Not going to jinx it, but things are looking a wee bit good.
A new Rasmussen survey in Connecticut finds Ned Lamont (D) leading Thomas Foley (R) in the race for governor, 42% to 35%.
Dan Malloy (D), who is battling Lamont for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, also edges Foley, 38% to 35%.
Just a month ago, both Democrats were running behind Foley.
By GottaLaff
This won't exactly be a 2010 vote-getter:
In December 1989, as federal investigators were zeroing in on a Pennsylvania doctor who would soon be convicted of selling steroids to professional wrestlers, Linda McMahon sent a confidential memo to a fellow executive at Titan Sports, the family company that operated what was then known as the World Wrestling Federation.The WWF, she wrote, should alert Dr. George T. Zahorian III that a criminal investigation could be heading his way, according to court documents reviewed by The Day.
"Although you and I discussed before about continuing to have Zahorian at our events as the doctor on call, I think that is now not a good idea," McMahon wrote in the memo. "Vince agreed, and would like for you to call Zahorian and to tell him not to come to any more of our events and to also clue him in on any action that the Justice Department is thinking of taking."
In an interview last week, McMahon said she could not explain the reason she directed Pat Patterson, a former wrestler, WWE executive and consultant, to alert Zahorian to the fact that he was under investigation.
By GottaLaff
Linda McMahon (R), who is running for the U.S. Senate in Connecticut, owns a 47-foot sport yacht named "Sexy Bitch," according to the Stamford Advocate.
Here's what you see on her website. Note the first name only identification, like, you know, Cher or Madonna:
By GottaLaff
Friends,H/t: Chris
Over the last few months, I've spoken with voters across Connecticut, sharing with you my vision for our future and listening to your thoughts on how we can work together to get our state back on track.
Four years ago, I was humbled to be joined by so many of you as I stood at the Old State House in Hartford to call for a new direction for our nation.
Today, it has become increasingly clear that we need a new direction in Connecticut.
I would be honored if you joined my family and me this coming Tuesday, February 16th at 11:00am at the Old State House in Hartford for a very special announcement.
When: Tuesday, February 16th, 11:00AM
Where: Old State House, 800 Main Street, Hartford, CT [Map] [Directions and Parking]
Immediately following the event, please join me and other supporters for a reception just down the block at City Steam, 942 Main Street, Hartford CT.
Please RSVP here.
Or RSVP on Facebook here.
I hope to see you at the Old State House on Tuesday as we stand up and begin to chart a new course for our great state,
Ned
By GottaLaff
Witnesses and emergency response authorities said as many as 100 people were injured and at least two were dead following a massive explosion, which homeowners more than 10 miles away mistook for an earth quake, blew up a power plant being built on the Connecticut River in the southern section of Middletown at about 11 a.m. Sunday.My Twitter pal JFKFan told me he felt the "earthquake". Scary stuff.
Medical rescue personnel said four of the 100 were injured, four critically, and two were dead at the site of the Kleen Energy Systems plant on River Road.
"There are bodies everywhere," a witness said. Another witness said many victims may be buried in rubble.
Santostefano said the explosion was related in some fashion to natural gas, but he did not know how. A neighbor of the plant said the plant may have used natural gas in its power generating systems.There's more. What a sad, tragic story.
Other neighbors said as many as 100 employees may have been working there when the explosion took place. A witness said the explosion took place when workers switched on the plant's energy generating systems during a test.
By GottaLaff
I have the inside scoop Ned Lamont is going to be the Dem choice for Gov in Ct, deal is cut..Thanks for the scoop, JFKFAN! Go Lamont!
Lamont Gov, Susan Bysiewicz A.G, Denise Merrill Sec. of the State, Blumenthal Senate...
This was a deal broke by Blumenthal, both have tons of cash, & GOP has a guy named Foley who also has, need millions for race...
looks like that is a pretty solid, due to CT campaign insiders I know..
I am certain that is what is going on, Ct has a glitch in campaign finance laws, he brings own money..
it came from my sources who are former DNC committeemen and big Union guys..
this came from my buddy [...] SEIU pol director & friend [...] who is a American Fed teachers pol director..& Nat commiteeman
By GottaLaff
I enjoy Michael Moore, and I think he and his films make great points. He's fun to watch, is bright, and has his heart in the right place. However, this is a little unrealistic and, IMHO, not helpful....
By GottaLaff
Ned Lamont, who took on U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman three years ago, has formed an “exploratory committee” to seek the Democratic nomination to challenge Gov. M. Jodi Rell in 2010. [...]
