Just broke on Fox - Ashcroft questioning NJSC Rule

Fox News Television | 10/03/02 | Brytani

[Brytani]

Fox news just reported, Ashcroft is asking NJ officials to explain why they are not following federal election laws in regards to military ballots in the switch and bait ruling.

This might get interesting

[Brytani]

Here's the REAL deal now with campaign finance reform. As we all know, after this years elections, pac's will not be allowed to run ads 60 days before an election. Any party can not put forth a candidate who will get clobbered by the PAC's, wait through the 60 days limit, then put in another candidate (Thank you NJSC) and not a single PAC can say a word about the candidate.

This decision has some serious far reaching implications.

[=Intervention=]

I agree. If I hear one more "oooh we can't let Ashcroft speak because the press will sayyy things"...one more little-girly-all-scaredy-tail-between-the-legs whimpering I'm going to puke. But then again, years of not standing strong produces such shows of fear...you get what you invest in.

[Peach]

Excellent point about Hitlery not wanting to extend Rudy's term during a time of national emergency.

[LADY J]

I'm with you!!! Everybody complains that Lott and the rest have no spine against the RATS and here I'm reading the same thing that all of us complain about!!

I'm sick and tired of wimps and Rinos in our party who will always 'go along to get along'. They fear they won't be liked and the media will be mean to them.

For heaven's sake - if what we believe in is not worth fighting for ---LOUD & CLEAR - then we may just as well turn our country over to the RATS!!

[Arkinsaw]

Your solution would be good if only the new campaign finance rules were clear. Can those who supported Toric. now send another thousand to Lautenberg? Does Forrester get to double up, since he now faces a new opponent? What a mess. As soon as you mess with the rules, it is a nightmare. This is why I am against giving ANY leeway to ANY candidate that does not follow the stated law. This would include, sadly, Katherine Harris in Florida, who missed the deadline by two weeks that required her to resign before running for office. She should have been disqualified.

I don't think the money matters. Forrester can win by going to the people of New Jersey and appealing to THEM to be the rule of law and final arbiter on these shenanigans. With one speech he could seal the deal I think and maintain his lead.

[jackbill]

Ooooh. Tarts. Could an amicus brief be in the offing?

No. The Attorney General has the obligation - not the right, but the obligation - to enforce the laws of the land. He has been asked to enforce the Voting Rights Act by either Forrester or his supporters. He is acting in that capacity. That's totally separate from the court actions.

[SixString]

THERE'S A REBELLION GOING ON!

---

Plus...

BONEHEADED LIE-BERAL QUOTES
COMMIE RAT BA$TARD OF THE WEEK

Click HERE to LISTEN LIVE while you FReep!

Click HERE for the RadioFR Chat Room!

Miss a show? Click HERE for the RadioFR Archives!

Tonight, UNSPUN with AnnaZ and Mercuria!
6pm pdt/9pm edt

PSSSST...

[Inkie]

Yes, I knew there was another really important point. That is major. The newly-arrived candidate can coast through without anyone to criticize (since the media will lie down for him as long as he is a Democrat).

[concerned about politics]

Actually, it will be hard for them to spin it that way since he's asking specifically about federal election law as it applies to overseas/military ballots. As long as his questions are on a federal level, he's safe (well sortof).

Those military ballots will be watched VERY closley. One screw up, and the Democrats have to run and hide. They'd better make sure ALL absentee ballots are sent and accounted for. That'll also screw up NJ Democrat multible vote fraud, too.
A lot of eyes are on the votes here.

[Peach]

I agree with you, Lady J and others. If we are too afraid to do what's right because of how it will look, what does that make us? I'm tired of trying to appease the media and DNC - it's impossible to appease the whiners and we don't get what we wanted anyway. What's the point?

[Arkinsaw]

For heaven's sake - if what we believe in is not worth fighting for ---LOUD & CLEAR - then we may just as well turn our country over to the RATS!!

And you will have the satisfaction of charging right up the middle to the stone wall and dying gloriously. Very brave but not especially good tactics. A victory by flank attack is, IMHO, just as good as a glorious loss.

[Inkie]

I pray that you're right. The people of New Jersey need to STAND UP FOR WHAT IS RIGHT. This would include whatever principled Democrats remain in that morally bankrupt party.

[Arkinsaw]

If we are too afraid to do what's right because of how it will look

Being afraid and using smart and subtle tactics are two very different things. Fighting against this ruling can be done in other ways besides changing your whole campaign strategy to make it your prime issue.

[Peach]

The newly-arrived candidate can coast through without anyone to criticize (since the media will lie down for him as long as he is a Democrat).

The newly-arrived candidate has a long and not very distinguished career and Forrester doesn't have to let him coast - he can attack his crappy voting record and stance on many issues very dear to so many in the country in the post 9/11 world.

[Brian Allen]

<< They should use Larry Thompson or the head of the civil rights division on this, not Ashcroft. >>

The fact A-G Janet Ashcroft participated in the electoral fraud that saw a man who did not live in the State of Missouri elected to the United States Senate in 2000 might seem to make it more sensible that that he not participate in this one?

[Arkinsaw]

I think I am right. But Forrester is going to have to ASK the people of New Jersey and he's going to have to do it honestly, humbly, and quietly with respect for them. He needs to make a major address on the subject and then fight it out at the polls.

I saw him on Hannity and Colmes the other night and he is perfectly capable of doing it and has the proper demeanor to carry it off. A majority of the people of New Jersey Democrat and Republican want to do right and will if asked properly.

[Peach]

A victory by flank attack is, IMHO, just as good as a glorious loss.

I understand your point and respect the differing viewpoint, but standing up to the rule of law, IMHO, is NEVER a bad tactic. If the GOP can explain what it's doing to a primarily disinterested voting bloc, make its point clear, I really don't see the problem.

Consider a commercial - soldier in Afghanistan, rifle in hand, can of Spam for dinner, opening his mail and lettering underneath "he's risking his life for our right to vote, while his own vote did not count in NJ". What part of this won't people get?

[TheRedSoxWinThePennant]

[hchutch]

The fact is, this issue will hurt the Dems more than it helps them, because it puts them in the same quandrythey have been in since Labor Day:

They have to CHOOSE between placating their base ("progressives") or appealing to the undecided/moderate/swing voters, and whatever their choice is, they will ALIENATE one or the other.

Gephardt has already alienated "progressives" with his stad with Bush on the war resolution. It's a well-laid decision, and as such, it is good to press for an advanatge that will probably net us even more seats either through the gaining of undecided/moderate/swing voters OR the bolting of "progressives" to the Green Party.

The key is to place the other side into that position FAR more often than we are placed in that position.

[Brytani]

Where they will screw up is the fact that overseas ballots have already come back to NJ with votes on them. As we all know, voting law makes it illegal for one person to cast two votes for an election. Will the NJSC try and change that too?