UPDATE #1: WASH-5: Anderson out. The Times Argus is reporting that Rep. Jon Anderson has lost his primary re-election bid to Rep. Warren Kitzmiller and Montpelier Mayor Mary Hooper. Hooper was the top vote getter (900), Kitzmiller came in at 829 and Anderson at 583 despite reports of city Republicans openly admitting to bullet voting for him on the Dem ballot (these are unofficial results). Also, Anderson only received 19 write-ins on R ballots, meaning he won’t be the Republican candidate either (the threshold was 25).

UPDATE #2: Welch beats Hill. Duh.

UPDATE #3: WCAX reports at 8:20 that 30 of 260 precincts (12 percent) have reported in, giving Costello 60% and Freeman 40% – of course that’s only 1450 and 978 votes respectively, but I just heard that there are similar results coming in from Franklin County towns. Also, I am told that Costello won in Montpelier (although not by much), and frankly, if Freeman couldn’t take Montpelier, with its higher turnout than most of the state (due to the House primary), liberal-leaning electorate, and being practically Freeman’s backyard, then he’s likely not going to win this thing.

I’d have to say its probably going to be Costello by roughly the 60-40 spread we’re seeing now, possibly more.

UPDATE #4 – WCAX calls it for Costello. With 45% of the polling places reporting, its at 61% for Costello, 39% for Freeman.

UPDATE #5 – The Free Press has some early Chittenden Senate results: With 9 of the 23 precincts reporting, it stands at Doug Racine 908, Ginny Lyons 863, Ed Flanagan 776, Hinda Miller 672, Denise Barnard 611, Tim Palmer 497, Tim Ashe 426, Dennis McMahon 241, and Sean Starfighter 156.

UPDATE #6 – More from the Freeps: Richmond and Hinesburg have come in with similar numbers (although Barnard is a lot higher up in Richmond). Unless Burlington really turns it around for Ashe (given that some of the big burb towns that have yet to come in will be his weakest), it’s looking likely that the Chittenden Senate slate will be (no surprises) Racine, Lyons, Flanagan, Miller, Barnard and Palmer.

UPDATE #7 – Washington-Chittenden 1 (Waterbury, Duxbury, Huntington, Buel’s Gore) 2 seats. Jack reporting–I just got off the phone with Sue Minter from a lively celebration at The Alchemist.

Sue Minter–592

Tom Stevens–439

Gordon Miller–154

UPDATE #8 – Allard goes down in Franklin 2. It’s not a done deal yet, but it looks like the biggest Jim-Dog of them all – Ron Allard – will likely come in fourth out of four in the primary. It’s likely to be McWilliams Greg “Moose” Christie and Howrigan. McWilliams is another conservative Moose is a moderate D, but – hey – sometimes its all about baby steps. At least he’ll likely Christie will come through for the caucus when the chips are down (of course he’ll have to get past a general election with Allard on the ballot as an I, most likely). (Caoimhin UPDATE) If Moose wins in November, he’ll be easy to recognize as a freshman representative. Here is a recent picture of him:

UPDATE #9 – Ballot trouble in Burlington. Yup. Again. This time its not enough ballots in some areas and its slowing up the results.

UPDATE #10 – Windham 5: Deen and Mrowicki are the unofficial Democratic Party nominees. Christian reporting in. I just got off the phone with the Brattleboro Reformer. Here’s the vote tallies they have so far.

    David Deen: 910

    Mike Mrowicki: 818

    Steve Darrow: 521

Even though the results are still unofficial, I don’t expect them to change. I’m certain that Deen and Mrowicki will represent the Dems for Windham 5 and they will not have any Republican challengers in November. Darrow forgot to submit his candidacy on time, so voters had to write him in as a candidate. Not sure if that hurt him in the end, but I still think we’re sitting pretty with the other two.

UPDATE #11: More Demward movement in Franklin County. Dem write-in candidates Margo Sherwood in Franklin-6 & George Bilodeau in Franklin-1 have likely qualified for the general election ballots.

