The annual spectacular Red Bank fireworks will not happen this July, according to a report in the Red Bank-Shrewsbury Patch.
“Following a several month-long process of examination and discussion, the KaBoom executive committee has concluded that KaBoom as we know it is not sustainable in the current economy, taking into account escalating costs to maintain public safety coupled with the increasing costs of products and services related to the event,” KaBoom Committee Chairman Tim Hogan said in a release. “KaBoom is a victim of its own successgiant water slide. Each year brought increasing numbers of visitors to Red Bank, especially as towns throughout New Jersey cancelled their own Fourth of July fireworks displays. Our security costs doubled in the last three years, and although we raised more money in 2011 than ever before, we continued to incur a deficit with each succeeding year.”
Michael Dupont. Photo Credit: NJ Turnpike Authority
Red Bank Councilman Michael DuPont differs with his fellow Red Bank Democrats over who should be the next Monmouth County Democratic Chairman.
In his press release this morning that listed “over 100 endorsements” Vin Gopal had a special section for Red Bank:
“As Democratic leaders in Red Bank, we proudly support Vin Gopal as the next county Democratic Chairman. Vin has supported Democrats in Red Bank for years, helping us raise money and helping us organize our campaigns. He would make an outstanding chairman and we plan to inform the Red Bank delegation about our support.”
Red Bank Democratic Party Municipal Chairman & Councilman Ed Zipprich Red Bank Mayor Pasquale Menna
Red Bank Council President Art Murphy
Red Bank Councilwoman Kathy Horgan
Red Bank Councilwoman Juanita Lewis
Red Bank Councilwoman Sharon Lee Red Bank Democrats Vice Chairwoman Lauren Niccosia
Red Bank Democratic Club President Barbara Boas Red Bank Democratic Club Secretary Deborah Marks
DuPont’s name is prominent in it’s omission.
When contacted by MMM DuPont was unaware of Gopal’s announcement or of his fellow Red Bank Dems’ endorsement. “Have these all been verified?” DuPont asked. MMM has not verified the endorsements.
DuPont said he is supporting Marlboro Council President Frank LaRocca for Chairman.
“LaRocca’s experience and ability to raise funds throughout the state make him the best candidate for Chairman,” said Dupont, “What Vin Gopal brings with his energy is more than made up for by LaRocca’s experience and fundraising skills.”
The councilman, who is also Treasurer of the New Jersey Turnpike Authority, emphasized that the chairman’s election is four months away, implying that Gopal’s support might not hold up over time.
Vin Gopal, a Monmouth County business owner and 11th District Assembly candidate, formally launched his campaign to replace Victor Scudiery as Chairman of the Monmouth County Democrats today. Scudiery sent a letter to his county committee members this week announcing that he is not seeking another term.
In a post on Blue Jersey, Gopal said that he has filled 75 vacant county committee seats in the past few weeks and that Monmouth County Democrats would work to defeat U. S. Senate candidate Joe Kyrillos in his home county.
Together, we will challenge Joe Kyrillos vote by vote in his home county and I will work tirelessly to make sure that happens.
In a press release this morning, Gopal boasted of the support he has received from more than 100 Democratic Leaders and the unanimous endorsement of the Monmouth-Ocean AFL-CIO Central Labor Council.
Marlboro Council President Frank LaRocca is expect to challenge Gopal for the chairmanship. LaRocca was not available for comment.
That is not the question the Assembly should be considering when deciding the fate of the Marriage Equality and Religious Exemptions Act
The heart of the argument for same sex marriage advocates is that civil unions have not worked in establishing the rights and benefits that married couples enjoy to same sex committed couples, as the New Jersey Supreme Court ordered.
The anecdotal evidence that the gay community has provided to “prove” that civil unions don’t work has been compelling enough to cause some state legislators to change their position on same sex marriage since the issue was voted on in the Senate in 2006. Senator Shirley Turner voted YES for the marriage equality bill yesterday. She told Politickernj,
“I was wrestling with this,” said Turner, who was the 24th”aye” vote. “I felt we could accomplish it with civil unions but from what I have been hearing from gays and lesbians, they have been telling me it was not working. They were not being treated as equals, and I don’t want anyone being treated unequally.”
Assemblyman Peter Barnes, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, is a Catholic who was previously opposed to same sex marriage. On February 2 he voted with his committee, 5-2, to move the Marriage Equality and Religious Exemptions Act to the full Assembly.
