First, watch this.

Now, read this.

As the clock ticks toward Election Day, Democrat Chris Murphy criticized U.S. Rep. Nancy Johnson, R-5th Dist., for letting the clock run out on Medicare legislation she sponsored.

Murphy, a state senator from Cheshire challenging Johnson, held a press conference at Danbury Democratic Headquarters on Main Street. He questioned Johnson's intentions in not bringing the bill up for a vote before Congress adjourned for the campaign season.

The bill would have eliminated penalties against seniors who missed an enrollment deadline for the new Medicare prescription drug plan. Though Johnson is the chairwoman of a health subcommittee, she never pushed for a vote, Murphy said.

"This was either an intentional bait and switch or shows an inability to lead her committee," said Murphy.

[...]

The House Ways and Means committee and the Health Subcommittee met a total of 12 times, Murphy said, and neither took action on the bill.

"Did Nancy Johnson really think no one would notice that after the press-conference lights were turned off, she buried her own bill?" Murphy said. "As one of the highest ranking members of the Ways and Means Committee, she could have forced a hearing on the bill at any time."

[...]

Seniors are turning against Johnson because of what they considered a flawed drug plan, said state Rep. Robert Godfrey, D-Danbury, who spoke in favor of Murphy.

"She used to be an independent voice when she went to Washington," Godfrey said. "She changed and became an insider. No longer is she from Connecticut traveling to Washington. She's from Washington traveling to Connecticut."

Think about it seniors. Remember, Nancy Johnson is one of the highest ranking members on the Way and Means Committee YET she never brought up the Medicare bil SHE sponsored which would have eliminated penalties against seniors who missed the Medicare prescription drug plan enrollment deadline.

This isn't rocket science folks.

Democratic senate candidate Ned Lamont will be in the Danbury area tomorrow. Come out and meet the man who wants to send President Bush's best friend packing.

Fresh off the unveiling of a new ad where Senator Dodd joined Lamont to fight for change in Connecticut, Lamont charged into the weekend bringing that message directly to voters across the state.

"The Democratic Primary shattered turnout records across the state because as Senator Dodd described, Connecticut is ready for change," said Lamont Campaign Communications Director Liz Dupont-Diehl. "Lamont is campaigning non-stop across the state this weekend talking to voters who are thirsting for change at home and abroad."

2:00pm-2:45pm - Lamont will meet and greet voters in Ridgefield.
Ridgefield Library, 472 Main St., Ridgefield. (Google map)

3:00pm-4:00pm - Lamont will meet and greet voters at WCSU's homecoming and street fair.
181 White St., between the O'Neill Center and the athletics center. (Google map)

UPDATE: Doh! The homecoming fair was at Westside campus and not midtown. Sorry for the mixup, all this baby stuff I'm going through is knocking me off focus and I should have caught the goof up from the press release.

Here are excerpts from Diane Farrell remarks which will be broadcasted tomorrow following Presdident Bush's weekly radio address.

"Our troops deserve from their leaders in Washington, nothing short of a commitment equal to the dedication the troops bring to their duty every day. Instead they get a flat denial of the horrible reality. That is why we need a new direction in Iraq .

"Democrats will change the course in Iraq and we will focus our efforts on defeating the terrorists with policies that are both tough and strategic.

"Democrats will do what Congress has failed to do - hold the president accountable. We will ask the tough questions and demand solutions that do right by our troops."

"When families here in Connecticut ask me about the billion dollars we spend every week in Iraq , I can’t help but share their dismay. In fact, when my cousin was deployed to Iraq , I wrote him a check so he could buy better body armor. Families are doing everything they can to protect their loved ones because our government isn't."

Changing direction in Iraq starts with changing the people we send to Washington ."

You can hear Farrell deliever the address tomorrow on major radio networks, including ABC, AP, AURN, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, NPR, American Forces Radio, Voice of America , BBC, CBC, and Australian Broadcasting Corporation

(This is exactly why incumbents should be challenged every election cycle. A cross-post from ConnecticutBLOG)


Oh man, is this guy for real?

State House Speaker James Amann, D-Milford, was at the Milford Metro-North train station Thursday to help stump for gubernatorial candidate John DeStefano Jr.

