|
|
|
SENATORS FOR VOTE FRAUD
October 19, 2002 -- IT'S more than a little ironic. On the same day it was announced that Saddam Hussein has been "unanimously" re-elected, the only two senators preventing a unanimous vote in the Senate on the election-reform bill were New York's own Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton. Why? "This would make it more difficult to vote in New York. It's designed to suppress minority voting participation," said Sen. Clinton. The "this" Sen. Clinton is referring to is the new anti-fraud provisions in the bill. They require that every person wanting to vote show a driver's license, Social Security number or other approved ID in order to cast a ballot. Clinton and Schumer preferred a system where a potential voter merely had to sign his or her name. So who is it exactly that this bill is "suppressing"? U.S. citizens have all the requisite ID - no matter what their ethnicity. Could it be that Clinton and Schumer are "sensitive" to some of the leftist fringe groups in this country who are clamoring for the right of illegal aliens to vote? It is no secret that New York is home to thousands of undocumented "residents" - who would vote overwhelmingly Democratic if they could just get past these darn ID requirements. New York's dynamic duo have a lot more 'splainin' to do on this one. E-mail: ahlert@mindspring.com |
|
bump! |
|
As if Queen Hillary! can talk. Snicker...snicker....LOL! This stuff is priceless. Welcome back, Mia T.
Thanks for the ping on another wonderful post
....someone from my old homestate recently called Laughtenberg the 'Rosie Ruiez' (the woman who used the subway to win the NY marathon) of NJ politics
.
 |
Forrester debates an empty chair as Lautenberg skips radio debate
By STEVE KORNACKI PoliticsNJ.com TRENTON, October 23 - The candidates for U.S. Senate sounded familiar themes today, with Democrat Frank R. Lautenberg pumping his prescription drug plan and Republican Douglas R. Forrester pushing his national security agenda.Ý But the campaign took an interesting twist at night, when a debate was held with only one candidate. Trenton-based New Jersey 101.5 (WKXW) went ahead with a one-hour forum that had originally been scheduled when Senator Robert G. Torricelli was the Democratic nominee. Forrester appeared, but he was alone.Ý Lautenberg refused the station's invitations, with his spokesman pointing to what he called an anti-Lautenberg slant among the station's talk show hosts. The Democrat's refusal to participate featured prominently in the broadcast, with moderator Eric Scott telling listeners at the start of the broadcast that a seat with Lautenberg's name on it would be available for the former senator if he had a change of heart. Scott, who also serves as the station's news director, said the forum is a modern tradition in statewide races, with every major party candidate participating in the last 12 years.Ý That includes Lautenberg, who appeared when he sought re-election in 1994.Ý He estimated the audience for the program at around one million listeners and said the station is consistently tops in the ratings. After the forum, Scott defended his news operation's objectivity, saying that the content of talk programs on NJ 101.5 has to be separated from that of its news broadcasts. "It's called a news-talk station for a distinct reason," he said.Ý "There's a news part and there's a talk part.Ý The news division has never been accused of having a bias."Ý Forrester fielded calls from listeners for about an hour, on topics ranging from how he acquired his personal wealth to employment discrimination against gays and lesbians. While there was no opponent to challenge him, Forrester was pressed on several issues, including Lautenberg's calls for him to release his tax returns, by Scott. Lautenberg was reported to be at a veteran's rally in Teaneck and a fund-raiser in Leonia tonight, but his campaign spokesman did not return calls seeking comment.Ý In a statement released last night, Forrester campaign manager Bill Pascoe said that Lautenberg was not at the Teaneck event. Earlier in the day, Lautenberg appeared at a pharmacy Colonia, calling for access to prescription drugs for seniors under Medicare.Ý He also attacked Forrester's prescription drug plan as too expensive for the average senior citizen. Forrester appeared in Teaneck at the Torah Academy of Bergen County, a private Jewish school.Ý There, he detailed his support for the Koby Mandell Act, a measure designed to aid the pursuit of terrorists around the world.Ý Ý Afterwards, he addressed Lautenberg's decision on Tuesday to appear at an October 30 debate on News 12 New Jersey.Ý Forrester also agreed to the appearance, but in doing so his campaign took shots at the format, which includes the four minor-party candidates in the first hour of the program. "It's too little, too late," Forrester asserted.Ý "And the fact that he had to be arm-wrestled into doing it suggests something very, very bad about his candidacy." Forrester has accused Lautenberg of avoiding debates for weeks.Ý He said the Democrats had argued that the voters are best served with a Democrat and Republican in the race when they sought to replace Torricelli with Lautenberg on the ballot, but that they are now ignoring that reasoning. "It's highly unfortunate that we can't get into a situation where we're one-on-one, because that was the argument that was made in court, that it was so essential," Forrester said.Ý "I don't want anyone to forget the shenanigans that were involved to get even this little bit." The Republican added that he feels Lautenberg won't debate because he wants to avoid questions about his record on issues such as national security.ÝÝ But Forrester denied apparent suggestions in his own press releases that Lautenberg might not be alert enough to debate. On Tuesday, Forrester's campaign issued a press release on the subject of debates, and said of Lautenberg, "He's been out of circulation so long that we have to ask: Does he even remember where he stands on the issues?" The release went on to cite a report from the Reuters news agency that described Lautenberg's response to a question at a voter forum as "rambling", and said voters should question whether the 78-year-old Lautenberg has "the fitness to serve." "I do not believe that age should necessarily be a limitation to serve in the United States Senate," Forrester said yesterday.Ý He added that his criticism of Lautenberg on the age issue comes from what he sees as the Democrat's hypocrisy on the issue. In 1982, the then-58-year-old Lautenberg defeated Republican Millicent H. Fenwick in a U.S. Senate race, in part, many believe, by suggesting that at 72, Fenwick was too old to serve. "I think he was wrong for that, and I think he should apologize," Forrester said.Ý At an event last week, Lautenberg brushed off questions of his age, saying he felt he could "out-run" his 49-year-old opponent. "If you look at me," Lautenberg said, "I think you'll see I'm fairly pugnacious."
|
roadside ad, 
