776 were wounded in action in Iraq last month.

The highest monthly figure since November 2004.

"These days, wounded are a much better measure of the intensity of the operations than killed," said Anthony H. Cordesman, a military expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

The surge in wounded comes as U.S. commanders issue increasingly dire warnings about the threat of civil war in Iraq, all but ruling out cuts in the current contingent of more than 140,000 U.S. troops before the spring of 2007.

"Progress."

"September was horrific" in terms of the toll of wounded, and if the early October trend continues, this month could be "the worst month of the war," said John E. Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a Virginia-based Web site that tracks defense issues.

Bush is at 33% in a new Newsweek poll. And aside from the Foley/Hastert mess, it's the Lieberman talking points on on the war that are bringing them down:

• Americans think Speaker Hastert should resign, 43%-37%. Sen. Lieberman still doesn't, and blames Democrats for igniting a "partisan frenzy."


• Americans now trust Democrats more on every single issue, including Iraq (47%-34%) and terrorism (44%-37%). Sen. Lieberman still doesn't, and calls mainstream Democrats who want to change course in Iraq the "anti-security" wing of the party.


• For the first time, a majority of Americans think the Administration knowingly misled the nation into war in Iraq, 58%-36%. Sen. Lieberman still doesn't, and scolds voters for impugning the "motives" of the Administration.


• Perhaps most significanlty, a huge majority of Americans now agree with the NIE that the war in Iraq has made us less safe from terrorism, 66%-29%. Sen. Lieberman still doesn't, and says the leak of the NIE was "a shame" and that it didn't change his strongly held (wrong) view that we are making progress in Iraq.

Sen. Lieberman is completely out to lunch on the major issues that are driving this election nationwide. Period.

He's part of the problem.

• Lieberman hit on Iraq:
  

  General Clark recalled that when he was the supreme commander of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in the 1990’s, he briefed Mr. Lieberman and other members of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
  
  “I thought he understood, but he didn’t understand,” General Clark said of Mr. Lieberman. “All that experience, he still rubber-stamped the Bush administration going into Iraq. I like Joe, but I am very disappointed.”



• Lieberman hit on torture:
  

  "I want to know what the moral reasoning is for a man who went from being a Freedom Rider to being a torture apologist," [Kevin] Miner asked Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, as some in the crowd applauded. "I want to know how you justify that."
  
  It wasn't the only tough question Lieberman faced from the college crowd in New Haven Friday, where he had gone to announce his idea for making college more affordable. But he answered the question - and others - without apology.
  
  "Obviously I don't accept your second description," Lieberman said, and then launched into a spirited defense of his recent vote on legislation governing the prosecution and interrogation of terror suspects. The approval by Congress of the detainee bill was considered a significant election-season victory for President Bush and the Republicans....
  
  His answer didn't sway Miner, or some of the other students gathered to hear Lieberman speak Friday.
  
  "I'll never vote for him again," said Miner, 24, of New Haven. "Everyone deserves due process. He no longer represents American values."



• Lieberman hit on Rumsfeld:
  

  But a review of the senator's public statements over that same period show he has been neither a consistent nor a forceful critic of Rumsfeld's, and at one point said that it would be a mistake to remove him during wartime.
  
  "It's amazing when you look at what politicians say in campaigns and compare it to what they actually do," said Ken Dautrich, a professor of public policy at the University of Connecticut. "How could Lieberman with a straight face say. . . he's been an advocate for Rumsfeld to be fired or step down? It's clearly not the record. I don't know how else you can interpret that other than a campaign ploy."



• Lieberman hit on his lies about Hastert:
  

  It always amazes me how many evasions, half-truths, and outright lies our favorite Junior senator can squeeze into a one-minute sound bite. Watch and learn...



• Quote of the day:
  

  "Deep down, Lieberman is a Republican. That's why I support him," [former Ansonia Mayor Bill] Menna said.

The New Haven Independent has a whole lot more.

House Majority Leader Chris Donovan to Sen. Lieberman:

Dear Senator Lieberman,

As you may know I’m supporting your opponent, Democrat Ned Lamont in the upcoming election for United States Senate. Yet I must write to say that I am disappointed in your refusal to demand that Speaker Hastert step down as speaker in lieu of his mishandling of the inexcusable conduct of Representative Mark Foley. What Mr. Foley did was absolutely wrong and Speaker Hastert did nothing to stop it. He turned his head away from Mr. Foley’s transgressions. He thought more of his Republican colleague than the well-being of the trusting young people in the House page corps.

Ned Lamont, correctly, has called for Speaker Hastert to step down. You, instead, have criticized those who want accountability from those entrusted with great authority. Mr. Foley misused his office to pressure his subordinates. Speaker Hastert valued political camaraderie over exercising his responsibility to take immediate actions to halt Representative Foley’s sexual pressures.

This whole incident is very troubling to the American people. We want more from our elected officials. I had hoped your immediate response would be to protect the pages. Instead you have opted to protect Speaker Hastert. Speaker Hastert must go, now.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

State Representative Christopher Donovan

Josh Marshall:

27%.

That's the number of Americans who think Denny Hastert should remain as Speaker, according to SurveyUSA.

63% think he should resign.

43% think he should leave the House altogether.

Gen. Clark today:

"The truth is, (Lieberman) didn't control the steering wheel, but he was sort of supporting the elbow of the guy who drove us into the ditch."

Just part of that "partisan frenzy"...

WASHINGTON (AP) — New Jersey Republican Senate candidate Tom Kean Jr. on Friday called for House Speaker Dennis Hastert to resign over the congressional page cybersex scandal, making him the first major candidate in his party to do so.

"He is the head of that institution and this happened on his watch, and Kean urges House leaders to go further by appointing an outside panel to review the matter immediately," Kean spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said.

Sen. Lieberman still won't.

Great show of support for Ned and Gen. Clark this afternoon. Some pics:





And the Young Republicans Club showed up, too (fully outfitted by... someone):



Much more, including video, at the official blog.

Light posting for the rest of the day, going to see Gen. Clark and Ned. Hope the sun comes out.

In the meantime, first nominee for Quote of the Day... Sen. Lieberman apologizes (for the first time?) for being an absentee senator:

While Lamont made an issue of Lieberman's Iraq stance during the primary campaign, several city residents said they were more upset with Lieberman taking time away from his duties in the Senate to seek the vice presidency in 2000 and the presidency in 2004. Lieberman said he understands the voters' frustration.

"I missed a number of votes (in the Senate), and I regret it," Lieberman said. "The staff continued to work (on constituent issues and legislation). I wasn't gone all the time."

Lieberman said it was a difficult time serving and campaigning at the same time.

"I've gotten the presidential bug entirely out of my system," Lieberman said. "I'll never do that again."

John at AmericaBlog runs down the facts on Foley/Hastert/Reynolds/Boehner as they have been established at this point:

FACT: GOP staff, working for Republican Speaker Denny Hastert, warned the page class of 2001-2002 to stay away from Foley - five years ago.

FACT: Former chief of staff to GOP Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-NY), Kirk Fordham, says he warned Hastert's chief of staff of Foley's behavior three years ago. Whether or not you believe Fordham, his testimony is consistent with the other facts showing that the Republicans knew about Foley's behavior long before last week.

FACT: Both Reps. John Boehner, the Republican House Majority Leader, and Tom Reynolds both say they told Dennis Hastert personally about the Foley issue months ago. Hastert says Boehner is lying. So one of the two most powerful Republicans in the House is lying about an investigation into a child sex predator. That deserves a separate investigation right there.

FACT: Hastert's staff was informed of the Foley emails a year ago, but Hastert would like us to believe his staff simply never told him that a member of Congress, a member of his leadership team, was under investigation for preying sexually on young children - children who Hastert was responsible for.

These are the facts that have led legislators, newspapers, commentators, and pundits across the country - conservative, progressive, moderate, and in between - to call for Hastert's immediate and unconditional resignation. Period.

Republicans are telling telling the Washington Post that, "Hastert's blame-the-media-and-Democrats strategy looks odd when conservatives are leading the charge for his resignation."

But Sen. Lieberman - like Dennis Hastert - blames Democrats and says this is a "partisan frenzy."



No, Senator. It just isn't.

To put it in language you might understand, this is like apple fritters. Everyone agrees on this, from Tony Blankley to Sen. Feinstein (D-CA) to Chris Murphy.

Everybody except for a handful of die-hard power-worshiping Republicans who have been in D.C. way too long. Like yourself.

Charles P. Pierce :

However, what happened to him here is not to be minimized. I can't remember another time in which Senator Edward Kennedy summoned up the family iconography in order to beat another Democrat over the head with it, even a putative Democrat like Weepin' Joe who, rejected by the Democratic voters of his state, now finds himself cast out of The New Frontier by the most important member of the Membership Committee. He's had his problems, God knows, and he wouldn't have wanted me on a jury in 1969, but you simply don't futz with Ted Kennedy on the subject of his brother's legacy. And, just for fun, let those enough with enough profanity in our vocabulary imagine what Harry Truman would have said about a Democrat who failed to abide by the verdict of his party's faithful, and who seems to be perpetually on the short-list of Cabinet appointments of the most incompetent and corrupt Republican administration since Warren Harding's ticker gave out. I'd have sprung for the first bourbon-and-branch myself.

Sen. Lieberman today again refused to call for Speaker Hastert's resignation, lamenting that the Foley scandal has "become another partisan frenzy in Washington" thanks to those demanding accountability from the Republican leadership.

But take a look at this partial list of the individuals and publications (many right-wing) who have done what Sen. Lieberman apparently cannot bring himself to do - call for Speaker Hastert to resign immediately:

The Washington Times — "House Speaker Dennis Hastert must do the only right thing, and resign his speakership at once."

Human Events, conservative magazine -- "I think he has to do this for the team, he has to step down.''

Michael Reagan, conservative commentator — "Any member of Congress who was aware of the sexual emails and protected the congressman should also resign effective immediately."

David Bossie, president of conservative organization Citizens United — "Speaker Hastert had knowledge of Congressman Foley’s inappropriate behavior and chose to protect a potential pedophile and powerful colleague over a congressional page."

Maggie Gallagher, conservative columnist — "With great power comes great responsibility. Memo to GOP House leaders: Have the decency to accept responsibility and resign from leadership. Or come November, I vote to let the other side put their bums in charge."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) -- "[I]t is clear that there was knowledge of improper, immoral, and possibly criminal behavior, and the leadership did nothing about it," she's quoted as saying in a statement from her office. "That leadership should go[.]"

This is not about partisanship, this is about right and wrong. Democrats and Republicans alike have unconditionally called for Speaker Hastert to resign in the face of the facts that have been revealed so far.

That Sen. Lieberman either won't - or can't - do what so many Republicans and Democrats, moderates and conservatives and progressives, have already done, is telling.

Front page of the Courant this morning:

If Lieberman believes that the invasion of Iraq was in keeping with the muscular foreign policy of Truman and JFK, Kennedy said, “He doesn’t have it right.”...

“President Kennedy would have been very careful with the facts. He would have been very careful not to sign on for distortions, misrepresentations and manipulation of intelligence,” Kennedy said. “That wasn’t the Cuban missile crisis. So Joe Lieberman is wrong on this, as he is on the war in Iraq.”

"Democratic sex scandals have been far worse."

- Newt Gingrich on FoleyGate

Sen. Lieberman, 1998:

In this case, the president apparently had extramarital relations with an employee half his age and did so in the workplace in the vicinity of the Oval Office. Such behavior is not just inappropriate. It is immoral. And it is harmful, for it sends a message of what is acceptable behavior to the larger American family -- particularly to our children -- which is as influential as the negative messages communicated by the entertainment culture.

Sen. Lieberman, 2006:

Mr. Lieberman cautioned against turning the incident into a partisan issue.

“The truth is, unless he knows what he saw and he saw something he should have acted on, he deserves to have a fact-finder come in,” Mr. Lieberman said, adding that an independent investigator could determine what was known.

"Progress":

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Thirteen U.S. soldiers have been killed in Baghdad since Monday, the American military reported, registering the highest three-day death toll for U.S. forces in the capital since the start of the war.

The latest losses -- four soldiers who were killed at 9 a.m. Wednesday by small-arms fire -- are part of a recent spike in violent attacks against U.S. forces that have claimed the lives of at least 24 soldiers and Marines in Iraq since Saturday, the military said.

The number of planted bombs is "at an all-time high," said Maj. Gen. William B. Caldwell, a military spokesman, defying American efforts to stanch the vicious sectarian bloodshed in Baghdad that threatens to plunge the country into civil war.

"This has been a hard week for U.S. forces," Caldwell said. "Unfortunately, as expected, attacks have steadily increased in Baghdad during these past weeks." Independent databases showed the three-day toll for American troops to be the highest in Baghdad so far.

“The Foley case bothers people,” he added. “If anyone thinks they can make this into another partisan flap, it’s not. It’s very real and human. The House Republican leaders and, frankly, the Democratic leadership, should not make it partisan.”

- Sen. Lieberman, yesterday on FoleyGate.

Simply disgusting.

Here's the verbatim transcript of Joe's "joke" about torture from the end of his interview with Imus (audio).

"I have particularly appreciated your interrogation of some of the other Democratic elected officials. And I'm very comforted to know that your interrogation is not covered by Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions."

He also refused to call for Hastert's resignation in the interview.