But the real fireworks began after a group of liberal bloggers and activists confronted the speaker about his continued support for U.S. Senate candidate Joseph I. Lieberman, who is running as an independent after being defeated in the Democratic primary by Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont.

Then a suggestion was made that Amann could always be replaced.

"You have any idiot in this town run against me in this town, I will crush them," Amann told the group, which included Branford Democratic Town Committee member Keith Crane, after the TV cameras and DeStefano left.

"Let them run in the town that I grew up in. You think you’re going to put someone up to me? Good luck," he said.

What's next, Keith will wake up with a horse head in his bed? I mean really, this is the tone one would expect from the Speaker of the House?

Oh, it's better when you watch Amann do his thing for the cameras.

You know, James sounds a lot like Joe did before the primary...right down to the arrogance.

F'n unreal. You can learn more about the tough guy by clicking here.

Because of the arrogance of Nancy Johnson, the people of the 5th district are will only have two chances to see Chris Murphy debate Johnson before the election.

But all is not lost if you in the Danbury area.

From Chris Murphy's press release

Chris Murphy, the Democratic candidate for Congress in the Fifth District, and Republican incumbent Nancy Johnson are scheduled to p art icipate in two debates on Monday, October 23. Due to Johnson's refusal to part icipate in additional debates, Monday will likely be the last opportunity for 5th District voters to evaluate the candidates side by side.

The first debate, sponsored by the Waterbury Chamber of Commerce, will occur at 1 pm at the Connecticut Grand Hotel in Waterbury . If you plan to attend, the Waterbury Chamber of Commerce requests that you notify Philippa by calling (203) 757-0701.

The second debate, hosted by the Brookfield League of Women Voters, will be held at the Portuguese Cultural Center in Danbury at 7:30pm.

Date: Monday, October 23, 2006
Time: 1 - 2 pm (lunch noon-1)
Place: Connecticut Grand Hotel, 3580 East Main Street, Waterbury , CT (Google map)

Date: Monday, October 23, 2006
Time:7:30 - 8:30 pm
Place: Portuguese Cultural Center, 65 Sandpit Road, Danbury CT (Google map)

It's really a shame Johnson agreed to only three debates. The fifth district is large and not everyone will have a chance to see these two next to each other (especially when you consider one fo the two debates is at 1 PM on a Monday and the other is at 7PM on the same night as the last senate debate).

At least we'll be able to see the two candidates next Monday so make sure you attend. You can always tivo/tape the senate debate and check it out when you get home).

Got word yesterday that Joe Lieberman would be in Danbury for a couple of stops. His day started with a visit toThe Goodrich Factory at 9 AM. He then paid a visit to the Danbury News-Times for a little shit-chat chit-chat.

...and guess who was trailing him throughout Danbury...

I hear Joe was pretty annoyed with The Kiss float following him all over the place. Did he think he could just come into my neck of the woods unnoticed?

Avoiding people and fake photo-ops, and mingling among Republicans...that's Joe's complete gameplan. Let the Kiss float be a reminder to everyone why Lieberman is in the political fight of his life.

You can't stop the bloggers.

Go to ConnecticutBLOG to hear the full audio recording of last night's senate debate. Also, make sure you go to CTBob and read Kirby's play-by-play transcript of each question and answer from the candidates.

People-powered media strikes again! Take that CBS!

Genghis nails it.

Rell is still stumbling and hesitating every now and again, although she's a lot sharper than she was in New London.

Obviously Rell knew she bombed last week so she had no choice put to give a better performance. DeStefano had to put it all on the line as this was his last debate.

Channel 30 is just awful. Joann Nesti was the only person I could tolerate...and what was the deal with the television break?

I'll have video highlights for everyone later.

Oh, this is not good news for Republicans.

Later today, SurveyUSA will release polls in four congressional districts which found "significant movement away from the Republican incumbent and towards the Democratic challenger, with the Republican's lead decreasing by between 9 and 13 points. Furthermore, all four districts show a shift in the party distribution of likely voters, with the Republican-Democrat difference changing towards Democrats by between 4 and 11 points."

Two possible explanations for this shift are:

1. Republicans are becoming less likely to vote, and Democrats are becoming more likely to vote;
2. Some "weak Republicans" are now identifying themselves as Independent, while some left-leaning Independents are now identifying themselves as Democrats.

