Forrester Statement On New Jersey Supreme Court Decision

Forrester 2002 | 10/2/2002 | Forrester 2002

[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.

[Humidston]

Peter Sheridan who is representing Forrester is LAME.

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

I went to the donation link, and my donation was rejected. It didn't say why, and clicking "help" just opened another window with the same information. We're doomed!

Maybe the piggy bank is full?

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

registered, please read the last paragraph of the post this is in reply to. It will give you an idea that your imagination may find fun.

[San Jacinto]

I think Forrester can beat Lautenberg

Oh, I think Lautenberg is very beatable, but I thought Forrester got off to a bad start tonight. This statement of his hits all the right notes, except the part about appeal. I think that is the worst thing he can do.

I just saw news clips of the two candidates. Lautenberg was at a rally in a party atmosphere getting hugged by that skin-head looking governor they've got up there. Our guy was surrounded by all these dour faces and looking glum while he read off the statement that he was going to take the case to the USSC. Worse yet, the news lady then said something about he had asked for Ashcroft to do something or other.

Here we are in a Senate race in a state that has not elected a 'Pub in 30 years, has not failed to re-elect an incumbent Dem running for re-election in some 60 years, and our guy has to be favored at this point. We have a chance to win the Senate by winning this big, fat Dem state in the Northeast.... (Sweet or what?) ...Yet, instead of riding high, we are coming across as sore losers trying to get help from our "big brothers" at SCOTUS or in the Bush administration.

There is so much Forrester could do against Lautenberg and the way he has been selected, but turning Lautenberg into a sympathetic figure by trying to get him "removed from the ballot" should not be one of them.

If Forrester says "I'm fighting for the 'Rule of Law!'", then Lautenberg says, "Where does the Rule of Law say You get to run unopposed? What's the matter, you're ideas are not good enough? Afraid the people won't vote for you if given a fair choice?"

Top that off with the fact that the chance for success on appeal is very remote (at least IMO), and it is a lose-lose proposition. It is the wrong strategy.

The right strategy is to nationalize the elections on two issues: (1) National security, since so many Dems are acting exactly like the Muslims in Peshwar with regard to their loyalty to the USA, and (2) Ethics, since the Dems currently have sleaze oozing to the service in three states -- HI (Mink), IA (Harkin), and FL (Reno/McBride) -- and it's erupting like a sleeze volcano in good old NJ.

Forrester should welcome Old Frank to the race and then start chasing him around the state like an outlaw, talkiing about how Torch and Old Frank and those like them made NJ a national laughing stock. Come on, Forrester, just stop whining and beat the guy like he was an old, dusty rug strung out over the clothesline.

(Damn, I miss Lee Atwater at a time like this.)

[gramcam]

"Here's another New Jersey bumper sticker: TORCH LAUTENBERG …"

Yes!! Red/White/Blue colors ... w/ burning torch under "Lautenberg"..
It even has the same cadence as "SORE LOSERMAN"....

[GretchenEE]

bump

May right be done.

[Politico2]

Many of you are saying that Forrester shouldn't appeal the case to the Supreme Court because it would look bad in the court of public opinion.

Forrester is taking a two-track approach to this: He is looking for a court to uphold the rule of law. Just because the state court made a political decision does not mean the Republicans have to take it. I have no empirical evidence on this, but if the campaign were silent and did not appeal, I believe most people (I'm not talking about activists, but "normal people" :) ) would conclude that Doug gave up or Doug agrees with the decision.

The second track here is to move forward against the Lautenberg-Torricelli machine. Whatever their differences, Lautenberg and Torricelli are now inextricably entwined. Any use of Torricelli cash will be viewed as tainted terrorist money. Lautenberg is vulnerable on many issues, not the least of which is campaign finance violations. The Democrat Party Bosses in NJ have gone through at least FIVE potential candidates and ended up replacing one ethically-challenged Democrat with another ethically challenged candidate. Did you know that Lautenberg was fined $20,895 by the FEC in May 1993 for receiving donations above the maximum limit?

And Lautenberg is as wrong on the issues for New Jersey as Torricelli. When Lautenberg served the Senate, the Bergen Record stated that the New Jersey fell to last place on the return of federal goods and services for their tax dollar. How exactly DID he protect NJ taxpayer's interests? ("N.J. GETS LEAST RETURN ON ITS TAXES," The Record (Bergen), by Adam Piore, October 8, 1997)

[fortheDeclaration]

Clintonism is winning at all costs, it is Hitlerism with a smiley face.

Amen and Amen!

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Not bad. But six of the judges were appointed by a Republican.

RINO I would guess. Clearly they are DNC operatives. The NY Times even said that '...the law clearly states...'. LOL. And, they are criminal tyrants wearing robes.

Remember that infamous court decision forcing the boy scouts to have homo scout masters? That was this very kangaroo.

This kangeroo court of pretend-judges also shut down all schools because the schools weren't getting enough funding. They strong-armed the state legislature into higher school funding, holding New Jersey students' education hostage. Kind of like a strike, but dictated from a kangeroo bench.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Torch hates Lautenberg and said he would not turn his campaign money over to him but today he has done just that.

Tainted money, funded by the Torch. Interesting vulnerability here.

