Republicans could be in for a long summer

In Chris Christie:The Inside Story of His Rise to Power, authors Bob Ingle and Michael Symons describe U.S. Attorney Christie’s reluctance to use Solomon Dwek as informant during the Operation Bid Rig investigation in 2006.  “Do I really want to get in bed with this guy?” Christie is described as asking his deputies who were pushing for approval to make Dwek an informant. 

Ironically given how Democrats and defendants have argued that the July 2009 arrests based on Dwek’s sting were politically motivated to help Christie, the Deputy U.S. Attorneys advocating the sting argued to Christie that he would have been acting politically if he did not approve Dwek’s cooperation.

If this Star Ledger article by Matt Friedman is an indication of charades to come this summer, the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee will make Joe Oxley’s confirmation hearing for his Superior Court Judgeship nomination a payback for the unceremonious end to former House Speaker, Senator and Commissioner of Community Affairs Joe Doria’s career when he his home was raided during the July 2009 federal operation. 

Doria has been cleared of any wrongdoing.  He has a letter from the U.S. Attorney, just like John Bennett does, but his career in public service is over.   Maybe Doria can become Chairman of the Hudson County Democrats some day.

U.S. Senate nominee Joe Kryillos is in the Democrats sites as well.  Dwek is the ammunition.

Democratic State Chairman John Wisniewski Tuesday issued a list of questions for Kyrillos, including how often he met with Dwek, what was discussed, who else was in attendance and whether he was ever contacted by law enforcement about it. “If you deny this and suggest Dwek is lying, does that raise the possibility with you that Dwek’s testimony that convicted others should be questioned?” Wisniewski wrote.

Kyrillos campaign spokesman Chapin Fay did not directly respond to Wisniewski, instead repeating that Kyrillos did nothing to help Dwek.

During the trial of Ridgefield Mayor Anthony Suarez it was revealed that among the diobalical schemes Dwek deployed in the 14 years leading to his 2006 arrest was a life insurance scam.  Dwek paid the life insurance premiums of people close to death who could not afford to keep their policies.  Upon the death of the insured, Dwek would give the deceased’s family 10% of the policy proceeds and pocket the rest.

Dwek’s father tried to get Soloman a pardon from President George W. Bush.  Maybe President Obama will pardon Dwek if he helps knock Chris Christie down a notch and helps keep Bob Menendez in the Senate.

• Tweet

Rand Paul Endorses Romney

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul endorsed Mitt Romney for President yesterday, less than 24 hours after his father, Texas Congressman Ron Paul sent out an email to supporters acknowledging that he does not have enough delegates to win the GOP nomination.

The Bayshore Tea Party Group and the Monouth County Tea Party Coalition are calling for the elder Paul to disown his son.

• Tweet

Barbara’s Babble: Straight from the Horse’s Mouth!

By Susan Christopher, First Amendment Advocate!

Check out Bayshore Teaparty’s website. Barbara Gonzalez has her own stardom opinion section called, “Barbara’s Babble.” The title is a perfect fit! She is still steaming over the comments made on More Monmouth Musings regarding an article titled, Bayshore Teaparty Goes Rogue! What can be determined after reading several of her posts is that she is truly thin skinned! Now she wants to control all teaparties to stay off any blogs; “that practice the ART of deceit, scandal and slander.” This is absolutely the most ludicrous claim of the century! What is this woman talking about? Are we not Americans? Are we not permitted to have opinions, or to disagree with issues involving Americans? I don’t get it. Does the Bayshore Teaparty advocate taking away freedom of speech? Aren’t we Conservatives, Teaparty or Republicans fighting for the same cause?

Seems Gonzalez has a serious problem! Where is the Barbara Gonzalez who first founded this great group with so much talent and tenacity? There seems to be a big change in this faction and not for the better. Perhaps it is time for someone else to step up to the plate for this group and do some damage control before they go by way of the dinosaurs…extinction!

• Tweet

New Obama Biography Inspires Taiwanese Cartoon Maker

• Tweet

Mitt Romney Clinches GOP Presidential Nomination

The Bayshore Tea Party Group’s endorsement of Texas Congressman Ron Paul was not enough to turn the tide.

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney rode into Paul’s home state of Texas tonight and rounded up enough delegates to seal the deal.

The Associated Press reports that Romney won big in Texas and surpassed the 1,144 delegates needed to secure the nomination at the Republican National Convention in Tampa this August.

• Tweet

Bayshore Teaparty Goes Rogue!

By Susan Christopher, A Concerned American

On May 21^st 2012, the Bayshore Teaparty issued a press release endorsing Ron Paul for President of the United States of America, and with great pleasure no less! They state in their endorsement that they are tired of the GOP ramming candidates down their throats. The Bayshore Teaparty, headed by its founder, Barbara Gonzalez, has made this decision based on principal missing the true importance of this 2012 election, which is to defeat Obama at all cost!  What’s more, she talks about Mitt Romney’s left-leaning policies, never mentioning any of Ron Paul’s dangerous agenda!