While it's not yet possible to determine which of the two explanations is correct, SurveyUSA concludes that national trends are very much driving these local races.

Take a look at the four races they're talking about.

CT-04: Diane Farrell (D) vs. Chris Shays (R-Incumbent)

Head to Head: Farrell 44%, Shays 41%. Only 24% of voters in Connecticut's 4th district think that the country is going on the right track, while 65% say we're headed down the wrong track and only 21% give President Bush a positive rating for the job he is doing, 77% disapprove. [Bennett, Petts, Blumenthal, 400 voters; October 10-12; margin of error 4.9%]

CT-05: Chris Murphy (D) vs. Nancy Johnson (R-Incumbent)

Head to Head: Murphy 45%, Johnson 40%. When asked to assess the job that Nancy Johnson is doing, only 39% approve. Only 32% of voters in Connecticut's 5th district think that the country is going on the right track, while 58% say we're headed down the wrong track and only 27% give President Bush a positive rating for the job he is doing, 70% disapprove. [Grove Insight, 400 voters; October 12; margin of error 5%]

NY-20: Kirsten Gillibrand (D) vs. John Sweeney (R-Incumbent)

Head to Head: Gillibrand 41%, Sweeney 42%. When asked to assess the job tht John Sweeney is doing, only 35% approve. Only 27% of voters in New York's 20th district think that the country is going on the right track, while 60% say we're headed down the wrong track and only 25% give President Bush a positive rating for the job he is doing. [Grove Insight, 400 voters; October 13; margin of error 4.9%]

PA-08: Patrick Murphy (D) vs. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-Incumbent)

Head to Head: Murphy 44%, Fitzpatrick 40%. When asked to assess the job tht Mike Fitzpatrick is doing, only 37% approve. Only 27% of voters in Pennsylvania's 8th district think that the country is going on the right track, while 66% say we're headed down the wrong track and only 27% give President Bush a positive rating for the job he is doing, 71% disapprove. [Grove Insight, 400 voters; October 15; margin of error 4.9%]

Seems like Nancy Johnson has some explaining to do.

[Chris] Murphy, a state senator from Cheshire challenging Johnson, held a press conference at Danbury Democratic Headquarters on Main Street. He questioned Johnson's intentions in not bringing the bill up for a vote before Congress adjourned for the campaign season.

The bill would have eliminated penalties against seniors who missed an enrollment deadline for the new Medicare prescription drug plan. Though Johnson is the chairwoman of a health subcommittee, she never pushed for a vote, Murphy said.

"This was either an intentional bait and switch or shows an inability to lead her committee," said Murphy.

[...]

The House Ways and Means committee and the Health Subcommittee met a total of 12 times, Murphy said, and neither took action on the bill.

"Did Nancy Johnson really think no one would notice that after the press-conference lights were turned off, she buried her own bill?" Murphy said. "As one of the highest ranking members of the Ways and Means Committee, she could have forced a hearing on the bill at any time."

[...]

Seniors are turning against Johnson because of what they considered a flawed drug plan, said state Rep. Robert Godfrey, D-Danbury, who spoke in favor of Murphy.

"She used to be an independent voice when she went to Washington," Godfrey said. "She changed and became an insider. No longer is she from Connecticut traveling to Washington. She's from Washington traveling to Connecticut."

Nancy Johnson: part of the problem in Washington.

Oh my! I can't wait for the debate tomorrow.

Here's a snapshot of comments regarding yesterday's debate (comments via the Danbury News-Times)

Stephen - 17/10/2006 10:48

"I'm a recent veteran. I'm against the war, how about you? I'm against Lieberman... "

I got out in 2001 (US Army Infantry) and I am with you 100% on that one ARNG.

I have no party affiliation, but I will not support any candidate that supports the biggest political and military mistake the US has ever made.

The mistake called Iraq.

Joe "Republican" has got to go!

Kevin Stayton - 17/10/2006 10:47

Did you know that just a few weeks ago Lieberman voted to undermine our Constitution? The Constitution State deserves a Senator that will stand up for the Constitution. Lamont gets our votes in November.

VoiceOfConnecticut - 17/10/2006 10:38

I was leaning a bit towards Lamont before the first debate, just to get rid of Lieberman, BUT Schlesinger has shown that he deserves careful consideration from any conservative.

It is obvious that the federal government needs a complete change of direction, and Lieberman is just another Bush shill. All incumbents that support the failed Bush agenda must go if this country is ever going to regain its position as a RESPECTED world leader.

M Holden - 17/10/2006 09:52

Ned won in spite of having the worst performance because Alan looked credible, and will take votes away from Joe.

Expect Alan to get a bump in the next poll, putting Ned in front, and then things will change back when people realize supporting Alan really will give Ned the race.

M Holden - 17/10/2006 09:52

Ned won in spite of having the worst performance because Alan looked credible, and will take votes away from Joe.

Expect Alan to get a bump in the next poll, putting Ned in front, and then things will change back when people realize supporting Alan really will give Ned the race.

J Warner - 17/10/2006 09:46

Maybe Lamont will start running a few ads about his qualification instead of being a lier about Lieberman. I guess all you Lamont supporters think Ned is a hell of a guy spending 12 million of his own cash on this race. Alan Schlesinger won this debate plan and simple but it doesn't mean I will vote for him.

Jeanne - 17/10/2006 08:37

The debate featured two politicians and a businessman. Ned spoke concisely and coherently. The two politicians spoke on and on, one whining (Joe) and one insisting that there was no difference( between the two liberals to his left Alan.) Hey Alan, if there had been NO difference, we Democrats would not have chosen an untried candidate over an 18-year veteran, We need a new Senator that represents us in Washington. All my money's on Ned Lamont.

anonymous - 17/10/2006 00:39

Ned Lamont handled himself very well, sticking to the issues. Joe monopolized his whole time by talking about being attacked while attacking the whole time he was talking about being attacked – pretty pathetic! But the best line of the whole debate came from Scheslinger, "Joe, your time has run out, no pun intended."

john powalski - 17/10/2006 00:20

Lieberman told many lies, and even repeated the falsehood about Lamont laying off employees. Lieberman was petulant and whiney, where Lamont was dignified and senatorial. Lieberman is out of time, energy, and ideas. It truly is time for change in Connecticut.

ARNG - 16/10/2006 23:30

I'm a recent veteran. I'm against the war, how about you? I'm against Lieberman...

This is pretty much consistant with the viewpoints of those in attendance. Lieberman whinned about being attacked...before he was attacked. Lamont didn't hit a homerun but didn't bomb either. Scheslinger proved that he shoud be given a serious consideration by conservatives.

Now off to the next debate...which reminds me, go check out my post on ConnecticutBLOG as WFSB is banning all local media from the next debate.

Go over to TPM Cafe and read Stirling Newberry's great piece on the man who's going to hand Nancy Johnson her pink slip.

Oh all the newspapers who covered the debate, The New Haven Register seemed to nail the opinion of most who attended the debate (my goodness, did I just say that). With the headline " Schlesinger steals the show" the Register gives credit where credit was due (my GOD, did I just say that about Schlesinger...what's wrong with me).

Alan Schlesinger, the forgotten U.S. senatorial candidate, came roaring into public view in a televised debate Monday as he put the two leading contenders on notice: "Look out Ned and Joe, here I come, baby."

The GOP candidate, who has consistently scored in the single digits in every political poll since the spring, came off as the most aggressive and colorful, as he advised the crowd of business people to vote for him and not his two rival "liberal Democrats."

The Register touch on two moments in the debate that I highlighted in a earlier post. I thought these were the two key moments where Schlesinger really hit Lieberman hard and caught him off guard.

Schlesinger blasted the Clinton administration for a lack of verification in its dealings with North Korea, and he held Lieberman accountable. "Joe, you had more moral outrage about Mr. Clinton's indiscretion than about North Korea's proliferation," he said, referring to the Monica Lewinski affair.

A considerable amount of time was spent on Social Security, with Schlesinger accusing both rivals of "standing for Social Security and Medicare bankruptcy," while he characterized the Senate as "the ostrich club," because they (the members) stick their head in the sand and they hope something good will come of it."

He called future funding for the entitlement programs "the greatest iceberg that this nation is facing. Right now, our ship is headed for it and these two are arguing over who gets the best deck chair to watch the crash."