"The Conscience of the Senate."

Write a letter to the editor and express your outrage.

Michael Ware of CNN (via Taylor Marsh):



Update: More from Ware:

Listen, Wolf. This is the way to put it in a nutshell. If the US continues its policy and operations as they are now the situation will worsen and the enemies of the US - principally al Qaeda and Iran - will continue to strengthen. There's a number of options that are presented to Washington at the moment. They either do this or they don't do this. They either need to get serious about the battle here on the ground - physically against al Qaeda and the insurgency - and commit the troops that the commanders need, or they need to look for alternative solutions. At the end of the day what they're facing is the potential of most of this country being subsumed by a Shia-led theocracy-style government with other parts of the government left as Western al Qaeda desert training camp facilities. To avoid that something radical has to be done. So Colin Powell is right. Staying the course will only strengthen America's enemies.

(Bumped.) Colin Powell, at a speech in Minnesota yesterday:

...In Iraq, “staying the course isn’t good enough because a course has to have an end,” Powell said.

Ned Lamont, in his major national security address last month:

This year the people of Connecticut are saying, simply, that we are on the wrong path – and we need a better way. We can’t “stay the course” when that course is not working.

Sgt. James Liska, at a press conference in support of Sen. Lieberman last month:

"I support Joe Lieberman because he has consistently said we are going to 'stay the course.'"

"Much", according to the dictionary:

much [muhch] adjective, more, most, noun, adverb, more, most.

–adjective
1. great in quantity, measure, or degree: too much cake.

"Much", according to Sen. Lieberman (hat tip NewHavenBoy at MLN):

[The AFL-CIO] defied precedent and chose to stay neutral, with much of the state AFL-CIO membership opting to stick with Joe Lieberman.

"Much"? Eh... not so much:

But Sharon Palmer of the American Federation of Teachers, which is part of Labor for Lamont, gave a different spin: "Sen. Lieberman lost the AFL-CIO endorsement today."

Palmer said Lamont was supported by AFL-CIO unions representing 83,000 members - just 3,000 short of the two-thirds margin necessary for an endorsement.

Bumped and Updated: Sen. Lieberman, from June (via Atrios):

BRIDGEPORT — U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman believes the U.S. will withdraw a "solid' contingent of its military forces in Iraq by the end of the year because of gains made by the Iraqi armed forces.

"There really has been progress made by the Iraqi military," Lieberman said Tuesday during a meeting with the Connecticut Post's editorial board. "Two-thirds of it could stand on its own or lead the fight with our logistical support."

The three-term U.S. senator said he believes a complete withdrawal is possible by late 2007 or early 2008.

Sen. Lieberman, back in March:

We're talking about 2006, 7, 8... that's three years. And I believe that a lot of very good things can happen in three years in Iraq that ideally would allow us to remove every American soldier who's there today.

New York Times, today:

Monday’s loss also represented one of the highest nationwide death tolls for American troops in the past year. In late August, nine soldiers and a marine were killed in a day. But before that, the last time eight or more soldiers were killed in hostile action was last November.

“Obviously this was a tragic day, with eight killed in 24 hours,” said Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, a military spokesman.

The deadly day set back efforts by American and Iraqi troops to tame the sectarian violence that continues to besiege the capital. Since August, the military has made securing Baghdad a priority, pouring in additional troops and conducting neighborhood sweeps.

But the violence has continued, spiking over the last week with the start of the holy month of Ramadan. Military officials said last week that suicide bombings in Baghdad were at a record. At least 17 soldiers and marines have been killed since Saturday, most in Baghdad or Anbar Province, where fierce fighting continues between marines and Sunni insurgents.

According to the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, an independent group that compiles figures based on information from the American military, 74 soldiers and marines were killed in Iraq in September, the highest number since April, when 76 died.

Don Michak finds Dan Gerstein and Tammy Sun running away - fast - from any association with mega-GOP fundraisers and energy industry lobbyists Tom Kuhn and Rick Shelby who according to Robert Novak hosted a $400,000 fundraiser for Sen. Lieberman last week in D.C.:

A Lieberman campaign spokeswoman, Tammy Sun, had told the Journal Inquirer that the fundraiser - which she said netted the three-term incumbent $400,000 - was organized by the campaign itself and had no prominent sponsors.

But Novak says its sponsors included Tom Kuhn, a close friend and college roommate of Bush, and Rick Shelby, a longtime Republican operative and executive, "who pressed fellow Republican lobbyists to pay a minimum of $1,000 a ticket."

Kuhn, the president of the Edison Electric Institute, an association of U.S. shareholder-owned electric companies, raised more than $100,000 for Bush in 2000 and 2004, according to Novak.

It depends on what the meaning of "hosted" is:

A top Lieberman campaign aide, Dan Gerstein, said today that he didn't know whether Novak was correct to identify Kuhn and Shelby as sponsors of the fundraiser.

"I don't know the terminology," he added, noting that certain individuals often are described as members of a "host committee" on invitations to such events.

Gerstein referred questions about the fundraiser to Sun, who stood by her previous statement.

"Novak is incorrect," she said. "There were no hosts, no sponsors or co-sponsors, no host committee, no names on the invitations. Everybody came as a guest, and it was a very bipartisan crowd with a lot of Democrats there as well as Republicans."

34 days to go. Get involved.

• Labor for Lamont was announced yesterday as Sen. Lieberman announced he had lost the AFL-CIO endorsement. Lamont's labor support consists of over 193,000 union members - the vast majority of union members in CT - supporting Ned and the Democratic team:
  

  “We’re proud to stand behind a candidate with the courage to stand up for change and working families,” said Robert Madore of UAW. “Labor for Lamont is going to work as hard as we can for change. We will be going door to door, making phone calls and doing lit drops.



• Today's Cup of Joe takes a good look at Lieberman's anti-middle-class votes on issues like the bankruptcy bill, healthcare, and trade:
  

  LIEBERMAN CAST KEY VOTE HELPING CREDIT CARD COMPANIES GOUGE MIDDLE CLASS: Lieberman cast a key vote for cloture on the credit card industry-written bankruptcy bill, which allows credit card companies and banks more leeway in bilking consumers with exorbitant interest rates. In return, Lieberman has received more than $1.1 million in campaign contributions from the banking and finance industry over his career. [Senate Roll Call Vote #29, 3/8/05; Center for Responsive Politics, Lieberman career profile]



• The Stamford Advocate followed a couple of Bush supporters campaigning togther at Grand Central:
  

  Koch, who ran the Big Apple from 1978 to 1989, made headlines in 2004, when he endorsed Bush's re-election and helped Republican Mayor Michael Bloomberg recruit volunteers for the national Republican convention in New York City.
  
  Koch said at the time he was a "liberal with sanity" who supported the war and considered Bush the only candidate willing to "stand up to international terrorism."
  
  The war and Bush have lost popularity, but Koch, in a brief interview yesterday, said he has no regrets about endorsing the Republican president and is confident in his backing of Lieberman. He and Bloomberg will co-host a Nov. 1 fundraiser for Lieberman....
  
  Lieberman afterward said he was not concerned that aligning himself with the pro-Bush Koch would fuel his own reputation as a Bush ally.

  
  And, what do you know, Bush-supporting Republicans loved them both:
  

  More than one commuter told Lieberman: "I'm a Republican, but you've got my vote," and non-constituents such as Republican Ron Feinstone of New York wished him luck.
  
  "I hang around some pretty conservative circles, and they all like Lieberman," he said.



• With help from the likes of Mel Sembler, Tom Kuhn, and Rick Shelby, Sen. Lieberman has outspent Lamont by 60% over the past few weeks. The Courant rounds up that and some other stories.


• Events today: Ned will be at Watertown High School in the morning and then at a healthcare event with Sen. Ted Kennedy and Diane Farrell in Bridgeport in the afternoon.

Gen. Wesley Clark will campaign with Ned Lamont at a rally this Friday at 12:30pm at UConn.

Details here.

Clark sent out an email in support of Ned last week, and post-primary in August he issued this statement in strong support of Ned and the Democratic Party:

You see, despite what Joe Lieberman believes, invading Iraq and diverting our attention away from Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden is not being strong on national security. Blind allegiance to George W. Bush and his failed "stay the course" strategy is not being strong on national security. And no, Senator Lieberman, no matter how you demonize your opponents, there is no "antisecurity wing" of the Democratic Party.

Indeed, Connecticut Democrats recognized all of this, and yesterday they chose Ned Lamont as their nominee for the U.S. Senate. Now, I hope you'll join me in supporting Ned as he heads into the general election this November.

In addition to Bush college roomate and GOP mega-fundraiser Tom Kuhn, last week's big-money D.C. fundraiser for Joe was also hosted by GOP operative and energy industry lobbyist Rick Shelby:

“Also among the Lieberman event's sponsors was Rick Shelby, a longtime Republican operative who is executive vice president of the American Gas Association. The luncheon's sponsors pressed fellow Republican lobbyists to pay a minimum of $1,000 a ticket.”

That's Rick Shelby, co-host of a huge 2005 fundraiser for Tom DeLay.

That's Rick Shelby, who won $1 billion in federal tax breaks for natural gas companies in the 2005 Bush-Cheney Energy Bill... that Sen. Lieberman voted for:

The American Gas Association, whose senior vice president, Rick Shelby, is a “host” of tonight’s event, is the industry association for natural gas corporations. Those companies will receive $1 billion in natural gas pipeline tax breaks from EPACT.

Rick Shelby gets what he pays for. What else is he getting from Sen. Lieberman?

It comes down to this:

Will he absolutely promise to caucus with the Democrats, period?

Why? Here's why:

Joe reportedly promised Harry Reid he won’t run as an Indy in exchange for Primary support
“I was told by a Reid source that in return for Harry Reid’s endorsement of Joe Lieberman to Connecticut delegates, Joe Lieberman has promised to rule out a run for Senate as an independent.”

Bob Novak claims GOP funding Joe in hopes he’ll flip
The luncheon’s sponsors pressed fellow Republican lobbyists to pay a minimum of $1,000 a ticket. Lieberman has announced he will stay in the Democratic caucus if re-elected.

But Republicans backing him against anti-war candidate Ned Lamont, the Democratic nominee, hope for a change of heart by Lieberman.

Joe threatened to leave party if stripped of seniority
“Lieberman said he would keep his senior position in the caucus, even though he lost Connecticut’s Democratic primary, and is running against Democratic nominee Ned Lamont, whom the Senate Democratic leadership has endorsed.

“That’s what I’ve been told,” said Lieberman in an interview Friday, before Congress recessed for the election. “Caucuses like to keep as many members as they can, not discourage membership,” implying that leaders risk his defection to the GOP if they strip him of seniority.”

Republicans Raise $$$ for Joe in Hopes he Flips
“A luncheon, hosted by President Bush’s college roommate, Tom Kuhn, cost $1,000 a plate for the former Democratic Vice Presidential candidate, an an effort to push the candidate closer to the GOP if he should indeed win reelection in Connecticut.”

Joe claims committee seniority more important than Party
“The critical thing is to caucus with the Democrats because if you don’t caucus with a party, you don’t have the opportunity to hold your seniority in the committee assignments that you’ve got and that’s important to the folks back home.” – Joe Lieberman

Doesn't sound like the answer will be "yes."

Before he lost the primary, it was righteous indignation that anyone would dare question his commitment to the Democratic party whose verdict he had already said he'd disregard.

Sen. Lieberman, July 19th:

Steinfels said that Lieberman would "absolutely not" run on the GOP line. She added: "He has said he's always been a Democrat, and he'll always be a Democrat."

Asked if he'd rule out accepting the line, Steinfels said: "Joe Lieberman will never run as a Republican. Never."

Sen. Lieberman, right before the primary:

"The more I have talked to voters in these closing days, the more I am concerned they have been shortchanged in this campaign," said Lieberman. "Instead of hearing an honest debate about the issues that really matter to people, they have been overwhelmed with bogus charges about my Democratic credentials..."

After he lost the primary, it has turned into righteous indignation that anyone would dare take away a shred of his power, and outright threats to the party he said he'd "never" leave that if they attempt to do so, he will do just that - leave:

Sen. Lieberman, Sept. 28th:

The critical thing is to caucus with the Democrats because if you don't caucus with a party, you don't have the opportunity to hold your seniority in the committee assignments that you've got and that's important to the folks back home.

Sen. Lieberman, Sept. 29th:

Lieberman said he would keep his senior position in the caucus, even though he lost Connecticut’s Democratic primary, and is running against Democratic nominee Ned Lamont, whom the Senate Democratic leadership has endorsed.

“That’s what I’ve been told,” said Lieberman in an interview Friday, before Congress recessed for the election. “Caucuses like to keep as many members as they can, not discourage membership,” implying that leaders risk his defection to the GOP if they strip him of seniority.

The man's word is worth nothing.

In a revealing article in The Hill, Alexander Bolton reports that Sen. Lieberman hinted on Friday that he would consider leaving the party if he was stripped of his seniority:

Lieberman said he would keep his senior position in the caucus, even though he lost Connecticut’s Democratic primary, and is running against Democratic nominee Ned Lamont, whom the Senate Democratic leadership has endorsed.

“That’s what I’ve been told,” said Lieberman in an interview Friday, before Congress recessed for the election. “Caucuses like to keep as many members as they can, not discourage membership,” implying that leaders risk his defection to the GOP if they strip him of seniority.

Also in the article, Sen. Lautenberg (D-NJ) appears to be angling to regain his seniority - on Lieberman's favorite committee - in the face of Reid's alleged guarantee to Lieberman that he would keep his committee assignments:

But the strongest response is likely to come from Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) who views Lieberman’s independent status as an opportunity to press Democratic leaders to restore seniority he lost four years ago.

If Lautenberg retrieves seniority accrued during 18 years of Senate service before retiring in 2000, he could leapfrog Lieberman to lead the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee or the Environment and Public Works Committee....

“I will make the case, I will make the case,” said Lautenberg emphatically. “The closer to the election, the better the reminder has to be.”

According to Robert Novak, Bush's mega-fundraiser, college roomate, and "close-friend" Tom Kuhn hosted a big-money D.C. fundraiser for Sen. Lieberman last week.

Here's a little background on Kuhn, who in addition to being a confidant of the president, was also a member of the Bush-Cheney 2000 Energy Dept. transition team.

He obviously got what he paid for from Bush, which included weakening the Clean Air Act:

Shortly after a judge ruled in 2003 that FirstEnergy Corp. (see Anthony Alexander) broke the Clean Air Act by failing to upgrade pollution controls when it renovated one of its filthy coal plants, the Bush administration released new rules that seriously undermined that same section of the Clean Air Act. Kuhn welcomed the weaker rules, saying, “Today’s regulations will lift a major cloud of uncertainty.”

As well as killing EPA initiatives to lessen air pollution in national parks:

Kuhn attended a 2000 meeting in which executives of polluting industries huddled with officials of states that face sanctions for flunking federal air standards. The meeting, organized by the top environmental appointee of Pioneer and then-Michigan Governor John Engler, explored how to relax federal air standards if Bush became president. Kuhn hosted a 1999 meeting of the “Air Quality Standards Coalition,” an industry group seeking to sabotage proposed EPA rules to cut air pollution in national parks.

Even better, in a fundraising letter for the Bush campaign in 1999, Kuhn spelled out quite clearly in his own words how the D.C. quid-pro-quo game is played, as the Center for Public Integrity recounts:

Thomas R. Kuhn, the head of the Edison Electric Institute, the primary trade group for electrical utilities, was a Bush Pioneer, one of the elite fundraisers who promised to raise at least $100,000 for the Texas governor. Kuhn wrote a May 27, 1999, letter to other fundraisers, informing them of the importance of letting the Bush campaign know exactly which industries were raising money for him. "As you know . . . a very important part of the campaign's outreach to the business community is the use of tracking numbers for contributions," Kuhn wrote. "Listing your industry's code does not prevent you, any of your individual solicitors or your state from receiving credit for soliciting a contribution. It does ensure that our industry is credited, and that your progress is listed among the other business/industry sectors." Bush and his administration made sure that the coal industry could cash in its credits.

So Tom Kuhn got what he paid for from Bush.

What is he getting from Joe?

Sen. Lieberman will be campaigning with former Mayor Ed Koch in New York tomorrow.

"Dems for Joe," "Dems for Bush":

Why have I endorsed George W. Bush when I don't agree with him on a single domestic issue? Because I believe the issue of international terrorism trumps all other issues. I don't believe the Democratic Party has the stomach and commitment to deliver on this issue..

Well, at least he and Sen. Lieberman agree on this issue. (As does Karl Rove. And Dick Cheney.)

Here's a fun game: how many speakers from the 2004 Republican Convention have endorsed Sen. Lieberman so far?

Pass it along:

(Update: Even more reason to ask whether Sen. Lieberman will unequivocally rule out accepting a Cabinet appointment from President Bush.)

Bob Woodward confirms that the idea of Sen. Lieberman being appointed Secretary of Defense was more than just a rumor, in an excerpt from his new book, State of Denial, in today's Washington Post:

After President Bush won reelection in 2004, White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. got out an 8 1/2 -by-11 spiral notebook, half an inch thick, with a blue cover. He called it his "hit-by-the-bus" book -- handy in case someone in the administration suddenly had to be replaced. He had intentionally used a student notebook, something he had bought himself, so it wouldn't be considered a government document or presidential record that might someday be opened to history. It was private and personal.

A second term traditionally leads to personnel changes. The question was whether one of them would involve Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld....