UPDATE #12 – Out-of-state news: Al Franken wins the DFL primary to qualify for the general election in Minnesota against Republican nonentity Norm Coleman. (Jack)

UPDATE #13 – More big blue-to-bluer news from Chittenden 3-5: Keogh is out. Challenger Suzi Wizowaty has unseated Blue Dog Bill Keogh. Wizowaty will join Joey Donovan on the Dem ballot line in November. Unexpected (and welcome) news. Definitely a big night for the “better” part of the “more and better Dems” blogosphere mantra.

UPDATE #14 – As per Rep. Nease in the comments, the results in Chittenden 3-1 are “Bill Aswad and Johanna Cole (beating Susan Wheeler by single digits).” Good news, IMO. Cole is a great candidate. Also in “Rutland 1-2 it will be David Potter and Barbara Carris.” Thanks Floyd.

UPDATE #15 – It’s Tim vs. Tim, and down to the wire in the Chittenden Dem Senate race. Surprisingly, Ashe has moved a scant 12 votes ahead of Palmer with only Burlington left to come in. The Prog city councilor running as a D may actually pull it off, and pull that #6 slot out from under Palmer…

And with that, I’m going to bed. Perhaps commenters or other GMD front pagers can keep the updates coming (or not)…

UPDATE #16 Chittenden Senate-Does anyone else think it’s ridiculous that the polls closed more than twelve hours ago and we still don’t know what happened in Burlington? Jack

Post ’em as you get ’em, and I’ll do the same.

First of all, a few belated GMD shout outs: Not only did our own JDRyan get hitched this last weekend, but so did Welch staffer and former Dem Party ED Jon Copans to lobbyist Rebecca McCarty. They even have a wedding web page. See?

Also getting birthday shout outs are our own “Vermonter” – Neil Jensen – as well as Candleblogger Bill Simmon. I think those are late shout outs as well.

And of course, a big shout out to Essex Junction uberblogger Steve Benen for hitting the even-bigger time by appearing on Rachel Maddow’s new MSNBC show on its first night yesterday. Unfortunately I missed it, but I think we all look forward to seeing Steve become an MSNBC regular and coming to blows with Pat Buchanan.

Okay, I’m hoarse from all the shout outs…. back to the Primary…

I’ve been trying to figure which of the Lite Gov candidates gains more from the contested primaries. Overall, turnout will be dreadful – and it doesn’t sound like local primary contests will drive up voting in those areas more than 10% or so. Still, every vote counts, and Freeman definitely benefits from the increased turnout in Montpelier, while Costello may benefit from the Franklin County bounce. It doesn’t sound like the two-and-half-way race (with former Rep Darrow going for a write in) in Windham-5 will drive up votes that Costello could bank on.

The big question is Chittenden, which may benefit Freeman a bit. The turnout spike will be centered in two Burlington districts that are not as far left as we think of Burlington as being, but this is primary voters we’re talking about. Many of the reliable voters in those districts are fairly loyal to the Party as an institution, which helps “institutional” candidate Costello, but I suspect any spike above and beyond that base may equal a net gain for outsider Freeman – although probably not by much. We’ll see.

Per today’s Rutland Herald:

A Dorset man, who told the court he does not recognize the right of the state to require a driver’s license, was arraigned on Monday after police said he hit a Manchester Police officer with his car while trying to escape a traffic stop.

[…]

Armstrong, who gave his name in a court filing as Claude-Emerson..Armstrong, did not enter a plea on any of the charges. Judge John Wesley said under the circumstance, the state would assume Armstrong was pleading not guilty and entered that plea on Armstrong’s behalf.

During a court hearing, Armstrong referred to himself as a “sovereign citizen” and asked the Bennington County State’s Attorney’s office to produce any contract between himself and the state of Vermont.

I wonder if this could get me out of paying off my student loans.

(I thought we should bump this back up to the top.  Does anyone know where to get primary results online? – promoted by JulieWaters)

Waddaya think? Last time I was involved in a bet with Philip Baruth, Shay Totten and Neil Jensen as to the results of the Lite Gov Dem primary, and I cleaned up on free beer – this time I have no clue. There’s been so little interest in the race (as demonstrated by the GMD polls: two years ago our online Tracy v. Dunne poll had 171 voters, but the one to the right has a scant 34 votes despite the fact that our traffic is twice what it was two years ago).

What about the other races? Franklin-2? Washington-5? Rutland-3? How about Chittenden 3-1 or Chittenden 3-5? Chittenden Senate? Republican and Progressive write-in attempts?

Hey, we take our drama where we can get it.

There are Blue Dogs (or, in our case “Jim-Dogs” a la Open Left’s “Bush-Dogs”) and there are Blue Dogs…. and then there is Ron Allard. Allard is in a class all his own. Well, no – scratch that, what he is is a Republican, and a more die hard Republican than most in the Republican caucus. For whatever reason, he runs as a Dem, and its truly a mystery as to why. Other conservative Dems have at least one or two issues where they act like Dems – maybe labor or ag issues or somesuch. Allard? He’s got nothing. His seatmate, Dick Howrigan, is also a hyper conservative Dem, but even he votes with his caucus on the big ticket issues – coming through when it counts, for example, on the votes to override Douglas’s vetoes.

But not Allard. He’s the Governor’s man (and a Republican) through and through. It’s a waste of oxygen to even try with him. Like other conservative D’s, he refers to himself as some sort of old school Democrat – in his case, however, he must be referring to the Democratic Party of 150 years ago, as its hard to imagine him fitting in in any Dem context this side of Mississippi in the last century.

So the question is, do either of the challengers in Allard’s Franklin-2 district (St. Albans & Fairfield), “Moose” Christie or David McWilliams, have any chance to do us all a favor and oust him?

Mmmmm… could be, wabbit. Longshot, sure – so its sure not time to bet the farm – but McWilliams has reportedly been doing everything right. He’s been knocking on doors and doing the kind of retail politicking over a long enough time necessary to win in a district like this.

Of course it is a multiseat district, meaning everybody’s running against everybody. Allard and Howrigan are both “legacy” candidates – the latest officeholders from local families with long histories of holding political office – but of the two, Allard’s legacy is the softest, making him the most vulnerable.

But Allard is pretty wedged in, and he’s already opted to pre-emptively hold the local Dems hostage by announcing that he would run as an Independent if he loses in the Democratic primary. And lets be clear, that’s not likely to happen, but sometimes…. every now and then… when a challenger busts their butt against a complacent, institutional incumbent, surprises can happen. And I can think of no surprise in the state that would be sweeter.

And yes, if Allard were to run as an Indy, he’d probably win. But maybe not – and besides, he’d be out of the Dem caucus. Whether he’d end up caucusing with the Republicans in Montpelier is anyone’s guess, but as far as I’m concerned, they’re welcome to him.

I first met Tim Palmer about four years ago through the typical round of Democratic Party campaign events.  I found his positive energy and enthusiasm contagious.  When Palmer first ran for State Senate two years ago, I enthusiastically supported his candidacy because I had discovered that he supported the same type of progressive democratic issues that are important to me.

Palmer cares deeply about Vermont, its people, and its future, and for that reason I will vote for Tim Palmer.  For the past 13 years, Palmer has worked with Democrats, Progressives, Republicans, and Independents inside the Statehouse and throughout the state on numerous projects dealing with issues ranging from energy planning to health care reform, from smart growth to employee compensation and rights, from universal broadband access to civil unions, and from reinvestment in our rail infrastructure to medical marijuana.  

When we spoke earlier in his campaign, Palmer said, “I have had a very full life.  I think that I can make a big difference in the Senate not only on the big issues facing Vermont like energy, economic development, health care, education, infrastructure, etc., but also on big issues facing individual Vermonters like death with dignity, marriage equality, home based alternatives to nursing homes, etc.  

I asked him, “Why are you running for Vermont State Senate?”

