Midterm Roundup
“Whither Foleygate?” ?!? Part 2
Will Foleygate have any effect on the midterm elections? The Midterm Roundup is tired of arguing. YOU make the call!
National Journal’s John Mercurio takes a look at the top 10 House races – all in Republican-held districts – most affected by Foleygate, in order of how drastically they’ve been transformed by the scandal (e.g. #1 FL-16, #2 NY-26, so forth).
While a list of this sort would seem to presuppose the notion that yes, Foleygate is clearly having an effect on the midterm elections, Mercurio begins his column with a curious first graf: “New polls confirm that the Mark Foley scandal, in its current form, won't fuel the coast-to-coast wave Democrats need to take back the House. Still, the scandal could easily end up making Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., the next speaker.”
So… wait, what? Foleygate won’t put Democrats in control? Or it won’t fuel the takeover? But then… “the GOP-inspired fiasco is shaping up a much-needed seat-by-seat opportunity that could put Democrats over the top this fall. While pre-Foley predictions put Democrats two or three seats short of the 15 they need to claim a House majority, the scandal has upended nine or 10 individual races over the past two weeks.” What’s the definition of “fuel” again? Fuel not the same as “shape up”? Or maybe Mercurio was just pointing out the fact that recent polls seem to defy the common sense… at least if you look at the right polls.
Here are some more races, not in Mercurio’s top 10, that might be affected, even if only indirectly, by Foleygate:
In Ohio, South Caroline, and West Virginia:
AP reports, “House Republicans are scaling back television advertising reserved for four Democratic-held seats in Ohio, South Carolina and West Virginia, officials said Wednesday, fresh evidence of the party's struggles as it tries to retain its majority.”
The 4 races the GOP is quitting on are Ohio open seats OH-06 and OH-13, where state Senator Charlie Wilson (D) is running to replace gubernatorial nominee Ted Strickland, and former state Representative Betty Sutton (D) is running to replace Senate nominee Sherrod Brown (D), respectively; along with SC-05, where 12-term Representative John Spratt (D) was thought to be facing his toughest challenge in years from state Representative Ralph Norman (R); and WV-01, where 12-term Representative Alan Mollohan (D) – damaged by ethical misconduct allegations earlier this year – is fending off a stiff challenge from state Delegate Chris Wakin (R).
So nearly $1 million is being taken out of those races and will instead be directed to… Florida’s 16th district. Yes, the one previously held by a one Mark Foley, and the one whose ballot will still bear Foley’s name. The AP has more on the GOP’s dogged unwillingness to give up on FL-16. Anyone else reminded vaguely of The Money Pit? “The stairs are out!”
As Josh writes, “These late in the campaign redirections of money happen every cycle. And both parties will be shifting money from less to more promising opportunities. But this is another sign that Republicans can see it's all defense this cycle.”
Meanwhile disarray continues on the Senate side of the GOP’s campaign spending. Earlier this week the AP reported that the RNC was making the highly unusual move of bypassing the NRSC and allotting money as they themselves saw fit. Now CQ reports that the NRSC’s spending tactics are again coming into question, this time from one of their own candidates. Mike McGavick (R), challenging Senator Maria Cantwell (D) in Washington state, has lodged a complaint against the NRSC for running an ad against Cantwell that McGavick says, “goes too far in its implications toward the senator’s private life.” Geez Mike, how ‘bout a little appreciation? These are precious funds the NRSC is spending on your ungrateful be-half/hind.
In Texas:
The Houston Chronicle reports that while experts disagree on just how much of an impact Foleygate will have, all tend to agree that if nothing else the scandal will suppress Republican turnout: “‘It's not a matter of just one or two races. Every race. Because what it really does is suppress turnout,’ said GOP consultant Royal Masset. ‘I really figure that Foley is probably at this point taking about 3 percent out of our vote. ... If people are just mad at Republicans, they're not going to vote.’” N.B. that was a Republican talking.
Pollster Mike Baselice, who works for Republican Governor Rick Perry's campaign, doubted Foley would have an effect on candidates who clearly have no direct connection to the scandal, but even he admitted, “It can be as much as anything a suppression issue, not a motivating issue.”
