Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Forrester Statement On New Jersey Supreme Court Decision
Forrester 2002 | 10/2/2002 | Forrester 2002

Posted on 10/02/2002 5:16:31 PM PDT by Politico2

Forrester Statement On New Jersey Supreme Court Decision

(TRENTON, OCTOBER 2) – U.S. Senate candidate Doug Forrester tonight issued the following statement:

“Today, the people of New Jersey lost. The Torricelli-Lautenberg machine’s disregard for the rule of law, fair elections and the people of New Jersey will, once again, make our great state the butt of national jokes.

“The good people of New Jersey understand what has transpired over the past few days. A few powerbrokers read public opinion polls and concluded that I was going to beat Bob Torricelli, and decided to change the rules of the game. The good people of New Jersey will not allow these political games to win the day.

“Today, this election became an election between, on the one hand, those who seek to restore New Jersey’s reputation and, on the other hand, those few powerbrokers who will say anything and do anything to rig the system to their advantage. I will continue my fight to restore dignity and honor the office of the United States Senate. And with the people of New Jersey, we will win this fight.

“Unfortunately, the New Jersey Supreme Court has now decided that New Jersey law, as written, should not apply to this election. Their decision is flawed.

“We will pursue an appeal of this matter to the Supreme Court of the United States, to ensure that the men and women of our military will not be disenfranchised and that the rule of law will be upheld.

“This is a fight that the Torricelli-Lautenberg machine began when it decided it could not win this election within the rules provided by state law.

“Regardless of the outcome in the courts, I will continue my fight to put the interests of the people of New Jersey before politics.

“The Torricelli—Lautenberg machine has failed to fight to strengthen our national security. The Torricelli – Lautenberg machine has consistently voted to cut defense and intelligence spending.

The Torricelli – Lautenberg machine voted against a national missile defense system to protect American families and our allies. The Torricelli—Laugtenberg machine has failed to clean more than 19 of New Jersey’s 132 Superfund toxic waste sites. The Torricelli—Lautenberg machine has consistently voted for higher taxes and against a Balance Budget Amendment. And under the Torricelli – Lautenberg machine, New Jersey has remained dead last among the states in getting a return on the tax dollars we send to Washington meaning our hardworking families continue to bear an enormous tax burden.

“These issues continue to confront us. These are the issues I have been speaking about since I entered this race. Theses are the issues I will continue to speak about until Election Day.

“Enough is enough. I will continue to stand against the Torricelli-Lautenberg machine. Hang on, New Jersey – help is on the way!”

-- 30 --

Paid for by Forrester 2002, Inc.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: New Jersey
KEYWORDS: lautenberg; military; missledefense; newjersey; nj; senate; senator; torch; torricelli
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 281-290 next last
To: rwfromkansas
"This is not ruling on a President, but a Senate race. It does not have near as big a national impact."

As evidence of that, the ruling today barely made it onto network news. I only saw it mentioned on NBC about halfway through the news. By the way, it nearly killed me to have to watch that much of network news.

161 posted on 10/02/2002 7:00:15 PM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Debates are a must...the fillin was horrible yesterday in his big victory speech.
162 posted on 10/02/2002 7:02:40 PM PDT by TatieBug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Now he has to scrap ads, commission new ones, and change his strategy.

Couldn't he just use the same ads, but every time Torricelli's name was one the screen, they just crossed it out with a black X and have a handwritten Lautenberg above it? I mean, a Rat is a Rat...

163 posted on 10/02/2002 7:02:52 PM PDT by T. P. Pole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Unknown Freeper
Thank you! How do I add the text rather than link? Sorry to keep pestering you with questions but you give good directions.
164 posted on 10/02/2002 7:03:25 PM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Politico2
Excellent statement by Forrester. Let's see that rhetoric on a TV/Radio ad blitz, please!
165 posted on 10/02/2002 7:04:19 PM PDT by Antoninus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
We make the law based on how we feel and we are not bound by elected legislator's or the people that elected them. After all, we are the creme de la creme and you are simply pissants.

I would interlineate it to read as follows:

After all, we are the creme de la creme and you are simply pissants we do it for your own good even if you are too obtuse to fathom the sublimity of our visionary objectives.

UMMV.

