Replies

Forrester is a conservative. He supports a ban on partial-birth abortion, parental notification, and will vote to confirm pro-life justices. His position on the 2nd Amendment is simple -- he recognizes the individual right to self-defense contained therein, and believes there is no need for new gun laws; rather, we should enforce the laws already on the books. He vehemently opposes McCain-Feingold campaign "reform" as an assault on the First Amendment (he's especially irked, he said on NJN back in February, by the provisions banning issue ads within 60 days of a general election and 30 days of a primary election, noting (correctly) that this is EXACTLY the time when an electorate begins to pay serious attention; and, therefore, incumbents' attempts to prohibit such discussion can only be interpreted as an incumbent protection measure). For similar reasons, he opposes public financing of campaigns, and he whacked Diane Allen at the same NJN appearance for her support for public financing.

The issue in the fall campaign is going to be a simple one -- do the voters believe Torricelli deserves another term, or not? Forrester appears to be the only one positioned to make that argument with clean hands. He's got a strong Republican Party history, is a successful businessman willing to put his money where his mouth is, and he's personally disgusted by the Torch, and wants to take him out.

What more could you ask for?

Oops, forgot taxes and "special rights" for homosexuals.

He's a businessman, and it's a small business, so it's probably incorporated as an S Corporation, which means he's paying 40 percent off the top before he gets to see the fruits of his own labor. He doesn't like taxes any more than the next guy, and wants them cut. He supported the Bush tax cut proposal, but doesn't think it goes far enough.

But he's also quick to point out that -- especially given the experience of New Jersey under Christie Whitman -- it is irresponsible to cut taxes with one hand while increasing debt with the other. The key is to get a handle on government SPENDING -- if you don't turn off the spigot, it doesn't make any difference whether the water is hot or cold, you're still WET.

So he wants to take a big whack at federal government spending, and reorder priorities along more market-oriented lines.

As for "special rights," it's my understanding that he believes no one should be granted "special rights" on the basis of sexual orientation. In addition, he's a known strong supporter of the Boy Scouts -- he's a former Eagle Scout himself, and at some of his campaign events, he's even had Boy Scout Color Guards present the flag.

What more could you ask for?

Well, a fully pro-life stance, a la Bret Schundler for starters. I'd also like to know if he supported the good Mayor in the last election, or if he stood on the sidelines. Finally, on the homo-promo issue, I'd like some stronger indication that when push comes to shove and the homos start demanding the same kind of crap in NJ that they've been doing in California, Vermont, Hawaii, and Massachusetts (infiltrating the schools, trying to get a 'gay marriage' bill passed, etc.), this guy will not be afraid to stand up to them.

In short, I'm wary of his positions on the social issues. I won't support another Christie Whitman.