Dirty Politics as Usual
I’ve come to expect it of the Democrats – dirty tricks. Years ago, they masqueraded as Secret Service agents at a political rally for George H.W. Bush, confiscating and destroying signs the rally participants had made. Two young ladies were busy taking the signs. When I challenged them, the one girl said sheepishly, “Maybe this really isn’t the right thing to do.” Her companion replied, as she tore up my sign, “The ends justify means.”
Then at a debate a William Paterson College (University), the Democrat candidate went over the time limit and kept on going over it, even though the moderator reminded him several times that he was violating the rules. The audience cheered his audacity.
This year, reports have come back that Bill Pascrell’s minions have been destroying his opponent’s lawn signs. Last night, in their final debate, Pascrell evidently violated the rules by grandstanding and introducing an Iraqi war veteran. I don’t know whether he did it on his own time or Straten’s, but Straten made a formal objection.
But there’s still more. After the debate, Pascrell’s son is said to have verbally attacked Straten. Then Pascrell himself physically threatened Straten (a much larger man) and according to Straten, had to be restrained by the police.
The Bergen Record reports that it was quite a feisty debate. Straten didn’t take Pascrell’s verbal abuse – including calling Straten a liar – lying down. When Straten objected to the veteran being introduced, Pascrell countered that introducing a veteran is never out of order. However, it was out of place in the debate, an unfair play Straten could hardly counter. Pascrell is a veteran of the Army, Straten of the Navy, serving aboard the USS Pyro, an ammunition ship, during the Vietnam War. Both men served, during the Vietnam War era, and Pascrell can hardly paint himself as the superior champion of veterans.
Pascrell brags about garnering funding for the repaving of our roads and repair of infrastructure of our bridges. But with Straten’s education as an engineer and his MBA, with some emphasis economics, not only could he tell you how much such work should or shouldn’t cost the taxpayers, but he could probably also tell us whether the engineers had done a proper job and whether the bridge will stand for the next 100 years, or crumble in ten.
The fact that Pascrell had to be restrained by police (which did not make the Bergen Record’s report) doesn’t bode well for his campaign. Did he think that Straten, a newcomer to national politics, was supposed to humbly cede to his political resume? Are we supposed to impressed that Pascrell is a “career politician”, a career spent taxing us, discouraging businesses (except for pharmaceutical companies, apparently), then benevolently returning the money to us in the form of bridges that will probably have to be rebuilt again, at even greater expense?
Rush Limbaugh tells us that if the new Conservatives are elected, they won’t be allowed to keep their own staff, but will have “insider” staffs forced upon them, who already know the drill and will make certain that Washington politics go on as usual. Few of the 1994 Republican Congress remained for more than a term or two and weren’t able to accomplish all that they hoped and promised.
Who is the better candidate? Someone who knows Washington politics, or someone who knows what they’re doing?
Then at a debate a William Paterson College (University), the Democrat candidate went over the time limit and kept on going over it, even though the moderator reminded him several times that he was violating the rules. The audience cheered his audacity.
This year, reports have come back that Bill Pascrell’s minions have been destroying his opponent’s lawn signs. Last night, in their final debate, Pascrell evidently violated the rules by grandstanding and introducing an Iraqi war veteran. I don’t know whether he did it on his own time or Straten’s, but Straten made a formal objection.
But there’s still more. After the debate, Pascrell’s son is said to have verbally attacked Straten. Then Pascrell himself physically threatened Straten (a much larger man) and according to Straten, had to be restrained by the police.
The Bergen Record reports that it was quite a feisty debate. Straten didn’t take Pascrell’s verbal abuse – including calling Straten a liar – lying down. When Straten objected to the veteran being introduced, Pascrell countered that introducing a veteran is never out of order. However, it was out of place in the debate, an unfair play Straten could hardly counter. Pascrell is a veteran of the Army, Straten of the Navy, serving aboard the USS Pyro, an ammunition ship, during the Vietnam War. Both men served, during the Vietnam War era, and Pascrell can hardly paint himself as the superior champion of veterans.
Pascrell brags about garnering funding for the repaving of our roads and repair of infrastructure of our bridges. But with Straten’s education as an engineer and his MBA, with some emphasis economics, not only could he tell you how much such work should or shouldn’t cost the taxpayers, but he could probably also tell us whether the engineers had done a proper job and whether the bridge will stand for the next 100 years, or crumble in ten.
The fact that Pascrell had to be restrained by police (which did not make the Bergen Record’s report) doesn’t bode well for his campaign. Did he think that Straten, a newcomer to national politics, was supposed to humbly cede to his political resume? Are we supposed to impressed that Pascrell is a “career politician”, a career spent taxing us, discouraging businesses (except for pharmaceutical companies, apparently), then benevolently returning the money to us in the form of bridges that will probably have to be rebuilt again, at even greater expense?
Rush Limbaugh tells us that if the new Conservatives are elected, they won’t be allowed to keep their own staff, but will have “insider” staffs forced upon them, who already know the drill and will make certain that Washington politics go on as usual. Few of the 1994 Republican Congress remained for more than a term or two and weren’t able to accomplish all that they hoped and promised.
Who is the better candidate? Someone who knows Washington politics, or someone who knows what they’re doing?
posted by Belle | 11:12 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home