Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Connecticut for Lieberman

It's official. Joe Lieberman is on the ballot.


The certification means that Lieberman, the Democratic nominee for vice president in 2000 and a presidential candidate in 2004, will run for re-election as part of the Connecticut for Lieberman party against Democrat Ned Lamont and Republican Alan Schlesinger.

Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz said her office validated 8,215 signatures before employees stopped counting. The campaign collected more than 18,500 signatures, but Bysiewicz's office did not validate them all because they were not needed.


I still can't get over the name he chose.

Update/Edit: Over at the Lamont campaign blog Tim has a post up highlighting Lieberman's trouble finding a new web host/tech help.

Source
Associated Press. "State Confirms Lieberman's Petitions To Appear On November Ballot". Hartford Courant. 8/23/06

Tagaris, Tim. "Net Vendors Turning Down Lieberman Party Work Offers". Official Campaign Blog. 8/23/06

64 comments:

TrueBlueCT said...

CGG--

Re: CFL, Joe Lieberman is out to re-define public service. It's no longer a matter of him being there for us, it's a matter of Connecticut belonging to him.

I hope some day the book will be written about Joe Lieberman's tragic fall. It's a cautionary tale about pride and ego, and also against any leader who would commit a nation's resource as unwisely as Bush and Joe have...

justavoter said...

wow non loser Lier Lieberman can be the first to go in the voting booth and vote for his own little party.

Also I believe he will have a mirror with him at all times to remind himself its the party of one.

BRubenstein said...

Its all about himself ( Joe) anyway...he has shown he doesnt care about the Democratic Party by doing this November race.

Anonymous said...

If Ned Lamont didnt have the biggest collection of hoods, thugs and gangstas behind him maybe people would take his Candidacy Seriously.

But Since all he wants to do is collect these kind of people to support his one issue message.

I am proud to be supporting Connecticut for Lieberman over Left Wing Liberal Lamos for Lamont

The LWLL is going to lose in November to The people of Connecticut who see Ned Lamont and his band of thugs as a threat to America and bordering on Communism.

cgg said...

BTW if comments are coming up slowly today it's because blogger is having mood swings.

BRubenstein said...

Anon 1:20..How can Ned be " bordering on communism"..by you when Joe's own press releases and tv ads accuse him of Republicanism?

cgg said...

Apparently Ned Lamont is America's first Republican Communist.

Bobby McGee said...

Anonymous said...
If Ned Lamont didnt have the biggest collection of hoods, thugs and gangstas behind him maybe people would take his Candidacy Seriously.


Lamont supporters are thugs. True gangsta's who make pins and sit behind keyboards.

Thugs.

Anonymous said...

no, Ned Lamont is for Ned Lamont...it is amazing the level of "projection" a narcisstic rich boy can place on a career public servant.

his type adopy any silly trendy ideology to aid themslves, their trust funds and gated estates are such the rest of the world can go down the tubes and it doesn;t matter one whit to themselves...it's all dress up like some backcountry costume ball ...

and if you don;t believe me . look at how fast true believer Tom Swan got sent to the landfill.

Anonymous said...

Why didn't Ned drop his candidacy after losing the convention? He lost fair and square, yet Ned continues on his quixotic attempt to redefine Democrat. Thanks Ned, you're shrinking the tent.

Anonymous said...

Why didn't Ned drop his candidacy after winning twice the number of delegates necessary to be on the ballot? Perhaps because he won twice the number of delegates required. The same reason John DeStefano didn't drop his candidacy.

Anonymous said...

The signatures that are valid are going to start dissapearing as fast as the Green Partie's in PA...

Anonymous said...

Hey Genghis, why is it okay to call supporters thugs, but not to satirize calling people thugs?

disgruntled_republican said...

Anon -

Genghis isn't here. I assume you are the same anon from yesterday who had a problem?

Calling a group of people "thugs" is far from name calling. People call me names on here all the time, I deal with it.

Anonymous said...

Did you get "gruntled" yet????

Patricia Rice said...