He’d be seeking the Democratic nomination for governor. [...]
He plans to talk not about controversial top Rell aide Lisa Moody, but about a new report about state finances from Moody’s Investor Services.
The strategy, and the issues focus, promise to differ markedly from Lamont’s Senate campaign in 2006.[...]
That year, Lamont ran as the “true” Democrat against conservative Democratic incumbent Joe Lieberman. Lamont was championed by anti-Iraq war, pro-public financing and pro-universal health care Democrats who have a disproportionate influence in primaries. [...]
This time, in the 2010 governor’s race, Lamont joins five other Democrats already “exploring” or actively mounting races.[...]
Lamont said he plans again to refuse donations in this race from government contractors and political action committees, or PACs, if he runs. [...]
He’s positioning himself as the one successful businessman in the race, “the one guy who has started a business and met a payroll,” in a state that hasn’t created jobs since 1990. The state ranks last (below Michigan) in job creation.
Much more here.
H/t: Chris
Just as sleezy and lowdown as you'd expect. Follow the link to read of the R's whining that they got caught, and how it's all "satire" not dishonesty.
Barack Obama's victory last year left many Republicans bemoaning their party's ineptitude when it came to political exploitation of the Web. Democrats, they admitted, were far ahead in the art of using the Internet to seduce voters.
So Connecticut Republicans decided it was time to boldly forge into the 21st century, only to stumble when one of their decidedly deceptive experiments ran into trouble last week.
Twitter, Inc., shut down 33 fake Twitter accounts created by Republicans using the names of Democratic state representatives. The Republican scheme was to send out posts under the Democrats' names mocking the liberal tax-and-spend bastards.
I'm so broke up over this. /happy dance
A new DailyKos/Research 2000 poll in Connecticut looks ahead to the 2012 U.S. Senate race and finds Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) losing badly in a three-way race.
In one match up, Gov. Jodi Rell (R) leads with 46% with Ned Lamont (D) and Lieberman tied at 26%. In another, Rell leads with 40%, followed by Richard Blumenthal (D) at 32% and Lieberman at 23%.
While 47% have a favorable opinion of Lieberman, 50% do not.
I viscerally hate this man, ever since the "get up and go to another hospital" incident. More blatant lies here. Video via Jed.
I remember reading about this when it was going on, and it was obviously paying for votes. I'm sorry he didn't get fined more.
U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman's campaign will pay a $50,000 penalty to settle allegations of improper petty cash payments made to workers during a hard-fought race in 2006 for the U.S. Senate.
The agreement between the Federal Election Commission and the Lieberman camp stems from a complaint filed by the campaign of Ned Lamont, Lieberman's opponent. Lamont beat Lieberman in the Democratic primary, but Lieberman won the general election after running as an independent.
"It is a pretty significant penalty," Lamont's campaign manager, Tom Swan, said Monday.
Swan had asked the Federal Election Commission to review about $350,0000 in cash expenditures Lieberman reported as stipends paid to workers in the two weeks before the Democratic primary. The money was used for about 1,000 canvassers in the campaign's get-out-the-vote efforts, documents show.
By GottaLaff
How shockingly unAmurkin of the Madam's Apple, that scarecrow of Right-Wingnuttia, to attract the attention of Connecticut officials in such an unpatriotic way.The New York Daily News reports that Ann Coulter is under investigation by the Connecticut Elections Enforcement Commission for allegedly voting in that state while registered to vote in New York City.
Officials are responding to a formal complaint filed by Coulterwatch.com blogger Dan Borchers. "For over 10 years, Ann Coulter has gotten away with illegal, immoral and unethical behavior, ranging from plagiarism to defamation, perjury to voter fraud," claims the conservative Borchers. Coulter declined to comment, but in the past has branded Borchers a stalker. He says the FBI has determined he poses no threat.Coulter was investigated and cleared of wrongdoing in 2006 for allegedly violating Florida's voter registration laws by voting in the wrong precinct.
I'd rather see Ned Lamont go at it again, but I'll settle for any real Democrat.
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who announced Monday he will seek a sixth term, is mulling a challenge against Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) in 2012.
Multiple Connecticut Democrats, speaking on condition of anonymity, say Blumenthal has begun informing influential members of the state's political class that he will prepare for a run against Lieberman.
(snip)
Should Blumenthal run against Lieberman, it would set up a clash between two well-known Connecticut politicians. “He's probably the most popular Democrat in the state,” said Quinnipiac University pollster Douglas Schwartz.