Tim Palmer (TP)  “I’m running because I have important real world experience that can be applied to issues facing the Senate.  We need common sense approaches of what works in the real world.  I’ve worked in a range of fields including economic development, housing, communications sustainability, health, aging, climate change, and food systems.  I want to apply my background to create jobs with a sustainable income that make a difference to all Vermonters…  I want to see us move forward as a state by developing good solid jobs and working for children and families.  I have plenty of experience in both these areas.”

“I believe that my ability to create jobs and maintain them over time is important to have in the mix of world-views in the legislature.  My background was further expanded this year in my lobbying work for Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility.  Our focus was on energy issues, workers comp, telecommunications, taxes, and transportation.”

Tim, you lost the Democratic Primary in 2006 by 29 votes.  Why did you lose, and why run again now?

TP “I lost because I didn’t really think through the dynamics of campaigns.  I campaigned in areas where people already knew me and did not reach out far enough into new areas.  Now, I am working to meet a cross-section of true Vermonters and Chittenden County representatives, and have focused on raising my name recognition throughout the county.”

“Most of all I was motivated to run by the Obama campaign.  I did a lot of campaigning for Senator Obama in New Hampshire and in other states.  I believe that government must be seen as a partner in solving problems, not as an enemy.  Vermonters must see government working hand in hand with them rather than fighting them

A prime example of that dynamic is how the Douglas administration is dealing with the Intervale.

As a Chittenden County Senator, I would be actively involved in finding workable solutions rather than accept the Douglas administration’s heavy handed approach which does not reflect the reality of the city and the county.”

Check out Tim Palmer’s website for details regarding his background and extensive experience (http://timpalmervt.com/)

Over 35 years experience in health, housing, aging, economic and community development, sustainability, and human rights work.

Served as Executive Director of Vermont CARES, the state’s oldest and largest HIV/AIDS services organization based in Burlington.

Advocated on behalf of low income seniors, senior centers and services, and area agencies on aging as Executive Director of the Community of Vermont Elders (COVE).

Represented over 600 employers as lobbyist for Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility (VBSR) on issues such as energy, transportation, health care, environmental protection, workforce development, and telecommunications access.

Currently serves as Interim Executive Director of the Sustainability Institute, a Vermont-based nonprofit that works locally and globally on climate change, food and poverty.

Led the effort to create the Vermont Alliance of Nonprofit Organizations (VANPO) and provided technical assistance to dozens of community based nonprofit agencies

Living and working in Burlington, I’ve gotten to know Tim Ashe and appreciate both his work ethic and community spirit.

A number of Democrats I know well have called Tim an interloper, because he was elected to city council as a Progressive, and now is running for State Senate as a Democrat.

I disagree with them, and tomorrow I will vote for Tim Ashe.  When I was nominated for Public Works Commission by Democratic City Councilor Russ Ellis, Tim Ashe also stepped forth and supported my candidacy.  I have worked with Ashe over and over at city meetings and events, and no matter how challenging the issue or question, he exhibits patience and a willingness to uncover the truth and work for creative solutions.  And, Tim Ashe, Russ Ellis, Kurt Wright, and I have all worked together on several zoning issues of critical concern to residents of the New North End.

That does not mean that Ashe and I agree on everything.  We don’t, for example agree about on the record review and several other land-use issues unique to Burlington, but Ashe and I do agree on open government, educational issues, protecting the Intervale, energy issues, and the environment.  

With a Bachelors Degree from UVM and a Master’s Degree in Public Policy from Harvard, Ashe is clearly prepared to work on issues in Montpelier.  Moreover, after serving for four-years on Burlington’s volatile city council, I believe that Ashe has proven he is able to hold his own, will work hard on constituent issues, and has the fiscal acumen to face Vermont’s financial problems head on.

This summer, I asked Ashe:

Why should people vote for you?  In other words, what special talents and credentials would you bring to a Senate seat?  

Tim Ashe (TA) “For starters, a vote for me is a vote for cooperation between Democrats and Progressives.  I will be an independent voice on issues of energy, working conditions, and health care in a way that people bound by party leadership sometimes can’t be  I also believe that we need balance and youthful energy in the senate, and other than Matt Dunne, I’m not sure that has ever happened before.”

Why have you have chosen to run in the Democratic Primary?

TA “I am running in the Democratic primary and that is a distinction, and I am seeking voter support by both parties as an option that the leadership in Montpelier should work together to unelect people like Jim Douglas.”

What if you don’t win a slot via the democratic primary, will you still be a candidate on the Progressive ticket?  

TA “No.”

With whom will you caucus?  

“My hope is to be elected with both Democratic and Progressive nominations and appear with both party affiliations next to my name which would signify as well as possible what this campaign is all about.”

If you run as a Democrat, how will you work with the other Democrats on the ticket?

TA “I have enthusiastically supported Ed Adrian, Doug Racine, Ginny Lyons, Mark Larson, Scudder Parker, and many others, and such that anyone cares I would continue to be vocally positive for people who’s beliefs come close to my own”

When people work on specific bills, parties caucus at the State House to work to achieve legislation, with whom will you caucus?  

TA “I assume I would caucus with both parties depending on the issues.  And, I certainly see issues where Senators like Vince Illuzzi would be allies.  The Connecticut Dam issue is a prime example where party lines and issues didn’t separate clearly.

As a Burlington Progressive, how will your role as Progressive fit in with your campaigning and work as a Democrat in light of the fact that two of the city’s progressive candidates for the House are being challenged by Democratic candidates?  

TA “In Burlington, I worked well with many Democrats and would carry that effort with me into Montpelier.  Just as I have tremendous respect for Mark Larson in my district and Dave Zuckerman and Chris Pearson are wonderful and respected legislators, no one can get anything done without working together.  In Burlington, we can’t get anything done without alliances, and I have worked in Burlington to build alliances across three-party lines.  I look forward to doing the same bridge building in Montpelier.”

Your key issues?

TA “Delivering health care to every single person in the State of Vermont.  Making a serious investment in wind and solar — alternate energies.  Fighting w/ everything I’ve got to save the Intevale, and protecting Efficiency Vermont. …Finally speaking from experience, what will it take to keep young workers in the State of Vermont?  In addition, I will continue to support affordable housing, increasing wages, equal rights of gay and lesbians, and protecting our civil liberties.”

According to his website (http://timashe.com/)

Since the Fall of 2006, Tim has been a Project Manager at Cathedral Square, a nationally recognized non-profit developer of high quality affordable housing for seniors and people with disabilities. In his role at CSC, he’s managed projects totaling 155 units of housing and $17 million.

Tim also served on the Board of Spectrum Youth and Family Services, a vital community organization serving at-risk youth.  He also coached in the Old North End little league for two years, and has volunteered in the Barnes Elementary School.

(Cross posted on Broadsides.org)

Oh no, guess what? The liberals are nervous. Yep, the obedient lib-Dems are finally starting to realize that the little party they were having in the immediate aftermath of the Sarah Palin selection may have been a bit premature. Oops.

Liberals never learn. Dems can’t seem to win. And the two phenomena are as connected as John McCain’s eyes have been connected to Palin’s ass.

Drunk on their Obama Kool-aid, the lib-Dems have been putting together their fantasy cabinet selections, planning their election-night party plans, and trying to figure out whom to meet or whom to give money to in order to get some prized inaugural dance tickets. In their minds, this presidential race was over before they could even dismantle the faux-stage at their faux-convention.

Cue screeching car sound – as in: The rubber hitting the road.

Because the polling news hasn’t been good. While the lib-Dems have been blogging and pontificating themselves into a stupor over all the stupid stuff about Palin, the American people have been moving away from Obama and toward – say what? – the McCain/Palin ticket. And the movement has been significant enough for the likes of Kos, AmericaBlog  and Talking Points Memo – three leading liberal blogs – to use words like “panic,” “worried” and “overestimated” while describing the current state of affairs.  

