In discussions with Wall Street executives, Republicans are striving to make the case that they are banks' best hope of preventing President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats from cracking down on Wall Street.
GOP strategists hope to benefit from the reaction to the White House's populist rhetoric and proposals, which range from sharp critiques of bonuses to a tax on big Wall Street banks, caps on executive pay and curbs on business practices deemed too risky.
It includes discussion of an approach to Democratic contributor James Dimon, the chairman and chief executive of J.P. Morgan, who donated to Democrats in the past. The Huffington Post got reaction from Senator Frank Lautenberg:
"Criticism of a group or organization has to be weighed in terms of the total context," he said. "When you see someone like Dimon, who's a pretty outstanding business leader, I can't imagine that he's going to want to be isolated from the Democratic presence. That doesn't bother me."
But isn't arguing that you deserve Wall Street support politically perilous? "I think that's harmful to their interests, but I'm not their doctor," said Lautenberg.
HuffPost clarified that the question was about Democrats fighting for Wall Street support. Isn't that the wrong message? "I don't think so. I think that unless there's some really egregious behavior, I think that they should support us and I think that we should be willing to accept their help," he said.
Not much to say here. Wall Street owns both parties and the elite like it that way. I'm reduced to hoping the big bonuses help close New Jersey's budget gap. I do wonder, though, what would constitute "egregious behavior" towards Wall Street.
One thing I enjoy reading and writing about is how government and candidates for office are using technology. A story in the NY Times says that Republicans in the House are kicking some serious Democrat donkey butt:
It may have been sort of a counterintuitive thought at one time, but it's become pretty well-established that Republicans on Capitol Hill have embraced Twitter more than Democrats.
But just how much congressional Republicans are out-Tweeting the Democrats may be a bit of a surprise. According to a new study from the public relations firm Fleishman-Hillard, House Republicans have pecked away on Twitter more than five times more frequently than their Democratic counterparts - sending out 29,162 tweets all told through Jan. 3, compared to 5,503 for Democrats.
In New Jersey, @Rep_Albio_Sires and @FrankPallone are our lone members on twitter in the House. @SenatorMenendez uses twitter from our Senate delegation, but the GOP clearly has more members utilizing the medium to communicate:
The study also found that about two-thirds of Congress' 132 active Tweeters are Republicans.
But what type of communicating they are doing offers the caveat to these numbers:
Many congressional Twitter users don't follow others or reTweet items, Mr. Senak said in an interview. "It can be more like one-way communication, which is not really what Twitter was designed for," he said. Mr. Senak, who writes a blog about the F.D.A., said curiosity about how lawmakers were discussing health care was a major reason he started the Twitter study.
If they're not utilizing the medium to create a dialogue, they're not getting the complete potential. See Cory Booker for an example of how you can harness the power of social media. But on top of that, it's troubling that our leaders aren't embracing new opportunities to interact with their consituents. I know it's hard to convey public policy in 140 characters, but if you use more words no one listens, are you better off passing up the opportunity at a captive audience? If you are on twitter, even though your member of Congress may not be, you can find and follow us @BlueJersey
The RNC is sending robocalls from Rudy Giuliani and John McCain into the homes of NJ Voters. Here's the Rudy call:
Hi this is Rudy Giuliani. I'm calling because I care about what's going on in New Jersey. The Trenton Democrats broke their promises and raised billions of dollars in taxes. Business, jobs and families have been driven out of the state. Special interests dominate Trenton and corruption continues to fester at taxpayers expense. Business as usual can't be allowed any longer. We need your vote to get New Jersey back on the right track. On Tuesday, November 3, let's replace the Trenton tax machine for the real change NJ needs. Vote Republican
This is John McCain calling with an urgent message. Trenton Democrats broke their promises and raised millions of dollars in taxes. As a result, businesses, jobs and families have been driven away. These corrupt special interests will continue to dominate unless you take action. This is an extremely close election and your vote will make a difference. On Tuesday November 3, vote Republican for the real change NJ needs.
