a plan and a vision,unlike Joe who's plan is to return Bush's (kiss) anytime he can.For 3 terms we have been saddled with "republican lite"...and Democrats are fed up with Joe's phoney pious pronouncements of his integrity, etc. especially since the war in Iraq has shown his complete lack of integrity. In the face of compelling factual evidence that the pretext of the war was phoney Joe still supports this war...showing us no integrity...he is a main reason for over 2500 good american deaths in Iraq not to mention tens of thousands of other deaths.

BTW..Joementum is a millionaire too...

cgg said...

Nice post Gabe. I have to tell you, it's disheartening to see Boxer com and shill for him.

Turfgrrl, I wouldn't say that Gabe misrepresented the plan B issue but rather that he focused on a facet of it that is specific to our state. That Bush's views are draconian doesn't make Lieberman's comments and less vile.

Patricia what campaign are you watching? Lieberman is taking negative to a new low every day.

Patricia Rice said...

You know what you don't see on Negative Ned's web site? ENDORSEMENTS. Are you not surprised that other respected legislators are not willing to lend their good name to Negative Ned?

Hey Bruce, How come there is not even one legislator in your Hartford/Weathersfield area that will publicly support Negative Ned? Is there not enough progressives in the Hartford area?

Connecticut's Democratic Legislators For Lieberman:

State Representative Deborah Heinrich
State Representative Thomas Reynolds
State Representative Patricia M. Widlitz
State Representative James Amann
State Representative Mary Fritz
State Representative Christei Truglia
State Representative Demetrios Giannaros
State Representative Louis Esposito
State Representative George Wilber
State Senator Biagio Ciotto
State Senator William Finch
State Senator Joseph Crisco
State Senator Donald Williams
State Senator Christopher Murphy
State Senator Robert Duff
State Representative Felipe Reinoso State Representative Lewis Wallace
State Representative Joseph Mioli
State Representative Steven Mikutel
State Representative Linda Orange
State Representative Roger Michele
State Representative Paul Davis
State Senator Martin Looney
State Senator Andrew McDonald
State Senator Andrea Stillman
State Representative Edwin Jutila
State Representative Joseph Serra
State Representative Carlo Leone
State Representative Christopher Perone
State Senator Edith Prague
State Representative Patricia Dillon
State Representative Mary Mushinsky

cgg said...

Patricia, Lieberman is the incumbent. It's in the interest of elected officials to support incumbency as a system. They tend to like that job security.

I expect most, if not nearly all, of those endorsements to not exist after the primary.

Patricia Rice said...

cgg: I understand about incumbency but when I look at the respected names on that list, I believe that they are all people of principle and would not support somebody who was not right for the job.

Negative Ned was not able to get even one State Legislator to take a stand on his behalf. That says something.

Anonymous said...

First - Great post Gabe.

Second - Patricia Rice, sure Lamont's been negative. Lieberman has been even more so. The big difference is that Lamont's negative attacks have been, for the most part, focused on substantive issues while Lieberman's negative attacks have been rather shrill and misleading.

On the subject of endorsements from Democratic legislators... I'm not sure it helps Senator Lieberman's cause to point out that only 32 out of 123 Democratic members of the General Assembly are listed (on the Senator's campaign website) as endorsing him.

Derby Conservative said...

It really burns me that BR and his "progressive" kin keep referring to Joe Lieberman as "Republican Lite" or something similar. This is complete rubbish! The American Conservative Union rates Joe Lieberman's voting performance in 2005 as an 8 out of 100. Joementum's 8 matched John Kerry, Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer. Joe's 8 is actually lower than Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein who all scored 12.

Lamontheads can villify Joe any way they choose, but PLEASE stop referring to him as a Republican or Conservative...we don't wan't him either!

Anonymous said...

Patricia - take the blinders off...

Did you miss State Rep Peter Tercyak marching with Ned in New Briatain parades?

Did you miss State Rep John Geragosian just marching with Ned in the Boom Box parade?

There are many more working behind the scenes...

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia Rice said...

Well, I guess you could claim that 90% of the universe supports LaMont and there is no way for me to disprove it. What I do know is the real legislators who support Lieberman will put their name behind him. If you want to believe that just because some politican walks in a parade the he supports the other guy in the parade...go ahead.

I still can't find a single State Rep or Senator who said they would support Negative Ned. Of course, you will say they all support him when nobody is around. Good luck!

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

Derby Conservative said... " stop referring to him as a Republican or Conservative...we don't wan't him either!"

Not when we have a like we haven't had in over 30 years we sure don't.

BTW - anyone familiar with Salazar will think twice about voting for Lieberman ever again.

Anonymous said...

Patricia - they didn't just march in the SAME parade as Ned...they marched WITH Ned, in the middle of Ned's volunteers are were bringing Ned over to shake hands with people they know.

Ahhh...facts cracking liebermantalking collapsing...

ctkeith said...

Patricia Rice,

Does voting For Lamont as a delegate count as an endorsement?
You might want to check the roster to see how many state reps were also delegates and voted FOR LAMONT at the convention.


Chris Shays (R) has already endorsed Lieberman and if you check a very large portion of Liebermans Donors are also Bush Donors.
You can run From Lieberman all you want but his Republican approval is the only reason he can even consider an indy run.

Derby Conservative said...

Shays only received a 20 rating from the ACU himself, so I would wager to say that he is barely a Republican and definitely not a conservative either. However, you don’t see us eating our young over his policies like you libs are about Lieberman and Lamont. Keep this up and it’ll be Sen. Schlesinger come January

Gabe said...

Hey Turf - I didn't mischaracterize anything - I agree with you 100% on the politics of the FDA with respect to plan B. It just wasn't the subject of this post.

Patricia Rice - Repeating Negative Ned over and over, while alliterative, does not in fact obscure the negative campaigning that Senator Lieberman has engaged in. Especially when his negative campaign materials and robocalls keep coming to my house.

Is that post really not going to lead to one single comment on the bankruptcy bill? Please? Please...

bluecoat said...

Gabe: the bankruptcy bill is bad for exactly the reason you talk about: catastrophic health costs. It was interesting the Kerry proposed for the federal govt. to reinsure anybody and everybody whose bills got over $50K a year, which would have helped the situation. His plan was also characterized as Hillarycare - there never was a Hillarycare as her meetings were shutdown by the special moneyed interests after only six days of meeting(wrongly or naively in secret BTW) but to read the spin you'd think she actually had a plan when she never did as the First Lady...and still doesn't today BTW

Gabe said...

bluecoat, thanks for making me feel better by mentioning it.

On the causes of bankruptcy - Divorce is also a big one -

Bankruptcy specialists said the numbers seemed sound.

"From 1982 to 1989, I reviewed every bankruptcy petition filed in South Carolina, and during that period I came to the conclusion that there were two major causes of bankruptcy: medical bills and divorce," said George Cauthen, a lawyer at Columbia-based law firm Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP.

Credit card debt is not...

"Each accounted, roughly, for about a third of all individual filings in South Carolina."

He said fewer than 1 percent of all bankruptcy filings were due to credit card debt. "That truly is a myth," Cauthen said in a telephone interview.