Long-shot GOP bids like those of Shelley Sekula-Gibbs' (R) write-in effort against Nick Lampson (D) in Tom DeLay’s old 22nd district and Van Taylor's (R) underdog campaign against Representative Chet Edwards (D) in TX-17 will be most affected by the scandal. Upsets like these can occur only with better-than-expected Republican turnout, something to which Foleygate is not exactly conducive. This Houston Chronicle article also mentions that a potential campaign visit for Sekula-Gibbs from House Speaker Dennis Hastert has been scratched. “We had been talking to his office about potentially visiting,” Dimond said. “We basically agreed it would be a distraction.” Guess this doesn’t count for Hastert’s list of cancelled fundraisers since it hadn’t been officially scheduled yet.
Speaking of cancelled fundraisers…
WaPo reports, “Weeks before the Nov. 7 elections, the Mark Foley scandal and its aftermath have already had a visible effect on Republican prospects: Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (R-N.Y.), the two men leading the GOP efforts to keep power in the House, have both been largely sidelined from the public campaign.” No raising money, no rallying partisans.
Much like love, fundraiser-canceling in the wake of Foleygate is a 2-way street. The Plank’s Eve Fairbanks notes that John McCain has reportedly canceled 2 events to stump for Tom Reynolds in New York.
WaPo also reports that Foleygate has given many Democratic challengers an impetus to use the personal lives of their GOP opponents as leverage for attacks. Some strategist point out that this tactic could overreach and backfire, but the Post reports, “Democratic operatives said they are aware of this possibility but are calculating that, as long as the attacks are at the local level, they will not backfire.”
And a new Gallup poll, which Josh already took a look at, finds that religious whites are shifting away from the GOP. Why? “One plausible explanation for the broad drop in Republican support in the most recent poll is the Mark Foley scandal in Congress. Since this situation involved issues of morality on the part of Foley, and allegations of a cover-up on the part of Republican leadership, it appears plausible that religious whites may have become disproportionately disillusioned with the Republicans and as a result lost more of their fervor for voting Republican than others in the population.”
For a dizzyingly comprehensive rundown on all the ways the GOP has been scrambling to neutralize the Foley scandal, Media Matters has A special Media Matters for America report: debunking the Foley myth machine.
And lastly, even if all of the above doesn’t do a single thing for you, the Roundup defies you to vehemently disagree with this most measured and somber of arguments, from Josh Marshall, with the help of reader CH: “In itself, Foleygate isn't going to drive many people's votes. And even fewer will admit that it has in polls. But I think Foley has provided a collective gut-check moment for the country, when perhaps a critical portion of the country has said, Enough. it's not about Foley. It's really about everything that has come before. But it's allowed people to step back, take in the whole picture and say: No, I'm done.
And then there's the Roundup's argument: "Baahh! Foleygate has to have an effect! Come on you guys! It's Foleygate! Bahhh!!!"
CQ Republican Slide Update
New changes since Wednesday morning’s update:
WA-08: from Leans Republican to No Clear Favorite
Significant changes made in 2 big Indiana battleground districts:
IN-08: in the tight race between the perennially targeted 6-term Representative John Hostettler (R) and challenger Brad Ellsworth (D), CQ shifts its rating from No Clear Favorite to Leans Democratic.
IN-02: The Count is endangered! CQ makes the shift from Leans Republican to No Clear Favorite. Big potential losers: Representative Chris Chocola (R). Big potential winners: Franken Berry, Boo Berry, Josh Marshall. (Could a Chocola defeat be the final cataclysmic event needed to trigger the General Mills Parousia – the Second Coming of Fruit Brute and Yummy Mummy?)
Changes also made in 2 New York state districts:
NY-20: Home to TPMmuckraker favorite Representative John Sweeney (R), CQ shifts the race from Leans Republican to No Clear Favorite.
NY-29: In the race between Representative John “Randy” Kuhl Jr. (R) and challenging retired Naval officer Eric Massa (D), CQ changes its rating from Republican Favored to Leans Republican.
It’s the GOP Cha Cha Slide! “Right foot two stomps! Left foot two stomps! Sliiide to the left. Sliiide to the right. Criss cross! Criss cross! Cha cha real smooth. Lets go to work!”
But stop right there, Mr. C – there may be hope for Republicans yet: CQ changes its OR-05 rating from Safe Democratic to Democrat Favored. “Get funky wit it! Turn it out!”
For an overall snapshot of CQ’s rating changes since Foleygate erupted, along with Cook Political Report’s changes, check out Election Central’s rundown.
CT-SEN: Lamont Smacks Forehead Repeatedly, Berates Self as “Stupid! Stupid! Stupid!”
It’s been a surprisingly long time since the Midterm Roundup took a look at the Senate race in Connecticut, which for a while there – before Foley, before Macaca, so long, long, long ago – was the very cornerstone of this column. Since Lamont’s whirlwind rise and huge upset in the August 8 Democratic primary, it feels to the Roundup like a sort of “mm, that was fun, wasn’t it, oh well…” indifference has gradually settled back onto the race. Once-giddy Lamont supporters haven’t found their man ahead in a single post-primary poll. And Lamont’s name has been noticeably absent from recent weeks’ headlines.
Until now. Unfortunately for Lamont though, not for the right reason.
Not helping Lamont’s cause the slightest bit was a recent campaign letter criticizing Joe Lieberman’s past stance on affirmative action and a comment made Wednesday by former state Treasurer and Lamont endorser Henry E. Parker. At a press conference, with Lamont at his side, Parker questioned Senator Joe Lieberman’s civil rights work in Mississippi in the early 1960s. “I’m saying that my view is there's no evidence of what he's done. Let him prove that he's been there,” Parker said. “I suspect that he was not there, and the reason I suspect that is because he's a guy who says anything to win.”
The Hartford Courant reports, “Lamont's campaign, which immediately seemed to grasp the political misstep, disavowed Parker's claim even before Lieberman produced news clippings placing him in Mississippi. …
“But the damage was done. The episode gave Lieberman an opportunity to reinforce a constant theme of his campaign - that Lamont has relentlessly distorted Lieberman's record in the contest for the U.S. Senate.”
The NY Times’s Empire Zone blog reports that while Lamont himself did not utter the questionable statement, “his campaign passed out fliers with copies of the letter, which Mr. Parker read aloud as the candidate stood nearby.”
Lieberman did respond in a hastily called press conference: “Now, that's really outrageous and, of course, it is a lie,” Lieberman said. “Don't put this on Hank Parker. This is an open letter to me at a press conference for Ned Lamont. … Ned Lamont was right there. He can't disown this.”
At a hectic time like this, the Midterm Roundup feels obliged to call out for help – Kevin Rennie! Speak! “When Ned Lamont infused another $2 million of his vast fortune into his campaign on Tuesday evening, he probably didn’t have it allocated to damage control. He’ll have no choice if he is to continue to be seen as a contender in the race for the U.S. Senate in Connecticut.”
Rennie is biting in his assessment of the situation: “Lamont seemed clueless that a vicious slander was taking place in his presence in the name of advancing his campaign. Now we know that the face of an imploding campaign is both impassive and clueless.” It might be enlightening to point out that Rennie, while currently a Hartford Courant columnist, was previously a Republican state senator. He’s also quite a wordsmith. In previewing the upcoming Monday debate between Lamont and Lieberman, Rennie writes, “A shrug accompanied by pointing at the aged and addlepated Parker won’t suffice to change the subject.” Addlepated huh? Well Mr. Rennie, the Midterm Roundup thinks you are bedizened.
But Rennie may have a point, after all. The Plank’s Jason Zengerle seconds the notion that Lamont may be fading, citing both a Chuck Todd and New York Times piece in doing so. Aside from this latest gaffe, the emerging perception seems to be that after winning the primary, Lamont just didn’t go for the jugular. Reminds one of that oft-eschewed cliché, “experience counts.”
NJ-SEN: You’re Corrupt! – No I’m Not!
The AP reports on the latest dust up in the oh so pleasant Senate race in New Jersey: “Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez told The Associated Press Wednesday that he has not been subpoenaed in any federal investigation, a claim Republican opponent Tom Kean Jr. continued to maintain.”
“The U.S. attorney's office has issued a subpoena seeking records from the North Hudson Community Action Corp. related to a lease agreement it had with Menendez, who rented a house he owned in Union City to the group, and also helped the nonprofit organization obtain federal funds. Menendez has said he obtained verbal clearance from the House Ethics Committee before entering into the lease agreement.”
On Thursday Menendez received a big endorsement and campaign boost from Senator Barack Obama (D-IL). And a day earlier, on Wednesday, Menendez won endorsements from the Black Ministers Council and a group of nurses and other health-care unions.
While Menendez has been struggling in polls of late thanks no doubt to Kean’s tireless corruption bludgeoning, the latest Quinnipiac poll has Menendez up 49%-45%.
NH-02: You1.65billionTube Hasn’t Forgotten the Little People
It’s so good to see that $1.65 billion hasn’t given YouTube a big head. The unwashed-masses-empowering video sharing site is just as committed as ever to subverting political campaigns. This time the victim is Representative Charlie Bass (R), who was nabbed on video comparing Representative Bernie Sanders (I-VT) to socialist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez at a recent campaign event.
In the video, Bass says of Sanders, who’s now running for Senate: “It’s going to be nice not to have Hugo Chavez across the Connecticut River representing Vermont at-large. Bernie Sanders and his Sander-nistas should go back to taxi-driving in the Bronx of New York City, where they came from to begin with.” Just for the record, Sanders is a self-described socialist, but the Roundup isn’t sure how Chavez fits into the whole taxi-driving thing.
Macaca it ain’t, but Bass’s opponent, attorney and 2004 nominee Paul Hodes (D), says the remarks went too far. Sanders himself spoke up as well: “This is pretty infantile stuff. … It looks like Charlie and the Republicans are getting nervous about the election.”
Thursday Night Debate Recaps!
PA-SEN: Rick Santorum and Bob Casey in… Steel Town Throwdown
AP: Pa. Senate Candidates Clash Over Issues
Okay, not a terrible headline. Can we kick it up a notch?
Philadelphia Inquirer: Santorum and Casey get riled in debate
Whoa… let’s loosen our collars a little…
Patriot News: The gloves come off
Bam! That’s what the Roundup is talking about!
Philadelphia Daily News: Casey, Santorum trash debate rules, each other
Oh no he di’int!
And of course, if ever you find yourself lost in life, just no direction whatsoever, a wandering vagabond drifting in a quagmire of uncertainty – there is always Kathryn Jean Lopez to guide you…
“I'll stop soon...but before I do...Casey really exudes I'm-not-going-to-say-anything-of-substance-but-damn-am-I-proud-of-myself. In contrast, Santorum's ‘I'm a fighter...but I'm an Italian kid from a Steele town, what do you expect’ makes him likable and it's honest.”
MT-SEN: Burns vs. Tester, Round… the 4th
AP: Senate Candidates Debate in Montana: “Democratic Senate candidate Jon Tester said the U.S. needs stronger diplomatic efforts to deal with North Korea and Iran, while incumbent Conrad Burns argued in Thursday's debate that Cold War methods of deterrence work best.”
Tying the AP for the Midterm Roundup’s award for Least Scintillating Headline about a Debate, it’s the Billings Gazette with, Senate candidates disagree on most issues: “In keeping with the prickly tone that has typified much of Montana's heated race for the U.S. Senate, Democrat Jon Tester and incumbent Republican Sen. Conrad Burns pointedly disagreed on almost everything in a debate here Thursday.”
None other than Sixers’ Kathryn Jean Lopez provides us perhaps the most telling reaction to the debate: “Instead of just watching Grey's Anatomy like the rest of TV-watching America, I made the mistake of turning on the Montana Senate debate on C-SPAN ... just in time to catch Conrad Burns defending earmarks. I resent the bad Republican candidates (Burns) for tainting the good ones (Santorum).” Sorry, but when someone tells you that you give Rick Santorum a bad name, it might be time to take a timeout and rethink your life a little. BTW K-Lo, ya should be watching House, but the Roundup still loves you.