According to Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh, Paul is not a teaparty candidate. Limbaugh stated on his radio broadcast, “Paul blames America for 9/11. This is NOT what the teaparty thinks.”  Paul is an Isolationist! How will he protect us from enemies foreign and domestic if he admits that America should stay out of foreign policy? Remember America is the Infidel, and we are on every terrorist group “hit list”. What will Paul do if Iran is allowed to complete its mission to develop a nuclear arsenal and threatens the destruction of the United States and Israel with it? How can America trust such a kook?

In an article written by journalist Ben Adler dated December 22, 2011, Adler states, “Paul is not a true libertarian: he takes socially conservative stances like opposing immigration and reproductive freedom. He is a non-interventionist.” How then can the BSTP with all good conscience endorse such a man? The answer is clear…it’s the principal of the thing! This is not about teaching lessons: this is the most important election of our time! BSTP talks the talk about restoring America to her former glory. Does this mean taking a step backwards and ignoring what happened on the day when we got hit by terrorists on American soil? Is this no longer an issue? How will this resonate with families who lost loved-ones on that dark day? Perhaps the Bayshore Teaparty is being influenced by the Obama administration that suggests terrorism is no longer a threat to us.

My husband and I were once proud members of the Bayshore Teaparty. We shared common principles and beliefs, but no longer.  I wrote to Barbara Gonzalez expressing my concerns over the Ron Paul endorsement, Gonzalez accused me of being influence by the media. Well to sum it all up, the Bayshore Teaparty has gone rogue with this perilous endorsement! Perhaps the teaparty should stand by its original policy and stay away from endorsing candidates; in all probability…they would be better off for it.

• Tweet

Penn’s Obama Rant

• Tweet

School Days, School Daze

Thanks to the left stream media America is learning that while a student at an elite Michigan prep school, Mitt Romney was a prankster who sometimes went too far.  At least two of his pranks were cruel bullying incidents.  He lead a blind teacher to walk into a closed door and he traumatised an apparently gay classmate, who later came out, by forcefully cutting off his bleached blond hair, according to a poorly sourced exposé in the Washington Post.

Thanks to the right stream media, sourced in part by Barack Obama himself, we are learning, four years late, that while in high school the President was a heavy drinker, pot and cocaine user, who hung out with communist radicals.   He bullied a “plump, dark” Black girl.

In recent weeks we’ve also learned that Romney transported his dog to a family vacation on the roof of his car and that Obama ate dog.

We’re likely to be in for a lot more of these types of stories over the next six months.  We’ll also be in for disingenuous complaining from both the right and left about each others tactics.   All of this is a positive development for America.

Especially at the presidential level, it is the duty of political opponents to do thorough opposition research and to pitch what they find to the media.  If the free media doesn’t run with the findings, it is the duty of political opponents to buy media to expose their opponent’s foibles.  Then the free media will investigate, report and opine on the veractity of the charges.   It is the duty of responsible journalists to verify or debunk opposition research pitched to them and the public and report accordingly.

The traditional media, which is leftist for the most part, took a break from its presidential vetting duty in 2008.  Likewise, Barack Obama’s political opposition, the Clintons and John McCain, took a pass on vetting Obama.  The Obama camp and the traditional leftist media brilliantly employed the race card to thwart Obama’s vetting.

Both Obama and Romney should be vetted, by each other’s campaign and by the media, over the next six months.  It is not unprecedented for the media to vette an incumbent President.  CBS’s Dan Rather famously got in wrong and lost his job over Memogate during George W. Bush’s 2004 reelection campaign. 

As we enter the vetting season, one of the side benefits will be that the biases of the vetters will be revealed to a skeptical public.   As the Internet continues to transform how we get our information and plays a more significant role in political campaigns, the truth that there is no such thing as an unbiased media source will become more and more apparent.

• Tweet

Why does President Obama take so much credit for killing bin Laden?

• Tweet

Buyer’s Remorse May Swing the Election

“I voted for Obama in 2008, but I’m not going to vote for him this time.”

By Adam Geller

We’ve all heard someone utter this phrase, or something close to it by now.   Whether we are in the business of politics, analyzing polls and focus groups, or having a more casual conversation about the political scene, this is a statement that seems to come up more often as we draw closer to Election Day 2012.

Now, to be fair, there are plenty of folks who are saying, “I voted for Obama in ’08, and I will vote for him again in ’12.”   As long as we are being fair, let us also acknowledge the fact that we have yet to hear anyone state that they voted for McCain last time, but this time they will vote for Obama.

So, the pressing question is the extent to which previous Obama voters will, in fact change their mind.   How many mind-changers are needed to make a difference, and swing the election away from Obama? 

The answer is: not that many.

Rather than add to the body of analysis that already exists on a state-by-state basis, I want to simply concentrate on the popular vote.   In sticking with an analysis of the popular vote, I make every assumption that much of the movement that I describe herein would take place in the battleground states with which we are all familiar.

Let’s start with a reasonable, conservative (small c) theory: let’s assume that no more than one-out-of-ten 2008 Obama voters actually do, in fact, change their minds and this time vote for the Republican.   Now, some may say that the actual number may be higher than that, but for now, let’s stick with a smaller safer assumption.   Let’s also assume, for now, that turnout matches 2008 turnout.

First, let’s go back and look at the actual popular vote results.   Recall that in 2008, the vote tally was:

Read the rest of this entry »

• Tweet