Blumenthal's candidacy would also provide an outlet for Democrats who still harbor ill will toward Lieberman after he supported the war in Iraq and backed Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the 2008 presidential contest.
By GottaLaff
Connecticut’s Democratic Party is officially complaining to Sen. Joe Lieberman for backing Republican John McCain in this year’s presidential race – but has decided against taking any tougher measures against him.Ooooo, harsh. That's telling him. I bet Joe's re-e-ally scared of getting grounded.State party officials voted Wednesday night to send the senator a letter laying out their unhappiness with his decision, amid new polls that show the Democrat-turned-independent drawing record low approval ratings from constituents unhappy over his presidential pick and his continuing support for the Iraq war.
That's the headline from CNN, more as soon as I get it. Man, two steps forward, one step back.
LA Times-
NEW HAVEN, Conn. -- Gay marriage is legal in Connecticut now that a judge has cleared the way.
New Haven Superior Court Judge Jonathan Silbert ruled at a brief hearing today morning that gay and lesbian couples now may pick up marriage license forms at town and city clerks' offices statewide.
Many gay and lesbian couples are planning ceremonies today.
The judge ruling followed a historic decision by the Connecticut Supreme Court.
The high court ruled 4-3 on Oct. 10 that same-sex couples have the right to wed rather than accept a civil union law designed to give them the same rights as married couples.
By Commenter Chris via GottaLaff
Chris e-mailed me the other day regarding the subject below, and I invited her to send me a full post on it. It's happens to be about, but not limited to, Connecticut and the effort to introduce ballot initiatives, bypassing the state Constitution:
First, a little background: Connecticut amends its Constitution through conventions . They meet and propose whatever changes, which are then put before the electorate for approval. Any proposals approved by the voters become part of the Constitution.
So, November 4, 2008 being the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in the even-numbered year next succeeding the expiration of a period of twenty years from the date of convening of the last convention, electors in Connecticut will vote on the ballot question:
"Shall there be a Constitutional Convention to amend or revise the Constitution of the state" as required by Article 13 of the CT Constitution. [Sec. 2] If a majority votes yes, then a convention must be held no later than one year after the date of the vote [Sec. 3]. If a majority votes no, a Constitutional Convention may be held in one of the intervening years [but not earlier than 10 years from the date of the last convention] at the request of a two-thirds majority in each house of the Legislature [Sec. 1]That's how we do it and it's complicated for a reason.
This year, proponents of holding a convention want to put forth the proposal of changing Article 13 . They want to implement an "Initiative Referenda", which basically means doing away with the conventions and bringing proposed amendments directly to the voters, the way it's done in other states, such as California. I don't like it.
For the record, I live in California, and I don't like it either.
Our Constitution has been around longer than the US Constitution and it's supposed to be difficult to change it.
It's supposed to be a deliberative process, rather than one that is subject to popular whims and fears, which is what direct initiative will bring us.
The proponents say that they will push for an agenda to amend the Constitution to provide for limiting property taxes (how well did that work out for ya, CA?). They also want hard changes to the Constitution for immigration reform, a three-strikes law, ethics reform, eminent domain reform, term limits, a recall provision, and "More!!! Much More!" .
All of those things (except eminent domain – which does need reform) can be accomplished by the Legislature. We don't have to change the Constitution for them, except maybe the recall provision, which I'm not convinced is a good idea anyway.
And then there's gay marriage. The CT Supreme Court decision earlier this month made direct initiative imperative if the voters want gay marriage banned. Richard Blumenthal, CT Attorney General, said that the court was the final arbiter and the decision would be respected.
Jodi Rell acknowledged that banning gay marriage was a fight she could not win. The decision was based on the equal protection under the law clause of the Constitution, so any amendment would have to address that. Do we really want to screw with equal protection? Do we really want one segment of the population deciding what rights another segment is allowed to have??
A major point of the Constitution is to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority!
There are others ideas out there which could find their way onto the ballot from initiatives - things we haven't thought of yet. And every popular whim that can gather enough signatures on petitions will make it to a ballot in November. We could be taking a lot of the decision-making power out of the hands of the people we've elected to make decisions about the way the state is run.
After writing all this, it is clear to me that my opposition to the ballot question isn't about amending the Constitution; it is against direct initiatives.
It is an argument best given when the question is about amending the Constitution to allow for Initiative Referenda. But still, I'm voting NO on the ballot question, just to be safe.
I completely agree with Chris. We have had election after election in which we vote on initiatives that are worded badly, are too convoluted for many to understand (I believe Rachel Maddow made that point last night), and most importantly, should never have made their way on to the ballot.
.jpg)