WA-SEN: Maria Cantwell and Mike McGavick in… Let’s Be Honest and Polite Tour ‘06
Seattle Times: Cantwell, McGavick debate Cuban policy, gas, border security: “In their first public appearance together and later at a newspaper editorial-board meeting, Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell and Republican challenger Mike McGavick on Thursday offered contrasting views about border security, gays in the military, trade with Cuba and how best to handle North Korea. … The tone of the discussions was frosty but civil, with Cantwell and McGavick playing to different strengths.”
Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Senate race square-off in Spokane: “Sen. Maria Cantwell and Republican opponent Mike McGavick disagreed about what the United States should do in Iraq and how to address the North Korean nuclear threat at two face-to-face forums here Thursday. … Neither candidate landed any crippling blows during the two polite face-offs.”
And in case you missed it on Wednesday, the California 4th district debate between Representative John Doolittle (R) and challenger Charlie Brown (D) had two of the most boffo socko performances the Roundup has witnessed in a long time, a mighty long time.
Doolittle set a devastating tone early, revealing himself to be a 97-year-old man with a vicious trifecta of antiquation, using the words “hooligans,” “flim-flam man,” and “hobnobs” in machine gun succession.
But Charlie Brown would have the last word and in the end simultaneously win both the Rhetorical World Heavyweight belt and the Roundup’s award for Most Cripplingly Awkward Comeback in a Political Debate, House or Senate. When Doolittle criticized Brown for his support of the ACLU, which Doolittle suggested protects the interests of the North American Man/Boy Love Association, Brown returned fire: “Mr. Doolittle knows more about man's love than I do with his support of Congressman Foley.” Reportedly Brown only got through the first half of his retort. Upon uttering the words “than I do,” Brown choked up, his eyes welling with tears, and he broke down crying, garbling the remainder of his rejoinder.
Count me among the people who regard it as the "house banking scandal" of this election - the scandal that shows people that this Congressional leadership doesn't play by "the rules" that the rest of us do.
Stirling Newberry http://www.bopnews.com
October 13, 2006 8:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just posted a photo of Republican thugs interfering with a federal election at the Miami-Dade Canvassing Board on 11/19/00 at my very own GOP website and captioned it "Republicans Save the Day!". Now I have to wait to see if the GOP photo screener will permit it.
If you want to see all of the photos I have tried to post including an old one of Mark Foley w/interns that I found on his official site in the Wayback Machine, check this link to my "Manage Photos" page on my very own GOP website.
October 13, 2006 8:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
I subscribe to the notion that the Foley scandal is the straw that broke the camel's back. Not much by itself, but when added to all the rest enough to give everybody reason to change.
I notice the new McCaskill v. Talent poll out showing McCsakill suddenly up 9 points. It seems to show independents swinging behind McCaskill. That is telling.
Ron Byers
October 13, 2006 8:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
AUTHOR: mrs panstreppon
EMAIL:
IP:
URL:
DATE: 10/13/2006 09:29:01 AM
October 13, 2006 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Update: The Republican thugs photo posted!
The GOP really does think that pounding on windows, kicking in doors and physically intimidating election workers is the way to win.
I've asked this question before and I'll ask it again. What is the difference between the way that Republicans goon squad conducted itself and the way Nazi goons condutcted themselves in the early '30s?
I don't see any difference. Those Republicans threatened the Miami-Dade election workers with physical violence and they should have been arrested for interfering with a federal election. Instead, they were rewarded by the Bush administraton and, in some instances, elected to Congress.
When I watched that ugly spectacle on television, I was shocked and horrified and knew something terribly was wrong happening in this country.
When James A. Baker III spoke about the Florida re-count, my impression was that Baker was telling me that George W. Bush was the next president of the United States, no matter what anyone else said or did.
Baker frightened me with his intensity. I knew then that something really, really important was at stake so I stayed on high alert from then on.
A couple of months after Bush was inaugurated, I worked at a bankrupt telecom here on Long Island and put together what I thought was one of the biggest financial swindles in world history. I even wrote to James Comey, US Attorney for the Southern district of NY , about it.
Then 9/11 happened.
(I am putting together some news stories about that sordid chapter in American history for a post here in the TPM Cafe. I found one WSJ story and one Salon story so far. If anyone has list of all of the names of the participants, can you pass it on, please? I know John Bolton and John Sweeney (R-NY) were in on it.)
October 13, 2006 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
That seems a brief version of Josh's thesis.
Let me give you a somewhat different perspective.
NY-24, where I live, is routinely counted among the easy pickups after the retirement of maverick Republican, Sherwood Boehlert. My feeling has been all along that the Democratic stiff was probably going to lose to the Republican routineer.
I don't think so any longer and I suspect Foleygate played a hefty part.
A Willie Horton-style TV spot is running saying the Democratic DA let the rapist of a 3-year-old go free because of a paperwork snafu that let the mandatory time to try the case elapse. The anouncer darkly intones: "We don't let rapists go free, [Mr. DA]."
Without Foleygate, such trash might have some resonanace. In this climate it is almost surely counterproductive. The Democrat's poll numbers are soaring.
From the best I can gather, lurid Republican spots are boosting the Democrat in many races for much the same reason.
Bring it on, guys.
Best, Terry
October 13, 2006 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
They call it the "Brooks Brothers Riot." A google search will lead you to many of the participants - most of whom have risen to wuthering heights by way of crony government job appointments - none of which they were qualified for.
October 13, 2006 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Merci beacoup. I can never remember the name "Brooks Brothers riot" probably because I think of them as Nazi-like thugs and Nazi-like thugs don't usually wear suits.
I posted the WSJ and Salon stories which are definitely worth reading, imo, if you haven't already. If you have read them, re-read for historical perpsective.
I am compiling a list of all those present so, in my spare time, I can dig dirt on them and generall y try to make their lives miserable. Those thugs should hav been arrested for interfering with a federal election.
I already caught Rep. John E. Sweeney (R-NY) taking contributions from Democratic bigwigs to earmark federal funds to promote their bogus educational software program. Sweeny is not only a thug but a whore who doesn't care where his money comes from.
October 13, 2006 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
This $1,000,000 Foley FL-16 move by the GOP must be a fake-out. They can't really be that stupid, can they? I mean, there's just not a snowball's chance they can retain that seat.
Oh, well. I hope they do throw away their money down there rather than on races that are actually competitive.
October 13, 2006 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
The fact that you were able to establish a webpage at gop.com is hil-ar-i-ous!
October 13, 2006 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Much of the MSM seem to be working with Republicans to shape the perception of Foleygate as limited to one man. Biased reporting and polling can have a powerful effect on public opinion, so they may be able to limit its overall effect somewhat. ABC's online poll and the ABC/WaPost polls shaped the outcome by limiting options, attaching bogus explanations to choices, and asking something like "given that Hastert saw only the few innocuous emails, should he have done more?" (sorry don't have time to get links and exact wording - I posted the online poll wording elsewhere on TPM; the ABC/WaPost poll is almost as bad). This was AFTER Hastert had already admitted that the matter had been brought up to him earlier as something that might require damage control if the public became aware of it.
ABC also had an online poll "What should happen to Hastert?" but they never allowed viewers to pull up the results and removed the poll link from the site entirely after 2 days.
As happened with Plamegate, established facts are being ignored in interviews and summary reports. Republicans leaders are refusing to comment on their own contradictory stories by saying we should wait for the investigation to clear up conflicting statements. The strategy seems to be to deflect, distort, and dilute the scandal until after the election, meanwhile pouring tons of money into at-risk races in hopes that they'll still be running the show (and to some extent writing the history) after the election.
On a TPM thread devoted to the Reynolds' campaign, OCPatriot posted a great sound bite:
This is a slogan with real substance behind it that goes to the heart of all the problems with the Bush administration. It's relevant to almost any discussion, whether Iraq, the deficit, global warming, Katrina, health and safety, all the environmental and energy issues. The vast explosion of lobbyists in the past 5 years - now 63 per legislator - the revolving door between Congress and K Street, and the endless miasma of corruption that ties this administration's leadership with special interests. It's telling that Foley was leaving Congress to become a lobbyist.
October 13, 2006 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with Ron Byers, Foleygate is probably just the final straw. It's part of the constant drip-drip-drip of scandal that has been plaguing Republicans who deceived themselves into thinking they were the teflon party. But Foleygate is more.
