Today, Monday, June 1, 2009, Connecticut Democrats will be treated to a guest appearance from Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana at the 61st Annual JJB dinner. He's the first elected Democratic governor of Montana in 16 years and last year he won reelection and became a sensation at the DNC Convention .
I first heard about the good governor of Montana in 2004 from my favorite progressive journalist, nationally syndicated columnist, blogger, and cable TV guest commentator, David Sirota. David's article in The Washington Monthly titled "Top Billings" was written in the wake of John Kerry's Presidential loss to give Democrats hope and ideas on how to defeat Republican and Right Wing strategies. Sirota, who served as senior strategist on Schweitzer's successful 2004 gubernatorial campaign, used Schweitzer's campaign as a model that Democratic candidates should study.
While Connecticut is labeled a "blue" state by the national media because it has voted Democratic in the last handful of Presidential elections and because its state legislature is controlled by Democrats, it has a Republican governor and one with an extraordinarily high popularity. Just like in 2006, Gov. Rell will not face a primary opponent, so her public image will not be marred by a brutal battle and she will have plenty of time to plan for the general election. The Democratic gubernatorial candidates, on the otherhand, will face-off in a tough primary battle in 2010.
So what should CT's Democratic Gubernatorial candidates learn from Gov. Schweitzer of Montana?
Many of you know that I've been a fan of Gov. Schweitzer (D-MT) since I first heard about him in 2004 from my favorite progressive journalist, nationally syndicated columnist, blogger, and cable TV guest commentator, David Sirota. David's article in The Washington Monthly titled "Top Billings" was written in the wake of John Kerry's Presidential loss to give Democrats hope and ideas on how to win against Republican and Right Wing strategies. Sirota, who served as senior strategist on Schweitzer's successful 2004 gubernatorial campaign, used Schweitzer's campaign as a model that Democratic candidates should study.
On January 21, 2006, I had a letter to the editor published in The New London Day titled Democrats, Fight Back Like Montana Governor where I promoted Schweitzer as a model for the 2006 Connecticut Democratic gubernatorial candidates. Over 3 years later, looks like the message got through.
In their first major decision since the election the Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid tell everyone to go eat a shit sandwich.
Senator Harry Reid just spoke to reporters after the private caucus meeting with Dems over Joe Lieberman's fate, and he confirmed it: Lieberman will not be stripped of his Homeland Security chairmanship, because the "vast majority" of the Democratic caucus wants him to stay.
"This was not a time for retribution," Reid said, adding that "we're moving forward."
Lieberman was removed from the Environment and Public Works Committee, a largely meaningless punishment since it's a topic (unlike Homeland Security) on which he has no differences with Dems.
Asked about liberal "anger" towards Lieberman, Reid said: "I pretty well understand anger. I would defy anyone to be more angry than I was."
But he added: "If you will look at the problems that we face as a nation, is this a time we walk out of here saying boy did we get even?"
"I feel good about what we did today," Reid said. "We're moving forward."
(Update 1): Greg Sargent pretty much sums things up perfectly at the end of his write-up:
So, Senate Dems will be allowing Lieberman to keep his plum spot despite the fact that he has been deeply awful in that role, and despite the fact that he endorsed efforts by the GOP to imply that Obama is in league with terrorists, suggested that Obama endangered our troops, and said Obama hasn't always put the country first.
Worse, Reid is echoing an argument he knows is false: That this is only about retribution. Reid and his fellow Senators have made the political decision to leave Lieberman in a job that he was a disaster at, rather than make the good governmental decision to remove him for the good of the country.
Reid and his fellow Senators have made the political decision to leave Lieberman in a job that he was a disaster at, rather than make the good governmental decision to remove him for the good of the country.
Here is an op-ed at the UCONN official newspaper, the Daily Campus, that talks of the Lamont/Kucinich event there back in April. FYI, to no ones surprise the author gets his facts wrong about the questioner mentioned in the commentary, and he tells liberals to "shut up"! http://www.dailycamp...
Of course there is a systematic suppression of political free speech at UCONN, including possibly fraudulent "noise complaints" against an October 2006 Ned Lamont/Wesley Clark rally from the UCONN School of Business. That "noise complaint" blocked the right of the UCONN Dems, rightfully according to the UCONN Student Union rules, to have music at later rallies with Ned Lamont and state Senate President Donald Williams. Of course, the UCONN School of Business has a clear bias:
The UCONN School of Business gets funding from the state budget, and maybe Donald Williams should know about their attacks and bias against his and the UCONN Dems' free speech!
You can send a note about these and other UCONN matters to the UCONN president Michael J. Hogan at:
president@uconn.edu
and Donald Williams at:
Williams@senatedems.ct.gov
the local Democratic state rep:
Denise.Merrill@cga.ct.gov
and the attorney general at:
attorney.general@po.state.ct.us
On Monday I attended an Edwards event at Exeter Town Hall in NH. It was NH Retail at its very best.
The Edwards stump has taken a major step forward since I saw him two weeks ago, the content has changed and the tone has shifted to that of an urgency in his current speech. The distinctions are now razor sharp between John Edwards and the rest of the field, "you have choices in this election and you need to be aware of them." The reality of where we are as a country today and the vision for where we all want to be as a people are now painted in excruciating and moving detail on one issue after another: universal health care; corruption; disenfranchisement of the citizenry; economic fairness; our two unequal school systems; global warming and conservation the list goes on ...
And it's only about 23 minutes so you can imagine, man. Follow me below the fold for the full video and the antidote.
A quick follow-up on yesterday's post about the primary in New Britain's 5th Ward. Democratic endorsed candidates Roy Centano and Lori Rocha won, leaving incumbent Democrat John Carroll off the November ballot.
Carroll campaigned with postcards and fliers, but he didn't have an army of door-to-door campaigning volunteers.
The town committee did.
"The Democratic Town Committee did me in," Carroll said after learning of the results. "I lost. No hard feelings. No remorse."
If anything, the primary resolved the question of just how powerful the Democratic Party machine really is, although Democratic Town chairman John McNamara was quick to say Tuesday that "it is not a machine; it is a group of dedicated individuals who work like a machine."
Last Sunday evening at the end of a long, hot, winding road through the state the Edwards family wrapped up their bus tour of NH. They were greeted by well over a thousand people at a Town Hall event on the banks of the river at lovely Prescott Park in downtown Portsmouth NH.
His remarks were sharp, clear and passionately delivered to an enthusiastic crowd.
He threw down the gauntlet on universal health care in the field and challenged the entire Democratic party on financing campaigns through lobbyist money. He presented the voters in attendance not only with his vision for change in this country, but he gave us a very clear picture of the kind of America that he wants us to create together. The grassroots are not only central to the campaign in this vision, but they need to be central going forward from January 20, 2009.
The full Q and A is now posted also: click here to see all of that tape.
On Saturday, I went to vlog an Edwards Town Hall in Dover, NH. It was a day marked by torrential thunderstorms yet about 300 NHer-ites turned out to see the candidate speak and take hard questions from Granite State voters. They, my neighbors to the north, know they're king makers and they take their job seriously. Thank God that at least "some people" still have respect for the process.
Overflow crowds and running behind schedule were the order of the day. Edwards only had time to take a few questions at the end of his remarks. They are presented here in Part Two. If you're going to an event in NH, for a Democrat, then you'd better plan to get there early. All the passion and attention seems to be on our side this time. Thank God that at least "some people" know what the GOP is doing to our country these days.
Part One of this vlog covers the remarks and makes the case that the Edwards message is a populist message that we, as a party, can be proud of and one that is long overdue. I don't think that any other candidate in this race deserves the mantle of progressive populist the way the Edwards does. That's why I support his candidacy for President.
I went to vlog an Edwards Town Hall in Dover, NH on Saturday. It was a day marked by torrential thunderstorms yet about 300 NHer-ites turned out to see the candidate speak and take hard questions from Granite State voters. They, my neighbors to the north, know they're king makers and they take their job seriously. Thank God that at least "some people" still have respect for the process. The media is certainly not capable of any meaningful discussion of the issues in this campaign and they will not be reformed in time for the primaries. Nary a patriot in the DC press corps.
Before the event started I heard some of the Edwards advance people talking about the overflow crowds they had seen at the stops all day long. He had done a bunch of house parties that were packed with 200 to 300 people. The Epping event left about 100 people standing out on the lawn under threatening skies. In this clip posted by the campaign at YouTube he's talking to an overflow crowd - in a garage in Nashua.
If you're going to an event in NH, for a Democrat, then you'd better plan to get there early. All the passion and attention seems to be on our side this time. Thank God that at least "some people" know what the GOP is doing to our country these days.
The General Assembly's Black and Latino Caucus staged a news conference last week to promote its lengthy legislative wish list and had the top Democratic state House leaders on hand to lend their support.
But the event turned awkward for both the minority lawmakers and the two leaders, House Speaker James A. Amann, D-Milford, and House Majority Leader Chris Donovan, D-Meriden.
There was, for example, the uncertain fate of a bill sponsored by state Rep. Felipe Reinoso, D-Bridgeport.
The controversial measure would allow children of illegal immigrants to qualify for lower, in-state tuition rates at state colleges and universities if they graduate from a Connecticut high school.
Last month, the bill died in the legislature's Higher Education Committee. Republicans were threatening to talk the bill to death as the panel approached its deadline for action. They argued the plan would create additional competition at state colleges for the children of legal residents and push up state costs.
Worried that a lengthy debate would block action on other bills, the committee chairmen waited until the last minute to bring the bill up and it never made it to a vote.
"This bill didn't die," said Reinoso last week. "We will continue to fight for it."
Reinoso made an impassioned argument that children shouldn't be penalized for the illegal status of their parents. Reinoso said many of these kids have the drive and brains to graduate high school and get into a university. "But the American dream ends there because they can't afford to go to college," he said.
Amann and Donovan voiced their personal support for the bill. Given their high-ranking leadership positions, you would assume that meant Reinoso would certainly be able to attach his proposal to some other piece of legislation and at least bring it up for a vote in the House.
But neither leader was ready to promise anything.
"There is a (committee) process," intoned Amann. "The bottom line is the bill died."
Amann decided to skip over the fact that it was a minority of Republicans who are being blamed for preventing a committee vote - something that also spared a number of Democratic lawmakers the angst of having to make a decision on such a potentially controversial issue.
The article doesn't make it clear whether the children of illegal immigrants are US citizens or not. If they are US citizens, they would be entitled to the same rights as other US citizens whose parents are legal. I don't think it's appropriate to punish children for the crimes of their parents.
Over the next few weeks, the congressional
Democratic majorities must decide how scared they still are of George W.
Bush and his right-wing attack machine. Or put differently, can a weakened
President still intimidate Democrats by questioning their patriotism or
doubting their support for the troops?
Bush has
thrown down the gauntlet with his demand for another $105 billion in war
funding without “strings” attached. He also has warned that he would
veto any measure that seeks to limit his discretion over how to fight the
war in Iraq.
With that question firmly in mind, we wondered whether Democrats would hold
firm on their pledge to include an ammendment to the Iraq war funding measure
which would require Bush to seek permission from congress before
launching any attack on Iran. It didn't take Bush and his radical right
minions long to start slinging mud
and issuing threats at the Democrats:
The White House has issued a veto threat against the measure, and Vice
President Dick Cheney attacked its supporters in a speech, declaring they
“are telling the enemy simply to watch the clock and wait us out.”
Top House Democrats retreated Monday from an attempt to limit President
Bush's authority for taking military action against Iran as the leadership
concentrated on a looming confrontation with the White House over the Iraq
war.
After Edwards and Richardson decided to skip, and after Roger Ailes joked about Obama being a terrorist, Politico reports that the NV Dems are doing the right thing and cancelling the debate. Right on. I am very happy our party will no longer validate Fox Noise Channel. Now, Lieberman will probably continue to be a friend of the show" on Hannity for some time, but this is nonetheless a very good step.
WASHINGTON -- Two leading Senate Democrats sought to build support Sunday for a bipartisan resolution opposing President Bush's war strategy in Iraq, cautioning that division over whether it goes far enough could spell defeat.
"The worst thing we can do is to vote on something critical of the current policy and lose it," said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee. "The public doesn't support his policy, a majority of Congress doesn't support his policy."
"If we lose it, the president will use the defeat of a resolution as support of his public policy," Levin said.
The new Democratic-led Congress heads this week toward its first vote on the war, with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee beginning debate Wednesday on a resolution condemning Bush's proposal to send 21,500 more troops to Baghdad and Anbar province. A vote could come as early as that same day.
The proposed nonbinding resolution, which is largely symbolic and would have no affect on money for troops, states that "it is not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq, particularly by escalating the United States military force presence in Iraq."
So it appears that some of our Congressional Democrats, in grand dramatic fashion, are struggling to gain support of some toothless nonbinding resolution opposing the escalation of the bloodbath in Iraq.
WHY ARE DEMOCRATS WASTING OUR TIME AND TAXPAYER MONEY ON THIS CHARADE? Do they take us for fools?
Jodi Rowland-Rell has her knickers in a knot over signs that Connecticut Democrats might actually discover their balls.
Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell said Monday she strongly opposes new Democratic proposals that would undercut a governor's authority over state bonding and end the gubernatorial power to fill a U.S. Senate vacancy.
Rell said she believes the controversial legislation amounts to "a test of wills" between herself and the General Assembly's controlling Democratic majority.
. . .
"They must think that Chris Dodd's going to win," Rell said.
Does all this talk from the White House and GOP talking heads of what a brave and courageous move it was when President Ford pardoned Nixon all seem a bit odd?