The extremist left of the Democratic Party has attempted to take control of the party. Joe Lieberman's big win this November will prove that most Democrats care more about good governance than they care about party I.D.

I am proud to support Joe Lieberman and am proud of good Democrats like Jimmy Amann for his courage and leadership. Many other good Democrat leaders will continue to support Senator Lieberman here in Connecticut. Democrats, Republican’s and Independents are united in their support for Joe while the extreme left continues to promote discourse and political anarchy for anyone who doesn’t concede to their way of thinking.

cgg said...

This "extreme left" BS no longer holds up. Ned won the primary. He is the endorsed Democratic candidate. Calling the majority of Democratic voters extreme is just silly.

Have any of you Lieberman supporters actually been talking to your friends and neighbors about this race? It's not just bloggers and peace activists. It's everyday people in your community who were unhappy with the direction this country is going. On August 8 they went to their polling place and voted for Joe's opponent. When did voting become an extreme leftist act?

smacktalk said...

Disgruntled--you said in a previous thread that you are "heavily involved" with state gop politics. Would you mind enlightening us as to how or in what capacity?

We see that you're involved in Kissel's race, but that isn't state politics. Don't usually see you at state gop events? Don't usually see you hanging with the state central crowd? Have I missed you somewhere? Are you the Republican bruce Rubentstein?

disgruntled_republican said...

Smacktalk -

I assume you are referring to my comment, "It isn't meant to be a shot...it is simply my observations as someone who follows politics and is quite extensively involved." Note it says in politics...not in state gop politics as you say. But since you bring state politics up, last time I checked, the 7th Senatorial District is in CT as is the 2nd CG. Furthermore, if you read my entire profile, you would know some of the areas I have been involved already.

And since I am not a member of state central, why would I hang out with that "crowd"? As for gop events, to be perfectly honest, I will support CT GOP when they start to support GOP campaigns outside of the gold coast and start coming to the average middle class towns like Enfield to help out...been screwed over by them on more than one occassion.

That good enough for you or would you like my resume? Perhaps you could share with us your resume too?

Anonymous said...

Dear Patricia--Reverend Al and Jesse Jackson do not approve your message.

Patricia Rice said...

cgg: I didn't say the majority of Democratic voters are extreme but the majority of Democratic voters who show up to vote in a primary are. If there was a way to take the vote of only the Democratic voters who DID NOT vote in the primary, Lieberman would of won BIG!

Those voters didn't bother to come out because they knew that even if Joe lost as a Democrat, they could still vote for him in the general election as an Independent.

bluecoat said...

Patricia Rice: you really should speak for yourself instead of saying:Democrats, Republican’s and Independents are united in their support for Joe while the extreme left continues to promote discourse and political anarchy for anyone who doesn’t concede to their way of thinking because I just spoke with two Unaffiliateds who are hardly leftists who volunteered to me that Joe was looking like a jerk in recent days with his flip-flopping on his support of Bush on Iraq and they were considering Lamont if he shows to have some integrity with his message. But to be truthful, like me, they always saw Joe as the chameleon that he really is. Too Bad, the CT GOP didn't seize on the opportunity to dump this clown and are now even stoopoing so low as to endorse the bum.

BRubenstein said...

PATRICIA RICE...you are a disgruntled democrat..have you registered yet with Joe's new narcissistic party? Have you switched your voter reg yet? YOU SHOULD

BRubenstein said...

PAT PAT PAT 52% of the party voted for Ned..under your shoddy analysis they( and I) are all extremists...when in fact its you and Joe that are extremists..

bluecoat said...

Those voters didn't bother to come out because they knew that even if Joe lost as a Democrat, they could still vote for him in the general election as an Independent. seems like a dumb move on their part since Ned said he'd go away if he lost to Joe but then we all know the statement is a bunch of nonsensical spin or outright confusion on the part of the poster..

justinh said...

Patricia Rice,

Your "argument" doesn't make sense unless you explain what you mean by "extreme."

Patricia Rice said...

