New Haven Independent

Posted by: TrueBlueCT | August 22, 2006 3:58 PM

What Lieberman didn't mention was his vote for not just NAFTA, but also CAFTA. (one of just ten Democrats to vote for both.)

He also stumbled when talking about the minimum wage. To me it was clear that he did not know that it currently stands at $7.40. And although I am glad he is talking about the min. wage this year, does anyone remember him talking about in years past?

Someone tried to make a stink about how Lamont's line guys aren't unionized, but from what I've heard the attempts to make Lamont's life miserable by organizing them went nowhere. Rumor has it Ned's company pays them an average of $60,000 year.

And Proto cracked me up when he described Ned Lamont as a multi-millionaire. He must have been confused, as Joe is the lousy multi-millionaire with the lobbyist wife. Ned is the 200 millionaire, with the venture capitalist wife.

Posted by: matt w | August 22, 2006 4:02 PM

How many of these unions have re-offered their endorsement post primary? You exchange "unions" and "labor leaders," so it's hard to get a grasp on what was being given here.

Posted by: ctblogger | August 22, 2006 4:10 PM

Lynn Fusco was Joe's treasurer and he's just calling in his chips from what he did in New Haven with the union and Yale.

This is all a Fusco production. Olsen not being by Joe's side speaks volumes...

Posted by: Jhnahan | August 22, 2006 4:20 PM

I work at Yale. I voted for Lamont in the primary. I will vote for Lamont in the general election. This is nothing but show business. Mr. Proto is just like Lieberman -- desperate to keep his connections and hold on to power. Those working people at Yale that I've discussed the election with are all Lamont supporters. I don't care if Lamont is a millionaire. I'm pretty sure that all one hundred senators are a great deal wealthier than I am, that includes Senator Lieberman.

Posted by: Conn. Lie. Party for Lieberman | August 23, 2006 9:23 AM

Connecticut has one of the highest minimum wages in the US... and will not be affected by the feds. (true it is good to raise it but even Schwarzenegger in california just approved a hike in the minimum wage. the better question is where has Joe been for the last 12 years on increasing the minimum wage.)

I guess this just shows how out of touch Joe is with connecticut.

It is no wonder the more educated voters go for lamont, people who are too busy to be adequately informed and low income voters tend not to understand that joe is B.S. ing them.

Posted by: aries4567 | August 23, 2006 12:27 PM

Whether these union "endorsements" amount to much is highlighted by the comments below. The unions can not go into the voting booth with a person and watch! Sure, Lieberman has seniority that will be missed, but his TRUE voting record and his support for the Iraq mess mean that he is not really a Dem anyway. The CT Sec. of State has certified that he is now the candidate for the CON_LIE party! That is sweat music to me - good riddens Joe.

Posted by: Jguillen | August 23, 2006 7:45 PM

Hey Joe: it's not just Iraq that haS everyone pissed off. You voted for all of Bush's disastrous policies, you supported Cheney's backroom oil deals, you tried to roll back affirmative action, you have flip-flopped on affirmative action, and you don't support acess tohealth care for poor people. Why the hell would I want to vote for you? Oh, by the way, when are you going to hire some people of color?

Posted by: Skydogct | August 24, 2006 6:24 AM

This news about the Oman Free Trade Agreement endangering our ports just makes the whole affair this week with Lieberman and the 20 labor unions look ridiculous. Over 400 organizations were against OFTA from the start. Included in the 400 were UFCW, CWA, UNITE HERE, Laborers, and Teamsters, all on the International level. Individual locals included 9 CWA, 9 Teamster, 6 UNITE HERE,
and 5 UFCW locals. Representatives of these locals were all on the podium with Joe Monday. What the hell were they thinking?

According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, from 1998 to 2005 Connecticut lost 52,000 manufacturing jobs. But Joe continues to vote for every free trade bill that comes along. NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO, or China PNTR, it was all the same to him. These free trade bills he supported did not include tough labor standards or strong human rights provisions but it didn’t stop Joe. He didn't think twice about supporting George Bush and screwing those 400 organizations when he voted for this OFTA only a few months ago. Senior Senator Chris Dodd, Representatives Rosa DeLauro and John Larson, and even Republican Rob Simmons voted against this anti-labor bill. Not Joe, he's the gift that keeps on giving, to multi-national corporations. I think these unions made a big mistake endorsing Joe regardless of past favors due. At least with Ned Lamont they would have supported a candidate who wants to level the playing field with free trade. A Senator who will insist on strong labor standards that won't sell us out, as GI Joe did. I happy to say our Teamster local endorsed Ned and I hope others do the right thing and follow suit.

Posted by: MikeB | August 24, 2006 11:39 AM

This whole thing is curious. Chuck Appleby -- Carpenters Union chief? Well I suppose, he is the Business Manager of Local 24 in New London and on the executive board of the Carpenters' regional body. You don't think Lynn Fusco would put a guy like Chuck up to that, do you?

Bob Proto and UNITE HERE 35, that's more significant, and the back story is interesting, how Joe was an ally in their desperate actions against Yale, where government leaders' suasion can make a difference with an image-conscious national university. They seem to be embarrassed, but dutifully paying a debt.

The thing is, in the Labor Movement (usually in locals and always in higher bodies), there are deliberative mechanisms for deciding on political endorsements. The reason is simple: individual members and leaders are going to have different thoughts and, for that matter, different interests in play. The effect is particularly pronounced in this race.

Watch for what happens in those higher bodies and COPE committees, that will tell you which way Connecticut Labor is tending, who will be putting thousands of people into motion and who will get the benefit of that. Something tells me it's not going to be Joe.
.

Posted by: vin | August 24, 2006 12:41 PM

Go Joe! Ned is a pupet for MoveOn.org
Ned has only one platform and that is hate Bush.
He voted 90% with Dems and that's not enough for the Ned Dems!
He shows independents and that's what a party needs.
Joe will win and win big and we shall start with Ned and push these American hating Dems back where they belong and that is
under a pity rock.
Fight the enemy over there. We did not start this they did and we will finish this in due time.
Go Joe! Go! The voters will show Neds a pupet and America will not stand with the hate filled MoveOn.org folks.

Vin from the front lines....

Posted by: Jacki | August 24, 2006 1:13 PM

Joe thinks that he is entitled to be Senator for life. He didn't have the conviction of his beliefs to run just for Vice President. NO. He had to run for Senator at the same time. Wishy-washy doesn't even begin to describe him. Waffle might come close.

Posted by: Conn.Lie for Lieberman | August 24, 2006 1:50 PM

Holy Joe was one of only TWO democratic senators to vote yea on
NAFTA CAFTA AND OFTA...

why any labor group would support him is beyond me.

I pray a reporter will ask one of these labor leaders what they think of Joe's votes on NAFTA CAFTA AND OFTA and how's that working for them.

Posted by: KZ | August 24, 2006 3:07 PM

VIN, yes, we liberal Dems sure are American hating!



We hate America so much that we want to stop young Americans getting needlessly slaughtered thousands of miles away.

We hate America so much that we want to make sure every American has a non-bankrupt Social Security and healthcare system when they need it.

Yep, we hate America.

Fight them "over there", you say? Let me get this straight...the reason we fight them "over there" is so that we don't have to fight those annoying terrorists over here. Which of course means that the longer we stay in Iraq, the safer we should be here, and the fewer attacks there are...so what was this about some people blowing up planes in London?

Posted by: Henry | August 24, 2006 4:34 PM

I support Ned all the way. Labor leaders are entitled to support who they want. I see no reason to question the role of Labor in our State or the integrity of leaders who support Joe.

Bobby Proto is a great leader who has done a lot for our town and for the state. If he likes Joe, he has his reasons and they are good reasons. Joe supported 34 and 35 in the big strikes in the past. That is reason enough for Bobby to stay loyal.

But not for all of us. Joe has got to go and Ned is just the right guy for the job. I support Ned all the way.

Sorry Bobby. I like to be with you but not on this one.

Posted by: jake | August 27, 2006 12:24 PM

The right to organize is the only issue for labor, and if CT's "progressives" had any brains it would be for them as well.

Union membership is the only lens through which you can view straight white males and have their votes come up Democratic. The ONLY one. Double the number of union members in this country and we're looking at another fifty years of New Deal. Triple the number and we might actually wind up with single payer.

For all of Lieberman's disagreeable positions, he worked hard to help Yale workers. When you've been on strike for a couple of weeks, things have a way of getting very clear. Ned Lamont didn't show up to Yale's picket lines when he was just a citizen, and resisted organizing at his business like any other anti-union boss. Of course, he turned up at Sikorsy once he was running for office. Up with the revolution!

So let's not kid ourselves. Lamont's a decent guy, but we're not talking about Paul Wellstone or even Obama here, the kind of candidate for whom you abandon people who have been with you in difficult struggles.