[OXENinFLA]

Wathcing the court yesterday (and right now, thank you C-span) and as soon as the Dem's laywer said the "Mechinacs" of the election then a judge uses the same phrasing.

Yeah OK. I'd like to see the judges bank statements to see if any large amounts emerge.

[OXENinFLA]

This is a GREAT question.

Should the "voters" have the opportunity to get to know and form an opinion on the new candidate with Debates Or are the Dems so confident they think New Jersey Dem voters will just go to the poll and vote straight dem?

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

The looming court threat ads to the sleaze factor. It is part of the campaign, in a way. At the same time, it is the right thing to do. They DELIBERATELY violated Federal law. Absentee ballots must be sent out 45 days in advance. If a state falls behind schedule due to late run-offs, it might get fined anyway. This, however, was not a late run-off. This was a deliberate violation of the 45 day law. And it is a FEDERAL issue, an effort to keep a timely, organised voting routine for our fighting forces.

It's asking a lot of our fighting forces to scramble at the last minute with rushed ballots, in some cases during special forces operations. Imagine some special forces soldier boarding an airplane, and some car drives up like a maniac to stop the plane for a New Jersey voting ballot. "I already voted," the soldier says. "Your vote was discounted. Here, vote again." "Good thing the plane didn't take off one minute sooner." The entire operation waits for his vote. That's if he's lucky enough to vote a second time.

[jejones]

The Democrats--now the party of "bait and switch" candidates.

[Got a right to Life? . . Huh?]

The New Jersey Supreme Court ruling: [the equitable relief sought herein is not inconsistent with the precedent of this Court].

Does NJSC precedent include a case where a candidate sought a replacement candidate, 30 days from as election, because of faltering poll numbers? Well it does now! Don't expect the courts to allow the same exemption from the law for any party other than the Democratic Party.

What is becoming increasingly clear is that state Supreme Courts are willing to abandon the rule of law in favor of the pursuit of their political ideologies.

[Got a right to Life? . . Huh?]

The New Jersey Supreme Court ruling: [the equitable relief sought herein is not inconsistent with the precedent of this Court].

Does NJSC precedent include a case where a candidate sought a replacement candidate, 30 days from as election, because of faltering poll numbers? Well it does now! Don't expect the courts to allow the same exemption from the law for any party other than the Democratic Party.

What is becoming increasingly clear is that state Supreme Courts are willing to abandon the rule of law in favor of the pursuit of their political ideologies.

[sanchmo]

Good move, Forrester: Keep bringing it home about the Torricelli-Lautenberg machine.

Also, a little ridicule in front of the press never hurts - like:

"Who's the democratic candidate today?"
"I encourage my opponent, whoever he happens to be today, to a discussion of the issues."
"This has been a good week. I already beat several Democrats: first Torricelli, then Menendez, then Pallone, and now it's Lautenberg. Am I forgetting anyone?"
"I apologize I took an evening off the campaign trail for a quite evening with my wife. Do the Democrats have a new candidate again?"

And next week he can add: "This has been a slow week - only one Democrat to campaign against."

[sam_paine]

So now Forrester has to go out and hit more tax cuts, a ban on abortion, elimination of the Brady Bill and all kinds of conservative dogma and the people of this heavily democratic state will just fly to the polls to vote for him. They just need to be told the truth and they will be converted. (SARCASM OFF)

Well that's not how Bush did it! To the dismay of many on this board, Bush put on an effective "compassionate conservative" facade, and ended up getting more popular while cutting taxes, getting missile defense, eradicating the Taliban....

Little bit of pragmatism over idiotic idealism in politics might be just what the pubbies need, you know.

[#3Fan]

The looming court threat ads to the sleaze factor. It is part of the campaign, in a way. At the same time, it is the right thing to do. They DELIBERATELY violated Federal law. Absentee ballots must be sent out 45 days in advance. If a state falls behind schedule due to late run-offs, it might get fined anyway. This, however, was not a late run-off. This was a deliberate violation of the 45 day law. And it is a FEDERAL issue, an effort to keep a timely, organised voting routine for our fighting forces. It's asking a lot of our fighting forces to scramble at the last minute with rushed ballots, in some cases during special forces operations. Imagine some special forces soldier boarding an airplane, and some car drives up like a maniac to stop the plane for a New Jersey voting ballot. "I already voted," the soldier says. "Your vote was discounted. Here, vote again." "Good thing the plane didn't take off one minute sooner." The entire operation waits for his vote. That's if he's lucky enough to vote a second time.

Yes it amazes me that so many Republicans here are willing to let the Democrats get an advantage by lining up candidates against one of ours. They are so willing to lay down to the Dems cheating. The odds say that if you have a disadvantage to your opponent, you're going to lose most of the time. The odds cannot be beaten. Forrester has had to spend money all through the primary and through the first part of the general defeating his opponents, Lautenberg comes in with a fresh bank account. It's vital that this action be stopped. The Dems will do this every election if precedent is allowed to be set.

News release from the NFL: From now on, anytime an NFC team plays an interconference game, beginning in the 4th quarter the score will be reset to 0-0 and another AFC team will finish the game against the original NFC team.