Posted on 11/09/2004 1:33:23 PM PST by ghost of nixon
Despite the Democrats fevered and sometimes openly illegal attempts to keep New Jersey a solid BLUE state, the recent scandal that encouraged Governor McGreevey to out himself as a (corrupt) gay-American has comfirmed our suspicions that NJ has "swung" to the LAVENDER state column.
While we RED staters have noted that lavender falls between blue and red on a palette of colors - leaving us hopeful that it might swing more red in upcoming statewide races - we must confess to being confounded by New Jersey's stubborn embrace of corrupt Democrats. Your governor has admitted that he hired his gay lover (who is a foreigner!) to be NJ's Director of Homeland Security - and his only qualification was that he looked hot in a mock turtleneck!! And this was six months after 911!! And a couple of months after his wedding!! To a girl!! And New Jersey just lets this guy remain in office until he wants to quit - and then still gives Kerry a six percentage point victory at the polls?!
Someone please explain New Jersey to us confused Red-staters. Is there any hope for the Garden State?
There's hope, but I am not holding my breath.
There is hope for us. We have several solidly GOP counties. I live in one. We send some good congressmen to DC. But we have some big urban areas filled with non GOP voters. We can do better and the tide is going our way.
McGreevey was elected because the NJ state GOP refused to back the conservative Republican who won the primary.
We have two Democratic Senators because the NJ Supreme Court decided to let the Democrats violate the state constitution.
But there were 360,000 more Republican voters at the polls this year and despite the lazy corruption of the state GOP, we're making progress.
Our Democrats DID NOT LIKE KERRY,and I suspect,a lot of them abstained from voting-or voted for Pres. Bush.
There are TWO Democratic Parties. One ( the one we all revile )has been so infiltrated by poorly disguised Socialists,who have spent 3 generations oozing into positions of power.
The other Democratic Party - which I suspect is the actual majority - is made up of people a lot like Zell Miller.Naturally, this is the party you never hear about !
It's more of a mauve with lavender highlights.
Lavender blue, dilly-dilly
For a laugh, check out post #8
LOL! I love the picture of the sheep in a sexy pose!
That's an oldie, but goodie...will rerun in Today's Toons 11/10/04...can't recall if I used it back in August...thanx from NJ (& good riddance to McGreevy).
NJ RNC sounds about as useless as the Arkansas RNC! A bunch of ignorant brown-nosers more intent of raking in money for themselves than representing our Contitution or people.
The women's side here, I just call it the Republican TEA party.
A lot of Freepers aren't going to like this, but there was a time when the Democrats embraced (or at least pretended to embrace) the "disenfranchised" in our society: those who were not Upper class White Anglo-Saxon Protestants- example: the "Boston Brahmins",the New York 500,etc.,etc.
The Democrats went out of their way to embrace the Irish,the Italians, the Jews,and the other "unfashionable" immigrants (Poles, Russians,Slavs,etc.)These were,at one time, people without a real voice in government.
A lot of that "ingathering" led to abuses,such as the corruption spread by Tammanny Hall,the labor racketeers who gained inside tracks,the Prohibition era gangsters who were able to buy and sell politicians,but,at the same time,the Democrats managed to hold on to the loyalty of the rank and file - partly because they were viewed by a lot of blue collar workers as the part of Labor: the Republicans being cast as the party of Management.
Around the time of the Vietnam War,the extreme left wing began "crossing over" from the ranks of the Socialist parties,and setting up housekeeping in the Democratic party.(There had always been a few of them there-lying low,as it were-and they paved the way for the newcomers.)
The rest is history. The left wing managed to grab effective control of the party,and began moving it further left...............BUT as the recent election results show,the "rank and file" of the party prefers "centrist" candidates,and "voted with their feet" as a way of resisting the left wingers.
I think, had the Democrats nominated Dick Gephardt or Joseph Lieberman,the election might have had a very different outcome.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.