Worse, the lib-Dems are refusing to look in the mirror while trying to come up with a reason for the Obama/Biden slip in the polls and the near-derailment in its messaging. Instead, they keep hitting the whining button and doing what they hate most in their conservative counterparts: Blaming the media and getting slimier and slimier with their personal attacks. Anything, in fact, but face the fact that their candidates and their party have all but abandoned “the issues” at the very moment when voters are beginning to ponder them.

If, as political scientists like to tell us, this is the time when voters start to pay attention, consider what they’re hearing from Obama and the Democratic Party:

* On the Iraq War, Obama was pushed into saying that the “surge worked beyond anyone’s wildest expectations” to the Fox News blowhard, Bill O’Reilly. Despite being an inaccurate – if not completely spineless – position, it effectively handed what was the number one issue directly over to Mr. Surge himself, John McCain.

* On energy issues, the Dems are in the middle of doing an about-face on offshore drilling. Instead of showing some spine and sanity in the face of the Republican’s new – and scary – hit chant of “drill baby, drill,” the Dems are flip-flopping like McCain on the issue and, according to The Hill, preparing to help pass new offshore drilling allowances.

* On health care, the Obama campaign continues to muddy and muddle through a confusing and all-but-impossible to understand “solution” that will allow the insurance companies and “the market” to remain in control. If it sounds a lot like the Hilary plan of 1993, well, it is. And we all know how that ended up – 15 long years ago. Thanks Dems. Sorry, but any health care plan from the Dems that doesn’t include the words “universal” or “single-payer” is just a pale imitation of the Republicans’ plan. In other words, not much change there.

And that’s what the lib-Dems don’t get: When you talk the talk of change, you’ve also got to walk the walk. Otherwise, you look like John Kerry or Al Gore. You know, two guys who took the voting public for fools by refusing to stand firm on their issues, changed issue-horses in mid-stream and, as a result, were both L.O.S.E.R.S.

Earth to the lib-Dems: This is no time to silence yourselves when it comes to the issues. This is the time to stand firm, talk tough and demand that your beloved Obama/Biden ticket listen to you. You know, kind of like the Christian right threatened to stay home unless one of their own was put on the McCain ticket. And then down came Palin.

Sadly – if not completely predictable – this election is starting to look like a rerun, complete with the liberal “shock, shock, shock!”

Yes, indeed: It’s the issues, stupid.

I began yesterday morning with a Democratic Brunch at the Ethan Allen Homestead in Burlington’s New North End with Democratic Candidate for Governor Gaye Symington and ended it listening to Senator Bernie Sanders speak to constituents on a boat-ride on Lake Champlain.

Senator Sanders, always concerned with Veterans affairs, shared news of the new GI Bill  (http://sanders.senate.gov/) while pointing out new key issues facing his Vermont constituents.

In these two very different events, both Sanders and Symington urged voters to create change with Obama.  Sanders spoke about serving on several committees with Obama, and his belief that Obama is the instrument of change we are seeking.  He stressed the fact that Obama would need to hear from Voters immediately following the election and continuously after his inauguration in order to fight the entrenched wealthy special interest groups that will be vying for a voice in Obama’s administration.

Symington urged Vermont voters to give “President” Obama the support to institute change by voting for candidates that will work with Obama here in Vermont to create change.  Her speech was fresh, energized, right on point, and not the worn-out stump speech candidates often fall back on at summer’s end.  No softballs were thrown here, and as, one observer said, “Gaye has finally found her song”.

Symington also spent time sitting down with prospective voters to answer questions and listen to concerns.  I sat with Greg Jenkins who drives one of those new mini all-electric cars.  Greg’s car costs a penny a mile in electricity to run and of course releases no pollutants to foul our air.  At our table, Symington began with a conversation about Greg’s car, moved on to energy planning issues and also spoke us about the challenges faced by friends, neighbors, and/or clients during these terribly trying economic times.  

Symington listened, and unlike many politicians, understood the questions.  Most importantly, after reviewing her record in the legislature, it is clear to me that Symington is capable of doing the hard work and planning necessary to rebuild Vermont’s economy and create a secure energy future.  

