HEADLINES

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Saudi Arabia urges US attack on Iran to stop nuclear programme (Guardian)

from memeorandum


Saudi Arabia urges US attack on Iran to stop nuclear programme (Guardian): "

Guardian:

Saudi Arabia urges US attack on Iran to stop nuclear programme — • Embassy cables show Arab allies want strike against Tehran — • Israel prepared to attack alone to avoid its own 9/11 — • Iranian bomb risks ‘Middle East proliferation, war or both’

"

Irish bailout 'stuns' experts

from Latest news and comment from Britain | guardian.co.uk


Irish bailout 'stuns' experts: "

There are fears that the additional money being put into Ireland's banks will not contain contagion in the eurozone

The additional €35bn (£29.8bn) being ploughed into Ireland's banks has shocked experts, who have expressed concern that tonight's bailout would not contain contagion in the eurozone.

Brian Lucey, associate professor of finance at Trinity College Dublin said he was 'stunned', adding: 'We've already put at least €32bn into them, so that's going to be €67bn, which is 50% of GNP, that's a world record'.

He also warned that a new government next year could rip up the deal. 'Sovereign governments have a right to effectively do whatever they want,' he said.

The EU authorities had hoped that the Irish bailout would draw a line in the sand and halt the threat of Spain and Portugal needing international assistance. But tonight, investors and analysts were far from certain that this would be achieved.

Ashok Shah, chief investment officer at investment firm London & Capital, said Ireland might now enjoy some "temporary relief", but that bond investors' concerns could now switch to Portugal and Spain.

'Portugal is already in the borderline, it will have to be rescued soon, maybe within a matter of weeks. The market will also focus on Spain. It will remain very volatile.'

Others agreed. 'There's absolutely no indication that the agreed package for Ireland is going to soothe those concerns stemming from the Iberian peninsula,' said Philip Shaw, chief economist of Investec.

Peter Westaway, chief economist at Nomura concurred. 'I don't think this is going to be a silver bullet. I think there are still going to be some question marks on Portugal and Spain,' he said.


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

"

Wikileaks: Under Cyber Attack, American Diplomacy Laid Bare, Who Gains With This Revelation? — UPDAT

Now that they might make the President and the Russians look bad….it's personal. Back when it only made President Bush look bad, it was useful. Right now, Wikileaks is facing a Denial of Service attack, but the New York Times and news organizations around the world are releasing the documents at this moment. Ben Smith says it demonstrates the impotence of the administration. I don't know what it demonstrates yet, outside of creating chaos.

To some of the revelations (note: I'll link every point even if it's repetitive for ease of search):

1. The Obama Administration doesn't like the Brits.

2. The Germans don't like each other (via Der Spiegel's Wikileaks coverage):

Even the leadership of a close ally such as Germany emerges in a poor light in the cables. The members of the ruling government coalition in Berlin denigrate each other in comments to the US ambassador to Germany, Philip Murphy. For example, Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg tattled on his colleague German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, telling the US ambassador that Westerwelle was the real barrier to the Americans' request for an increase in the number of German troops in Afghanistan. And the US diplomats are rather cool in their assessment of Chancellor Angela Merkel: One dispatch describes her as risk-averse and "rarely creative."

3. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wants her diplomats to be spies:

Sometimes the US embassy activities seem to go beyond the requirements of diplomacy. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demands of members of her diplomatic corps that they prove their worth as spies. The embassy staff are asked to acquire any accessible personal details of UN staff, including credit-card numbers and frequent-flyer customer numbers.

4. Everyone is terrified of Iran (from the New York Times):

Feeding the administration's urgency was the intelligence about Iran's missile program. As it weighed the implications of those findings, the administration maneuvered to win Russian support for sanctions. It killed a Bush-era plan for a missile defense site in Poland — which Moscow's leaders feared was directed at them, not Tehran — and replaced it with one floating closer to Iran's coast. While the cables leave unclear whether there was an explicit quid pro quo, the move seems to have paid off.

There is also an American-inspired plan to get the Saudis to offer China a steady oil supply, to wean it from energy dependence on Iran. The Saudis agreed, and insisted on ironclad commitments from Beijing to join in sanctions against Tehran.

Also, the New York Time's bias just seeps on through. "The move seems to have paid off", they say. How exactly has it paid off? Never mind. There's more.

The Telegraph documents how destructive this leak may be:

Officials involved in overseeing British policy in the region say that diplomatic materials compiled between 2008 and 2010 on Iran contained sensational information that could jeopardise efforts to disrupt the nuclear programme if unveiled on WikiLeaks.

The UK has played a key role on breaking up one network of businessmen in Dubai who had been using the emirate as the "HQ of a worldwide spiders web" to supply equipment to Iran's banned nuclear programme.

"Information was provided to the UAE authorities that was only procured by getting inside this group. It was a very successful effort of disruption carried out at some personal risk by our people," said one Whitehall official. "It would not be good for any of this to come out."

5. U.S. has doubts about Turkey. From Speigel Online International:

The leaked diplomatic cables reveal that US diplomats are skeptical about Turkey's dependability as a partner. The leadership in Ankara is depicted as divided and permeated by Islamists.

US diplomats have grave doubts about Turkey's dependability. Secret or confidential cables from the US Embassy in Ankara describe Islamist tendencies in the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

The US diplomats' verdict on the NATO partner with the second biggest army in the alliance is devastating. The Turkish leadership is depicted as divided, and Erdogan's advisers, as well as Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, are portrayed as having little understanding of politics beyond Ankara.

The Americans are also worried about Davutoglu's alleged neo-Ottoman visions. A high-ranking government adviser warned in discussions, quoted by the US diplomats, that Davutoglu would use his Islamist influence on Erdogan, describing him as "exceptionally dangerous." According to the US document, another adviser to the ruling AKP party remarked, probably ironically, that Turkey wanted "to take back Andalusia and avenge the defeat at the siege of Vienna in 1683."

How, precisely, is it helpful for this information to be out and open? Once again, Der Spiegel nails it:

Never before in history has a superpower lost control of such vast amounts of such sensitive information — data that can help paint a picture of the foundation upon which US foreign policy is built. Never before has the trust America's partners have in the country been as badly shaken. Now, their own personal views and policy recommendations have been made public — as have America's true views of them.

Forget the content of the leaks for a moment, this is a moment of impotence so complete and horrifying–the Jerusalem Post notes that Israel's leaders were notified but that US officials aren't sure what's in the documents–that America is diminished before everyone. Consider this thumbnail:

The documents quoted in the leaked article include nicknames for a number of world leaders. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is referred to as "Hitler," French President Nicolas Sarkozy as a "naked emperor," the German Chancellor is called Angela "Teflon" Merkel and Afghan President Hamid Karzai is "driven by paranoia." Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is an "Alpha Male," while President Dmitry Medvedev is "afraid, hesitant."

The documents also say that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il suffers from epilepsy, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddhafi's full-time nurse is a "hot blond," and Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi loves "wild parties."

The article also quotes the State Department as saying that US President Barack Obama "prefers to look East rather than West," and "has no feelings for Europe."

"The US sees the world as a conflict between two superpowers," the diplomatic cables say. "The European Union plays a secondary role."

Well, this Wikileaks release of information doesn't seem particularly surprising, just confirming what most who pay attention believe about things. Still, how is this helpful to the U.S.' standing in the world? I don't see it.

The cavalier nonchalance of some on the left, in particular, about this leak speaks volumes. Aren't these the same folks who deified Valerie Plame? But wholesale diplomatic revelations is okay? I don't get the justification here.

UPDATED:

More from Greg Mitchell of The Nation.

China ordered the hacking of Google. Evil vs. evil. I wonder who won.

Israel feels vindicated by Wikileaks.

Blackfive: "This is nothing but Anti-Americanism wrapped in a sleazy cloak of whistle-blowing."

I've wondered this too: Will Hillary Clinton be booted for the spying orders? That would, however, free her up to run against President Obama.

UPDATED again:

Via Assange's own site (back up, evidently):

The full set consists of 251,287 documents, comprising 261,276,536 words (seven times the size of "The Iraq War Logs", the world's previously largest classified information release).

The cables cover from 28th December 1966 to 28th February 2010 and originate from 274 embassies, consulates and diplomatic missions.

More:

Key figures:

* 15, 652 secret
* 101,748 confidential
* 133,887 unclassified

* Iraq most discussed country – 15,365 (Cables coming from Iraq – 6,677)
* Ankara, Turkey had most cables coming from it – 7,918
* From Secretary of State office – 8,017

According to the US State Departments labeling system, the most frequent subjects discussed are:

* External political relations – 145,451
* Internal government affairs – 122,896
* Human rights – 55,211
* Economic Conditions – 49,044
* Terrorists and terrorism – 28,801
* UN security council – 6,532

UPDATED AGAIN:

William Jacobson says that it's official: President Obama is Jimmy Carter II.

And here the Pentagon's super awesome security measures.








Sent from my iPhone

More Hope & Change… “Never Before Has a Superpower Lost Control of Such Vast Amounts of Sensitive In

More hope and change… The release today of 251,000 sensitive security documents is the largest leak of information of this kind in history.
The documents presumably came from the same source-
Der Spiegel reports on the Wikileaks leaked information:

251,000 State Department documents, many of them secret embassy reports from around the world, show how the US seeks to safeguard its influence around the world. It is nothing short of a political meltdown for US foreign policy.

What does the United States really think of German Chancellor Angela Merkel? Is she a reliable ally? Did she really make an effort to patch up relations with Washington that had been so damaged by her predecessor? At most, it was a half-hearted one.

The tone of trans-Atlantic relations may have improved, former US Ambassador to Germany William Timken wrote in a cable to the State Department at the end of 2006, but the chancellor "has not taken bold steps yet to improve the substantive content of the relationship." That is not exactly high praise.

And the verdict on German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle? His thoughts "were short on substance," wrote the current US ambassador in Berlin, Philip Murphy, in a cable. The reason, Murphy suggested, was that "Westerwelle's command of complex foreign and security policy issues still requires deepening."

Such comments are hardly friendly. But in the eyes of the American diplomatic corps, every actor is quickly categorized as a friend or foe. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia? A friend: Abdullah can't stand his neighbors in Iran and, expressing his disdain for the mullah regime, said, "there is no doubt something unstable about them." And his ally, Sheikh bin Zayed of Abu Dhabi? Also a friend. He believes "a near term conventional war with Iran is clearly preferable to the long term consequences of a nuclear armed Iran."

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's emissaries also learn of a special "Iran observer" in the Azerbaijan capital of Baku who reports on a dispute that played out during a meeting of Iran's Supreme National Security Council. An enraged Revolutionary Guard Chief of Staff Mohammed Ali Jafari allegedly got into a heated argument with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and slapped him in the face because the generally conservative president had, surprisingly, advocated freedom of the press.

A Political Meltdown

Such surprises from the annals of US diplomacy will dominate the headlines in the coming days when the New York Times, London's Guardian, Paris' Le Monde, Madrid's El Pais and SPIEGEL begin shedding light on the treasure trove of secret documents from the State Department. Included are 243,270 diplomatic cables filed by US embassies to the State Department and 8,017 directives that the State Department sent to its diplomatic outposts around the world. In the coming days, the participating media will show in a series of investigative stories how America seeks to steer the world. The development is no less than a political meltdown for American foreign policy.

Never before in history has a superpower lost control of such vast amounts of such sensitive information — data that can help paint a picture of the foundation upon which US foreign policy is built. Never before has the trust America's partners have in the country been as badly shaken. Now, their own personal views and policy recommendations have been made public — as have America's true views of them…

The leaked documents presumably came from the same source- Private First Class Bradley Manning who was upset after a bad breakup with his boyfriend.

…As with the close to 92,000 documents on the war in Afghanistan at the end of July and the almost 400,000 documents on the Iraq war recently released, the State Department cables have also been leaked to the WikiLeaks whistleblower platform — and they presumably came from the same source. As before, WikiLeaks has provided the material to media partners to review and analyze them.

With a team of more than 50 reporters and researchers, SPIEGEL has viewed, analyzed and vetted the mass of documents. In most cases, the magazine has sought to protect the identities of the Americans' informants, unless the person who served as the informant was senior enough to be politically relevant. In some cases, the US government expressed security concerns and SPIEGEL accepted a number of such objections. In other cases, however, SPIEGEL felt the public interest in reporting the news was greater than the threat to security. Throughout our research, SPIEGEL reporters and editors weighed the public interest against the justified interest of countries in security and confidentiality.

More…. Now We Know… Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Got Bitch-Slapped By Ali Jafari








Sent from my iPhone

Now We Know… Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Got Bitch-Slapped By Iranian General

It's kiss and makeup time…

President Ahmadinejad (right) welcomes new Revolutionary Guards leader Mohammad Ali Jafari (Telegraph Photo)

Today's Wikileaks leak is the historic. Never before has a superpower lost control of such vast amounts of sensitive information. The The leaked documents presumably came from the same source- Private First Class Bradley Manning – who was bitter after a breakup with his boyfriend.

But despite the horror of this latest leftist assault on the United States, at least we now know this…
Ahmadinejad got bitch-slapped by Ali Jafari.
Der Spiegel reported:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's emissaries also learn of a special "Iran observer" in the Azerbaijan capital of Baku who reports on a dispute that played out during a meeting of Iran's Supreme National Security Council. An enraged Revolutionary Guard Chief of Staff Mohammed Ali Jafari allegedly got into a heated argument with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and slapped him in the face because the generally conservative president had, surprisingly, advocated freedom of the press.








Sent from my iPhone

New York Times Manages to Praise Obama Administration In Its Report on the Historic Leak of Sensitiv

Wikileaks announced today that leading international newspapers, including The New York Times, were going to release the classified American security information today even if the website was shut down.

They misspelled Spiegel.

Despite the fact that we have the most radical far left president in American history sitting in the White House these leftist papers couldn't resist the temptation to embarrass and damage US foreign policy. But, at least they praised the Obama Administration for their handling of this latest disaster.

John Hinderaker at Power Line reported on how the New York Times managed to make the Obama Administration look good despite this historic breach of security.

The paper needn't have much fear of criminal prosecution, since it uses the leaked cables as an opportunity for a paean to the Obama administration's foreign policies. Here, the Times reviews cables relating to Iran's nuclear program. Not surprisingly, they record the fact that pretty much everyone in the region urged the U.S. to do something to stop Iran from getting the bomb, by military action if necessary. The entertaining part of the story, however, is the Times's defense of the Obama administration's policy of "engagement" with Iran:

The election of Mr. Obama, at least initially, left some countries wondering whether the sanctions push was about to end. Shortly after taking office, in a videotaped message timed to the Persian New Year, he reiterated his campaign offer of a "new beginning" — the first sustained talks in three decades with Tehran.

The United Arab Emirates called Mr. Obama's message "confusing." The American Embassy in Saudi Arabia reported that the talk about engaging Iran had "fueled Saudi fears that a new U.S. administration might strike a 'grand bargain' without prior consultations."

In Europe, Germany and others discerned an effort to grab market share. "According to the British, other EU Member states fear the U.S. is preparing to take commercial advantage of a new relationship with Iran and subsequently are slowing the EU sanctions process," the American Embassy in London reported.

The administration, though, had a different strategy in mind.

The Times explains that Obama sent an emissary to meet with "more than 70 Middle East experts from European governments." His mission was to explain that the administration wasn't really serious about engagement (my paraphrase). This stratagem, the Times tells us, worked like a charm:

The decoding of Mr. Obama's plan was apparently all the Europeans needed, and by year's end, even Germany, with its suspicions and longstanding trading ties with Iran, appeared to be on board.

The paper details how the administration went on to secure support from Russia and China, which is where the story ends. Of course, what has happened since then is not encouraging, as Iran continues its nuclear weapons and missile development apace. Still, President Obama could hardly ask for a gentler treatment of one of his administration's central foreign policy frustrations. Leaking, evidently, isn't what it used to be.








Sent from my iPhone

Wikileaks Dump: Iran Has Nuke Missiles That Can Reach Western Europe


Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, second left, reviews, Iran's Shahab-3 missile, a weapon capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and reaching Europe, Israel and U.S. forces in the Middle East back in 2005. (LJ World)

Iran received help from North Korea and has missiles that can reach European capitals in Western Europe.
The New York Times reported:

Secret American intelligence assessments have concluded that Iran has obtained a cache of advanced missiles, based on a Russian design, that are much more powerful than anything Washington has publicly conceded that Tehran has in its arsenal, diplomatic cables show.

Iran obtained 19 of the missiles from North Korea, according to a cable dated Feb. 24 of this year. The cable is a detailed, highly classified account of a meeting between top Russian officials and an American delegation led by Vann H. Van Diepen, an official with the State Department's nonproliferation division who, as a national intelligence officer several years ago, played a crucial role in the 2007 assessment of Iran's nuclear capacity.

The missiles could for the first time give Iran the capacity to strike at capitals in Western Europe or easily reach Moscow, and American officials warned that their advanced propulsion could speed Iran's development of intercontinental ballistic missiles.

There has been scattered but persistent speculation on the topic since 2006, when fragmentary reports surfaced that North Korea might have sold Iran missiles based on a Russian design called the R-27, once used aboard Soviet submarines to carry nuclear warheads. In the unclassified world, many arms control experts concluded that isolated components made their way to Iran, but there has been little support for the idea that complete missiles, with their huge thrusters, had been secretly shipped.

The Feb. 24 cable, which is among those obtained by WikiLeaks and made available to a number of news organizations, makes it clear that American intelligence agencies believe that the complete shipment indeed took place, and that Iran is taking pains to master the technology in an attempt to build a new generation of missiles. The missile intelligence also suggests far deeper military — and perhaps nuclear — cooperation between North Korea and Iran than was previously known. At the request of the Obama administration, The New York Times has agreed not to publish the text of the cable.








Sent from my iPhone

John McCain Calls for Regime Change in North Korea

I've been out in front on this issue: "Regime Change North Korea." But I'm not pussy-footing around the military option. The story's at Politico and CNN (at Memeorandum):
"I think it's time we talked about regime change in North Korea, and I do not mean military action, but I do believe that this is a very unstable regime" ...








Sent from my iPhone

Technicalities: Is Rahm Emanuel Even a Resident of Chicago?

From the LA Times:

A veteran election attorney filed papers Friday to try to knock Chicago mayoral candidate Rahm Emanuel off the ballot, charging he does not meet city residency rules.

Under Illinois' municipal code, a candidate must be a resident of the city for a year prior to the election. Emanuel was working as President Obama's White House chief of staff until he returned to Chicago last month to campaign for the Feb. 22 election.

Emanuel said he meets the standard because he owns a home here, has voted here and always intended to move back. Lawyer Burt Odelson said the fact that Emanuel rented out his home, instead of leaving it empty, means he's not a resident.

"The law says you have to have a physical presence, not just intent," Odelson said. "Maintaining a residency means you have a place to go home to, a place where you sleep, a place where your wife and family are."

Odelson filed his challenge on behalf of Thomas L. McMahon, a retired Chicago police officer, and Walter P. Maksym Jr., a lawyer. Fourteen other Chicago residents have filed similar objections.

The code does not define residency, but exempts members of the military who serve away from home. State election code also includes a government service exemption that protects the residency status of anyone who temporarily leaves "on business of the United States."

Should Emanuel's lawyers argue that serving as the White House chief of staff fits the bill, Odelson has prepared a retort.

"Service to the United States is when you're in the military," Odelson said. "It's not when you're in service to the president of the United States."

Read the whole thing here.








Sent from my iPhone

Was Connecticut Conned?

Republicans and conservatives in Connecticut may be feeling like all their friends are having a big party, but they are not invited.

While most states in the nation, even some in liberal New England, caught the Tea Party/conservative wave, Connecticut citizens sent all of their incumbent Democratic representatives back to Congress.

And, while Republicans did pick up 14 seats in the Connecticut state house and one in the state senate, the General Assembly will continue to be controlled by Democrats, as it has been for decades.

And, now, the only current, major Republican-held position, that of governor, will be filled by a Democrat as well. Six days after the election, Republican gubernatorial candidate, Tom Foley, a wealthy businessman, new to politics, conceded the race to Democratic candidate, Dan Malloy, the mayor of Stamford, following a ballot controversy.

The troubled ordeal of the governor's race began in the afternoon of election day, when about half of the city of Bridgeport's polling stations were discovered to be running out of ballots. It was determined that only 21,000 ballots had been ordered for 70,000 registered voters.

The election snafus continued with questionable decisions by Democratic Secretary of State, Susan Bysiewicz, who attempted to remedy the ballot shortage by photocopying blank ballots while waiting for new ones to be printed.

The Hartford Courant story which chronicled the election, indicates that the Malloy team, understanding that the close gubernatorial race could be decided in their favor in heavily Democratic Bridgeport, "arranged an emergency after-hours hearing in Superior Court in Hartford," in order to file a motion for a court order to keep Bridgeport polls open for an additional two hours in precincts where there had been a ballot shortage. Secretary Bysiewicz joined that motion, while Republican attorneys and the state attorney general's office opposed it, arguing that the ballot shortage was the consequence of incompetence.

However, at several minutes before 8:00 p.m. closing time for Connecticut's polls, Judge Mitchell Berger granted the emergency order for the extension of voting hours in Bridgeport.

Following the court order, the mayor of Bridgeport, Democrat William Finch, used the city's 911 emergency system, in reverse, to inform voters that the polls would remain open for an additional two hours in precincts with ballot shortages.

With the race so close, both candidates were expressing confidence well after midnight and into the net day. Secretary Bysiewicz displayed more of what the Wall Street Journal termed, "bizarre" behavior, by announcing "unofficial" election results: that Malloy had won the race by about 3,100 votes.

Two days after the election, a suspicious bag containing 335 photocopied and filled ballots was discovered in Bridgeport. Meanwhile, a video surfaced, taken by the Republican mayor of Vernon, Connecticut, who served as a poll-watcher in Bridgeport, and who observed people voting without identification, voters receiving more than one ballot, and ballots left unsecured at the polling place.

On Friday after election day, Mayor Finch reported that, in Bridgeport, the count showed Malloy had about 17,000 votes to Foley's 4,500. However, Foley was not prepared to concede based on yet another unofficial count, and suggested he might seek a judicial review of the results.

On Friday evening, Secretary Bysiewicz's office made yet another announcement, this one that Malloy had won by 5,637 votes, a margin that would not require a recount. Malloy essentially said the results confirmed what he already knew, but Foley expressed considerable discomfort with the results, and insisted he was not planning to concede until he was "certain that the will of the voters was honored."

At this point, the Republican candidate was sounding strong and decisive, adjectives that did not necessarily cling to him throughout the campaign. While he had been a couple of points ahead in the polls, he had been criticized for not putting out strong conservative views. Foley often appeared weak and ambiguous, with a few bright spots during debates with Malloy. In his literature, however, he demonstrated clear support of merit pay for teachers, school choice, and the need to confront the union pension problem. By contrast, Malloy had been supported by the powerful unions in the state.

Nevertheless, on Monday, November 8th, Foley delivered a somewhat surprising concession speech that was devoid of doubt about the results. Stating that he did not think he could make up a gap of about 6,000 votes, Foley said, "The election on Tuesday was a conclusive victory for Dan Malloy, and this result should not be questioned."

Foley said that his team had explored the possibility of asking for a precinct-by-precinct re-canvassing of the vote, but determined that, in the end, it would not change the outcome of the election.

Meanwhile, as Foley was conceding, Chris Healy, chair of the Connecticut GOP, and possible contender for national GOP chair Michael Steele's position, was referring to the situation in Bridgeport as a "complete farce" and a "circus," and announcing that his team would be asking federal and state authorities to formally investigate the election- in spite of Foley's decision.

In his concession speech, Foley stated, "what happened in Bridgeport should be looked into," but asserted that the rest of the state's counting seemed "very reliable."

However, the Republican candidate for Attorney General, Martha Dean, an experienced attorney with a constitutional law background, who had Tea Party support during her campaign, had a different view. On November 11th, in an interview with Dan Lovallo, a local talk show host in the state, Dean, who lost to a Democratic candidate, questioned the results of the election in Connecticut's other two major cities, Hartford and New Haven. Dean appears poised to investigate her hypothesis that illegal aliens are being given a pass to vote in Connecticut elections.

While Connecticut might be perceived as a "deep blue" state, Peter Raymond cites interesting statistics in an article, in American Thinker, about the questions surrounding the controversial election. In particular, he notes that, in the Bridgeport 2010 election, votes for the Republican gubernatorial candidate plunged by 64% from the ten-year average of Republican votes cast for governor. Even in 2006, the last gubernatorial election, Raymond reports that there were 51% more votes cast for the Republican candidate than this year.

In the wake of the election, it is clear that Governor-elect Dan Malloy is beginning his term amid controversy that is not ending quickly. Public hearings are being held in the city of Bridgeport to determine why the election took the path that it did. A fact that Malloy must also reckon with is that most people in Connecticut did not vote for him. The state actually had three candidates for governor. The third, Tom Marsh, originally elected as a Republican to his local position, announced his candidacy for governor on the Independent ticket in the spring. Marsh received 17,000 votes, enough, had he not triangulated the race, to have given Foley the win, assuming that most of those votes would have gone to the Republican candidate.








Sent from my iPhone

Heritage Foundation

DrudgeFeed.com - Drudge Report RSS feed

RedState

Right Wing News

RenewAmerica

Hot Air » Top Picks

Conservative Outpost

Conservative Examiner

Michelle Malkin

Big Government

Big Journalism

Big Hollywood

Pajamas Media