Matt Smith, my new friend who runs the LieberDem website, announces this morning he now supports Ned Lamont in the primary.

In other news, he has invited me to contribute to a new blog he will be starting, and I have happily accepted. Hope some of you will stop by when it's up.

Told ya it would be an exciting weekend.

Boy. You'd think after getting caught red-handed hiring goons to disrupt campaigns today, the Lieberman crowd would be on their best behaviour for a few hours.

Not a chance. If you've been so bored that you're reading me regularly, you'll know I've been posting over at Lieberdem. This afternoon, a Lieberman supporter hacked my blogger account and that of another Lamont supporter, and began entering phony Lieberman-supporting messages under our bylines.

Lieberman supporters have been decrying the bloggers, saying Ned should be tarred with the same brush. That works both ways, guys. When we look back to the Connecticut Primary of 2006, your dirty tricks will be well remembered.

And I just made sure this latest one is on the list.

Maybe voices in the wilderness aren't calling out in vain after all.

Thanks Dan, and also to Lieberdem who has also had very nice things to say, and whose blog you should definitely watch this weekend.

Here's the client list of Richard Goodstein, identified by Josh's crack team as the chief thug disrupting a Lamont campaign appearance. Any of these in Connecticut? Can anyone find a connection to Lieberman?

Name, House ID:

AIR PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS, INC. 34298002

AIR PRODUCTS HEALTHCARE 34298007

AMERICAN HOMECARE SUPPLY 34298008

LEXMARK INTERNATIONAL, INC 34298003

In the Senate:

AIR PRODUCTS & CHEMICALS 45835-36

AIR PRODUCTS HEALTHCARE 45835-90

AMERICAN REF-FUEL CO 45835-12

BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL INC 45835-75

COEUR D'ALENE MINES CORP 45835-24

LEXMARK INTL 45835-48

MICELL TECHNOLOGIES 45835-51

QWEST COMMUNICATIONS 45835-63

Democrats sending Democrats disguised as Democrats to Democratic rallies so that the Democrats can shout down the Democrat's talking points, frustrating the Democrats.

This, folks, is right-down-the-rabbit-hole insane.

This latest silliness from the Lieberman campaign, sending thugs out to disrupt Lamont's rallies, is doubtless intended to counter similar disruptions of Lieberman's rallies by Lamont volunteers. We've moved way beyond anyone trying to convince anyone here; this is simple intimidation. It has to stop.

Joe Lieberman and Ned Lamont should today issue statements to their supporters to ratchet down the confrontation level and stick to the issues. We should demand that they do so.

The Sundog wishes The Vile One well on his antler-restoring sabbatical. Probably a good time to take one; next week might be a challenging one for Moosie's blood pressure.

If you read his column this morning, it is apparent that either we are finally on the Moose's radar or there's a planetary convergence going on.

First of all, I realize that referring to him as a Democrat is inaccurate, and I'll correct that in the future. When I do so it's simply in reference to the fact that, in his mind, he most certainly IS a Democrat if you let him define Democrat the way he'd like to. His position with the DLC, too, shows that he feels that people like himself should be the model for Democrats.

As some have noted, the Moose has directed much of his ire lately toward the lefties.

Wonder who he's referring to. Anyway, Marshall, you don't get my point. Advocate a vital center all you want. Decry the wrongheaded positions of anyone you consider has one. Lobby mightily for a centrist, inclusive Democratic Party.

But please, for the love of God, take a logic class and learn what an ad hominem argument is.

It is particularly disgusting witnessing the left's ambiguity or hostility toward's Israel's war of self defense.

The thing about Wittmann is, there are no gradations on his emotional color scale. Everything worth blogging about to him requires dragging out the trusty, dog-eared Roget's from his college days and finding the most extreme adjective in the list. People who haven't jumped right onto Wittmann's side here aren't just "wrong", they are "disgusting".

What's disgusting is the abuse of the language to make rhetorical points that you can't make by simply making your points and letting people judge them. The Moose sees this in lefty blogs, and make no mistake, he's right; there are some serious mental cases out there. What he doesn't get is that, in his Moosie way, he does precisely the same thing.

It boils down to this: A Democrat shouldn't have so much hatred bottled up inside.

The vile Marshall Wittmann (adjective explained later) just keeps it coming about the "nutroots". Today he favors us with these tasty meme morsels:

The Lamont campaign has made much of the inadvertent hug of Joe by President Bush. Well, turnabout is fair play. The embrace of Ned by the vile bloggers tell us much about Lamont. As much as he claims that he is in the middle of the political spectrum, Lamont has embraced the outer reaches of the vulgar left in pursuit of his ambitions.

Inadvertent? Marshall, CHILDREN have resulted from less lusty embraces.

Wow, "vile bloggers" and "vulgar left" in the same paragraph. Is Marshall running out of hate words yet? It doesn't appear so. Is there anything left? Now we're all the way down to "vile". Notice that he always reserves his very deepest hatred for the left wing of his own party. Talk about someone who needs to sit down and think hard about who he really is.

But anyway, I think it's time to turn Wittmann's tactics against him. So until he comes up with an even darker insult, we shall refer to him here as The Vile Marshall Wittmann, or for short, The Vile One.

I'm still waiting for an explanation of The Vile One's connection with the Lieberman campaign. But thanks to Jpeg Jane, all the discussion is about LEFTY bloggers, not righty fascist ones.

Jane Hamsher isn't the slightest bit sorry about her stupid minstrel-show graphic. Her "apology" this morning is a joke; the very definition of an insincere apology. "I'm sorry I did this, but here's a list of reasons why I'm not all THAT sorry."

I must admit I haven't read all that much of Jane's output. I'm rather startled at her naivete and ego. Let's take this morning's post apart.

Before we get started, remember that I am a solid Lamont supporter, because this isn't going to be pretty.

I sincerely apologize to anyone who was genuinely offended by the choice of images accompanying my blog post today on the Huffington Post. It's also important to note that I do not, nor have I ever worked for Ned Lamont's campaign. However, at their request, I removed the image earlier today.

The obvious question being, of course, why did you take it down if you don't work for the campaign? In truth, she doesn't work with the campaign. But it's pretty disingenuous to travel with the Lamont campaign and then object wide-eyed when someone associates your remarks with him. We're not stupid out here, not even the Lieberman camp.

Unfortunately, Senator Lieberman's campaign has used this in attempt to hurt Ned and score political points, mustering their own faux indignation in attempt to further distract from the issues important to the voters of Connecticut.

Shorter Jane: But I don't believe anyone was actually offended for a moment. And anyway, look over there!

For weeks, Senator Lieberman has attempted to woo African Americans by pretending to be someone he clearly is not. Meanwhile, his campaign has liberally distributed race-baiting fliers that have the "paid for by" Joe's campaign disclaimer at the bottom, lying to the press about their intended recipients.

Sentence 1: That's called politics, Jane. And it's not as if Joe has NO record helping African Americans.

But for some reason, more questions have been asked about me, a blogger. With so much at stake this election, is the choice of images used by a mere supporter really newsworthy?

Excuse me for a moment while I bang my head into the wall.

I can't believe this apparent political infant is in a position to blow someone's campaign with her wide-eyed innocent act. Jane, you travel with the Lamont campaign. That implies that you are intimately associated with them, certainly enough so to give ammunition to people who are looking for it.

To the extent that rightwing Republicans like Michelle Malkin are trying to harm Ned Lamont with this ginned up controversy by "defending" his opponent with these absurd charges of racism --- I regret it and I invite them to take it up with the person who did it, namely me.

Ahh. So you don't actually regret it at all, you simply regret that the Republicans made hay of it. Thanks, that's what I thought you really meant.

I answer to nobody and I operate entirely on my own volition.

You answer to Ned Lamont, at least to the extent of following his wishes regarding the picture.

If you have a problem with something I've written, you know where to find me.

Yes, we do, don't we? That would be tagging along with the Lamont campaign, wouldn't it?

This is ridiculous. Jane seems utterly oblivious to the optics of the situation. If you travel with a candidate, not as press but as a supporter, you are presumed to have the good sense not to damage the campaign. Jane's ego apparently wasn't satisfied with tagging along; she wanted to go over his staff's heads and do some freelance campaigning of her own.

I'm not buying the wide-eyed innocent act. I think Jane should voluntarily step off the bus. If she won't I thnk Lamont should put her off.

This morning Jane Hamsher of firedoglake.com published a completely despicable Photoshopped picture of Joe Lieberman in blackface in her column at HuffPo.

You know, I can't identify with anyone on the left OR center any more. This is the left whose principles I have supported for more years that Jane Hamsher's been alive? You mean it's become as full of haters, idiot blog commenters and idiot bloggers as the right?

Color me depressed.

Jane? We have enough problems getting Lamont elected, could you please shut up? You've done enough. Really you have.

Am I reading something into this that's not there, or is Bill Maher's column this morning equating Mel Gibson's insanity to the calls for restraint in Israel's careful destruction of Lebanon?

I too am disturbed by the shocking episodes of anti-Semitism in the past week, and nothing at all could ever excuse them. But to link them to criticism of Israel and claim it's all the same anti-Semitism is a seriously disturbing point of view, even for such an intellectually challenged person as Bill Maher.

This is looking to be a bad century for non-extremists. Time to buy that solar-powered Winnebago.

I am concerned about the rhetorical tone in the lefty blogosphere.

Oh, sorry; that makes me a "concern troll." You are now free to ignore anything I say.

Let me tell you about my week online last week. I spent a good deal of it over at LieberDem, trying to defend Kos and the rest of the lefty blogosphere against the charge that we're all wild-eyed crazies. Pretty much alone, I might add, and pretty much successfully for the most part - Lieberdem himself thanked me for bringing reaonable discourse to the process, and admitted I made some good points. I suppose to some, that means I slept with the enemy. But at any rate, I had great discussions and turned some trolls into participants in the conversation. A very satisfying experience. I felt like maybe I made just a little bit of a difference. Then...

...fast forward to today, when Atrios posts a comment about "What exactly is there to like about Joe Lieberman?" Rather exasperated. I foolishly jumped into the comments and said, prominently identifying myself as a Lamont supporter, come on, he's been a solid Democrat most of his life; it's just his choices over the last few years are wrong in my book.

Ever see a pack of dogs go after red meat?

The irony and the unfairness of the situation are still with me. First of all is the fact that over the last week I probably had far more positive effect on the Lamont campaign than the people who were busily banging their keyboards at me, and then the fact that I busted my b*lls trying to defend the excesses of the blogosphere, only to fall a victim to those very same people, who treated me with the same jump 'em and dump 'em tactics thay use on any Republican insane enough to post there.

My eyes are opened. You know what? When one can get a better conversation going on a Lieberman blog as a Lamont supporter than on Atrios's blog as a Lamont supporter, something is clearly wrong. Someone clearly needs to try the decaf.

My efforts to defend the lefty blogosphere as a sane participant in the political process are over. Fend for yourselves, guys. I thought maybe I was doing a good thing, trying to build bridges, but maybe nobody wants to cross a bridge to where you've arrived.