By “Fred Lehlbach”
By now, we have all seen the video of Junior grabbing the microphone away from Rhoda, linked here.
We have all heard Junior lecture us at Town Hall meetings. I say “lecture” because Junior doesn’t hold Town Halls to listen to you, his constituents, he holds them to tell us why he knows better. Remember, he believes he is smarter than we are, and therefore, doesn’t care what we think.
The following hand written notes from Rush that have been forwarded to me illustrate the basic arrogance of Rush Holt. The first one says:
“I hope you now see that the bill would make healthcare more affordable for your business and employees. I know that at the town meeting (you)(sic) did not want to believe me.”
I should tell you that the hand-written portion was at the end of a three page form letter where Junior simply repeats all of the talking points that were trotted out to support the healthcare bill, and which we now know to be falsehoods. But Rush Holt is so sure he is right, that, like a four year old, he is incapable of reason. You are not smart enough to understand.
Look at the second note:
“You may think this is a form letter, as you say my climate bill letter to you, but this is my reply to you- although I must say, it is difficult for me to figure out what you are really thinking amid your angry, insulting ravings”
Unfortunately, it was exactly the same letter that the first note was written on. So it was a form letter. See, Rush doesn’t believe his opponents are smart enough to compare notes.
But look at the tone and language of the note, calling his constituent, who was voicing his opinion, angry, insulting and raving. I will tell you what is insulting, Junior, and that’s your tone and language toward your constituents.
But even more fascinating is what some amateur handwriting analysis tells us about the notes. I am paraphrasing a report on his handwriting here:
Because Rush has sharp needle pointed ‘m’ and ‘n’ humps, he has a very sharp mind. He instantly sizes up situations, making instant decisions…he may be seen as highly intelligent. Rush is often irritated by slow talkers or slow thinkers.
His handwriting tells us that Rush is moderately outgoing, and that his emotions are stirred by sympathy and heart rendering stories. (Like a typical liberal). His handwriting tells us that he will be somewhat moody, with highs and lows. Sometimes he will be happy, the next day he might be sad. Or insulting, like in the notes.
The handwriting is that of someone who will demand respect and will expect others to treat him with honor and dignity. Rush believes in his ideas and will expect other people to also respect them. He has a lot of pride.
Rush can be defiant. He sometimes has the attitude that if someone doesn’t like it the way he is doing it, then they can just “go to hell!” (This is actually a direct quote from the handwriting analysis report, and is borne out by the tone and language of the notes themselves.)
Rush is sarcastic. This is a defense mechanism designed to protect his ego when he feels hurt. He pokes people harder than he gets poked. These sarcastic remarks can be harsh, bitter, and caustic.
Rush has a tendency to put things off, Rush procrastinates. He sometimes pretends to be busy, so he will not have to do whatever he is putting off. He is often late to appointments or deadlines.
Anyone who has been to an event with Junior knows he is often late.
I think this analysis pretty much sums up Rush Holt: harsh, bitter, defiant, prideful, demanding of respect, irritated if he thinks he is smarter than you.
Not exactly the kind of guy you want in Congress, is it?
Posted: October 16th, 2010 | Author: Art Gallagher | Filed under: Fred Lehlbach, Rush Holt | Tags: Fred Lehlbach, Rush Holt | Comments Off on Rush Holt’s Arrogance is Astounding
Not surprisingly, The Neptune Nudniks let Pallone spin the stroy
By Art Gallagher
The Asbury Park Press has finally reported Congressman Frank Pallone’s interference with the Food and Drug Administration on behalf of a campaign donor.
After receiving campaign contributions from ReGen Biologics, a Hackensack based medical device manufacturer, and its executives in 2008, Pallone, Congressman Steven Rothman and Senators Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menedez , the four legislators pressured the FDA into approving ReGen’s Menaflex knee patch. Menaflex had previously been rejected twice. This week the FDA reversed the decision and announced it was rescinding the approval.
Pallone told the Asbury Park Press that what he did was routine, what he would do for any constituent.
ReGen is in Hackensack which is not in the 6th congressional district. ReGen CEO Gerald Bisbee, who along with his wife Linda contributed $32,000 of the over $50,000 contributed to the legislators and the Democratic party, lives in Connecticut. John Dichiara, the company’s government affairs director, wrote checks for $20,800. He lives in New York.
Pallone told the APP that he has three staffers who help residents who are having trouble with government red tape.
Maureen Nevin of Asbury Park has not had as much “routine” help from Pallone. She hasn’t made any campaign contributions, according to campaignmoney.com
Patrick Donohue hasn’t given any money to Pallone either. Maybe that is why Frank won’t release H. Con Res. 198, a resolution recognizing Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury as the leading cause of death and disability in the United States for children and young adults from birth until 25 years of age and endorsing the National Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury Plan, from the committee he chairs.
Pallone told the APP that the FDA has mismanaged the project from the beginning. He said that the product is approved in Europe and that, “This is a product that could have helped people. It could have saved people a lot of pain.”
That’s not what Pallone was saying in May of 2009. He, Henry Waxman and Bart Stupak signed a 16 page letter to the FDA raising questions about the ReGen Menaflex approval and asking them to review it. That hardly seems routine. I guess the APP fact checkers missed that.
During his Red Bank town hall meeting in August of 2009, Pallone said “Nancy Pelosi and Henry Waxman are the two finest people I know in Washington.”
Let’s summarize what we know of Pallone’s involvement with ReGen and the FDA so far.
1) In 2008 Pallone received campaign contributions from ReGen executives and then he joined his NJ colleagues Rothman, Lautenberg and Menedez in applying pressue to the FDA to approve the ReGen product.
2) In 2009, Pallone reversed course. He joined Waxman, “one of the finest people he knows in Washington” in raising questions about the ReGen product’s approval and asking the FDA to review it. He did so in a 16 page letter with a signature larger than John Hancock’s.
3) In 2010, while in the midst of the tightest election he has ever faced in his career, Pallone flips again. He tells the Asbury Park Press that what he did was routine, like what he would do for anybody. He said the FDA mismanaged the process from the beginning and that the product could help a lot of people.
THAT’S WHY WE CALL HIM PHONEY PALLONEY!
Posted: October 16th, 2010 | Author: Art Gallagher | Filed under: Asbury Park Press, Frank Pallone, Health Care, Neptune Nudniks, Patrick Donohue, Pediatric Brain Injury | Tags: Asbury Park Press, Campaign Cash, FDA, Frank Pallone, H Con Res 198, Henry Waxman, Maureen Nevin, Menaflex, Neptune Nudniks, Patrick Donohue, Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury Plan, Phoney Palloney, ReGen | 15 Comments »
By Art Gallagher
The Kansas City Star thinks it’s newsworthy that New Jersey Congressmen Frank Pallone and Steve Rothman, along with Senators Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez were found to have exerted pressure on the FDA to approve a knee patch that had insufficient scientific backing to be approved for patient care, prompting the FDA to rescind its approval of the project.
The Bergen Record covered the story. So did phillyburbs.com , who ran the Associate Press coverage.
Nothing from the Asbury Park Press or MyCentralJersey.
Someone(s) from Gannett visited MMM 16 times today. They read my story about the lack of coverage and the Little campaign’s press releases about it. At least we know that someone at Gannett knows about it. Maybe they’ll cover it tomorrow.
They’ve been busy writing about the fact that someone started a website to draft Governor Christie to run for President, even though Christie repeatedly says he’s not running. What’s newsworthy about that? Anyone can start a website. I even did it!
They’ve also been busy writing about a few people (28 out of 40,000) who complained about getting Gerry Scharfenberger’s reverse 9-11 call too late in the evening.
I can understand how the fact that a 22 year incumbent congressman who is up for reelection was found to have inappropriately influenced the federal agency that is charge with guarding our food, and assuring the safety of our medicine and medical devices, in exchange for campaign cash, might slipped by them. Now that we know that they know, I’m sure they’ll cover it. Don’t you think?
The Gannett papers wouldn’t let their bias influence what news to report, would they? Especially after writing a scathing editorial earlier this year about Rupert Murdoch donating $1 million to conservative causes. The wrote so eloquently about how hard legitimate journalists work to be unbiased.
I’m sure they just haven’t gotten to Pallone’s graft and putting the health of thousands of Americans at risk yet. Now that they know about it, I’m sure they’ll cover it. Don’t you think?