166 posted on 10/02/2002 7:04:31 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Politico2
This is starting to smell a lot like election year 2000 in Florida. Once again, a state supreme court thwarts the law and forces the issue up the ladder to the federal court system. I hope Forrester keeps at it but the odds are stacked against him in NJ.
167 posted on 10/02/2002 7:04:34 PM PDT by inspector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
By the way, is "creme de la creme" a phrase you commonly hear on your shop floor?
168 posted on 10/02/2002 7:07:37 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Peach
good job !

try this next time:

<a href=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/761779/posts target=blank>N.J. Supreme Court Order Violates Reasoning of Bush v. Gore (MUST READ)</a>

the 'target=blank' modifier makes a new window open for the site/thread you're referring to,
which is helpful for old folks like me who lose our place easily     

the thread title between the <a> tags will show up as a hightlighted link ...

169 posted on 10/02/2002 7:07:56 PM PDT by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Libertarian Jim
According to Newt on Hannity tonight, it's a FEDERAL LAW that the absentee ballots overseas to the our sevice people must be mailed on or before 35 days in advance of an election. I count 34 days from today ~ October 2 to November 5. Hopefully the US Supreme Court will take it on this issue. Hang on gang...here we go again hopefully to victory again. They just can't continue making our laws to suit their failures.
170 posted on 10/02/2002 7:09:16 PM PDT by TatieBug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: TatieBug
Neither Newt nor Hannity is the best place to learn what will happen and why. Just my opinion.
171 posted on 10/02/2002 7:10:26 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
The problem with not going to the SCOTUS is that it will set precedence for other states and or continueing flagrant unlawfullness by the NJSC. OTH, if SCOTUS hears the case and rules in favor of NJ, then it really will set a precedent.

Either way its a risk. However, Forrester needs to keep pounding the fact he is concerned about our military as being the main reason he goes to the SC.

He need to continue pounding on the disenfrancising of our military. He needs to confront L'berg to see what he is doing about guaranteeing our military and absentee voters will not be strung out to dry.

172 posted on 10/02/2002 7:10:40 PM PDT by rstevens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Politico2
I hope and pray that the American people will see the Democratic party's basis is their control of the Judiciary! It is crystal clear now why they are so paranoid of Bush's Judicial nominations! They must be desparate to SHOW their hand so blatantly.
173 posted on 10/02/2002 7:10:48 PM PDT by Alissa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tomkat
Oh, Tomkat - thank you (I think?!) I'll try it next time and think I get it. Will definitely preview before I post one of those!
174 posted on 10/02/2002 7:14:51 PM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: inkling
Don't get mad -- Get the Senate!!! Let's all send $25 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee via www.nrsc.org.

done

175 posted on 10/02/2002 7:18:56 PM PDT by RightWingMama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Peach
you're quite welcome ...

one thing i like about html is that it allows me to delude myself into thinking i know some programming,
while still being no competitive threat whatsoever to those who actually do !


176 posted on 10/02/2002 7:19:39 PM PDT by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Politico2
As much as most of us know that we are right, Forrester should drop the appeal to the USSC. Even if SCOTUS rules in our favor, the RATs can revert to the Carnahan option and just tell voters to pull the Toricelli lever with the promise that Lautenberg will replace him in January 2003.

Instead Forrester should ask Pres. Bush to travel to NJ this week and nationalize this disgraceful action by the Dems and the NJSC. I doubt that very many people outside this region even know what has transpired. Bush can use this sham bait-and-switch to shame the Dems and point out how liberal judges are destroying our freedom and the rule of law.
177 posted on 10/02/2002 7:19:58 PM PDT by TomT in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
After all, we are the creme de la creme and you are simply pissants we do it for your own good even if you are too obtuse to fathom the sublimity of our visionary objectives.

That's why you write briefs and I wear'em.

178 posted on 10/02/2002 7:21:03 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: epow
We'll see, I guess.

Interfering in a state race where people will be able to vote (even if by write-in) for Torch will be tough for them.

179 posted on 10/02/2002 7:21:43 PM PDT by GraniteStateConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: rep-always
Pray for our country, we are under assault from within.
180 posted on 10/02/2002 7:22:05 PM PDT by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 281-290 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson