Joe Lieberman is still - amazingly, and despite all actual, you know, evidence - claiming his website was hacked. From an email his campaign just sent supporters today under the candidate's own name, announcing the re-launch of Joe2006.com this coming Tuesday, a full four weeks after his website went down:

We appreciate your patience as we substantially upgraded the site's security and functionality. And we are confident you will find the un-hacked version worth the wait.

Joe2006.com was "hacked." = "It is very much a sunrise."

And from the campaign who disdains all things blog-related comes... an official blog!

One of the first things you will notice is that we have added our own blog. That's a place you can find out the latest scoop on the campaign, in real time.

Atrios on why Sen. Lieberman has no credibility on national security:

The NYT reminds us of things a mere 10 months ago.

Missing from Mr. Bush’s latest speeches, at least so far, is detail about the progress of his previous plan, the “Strategy for Victory” of November, billed as the product of a review and rethinking of what had worked and what had failed.

About which Lieberman wrote:

Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do. And it is important to make it clear to the American people that the plan has not remained stubbornly still but has changed over the years. Mistakes, some of them big, were made after Saddam was removed, and no one who supports the war should hesitate to admit that; but we have learned from those mistakes and, in characteristic American fashion, from what has worked and not worked on the ground. The administration's recent use of the banner "clear, hold and build" accurately describes the strategy as I saw it being implemented last week.

Somebody, please ask Joe how his and Bush's "Strategy for Victory" as put forward in November 2005 is progressing almost a full year later.

Here's how the Pentagon says the "Strategy for Victory" is going (from the PDF of their Iraq progress report released yesterday):



Joe was wrong in 2002. He was wrong in 2003. He was wrong in 2004. He was wrong in 2005.

And he is wrong now.

"Vets for Freedom", the Republican front group headed by Dan Senor, will run ads for Lieberman (R) beginning next week, according to Jennifer Medina in the Times:

The ads will begin on Wednesday, with the group spending $75,000 to $100,000 for two days’ viewing, primarily on cable news stations, but also on network affiliates in Hartford. The group plans to continue the campaign through the election cycle and will probably do another commercial, advisers to the group said....

The group is receiving advice from Taylor Gross, a former White House official; Bill Kristol, the editor of The Weekly Standard; and the Republican strategist Dan Senor. Mr. Lieberman’s former chief of staff, Bill Andresen, is also helping the group, which by law is prohibited from communicating with the campaign.

In the next two months, Mr. Senor said, the ads will be shown on cable news outlets in Connecticut, but the group will also place them in other national media markets. There are no plans to promote any other candidate, but that could change in the next several weeks, Mr. Senor said.

There's little reason to be concerned about the impact of these particular ads. Regardless of what pro-Bush neocon PR firms try to peddle, most voters in Connecticut know that Sen. Lieberman's blind support for the Bush-Cheney policy in Iraq has hurt our troops, not helped them.

But what will Sen. Lieberman say about the fact that this pro-Bush group (with links to to the Swift Boaters) is paying for ads on his behalf? Bush was forced to comment on the Swift Boaters in 2004. Lieberman needs to be forced to comment on this group in 2006.

He needs to defend his links to failed neocon architects of the war, like Kristol, and failed ideologically-driven participants in the reconstruction, like Senor. And he needs to be forced do it before these ads start running.

Dave Johnson has the definitive post on the links between this group and the Swift Boat group that attacked Kerry in 2004:

Pay close attention to the modus operandi operating here: Just as with the Swift Boat Vets for Truth, what we have here is conservative, party-aligned political operative PR firms setting up well-funded front-groups to attack opponents. Using a front group provides the real backers a degree of separation, insulating them from criticism for the nature of the attacks and smears.

They're going to smear Ned, if not in this ad, in future ones. Get ready for Osama bin-Lamont on a TV screen near you.

Support our troops. Elect Ned Lamont (D).

If it's Friday afternoon, it must be the Pentagon releasing a detailed report admitting Iraq is a chaotic, bloody mess. (PDF of the report available here):

Iraqi casualties soared by more than 50 percent during the roughly three-month period ending in early August, the product of spiraling sectarian clashes and a Sunni-based insurgency that remains “potent and viable,” the Pentagon noted today in an comprehensive assessment of security in Iraq....

“Death squads and terrorists are locked in mutually reinforcing cycles of sectarian strife, with Sunni and Shia extremists each portraying themselves as the defenders of their respective sectarian groups,” the report noted. “The Sunni Arab insurgence remains potent and viable.”

What a different picture than that painted by Lieberman during the debate:

The situation in Iraq is a lot better, different than it was a year ago. The Iraqis held three elections. They formed a unity government. They are on the way to building a free and independent Iraq. Their military -- two-thirds of their military is now ready, on their own, to lead the fight with some logistical backing from the U.S. or stand up on their own totally. That's progress....

