GOP Gets The Bill For The Bysiewicz Lawsuit
by Christine Stuart | Jul 1, 2010 1:08pm
(29) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Courts, Election 2010, Legal
When Connecticut Republican Party Chairman Chris Healy showed members of the state party the bill for their successful effort at knocking Susan Bysiewicz out of the race for attorney general, some jaws hit the floor.
Its decision to fight a lawsuit Bysiewicz filed against herself in an effort to show she was qualified for the office cost the Republican Party $140,000.
“We have no regrets about it,” Healy said Thursday. “Well worth the investment.”
Healy said he presented the state committee with the bill from their lawyer, Eliot Gersten, on Tuesday at its meeting and just one person voted against it.
“No one gasped,” Healy said Thursday.
However, a few Republican sources have said they were surprised at the final bill, which was much higher than they initially anticipated.
“The integrity of the election had to be maintained,” Healy said. “Eliot Gersten did an incredible job.”
It doesn’t hurt that the Republican Party was successful in its efforts, which took the case all the way to the Supreme Court. Healy said the party has already paid some of the legal fees and plans on making good on the rest.
Bysiewicz, a popular Democrat who’s secretary of the state, convinced a lower court that even though she hasn’t been appearing before judges or doing technical legal work, her job as secretary of the state could still meet the legal definition of being a lawyer.
But the Republican Party appealed that lower court decision to the state’s highest court. The court ruled from the bench before the Democratic convention in May that Bysiewicz has in fact not been working as a lawyer, and is therefore ineligible to run for attorney general.
Headlines from the Bysiewicz court case.
Supreme Court Says Bysiewicz is Not Qualified
GOP Pressed To Make Additional Argument
Is She Practicing Law? Or Is She Just In Charge of a State Agency?
Bysiewicz Is Actively Practicing Law At Press Conferences
Bysiewicz Takes the Stand; Says Running For AG Is Her Civil Right
(29) Comments
posted by: CT Jim | July 1, 2010 2:41pm
Shows Healy’s only option is to take eveyone to court so only Republicans are on the ballot.
Reminds me a lot of the old republican party for sure.
We can all look forward to poll watchers and police presence at polls in the inner city and predominatly democratic areas.
So I guess the new republican motto is ” If You Can’t Beat Em Disqualify Em” 
posted by: main street | July 1, 2010 5:56pm
this is news? how come it wasn’t news when obama spent 2 million hiding his original birth certificate?
posted by: Walt | July 1, 2010 6:00pm
Seems more that the Dems insisted on pushing an obviously legally- unqualified candidate.
The only other option appeared, if Bysiewicz’s claim was accepted, was to charge all CT’s past Secys.of State with practticing law without a license.
What a phony!
She should have been required to pay all costs.
posted by: ACR | July 1, 2010 7:12pm
CT Jim said:
“If You Can’t Beat Em Disqualify Em”
She did it herself; and considering her current position she has no excuse what-so-ever.
Hopefully she’ll never darken the door of Connecticut politics again.
posted by: CT Jim | July 2, 2010 6:00am
Main Street,
Obama spent $2 million hiding his birth certificate???
Really???
This is a total fabrication.
Maybe you just confused it with the money Bush spent hiding the fact that he never showed up for the Alabama Air national guard.
Obama also spent $2.25 at the ripe old age of 26 hours to put his birth announcement in a local Hawiian newspaper because he knew that he wanted to be President and people like you would find out that he was a muslim born in Kenya. LOL
posted by: Walt | July 2, 2010 5:42pm
Hey Jim
Do not claim to be an expert but on the few occasions when I have worked the polls, (sometimes as a Dem, others as a Repub)., there were always reps of both major parties and often a cop observing so that inequitable handling of votes would be prevented.
Your stuff re poll watching seems strictly phony to me.
Don’t know whether or not the law requires watchers at each voting location, but it is a good idea and often happens.
Your racist suggestions that they are used only or mostly in inner-city or areas with Dems in control is just more BS as I see it.
Can you back up any of your statements with facts?
Thanks
posted by: Walt | July 3, 2010 6:49am
Correction
On second thought, never worked the polls when I was a Repub.
Only did so when I was a Dem, and was a poll watcher, but the comment holds.
posted by: CT Jim | July 3, 2010 7:09am
Walt,
I stand by my words and if you were to take up a history book or 2, or maybe google poll watching you will see that especially back in the 60’s and 70’s poll watching was an art developed by Republicans to keep voter turnout low in predominatley poor districts that tended to vote democrat.
Also can you tell me where in CT there are police standing at polls???
I have been voting for 32 years and havent seen on yet. quite frankly if it did happen I would ask that the officer leave as to not intimidate voters. The late Supreme Court justice Rhenquist got his start in the GOP as a poll watcher in Arizona, what they would do was to claim a voter (usually of color) couldn’t vote because he or she was a felon then would request the police be called then would engage the officer in a long conversation at the polls, the idea was if a person had a warrant out for their arrest they would turn around and leave this would cancel a democratic vote. This was and still is prominate in the south.When you see a person from both major party’s at the polls with a voter list and pen in hand that is not poll watching they are there to determine how many of their ones (1’s are voters who promised to vote their way via phone or mail)
have showed up to vote, those who havent will recieve a last minute call to remind them to vote.
Is this enough facts for you?
posted by: Walt | July 3, 2010 12:39pm
Not a bad answer Jim.
Do not doubt your semi-ancient history re the polls in the South but do not believe it ever applied in CT where I have voted for much longer than you and certainly does not apply in this area in recent years.
Sort of irrelevant here and today, don’t you think?
As to cops, maybe my memory is faulty. Does sound too similar to the Dems armed- Black - Panther problems at polls recently (non - CT).
My parents were Dem poll workers and my father a Dem Ward Registrar of Voters for many years and as I recall were very observant of ward activities and would have reported illegitimate behavior by the Repubs if it had occurred, (Would have been quite surprising as my father was friendly with his Repub counterpart).
So too with my experiences as a Dem poll worker.
Suggest change in your sign-in name to “Ole -Time South Jim” if using such as your story above which has nothing to do with CT.
Have been both a Dem and a Repub. Now neither.
To me on a national level. Dems are now mostly the enemy, especially of old folks,( examples, health care, spending, abortion, the economy, in no particular order) and the Repubs not always a heck of a lot better.
Neither Party deserves blind allegience such as you have for the Dems .
More sensible as I see it, to vote for the least objectionable candidates, from either major party and pray that things improve..
posted by: CT Jim | July 3, 2010 10:19pm
Dems are the enemy??
cant understand why, they are the party that gave you Social Security, Medicare, VA Benifits and with all do respect Republicans claimed those were some socialized programs that were going to make us all commies.
Me have been a Dem all my life but don’t like them when they are weak and cave to the right.
As for health care would have loved single payer but am disgusted they let the public option go although I belive with in the next 10 years it will be there.
i don’t see a independent movement that would be able to do much on the national level, on the state level Working families Party has done some good things but most other independent groups are just hot air.
Have a nice 4th of July and stay safe.
posted by: CT Jim | July 4, 2010 9:04am
Walt,you seem to pooh pooh the assumptiom that anybody would do anything in this day and age to supress the vote and it was only in the old south and couldn’t possibly be today (unless of course its the Black Panthers) which was hillarious but there was no connection made to a party but it was obviously a quest to make sure African Americans voted in 2008.
In 2004 in New Hampshire which is far from the deep south some Republican operatives jammed the phone lines of Democrat phone banks in an attempt to supress the GOTV calls that were going out on election day.
These operatives went to prison for these crimes.
In 2009 a couple of youg Republicans set up some ACORN orgainizers to make it look like the whole organization was engaged in prostitution and drug dealing, why do you say? Because ACORN registered millions of voters in 2008 mostly poor inner city people of color and many in the republican party believe they were resposible for them getting a president they didn’t like.
also in 2009 these same young republicans were caught trying to place a tap on the phones of US Senator Landrieu D-LA and are presently awaiting a federal trial that may put them in prison for years.
Do you still believe doesnt happen today?
posted by: Walt | July 4, 2010 8:01pm
Editor
My fairly long detailed rebuttal to Jim was rejected and erased saying I was not authorized to perform some act.
What gives?
Walt
posted by: Christine Stuart | July 5, 2010 7:00am
Walt,
Scroll back up I believe your comment was posted.
~Christine
posted by: Walt | July 5, 2010 7:09am
Jim
True, but just more ancient history again.
Not much recent change except for Bush/ Repub addition of Prescription Coverage to Medicare, the Obama/Dem slight improvement re the gap in that coverage last year and their taking away of a half trillion $$$$ from Medicare funds for use for other folks,
Overall, Dems, former heroes to the old folks, as said, are now the enemy.
As to the VA, take a look at changes, now effective at the V.A. in West Haven under the Dem/Obama leadership.
Go to the West Haven V.A. and see the new signs saying no PSA (Prostate Cancer Tests) for Vets over 70.
Ask about colonoscopy (Colon cancer) tests for Vets and you will find that they are basically no longer available for Vets over 70.
As an admittedly old- Vet from WWII, whose PSA’s last year (outside the V.A.) led to diagnosis and successful (I pray) treatment of my cancer, I cant cheer for your view of Dem./Obama treatment of Veterans.
Look at reasonably recent political actions Jim, not just the 1930’s et. seq.
Consider recent truths and your blind praises for the Dems look awfully weak.
posted by: Walt | July 5, 2010 7:17am
Christine,
No.
The comment I lost was similar to the one re-typed and sent a few minutes ago.
When original was submitted, screen just said I was not authorized to take an action (what action I do not know), and erased everything I had written,
Odd, at least to me.
posted by: Walt | July 5, 2010 8:04am
Christine,
No.
The comment I lost was similar to the one re-typed and sent a few minutes ago.
When original was submitted, screen just said I was not authorized to take an action (what action I do not know), and erased everything I had written,
Odd, at least to me.
PS
This one submitted and rejected five times saying you are not ready to accept(7:22 a.m.) but at least was not erased.
Will try later.
posted by: CT Jim | July 5, 2010 11:45am
Walt,
those cuts to the VA are cuts that were made BEFORE Obama took office. Unlike the Bush administration that cut $100’s of billions from the VA, Obama has actually increased the VA budget.
As For medicare part D, that program was laced with about $600 Billion in monies for big Pharma, that number for some reason was going to grow to $750 billion till Obama stripped it out and put it into the Universal health Plan. He also is correcting the Bush wrong of the giant donut hole in part D that has beeen bankrupting senoirs acrosss the country.
Most Senoirs will recieve $250 towards that hole this year and the entire hole will be closed by 2010. So all that Obama needs to say to you is “Your Welcome”. As for ancient history I never thought of 2009 and 20004 as ancient history but if thats what you think oh well.
And these shady tactics have continued today.
It makes me laugh when some one calls these tea party organizations independents LOL they were created by Frank Luntz and the vast majority are registered Republicans.
posted by: ACR | July 5, 2010 1:18pm
>>....
those cuts to the VA are cuts that were made BEFORE Obama took office.
A decrease> in a proposed increase isn’t a cut.
posted by: Walt | July 5, 2010 2:01pm
Jim
You are now switching from ancient history to a few real mis-truths.
Most seniors, including me, will get not one penny of the $250 you claim they they will receive from the feds re the donut hole this year.
A comparatively few,only those who were subject to the donut hole, will receive the $250 and that was an improvement, as said in my previous post., I would agree..
Cant continue calling them “un-truths”. Must say “Lie” re your claim, that the “donut hole” will be closed this year
.
You claim that the omission of services I cited was done in Bush’s budget and I’ll admit to not being a budget expert.
The signs re no PSA’s for Vets over 70 just appeared this year.
If your claim is not another lie it seems Obama had over a year in office in which to stop the anti-old-Vet change you , as usual, blame on Bush.
Incidentally I had a V.A. PSA last May in 2009) as a double check on my outside PSA cancer predictions.Obama was Pres then, not Bush, and it still looks like you are lying or woefully misinformed.
You seem to be digressing again by newly bringing the Tea Party folk into the story,
To what part do they relate?
(Not to me certainly, Who is Luntz and why is he relevant to this story?)
I am submitting facts as I know them. You are now switching from your ancient history countering with made up untrue stuff and folks I have never heard of like Luntz and oribably insinuating that I am a Tea Party guy which is not true.
posted by: CT Jim | July 5, 2010 6:29pm
Walt, I never said you were a tea party guy I was stating how Frank Luntz a Republican operative helped an ex republican congessman from Texas create the tea part to enhance the GOP’ s chances in 2010 and came out with words like socialized medicine and death panels MONTHS before any bill was written. I also said that the donut hole will be closed by 2020. As for ACR come on Bush cut the VA everyyear for 8 years.
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | July 5, 2010 11:14pm
Luntz is a WH guy and graduated from Hall.
Luntz didn’t form the Tea Party. He does advise both parties, primarlily the GOP, on language and how to define words and arguments.
The best part is when you read what he says about using Climate Change instead of Global Warming.
Luntz has a beautiful definition that encompasses much more than cap and trade and the simplistic Al Gore enviromentalists. He defined a path for the GOP to retake the issue for 2010 by expansing and reclaiming and redefining the language.
However, put that intellectual ammo into the hands of Sarah Palin to use in a live interview?
Truly sad. Drill baby drill indeed.
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | July 5, 2010 11:16pm
Here’s what Luntz says and it doesn’t take much imagination to know how the GOP could harness the issue and steal the Democrats thunder.
——In 2010, Luntz announced new research that shows the American people are eager for Congress to act on climate legislation that would promote energy independence and a healthier environment.
“Americans want their leaders to act on climate change – but not necessarily for the reasons you think,” Luntz said.
“A clear majority of Americans believe climate change is happening. This is true of McCain voters and Obama voters alike. And even those that don’t still believe it is essential for America to pursue policies that promote energy independence and a cleaner, healthier environment.”
In reference to recent political events, Luntz added: “People are much more interested in seeing solutions than watching yet another partisan political argument
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | July 5, 2010 11:24pm
And here we have Sarah Palin in her now classic O’Reilly interview trying to get her little head around Luntz’s talking points.
If you have any respect for Sarah, please don’t watch. Palin tries Luntz’s language theory argument on for size and literally uses the words “not allowing BP to define the spill” and then goes off into her buzzword interjections that make no sense whatsoever in context much like the Couric interview.
No wonder Luntz gets paid well.
http://tinyurl.com/25t5ezb
posted by: Walt | July 6, 2010 7:36am
Jim
Please read your own post above(July 5,11<45 a.m.)
Could be a typo, but you did say the donut hole goes away this year, not in 10 years as you now claim you said.
As for Luntz whom I believe I never heard of before, your note makes me think he is a smart guy.
“Death Squad” of course does not appear in the Act, but it does provide for a panel to limit treatment as has already been done under Obama at the V.A. re colonostomies and PSA’s as I pointed out above
These changes would have been like a “death squad ” for me if I had relied on the V.A. for my 2009 cancer tests and had the Obama/Dem current changes at the V,.A. been then in effect.
We have sort of beat this topic to death. Please do not respond with added BS which will compel me to respond with facts if I have them.
I am as ancient as the good Dem actions you cite in your early posts
Let me rest
Thanks,
Walt
posted by: CT Jim | July 6, 2010 9:34am
Walt, that 2010 was in fact a typo by me. Why would I say senoirs were getting $250 in 2010 and then the entire hole would be closed in the same year??
Either way that has been cleared up.
And did you read my last post? It states that Frank Luntz who you do know but are being so coy about being nailed on facts put out a talk sheet for tea partiers to protest the upcoming Health Care bill.
He told them to yell about SOCIALIZED Medicine and DEATH PANELS 4 months BEFORE a word was typed into that bill.
How would he know there was socalled death panels months before???
Can you get me those facts?? As for the VA Walt those are BUSH’S cuts not Obama’s and if you asked the VA when they were ordered you will find out thaey were ordered in 2008, but I wouldn’t want to confuse you with the facts now.
Also Walt is 2009 and 2004 ancient history??? Did I fall alseep and wake up in the year 2525? Is man still alive??
I am also surprised you relied on the VA for your tests. How come Vets get socialized medicine for their entire life and the rest of america is not supposed to? So you fought not only for our freedom but your right to socialized medicine? And now you fight against everybody elses right to the same??Gee the only other countries that do that are communist ones.
Really enjoying the facts here.
posted by: Walt | July 6, 2010 5:02pm
Jim
You have stopped defending your earlier posts but are becoming a real pain in the kiester with BS.
If you read my post slowly or have someone interpret it for you, you will find that
1, I did not rely on the V.A. for my cancer tests as you claim. As stated, I had one PSA there to double-check on reports of possible cancer from outside docs. If I had relied on the V.A., and the Obama changes were in effect when I needed it, I would probably be pushing up daisies by now. (Obama, not Bush, was the President at that time and most, if not all, changes had not been made , If your version had been correct he and HIS V.A. Chief had plenty of time to prevent their being made effective. To this date the Obama Administration has not reversed the decision .)
2, A few posts ago you were bragging about Dem acts for the nation’s Vets, now you insult the Vets by describing them as just being leeches on the government via socialized medicine.
As I see it Vets earned any benefits they receive from the government .
I do not receive my primary health care from the V.A. but if I did I would owe no apologies to you but. on behalf of those Vets who do receive care there, I think you owe them an
apology.
3, As you claim knowing Luntz is something to be ashamed of, and as you falsely claim I know him, you owe me an apology too.
What I now know about Luntz, I learned from your posts, and if your stuff on him is true I think he is a pretty sharp guy.
Stop and think, Jim. Re- read your and my posts or get help in understanding them.
Ask youself “If the V.A. changes were really made by Bush,as I claim. why did not my hero Obama get his V.A. Czar to reverse these regs which abandon old time Vets by stopping tests for their health and abandoning them at a certain age.?”
posted by: CT Jim | July 7, 2010 10:33am
Walt,
So let me get this straight we had Bush as president for 8 LONNNGG Years and systomatically destroyed the american way of life, signed thousands of executive orders changing everything in government he could, dumped the worst economy since Hoover on Obama and you expect Obama to fix it ALL in 17 months???
Really Walt???
I owe you nothing Walt so don’t expect anything more than you give.
As for your lifetime of Health benifits for 2 years of service to your country on top of property tax breaks help in buying housing etc. That is one great benifit package that only people like you get.
Anybody else with 2 years of service to a company take nothing with them nevermind a great socialized medical plan.
I have defended my posts you just choose to ignore facts you don’t like.
If ignorance is bliss you are one mellow dude.