Barnes said it was the job of legislators to “tackle the difficult issues, whether we agree or disagree,” and his Catholic faith had put him at odds with this issue. Barnes told Politickernj,
“As a Catholic, as I really struggled with this over the past (few) years,” he said. “Tradition has not always been good, and it has not always been fair. Tradition can’t control our vote.”
“I will absolutely be voting for this out of committee today, and I am absolutely leaning in favor of voting for this on the floor,” Barnes said. “The civil union is not working…I don’t think reasonable minds can even disagree on that.”
“The civil union is not working….I don’t think reasonable minds can even disagree on that.”
A reasoning mind, which is very different from a reasonablewould want more than heart wrenching stories and anecdotes from advocates before concluding that “the civil union is not working.”
One could easily make a reasonable argument that the civil union has worked. There were 5,790 civil unions registered from 2007 through 2011 and less than 20 civil rights complaints. If judged only by those statistics, a reasonable mind would conclude that civil unions have worked extraordinarily well.
But that is a reasonable conclusion, not a reasoning conclusion.
Patrick Murray, the Monmouth University pollster, blogged:
The New Jersey Supreme Court declared that the state must provide and protect identical legal rights for civilly joined same sex couples as it does for married heterosexual couples. Same sex marriage advocates argue this hasn’t happened in practice under the state’s civil union law. They have provided witnesses who give compelling stories of instances when their rights were denied. Opponents have argued these are isolated instances that can be corrected with improvements to existing law.
The researcher in me says there is a pretty easy way to determine this. Take a random sample of same sex civil union couples and a matched sample of heterosexual couples married at the same time and survey them. If the former group has had significantly more problems with health insurance, parental rights, having next of kin rights honored, etc. – then the argument that civil unions don’t meet the Court’s mandate would be strong. If not, perhaps the incidents are isolated and modifications to the current bill are all that is needed. This is something that should be examined honestly by our three governmental branches.
Murray’s methodology would bring far more reasoning to the debate than there has been to date. Such a study would be examined honestly by our three governmental branches, if they were serious about the issue and not playing politics. If Murray or another pollster could construct a poll that tested the veracity of the respondents while collecting the data, such a study would be very useful.
Yet, such a study would not resolve the issue.
If the study concluded that civil unions are working, gay marriage advocates would emphasize other arguments, “separate but equal” perhaps, in their fight to have their relationships called marriages.
If the study concluded that civil unions are not working, the reasonable approach, the approach that gay marriage advocates are pushing and reasonable minds are falling for, would be to call the relationships marriages.
A reasoning approach, assuming the objective is equal rights and benefits, would be to study why civil unions haven’t worked. Assuming that the relationships will not continue to suffer the inequities conveyed in the anecdotal stories the legislative committees have relied upon as evidence that civil unions are not working is not reasonable or reasoning. Changing the name of the relationships from civil unions to marriages will not be a panacea.
Civil unions were a completely new distinction in 2007. Employers, hospitals and others who have “caused” the inequities or inconveniences that same sex couples have suffered did not know what civil unions were. The forms that triage nurses used to admit patients into hospitals and the human resource personnel used to process employees did not have a box to check that said “civil union.” There was one heart wrenching story of a New York doctor saying “What the heck is that?” to a partner of a trauma patient explaining his relationship as next of kin. The doctor didn’t buy or understand that the partner was next of kin to his patient and the patient’s sister had to travel from Delaware to authorize “emergency” treatment. There will likely be other doctors who say “What the heck?” when a partner says “I’m his husband” when arguing that he is authorized to approve treatment.
Same sex couples argue that they shouldn’t have to carry official paperwork that explains and proves their relationship anymore than married couples should have to. All it will take is one multi-million dollar suit involving a partner who lies about martial status to authorize treatment that goes wrong before hospitals require all couples, gay or straight, to produce there relationship certificates before treating incapacitated patients.
“Why haven’t civil unions worked?” if they haven’t, is both a reasonable and reasoning question that should be asked if the objective of the Legislature is to ensure that same sex couples have equal rights.
There has been no effective method to ensure that civil unions work.
Garden State Equality, the gay advocacy group leading the way to same sex marriage has not wanted civil unions to work. They encourage their members to report discrimination to on their website. They don’t encourage civil rights complaints to the authorities. That explains why there is so much anecdotal evidence that civil unions don’t work and so few complaints.