So I am confident that the situation is improving enough on the ground that by the end of this year, we will begin to draw down significant numbers of American troops....

Joe Lieberman is as credible on Iraq as George Bush.

New Britain's own Spazeboy has posted some video of the Lamont campaign's Labor Day weekend kickoff event this afternoon at the Stanley Works factory in his hometown.

This weekend will be a busy one, as the traditional campaign season gets underway with Ned attending a full slate of events with Sen. Dodd, Rep. DeLauro, and others (hopefully it doesn't get too rained out!):

• Sat. 9/2, 11am: Goshen Fair, Goshen Fairgrounds, Rt. 63, Goshen


• Sat. 9/2, 12:40pm: Farmington Antiques Weekend, 152 Town Farm Road, Farmington


• Sat. 9/2, 3pm: Woodstock Fair, Woodstock Fairgrounds, Rt. 169, Woodstock


• Sun. 9/3, 11:30am: Machinists Union Rally, Local 1746 Machinists' Hall, East Hartford


• Sun. 9/3, 1pm: Ned Lamont (D) and Sen. Dodd (D) at the Haddam Neck Fair, 26 Quarry Hill Road, Haddam Neck


• Sun. 9/3, 2pm: State Central Democratic Picnic, Sunrise Resort, 121 Leesville Road, Moodus


• Sun. 9/3, 5:30pm: Ned Lamont (D) and Rep. DeLauro (D) at St. Barbara Greek Festival, St. Barbara Greek Orthodox Church, 480 Racebrook Road, Orange


• Mon. 9/4, 9am: Ned Lamont (D) with DTC members and Democratic candidates and officials at the Newtown Labor Day Parade, 79 Main Street (Route 6), Newtown

"No, it's over. I did what the folks in the Connecticut Democratic Party who nominated me asked me to do. I will abide by the decision of the people of Connecticut."

- Sen. Lieberman on staying in the Senate race, Larry King Live, Oct. 31, 2000.

(Via UptownNYChick at FDL, hat tip CTBob.)

Update: This is funny. In the same transcript, Lieberman goes on make excuses for screwing over Democrats by simultaneously running for VP and the Senate and possibly allowing then-Gov. Rowland (R) to appoint a replacement if he and Gore had won the White House.

As part of his equivocation, he extols the democratic virtues of... primaries!

"At worst, there will be a special election two years from now, when everybody who wants to participate can. A lot of them who wanted to run for the Senate were running for other offices this year couldn't, and the voters can participate as they couldn't fully this year, because there was no time to have primaries."

Ah yes. Joe Lieberman, that infamous proponent of party primaries.

Nancy Johnson (R) is a disaster, and the 5th Congressional district deserves better. Today, the Lamont campaign is sending out a call to supporters to learn more about Chris Murphy's campaign and help him win in November.

The 5th CD came out big-time to support Ned in the primary, and Chris is an great guy with an excellent shot at winning the seat. Let's all get together to help him out and show the Connecticut for Lieberman Party what being a "devoted Democrat" really means:

http://www.nedlamont.com/helpchrismurphy

Update: Chris Cillizza of the WaPo on the state of the race today:

15. Connecticut's 5th District: Given her demonstrated fundraising ability ($2.6 million on hand at the end of June) and her longevity in Congress (24 years), Nancy Johnson (R) isn't an obvious target. But, Republican insiders say that MoveOn.org's "red handed" commercials that ran earlier this cycle did damage to Johnson's image. Plus, state Sen. Chris Murphy (D) is running an extremely active campaign with $1 million in the bank. The district is extremely competitive (Kerry won it by 1,100 votes in 2004) and if voters are looking for a fresh face Johnson could be in trouble. (Previous ranking: N/A

Help build the Democratic party while Joe Lieberman tries to tear it down.

This is horrible news. Thankfully no one was hurt.

Friends of O'Rourke's have set up this website.

Update: I know this is kind of off-topic, but as even Joe Lieberman would tell you, diners are a very important aspect of the Connecticut political scene.

The last time I was at O'Rourke's was the morning of August 9th, to celebrate the primary victory the night before. They still had a Lieberman sign in their window, but it didn't matter. I had a great andouille omelette. Brian was passing out cakes and breads as usual, including some fresh out-of-the-oven bread, steaming hunks of which he ripped off handed to me and the other dozen or so customers. It was someone's birthday. An employee came over and sang in deep soulful tones. Just a typical morning by the railroad tracks in the north end of Middletown.

O'Rourke's is a Connecticut institution - a community treasure the likes of which simply don't exist anymore. You need only read through a few of the memories already posted from devastated customers to realize this. Some are from last week. Others from decades ago. All are heartfelt.

The Rajun Cajun in Hartford - good friends of the Lamont campaign - have already offered to hire out-of-work waitstaff. People are already pulling together to help. It's inspiring. It's that same spirit that inspires this campaign.

(Minor party candidate edition.)

• Some minor party candidate is getting cranky about not being invited to march with the Democrats at Newtown's Labor Day parade:
  

  "I contacted Lieberman's people and told them it would be embarrassing for me and other Democratic town officials if he marched with us," [Newtown First Selectman Herb] Rosenthal said Thursday. "I and the Democratic Town Committee don't want to give the wrong idea that we are embracing his independent candidacy."...
  
  Dan Gerstein, Lieberman's communications director, said Thursday that Rosenthal is backpedaling now on what his real statement to Lieberman was regarding his presence at the parade. "Mr. Rosenthal told the senator that he was not invited, period," Gerstein said. "It was his intent to tell us that the senator was not welcome at the parade at all. He (Rosenthal) has since changed his story to say he was just dis-inviting the senator from marching with the Democrats."

  
  It's a little perplexing why a minor party candidate would want to pick a public fight with a Democratic public official like this. Democrats support other Democrats. And, anyway, this minor party candidate hasn't marched in this parade for years:
  

  Rosenthal believes Lieberman's desire to march in this year's parade is campaign oriented."He won't be marching because he's a Democratic U.S. Senator," Rosenthal said. "We have invited him every year for the past nine years I've been involved, and he only came one time. That was before 2000 sometime. Senator Dodd comes more often."

  
  Anyway, Ned Lamont (D) will be there.


• The same minor party candidate is clamoring to be included in debates:
  

  Sen. Joe Lieberman called on the four other candidates in the hotly contested U.S. Senate race Thursday to meet next week and agree to a debate schedule.
  
  Lieberman, who lost the Democratic primary to businessman Ned Lamont and is now running as an independent, sent letters to Lamont, Republican Alan Schlesinger, Green Party candidate Ralph Ferrucci and Concerned Citizens candidate Timothy Knibbs.

  
  Personally, I think Ned Lamont (D) and Alan Schlesinger (R) should be magnanimous and allow minor party candidates to participate. Although five may be a little crowded in the studio... maybe just the first four candidates on the ballot.


• Sen. Man-On-Dog (R-PA) calls the same minor party candidate's loss in the Democratic primary a "tragedy" (hat tip Joementum).

David Sirota nails it. Connecticut for Lieberman is a train wreck:

As I said before - something has gone horribly, horribly wrong over at Lieberman HQ. Some D.C. insiders and corporate lobbyists have tried to question whether a first-time candidate like Ned Lamont is ready to be a U.S. Senator - as if somehow business experience doesn't matter and the only thing that does matter is being an insulated career politician with experience hobnobbing in the Senate club. But I'd say it's the other way around - people should be asking themselves, when looking at this kind of behavior, whether Joe Lieberman is fit to be in elected office, because clearly this is a guy who has lost control of his faculties.

Even Shays beat Lieberman to the punch in running away from Iraq. And now Lieberman is left stranded on an island with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and maybe 25% of the American public at most, in basically defending the Iraq war as it is being presently conducted, and calling his critics Al Qaeda sympathizers.

And now he's freaking out. As is his press operation.

Another year, another "stay the course" PR offensive (front page of NYTimes.com):



Ned Lamont responds (from a press release):

"Once again, President Bush demonstrates a stubborn and unrealistic view of how to defeat terrorism and keep Americans safe," said Lamont. "All Americans want victory in Iraq - our security depends on it, and we owe our troops nothing less. Unfortunately, 'staying the course' won't bring us that victory."...

Sen. Lieberman this week began airing an ad trying to distract attention from the War, telling voters to focus on "the good stuff." The ad, listing "the good stuff," launched at the same time at least 11 American troops have been killed in the last 5 days in Iraq. In all, more than 2,600 American troops have been killed in Iraq, including 20 from Connecticut. George Bush and Joe Lieberman continue to be among the dwindling numbers of military and government leaders clinging to the stay the course strategy. Republicans and veteran support for Lamont's position continues to grow:

- Republican Congressman Chris Shays has now declared that we need a timetable.
- Decorated veteran Congressman Murtha has called for changing our course and has endorsed Lamont.
- Decorated veteran and former Republican Jim Webb has also called for change and endorsed Lamont.

Support our troops.

Send Ned Lamont (D) to the Senate.

• Issues, you say? While the Lieberman campaign rides kicking and screaming into the sunset, Ned was in Hartford talking with seniors about the upcoming disaster with Medicare Part D. Christine Stuart was there for the New Haven Independent:
  

  As of Sept. 22, Medicare Part D will not cover out-of-pocket prescription expenses between the annual amounts of $2,251 and $5,100, which means seniors could be paying upwards of $3,000 a year for their medications.
  
  Lamont said he would fight for a universal health care plan that allows the federal government to negotiate and obtain the best drug prices for Medicare Part D and all Americans, just as the Veterans’ Administration now is permitted to do. The U.S. could save billions of dollars in drug costs by helping to close the Medicare Part D donut hole, he said.



