They Commission Polls

Apologies for posting twice on Joe Lieberman in the same day, but Markos Moulitsas commissioned another poll in CT on the 2006 Senate race and how Connecticut voters think about their choices today.

Research 2000 for Daily Kos. 3/31-4/2. Regular voters. MoE 4% (9/10-12/2007 results)

If you could vote again for U.S. Senate, would you vote for Ned Lamont, the Democrat, Alan Schlesinger, the Republican, or Joe Lieberman, an Independent?

All

Lamont (D) 51 (48)
Lieberman (I) 37 (40)
Schlesinger (R) 7 (9)

Democrats

Lamont (D) 74 (72)
Lieberman (I) 19 (25)
Schlesinger (R) 2 (3)

Republicans

Lamont (D) 4 (7)
Lieberman (I) 74 (69)
Schlesinger (R) 19 (24)

Independents

Lamont (D) 53 (49)
Lieberman (I) 36 (38)
Schlesinger (R) 6 (9)

Lieberman has shored up his support with Republicans, who clearly see him as one of their own. He has predictably lost ground among Democrats. But interestingly, he also lost the same amount of ground (six points) with independents.

Clearly, his whole “independent” schtick isn’t playing well with real independent voters. I’ll have more on this poll later today. The crosstabs are below the fold. Crosstabs for last year’s poll can be found here.

I think this yet again shows both how successful Joe Lieberman was in 2006 at lying to the people of Connecticut about who he was and what he stood for. Would anyone believe him if today Lieberman were to say, “No one wants to end the war in Iraq more than I do”? Voters shouldn’t have believed them in 2006, but as our dear President says, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice…you can’t get fooled again.”

This poll also shows how fed up Connecticut voters are with Lieberman’s embrace of a far right wing world view. It’s not what he ran on and independent voters have not been rewarded for their faith in the man’s long-perceived moderate views. Add to that a rise in Ned Lamont’s popularity and it’s safe to say that people in Connecticut now recognize how much they screwed the pooch by reelecting Lieberman.

Good Dem vs. Bad Dem

Last week we saw Senate Majority “Leader” Harry Reid wrap both arms tightly around Joe Lieberman.

“I can tell you Sen. Reid had talked to me a few times and said he knows there will be talk if we get more than 51 Democrats next year,” Lieberman said. “As far as he is concerned, I will retain my seniority, etc., no matter how many Democrats there are next year.”

Reid’s spokesman, Jim Manley, confirmed Lieberman’s account.

This inexplicable and indefensible response from Reid prompted outrage among real Democrats around the country. Not surprisingly, though, this anger towards Lieberman was not limited to Democrats outside of Washington.

To wit, Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa was rightly pissed:

In a March 30 appearance on ABC’s “This Week” program, Lieberman suggested that the Democratic Party left him.

“The Democratic Party changed. The Democratic Party today was not the party it was in 2000. It’s not the (former President) Bill Clinton-Al Gore party, which was strong internationalists, strong on defense, pro-trade, pro-reform in our domestic government.”

“It’s been effectively taken over by a small group on the left of the party that is protectionist, isolationist and basically … very, very hyperpartisan,” Lieberman said. “So it pains me.”

“That’s ridiculous,” Sen. Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat, said in response to Lieberman’s remarks. “It’s self-serving.”

Indeed Senator Harkin. Glad to see that some long standing Senators can see Lieberman for what he is…and say so in public.

Olympic Flame FAIL

Paris edition:

Later in the relay, police threw other protesters to the ground and carried some away. The torch was snuffed out and placed on a bus.

It was extinguished and put on a bus again less than an hour later as protesters booed and began chanting “Tibet!” although none appeared to rush the torch.

The relay resumed but protesters were planning more demonstrations along Monday’s route.

Let me get this straight. Olympic organizers were so afraid that protesters would disrupt and possibly extinguish the Olympic flame that they extinguished the torch and put it on a bus not once, but twice? I thought the whole point of the Olympic flame was that you were never allowed to put it out.

That Word Doesn’t Mean What You Think It Means

Beijing Olympic Committee spokesman:

”A few Tibetan separatists attempted to sabotage the torch relay in London, and we strongly denounce their disgusting behavior,” said Sun Weide, a spokesman for the Beijing Olympic organizing committee.

Quick question: which is more disgusting?

london

Tibetans protesting the Olympic torch in London.

Or:

Norbu, son of Phurwagoen, 15, student at Tibetan Middle School, from Shanglung Village – shot and killed by Chinese security forces on March 16th in Amdo.

Or any of these much more graphic pictures of these Tibetans murdered by Chinese paramilitaries for protesting for their independence on March 16th.

In my view, only one of the pictures above is representative of “disgusting behavior” and it most certainly is not the one that involves free people expressing their political views with peaceful protest.

The San Francisco Torch

The Olympic Torch relay route only makes one stop in North America: San Francisco. The torch will arrive on April 9th – this coming Wednesday. Though the torch is only stopping in one American city and though San Francisco is historically among the most liberal when it comes to politics and protest, Mayor Gavin Newsom has consistently been an obstacle to alternative views about what the Beijing Olympics mean and what feelings the presence of the torch on American soil may elicit. Newsom has discouraged protesting and the exact torch route was only released last week – making it near impossible for the coalition of groups organizing against the torch in SF to lock down plans and apply for necessary permits. San Francisco is a city that is used to protests and I’d guess that at a certain point, Newsom has to just get out of the way and let events move forward. There is a large Tibetan-American community in the Bay Area and many, many people support Tibetan independence and human rights in SF. I’d simply hope that unlike in London and India, the US does not welcome Chinese security guards to surround the torch on its brief stop on American soil.

torch security

London: The guys in blue are Chinese security agents.

A coalition of Tibetan support groups in the Bay Area have a central website for activities and protests connected to the San Francisco torch relay. It is SFTeamTibet.org. You can get a schedule of all planned protests taking place on April 8th and 9th here.

CREDO Action has also printed free protest signs for the torch relay. You can reserve a protest sign here.

You can also sign up to get text message updates about the events at the protests in San Francisco by texting “sftorch” (leave out the quotation marks) to 41411.

Sarkozy Sets Conditions for Attending Olympics

This is a strong statement from France’s Human Rights Minister on what is required for President Nicoals Sarkozy to attend the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony.

In an interview with Le Monde, Rama Yade set out a list of conditions needed for Sarkozy to attend the ceremony August 8, the paper said.

“Three conditions are essential for him to attend,” she was quoted as telling Le Monde.

She said the conditions were: “An end to violence against the population and the liberation of political prisoners; shed light on the events in Tibet; and the opening of a dialogue with the Dalai Lama.”

Journalism: You’re Doing It Wrong

Glenn Greenwald drops ten tons of irony after dissecting an inane biographical interview of Attorney General Michael Mukasey by the Associated Press in a post called “The Associated Press fails to reveal Mukasey’s favorite color”:

This is why the Founders bestowed constitutional primacy to a free press. Just think about what the Government might be able to get away with — the kind of creepy propaganda they would be able to disseminate — without our ornery watchdogs serving as a vigilant check on the behavior of high political officials.

Heh, indeedy.

I remember growing up reading a magazine called Sports Illustrated for Kids. Like the name describes it, it was a reduced version of Sports Illustrated that featured a lot of how-to articles for different sports and questionnaire style interviews of popular athletes. I was able to learn what Wayne Gretzky’s favorite food was or what Jerry Rice felt the first time he caught a touchdown pass. While these were quite enjoyable to a ten year old child, I wouldn’t really consider Sports Illustrated for Kids a pinnacle of journalistic rigor.

The Associated Press interview of Mukasey by Lara Jakes Jordan strikes me as an inappropriate replication of Sports Illustrated for Kids journalism with one of America’s most controversial and infamous government officials.

Chinese Hegemony Via Olympic Flame

China continues to export their style of governance and control through the Olympic Torch relay route. This time the story comes from Chinese suzerainty India:

Anxious to ensure that the Olympic torch relay passes peacefully though India on April 17, the Chinese government has sent a team of investigators to keep an eye on Tibetans in New Delhi, particularly those who could turn out to be potential trouble makers.

The team, according the highly-placed sources, has been trying to familiarise themselves with the route that the Olympic torch would take, on motorcycles. 

If I were an Indian citizen, I would be outraged that my government is allowing another country’s security forces in to do the work of policing an Indian city. This just goes to show the great lengths China is willing to go in their war against bad national image (remember, war is their word, not mine) in connection to the Olympics. Once again, it could not be more clear that the Beijing Games are a political event and not mere sport.

Tibet Caucus Membership

Via Mikel Dunham, here’s a list of current members of the Tibet Caucus.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (CA-46)

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)

Rep. Maxine Waters (CA-35)

Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (MI-11)

Rep. Steve Chabot (OH-01)

Rep. Jim Walsh (NY-25)

Rep. Jim McGovern (MA-03)

Rep. Barbara Lee (CA-09)

It’s disappointing that this list is so short, but to my knowledge no Tibet support groups in the US have made concerted efforts for their members to petition their representatives to join the caucus. While it would be great to see a longer list of representatives standing up for Tibet, actions are more important than words now. I’d rather have elected officials working to pressure China to stop the crackdown in Tibet than put their names on a list. That said, my deepest thanks to the eight representatives who have stood up and joined the Tibet Caucus already.