Steve Goldstein, CEO of Garden State Equality, was Vice Chairman of the Civil Union Review Commission that concluded in 2008, one year after the civil union law became effective, that civil unions don’t work. Goldstein’s participation on the commission was clearly a conflict, especially in light of his work to ensure that civil unions not work by using stories of discrimination to advance his same sex marriage agenda and by encouraging his members to report discrimination to Garden State Equality rather than the Division of Civil Rights.
The question for legislators in the Assembly considering the Marriage Equality and Religious Exemptions Act should not be “Have civil unions worked?” Despite the reasonable evidence that they have worked—so few complaints with the Civil Right Division—there will be much work to do to ensure the civil rights of same sex couples even if their relationships are called marriages.
The question before members of the Assembly should be “What is marriage?”
Bob Menendez and the Senate have failed to pass a budget for more than 1000 days. That is an incredible leadership failure. What is worse, today’s budget proposes more of the same—more spending, more taxes and more debt. And while countries like Greece struggle to pass austerity budgets, the White House says that this is no time for austerity. That is insane.
In New Jersey we have proven that hard decisions and tough measures can turn things around. They haven’t learned that lesson in Washington, but it is time they do.
The New Jersey Senate passed S-1, “The Marriage Equality and Religious Exemption Act,” on a 24-16 vote, according to Poltickernj.
Republican Senators Jennifer Beck and Diane Allen crossed the aisle to vote “YES” on the bill that the Democratic legislative leadership declared was their top priority of the year. Democratic Senators Jeff Van Drew and Ronald Rice voted “NO” with the Republican caucus.
The Assembly is scheduled to vote on the bill on Thursday.
Monmouth County Assemblyman Declan O’Scanlon will be absent for the vote on Thursday as he will be traveling to attend Beck’s wedding. Beck is getting married, to a man, Highlands restaurateur Danny Shields, on Sunday February 18th. O’Scanlon told MMM that he is not ducking the issue, though he has not yet decided how he will vote should the bill come before the legislature for a veto override.
Governor Christie has said he will veto the bill and that he wants the issue put to referendum in November.
We Respectfully Disagree With Lincoln Day Dinner Speakers
There ARE Other Candidates For President
Gingrich Campaign Organizing New Jersey
We read with a slight tone of amusement, this morning’s post and comments here on MMM about last night’s Monmouth County Lincoln Day Dinner. The first thought that came to our mind is this, “Fellow Republicans, is there not a Primary scheduled for June where THE PEOPLE get to decide on who N.J. wants as their Presidential candidate?”
We’ll not comment on some of the comments at Sunday night’s Monmouth County Lincoln Day Dinner because such “heated passion & exuberance” is often expected, although often over the top.
We’re just not going to be distracted by such attempts from the Romney camp to grab the media spot light.
What we are here to say is that YES, there is a Primary in N.J. and that primary WILL include a very strong contest by the Newt Gingrich Campaign
The Newt 2012 campaign has actually been on the ground for more than a couple of weeks and just recently finalized its leadership team. We are collecting ballot petition signatures and going door to door talking with the voters rather than the leadership. After all, it’s the voters that make the decision
And, New Jersey’s voters deserve a Conservative choice on the primary ballot, not someone who claims to be a “Severe Conservative,” yet has a record as liberal as they come.
So, while Newt Gingrich continues to promote his candidacy, vowing to go all the way to the convention; and despite the Conventional Wisdom which says that a Romney NJ win is guaranteed,in N.J., Newt’s N.J. supporters will fight for each and every delegate to bring the 2012 Presidential Nomination home for Newt Gingrich. Only a Clear Conservative Choice between President Obama and our nominee will bring the win home for Republicans in November. Newt Gingrich is not only best suited to win, but deliver on his platform as he did in the past, creating jobs and balancing the budget. Newt has the experience to get the job done while bringing bold ideas to the table.
Not only are we asking grass roots volunteers and supporters to be with Newt, we are also building a slate of delegates for Newt, so Newt’s supporters are welcome to contact us as soon as possible if they are interested in standing as a delegate for Newt at the convention in Tampa, Florida.
Wouldn’t it be nice for N.J.’s Presidential Primary to actually mean something this year? You can start to see that happens by getting involved in making sure a true Conservative is on the ballot this June, and help us to fight for the Party of Reagan.
We’ll soon get to work on defining Newt’s message of REAL Conservatism while we illustrate the differences between Newt & other candidates real soon, but right now, we’ll be working on putting Newt on the ballot with a full slate of delegates and discounting such “puffery” exhibited at the Lincoln Day Dinner.
Don’t fall in line as sheep. Investigate and decide for yourself. Be Bold, Be Brave & Fight For Conservatism Like Newt Does In The Following Video. It says it ALL about there being a lot more to happen with this primary season.
Senator Joe Kyrillos addresses the Monmouth County Lincoln Day dinner. Photo Credit: Rhoda Chodosh
The Abraham Lincoln impersonator played second fiddle to U.S. Senate candidate Joe Kyrillos at the Monmouth County Lincoln Day Dinner last night in Atlantic Highlands.
The annual dinner is named for Lincoln. Lt. Governor Kim Guadagno was the keynote speaker. The night belonged to Kyrillos. The name of Monmouth County’s favorite son who is challenging Bob Menendez for one of New Jersey’s seats in the United States Senate was stuck on most lapels and his photograph was prominently projected on the wall behind the stage.
The Republican faithful who had not already signed Kyrillos’ nominating petitions at his campaign kickoff were lining up to do so.
The enthusiasm for Kyrillos, who is on the verge of exceeding the required 1000 signatures required to get on the primary ballot stood in stark contrast to the reception that his potential primary opponent, former Highlands Mayor Anna Little, received while working the Lincoln Day crowd.
Working the very same room where she defiantly refused to concede defeat in 2010, but rather declared a 2012 rematch against Congressman Frank Pallone, Little and her manager, Larry Cirigano, struggled to get signatures on her U.S. Senate nominating petition. Little resorted to erroneously telling polite Kyrillos supporters that it was OK to sign more than one nominating petition for the same race.
Any signatures that appear on more than one nominating petition will be invalidated should the petitions be challenged.
Little received polite applause during the ritual roll call acknowledgement of present and former elected officials. Kyrillos received a standing ovation during his introduction of Guadagno.
Bayshore Tea Party Group Leaders, Frank Gonzalez, Barbara Gonzalez, Lynn Gordon and Bob Gordon at the Monmouth County Lincoln Day Dinner. Photo Credit: Rhoda Chodosh
There were at least unhappy four people of the approximately 500 Republicans celebrating Lincoln Day in Monmouth County last night.
Bayshore Tea Party Group Co-founders, Barbara Gonzalez and Bob Gordon, along with their opposite sex spouses, Frank Gonzalez and Lynn Gordon stood up during Lt. Governor Kim Guadagno’s speech and quietly walked out of the Shore Casino in Atantic Highlands.
The Tea Partiers were upset about the support of Mitt Romney expressed by Guadagno and other speakers.
In an email to BTPG members sent after the event, Gonzalez said,
Some of us attended the Lincoln Dinner this evening, which is a republican event, held at the Shore Casino.
Four of us walked out during Lt Governor’s speech. Why?
Well, first, one speaker got up and told us how no other candidate is worth a crap and how Romney is the only one we should support. Then, the Lt Governor got up and spewed the same garbage.
The four of us that walked out were appalled. This was a disgraceful way for the republican party to act. There are three other candidates running on the republican ticket. How dare they.
That being said, what are you going to do about it? Are you going to let them dictate who we should be voting for? Whether you support Gingrich, Santorum or Paul, you should hopefully be working your butt off for them.
We are actively doing some work for Santorum from the office if anyone is interested. Helene is the county leader, so contact her or reply to me if you want to help. I can tell you this….my passion to have Santorum win has just been increased by what I saw this evening.
Hell hath no fury like a woman being told who to vote for!
Other speakers who spoke in support of Romney were New Jersey National Republican Committeeman Bill Palatucci and Congressman Chris Smith.
I HAVE NEWS FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY OF NEW JERSEY: ROMNEY IS NOT THE ONLY CANDIDATE IN THIS RACE AND IT WAS DISGRACEFUL TONIGHT AT THE LINCOLN DINNER. I AM ASHAMED TO BE A REPUBLICAN. THEY SAID WE ALL HAD TO VOTE FOR ROMNEY AND THAT NO ONE ELSE CAN WIN. WELL, HOLD ON TO YOUR HATS!!! YOU JUST GAVE THE TEA PARTY A SHOT OF ADRENALINE! AGAIN, THAT WAS TOTALLY DISGRACEFUL.
