I don't want Jeanine Pirro to win the election for New York Attorney General, but I'm sorry to see her personal life splashed all over the papers. This is really sordid. I also don't wish a federal investigation on anyone, especially over marital problems.

Shorter version: Pirro asked Bernie Kerik to bug her husband to find out about his mistress. This is the same husband who went to jail a few years ago for tax evasion, where Jeanine wasn't indicted because she had innocent spouse status even though she signed the return. The feds were tapping Bernie in 2005 on an unrelated matter and they caught his coversations with Jeanine. Now she's under investigation.

(Guest Post by Big Tent Democrat)

When we last heard comprehensively from Joe Lieberman on Iraq in December 2005, this is what he said:

Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do.

Thus Lieberman fully embraced the Bush plan for the Iraq Debacle, as he has since Day One. Today, after months of silence on Iraq, Lieberman, like Garbo, will talk:

(Guest Post by Big Tent Democrat)

The plot thickens:

Three former college football teammates of Sen. George Allen say that the Virginia Republican repeatedly used an inflammatory racial epithet and demonstrated racist attitudes toward blacks during the early 1970s.
"Allen said he came to Virginia because he wanted to play football in a place where 'blacks knew their place,'" said Dr. Ken Shelton, a white radiologist in North Carolina who played tight end for the University of Virginia football team when Allen was quarterback. "He used the N-word on a regular basis back then."

A second white teammate, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he feared retribution from the Allen campaign, separately claimed that Allen used the word "nigger" to describe blacks. "It was so common with George when he was among his white friends. This is the terminology he used," the teammate said.

A third white teammate contacted separately, who also spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear of being attacked by the Virginia senator, said he too remembers Allen using the word "nigger," though he said he could not recall a specific conversation in which Allen used the term. "My impression of him was that he was a racist," the third teammate said.

Deep macaca indeed.

Former Senator Gary Hart, writing at Huffington Post today, opines that the October surprise may be that Bush launches a pre-emptive war against Iran before the November elections.

The steps will be these: Air Force tankers will be deployed to fuel B-2 bombers, Navy cruise missile ships will be positioned at strategic points in the northern Indian Ocean and perhaps the Persian Gulf, unmanned drones will collect target data, and commando teams will refine those data. The latter two steps are already being taken.

Then the president will speak on national television. He will say this: Iran is determined to develop nuclear weapons; if this happens, the entire region will go nuclear; our diplomatic efforts to prevent this have failed; Iran is offering a haven to known al Qaeda leaders; the fate of our ally Israel is at stake; Iran persists in supporting terrorism, including in Iraq; and sanctions will have no affect (and besides they are for sissies). He will not say: ...and besides, we need the oil.

(Guest Post by Big Tent Democrat)

Talking about race is always difficult. Talking about race issues in the Democratic Party is paradoxically more difficult as we Democrats have a hard time facing up to the problems in our midst. We're not racists we think. We fight racism. And we do. But we have race issues all the same. How to talk about them? How to do it constructively? The Clinton lunch contretemps gave us examples of good and bad ways to do it. Today, Matt Stoller discusses the Maryland Senate race and I'm not sure if I agree with Matt's approach:

I'm watching Maryland politics with tremendous interest. On the heels of Al Wynn's stolen election, I see Michael Steele attempting to run a campaign entirely based on African-American resentment of Democratic fecklessness and institutional racism. Gregory Kane at BlackAmericaWeb sums up this attitude.

Republican and former Ambassador Mel Sembler co-hosted a fundraiser for Joe Lieberman . Who's Mel Sembler? Besides being the Chair of Scooter Libby's defense trust, remember Straight? If not, Lindsay at Majikthise (and writing more at Firedoglake) and Jesus' General have the scoop. Lindsay's father, Professor Barry Beyerstein, wrote a searing report on Straight after being invited to visit its facilities.

And don't forget to check out Sembler's lawsuit to recover a p*nis pump.

by TChris

Indiana bans automated telephone calls that play prerecorded messages unless a live person first obtains permission from the called party. That law didn't stop Republicans from using automated telephone calls to target Democratic congressional candidate Baron Hill, who is running for the seat he once held, now occupied by Rep. Mike Sodrel. Indiana's Republican Attorney General Steve Carter filed a lawsuit today against the Republicans who are responsible for the calls -- Republicans who have a history of nasty election practices.

Carter also is seeking a preliminary injunction against the California-based group, Economic Freedom Fund, which is financed by Bob J. Perry, a Texas homebuilder with close ties to White House adviser Karl Rove. Perry also bankrolled the Swift Boat attack ads against the war record of Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry in 2004.

