Heckuva job, Bloomie!

With Mr. 28% at lower than a 28% approval rating in New Jersey, Republican voters are leaving their party by the score. And this is especially true in the Big Apple, where Repubs are now taking smaller bites.

Across the river and through the tunnel, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has announced that he, too, is leaving the party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Reagan to become an ‘independent’. Hell, if Lincoln and Teddy were around today, I am sure that would say good-bye to the GOP, too. If Reagan were around, I am not sure he would ever really know what was going on anyway.

Now, an argument can be made that Bloomberg was a lifelong Democrat, and never embraced the neo-con values of today's Repubs, anyway. However, he did stand shoulder to shoulder with Bush and other Republicans while in office and embraced their support and as well as their good will.

And that makes him the beneficiary of the Repubs in my book.
I guess when you have a couple of billion dollars, you can play fast and loose with your core values.

What does this mean for New Jersey? That Republican days are numbered here and they may very well become 'the third party' they were back in 1856.

Repub core values will be in the back of voters’ minds on Election Day, not helping Repubs in close races. While no doubt property taxes, auto insurance, sprawl, school funding, open space, etc. --- will always be the issues at the heart of every New Jersey voter ----Repub stands on national issues that reflect the core values of the Bush/Cheney regime in DC will be in the back of voters’ minds at the polls in November.

Voters will be lots smarter this year: The Repubs' stand on such issues as abortion, marriage equality, the war in Iraq, torture, spying on Americans, the suspension of habeas corpus, Alberto Gonzalez… [The list is endless!] will help the Democrats pick up seats in the NJ State Legislature.

This is at a time when the Party in power usually loses seats, during the mid-term election.

Two races to watch closely:

Senator Ellen Karcher vs. Assemblywoman Jen Beck in the 12th and Senator Tom Kean, Jr vs. Gina Genovese in the 21st. Both races will be very expensive and provide opportunities for the Democrats to solidify even more strength in the Senate.

Prediction:

Karcher, in a close race, will retain her seat.

Right now, an even money coin toss for Jr. He’s probably focusing too much on his Minority Senate Leadership race against Senator Leonard Lance, and not enough on his race in the 21st. I have met Gina and she is a contender.

Governor's Gala raises a couple of mil

I arrived at the Governor's Gala at NJPAC last night pretty late. Most of the big names were already out the door, but they tell me the fund raising was a couple of million. That's very strong funding for Democrats this fall --who oppose this president, this war, support a pro-choice platform, and value the working families of New Jersey. Very impressive. Tip O'Neil said that money is the mother's milk of politics. And, until someone thinks of a better system---publicly funded elections, maybe ----it's what we have to get out our Democratic message in a democratic society.

On the other side of the aisle, the Repubs raised just 600K last week when Bush came in to Edison. Top Repubs, not wanting a picture with a guy who has a 28% approval rating in NJ, stayed away in big numbers.

Our guy President Clinton raised 2 million. Their 28% guy raised 600K. That's the fact, jack.

The Republican Ideological Merry Go Round.

Yesterday I ran into a Republican friend on Main Street in Flemington, who said he had been reading my recent blog entries. He said that he was offended by my assertion that Republicans had no consistent ‘core values’. He said that while our values differ in our respective parties, that Republicans were by and large more conservative, and consistent in those conservative values. This is a conversation we have had time and again, so it was not new for either of us.

“Ok, so what are the so-called conservative values you claim the Repubs have?”

“We want smaller government; the Democrats want a government to control everything. And we are pro-family values.”

“Nope, you only want a smaller government ----one small enough to fit in to our bedrooms and homes so gays and lesbians cannot enjoy true civil marriage. Or a government small enough to fit in wombs so no woman can ever have an abortion, no matter what. And, actually, you want the government large enough to take away some of those basic rights, but small enough to not have to fund social programs ----the same programs that support families and children."

This guy supports the war and is solidly anti-choice, as if you could not tell. Neo-cons are SOOO predictable.

“Well, we’re the party of fiscal conservatism and fiscal accountability. We're better at being watchdogs over money.”

“Again wrong, chief. When Clinton was in office, the federal government had a surplus. Now, Bush has created a huge deficit. What’s so conservative about that?”

“We want to put more power in the hands of the people.”

Nope again. ‘Power in the hands of the people?’ Give me a break! Under this president, civil liberties ---under the Patriot Act --- have been severely curtailed, in the name of 9/11. The suspension of Habeas Corpus. America citizens being held as ‘enemy combatants’, who may not see an attorney. This is an administration that has advocated the use of torture to interrogate prisoners. This is an administration that has advocated secret military tribunals to deal with American citizens. How is that putting ‘Power in the hands of the people?” And so on.

This went on and on for almost an hour on Main Street. Reminded me of the the lyrics from Phil Och’s “Flower Lady”:

“And they argued through the night; black is black and white is white, walked away both knowing they were right.”

“Too many damn laws!”

A few weeks back I attended the United Way annual dinner in Hunterdon County, and as always as a United Way Board member, I was sitting at a table with several UW supporters, clients, and volunteers. Being one of the only Democrats at the table is not an unusual experience for me, and the subject matter always turns to local, state and national politics.

Now, even the Republicans at the table have nothing to crow about regarding national politics these days with ‘Mr. 28%’ [and falling in NJ, thank you] in the White House, and both of NJ’s Senators being Dems. The same can be said for Trenton with the Dems holding both houses of the Legislature and Drumthwacket. [I always like saying “Drumthwacket”, mostly because when I was growing up in Brooklyn my house did not have a name.]

Anyway, the only thing the that many Repubs in Hunterdon have to drone on about these days is local politics. After our discussion about the Rs heated sheriff’s race and the multiple candidate freeholder race, the main R at my table made an ‘interesting’ observation:

“Problem with you Democrats is, you want too many damn laws! Laws for this! Laws for that. We should have a limited number of laws. Like we do in the Constitution. Just a dozen or so amendments. Like we do in the Bible. Only ten commandments there. And we do OK with them.”

Now when I came to the table, I had figured the guy voted for GW with his being a Repub and all----but after his last comment, my figuring was confirmed. So, I played along, and inquired, “Well, that’s interesting, how many laws do you think we should have?”

“Maybe no more than a hundred. Or a thousand, if you really need them," he chimed, with a big smile on his face.

Now, that I was too far in to this discussion to get out, I asked, “So, when we reach the limit, do we get rid of some laws? How do we do that?”

The answer seemed so logical to him:
“Well, you just set up a state commission to get rid of the old laws. I’m not saying you just get rid of the oldest ones first, but the commission looks at the bad laws, and just -----Phsxxsst [insert Bronx cheer here, which I do not know how to spell]---get rid of them. Off the books. Sayonara, amigo.”

Well, at least he has a sense of diversity ---- with his ‘Sayonara, amigo’ quip.

Before, I turned to my right and spoke to the one other Democrat at the table---the one with good sense to not speak to Mr. Repub, I asked finally, “This commission you want to set up to get rid of the extra laws---wouldn’t that require a new law to set up the commission? And what law would you get rid of to establish the new law to set up the commission?”

“I leave that to the lawyers”, he replied confidently.

Good call to give to ‘the lawyers’, I thought. And people always ask me ‘So, where do you get your comedy from? Real life, I say, real life.

Tomorrow: There is actually a commission that gets rid of old laws: The Law Review Commission. Well, some times they do, and sometimes it’s too ‘controversial’. But that story is for tomorrow.