And the RNC isn't alone, Rosi got a robo-call from Cory Booker the other day. Let us know in the comments if you've gotten any robo-calls.
The final numbers on registered voters eligible to cast ballots in Tuesday's election show 1,766,669 New Jerseyans list themselves as Democrats and 1,061,899 signed up as Republicans. Another 2,393,679 consider themselves as unaffiliated and 2,633 are registered under other parties.
Nearly half of the registered voters are unaffiliated. The total number of registered voters at 5.22 million this year is down from 5.33 million last year for the Presidential election. Many of those people that are registered have either requested to vote early or already cast their ballot:
100,770 of those registered have already voted by mail, state Secretary of State Nina Mitchell Wells said as she announced the figures Friday at Rutgers University in New Brunswick. She said county clerks had issued 179,142 Vote by Mail ballots as of Thursday.
Here is what the Division of Elections had to say about people still wanting to use a vote-by-mail ballot:
"There is still time to apply for and vote using a vote-by-mail ballot, however, you must complete the application and return the voted ballot in person because the deadline for mailed applications has passed," said Robert Giles, director of the Division of Elections. "Registered voters may apply for a vote-by-mail ballot in person with a county clerk until 3 p.m. on Monday, November 2. To be accepted, all vote-by-mail ballots must be returned to your county Board of Election by 8 p.m. on Tuesday, November 3 (Election Day)."
The key will be who turns out comes Tuesday. We're in the heart of the Get Out the Vote operations for these campaigns, what are you doing to help make sure everyone casts their ballot.
Today's withdrawal by Dede Scozzafava in the NY23 special election to Congress is an important milestone. In her statement, she says "It is increasingly clear that pressure is mounting on many of my supporters to shift their support." It's a polite way of noting that the far-right conservatives -- mostly outside the district -- have successfully purged her for perceived disloyalty to conservatism.
This must be a very unwelcome development for Frank LoBiondo. To be sure, he's "pro-life" and part of the Gingrich's Revolutionary Class of 1994, so he has right-wing credentials she doesn't. But his occasional moderate votes are increasingly unwelcome to conservatives both inside and outside of Congress. His vote in favor of the energy bill earned him attacks nationwide by outraged conservatives. There's many who would love to get rid of him.
Now, LoBiondo, unlike Scozzafava, has lots of money and the advantage of incumbency. It's now possible to imagine a successful challenge to him, but it's extremely unlikely. But today we see one more step down a road along which moderate Republicanism is extinguished.
I really appreciate getting press releases from Republican Assemblymen John Amodeo and Vince Polistina, but what's up with this one?
AMODEO AND POLISTINA: IT WILL TAKE NEW JERSEY A LONG TIME TO FIND ITS "LOST DECADE"
RUTGERS REPORT SAYS IT WILL TAKE EIGHT YEARS TO REGAIN THE JOBS LOST DURING CURRENT RECESSION
I too resent the fact that the entire Obama administration will be devoted to repairing the Bush "43" economic disaster, but if they had any shame at all, Republicans wouldn't bring up the lost decade.
There's been talk about a new PPP Poll and the (I think) 9 point Christie lead, but what hasn't been discussed is the strange question thrown into the poll:
only 79 percent of voters ready to rule out the possibility that their president is the Anti-Christ. Eight percent say he is, while 13 percent are not sure.
[snip]
Twelve percent of McCain voters think Obama is the Anti-Christ. Twenty-one percent are not sure.
Fourteen percent of Republicans think Obama is the Anti-Christ. Fifteen percent are not sure.
Eighteen percent of "conservative" voters think Obama is the Anti-Christ. Seventeen percent are not sure.