The calls (discussed here) make false claims about Hill. While Sodrel pledged to run a clean campaign, Hill points to dishonest statements in Sodrel's advertising as evidence that Hill hasn't kept his word. The dirty tricks may be a sign of desparation as polling shows Hill with a lead over Sodrel.

(Guest Post by Big Tent Democrat)

SusanG at dailykos takes apart Barack Obama's Latest quite nicely. As I wrote before, Obama is not helping Democrats in this cycle because he has bought into the Lakoffian 'appeal to Conservatives' approach. But it is worse than that now. 60 days from an election, he is lecturing Dems that they 'need an agenda.' I can tell you the agenda we don't need - this one:

What Democrats have to do is to close the deal. We have got to show we have a serious agenda for change.

Show the agenda Obama. Don't tell people Dems do not have the agenda! Honest to Gawd. 60 days from the election and he says stuff like this? Just incredibly stupid.

More on the other side.

Good news from the Pew Research Center -- the public is strongly favoring Democrats in the November elections and a mood of anti-incumbancy and anti-Bush rules the day.

As the congressional midterm campaign begins in earnest, the mood of the electorate is sharply drawn. Voters are disappointed with Congress and disapproving of President Bush. Anti-incumbent sentiment, while a bit lower than a few months ago, is far more extensive than in the previous two midterms and remains close to 1994 levels. Moreover, there are indications that voters are viewing the election through the prism of national issues and concerns. Many more voters see their vote as being against the president than at a comparable point in 1994, and a solid majority says party control of Congress will be a factor in their voting decision.

FigureVoters are expressing strong and consistent anti-Republican attitudes. The GOP lags well behind the Democratic Party on nearly all major issues, including the economy, Iraq, education, health care, the environment and the budget deficit. And the Republicans have lost ground in recent years even on such traditional strengths as terrorism and improving the nation's morality.

by TChris

This is primary day in many states, including Rhode Island, where Lincoln Chafee, one of the country's few Republican moderates holding elected office, may be voted out by right wing voters. Meanwhile, battles are underway in several states regarding conservative legislative efforts to make voting more difficult.

Here's a place to talk election politics.

(Guest Post by Big Tent Democrat)

NYTimes' Jennifer Medina is caught by mcjoan of dailykos in one of the most blatantly dishonest news articles that I have seen:

The article then goes on to describe the contents of an e-mail Lamont had sent to Lieberman following his floor speech scolding Clinton. Well, partially describes the contents of the e-mail. Here's what the NYT says he wrote:

"At the time, Mr. Lamont wrote that he had 'supported the moral outrage' Mr. Lieberman expressed reluctantly because he 'thought it might make matters worse,' adding that 'unfortunately, the statement was the beginning of a process that has turned more political and morally offensive.' He urged Mr. Lieberman to 'stand up and use your moral authority to put an end to this snowballing mess,' and suggested that 'It's time for you to make up your mind and speak your mind as you did so eloquently last Thursday.'

'I'm the father of three and the thought that Clinton testifying about oral sex before the grand jury may be broadcast into my living room is outrageous,' Mr. Lamont wrote. 'This sorry episode is an embarrassment to me as a father and to us as a nation.'"

Some careful editing there.

More than just careful, dishonest and a gross violation of journalistic principles.Medina purposefully omitted the opening and closing sentences of the second paragraph, utterly changing the meaning of Lamont's "outrage." The full text (provided on the flip) of the Lamont e-mail makes patent the dishonesty in Medina's reporting - Lamont was urging Lieberman to criticize the Starr inquisition and to not allow himself to be an enabler of Republican outrages (sound familiar?) Of course, Lieberman did not heed Lamont' s call. But see for yourself on the flip.

(Guest Post by Big Tent Democrat)

In a contemptible manuever, the Anti-Defamation League, an organization dedicated to fighting antisemitism, cynically sacrificed its principles to enable Joe Lieberman to again falsely cry antisemitism. The Murdoch-owned New York Post was the media vehicle for this despicable ploy:

A string of anti-Semitic rants about Sen. Joe Lieberman have popped up on the liberal MoveOn.org's open forum Web site, drawing criticism from the Anti-Defamation League.

. . . "We recognize that Action Forum is an open forum intended to foster the free flow of ideas," ADL head Abraham Foxman said in a letter dated Aug. 31 to MoveOn, which supported Lamont in the Democratic primary against Lieberman. "Nevertheless, since such profoundly offensive content is appearing on a board clearly linked to MoveOn.org, we believe you should assume some responsibility to respond to this hateful content," Foxman wrote in the letter, which was forwarded by Lieberman's campaign.

Foxman's ploy was almost certainly done at the behest of the Lieberman campign. The Foxman letter came 12 days AFTER Move On had removed the comments: