Posted on 10/03/2002 3:56:25 AM PDT by looney tune
The Palm Beach Democrats Torricelli infects New Jersey with chad fever.
Thursday, October 3, 2002 12:01 a.m. EDT
There aren't any palm trees in Trenton, but the spirit of Florida 2000 is alive and well among Democrats in New Jersey. They're now trying to pull a Palm Beach by changing election rules in the middle of the game to retain a Senate seat and maintain their last hold on Washington power.
New Jersey law clearly states that changes can be made to a ballot "not later than the 48th day preceding the date of the general election." We are now 33 days from this year's Election Day of November 5, military ballots have already gone out, and some absentee ballots are already on their way in. But Democrats want voters, and the courts to ignore all of this so they can substitute a candidate for Bob Torricelli who actually has a chance to win.
This certainly qualifies as a democratic innovation. Perhaps every state should make primary elections irrelevant. Or maybe we should all adopt a new 13% rule (the margin Mr. Torricelli was trailing by when he "dropped out"): If a candidate is losing in the polls by that much or more on October 1, the party can toss him off the ballot and find somebody else, anybody else.
The Democrats are even going back to their old reliable, a liberal state Supreme Court, to justify this election law rewrite. Even these notoriously activist judges couldn't help but notice the bizarre nature of the Democratic request at their hearing yesterday morning. Justice Barry Albin asked, "If not the 48-day limit, where do you draw the line?" And Chief Justice Deborah Poritz wondered if the legislature hadn't set that time limit because "there is less likely to be manipulation at that point?" Well, yes. But somehow the judges had managed to overcome their qualms by yesterday evening, allowing former Senator Frank Lautenberg on the ballot.
All of which raises a broader point about the length today's Democrats are willing to go to keep their hold on power. Because Al Gore ultimately lost, Democrats have persuaded some Americans that they were the victims in 2000. But keep in mind that George W. Bush won Florida every time the votes were counted. Democrats started the legal fight by flying a fleet of lawyers into Palm Beach the day after election night to exploit hapless voters who couldn't figure out how to punch a butterfly ballot. They had hoped to steal the election in three heavily Democratic counties by recounting hanging and dimpled chads. Only the U.S. Supreme Court put a stop to this creative theft.
This year it is the Democrats' single-vote majority in the U.S. Senate that is in jeopardy. They have that control only by virtue of James Jeffords's lie to Vermont voters when he ran as a Republican in 2000. And as the election nears two years later, there are at least eight close Senate races, five of them involving Democratic incumbents. So the party is doing whatever it takes, ethical or not, to prevail.
In Iowa, incumbent Tom Harkin has already had to fire two campaign aides after a mole acting on his behalf recorded a strategy session of GOP challenger Greg Ganske. Harkin campaign manager Jeff Link initially denied having anything to do with taping the meeting, but he resigned last week anyway. Mr. Harkin dismisses this as "just politics," but it fits his history of last-minute campaign rabbit punches.
In New Jersey, Democrats now want to nominate Mr. Lautenberg, a 78-year-old Senate retread whose promise to serve a complete term has to be doubted. Once he wins, and serves a decent interval, he can profess health problems and resign, allowing Democratic Governor Jim McGreevey to name a much younger replacement.
We're beginning to think that maybe Republican John Ashcroft's decision in 2000 to concede his Senate defeat to Mel Carnahan's widow was a mistake. A Missouri judge kept the polls open well past the normal close, and reports of election fraud have since been proven in spades, but Mr. Ashcroft stepped aside rather than precipitate an ugly legal battle. Rather than respond in kind, however, Democrats seem to have concluded that Republicans are patsies who can be rolled if they're simply brazen enough. Democrats will say that New Jersey voters will now get a real "choice." But what they're really getting is ballot manipulation foisted on them by political insiders who are demonstrating contempt for the rule of law.
GRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!
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.
GRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!
No Dog, you're not. The NJ voters had no say in this decision, and so cannot be compared to the idiots in PB. (Unless of course they elect that dottering old fool "I'll Break any Lawtonberg", which I pray NJ voter's are smart enough not to do)
But you do have to admit that your NJSC just gave the FLSC scoflaws a huge run for the money as the most inept, liberal, and criminally corrput State Supreme Court in the country!
Congressman Billybob
Click for "Til Death Do Us Part."
This should just be about fairness. Doug Forrester and the GOP have expended millions of dollars and massive effort to unseat this unethical slimeball Clinton-wantabe. Now that effort, within 35 days of the election, appearing to be successful, the Demos decide: let's change candidates -- without any consequences. They have a new candidate -- fresh after 2 years of retirement, with financial resources to start a whole new campaign, and a "clean slate" as far as the liberal media are concerned. That same liberal media don't even blink an eye about these events -- just pleased to see a reliable Demo seat preserved. Stupid Mara Liaison, Chris Matthews and other "objective" media types didn't even consider whether this manuever should be questioned... After all, don't the people of NJ deserve to have a viable Democrat candidate to vote for?
The best argument the Republicans pushed in yesterday's legal wranglings before the NJ Supreme Court was: if you pass this mess, you can count on seeing similar claims every future October/November.
The Democrats have no shame -- they appear willing to tarnish every law, bend every standard, trash every precedent in this great democracy if it means promoting their cause and power. Disgusting.
Not one person mentioned that yesterday.
The talking points are out. Of course, they're leaving out the part that we DID want him to quit the race, but within the time limit.
Liars, every single one of them.
No from where in Hell does the WSJ think all those Palm Beach folks immigrated. We have watched with horror for years as all these disgustingly, sick, sacks of crap invaded the state from NY/NJ. Like swarms of locusts or fire ants, they destroy everything they encounter.
This is an example of Banana Republic sham elections can the violence that accompanies such sham elecxtions be far behind? Throughout history it has shortly followed.
Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown
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.