Posted: October 15th, 2010 | Author: Art Gallagher | Filed under: Pallone | Tags: Asbury Park Press, FDA, Gannett, MyCentralJersey, Pallone, RGen | 1 Comment »
A replay of the debate between Scott Sipprelle and Rush Holt which was held yesterday at Rider University can be view by clicking here.
Posted: October 15th, 2010 | Author: Art Gallagher | Filed under: Holt, Scott Sipprelle | Tags: Debate, Rider University, Rush Holt, Scott Sipprelle | Comments Off on The Sipprelle-Holt Debate, #1
(HIGHLANDS, October 15) – Republican Congressional challenger Anna Little – continuing to highlight a report in The New York Times indicating that her opponent, 22-year incumbent Frank Pallone, worked to overturn a decision by the Food and Drug Administration after receiving campaign contributions from a medical device manufacturer whose device had been unanimously rejected on multiple occasions by FDA scientific reviewers – today called on Pallone to explain the exact nature of the transaction.
“Yesterday, The New York Times published a disturbing report about our Congressman, Frank Pallone, using his influence to get the FDA to approve a medical device after receiving campaign contributions from the device manufacturer,” said Little. “So yesterday, we challenged Rep. Pallone to tell us what OTHER federal government agencies he’s influenced on behalf of campaign contributors.
“Today, we’d like to go back to the original transaction, and get some more detail from Mr. Pallone,” said Little.
“Specifically, we’d like answers to the following questions:
“When you accepted your first contribution from an executive of the device manufacturer in December 2007, did you know then that he was hoping you would look favorably upon his request for help with the FDA? Put another way, was the campaign contribution — $2300, the maximum then allowed by law – the first you had heard of the device manufacturer and its problem with the FDA?
“If not – that is, if you knew of the device manufacturer’s problems with the FDA BEFORE you accepted the contribution – did you or anyone on your congressional or campaign staff (including fundraising consultants) indicate to the executive that his request would be far more likely to be given favorable consideration if it were accompanied by a contribution?
“If yes – that is, if you did NOT know of the device manufacturer’s problems with the FDA at the time you accepted the contribution – at what point, exactly, DID you become aware of the problems with the FDA? And at that point, did the fact that you had already accepted a contribution from an executive of the company raise any questions at all in your mind as to the propriety of offering assistance to a campaign contributor?
“The timing of the two contributions – the first, in December 2007, the second, in October 2008 – certainly seems interesting, given that the heavy lifting of the influence exerted by your office appears to have begun in December 2007. Would it be reasonable to draw the conclusion that the December 2007 contribution was an enticement to action, and the October 2008 contribution a ‘thank you’ for a job well done? If not, why not?
“We have many more questions for Mr. Pallone on this matter,” said Little. “But we don’t want to overtax him the way he overtaxes us. So we’ll just leave it here for now.
“Remember, you cannot change Washington without changing the people we send to Washington!”
Yesterday’s New York Times report: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/15/health/policy/15fda.html?_r=2
Last year’s New York Times report: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/health/policy/25knee.html
Posted: October 15th, 2010 | Author: Art Gallagher | Filed under: Anna Little, Pallone | Tags: Anna Little, Frank Pallone | Comments Off on LITTLE TO PALLONE: WHAT OTHER DECISIONS DID YOU TRY TO INFLUENCE BECAUSE SOMEBODY GAVE YOU CAMPAIGN CASH?
Like clockwork, Greg Kelly has the calendar here.
Sunday evening is jam packed for the 6th congressional district:
At 5PM Governor Chris Christie, “America’s Governor” who is not running for President, will rally with Anna Little and her supporters at the American Legion in Piscataway.
Then at 7PM, Little will debate Frank Pallone at Temple Shalom in Aberdeen.
Do you think the announcement of the Christie rally had anything to do with Pallone agreeing to debate Little 2 hours later? I do.
Do you think Governor Christie will attend the debate? I hope he does, doubt he will, but it wouldn’t shock me.
Posted: October 14th, 2010 | Author: Art Gallagher | Filed under: Anna Little, Chris Christie, Greg Kelly, Monmouth County Life, Pallone, Weekend @ Monmouth | Tags: Anna Little, Chris Christie, Frank Pallone, Weekend @ Monmouth | Comments Off on Weekend@Monmouth
By Art Gallagher
The FDA made an extraordinary and unprecedented move today when it announced that it was rescinding its 2008 approval of a medical device. The FDA said that the approval was made in error, after the product had already been rejected, based upon political pressure made by Congressman Frank Pallone and Steve Rothman as well as Senators Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez. All four knee jerks waged their campaign for the product’s approval by the FDA after receiving significant campaign contributions from the product’s manufacturer.
It’s pretty big news when a federal agency reverses itself and cites the inappropriate, if not illegal, actions of four federal legislators from the same state as the reason for their errant decision. Don’t you think? Some might say it is something of a scandal. No?
The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Associated Press, Fox, The LA Times, TIME and many others thought it was newsworthy today.
Not so the NJ Media outlets. The Star Ledger’s NJ.com has a difficult to find article on the matter, but their piece doesn’t mention Pallone, Rothman, Lautenberg or Menendez.
The APP and MyCentralJersey have nothing on it. The Associated Press, the news syndicate the APP and MyCentralJersey(the website for the Courier News and the Home News Tribute) get much of their news from, published a the story, with the knee jerks named, at 4:30 this afternoon.
The Little Campaign issued at press release on the matter, questioning what else Pallone has sold his office for, at 5:05 this afternoon.
Maybe the story broke too late in the day for the Neptune Nudniks and their MyCentralJersey brethren and they will cover it tomorrow. What’s the Star Ledger’s excuse from editing out Pallone, Rothman, Lautenberg and Menedez from the story? The Star Ledger subscribes to the Associated Press too.
My guess is that they are unfair and biased, i.e biased and pretending not to be.
UPDATE: It has come to our attention that the APP has a reporter working on a story about Gerry Scharfenberger’s reverse 9-11 call about recycling, with a political rather than budgetary or environmental slant. That’s a higher priority than Pallone selling his office and putting patients’ health at risk.
Posted: October 14th, 2010 | Author: Art Gallagher | Filed under: FDA, Pallone | Tags: Fair and Biased, FDA, Frank Pallone, Main Stream Media, RGen, Unfair and Biased | 10 Comments »
(HIGHLANDS, October 14) – Republican Congressional challenger Anna Little – responding to a report in The New York Times indicating that her opponent, 22-year incumbent Frank Pallone, worked to overturn a decision by the Food and Drug Administration after receiving campaign contributions from a medical device manufacturer whose device had been unanimously rejected on multiple occasions by FDA scientific reviewers – today called on Pallone to tell his constituents what OTHER federal government decisions he has tried to influence on the basis of campaign contributions.
“Today The New York Times published a disturbing report about our Congressman, Frank Pallone, using his influence to get the FDA to approve a medical device after receiving campaign contributions from the device manufacturer,” said Little. “The device in question had been reviewed and rejected unanimously by FDA scientific reviewers over a number of years, according to a report issued by the FDA last year,” continued Little. “But under pressure from Frank Pallone and others, senior managers at the agency made a political decision to overturn the recommendation of their own reviewers.
“According to a report in The New York Times from last year, Rep. Pallone began making inquiries on behalf of the device manufacturer after receiving contributions to his campaign account — $2300 in December 2007 and another $1000 in October 2008 – from an executive of the device manufacturer. The inquiries began in December 2007.
“Here in New Jersey, especially, where we have long fought a corrupt political culture where ‘pay to play’ has been deeply embedded at the state and local level, it’s especially troubling to learn that our representatives in Washington apparently have been engaging in the same kind of activity.
“I don’t know which is worse – knowing that the FDA can be influenced by political pressures, or NOT knowing what other federal agency decisions Frank Pallone has tried to influence because a campaign donor asked him to. Perhaps Rep. Pallone can save us a lot of time and trouble by just telling us what other federal agency decisions he’s tried to influence based on his latest campaign needs?
“Remember, you cannot change Washington without changing the people we send to Washington!”
Today’s New York Times report: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/15/health/policy/15fda.html?_r=2
Last year’s New York Times report: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/health/policy/25knee.html
Posted: October 14th, 2010 | Author: Art Gallagher | Filed under: Anna Little, Pallone | Tags: Anna Little, Frank Pallone | 1 Comment »