Now, if I were asked that question a few years ago about Bush, I probably would have answered "yes" or "hell yes" just as a goof. But with the level of vitriol and the Bible Thumpers (who don't actually follow what is written in the Bible) and teabaggers and wingnuts and outright racists coming out from all corners of Right Wingnutistan, you never know just how many of them answered this question seriously.
That being said, I was able to uncover (due to super duper sleuthing) some other views of NJ republicans that will make your head spin (and not because it is Obama the anti-Christ making your head spin):
57% of NJ republicans believe that the "Democratic Party" secretly took the letter "N" out of the name and was really the "Demoncratic Party"
42% believe that "ACORN" stands for "American Criminals (for) Obama Rule Now";
67% don't actually know what the word "socialism" means (ok, so this one may be real);
36% think that "Marxism" is based on using comedic eyeglasses and moustaches to lull the electorate into subservience;
29% think Corzine got his wealth by personally stealing billions from NJ taxpayers and pocketing it all; and
19% support Christie Whitman in her run for Governor this year;
Oh yeah, one more for you. 72.96% of all statistics are made up.....
The Chairman of the Republican Party - the Grand Ol' Party - is reported to have said that Chris Christie is not running as a member of the party.
Richard LaRossa in PNJ reported that he has multi-sourced a comment by a frustrated Jay Webber (the bold is from the original):
According to multiple sources familiar with the meeting, an exasperated Webber blurted out: "This doesn't help Chris Christie because Chris Christie isn't out there running as the Republican candidate."
Jay Webber is the hand-picked Republican state chair of Chris Christie, and also is someone who ran against an incumbent Republican to get his Assembly seat. And he says that Christie is not running as the Republican candidate.
Now, from a strategic perspective that's probably the right move. Republicans are a significant minority in the state, and haven't won in a long time. The positions of the Republican platform are unpopular in the state, so running an honest campaign and telling the voters of New Jersey what he actually intends to do would be a loser.
Christie cannot -- and Webber admits this -- win a campaign by telling the truth about what he wants to do as Governor. He has to stick to platitudes like "end corruption" and "cut taxes" without telling anything about his real plans.
Which is why he won't tell us his real plans. It's why he won't say what parts of the budget he will cut, how many employees he plans to lay off, what departments he intends to gut, what policies he wants to pursue.
All he will do is stand there and say, "I put people in jail! Cut taxes!"
Because telling the truth, for Christie, is a loser.
Nearly every statement sent out by New Jersey Republicans tries to place the blame squarely on the leadership of Democrats for our current budget situation saying how over the last 8 years, the world has fallen apart. As if they have had no role in creating what we are dealing with today and didn't hold any positions of leadership in this state in the past. But in the heat of the moment, Assemblyman Malone slipped and said what we all know. That Republicans share the blame and the responsibility for this "dilemma" too. Let's go to the video:Somebody writing the GOP talking points must not have seen what Assemblyman Malone said, because his own leader tried to act like it's all the blue guys fault:
Assemblyman Alex DeCroce (R-Morris) blamed Democrats for creating a "fiscal crisis" over the past eight years, saying that New Jersey's economy has lagged behind the rest of the nation.
I think the Minority Leader needs to talk to both his budget chair and their communications people. Someone was off message and I'm guessing it was Joe Malone, who was the one telling the truth.
It seems like you can't read a column or any article, or any Christie ad (or statement, for that matter) on the NJ budget without hearing yet another criticism of something in the budget.
I get press release after press release from republican Assemblymen (and Assemblywomen), as well as members of the NJ republican party - each and every one denouncing something that either was cut or wasn't cut in the budget.
And while this is far from an ideal budget - we should keep in mind that it is the lowest budget in years, a balanced budget is required, and cuts have to be made in areas that some groups won't like.
All of that being said, what is stunning is that with all of the criticism, there has not been one single credible budget alternative offered up by these critics. Chris Christie thinks that he only needs to criticize Corzine's budget, but of course, that will do no good if he were to win in November, as he actually would have to craft one that is balanced. Now, this may be tough for Christie to grasp, since he admitted that he is no good at math.