Why are they selling this idea so hard? Do they feel they need to firm up the ground under the President now that the Democrats have control of the Congress? After all this "Ford spared the nation unneeded hardship" we heard in this past week I bet if you took a poll the American public an asked if they agree with the idea that prosecution of President Bush is bad for the Nation, even if he is guilty, they would agree.
Every time I hear the Right Wing all on the same page it makes you ask yourself if something is up. I'm just wondering. Your thoughts?
In less than four years, the war in Iraq has cost the lives of at least 3,000 American troops. With the military's announcement Sunday of the deaths of two soldiers in recent days, the tally blurred past like a highway milepost, a true statistic for only a moment in time. The war goes on, and deaths continue.
FULL DISCLOSURE: No Liebermans were harmed in the prosecution of this war.
George Jepsen, former CT state Democratic Party chair and the chairman of Ned Lamont's senate race, has published an op-ed in today's Hartford Courant that rightly credits Lamont with helping make the midterms elections about the war in Iraq and the need to start brining the troops home.
Lamont's message resonated broadly because he was the first national candidate to dare say what many people believed, that America was being driven over a cliff by an ideologue, a divorced-from-reality president, and a corrupt Congress. Those responsible for the mess should be held accountable. What made the campaign unique was that its target was a fellow Democrat, Lieberman.
Pundits initially dismissed Lamont's challenge. But, especially in the wake of Lamont's August primary upset, the national debate began to shift. Democrats increasingly framed their campaigns as a referendum on Bush and the war. Republicans, on the defensive, began to speak about the previously unspeakable - the need for an exit strategy. Even Joe Lieberman recast himself as a war critic. By mid-fall, Ned Lamont's once-lonely voice had become mainstream.
It's easy to miss the importance of the Lamont campaign if you look only at where we arrived on November 7th. Many Democrats around the country made withdrawal from Iraq a central piece in their campaigns. The leadership Lamont showed in speaking to this issue translated into national grassroots support for his campaign and a simultaneous demand from the American public to have Democratic candidates who would repudiate the Bush administration's failed policies in Iraq and work to bring the troops home. The Lamont campaign, particularly during the primary, but also during the general election, was a nationalized race that framed questions of accountability and responsible leadership.
Jepsen gets this and his op-ed is a concise enunciation of what the Lamont campaign achieved, even in defeat.
To make things work, Lamont activists can't sulk and walk away. Politics is a contact sport and losing, although painful, is part of it. They need to understand that with very tenuous majorities in Congress, Democrats are hardly in a position to call all the shots. Compromise will be necessary to govern responsibly and position the party for further growth. As long as Lieberman remains with the Democratic caucus, he should be given the opportunity to work for positive change.
Lieberman supporters, in turn, need to admit that Senate seats are not lifetime sinecures and there is nothing wrong with an issues-based challenge that spurs debate and re-energizes democracy. They also need to acknowledge that the energy that fueled the Lamont campaign was a positive expression of the need for a new direction in America - change supported by most Democrats and, indeed, most Americans.
Agreed -- I won't go anywhere and I'm pretty sure the Connecticut blogosphere isn't going anywhere either.
Bob Herbert's column in today's New York Times (hidden behind the Wall of Silence from all but the "Select"), nails it.
The Democrats are thinking too much and doing too little. This is a party in need of a moxie transplant. It's time for the patient to climb off the couch, walk outside and mix it up with the gang that has made a complete and utter mess of the country that was entrusted to it.
Today, Monday, June 1, 2009, Connecticut Democrats will be treated to a guest appearance from Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana at the 
I know some of you are not fond of 
On Monday I attended an Edwards event at Exeter Town Hall in NH. It was NH Retail at its very best.
Last Sunday evening at the end of a long, hot, winding road through the state the Edwards family wrapped up their bus tour of NH. They were greeted by well over a thousand people at a Town Hall event on the banks of the river at lovely Prescott Park in downtown Portsmouth NH.
On Saturday, I went to vlog an Edwards Town Hall in Dover, NH. It was a day marked by torrential thunderstorms yet about 300 NHer-ites turned out to see the candidate speak and take hard questions from Granite State voters. They, my neighbors to the north, know they're king makers and they take their job seriously. Thank God that at least "some people" still have respect for the process.
I went to vlog an Edwards Town Hall in Dover, NH on Saturday. It was a day marked by torrential thunderstorms yet about 300 NHer-ites turned out to see the candidate speak and take hard questions from Granite State voters. They, my neighbors to the north, know they're king makers and they take their job seriously. Thank God that at least "some people" still have respect for the process. The media is certainly not capable of any meaningful discussion of the issues in this campaign and they will not be reformed in time for the primaries. Nary a patriot in the DC press corps.
MLN is powered by