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.
In NJ, there is a tradition that when a RAT or GOP judge steps down the governor will replace that judge with a judge of the same party. So just because they were appointed by a republican, does not mean they were conservative, or even something approaching republicans.
McGreevy decided to break tradition with his first appointment and replaced a GOP judge with a RAT.
If you fight it in court it will energize their base. If you shine the harsh light of truth on him he will shrink before your very eyes.
The one lawsuit I would file would be by the donors who wasted their money on paying for ads to demonize the Torch. I can't believe that the lawyers didn't pound that home. The NJSC ruled that the Dems have to pay the cost of redoing the ballots, maybe they would have ruled to throw Forrester a bone by making the Dems pay for wasted ads. The Judges tend to throw the losing party a bone. Rarely is a decision totally one sided.
Excellent statement. My anger at this Rat slapping the law in the face AGAIN knows no bounds.
The media want us to believe that Forrester had nothing going for him but people's disgust with Torricelli, which I don't believe. I think he can win if he runs a smart campaign.
Lautenberg didn't win by much the last time he was on the ballot, in 1994, when he was much younger than he is now.
The 1994 vote was 1,033,487 for Lautenberg vs. 966,244 for his opponent (Haytaian). A 67,243-vote margin out of 2 million votes.
I agree. Remember, the SCOTUS first decision in Bush/Gore was to demand SCOFLA show where they got the authority to change the certification deadline. So, I predict the first SCOTUS decision here will be to throw this back to SCONJ to prove themselves.
SCOFLA never did (as I remember anyway) send a justification to SCOTUS on that original decision. They couldn't find one.
Forrester needs to find ONE submariner who returned his absentee ballot. A submariner who has already returned a ballot is likely out to sea for the month and receiving mail is very dicey. Many, if not most submariners don't use an AFP address. Therefore any mail, if they even reached a mail port, is likely waiting for him at home.
And DO NOT use the phrase "We're doomed!" It demoralizes follks, and we do not need that!
Mort and Fred on Special Report tonight said that Forrester should immediatly start challenging Lautenberg to debates, and lots of them. Their reasoning was that Lautenberg was "over the hill" and that his mental capacity is diminished, rendering him not quick enough to perform well in debates.
I didn't say to wait for the courts. I said it's worth a try to appeal to the SCOTUS. You can chew gum and walk at the same time. Appeal the thing and campaign at the same time.
The course of action Forrester has chosen is by far the best he can do under the circumstances. I think he has a good chance of winning this thing if he starts hammering away at the Rats immediately.
New Jersey is full of Dems. I'm surprised they were going to dump Torricelli. I'll be surprised if they can see the senility in Lautenburg and do the right thing and vote Forrester.
I also hope that those conservatives who have stated they will not vote for their Republican candidate because they aren't conservative enough will reconsider.
They're not conservatives, they're complainers.
Of course I do. But I don't want the USSC deciding election matters, either. I want to know why Christy Witman has loaded the SCONJ with liberal scofflaws. I want to know why the idiot that presented the Republican case to SCONJ got his butt kicked by the Dems. I want to know why the public educated NJ electorate is so corrupt that the majority would apparently keep Torch in as long as they have, and then blindly elect his backroom-dealing replacement over an milquetoast ?conservative? candidate.
The democrats themselves aren't the only problem, and "beating" them in the courts is not the only solution.
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.