Why is the Bayshore Tea Party Group Challenging Monmouth County Incumbents?

Bayshore Tea Party Group Co-Founders Bob Gordon and Barbara Gonzalez took to their Asbury Park Press blog yesterday to attempt to explain why they are challenging the 13th Legislative District and County Republican incumbents.  In this post I’ll attempt to explain their explanation with the benefit of having spoken to them and having attended the meeting where they introduced most of their candidates.  If I get any of it wrong, I suspect they will correct me in the comments.

Gordon and Gonzalez would probably object to the characterization that they are challenging the incumbents.  They would say they are supporting the challenge, not doing the challenging.  Just as senate candidate Leigh-Ann Bellew said she is not the BTPG’s candidate, but anticipates the group’s support.  This a linguistic distinction without a practical difference.  The challenge is a Tea Party challenge.


The “need”

There were several citizens that are aligned with the Tea Party platform that had expressed an interest, or even a NEED, to run for office.  Once this interest was expressed to the Bayshore Tea Party group, and other Tea Party Groups, it was decided that a full slate would be the right thing to do.  Again, most of you reading this know that this was one of those actions that would be considered… necessary.

Translation: Bellew wanted or NEEDED to challenge State Senator Joe Kyrillos and sheriff candidate Dan Peters wanted to seek the office for the third time.

Bellew knows enough that a full slate will be taken more seriously by primary voters. She welcomed Peters’ participation and convinced Gordon and Gonzalez of the need to recruit four more candidates to fill the slate. Peters ran in the 2010 primary without Tea Party support, but because of a “disagreement “or “misunderstanding”  between then GOP Chairman Joe Oxley and County Clerk M. Claire French, Peters was bracketed on the ballot with Anna Little in the 6th Congressional District and with David Corsi in the 12th.   Little and Corsi had Tea Party support and won the Monmouth County portions of their primaries.  Peters lost, but likely had a better showing than he would have had he been on the ballot in his own column.

They don’t like that incumbents are protected by the party.

Gordon and Gonzalez think the founding fathers would frown on the way incumbent office holders are protected from intra-party challenges and the lack of competition. Despite the fact that they like Chairman John Bennett and think his candidate selection process is an improvement over Oxley’s, they realized that a challenge to the incumbents would be fruitless at the party convention.  They could not get a sufficient number of county committee members to sign petitions for challengers. They blame that on their perception that county committee members would fear political or economic retribution from the party if they signed a challenger’s petition.


Gordon and Gonzalez feel that they are not represented in government. “Who represents us?” they ask as a complaint about Obama’s reelection, about Governor Christie’s “over the top” treatment of Obama immediately after Superstorm Sandy.  They complain about Christie’s chastising congressional Republicans for the delay in approving federal aid for recovery from Sandy and his adding 100,000 New Jersey residents to the Medicaid rolls as an embrace of ObamaCare. The want Christie to be fighting ObamaCare on 9th and 10th amendment grounds.

Style vs Substance

With the exception of Bellew’s ideological differences with Kyrillos over abortion and gun rights, BTPG’s and their candidates’ gripes with the incumbents seems to be more a matter of style than substance.  They are angry that the incumbents have not spoken out against the post Newtown, CT massacre legislative challenges to gun rights in an angry manner.  They are angry that Assembly Members Declan O’Scanlon and Amy Handlin haven’t expressed anger about the anti-gun bills that recent passed the Assembly.  They don’t approve of 100% of the votes cast by O’Scanlon and Handlin on the issue.   They are angry that Sherriff Shaun Golden has not spoken out about in support of the 2nd amendment.   They have not, to my knowledge, expressed any complaint with Freeholders Tom Arnone and Serena DiMaso.

In summary, ultimately, Assembly Members Declan O’Scanlon and Amy Handlin and Freeholders Tom Arnone and Serena DiMaso are facing primary challengers because Leigh-Ann Bellew needs a full slate of candidates for her challenge to Senator Joe Kyrillos.

Peters filed to run for sheriff in 2007 and then withdrew because he did not meet the residency requirement.  He ran, on his own in the 2010 primary, losing to Golden.  Without the Tea Party support, he may or may not have challenged Golden again.  He does want to be sheriff.  Running with a team this time gives him another shot.