I believe I am doing my part to respond to Senator Sanders and Speaker Symington’s messages.  I support Gaye Symington as Vermont’s next Governor, and tomorrow in order to send committed, energetic, and solution-driven candidates to the Vermont Statehouse, I will also vote for Chittenden County Senate candidates Tim Palmer and Tim Ashe . You may read my posts on Palmer and Ashe later today.  And, please vote in tomorrow’s primary.

(Note: For a definition of what I mean by “Jim Dogs”, click here)  Montpelier’s free weekly, The Bridge, last week printed a look at the Democratic primary in District Wash-5, which covers the city. This, of course, is the race which pits sitting Representative Warren  Kitzmiller and Mayor Mary Hooper against also-sitting Rep. Jon Anderson. Anderson, a former Jim Douglas campaign contributor, was famously appointed to the position, against the wishes of the city Democrats, following the retirement of long-time Rep Francis Brooks.

The article spends a lot of time reviewing the first major action by Anderson following his appointment; his vote to uphold Governor Douglas’s veto – a vote which cemented his poor relationship with city Dems, as well as put him in the doghouse with the House Leadership. And if that relationship had any hope of improving, Anderson likely gave it another good kick in the head for the Bridge article (note: no link is available, as the Bridge has no online presence – emphasis added):

Anderson explains the vote as a matter of principle. He agreed with Governor Douglas on the policy question, and believed the Democrats were playing politics. Party leaders, he claims, told him that “we just want to make the Governor look bad.”

Oh, did they?

Let’s be clear, Anderson is dodging responsibility for sticking it to both the Dems and the Progs when the chips were down, not simply by dumping it back onto the leadership, but by calling them unprincipled political weasels in the process.

I wondered how they might feel about that, so I contacted Rep. Floyd Nease, who as Assistant Majority Leader in the House, acts as “Whip” to get the caucus together for important votes.

Nease was not pleased, and called Anderson’s comment “patently untrue,” calling Anderson and his actions a “great disappointment.”

A “he said, he said?” Not likely, as Anderson has reportedly suggested all sorts of explanations after the fact, this being the latest. Although he has explicitly denied it when being questioned by “colleagues” in the caucus, most insiders behind the scenes assume that Anderson’s vote was part of a deal with the Governor for the position.

And let’s be clear about another thing; that is, who was on the right side of “principle” in that override vote:

Thursday’s vote was 96-52 in favor of overturning a veto by the governor of a mid-year adjustment to the state’s budget. Douglas said he vetoed the bill because it did not include funding for a scholarship program he supported.

There’s the “principle over politics.” Douglas once again petulantly stood in the way of the most modest legislative action – a needed budgetary adjustment – because the legislature didn’t lie down and play dead over yet another of his phony pet projects designed to maximize sound bites while achieving nothing as public policy.

That’s some principle to stand up for.

While it’s true that he has been a pretty faithful vote since then, it’s equally true that a town like Montpelier can – and should – do better. Anderson knows this, and its why he has been openly courting self-identified Republicans in town to cross over into the Dem primary and vote for him.

The only question is whether he will bow out gracefully when Hooper and Kitzmiller beat him tomorrow, or if he will again ignore his Party’s decision to run as an independent.

Remember last year when Obama caught a raft of shit for saying he would go into Pakistan if necessary to fight al Qaida?

And who was giving him a hard time? The Republicans, of course.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney criticized Democrat Barack Obama on Friday for vowing to strike al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan if necessary as the Obama camp issued a strident defense of his plan.

But then, in another example of how the Bush administration has come around to follow Obama's advice, the U.S. is doing exactly that.

 All Things Considered, September 3, 2008 · Pakistan says U.S.-led forces crossed into its territory and launched an attack that killed at least 15 people. The target of the attack was a village in South Waziristan, which is a tribal area used as a base by the Taliban and al-Qaida.

So what have we seen? Timetable on getting out of Iraq? Check.

Attack al Qaida in Pakistan? Check.

How come the guy who isn't supposed to have the experience to run our foreign policy is always right all of a sudden?