Somebody correct me if I'm wrong

But isn't it true that if you are elected to Congress as an independent, you are not assigned any meaningful committee seats by the House or Senate majority, be it Republican or Democrat? So even if Lieberman is elected as an independent, he will not sit on any substantive committees.

-------------------------------------------

Party affiliation has nothing directly to do with committee assignments. What happens is the majority party holds all the power to appoint committee chairs and members, but all members must be on at least one committee. The Democrats, should they win, could chose to not allow Lieberman to maintain his seniority, and thus not be the committee chair. However, such an event is unlikely since Lieberman will 90% be the deciding vote for the Democrats taking Senate control.

Currently, there is one independent Senator, but he caucuses with the Democrats and thus gets committee assignments as if he were a Democrat. He’s also a former Republican and kept his seniority.

Connecticut has three major party candidates, not two. The author, Colin McEnroe, is confusing a two person race with a three person race. Schlesinger will not receive anywhere near 30% of the vote. He’ll be lucky to receive 10%, yet a dead horse convicted of child pornography would be expected to receive 30% in a two person race. The reason any single major candidate will receive between 20% and 30% of the vote is because that percentage will always vote against the incumbent. Thus, in a two way race, 70% of the total vote is an enormous win and 60% is huge.

The reason Schlesinger will not receive the usual 30% of the Republican candidate in Connecticut is because Lamont counts as the stronger non-incumbent candidate, and thus will receive the lion’s share of the non-incumbent vote. Lamont has basically pushed Schlesinger into minor party status. There just simply are not enough protest votes left to propel Schlesinger to the 30% range.

Lamont is stuck in a solid second because of the dynamics of Connecticut, a state where Independent voters outnumber either Democrats or Republicans. Lamont is having a hard time winning over the Independent vote, something vital to a general election win in Connecticut. Currently, Lieberman has over a third of the Democratic vote, and over 50% of the Independent and Republican vote. That’s going to make for a hard win for Lamont.

Plus, Lamont is at the huge disadvantage in that the Democratic establishment can’t really get behind Lamont with money or resources. The reason being is that Lieberman will likely hold the deciding vote for who controls the Senate. Without Connecticut’s vote, there is almost no hope of Democrats taking control of the Senate. As I’ve written many times, alienating Lieberman can only hurt the Democratic agenda. This dynamic hurts Lamont’s chance for a general election win.

What many of the posters who are defending the ad as being non-racist do not understand is that racism and many other issues are talked about in code.

For example, when George Bush mentioned the Dread Scott decision in his debate with Kerry, that’s code to the Anti-Abortion group that he is own their side. This is because the Dread Scott decision is talked about among that group who compare it to Roe v. Wade, and claim that both denied rights to a group.

Most racism has particular components to it that are repeated. Anti-black racism has long been a story of black men preying on white women. Black men used to be lynched for looking at white women. Have you never read To Kill a Mockingbird?

The women in the ad is not someone who is factually interested in dating Ford. She was chosen because she is white and blond, and that feeds into the racist code that Republicans have been using for over a generation now.

Do you think that Jesse Helms having black hands coming out and taking the employment contract was anything other than a message saying “Black are taking your jobs?”

The ad was an attempt not just to remain voters that Ford is black, but harkens back to a time when a black man could be killed for the simple interest of a white women, and it’s an appeal to those who wish those times would return.

Let’s be honest, the only reason to lie about the date of the affair was to deceive your husband from the beginning. You knew that it was possible that the child was conceived by your ex. Then you compared this lie by lying about ultra sounds fixing the conception date to a specific day. There are no such tests. They can be a week to ten days off.

You started down this path with a deception and betrayal having an affair, then you lied about the date to cover up you conceived with another man, and now you want to know how to tell you husband.

Does it really matter how you tell him, since you have zero credibility?

As others have posted, your husband is probably not stupid enough to not have contemplated that the child isn’t his, and you certainly don’t deserve him if he sticks around.

Now, as to how to resolve your self inflicted torment, find out your blood type and your husbands blood type and see if the child could possibly be his. This can be done without DNA test, and if the child’s blood type does not match your or your husband’s (Remember A + B can equal AB) then you know it’s not his. If it matches your husband’s, ask for your ex’s blood type, if they aren’t the same, then the child is biologically your husband’s. Assuming of course, that there isn’t another affair in there someplace.