Which, I guess, that also explains how his idea of a budget would be rainbows and free ice cream and tax cuts for everyone everywhere. As Paul Mulshine said, it is just fantasy.
The state is in dire financial straits - and despite the fact that republicans want to ignore it - Corzine has done some things that would mitigate the disaster. Shoring up the unemployment fund to avoid a $400 million tax increase on employers comes to mind. So does his own economic stimulus plan from last year - when McCain was still denying that the economy was in trouble.
So Corzine's budget leaves some things to be desired - that's life when you have $4 billion less in revenue. But before any more NJ republican jackholes follow their national brethren and point fingers, they should realize that not having any credible solutions - let alone any solutions at all - are a sure fire way to not be taken seriously.
David Norcross, a former state party chairman, said in a telephone interview on Election Day that in some ways the race showed the ''fallacy of the moderates in talking about a big tent.''
''They're the ones who always said it was a big tent, but when it came time to let the conservatives in, they didn't want to do it,'' Mr. Norcross said. ''That is a problem that will be front and center and that will have to be dealt with.''
Most now think Norcross's strategy of excluding moderates led to losses first in New Jersey and then nationwide, so he's not exactly the brightest bulb in politics. As for the socialist name, a few months ago conservatives tried to name George W. Bush a socialist in another RNC resolution.
Of course it's completely appropriate for the Republicans to pass resolutions showing how they differ from Democrats (or even their own leader.) It's the name-calling that is an expression of a party that can't be trusted with government... Iraq and New Orleans taught us that. For all that the right made up the term "Bush Derangement Syndrome," here is my account from 2007 of how the DNC passed resolutions:
The DNC Resolutions, co-chaired by Maria Echaveste and James J. Zogby, had a surprising atmosphere: Throughout the meeting, loud jazz music from the neighboring room made it hard to hear. I was struck that many of the resolutions could have come from the blogs: "Calling for the Restoration of Habeus Corpus," "Stressing the Need for Action in Sudan," "Supporting Accurate, Open Transparent Elections in the United States of America," "Commending Howard Dean for the 50 State Strategy," and, of course, "Expressing Deep Concern with the Bush Administration's Performance in Iraq." Well, that last was kinder than any blog title would be, but the resolution clearly condemns every aspect of Bush's policies and his attempt to escalate the war. When the resolution opposing escalation came up, the chair asked "Are there people opposed to this?" Everyone laughed.
"Expressing Deep Concern" vs. calling the people names. I hope for the country's sake Republicans find themselves some new RNC members who don't have the maturity of five-year-olds.
During the campaign season, Leonard Lance portrayed himself as a "moderate" - yet there has been little in his votes that can be classified as anything other than "toeing the party line". Both Chris Smith and Frank LoBiondo recently received solid grades for their votes last year regarding issues important to the middle class - and yet Smith has the highest 2009 grade of the NJ republicans on such issues, which is a paltry 63%.
President Barack Obama has presented these three New Jersey Republicans who consider themselves both moderates and mavericks an opportunity to demonstrate their moderation and independent thinking, and advance the country forward at the same time. Of course, Cao "threatened" to vote with the Democrats on the stimulus bill, but ended up voting no as the republican party's chief deputy whip, California Rep. Kevin O. McCarthy, stood near Cao during the entire vote.
However, with Obama's budget fairly certain to pass the House anyway, it would show that on a vote where the outcome is not likely in doubt that Lance, LoBiondo and Smith stand with America as opposed to extremists like their colleague Scott Garrett.
The NJ GOP repeatedly whines that any increase in the tax rate for people making lots of money will create an exodus from the state. If they have to pay another $3000 a year to the state they will give up their homes, short commutes, school systems, their children's friends, etc. even though it is a small percentage of their annual income.
Leaving aside the evidence that previous progressive tax structures have not created a mass movement of rich folks out of the state, let's assume that the Republicans are right about this. That when a state increases taxes on the rich the rich will run to the nearest border state.
Well, then, good news! Just in time for the Census count that will determine the number of US Representatives New Jersey gets New York has done us the incredible favor of increasing taxes on people making $300,000 or more a year.
Now we can expect an influx of right Manhattanites crossing the border to buy our McMansions in Bergen, Morris, Somerset and Hundson counties. No more vacancies as the rich flee New York State! They'll give up museums, restaurants, Central Park, convenience and everything else they love about the city to move to the burbs and increase their commute from 15 minutes to a hour and a half.
I expect to hear the GOP cheering that our long shrinking population -- which the Census actually says has grown by 271,000 in the past seven years -- will now grow with rich New Yorkers. Yippeeeeeeee!
There are two utterly ridiculous and coordinated lines coming from the NJ republicans in response to Corzine's budget proposals. And not surprisingly, neither of them are based in reality, nor are either of them even remotely related to anything constructive that the NJ republicans would offer in terms of balancing the budget.
So, I think it is time for some remedial math.
For starters, the claim that the middle class is getting squeezed and will be taxed out of the state has become laughable - and not just because the main tax increase would go to the upper upper income people in terms of the personal income tax hikes. In fact, let's start with the baseline median income of a NJ household , which is around $67,000. Now, this may or may not be enough in general, but it is something to use when using the term "middle class".
Since there are tax rate increases proposed for families making more than $500,000, it is laughable for any disingenuous republican to call that "middle class". Let's review:
REMEDIAL MATH ITEM #1: $500,000 income level for tax increase > $67,000 median income for "NJ middle class"
Ditto for the property tax rebate freezes and elimination of the deduction. Since this impacts many who earn well over $75,000 (also a number that, while isn't nearly high enough, is more than the state's median income), it is tough to call this "NJ's middle class".
REMEDIAL MATH ITEM #2: $67,000 median income for "NJ middle class" < $150,000 (where this is fully phased out).
Let's move to the other ludicrous line - that Corzine can't reduce the budget. Last year's budget was around $33 billion. This year's budget is just under $30 billion. Now, here is the tricky part, so stay with me: the proposed budget includes $4 billion in spending cuts.
REMEDIAL MATH ITEM #3: $33 billion > $30 billion. This $3 billion cut is 10%. The $4 billion in spending cuts are more than 10%.
*******************
And here is a BONUS item: $4 billion in spending cuts = $4 billion in spending cuts
But somehow, facts and reality don't apply to republican talking points, so even though they get an F- on their math, that doesn't mean the rest of the state has to get one as well.
I'm...astonished. Assembly Majority Minority Leader Alex DeCroce launches the first volley, accusing Governor Corzine of trying to dismantle the middle class. Now there's one we haven't heard before.
Corzine ought not be surprised by opposition from cynical Republicans in the legislature. Even if he allowed them to write his budget and his budget address, they would still find a way to criticize it after he delivered it. What else are we to expect from a party that is howling about proposed cuts to a program they attacked as a gimmick less than two years ago? Corzine's budget is far more "fiscally conservative" than anything they have offered in recent memory.
Legislative Republicans may well have some good ideas that could help the state, and Corzine indicated in his speech that he is willing to work with them. But the Republicans need to take a hint from Barack Obama's inauguration and put away childish things like partisan posturing and sensational forecasts of middle class doom.
I'm not gonna, look, I'm not going to soft pedal this with you. I'm not going to try to blow smoke either. The reality of it is, you are absolutely right. You have absolutely no reason, none, to trust our word or our actions at this point.
(Update) Runner-up quote of the day on the same topic, is from Arlen Specter:
"When I came back to the cloak room after coming to the agreement a week ago today," said Specter, "one of my colleagues said, 'Arlen, I'm proud of you.' My Republican colleague said, 'Arlen, I'm proud of you.' I said, 'Are you going to vote with me?' And he said, 'No, I might have a primary.' And I said, 'Well, you know very well I'm going to have a primary.'"