• It's all well and good that Dan Gerstein has now admitted that the sun sets in the west. But what of his - and Sean Smith's and Marion Steinfels' - repeated charges on primary day accusing Ned Lamont supporters of "crashing" Joe2006.com (a website that almost a month later is still not back up)? I'm thinking specifically of this one:
  

  "If Ned Lamont has a backbone in his body, he will call on these people to cease and desist," Lieberman Barking Head Sean Smith said. "Voters cannot go to our Web site. They cannot access information. It is a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise voters."
  
  Marion Steinfels, a Lieberman campaign spokeswoman said that the attack was a denial of service attack designed by the Lamont team to bring down joe2006.com.

  
  That was a flat out lie. And one for which Sen. Lieberman and his campaign has yet to apologize. When will Gerstein - and his boss - finally admit that they were dead wrong about that, too? "Disenfranchisement" is a very serious charge. While Sean Smith may no longer be in the employ of Sen. Lieberman, his campaign really needs to answer for this.


• Lieberman may not attend Democratic caucus events in D.C. next week, according to an internal campaign memo obtained by the AP:
  

  "We should discuss his schedule when he's in DC and whether it makes sense to go to Caucus events, etc. or not," wrote a senior Lieberman aide to several other top staffers.



• Wonder how Diane Farrell (D) feels about this. The Stamford Advocate reports that Joe is asking Westport Republicans for money (he already has Shays' endorsement):
  

  Some Republicans in Westport reported receiving phone calls to attend a fundraiser in town for Lieberman later this month.

  
  Speaking of Farrell, Ned and Jim Dean will be joining her in Greenwich tonight for a rally. Democrats united. What a concept.


• Great news: David Sirota will be joining the Lamont campaign as a strategist. I particularly agree with his take on the nexus between politics, activism, punditry, and writing:
  

  And on a personal note, I believe that we have too many writers/pundits who have not engaged directly in politics and who instead just sit back and simply comment on politics from the armchair. They seem to see the actual work of politics as some sort of disgusting behavior that they are too good to get their hands dirty engaging in. I think that is one of the reasons some of these pundits seem so disconnected from reality when they comment on politics - it’s because they actually ARE disconnected from being a part of what winning politics is all about. It’s easy to get things wrong if you’ve never actually worked in the trenches. That’s why, as a writer, I make no apologies for putting my work into actual action.

Now, this doesn't sound very "soothing":

"They're so blind in their hatred of Joe Lieberman that they have to make even the most trivial, silly things an issue."

Breathe, buddy, breathe ...

"I've already gotten three calls about this. It just shows how tone deaf people are. Why aren't they calling about Lamont's flip-flop on earmarks? Why isn't that an issue?"

OK, now he was making me tense.

"This is a camp that mocks Joseph Lieberman's wife and kids and we make one honest mistake that we own up to and they jump all over it. I can send you documents that show how much more negative they are than us, how they continue to resort to these kinds of tactics. ... It's not even a close call."

I thought we were all going to relax and get away from the negativity here. Remember the soothing sounds of the waves, the female announcer's dreamy voice: "Joe Lieberman thought you might enjoy a break from Ned Lamont's negative attacks," she cooed. "So, just sit back and think about - good stuff."

And the best news:

...Gerstein said they were going to continue to use the ad.

"Of course we will," he said. "Why in God's name wouldn't we, just because Ned Lamont's people reflectively attack us? That's just insane."

Um, actually, you might want to stop using the ad because it's a horrible ad. But don't listen to me.

I'm just going to sit back, relax, and and enjoy the sunset:

As Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld prepare to launch yet another PR offensive to try and gain support for their stay-the-course non-policy in Iraq - certainly to be backed by Joe Lieberman in their efforts - it's no surprise that Ned Lamont (D) continues to receive support from longtime allies of the uniformed military, such as Reagan-era Secretary of the Navy and current Virginia Senate candidate Jim Webb (D-VA) and Rep. Murtha (D-PA).

Webb today:

Webb, who is challenging Republican Sen. George Allen's bid for a second term, was emphatic in backing his new party's nominee over Lieberman.

"Joe Lieberman got too close to this administration," said Webb, who bolted the GOP in part because of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq and his handling of the war since then.

Murtha yesterday in New York:

In response to one question, Murtha also said he would campaign in Connecticut for Ned Lamont if invited.

It certainly is no surprise, given the pleas of our men and women in uniform expressed in letters like this one in today's Stars and Stripes (hat tip reader J):

Losing faith in government

It is unfortunate, but I believe I have lost almost complete faith in my government.

Did anyone listen when people said the war would be easy to win, it’s the peace that will be hard? Did anyone in my government read any history about the culture in Iraq? Why does my president refuse to take his blinders off and look at the Iraq problem from a different view?

I now believe my government has lost touch with what’s really going on, not only in Iraq but in the U.S. as well. All I ask is that my government officials get off their bottoms and actually do something! I’m so glad I’m protected from flag-burning homosexuals in the country, but what about the real important issues?

I’m frustrated and angry that the best country in the world is allowing itself to fall apart. Will somebody please do something!

Staff Sgt. David C. Mardon
Camp Ramadi, Iraq

Support our troops.

We owe them better than Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Joe Lieberman.

Update: Watch Keith Olbermann.

Ned Lamont (D) and Diane Farrell (D) will be in Greenwich tomorrow (Thursday) at 6pm, along with Jim Dean of DFA, for a rally to celebrate the official DFA endorsement of Diane for CT-04.

Perhaps an enterprising Farrell supporter will print up some buttons with this image (hat tip CTBob):



You can volunteer to help the Democrats fight back against Shays (R) and Lieberman (R) at Diane Farrell's website.

"I made an honest mistake. I thought the footage was of a sunrise, but when I went back to check, it was in fact of a sunset. It is clear that I am spending too much time in the editing room."

- Lieberman media consultant Josh Isay in a statement to Greg Sargent at TPM Cafe. (Still no word from Gerstein, who made the original "sunrise" claim).

Perhaps Isay made a similar mistake joining a campaign that, just like the sun over the California coast in his ad, appears to be sinking quickly into darkness.

And they're hiring a receptionist on Craigslist.

What a mess over in Joe-land.

(Bumped)

What other conclusion is there to draw from comments like these? (major hat tip Scarce):

FOX NEWS: "Do you think [Lieberman] is actually going to motivate Republicans to come out and vote against Democrats?"

MICHAEL O'BRIEN, SEIU: "Absolutely."

LIEBERMAN: (laughing) "Well, I guess I should say they should have thought of that during the primary. But here we are."

Watch the entire Fox News clip here, including Lieberman's warm embrace of Chris Shays (R).

It's clear now that hurting Democrats across the board is not merely an unintended side effect of Lieberman's continued candidacy, but that it's one of the goals of the Connecticut for Lieberman party.

Update: Chris Bowers weighs in on Angry Vengeful Joe:

No matter which reading is accurate, Lieberman's sheer disdain for democracy is overwhelming. As far as he is concerned, democracy is only useful as long as it allows you to remain in power, and now he is just a tough parent punishing bad children who actually had the gall to vote for someone else. This is pure, arrogant, aristocracy, through and through.

As does Steve Gilliard:

Memo to Rahm Emmanuel:

Take the hint, Lieberman is going to fuck your candidates over for spite. Petty bastard. Thought this would work out your way, huh? He doesn't give a shit about your House candidates. He just made that crystal clear, buddy....

Lieberman has to be one of the most selfish pols in modern history.

David Sirota asks the question, and hits on one aspect of the ad - and Joe's attitude - that hasn't gotten enough attention:

It strikes me that there is something very telling about Joe Lieberman’s new “don’t worry be happy” ad - something that shows exactly why Connecticut voters are so ready to throw him out of office. The ad asks voters to simply relax and think about all the “good stuff” that ol’ Joe thinks is going on in the world. Do you realize how so totally divorced from reality you have to be to look at the world today and think that by sheer repetition of 30-second ads, you can make everyone believe that “it’s morning in America?”

Joe may not realize it, but people aren't too happy about the way things are going in America right now. In fact, about 70% think the country is headed in the wrong direction:



The ad - even if done well - would have struck exactly the wrong note. And Lieberman's campaign is continually striking the same wrong note. Voters across the political spectrum want accountability, want a change of direction, want real leadership. They don't want more of the same.

He really needs to go back to metaphor class:

"The idea of the Lamont campaign posing as guardians of the truth has about as much receptivity as John Karr heading the FBI," [Gerstein] said, referring to the man who offered the now-discredited confession to killing JonBenet Ramsey.

Dan should really just sit back, relax, and enjoy the sunrise.

Dan Gerstein claims the ad was filmed in reverse by mistake.

"Is the sunset in Joe's new ad a fitting metaphor for the end of his Senate career?" said a statement issued by Lamont's campaign. "Like the rest of the information coming out of his campaign it is full of distortions and lies."

Each campaign issued dueling fact sheets backing and attacking the claims made in the commercial. In an interview, Gerstein took issue with the idea that the sun is setting. "It's actually a sunrise," Gerstein said. "It's very much a sunrise."

Funny, when I think of a sunrise, usually it involves the sun.

Rising.

Not setting.

Like it does in this ad.

Even Dan Gerstein shouldn't be allowed to "take issue" with astronomical truths.

Update: A diarist at dKos seems to have found the source video for the "Sunset" ad on Getty Images.

It's standard stock footage of a sunset (not a sunrise) on a beach in Santa Barbara, California.

View stills from the stock footage here.

More of that famous Lieberman "civility":

When Joe Lieberman heard that his political challenger, Ned Lamont, had dined with Israeli Vice Premier, Shimon Peres, it must have reminded him of the day when Jim McGreevy switched from the Lieberman presidential campaign to declare for Howard Dean.

By December 19, 2003, Mr. Dean and the anti-Iraq war Democrats were riding high and the then New Jersey governor thought to catch the wave — even though he had been backing Mr. Lieberman and his political line for years.

Mr. McGreevey called the senator to rationalize his public endorsement of Mr. Dean, and Senator Lieberman replied, "Don't piss on me and tell me it's raining."

Jack Kemp said today he plans to campaign with the Connecticut for Lieberman candidate.

And, in a roundtable discussion on NY1 tonight, Al D'Amato stated that he would be attending a fundraiser for Lieberman this Sunday, and that he and Mayor Bloomberg (R) were going to organize an event for Joe.

Wow. Really, this ad is worthy of a dissertation. But I'll begin with two minor questions:

1) Who was the genius strategist who though a "setting sun" might be a good visual metaphor for Lieberman's last days in the Senate? Morning in America? More like Twilight in Connecticut.

2) How many voters in Connecticut - of any party - are feeling "soothed" by the state of the nation right now? Even if this ad was done well (which it obviously wasn't), would the message resonate with... anyone?

Update: A couple more points:

3) Last time I checked, the sun set in the west. And Long Island Sound was to the southeast of Connecticut. Wherever this sunset was filmed, it wasn't in Connecticut.

4) How sensitive of Joe to release an ad asking voters to think of "good stuff" on the one-year anniversary of Katrina. I'm personally not thinking about any "good stuff" today. I'm feeling quite furious about what happened a year ago today, and a year ago tomorrow, and a year ago next week.

Sen. Inouye, who was one of the only senators to have come out in support of Lieberman's fifth-party run, is now the first such senator (and as far as I know the first such politician) to withdraw his endorsement of the Connecticut for Lieberman candidacy, according to the Honolulu Advertiser (hat tip ehananoki at dKos.)

And his reasons for doing so?

Inouye initially said that he'd support Lieberman as an independent because he was concerned about the single-issue focus on the war in Iraq that turned primary voters against Lieberman, who is strongly aligned with President Bush on the war.

But Hawai'i's senior senator said he was disappointed when Lieberman made a speech "very critical of the Democratic Party."

"I told some of my friends after he gave his speech saying the party isn't the party he knew that he doesn't get my support," Inouye said in an interview.

From comments here, it seems like this was at least partly due to pressure from local Democrats on Inouye.

Who will be the next to jump Joe's sinking ship?

Update: Bob Geiger has more at HuffPo:

My guess was that the middle finger Joe Lieberman gave Democratic voters in Connecticut after they selected Ned Lamont as their Senate nominee on August 8 and Joe's ill-advised independent bid for the Senate would run its course and begin to unravel by the end of September.

It looks like it's starting a month early.

To continue in reminiscence mode...

Remember back in the day - way back in early July - when Joe Lieberman would run around telling anyone who would listen that Ned Lamont was a "closet Republican" who voted in league with Republicans in Greenwich and couldn't be trusted to be a real Democrat?

Remember when, in the debate, Joe said:

I have been a Democrat all my life. And I must say I laugh at Ned Lamont holding party loyalty up as a test of my candidacy. He fails that test. When he was on the Greenwich boards, he voted 80 percent of the time with Republicans against education, for cuts in healthcare, for lower health benefits for public employees.

Look at his campaign. He's got a former Republican senator, a former Republican state chairman working in his campaign. And the guy doing the ads he is paying for on TV helped to put George Bush in the White House in 2000, and tried to stop Barack Obama from being a senator a couple of years ago. So he fails his own test.

And:

Well, the reality is that Ned Lamont has to make up his mind about who he is. He did vote, as his local newspaper said in Greenwich, like a conservative Republican when he was last in public office on the town board. This year, he has reappeared as a very liberal Democrat.

And:

It's a choice between a senator who has agreed with Democrats 90 percent of the time, but had the courage of his convictions when he did not. And a challenger who agreed with Republicans 80 percent of the time in Greenwich, but now has emerged as a very liberal Democrat who can't even make up his mind about how we should exit Iraq, the issue that brought him into this race.

And now?

You guessed it. Greenwich Republicans want to endorse Joe Lieberman (R):

Local Republican committees are starting to follow the lead of their rank and file in Connecticut by abandoning the quixotic Senate candidacy of Republican Alan Schlesinger. On August 11th, the Killingworth Republican Town Committee voted to withdraw its endorsement of Schlesinger.

A dozen more may follow, including at least one town that raises more money than any other for Republican causes around the state, Greenwich. The question for most towns will be whether to include the “L-word” in their resolutions. Some want to endorse Lieberman, who’s drawn significant Republican support since his narrow 1988 upset of disagreeable Republican Lowell P. Weicker, Jr, now an unaffiliated voter.