He said Lieberman "drank the Kool-Aid," when he agreed with 2000 Democratic presidential contender Al Gore to put Social Security in a "lock box" to protect the program.

"You want to put an IOU from Joe Lieberman in a lockbox. I'd rather have cash. When I retire, I want a check," Schlesinger said. To solve the problem, he said he would take the money that is earmarked for Social Security and put it into mortgages for Americans.

Schlesinger made some very valid points and showed why he's the true Republcian in the debate attacking Lieberman over North Korea and most notably, Social Security. I think when he mocked Lieberman for "drinking the kool-aid" in 2000 with the "lock box" concept, Schlesinger help himself by painting Lieberman as a liberal and which might catch the attention of fiscal conservatives who believe the Democratic party is the party of taxing and spending.

Here's a replay of those two moments (FYI: Schlesinger comment regarding North Korea is now in the top 25 viewed video clips on You Tube).

Schlesinger attacks Lieberman over North Korea.


Schlesinger attacks Lieberman over Social Security.


As readers of this site know, I was really hard on Schlesinger for a good amount of the campaign but after watching him debate Lieberman and Lamont, I think less known of the three candidates came across pretty well. Schlesinger stuck to his conservative views on such topics as illegal immigration, fiscal responsibility, and security as well as did something the other two candidates did not do, try and offer a possible solution to a looming problem, Social Secuirty.

Hell, don't take it from me, look at what another newspaper said about Schlesinger.

The Stamford Advocate:

U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman went into yesterday's first debate anticipating attacks from his primary opponent, Democrat Ned Lamont.

He was stunned, however, when some of the harshest criticism came from Alan Schlesinger -- the Republican candidate who has been overshadowed in the race and trailing far behind in polls.

"I thought the attacks were only going to come from this side," Lieberman said at one point, referring to Lamont.

From a second article in the Advocate

Observers who watched the debate live or on television said the Republican, who has been hemorrhaging party loyalists to incumbent Joseph Lieberman's petition candidacy, made the most of the opportunity.

"You can't really say he hit a home run," University of Connecticut pollster Chris Barnes said last night. "But the fact he's there, he's on stage, it elevates his credibility."

In the end, Schlesinger had nothing to lose in coming out swinging as hard as possible. His presentation was informatinve as well as entertaining and it was a welcomed relief from all the attacks and mud slinging we've grown accustomed to over the last ten months.

Now I know what you're saying...oh, you're just trying to prop Schlesinger up and to that I say, all you need to do is look at my video footage in the previous post and it will speak for itself.

For a more detailed analysis on the media's take on the debate, check out bluestater's report at MLN. I was able to ask Schlesinger a coiple of questions after the debate and I'll bring you that footage later today.

UPDATE: Read The Hartford Courant Rick Green's take on the debate as it seems like we walked away from the event with the same impression.

Hey, did you miss the debate? Don't worry, thanks to People-Powered Media (PPM), you no longer have to rely on the networks to see the big showdown in Stamford.

After hours of uploading video files, I'm pleased to present to you, the complete senate debate unfiltered as it actually happened. Unlike the network broadcast, you'll really get to hear the responses from the audience and get a better understand why Alan Schlesinger won the debate.

As a bonus treat, I had a chance to interview the man of the hour, Alan Schlesinger and I'll bring you that video later (I'm tired).

Check out the photograph at the top of this post. Wanna know why Ned Lamont and Alan Schlesinger are looking at Joe Lieberman like he's nuts? Well, watch the video and you'll understand.

Enjoy.
Act one: mud slinging


Act two: that little North Korea problem


Act three: an apology and a debate over social security


Act four: those illegal immigrants


Act five: taking the gloves off


Final act: the real Republican

Who won the debate
	Ned Lamont
	Alan Schlesinger
	Joe Lieberman
	no one
Free polls from Pollhost.com

Earth to Joe Lieberman: I think you have a problem and his name is Alan Schlesinger.

All I can say is WOW!

It think Joe Lieberman just lost a big piece of his Republican support base as the true Republican Alan Schlesinger ripped the de facto Republican to shreds at today's debate. Knowing that he didn't have anything to lose, the Republican nominate candidate came out of the gate swinging and really whacked Lieberman upside the head on a variety of issues ranging from North Korea to Social Security. Lieberman looked like a target bear with a bullseye on his ass bouncing back and forth and Lamont and Schlesinger took turns taking shots at him and keeping the junior senator on the defensive for most of the debate.

Sticking to his theme of "change," Lamont portrayed Lieberman as part of the problem in Washington and offered himself as a voice of a new direction in Washington. Although Lamont didn't hit a homerun against Lieberman, he won't need to worry about losing any supporters after his performance. On the other hand, Lieberman's presentation was rather uninspiring as he used the term "bi-partisan politics" in every answer he gave.

Lieberman didn't outline any proposals or give any real indication in terms of what he would do if re-elected senator opting instead to use a majority of his time going after Lamont. In the end, this proved not to be a wise move as it gave Schlesinger the opportunity he needed to attack Lieberman and really catch him off-guard. On topic after topic, Schlesinger hit Lieberman upside the head and captured the audience attention...and he had a good time doing it.

At one point while Schlesinger was tearing Lieberman to pieces, I turned around  to get a feel of the crowd and a majority of the people were very impressed with Schlesinger while Lieberman's camp (including mouthpiece Dan Gerstein) gave a look of utter disbelief. I couldn't resist taking a snapshot of DANGERstein and the female Lieberman supporter...it just another priceless moment that I had to share with everyone.

Now, I'm going to keep this report short since I'm still processing the video from today's debate. I was able to get a one on one interview with Schlesinger and I asked him about the de facto Republican running in the race and lets just say, he had a few words to say about that.


Here are some highlights of Schlesinger in action from today's debate. I'll post more clips as well as the entire debate later tonight.

Schlesinger attacks Lieberman over North Korea.


Schlesinger attacks Lieberman over Social Security.

Nancy Johnson still has me I'm a state of shock.

If you didn't attend yesterday's debate between Nancy Johnson and Chris Murphy, you missed one of the strangest performances ever given by an incumbent.

As you know, I kind of lead on the progressive side as I truly believe that you can't trust anything a Republican tells you nowadays and yesterday, Nancy Johnson proved my point.

Although I videotaped the event (with the help of the great Spazeboy), one really needed to be part of the audience and experience the reactions from the crowd as Nancy Johnson made one outrageous statement after another. The responses from the crowd ranged from moans and groans to a woman standing up, saying "I can't take anymore of her bullshit," and walking out of the auditorium. The look on disbelief on everyone's faces including some Nancy Johnson volunteers was unreal.

Like a kid getting every present he wanted on Christmas Day, Murphy not only outperformed Johnson, he easily debunked every one of her claims, and clearly won over the crowd with his detailed outlined proposals which he would bring to Washington if elected Congressman. On the other hand, Johnson stumbled several times and seemed like she was unprepared for the debate as she gave several long-winded answers to pretty simple questions which left the audience at times confused if not puzzled.

Think I'm kidding when I said Johnson completely bombed?

Think I'm kidding when I say watching Johnson's performance was like watching a trianwreck?

Well you can watch the highlights from the debate and judge for yourself.

Watch as listen to Johnson as she delivers the White House talking points on such topics as No Child Left Behind (it's fully funded), the situation in Iraq (we're fighting the terrorists there so we don't have to fight them here), and the FISA law (I'll let her explain it).

I also have responses from several people who attended the  debate including views from U.S. Congresswoman (and New Britain native) Anna Eshoo (D-14 Cal), Former Congressman Toby Moffett, State Rep Tim O'Brien, and several members of the audience.

Hell, Spazeboy and yours truly even caught up with Murphy and got his views on the event as well.

First, here a brief clip of the pre-debate highlights.


Now, the main dish.


BONUS: Post-debate comments


UPDATE: Good LORD! The News-Times couldn't send a reporter to cover the debate? Can someone please tell me what the point of Fred Lucas story and why is it on the FRONT PAGE OF THE NEWSTIMES! I mean really, why is his story on the front page while the AP story on the debate is buried in the paper? Hell, you can't even find the story on the debate on their online edition because it's so limited.

When it comes to covering politics, the News-Times is going an god-awful job and for a paper that services a good portion of the 5th district, they should be ashamed of themselves. I can go to the debate, videotape it, take photographs, and come back with a report and I'M NOT GETTING PAID.