BTPG’s Gordon, Gonzalez and many of their members feel unrepresented because their elected officials don’t express anger over anti-gun legislation and ObamaCare.  They don’t yell at legislative hearings, attend roadside rallies, or issue angry press releases.   Gordon, Gonzalez and some of the members of their group say they don’t like that under normal circumstances incumbents don’t have competition to be re-nominated for their offices.  One has to wonder how they would feel about that if one of their candidates ever got elected and wanted to run again.



Posted: April 11th, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: 2013 Election, Bayshore Tea Party Group, LD 13, Legislature, Monmouth County, Monmouth County Board of Freeholders, Monmouth GOP | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , | 19 Comments »

19 Comments on “Why is the Bayshore Tea Party Group Challenging Monmouth County Incumbents?”

  1. MLaffey said at 8:17 am on April 11th, 2013:

    Before I talk about the tea party in general let me say that I have great respect for Leigh Ann and understand that she is running for a principle that is very important to her.

    As to the rest of it. The Tea Party is backing candidates in the assembly to run against two of the most conservative legislators from Monmouth County and the biggest proponents of good government legislation in office. I do not agree with either of them on everything but I do not agree with anyone on everything. They are also running against two Freeholders and a Sheriff who have been fiscally responsible and have done nothing to my knowledge to indicate they oppose the Tea Party agenda. By supporting candidates against these politicians they are sending the message we don’t really care how conservative you are if it is convenient to us in our quest to amass power we will go after you. Further all these BSTP candidates are highly unlikely to win. This is not Anna Little running in 2010. Different candidates different atmosphere.
    When these candidates loose and you can bet your lungs that they will, the BSTP will have lost influence and elected officials will no longer be willing to work with them.

    I support most of the Tea Party Platform. I would like them to be able to promote more of their agenda not less. This is not the way to do it. This is poor political strategy. This will cause them to fade into irrelevance. It is unfortunate.


  2. EXCELLENT POINT said at 8:21 am on April 11th, 2013:

    “One has to wonder how they would feel about that if one of their candidates ever got elected and wanted to run again.”

    The truth is that Babs & the BSTPG want to feel relevant at a time when their membership is declining BECAUSE of Babs & Gordon. And the following is evidence of their duplicity.


    “Gordon and Gonzalez would probably object to the characterization that they are challenging the incumbents. They would say they are supporting the challenge, not doing the challenging. Just as senate candidate Leigh-Ann Bellew said she is not the BTPG’s candidate, but anticipates the group’s support. This a linguistic distinction without a practical difference. The challenge is a Tea Party challenge.”

    The Two Assembly Candidates…





    A lot of people see her as mostly bluster.


    Silence Dogood, Redux

  3. Barry said at 11:32 am on April 11th, 2013:

    I think there is a histroy lesson needed here. The States are not final arbiters of what is the law of the land. If you read the Articles of Conferderation yes, but not the U.S. Constitution. These states that are opting out of the exchanges is per the Act itself so in effect the States are not countervening the act but actually following it.

    The Supreme Court decision in June 2012 not the states was the basis for states to refuse to expand Medicaid.

  4. Bayshore TP Explains PrimaryThe Save Jersey Blog | The Save Jersey Blog said at 12:44 pm on April 11th, 2013:

    […] It’s a lengthy but interesting read. Click here if you’re interested; for a counterpoint, visit MMM. […]

  5. Dan Peters will win said at 1:55 pm on April 11th, 2013:

    When I walk on the moon!

  6. Robert218 said at 5:04 pm on April 11th, 2013:

    Yes your history lesson is correct. We think the issue was a matter of choice for the Governor. There is no compulsion in this law that requires Exchanges or additions to medicaid. The court has ruled that this is indeed a “tax” and if it is a tax then it is constitutional. We do have to wonder how that is possible as tax bills must originate in the House. This bill with its so called tax provision originated in the Senate. I haven’t checked lately on the number of states that have refused the exchanges and the Medicaid additions. I do wonder how the governor can classify it as the law of the land if some accept it or some have a waiver from complying, and others go along because that expense will be borne by the federal government. One wonders where they get the money and what the cost will be down the road. At any rate you are correct we are not yet at the 9th or 10th amendment test stages, Yet.

  7. BSTP are frauds said at 11:18 pm on April 11th, 2013:

    I’m county committee, the BSTP has never reached out to me asking for my support, and I’m certainly not going to go beg them for their petitions to sign.

    IMO, they are lazy loud mouths and don’t put it any real on the ground effort to advance their agenda, which is too bad.

  8. Time for Change; Go BSTPG!!! said at 1:57 pm on April 12th, 2013:

    It’s time for change period. BSTPG people can run because they simply can.

    These current incumbents who call themselves “fiscal conservatives,” have failed to say anything about money matters when excessive payments were discovered being paid out to the president of Brookdale Community College. At least John Curley said something.

    These so called “fiscal conservatives” never once made calls for an investigation into the improprieties regarding unlawful pension payments to a friend of the sheriff at the sheriff’s department. At least call for an investigation. Such serious allegations warrant an investigation

    Perhaps its time for change. People that will truly look after the taxpayers’ money.

  9. If Mrs. Bellew said at 6:54 pm on April 12th, 2013:

    Is a Fiscal Conservative, then why did she take PAC money from the liberal Whitman?

    If she is a fiscal conservative, she needs to come clean on this bankruptcy issue.

    If she can’t operate her house hold as a fiscal conservative, how can we trust her with spending our money?


    Silence Dogood, Redux

  10. @ Silence said at 8:29 am on April 13th, 2013:

    Silence, your questions are valid as are mine–which are directly above yours.

    We do answers from all the candidates. From the incumbents regarding their stance and actions on the fraud that took place in this county, to Ms. Bellew who allegedly declared bankruptcy. We need answers now with the primary around the corner!

  11. woops @Silence said at 8:31 am on April 13th, 2013:

    Sorry for the typo. “Second sentence should have read: We do NEED answers from all the candidates.”

  12. @woops said at 12:59 pm on April 13th, 2013:

    Now, what “fraud” would that be?


    Silence Dogood, Redux

  13. @@Woops said at 2:04 pm on April 13th, 2013:

    C’mon silence, are you a new comer to this site? It’s been reported here dozens of times by Art. Our esteemed Lt. governor refused to answer Art regarding the matter.



  14. @@Woop said at 6:24 pm on April 13th, 2013:

    a) Brookdale – Problem solved

    b) Old news – NOTHING has ever come of that.

    Silence D0good, Redux

  15. @@@Woop said at 8:16 pm on April 13th, 2013:

    Nothing has ever come due to the many conflicts of interest (see below); not one has called for an independent investigation–otherwise the “problem” would be SOLVED!


  16. @@Woops I Pooped said at 7:43 am on April 14th, 2013:

    As Tommy Lee Jones said to the Alien Cockroach in Men In Black As He Was Trying To Retrieve His Gun….

    — —

    Enough with the conspiracy theories. If there was something there, something would have been done about it by now.

  17. Sorry, no Conspiracy said at 8:12 am on April 14th, 2013:

    There is no conspiracy. There is ample and compelling evidence of wrongdoing. Some serious allegations have been made. People have been demoted to make way for another person to get a position that permitted a pension and a salary. Well, you know the story by now.

    Any serious allegation–ANY–needs to be thoroughly examined.

    Make sure you tell your boy that!

  18. l assure you said at 11:04 am on April 14th, 2013:

    I assure you that there are no boys in this race except for maybe the erstwhile challenger.


  19. Politicalpony said at 12:43 pm on April 15th, 2013:

    Do you think this article might be just a little bit short of all the issues or the full classification of why these citizens are running for office? Reading this you would think all they are interested in is the 2nd amendment and a vendetta against the GOP. There true motive is one of much more complexity. A short list might include issues such as Public Education, Property taxes, Sales tax, unfair redistribution of property taxes throughout the state Perhaps the over load of government hiring and the inappropriate passions state workers receive at the cost of the tax payers. These people are tiered of Republicans that act and vote like Progressives. A total lack of respect for the people and the constitution. Perhaps even the lack thereof. Yes there is so much more to these candidates than this article would leave one to believe.