"I think there are a lot of people in the Republican caucus who are glad to see this action taken without their fingerprints, without their participation,"
A recipe of one part NIMBY-ism, two parts "tough sounding words that say so little", five parts hypocrisy (since there are only five of them left) and three parts of head smacking "WTF???", this latest gruel is not for those who have had their fair share from this crew already. The full text of the letter is below:
Dear President Obama:
We are writing in regard to your recent Executive Order closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base within one year and its lack of any provision for a definite disposition of those detainees who are not releasable to their own or other countries. We are concerned this could result in the detainment of the terrorists at facilities within the United States. As such, we request you not send any of the Guantanamo Bay detainees to the State of New Jersey.
In addition to the enormous legal problem issues which will arise from bringing the Guantanamo detainees into New Jersey, we are very concerned about potential security issues related to the detainees. The federal prison system in New Jersey is already severely understaffed and underfunded. Adding several hundred special prisoners of any kind would be a severe risk to the safety and security of the staff and other federal prisoners. Further, our constituents who live near the prisons could be placed in danger to the presence of the detainees.
We are also strongly opposed to any Guantanamo detainees being transferred or housed on any military base in New Jersey. Housing the detainees on military bases would create an unnecessary and egregious threat to the men and women of the Armed Services who serve the United States on New Jersey military bases. Fort Dix has already been the target of a terrorist plot; the presence of detainees at any military base would certainly increase the probably of a future attack on the base or the surrounding population.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Let's start with a question. The republican party is historically notorious for the emphasis on punishment as opposed to rehabilitation - when it comes to drug offenses as well as violent offenses. And while I agree that there are many situations where rehabilitation is not a fitting remedy for a crime, especially with certain violent crimes, I want to know why the NJ republican House delegation is not more concerned with the relative lack of funding and staffing at our Federal prisons?
Since I have been very busy, of late, building a website(I work like I have OCD, truth be known...), I have not been able to keep up on the NJ Political Woof and Warp. So thanks to a very attractive and intelligent soon-to-be-lawyer friend of mine, the following came into my inbox, today.
And so, hilarity ensued. I mean, I ain't had so much fun since the pigs ate my little brother.
"I think Washington could be rightly described as a fairly mean place these days," Saxton said. The partisan rancor has persisted since Republicans took the House of Representatives in 1994, he said, and it upended an established system of 40 years. "The Republicans didn't know their place anymore and the Democrats didn't like their place, and so both sides tried very hard to make the other look bad."
Saxton was always more of the moderate type Republican, so it doesn't surprise me he didn't like the rabidness of the 1994 GOP takeover. The question is, can this train return to the station?
Just weeks before the Borough Council's political majority switches from Republican to Democrat, the Republicans next week are planning to hire a lawyer to sue former Borough Attorney Patrick J. Diegnan for malpractice.
The Republicans have placed a resolution on the agenda for the council's Monday, Dec. 8 meeting that would hire Somerville attorney Peter A. Ouda to represent the borough in the potential lawsuit against Diegnan. Diegnan was borough attorney for 25 years before retiring that post in 2007. He also is a Democratic state assemblyman and chair of the borough's Democratic organization.
Bengivenga was up for re-election along with fellow Republican Matthew Anesh. Both were ending their first year on the council when the land purchase took place.
But wait, there's more:
Asked why he had not investigated the matter more fully in 2006, Anesh noted that the council is assigned to committees, and he said he was not assigned to the recreation committee.
"But even that being said, when we were presented with the agreement, I guess we just kind of missed the ball," Anesh said.
He can't even get the saying right, they dropped the ball. And that provides grounds for a malpractice suit? What timing on so many fronts. Follow me below the fold for more of the story...