Bruce,Bruce,Bruce, 48% of the Party did not vote in the primary but will have an opportunity to be heard in the general.

Patricia Rice said...

What's extreme? When a Senator votes with his party 90% of the time but somehow that's not good enough.

Worse, because he won't hate Republican's as much as the liberals would like him to.

TrueBlueCT said...

Is it me, or is this blog getting dumber and dumber.

I look back up at the last arguments, 1)that despite a venture capitalist wife, Ned is a communist, and 2)that, according to Pat Rice, conservative Democrats didn't bother to show up to the primary...

It's not funny. It's not interesting. It's just painfully stupid. The only thing is reminds me of is Free Republic. ugh.

D for Demsbetta said...

CGG, wouldn't Ned actually be America's second Republican Communist? After his great-grandaddy that is, who managed to be chairman of JP Morgan, commute to Wall Street by yacht, and somehow managed to fund the entire Communist Party on the side.

Hey, I read it in the MSM, so it must be true. Especially if it's a paper with Republican right there in the name. I figure they oughta know who the real Republican Communists are, right?

cgg said...

Again, doesn't hold up. Showing up to vote isn't an exteme act. If these so-called supporters liked Joe so much they would have shown up in the first place. The primary had record turnout, despite being in August. That's not extreme. That's people making their voices heard.

Anonymous said...

Brucie said: "PAT PAT PAT 52% of the party voted for Ned..under your shoddy analysis they( and I) are all extremists...when in fact its you and Joe that are extremists.."

C'mon Brucie, how can we take you seriously when you make such a statement. It is wrong. 52% of the registered Democrats that chose to vote on primary day (which I think was appx. 43%) voted for Ned, and NOT 52% of the party, as you claim. Are Democrats who chose not to vote in the primary not part of the party? Did you purposely try to mislead people with your comments? Were you just careless in your choice of words? Do you not understand the difference? Which is it?

another different anon said...

DR--maybe when Kissel stops acting like his sh*t don't stank and talking down to people who "don't know my district", the folks in hartford would have an interest in his race. It's not even that he's a 'maverick' and not a reliable GOP vote in the senate, it's the attitude. pure and simple.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

cgg said...
This "extreme left" BS no longer holds up. Ned won the primary. He is the endorsed Democratic candidate.


Thank you very much for that too!

Because of it, Dems from coast to coast are being painted as extreme nut cases, which will probably result in more Republican victories than otherwise possible.

Thanks again!

cgg said...

We'll see how well the argument holds up ACR. I'm not sure that the same games will work in 06.

Anonymous said...

one caffenated geek girl's 'games' are another caffenated geek girl's 'successful tactics.'

justinh said...

Patricia Rice said:

"When a Senator votes with his party 90% of the time but somehow that's not good enough."

Are you suggesting that voting on something like cloture is equal to voting on the Energy Bill or the Levin Amendment? If so, I'd suggest this is an "extreme" argument, because it claims Lieberman is in the mainstream of the party, by ignoring the relative importance of the votes.

"Worse, because he won't hate Republican's as much as the liberals would like him to." I'd suggest, too, that is an "extreme" rhetoric, since polls showed that most voters cited that their opposition to Lieberman was based on the war, not their hatred of him.

disgruntled_republican said...

Another different Anon -

I wasn;t referring to Kissel in the slightest bit in my comments.

justinh said...

But what would suggest that the Democrats who didn't bother to vote in the primary are mainstream?

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

What, FakeBlueCT, DorkFan84, gruntled_republican, decaffeinated greek guy, justawhiner, bluenose, Authentic Connecticut Whig, patricia wheatchex and BRubenstein were all taken?

Quit horning in on my Blogger name!!

;-)

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Need your advice.

I just registered last week as a member of the Connecticut for Lieberman party. Then, a bunch of thugs from the Connecticut for Lieberman party infrastructure somehow found out that I was making verbal comments supporting Jodi Rell. They sent out their lawyers (and an obscure college professor) to purge me from their party, claiming that some statute enabled them to do that. They claim that I'm not a "true" Connecticut for Lieberman, because I'm acting like a Connecticut for Rell voter.

I've been a week-long member of this organization, and they are already throwing me out. What can I do? Do I have any rights?

Hee hee hee hee hee

John Orman is everything your parents warned you about college professors.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Brube wrote:

Its all about himself ( Joe) anyway...he has shown he doesnt care about the Democratic Party by doing this November race.

au contraire.

A Joe victory will keep the Democratic party in the center, a Lamont victory will confirm that there is no center to the Democratic party.

ACR is right about this. Either way, you've set up a situation where Republicans will win. If Lamont somehow pulls this out, it's due to extremism. If Lieberman wins, which is likely, the Left has been resoundingly defeated. (I can already hear the muffled silence in Lamont's November ballroom- "the mood is one of nervousness... the Lamont campaign is quite concerned... they may have a statement for us at 10:30. Channel 8 will keep you up to date on this, as well as the plans for Governor Rell's inaugural parade, later at 11:00.")


And this whole notion "it's all about Joe..." I mean, yeah, so what's the real point. That you have to be an egomaniac to think that you are the one or two people in your state that should be Senator? Governor? We'd have to disqualify everyone.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

cgg said... I'm not sure that the same games will work in 06.

Hezbollah, Hamas, nor Al-Qaeda are interested in games.

Denying the seriousness of these groups or their stated intentions, for political gain is quite beyond the pale.

Another Different Anon said...

ADNR--y'know, i was just using it in an isolated case, but since thou protestest so quickly, methinks I'll run it again! muhahaha

(don't worry,it'll be the last time, my whiny friend)

DR--I appreciate that, but I also noted that you did not refute the kissel comments....eeeeenteresting.

BRubenstein said...

Fat guy and a diff anon..the fact is that 80% of my party didnt vote for Joe in the primary....he is unpopular with the party liberals and the party mainstream ...he is the extremist..and his fellow travelers like Pat Rice...Turfgrll..and others...

cgg said...

No, beyond the pale is implying that Lamont's victory somehow pleased the terrorists.

justavoter said...

Anonymous said...
Why didn't Ned drop his candidacy after losing the convention? He lost fair and square, yet Ned continues on his quixotic attempt to redefine Democrat. Thanks Ned, you're shrinking the tent.

The difference is that Ned is still running in the Democratic Party and your Conservative Right Wing Lieberman decided to dump ship and create the Party of One .

So you can support whomever you want but the loser will be Lieberman in November .

The only thugs in this are the people like Dick Cheney Rove and others on the Right who support Lieberman .Ned Lamont is a real Democrat unlike the fake Lieberman with that fake smile on his face.

justavoter said...

Patricia Rice said...
The extremist left of the Democratic Party has attempted to take control of the party. Joe Lieberman's big win this November will prove that most Democrats care more about good governance than they care about party I.D.

I am proud to support Joe Lieberman and am proud of good Democrats like Jimmy Amann for his courage and leadership. Many other good Democrat leaders will continue to support Senator Lieberman here in Connecticut. Democrats, Republican’s and Independents are united in their support for Joe while the extreme left continues to promote discourse and political anarchy for anyone who doesn’t concede to their way of thinking

what a joke Pat you have to be kidding.
The only extreme is Lieberman not the Lamont supporters who voted in the Democratic Primary and whom are regular people.

For you to label them extreme is a lol.

Its people like Joe Lieberman and his support of Bush's War and other policies that are extreme and thats to the Right Wing Conservative side.

What are you going to do when Joe loses in November move to Maine.

Because from your perspective the Left Wing will have control of Connecticut and those Progressive Democrats are dangerous who knows we might get Universal Health Care ,Independence from big Oil using Alternative Energy Systems in Connecticut and elsewhere which Lieberman never supported he supported the Dick Cheney Energy Bill do you remember that?

Anyway Pat go vote for Joe its a Free Election and Lierman is going to be a big loser.