Card had the names of 11 possible Rumsfeld replacements in his "hit-by-the-bus" book, among them Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), who had been Al Gore's vice presidential running mate in 2000 and was a staunch defender of the Iraq war, and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

And Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson also pushed specifically for Lieberman to replace Rumsfeld in private conversations with the president:

With Card's knowledge and encouragement, Michael Gerson, the chief White House speechwriter, also lobbied the president. Gerson said he believed that Rumsfeld should be replaced, as a symbol of change. The president should talk to Lieberman about taking over for Rumsfeld, Gerson recommended. What better symbol of change could there be than to bring in Gore's running mate?

Knowing how important loyalty was to Bush, he said, "Mr. President, it's not disloyal to have someone in for four years, four and a half years, in a job like this, and then for a variety of reasons, many of them not of his own doing, okay, to say that it would be advantageous to have a change."

Interesting idea, Bush said.

(Photo by Suzanne Ouellette for The Day)

The Day covers Ambassador Wilson campaigning with Annie Lamont and George Jepsen in Old Saybrook this weekend:

Wilson, who said he had no particular animus toward incumbent U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, “other than to believe that when the voters turn you out, you're supposed to go away,” gave his support to Lamont because, in Wilson's words, the Bush administration needs to be held accountable.

“The Republican majority in Congress has abrogated its constitutional responsibilities to provide oversight of the executive branch,” Wilson said. “It has sacrificed the Constitution of the United States on the altar of partisan politics to a radical regime.”...

Wilson pointed out that Mel Sembler, the former Republican National Committee finance chairman and the chair of Libby's legal defense fund, recently hosted a fundraiser for Lieberman in St. Petersburg, Fla.

Sembler told the Associated Press the event raised a “couple hundred thousand dollars” for Lieberman, who was there.

• Tickets for the Oct. 23rd debate in New London will be available starting at 8:30am tomorrow morning at the offices of the New London Day (47 Eugene O'Neill Dr. in New London, or 457 W. Main St. in Norwich), at the Garde Arts Center (325 State St., New London), or at the public libraries in Groton and Waterford. First come, first served.


• I don't know how much Joe paid for his last TV ad, but if that's how he wants to spend Mel Sembler's money, and Mel is fine with it, that's all that really matters, I guess. But maybe next time he should just ask Spazeboy to cook something up (it's cheaper, funnier... and better music, too!):
  
  


• Same old, same old. Newt Gingrich used Lieberman's vote on the detainee bill to inoculate Republicans and attack Democrats on Fox News today:
  

  WALLACE: So, Speaker Gingrich, have they, in fact, put Democrats in a box? And is this now back to the Karl Rove playbook, they're "soft on terrorism"?
  
  GINGRICH: First of all, this was all in response to a Supreme Court decision called Hamdan, in which the administration had to get something passed or they had no authority....
  
  Second, there's a genuine, legitimate disagreement between those people who believe that this is a vicious, brutal war and requires wartime rules and those people who believe you can handle this as a criminal justice matter and have procedures that are more like the criminal justice system.
  
  That's a very significant difference of approach, and it tends to fall into the two parties — not totally. I think Senator Lieberman, for example, voted for the administration bill.

  
  Again, Sen. Lieberman was the 99th of 99 senators to vote on the bill, after milling around the senate floor for minutes to see how the vote was shaping up (assumedly to see if he would get cover from colleagues like Lautenberg and Rockefeller on the bill, which he did).

Newsweek, talking about increased pressure on the Administration in the wake of the release of Bob Woodward's new book:

Democrats as well as a few Republicans will renew their calls for Rumsfeld's head, but it is doubtful that Bush will dump his Defense secretary before the elections. That might be seen as a concession to the "Defeatocrats," as the GOP likes to call the opposition. (Rumsfeld himself had no comment about Woodward's book.) But a senior White House official, operating under the usual cover of anonymity, gave a less than airtight guarantee of Rumsfeld's job security.

Will Sen. Lieberman - win or lose - unequivocally rule out accepting a cabinet appointment from President Bush, which might leave the choice of his replacement in the hands of (a likely) Gov. Rell (R)?

Now that administration officials are openly questioning whether Rumsfeld will stay on, this sounds like a good question for the debate(s).

Amazing as it seems, there are just 37 days remaining until election day.

CTBob put together this great video capturing what it's like to volunteer for the campaign (although your soundtrack may differ):



Get involved in whatever way you can.

Five weeks to go.

...Schlesinger, who has never been married, railed about Rowland and the paid escort rumor.

"The biggest whore in the world and he spreads a rumor about me," Schlesinger fumed. "It's totally made up."

- Alan Schlesinger (R), regarding rumors spread about him, in a lengthy profile in today's Courant.

Well, that's one clear difference between Schlesinger and Lieberman. One despised Rowland, the other loved him.