Who said irony was dead?

It was three weeks ago tomorrow that then-Lieberman campaign manager Sean Smith accused Ned Lamont supporters - and the campaign itself - of "attacking" their website and "disenfranchising" their primary day voters.

MATTHEWS: Sean, what do you believe the Lamont people did to you to disrupt your campaign today?

SMITH: Well, somebody has embarked on a coordinated attack on our website and our email system. They are denying voters in Connecticut a chance to communicate with our campaign and denying us a chance to communicate with voters of Connecticut. This is going to have a suppressive impact on voter turnout and the Lamont campaign, and Ned Lamont specifically, should categorically denounce these kind of dirty tricks and he should order his supporters - or whoever is behind this - to cease and desist immediately.

MATTHEWS: Technically, how do you know your system was hacked into?

SMITH: We know that it has been under a barrage of hits over the last 24 hours. They've put up this message on the website that says, we have, somehow, not paid our bills. They've denied any and all ability for us to communicate internally and to the public.

MATTHEWS: But can you say, categorically, that this was sabotage? Categorically?

SMITH: We can say that we've paid all of our bills and there is no internal glitches in our campaign. And, look, this is what we talked about earlier...

MATTHEWS: No, really, this is the point of this: Do you believe that this was an offensive action by your opponents? Can you say that, categorically, you are the victim of sabotage?

SMITH: We can say that... I don't know if it was our opponent's campaign but the supporters of our opponent and the people who have been attacking Joe Lieberman for two years on the internet are the type of... [call interrupted]

MATTHEWS: Ok, Sean, let me ask you again. You have a system that's shut down. You say that someone has put up on the website that you haven't paid your bills yet and you're saying it was sabotage by some supporter of your opponent, Ned Lamont. Is that correct?

SMITH: We've asked law enforcement to get to the bottom of this... We don't know whose behind it but we know that our opponent could get our in front of the voters of Connecticut right now and ask whoever it is, whether it's his supporters or not, to denounce this kind of politics and to cease and desist and let every voter in Connecticut have the right vote.

Those were very serious charges that have since been completely disproven. Three weeks later, Joe2006.com remains pretty much dormant.

Does the Lieberman campaign stand by the charges they made on August 8th?

And how is that investigation coming along?

After standing on the sidelines during the primary campaign, the 50,000-strong Service Employees International Union today threw its support to the Democratic nominee for senate, Ned Lamont. From a press release:

On the steps of the State Capitol Building, dozens of members and officials of the Service Employees International Union pledged to work for Ned Lamont as they endorsed him for the US Senate.

"After hearing from both candidates our members voted overwhelmingly for change in Connecticut and Washington," said Paul Philson, State Director of SEIU. "Our 50,000 workers are going to get off the sidelines and work enthusiastically for Ned Lamont to bring change to Connecticut and Washington."

SEIU is one of the most politically active and effective unions in the State.

"If we want to change the way we do business we need to change the people who represent us," said Mike O'Brien of CSEA. "Joe running as a minor party candidate can only hurt the working people of Connecticut." "I want to thank the 50,000 members of SEIU who are joining me today to fight for change," said Lamont. "People are working harder every day for less money. We need to raise the minimum wage, get health care for everyone and stop sending our jobs overseas."

Also, as the official blog significantly notes, SEIU Local 32BJ became the first union to switch endorsements from Joe Lieberman to Ned Lamont post-primary.

Update (and bumped): John DeStefano (D) was also endorsed by SEIU today, and reiterated his strong support for Ned Lamont (D):

"I don't stand here by accident with Ned Lamont. I stand here fully supportive with the message he is taking both to the families of Connecticut and to the nation," DeStefano told the crowd. "This election is about change, it is about change and the things that our families want and I'm proud to be standing here today in supporting Ned Lamont, clearly, wholeheartedly, completely, as our next United States senator." ...

"Ned Lamont took a stand and spoke to what was in the hearts and in the lives of Connecticut's families," he said. "And voters responded to that and they sent a very clear message about what they want."

And Paul Filson, director of SEIU's CT state council, had this to say:

Filson said union members will be informed of the endorsement. He expects hundreds will work to get out the vote on Election Day, knocking on doors, making phone calls and handing out informational fliers for candidates at work sites.

"We do not make paper endorsements," he said.

Who is this?



As the official blog notes, this isn't the first (or the second) (or even the third) time someone in a costume has crashed a Ned Lamont event.

Short, more later...

• Iraq is still a disaster:
  

  Violence in Iraq left nearly 50 people dead Monday in a suicide car bombing and clashes between Shiite militia and Iraqi security forces, a brutal contradiction of the prime minister's claim that bloodshed was decreasing.
  
  The deaths followed a day of bombings and shootings on Sunday, when more than 60 people were killed across the country, from the northern city of Kirkuk to the capital Baghdad and down to the south in Basra. The dead included eight American soldiers, one of the deadliest weekends for the U.S. military in recent months....
  
  The U.S. military said eight U.S. soldiers were killed Saturday and Sunday in and around Baghdad, seven of them by roadside bombs and one by gunfire. More than 2,600 U.S. military personnel have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, according to an Associated Press Count.

  
  And Connecticut lost a brave Marine on Friday:
  

  A marine from Connecticut was killed in combat Friday in Iraq, the U.S. Department of Defense announced Saturday.
  
  Cpl. Jordan C. Pierson, 21, of Milford, died during combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 25th Marine Regiment, 4th Marine Division in Plainville.



• The Stamford Advocate summarizes the debate over what to call Joe Lieberman (R/CFL/Joe/Lieberman/DeFactoGOP/CON-LIE). The punch line? According to Dan Gerstein, the senator doesn't even know how to refer to himself:
  

  "It's an unusual circumstance," Gerstein said. "He is a registered Democrat. . . . If he's asked his party affiliation, he'll say a Democrat. Clearly he is running as an independent candidate. He's a petitioning candidate. I think he'll present himself as a senator for all of Connecticut."

  
  It makes perfect sense. Sen. Lieberman's party affiliation is as confused as the justification for his continued candidacy. He doesn't know what to call himself, because he doesn't know why he's still running. Or, rather, he does know, but doesn't want to admit it - he's running solely in order to hold on to power. In any case, Independent Party CT candidate John Mertens (who didn't make the ballot) is not too happy with the senator for using the "independent" label:
  

  "He absolutely should not be using the word 'independent,' " Mertens said. "Technically someone who petitions onto the ballot is unaffiliated -- not independent. He has no affiliation whatsoever with the Independent Party. That gets my dander up."

  
  Sec. of State Bysiewicz gets the last word:
  

  Asked how Bysiewicz describes Lieberman's candidacy, her spokesman, Dan Tapper, said "he remains a registered Democrat but is now running as a petitioning party candidate under the Connecticut for Lieberman Party name."


Again, it's simple. Lieberman is now running against the Democrat. He is a "petitioning party candidate," not an independent or unaffiliated candidate. He chose to name his faux-party "Connecticut for Lieberman." Thus, as he desired to be, he now is the "Connecticut for Lieberman" candidate.

Back from a few days away, but from a quick reading of news items from the last two days here's what I've got:

• Lieberman twisted like a tree in a tropical storm on Iraq:
  

  In an Op-ed piece in today's Hartford Courant, Joe Lieberman wrote: "I believe that Ned Lamont's strategy of pulling all our troops out by an arbitrary, politically determined date will lead to the collapse of Iraq..." OK, then, a question: Why doesn't GOP Rep. Chris Shays' new call for a withdrawal, most of which Shays says could take place next year, constitute the setting of an equally "arbitrary, politically determined" date? Why wouldn't Shays' proposed withdrawal lead to the "collapse" of Iraq, too?



• Ned Lamont re-emphasized the heart of his campaign, the revolutionary idea that a senator should actually be both responsive to and representative of his constituents:
  

  I’ve been amazed at the passion and involvement of the people I’ve met. You’ve turned out at town hall meetings to ask Sen. Lieberman why he didn’t give up his Senate seat in 2000 when pursuing national office – although his victory would have meant Gov. John G. Rowland would have appointed his replacement. You’ve asked why his glossy brochures don’t mention foreign policy or the war. You’ve remembered how he waited until the very last minute to vote against Clarence Thomas, how he has failed to fight other Bush appointees that will tilt the Supreme Court to the right for generations. You’ve pointed out how Sen. Lieberman never comes to your town for meetings with citizens; he comes for fundraisers.
  
  Thanks to your courage and common sense, the people of Connecticut have spoken loudly and boldly: We want change.

  
  
• Democrats in both Greenwich and Newtown said they would give Loser Joe the cold shoulder at upcoming events:
  

  "I hope he comes [to the Democratic picnic]. I think it'll give an opportunity for many of us to vent our anger," said Peter Berg, a Democratic Town Commitee member and Lamont supporter.

  
  

  "I told him through his office, that as a duly elected Democratic official, he's putting me in an uncomfortable, almost embarrassing position. We have a duly elected candidate, who was endorsed by a historic turnout of state Democrats in the recent primary. I don't have to march [in the Labor Day parade] with [Sen. Lieberman], the DTC doesn't have to march with him, so why would he want to make it look like he's in good graces with the Democratic Party?" [Newtown First Selectman Herb] Rosenthal continued. "He is not in good graces with state Democrats."



• Dan Gerstein freaked out and frantically called the New York Times to make it clear that his boss didn't mean what he actually said on Friday about being a "noncombatant" in the House races.

Another week of Joementum begins tomorrow...