Wednesday, August 16, 2006

Open Forum

Schlesinger goes on Hardball. It's not pretty.

Molly Ivins and Susan Campbell write about the Lamont-Lieberman race, while Ned Lamont pens a piece for the Wall Street Journal.

Colin McEnroe explores election irregularities.

And, most importantly, I really hope Xena gets to be a planet. I think that makes me a nerd.

What else is going on?

46 comments:

The True Gentleman said...

GC, why do you say "It's not pretty" in referencing Schlesinger's interview on Hardball? I thought he actually handled the questions rather well.

matt w said...

Doing an online research project - calling town clerks to see where Lieberman's petitions stand - this morning.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/8/16/8130/48155

Genghis Conn said...

I thought Matthews was pretty hard on him. He did okay, but I can't imagine he made a good impression.

The True Gentleman said...

I don't think he made a worse impression than some voters may have already had of him because of the casino/gambling issues. I did find it interesting that he is trying to push the domestic discussion but no one really wants to talk about it - focusing on Iraq and the Middle East instead.

Anonymous said...

Neddie is trying furiously to shed the Kos/Sharpton/Jesse Jackson skin he's adopted by pretending to be a DLC type who's against the war because it costs too much money.

What a crock. I suppose that's how Greenwich millionaires think, just change the summer wardrobe for the new designer fall collection. Can;t wear white, I mean liberal, after Labor Day

Anonymous said...

Simply put, Matthews is a good interviewer. He forces answers to tough questions. Alan S is an admitted card-counter at the casinos...It wasn't any worse for Mr. Gold, umm, Schlesinger, than the truth...right?

BrassBoy said...

Matthews is a good interviewer when he wants to be, i.e. if you are somebody he doesn't know or doesn't share his world view. Other than that he can pretty tame.

That being said, Schlesinger was okay, at best. I think he handled the questions as well as he possibly could, given the circumstances, but he needs to stop trying to be so jokey.

GMR said...

I don't have a problem with anyone counting cards at a casino. Counting cards is not illegal, it's simply using mathematics to make better bets. I look at it simply like I look at making good bets (e.g., don't split your 10s, etc).

Card counting isn't easy though. You can turn the odds in your favor, but not by much, and you've got to be really good at it. Schlesinger, or Gold, wasn't good at it.

There's also the allegation that Schlesinger used a fake name on the wampum card or whatever it's called. I don't see a problem here either, as he was a semi-public figure, and as long as he didn't cheat on his taxes, using a fake name on a frequent gambler card isn't a big deal.

What's my beef with the guy? Well, one thing that I'm more upset about than I could ever be about the card counting and wampum card allegations was that Schlesinger had to be nagged by two NJ casinos to pay back around $20K in gambling debt. That tells me a few things: he's not good at figuring out when to fold up and try something else, he's not good at paying back people he owes money to, and he's certainly not good with finances.

But, hey, we could be talking about the Nevada Treasurer's race. That has three candidates to manage the $3.3 billion pension fund for Nevada state employees. One of the candidates died of a heart attack after being indicted for fraud, and the other two both declared personal bankruptcy in the past year (one of them said something like, "I'm a bit of a risk taker").

Anonymous said...

Of course Lieberman is still wearing his Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield/Hannity/O'Reilly/Coulter/Buckley skin.

Geez, this is fun. So much easier than real debate.

Oh, and I forgot to call Joe the D.C. multi-millionaire that he is.

Anonymous said...

Shouldn't be messing with the planets....

Too bad Diebold didin't run the election machinery, that would be sweet. What is up with Colin??? So 4 losers couldn't remember how they registered....wowser.

TrueBlueCT said...

Wow. Schlesinger is a freak. I bet Johnson, Shays, and Simmons can't wait for the Senate debates. (Alan is going to cost them a % point, or two.)

Anonymous said...

Schlesinger looked like certifiable on there. His head was tilted up, chin stuck out, and he had that maniacal smile stretched across his face the entire time. The way he handled the questioning about the card counting and gambling debts was enough to have people make a decision against him well before they even got to talking about "issues."

janes1978 said...

Well speaking of issues- did you read about his new ad and the tax information that Murphy is trying to spin in the media. What a joke.

The True Gentleman said...

Mr. Schlesinger answered the questions the same he has since the casino/gambling/debt settlement issues first were made public. I don't think he hurt himself at all in that interview - people already have their minds made up. At least we now know that he supports, if necessary, military action against Iranian nuclear facilities to ensure that the Iranians do not develop a nuclear option.

Anonymous said...

Lamont's family was partner with J.P. Morgan.

Lieberman's dad sold Captain Morgan

About four decimal points of difference

Anonymous said...

TG: It's hard to hurt yourself when you're pulling 6%.

Anonymous said...

truebluect - whatever % points AS costs the 3 R Congressional candidates will be more than offset by the fact that Lieberman is running as an independent. Sorry to disappoint you, but in the end, all 3 are going to be re-elected.

BigGulpzHuh said...

Speaking of issues- Today's article on Murphy being aginst big oil showed him to be a true hypocrite! He says he is agianst them then Johnson's campiagn found out that he received $2,000 from Lyondell-Citago.

TrueBlueCT said...

TG--
You're kidding me, right. As a Republican are you really supporting Schlesinger? Or would you like to see him replaced?

If that's your candidate for United States Senate, I'm LMAO. I just hope Alan will make joint appearances with Rell. I'd pay dearly for a photo of the two of them together.

brasscitypatriot said...

Let's see what's going on.. Since my gas prices have gone up and
Chris Murphy has admitted voting for SB2000- which increased the gross receipts tax on petroleum compaines. Of course these compaines immediately add it right on to the price of gasoline, which then comes right out of my pocket. I'm sick of it... that is what is going on and after finding this out Chris has lost my vote.

Anonymous said...

Taking a side note on another Republican has anyone actual looked at the bills Johnson's ads talk about? I personally looked into the added tax increase on clothes, since I'll be school shopping with my kids soon. The fact is you use to be able to buy clothes up to $75 without having to pay the sales tax. Murphy really did voter to cut this to $50. Not what I call family friendly.

TrueBlueCT said...

Jim Shea of the Hartford Courant weighs in on Joe's ego.

The True Gentleman said...

TrueBlue, why do you assume that just because I said that Mr. Schlesinger didn't hurt himself any more than when the stories originally broke it means that I am supporting him?

BRubenstein said...

GMR..One thing that puzzles me is this...Ive a masters in Economics and a law degree like Alan Gold and count the cards too...ive been to foxwwods 10 times and won 8 times..( im at the $10 blackjack table)..how could he lose counting cards when it gives you a good edge? For hium to have those gambling law suits against him and forget about it indicates a certain idiocy.. Do we really want a losing card counter in the Senate?

TrueBlueCT said...

TG--
So you're not supporting Schlesinger? I thought you were a real Republican.

Sean said...

GC, I don't know if "its not pretty" is really accurate. I actually thought Schlesinger did better than I had predicted he was going to.
I blogged about it and thought he did generally well, though he did have to admit some damaging stuff about gambling in the beginning. If you compare his performace to Lamont at the debate, I would say Schlesinger was more articulate and spoke better, but had to discuss the detrimental topic of gambling. Having said that, he still should probably resign to make room for a better candidate.

Anonymous said...

like ORCHULLI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Blurred Lines said...

Where did everyone see this article on Murphy? Also, I don't think the general assembly in CT - not sure where you're writing from - has ever had a SB2000? And, in giving you the benefit of the doubt, I check on SB 200 and that was a bill regarding Trauma Informed Behavioral Health that didn't even pass. I imagine that when Nancy's staff is going to write, all at once with suddenly new, waterbury related screen names, they will have their facts straight.

I guess after a quarter-century in one job though, your line of facts becomes a bit blurred.

Anonymous said...

Come on anon 12:55, Orchuli is a loser too. Smart Republicans will vote for Lieberman.

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure how Johnson's campaign can possibly point fingers at Chris Murphy about some random 2k check when Nancy Johnson has been bought and paid for by the pharma/medical and insurance companies. Quite unbelievable - talk about hypocrisy?

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/indus.asp?CID=N00000561&cycle=2006

Anonymous said...

Free tip to all the Johnson interns: in addition to doing your homework (SB2000?) spacing your blog comments out a bit might make your efforts seem a bit less contrived. You're new, we know, just try not to let it happen again.

bluecoat said...

Are those tax increases that Murphy voted for the same ones signed in to law by Rell?

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

I don't know what some of you were watching, but the opening of that Hardball interview looked like the 1919 World Series, with Alan playing the role of the White Sox.

You just say, "Chris, this is old news. The casinos don't like me because I'm really good at card-counting- you probably saw the scene in Rainman. They don't like to lose. And yeah, years ago I ran up some debts- but that's behind me." End of story. Whether it's totally true or not.

My guess is that Alan is trying to again cut his support in half. Maybe to 3%.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Brubenstein,

When you're right, you're right. We don't want a bad card player in the Senate. That's why Republicans are voting for Joe. They are smart enough to see your wisdom.

Harry Truman was probably the best card player ever to sit in the Oval. And he was pretty good, with a few exceptions.

And he would have been Foxwoods worst nightmare.

By the way, I have a law degree and a degree in economics, too. The law degree has proved decidedly unhelpful in my table games- except poker.

Perhaps you can explain to us how the JD can be applied to blackjack.

brasscitypatriot said...

Let me clairfy a few things... Yes I am new at blogging, my son tought me not that long ago and maybe I have more to learn (we all do).

In response to blurred lines two things.

1. Did you happen to look under the 2005 votes? The vote I was talking about took place in 2005. I apologize to all bloggers that I didn't make that clear earlier. I'm sure though that you look under the 2005 votes it will be quite clear. What I was talking about.

2. In response to being a Johnson staffer/ intern or whatever you call them- I'm not sure if I should be pleased or insulted. However I can tell you it made me laugh that you thought so. My family will get a kick out that tonight. However, I think my dad (a ture Dem who raised a true Dem) might have rolled over in his grave. Thanks for making me lol.

Anonymous said...

Hey Blue Coat-- Rell vs. Dems in Hartford- Who do you think would win out?

Anonymous said...

No, bluenose, most were signed by the best friend of senate Democrats (espcially your soon to be unemployed bud Kevin Sullivan) at the time, the Honorable John G. Rowland

You do have a point. As 41 learned, all a Republican ever gets by agreeing to a Dem tax hike is to have them blame you for it later.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

LOL at the WSJ editorial.

Ned said

Here are the four lessons of my business life that I talked about every day on the campaign trail, and that have resonated with Connecticut Democrats:

Ned doesn't list lessons for business success five, six and seven:

5. Be born into wealth in order to accumulate capital

6. Marry a rich woman. It's just as easy to fall in love with a rich woman as it is a poor woman.

7. When you take a wrong turn in your business (Cable TV systems for gated communities), downsize quickly.

While not especially actionable, 5&6 are key to success in Senatorial politics. (Rockefeller, Kerry, Kennedy, etc, etc.)

Anonymous said...

Hey Anon 1:10- The fact we must all face is that politicians need money to run and they get it from companies and individuals. However, it wasn't to swift of a move on Murphy's part to take money from from a group then campaign against them. Very simple don't bite the hand that feeds you or votes for you. Maybe I should have given this little life lesson to Lieberman earlier.

BRubenstein said...

fatguy..my masters in economics was in quanitative techniques and is helpful in both poker and blackjack....the law degree was only helpful in helping me "focus" in an intellectual way..

I will reserve you a seat at the next texas no limit hold em game in foxwoods...

Blurred Lines said...

I went back and looked at the 2005 votes, and you were right. SB 2000 was a transportation tax bill that passed the Senate 33-0 and the House 124-7. So, you are going to bring up a bill from 2 sessions ago, that everyone voted for, because of some 2k check? Yet, you don't have a problem with the 100's of thousands of dollars Nancy has taken from the Medical Industry and the Pharma Industry - that has arguably been a catalyst for the increasing medical coverage costs and pharmaceutical drug increases? You talk about hypocrisy???

brasscitypatriot said...

Blurred lines.. I brought up the gas tax vote and the issue because I filled my tank up last night and it was over $60 at the tank. However, I didn't mention anything about a check or financial contributions of political candidates- I believe that was before I got online said by BigGulpzHuh. He mentioned about some article but I haven't gotten a good look at the paper myself today.

On the other subject my opinion on financial contributions is this all candidates have to have backing and support via money and endorsements. No candidate should deny that, and if your going to make an issue of the fact then as a candidate don't take the money yourself (very plain and simple). Pull a Dean that is what I say. Oh, I did hear Murphy got some sort of Union endorsement- Any of this true, if so what group?

brasscitypatriot said...

Oh, blurred lines I forgot to mention in my previous post that I brought up Murphy's vote in 2005 because it is effecting us now! I believe the last increment increase was July 1 of this year. Secondly, I mentioned Murphy's vote in 2005 because those other elected officals, are not on my ballot in November Johnson and Murphy are. Those other officials will have to held accountable for their pasts votes by the voters in their own districts and they should be. Personally, we should all be outraged at the taxes in CT.

The True Gentleman said...

TrueBlue, nice try. I don't really think that anyone here would doubt whether I am a "real Republican" one way or the other...

bluecoat said...

and Jodi told everybody what a good job Johnny was doing by raising taxes 27 times; OK I got it.

Anonymous said...

Given the circumstances, I thought Schlesinger did an okay job on Hardball. If nothing else comes out about him, he could have a decent showing (25%) if Lamont and Lieberman go after each other "hammer and tongs" and AS is left looking like the reasonable one.