The Connecticut For Lieberman Party I bet ya will be gone after he loses in November its not a real Party its only a Party of One.

Gabe said...

Denying the seriousness of these groups or their stated intentions, for political gain is quite beyond the pale.

What about implying that one candidate's victory emboldens the terrorisits for political gain? Which side of the pale is that on?

justavoter said...

FatGuyinMiddleSeat the real point is Joe left the Democratic Party after the Primary and decided to go his own way so lets be honest.
Rell and the others are Republicans Greens etc .

There is even a Independent Party in Waterbury which is not happy with Joe Lieberman using Independent when he clearly has a party of one called CT For Lieberman its that simple.
Lieberman is wrong and he is extreme he agrees with people like talk show host on CNN Glen Beck who interviewed him the other night these are the people who support Lieberman and its all coming from the Neo-Cons.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

cgg said... implying that Lamont's victory somehow pleased the terrorists.

I wouldn't stoop to anything so subtle. Subtlety is merely another form of double-speak prevarication that has no place in a political discussion except by those that wish to avoid actually taking any sort of stand on anything risky. (ie: John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, John (flip-flop) Kerry)

I would agree that Lamont's "victory" (which will actually harm the Democratic Party, hopefully) did indeed please any terrorists that have learned of it.

But I'd never be so gutless as to simply imply any such thing.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

justavoter said... Ned Lamont is a real Democrat


Which is exactly why so many Republicans will vote for Joe.


We'll look at this way.

Which do we want?
A:) A Republican in the Senate
B:) No Lamont in the Senate

Our collective fear of Lamont in the US Senate offsets our desire to get one of our own in making choice "B" our overwhelming desire.
The only sure to achieve that is to vote for Joe.
Which is exactly what most of us will do.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

>>.... using Alternative Energy Systems

Name one that's truely viable right now.

MikeCT said...

New poll shows that Chris Murphy is in a tight race with Nancy Johnson! (Hat tip to No More Nancy.)

TrueBlueCT said...

Can I deem this the worst CLP thread, ever?

How long till Genghis gets back from his vacation? The Repuglicans are taking the dialogue down to an ungodly level. Lamont is a communist, Lamont's win is a win for the terrorists, etc....

I'm embarassed to be a poster on this blog.

Anonymous said...

Not as embarrassed as we are by you and your posts trueblue. Not by a long shot.

cgg said...

ACR said: I would agree that Lamont's "victory" (which will actually harm the Democratic Party, hopefully) did indeed please any terrorists that have learned of it.

Terrorist cells don't fear Republicans any more or less than any other Americans. It's not like Bush being in office has made anyone have second thoughts about blowing themslves up. If people actually believe that Ned Lamont somehow fits into Al Qaeda's plans then I worry for our country's future.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

cgg said... Terrorist cells don't fear Republicans any more or less than any other Americans

Either you're pulling our leg or you're too young to remember the fabulous job Carter did getting our hostages back from Iran.

No one respects the US military when there's a Democrat as Commander in Chief.

Truman was the last time the world saw a Democrat US President with any backbone.

Anonymous said...

ACR:

Who was president when 9-11 happened?

That's what I thought....

bluecoat said...

ACR: on alternative energy, your gaga girl, Jodi, is about to spend some buckos:Power projects' fate awaited ROB VARNON

cgg said...

You're right ACR. I forgot how Bill Clinton was president and Democrats controlled congress on 9/11.

justinh said...

You're right, TrueBlueCT. This is mostly junior high school bickering. Few of these arguments make a lick of sense. I tried to engage Patricia Rice above to gauge whether this was a forum for serious discussion, but I never received a response.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

cgg said...
You're right ACR. I forgot how Bill Clinton was president and Democrats controlled congress on 9/11.


Clearly you have little knowledge as it regards just how intel works.

Once the whole thing is gutted it takes more than a couple of months to rebuild it.

bluecoat said...

the problem wasn't intel, the problem was security and connecting the dots. and Bush didn't take over the reigns complaining Clinton was off base on terror, he claimed he was off base on misslie defense.