Foleygate has shifted the focus from the White House to Congress. The Democrats and the MSM have been obsessed with Iraq and other important but complicated national issues. Protecting teens working in the US Capitol is not a complicated issue, but the bumbling House Republican leadership couldn't even handle that simple task.
October 13, 2006 8:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
The original muckraker on the "Florida 2000" election story is Greg Palast, an American who did a documentary on it for BBCs News Night:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/cta/progs/newsnight/palast.ram
http://www.gregpalast.com/
October 13, 2006 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
C92, Apparently, everyone can have their very own GOP website and the GOP is a lot more liberal than I ever imagined. I just uploaded a photo of a naked Governor Schwarzenegger captioned "Hung Up On Governor Schwarzenegger" which shows Arnold's dick hanging out like a flagpole. I don't know if it will make the front page of "My Photos" but right now, it is in my Manage/Photos page.
October 14, 2006 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think this seat is important in terms of the Presidential race in 08. Florida has too many electoral votes for the GOP to give up on any chance of remaining the dominant power. This to me is about the ability to engage in election fraud in FL.
October 14, 2006 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
ob, The BBC link doesn't work and I could not find the video in the BBC archives.
What was really annoying is that the New York Daily News published an article criticizing the judge in the ACLU vs DoD. I don't have time to track down his name at the moment but I first read about the judge in connection with a search for mob-related articles. The Daily news claimed that the judge was lax about letting a mobster take a trip.
Then I read about the ACLU's case and put two and two together. Seems to me as if the NY Daily News was threatening the judge in some way. Release the photos and your career is ruined is the message.
I'm thinking that maybe the ACLU lawyers were threatened in a more heavy-handed manner and that's why we haven't seen the Abu G. photos. It's been more than a year since those photos were due to be released. Anything could be happening in the current political climate.
Here are some links to the ACLU web pages on torture that worked as of right now:
6/2/05 ACLU press release about court ruling on Abu G. material
ACLU documents regarding prisoner abuse which includes statements from members of the military
October 14, 2006 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry the link didn't work for you, I noticed there is a space in the url that shouldn't be there. Here is the link to the Newsnight archive with the story - it's short. It opens in Real Player (the only player option).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/events/newsnight/1174115.stm
Have you gotten any comment from the ACLU on the AG photos?
October 14, 2006 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Way to go, Ben!! You're take-down of Ned Lamont made the Joe Lieberman site!! very disappointing.
http://joe2006.com/blog_details.asp?id=132
You do know, don't you, that Ned Lamont is the Democratic party nominee. I'm sure it doesn't matter a bit to you, though. You show your bias toward Lieberman in this paragraph:
It’s been a surprisingly long time since the Midterm Roundup took a look at the Senate race in Connecticut, which for a while there – before Foley, before Macaca, so long, long, long ago – was the very cornerstone of this column. Since Lamont’s whirlwind rise and huge upset in the August 8 Democratic primary, it feels to the Roundup like a sort of “mm, that was fun, wasn’t it, oh well…” indifference has gradually settled back onto the race. Once-giddy Lamont supporters haven’t found their man ahead in a single post-primary poll. And Lamont’s name has been noticeably absent from recent weeks’ headlines.
Just curious - are you aware that Joe is lying about Ned in his recent ad? Hmmmm...funny that you haven't done any investigative reporting on that!!!
Shame on TPM!!!!!
October 14, 2006 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Observer, Thanks for the link. I never wrote to the ACLU about the Abu G. photos. As a matter of fact, I don't even know how I switched topics here from the Miami recount to AbuG.
I looked back at my history and still couldn't figure out how I got on to the ALCU. Something I read along the way must have triggered the Abu G. stuff. I never wrote about the NY Daily News and the judge in the ACLU vs DoD case before here or anywhere else.
You'll have to excuse me. I'm off my meds and my concentration is shot.
Now I feel obligated to track down the name of the judge and the Daily News story to prove to myself that my memory isn't gone, too. I'll let you know if I find anything interesting.
October 14, 2006 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
c529t
December 11, 2007 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
c353t
December 12, 2007 5:43 AM | Reply | Permalink