I've been thinking about this for a few weeks now, but now that I have a little time (90 minutes give or take by my watch) I thought I'd write this down and throw it out to everyone.

(In advance I apologize if this has already been commented on, but I don't have as much time to read dKos as I used to).

This diary focuses on the question "who makes a better president:  a senator or a governor?", and while I'm not going to try to answer that question, I am going to offer my thoughts as to why all of the top contenders this election cycle are sitting senators, while the governor's have failed to make the cut.

Short diary, it's late.... but history is repeating itself, and it feels like this time around we're being manipulated.

I'm sure this has been diaried somewhere else, but my partner pointed this out as we were walking our dogs tonight.

So we now have a pattern of the Democratic party in what appears to be shambles:  

- ridiculous votes condeming free speech (I mean against the Move-on.org ad) - impeachment off the table was reinforced yesterday - the Kyl-Lieberman vote that Bush will probably use to go to war with Iran - the vote to expand Bush's illegal wiretapping program in August

and on and on.

I'm fed up!

[NOTE – I write this because of the amount of vitriol expressed in another diary asking whether or not Jenna is still a virgin.  So I’ve tried to distill my thoughts on the subject, and back them up, so that we can focus on the question at hand.  KJ]

     Abstinence only education, or abstinence until marriage programs, began in earnest around 1996, but really took off in 1999-2000.  Millions of school children have been exposed to this program.  But, as the Journal of Adolescent Health points out “Schools and health care providers should encourage abstinence as an important option for teenagers. ‘Abstinence only’ as a basis for health policy and programs should be abandoned.”
“Schools and health care providers should encourage abstinence as an important option for teenagers. ‘Abstinence only’ as a basis for health policy and programs should be abandoned.”

Follow me below for my "I have no life: diary entry.

As many of you, while showering this morning and going over the list in my head of upcoming legislation, my representatives (yes, even Lieberman and Shays) bizarre positions on - well everything - I got to thinkng about a news story that I saw earlier in the morning on CNN.

The story was about subsidies for farmers.  The report had that "this is why big government is a bad idea and can't work - because people who don't need the money are getting it and it leads to bad things".  Yes, people like David Letterman who received over $8,000 for farming done on his ranch.  People like.....well there were almost a dozen people they flashed on the sceen that are rich and receiving government handouts.

So what.... follow me please...

Tomorrow Bush  will be sedated for a colonscopy.  Cheney will officially be president with all the Constitutional authority.

What will Cheney do.....

While watching CNN just now, Miles O'Brien was interviewing a Democratic and a Republican strategist on a variety of topics.  The usual:  McCain and his lack of money, the Clinton/Edwards open mic gaff, and...... impeachment.

Follow me below for an interesting tidbit....

I'm not a financial analyst and I don't pore over financial data for a living.  But I want to share an observation that I think provides some indirect evidence that things are not as good as everyone believes.  Follow me below....

I ask the question because of what I read about today's cloture vote in the Senate.  The Senate was going to vote on their "non-binding resolution" to basically give a vote of no-confidence to Bushco.

Well the Republicans blocked the vote (they voted to not end debate, esentially filibustering the resolution), along with my embarassing senator from CT, Joe Leberman.

Follow me for his words of foreshadowing below...

2 months ago, if memory serves, we had an election in CT.  When I went to the polls I had the option of voting for Ned Lamont (D), Allen Schlesigner (R), Ralph Ferucci (Green Party), and Joe Lieberman (CT For Lieberman).

We voted and despite our best efforts, Joe Lieberman (CT for Lieberman) won.

Evven though Joe lost the primary, he formed his own party, registered to run as its (sole) candidate, and won under that party's name.

But guess what...... he's changed affiliations!!  

Follow my rant below......

According to a full page ad in today's Connecticut Post (accompanied by half-page size pictures of poor homeless-looking puppy dogs): "Voters in the 4th District who care about animal welfare should support his reelection."

More below...

Matt Drudge has the breaking news that the IM's surrounding Mark Foley and the Page scandal is all just a prank got awry when the IM's got into the hands of political opoeratives.

I'm really bad at sourcing this, so please feel free to add any links that might prove or disprove my idea.

So let's say your a republican lawmaker (pretend to be sleazy).  It's an election year and all indications are that your party, and probalby you personally, will lose power.

One of the main problems is an unpopular war waged by an unpopular president about to enter his last congressional session - he's a lame duck.  So you need something that will allow the congress to distance itself from the president on an issue that most Americans don't like, maybe something that even the courts have ruled against.  Something that allows you to come off as the good guys, while at the same time allowing the president to have only a modest loss of face (probably something that in the end you can work a compromise on).

More overr the fold...

As I'm sitting here watching "When the Levees Broke" I can't help but think.... all of those people who have not returned to New Orleans are living someplace.

The someplace they are living is going to have an election coming up in a couple of months.

Have these people - voters - registered to vote in their new home (whether it be permanent or temporary)?

Has anyone done a study on what effect these voters might have on the local elections in their new communities?  If I make a general assumption that many of the voters from N.O. were Democrats, will their vote be watered down in their new communities?  Will they play a role in turning a predominantly repuglican community into a Democratic one?

Or are they still going to vote in New Orleans as absentee voters??

Just wondering....

In the week since the Democratic party in CT voted for change, Bush, Rove, and repuglicans everywhere have ome to Lieberman's aid.  Sometimes obliquely, sometimes overtly.  But we all knew that now that the WH was essentially behind Lieberman (Bush is noted for rewarding loyalty after all), that it wouldn't take long for the race to go off the charts into bizzarro world.

So, I just want to throw out to Joe, that if he runs as an Independant he can forget about any future place in the Democratic party, as he will no longer be a Democrat.

If, however, he bows out.  Joins in the Democratic party fight to regain the House and Senate, and the White House in 2008, then it would be logical that he will trade in his Senator title for a Secretary of ____ title.

Do the right thing Joe.  Bow out now so that in 2008 we can take advantage of your skills and knowledge when we regain the White House.  Otherwise you'll be abandoning the party, have your influence GREATLY diminished, AND deprive the new Democratic President of a valuable member of his new Cabinet.

That, I think, is what is best for the country in the long term.  Bigger and better positions making policy.  Do this, and as a CT voter I will continue to respect you.

Don't let anyone fool you into thinking that the Lieberman campaign is not pushing hard to GOTV.  I can tell you first-hand that there is an army of people that are swarming across my area pushing for Joe.

The media was full of stories about the race this morning.  Here are a few choice items below the fold: