Help Forrester! Opposition Research on Lautenberg!!

Myself | October 2, 2002 | Miss Marple

[Miss Marple]

The purpose of this thread is to assemble research on Frank Lautenberg. If you have articles, links, personal testimony, or just some ideas on campaign issues, please post them here.

Remember, we are "citizens, not spectators!" Let's help Doug Forrester and defeat these slimeball Rat crooks!

Strategy ideas for working with the Greens and the Libertarians are also welcome, because they were dumped on, too!

Everyone is welcome! We have excellent researchers here and I know we can help!

By the way, New Jersey residents: Lautenberg's official papers are at Rutgers University! If you have some spare time, checking these out would be a good way to help!

[Question_Assumptions]

I think that Forrester simply needs to say that (A) he is pro-choice but not pro-abortion (in other words, he supports abortion rights but doesn't believe in Federal funding, a litmus test for judgest, or extreme pro-abortion positions such as allowing children to be taken across state lines for abortion or late third-trimester abortions) -- make Lautenberg the extremist here, (B) he thinks that the answer to cutting gun violence is to enforce the laws on the books and to focus on punishing guns used for crimes, not to enact more laws that will not be enforced, and (C) he need to explain that the reason he wants to use taxpayer dollars to clean up toxic sites is that the Superfund, despite good intentions, simply isn't getting the sites cleaned up, which is of paramount importance, and that trying to extract money from NJ companies for clean-ups in a weak economy will only increase the unemployment rate.

These are the three issues that I saw in an anti-Forrester ad on WABC last night. Note that I'm pro-life but I think that Forrester can get milage out of being a "moderate" pro-choice candidate. He should also point out that even if Roe were overturned, it would simply turn abortion law back to the states, it wouldn't outlaw it. All of these issues were are the heart of the Dem attack and Torricelli's teary speach. Forrester must address them now on television and radio.

In doing so, he then must point out that it is the Democrats that are trying to squash the very real issues he was trying to raise, in particular, being weak on defense and support of the intelligence agencies. Lautenberg probably has a history of votes that will make him vulnerable here. And this will help move him beyond the idea that his candidacy was only "anti-Torricelli".

As for the Supreme Court issue, Forrester should point out that the same liberals who hold extreme pro-abortion issues to pass a Lautenberg litmus test are also the same sort of extreme (use that word) liberal judges who do things like declaring the Pledge of Allegence uncontitutional. In other words, the judicial activism that supports extreme readings of Roe goes far beyond simply abortion rights.

[Aegedius]

Forrester should not let up on Torricelli's enablers.

"Mr. Lautenburg, why did you not speak out about Sen. Torricelli's wholesale corruption?"
"Mr. Lautenburg, when you saw the results of the Torricelli Princlple on 9/11, why didn't you speak out?
In addition, I have 3 more suggestions:"
1. Attack
2. Attack
3. Attack

[mewzilla]

Here's a suggestion. Go to opensecrets.org and look up what they've got on Frank. I looked quick at his last personal financial filing (1999?) and found, for instance, that he had $184,959 in retirement income from a company called Automatic Data Processing. His financial statements might make interesting reading. Not to mention his old donor lists.

[Miss Marple]

Your ideas are like mine. Lautenberg originally got elected by hinting that Millicent Fenwick, in her early 70's, was TOO OLD to serve. I am unable to find the exact quote, but those who are going to Rutgers or who have Lexus Nexus may be able to find it. This would be a good thing.

[mewzilla]

With all due respect to Barnes, this AIN'T about the darn Senate race now. It about the rule of law. It's about whether that phrase still means anything. And it's about whether or not justice is for sale to whichever party that can get its pols into office and stack the courts. The principle matters here. That's why this decision bloody well needs to be appealed.

[A Citizen Reporter]

The irony in this story is the money. Will the Torch hand over his $5 mill war chest? (It would be hard to imagine the NJ dems pushing Torch out, without also taking the money.) If not, will Lautenberg fund himself? Then this irony, on the reason Lautenberg decided not to run again in 1999.

Sen. Lautenberg says he will not seek re-election

"The compelling factor, I've got to tell you, in my decision was the searing reality that I would have to spend half of every day between now and the next election fund-raising," said Lautenberg, a Democrat.

To run an effective campaign, Lautenberg said he would have had to ask thousands of people for help and raise an average of $25,000 to $30,000 every business day. That would have distracted him from his legislative work in Washington, he said.

Or he, as a MILLIONAIRE, could decide that the only way to run is to pay for it himself.

RE: Brit Hume's show..."MEATHEAD!!!" LOL, I LOVE Fred Barnes!

[Huck]

Good job. Shake it off, folks. Let's get busy and beat this old coot! No sulking. And I agree with what Fred Barnes just said to Brit on Fox: forget the courts. Let's roll.

Unfortunatly, the only thing I can say about the Louse is that I went to high school with his niece, who cleaned out my notebook for me.

[Tacis]

There has to be a deal! Lautenberg quit, he has already declared that he now longer wishes to serve and has acted on that declaration. He quit!! If he had wanted to return for the good of the country (to replace a crooked theif in the Senate), he would have acted in the state primary. His action is no for the good of the country but only for the good of his Jersey party.

Thsu, nothing he says or does can be trusted to be in the best interests of the country. If elected, he will not serve out his term. He will only keep the seat warm until a replacement can be recruited (does Torricelli have enough on the governor to force him to reappoint Bob to a seat he could not win?). We must hit on the "if he wanted to be senator for the country, he would have run in the primary" and "more disgrace and corruption from Jersey in the eyes of the rest of the country."

What were his committees? What did they do? How did he vote on resolutions related to war and on appointments? What is available from the FBI via a FOIA request? Who were his staff members? Are private videos available? The media will already be destroying any news tape that makes Lautenberg look dumb, old or crooked. Has he paid all his real estate taxes? Does he employ any illegal aliens and not pay the taxes for them? Drunk driving? How about his family members? Any convictions or unexplained wealth? This is Jersey, the integrity state. Even if corruption doesn't offend dems in Jersey, it might influence voters in other states and force them to realize how filthy these people really are.

[ER_in_OC,CA]

This one is critical and timely.

Lautenberg voted AGAINST authorizing military action against Iraq.

Cut & Paste Link: http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/rva/1021/10212.htm

I repeat:

LAUTENBERG VOTED AGAINST OPERATION DESERT STORM

[backhoe]

Miss M, here's what I use:

General search engines:

HotBot
Description: An advanced search engine. There are many configurable options, both in simple as in advanced search mode.

-http://www.google.com/advanced_search--

-http://www.profusion.com/--

100's OF SEARCH ENGINES

Specific search engines:

Skipease:

White pages, Yellow pages, Reverse lookups, US Govt. Directories, Inmate/Prison locators, SS# info, Bankruptcy, Owner of Domain names, Medical profession, Campaign Contributions, Deceased person, US Corporation info, etc.

NewsTrove

-http://www.opensecrets.org/--

-http://www.issues2000.org/--

-http://www.activistcash.com--

-http://www.consumerfreedom.com--

-http://www.ussearch.com/wlcs/index.jsp?srcAdID=4040003011&sourceid=--

www.guidestar.org

[VRWC_minion]

Good thread. What I would like to see is the reasons he left the senate, preferably in his own words. I think it would be powerful to have him disqualify himself and it would be a good question for Forestor to keep asking "why do you want to run", besides saving the RATS from defeat and "what makes anyone think the RAT gov won't appoint the Torch to finish your term ?

[Peach]

You're right - there's a reason he's back in. The $$ is irresistable.

[Howlin]

To: Liz

This one is critical and timely.

Lautenberg voted AGAINST authorizing military action against Iraq.

Cut & Paste Link: http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/rva/1021/10212.htm

I repeat:

LAUTENBERG VOTED AGAINST OPERATION DESERT STORM

245 posted on 10/2/02 7:06 PM Eastern by ER_in_OC,CA

[Peach]

Good job. That vote didn't look good 11 years ago and looks particularly bad in a post 9/11 world.

[Unknown Freeper]

QA, I know this is off topic but...what is that construction on Hoes Lane about? Is that for 18? /back to being upset about this crime of the century and ashamed to be from here

[Pegita]

Whatever we come up with, Miss Marple .. it would be nice if our laundry list were:

51 reasons why ...

[mewzilla]

Here's an oldie but a goodie from 1999: Frank defending Larry Flynt.

[MoralSense]

If Lautenberg doesn't sound any better or more capable than he sounded yesterday, he'll be mincemeat. He's doddering, hesitant, and completely insincere -- just reads from a script, can't handle any sort of heat.

[ffrancone]

WANT TO TAKE BACK THE SENATE??

WANT TO SHOCK HILLARY?

THEN DO YOUR PART TODAY! GO TO:

TakeBackCongress.org

A resource for conservatives who want a Republican majority in the Senate

[Argus]

My advice to Forrester would be to just keep running against Toricelli, and point out that, if elected, Lautenberg will simply resign after being sworn in in 2003, so NJ Democrat Governor MCgreevey can appoint his replacement - Robert Toricelli!