Rothman Can Still Change His Mind

My thoughts (0.00 / 0)

The way Congressman Rothnman has come out swinging so aggressively and so arrogantly so quickly has been annoying to watch.

I agree with every one of your points in this blog post, Jeff.  

---

by: vingopal @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 02:54:15 AM UTC

What has Rothman said... (0.00 / 0)

...that could be construed as aggressive or arrogant?

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 03:15:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

RE: (0.00 / 0)

within 2 days of a new map, turning around and challenging your "friend you love", not giving, even time to take in the potential of what it does for the party as a whole or how about politicizing a county freeholder swearing in when it should be about the freeholders who got sworn in.

I don't disagree with his decision to run in any primary he wants, thats his right, but the whole process during the past 2 weeks has just seemed disrespectful to his colleague and friend who he is running against, who he has no issues with as far as his opponent's voting record. If he had to run against him because it was what best for him (not his constituents because they were already had a great Congressman and certainly not his party), then at least slow down and do it the respectful, right way.

Bertin, it is just my personal opinion on how it came across to me. I'm not looking to debate my opinion, everyone is entitled to their own and I'll leave it at that.  

---

by: vingopal @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 03:45:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rothman had no time to wait (4.00 / 2)

I know for a fact that Michael Wildes had been soliciting pledges for at least a week before the final map was announced (how he knew that the Jewish communities of Englewood, Fair Lawn, Teaneck, and Tenafly were going to be split up is beyond me, but without any evidence to say otherwise, all I can guess is that he was hedging his bets) and had around $250K pledged by the end of the weekend after the announcement.  If Rothman had waited any longer than he did, there is no doubt in my mind that Wildes would have announced before him, hoping to box him out of the race.  Rothman had no choice but to come out fast and strong.

As far as the freeholders meetings (yes, there were two of them) go, if anyone was disrespectful and politicized both of them, it was Pascrell by showing up to the Bergen meeting and turning the Passaic one into a kickoff rally for his primary election campaign.  Rothman was far more respectful to the Passaic freeholders by allowing them their space and not showing up at all and he did nothing like what Pascrell did at the Bergen meeting.  You are entitled to your opinions, but not your own facts and accusing Rothman of politicizing something that he didn't, while ignoring what Pascrell did, does not seem like an expression of one's opinion, but a spinning of facts to serve one side over the other.  That is not a good way for a future Monmouth County Chairman to maintain relationships with both counties.  I think that you own Congressman Rothman an apology.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 04:12:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Pascrell is not a progressive (0.00 / 0)

Pascrell is cut from the same cloth as the man you ousted from the Hawthorne Municipal Chairmanship, John Girgenti, so spectacularly that it played a major role in his retirement.

If Pascrell was a progressive, he would not have been the last Democratic Congressman in the state to agree to sponsor the DOMA repeal legislation and have to be shamed into doing so by a Blue Jersey blogger.

I know from personal experience that the only reason that he votes as progressively as he does (I am not sure, but I don't think that his progressive ranking amongst fellow Democrats is even that high) is because of the work that his staff does to encourage him to vote the way that they think he should rather than the way that he would like to.  Pascrell is one of the most (if not most) staff-dependent electeds in the state.

"I'm seeking to continue to represent the 9th Congressional District where I was born, raised and lived practically my whole life."

Why is that wrong?  Why should where someone lives at the moment define the rest of his or her political career?  If you truly had a problem with this kind of behavior, then you were very quiet about it when Assemblyman Reed Gusciora chose to move out of Princeton, where he lived most of his adult life, so that he could continue to be an Assemblyman in a safe legislative district instead of taking on State Senator Kip Bateman, who along with Jen Beck and Sean Kean was one of the Republicans who was considered to be a possible Yes vote on marriage equality yet betrayed the LGBT and progressive communities when they voted No, in a more competitive but winnable district.  Considering the Republicans margin of victory in LD16, I believe that it is safe to say that if Reed had been at the top of that ticket, there is a very good chance that they all would have won.  I was the only one here who took issue with Reed's decision.  Why are you taking issue with Steve's now?  At least he has a long history of living in Englewood and Tenafly and representing most of the new 9th in one capacity or another.

As far as CD5 is concerned, I have already stated on numerous occasions that I believe that Assemblywoman Connie Wagner has the potential to be as strong an opponent to Garrett as Rothman if not stronger, because of the national attention and dollars that her campaign could attract.  She would also give our state a chance to finally have a Democratic Congresswoman.  There is no doubt in my mind that if Rothman beats Pascrell and Wagner beats Garrett, our state's Democratic congressional delegation as well as our congressional delegation as a whole will become far more progressive going forward.

You can walk in lockstep with John Currie and the DINOs in the PCDO if you choose, but it is the wrong choice both for CD9 and for your own political future.  I know that it is unlikely that the BCDO will run two openly gay men for State Assembly in LD38 in 2013, much less replace Wagner with anyone other than a woman, gay, straight, or otherwise, if she runs and defeats Garrett this year, but if I am wrong about this, you didn't improve your chances of getting a shot by sticking with your peers in the PCDO, who don't even bother to have nominating conventions or special elections, rigged or otherwise.  The Executive Board makes all of the decisions.  Right?  I guess nobody over there believes in small-d democracy and the man you've endorsed has been the de facto boss there for a very long time.  That is an endorsement to be proud of indeed.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 03:55:37 AM UTC

"I am not sure, but..." (I'll throw it out there anyway) (0.00 / 0)

I'm am not sure, but I don't think that his progressive ranking amongst fellow Democrats is even that high

Actually, Bert, a front page story in yesterday's Sunday Record reports that Pascrell and Rothman have very similar voting records. The article goes on to say:  

According to Congressional Quarterly, Pascrell voted the same way as a majority of House Democrats did 92 percent of the time, and Rothman 93 percent of the time, since 1997.

Over the past decade, Pascrell's average liberal voting score was 77 percent, while Rothman's was 76 percent in the ratings by the National Journal magazine, which analyze 50 to 80 key House votes each year.

As long as we're on the subject of what you're sure about, are you sure Pascrell signed on to the DOMA repeal bill only because he was "shamed into doing so by a Blue Jersey blogger?" Or is that just speculation presented as fact? You know, like this scummy, innundo-laden speculation?

---

by: JeffO Teaneck @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 08:26:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Pascrell is not a progressive? (3.50 / 2)

If he's not, Rothman is definitely not.  Rothman consistently votes for job killing so-called "trade deals."  Pascrell consistently opposes them.

And Gary Schaer, one of Rothman's biggest supporters, is not exactly a friend of SSM.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 13:11:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rothman v. Pascrell (4.00 / 2)

I'm hearing an awful lot of very cheap shots directed at Rothman recently. A lot of the backhanded, veiled characterizations of him - he's a traitor, gutless, a bad Dem - are coming from people who were already aligned with Pascrell.

Suggest Pascrell would stay and take Garrett out if he was in Rothman's situation? Cheap shot. It's pretty easy to say what he would do in that circumstance - because he's not in that circumstance. So that's all talk. You don't know what he'd do. Neither do I.

Link to Politicker's (very thinly sourced) post that DCCC was ready to fork over $2M behind a Rothman-Pascrell contest? Cheap shot if you don't even mention the fact that Rothman denies that offer was ever made.

There's a lot of opportunism at play here, and if Pascrell and his team are the ones honing it, I would suggest that has a tipping point, after which these kinds of accusations are going to start making Pascrell look bad.

This is not an optimal situation. NJ lost a CD. GOP won the map. New 5th CD is not a fair-fight district. This is where we are. Compete on substance. These characterizations suggesting Rothman's some kind of bad Dem, because he wants to move to where the redistricters moved his constituents, are going to start looking absurd.

To be clear, I don't have a dog in this fight. I admire them both.

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 04:44:15 AM UTC

I like What Rosie Said..... (0.00 / 0)

I would have preferred that Rothman had chosen to kick Scott Garrett's ass.....but I believe Connie Wagner can accomplish that mission if she has the will....and when she has a unified base of support from all progressive Democratic activists/volunteers.

As far as the Rothman v Pascrell primary..let us all take care to not allow it to become a source of disunity and dissension and bitterness amongst us...as those results are precisely what the Republicans had in mind when they drew this map.  Let us not be divided and conquered!

Let the candidates debate and make their respective cases to the people.   Then, let the voters do what they will do and I hope that the candidates will keep it clean and above board...........my sense is that negativity (overt or covert)  will end up damaging the one initiating far it more than the intended target.  

Lets all focus as much as possible on a statewide unification of Democrats in the mission of getting rid of Garrett, whoever runs against him.

---

by: Nick Lento @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 06:13:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's not a cheap shot... (0.00 / 0)

.....to express your opinion on this blog.  My opinion is firmer than ever that Rothmann is putting himself first and his party last.  I think that reflects a real lack of intestinal fortitude and I think it really sucks.

Is that thickly veiled enough for you Rosi?

activist for hire.

---

by: Jay Lassiter @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 10:28:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Jay (3.00 / 1)

I'm pretty sure I didn't say that it was a cheap shot to express an opinion at Blue Jersey.  

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 10:41:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rosi (0.00 / 0)

I am pretty sure you say a lot of things without actually coming out and saying it.

activist for hire.

---

by: Jay Lassiter @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 10:44:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

yawing at the writer of this comment..... (1.00 / 1)

Who continues to lecture BlueJersey readers with her Schoolmarm'y tenor.

It makes me like Rothman less and less.

activist for hire.

---

by: Jay Lassiter @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 10:25:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

schoolmarm'y? (0.00 / 0)

I guess that when people behave childishly, a progressive leader like Rosi has to treat them accordingly.  As someone who has felt the sting of her ruler on his knuckes from time to time, both when I have deserved it and other times when I haven't, I can appreciate her overarching goal here at Blue Jersey, with DFA-NJ, with GSE, and with the Flemington/Hunterdon County Democrats.

Each one of these causes of hers has one thing in common.  They deserve to be taken more seriously than they are, but often the reasons that they are not taken as seriously as they should be are self-perpetuating.  I don't believe that Rosi is being schoolmarm'y when she challenges those of us who take a more strident than necessary tone when making a point to be more focused and thoughtful and she has every right to do so as the adoptive mother of this brainchild known as Blue Jersey.

You don't necessarily have to accept Rosi's perspective when you don't agree with it as I often don't, but I think that the way that I often respond to her criticisms, which is by clarifying my point or repeating aspects of it that I feel were missed or misunderstood is better than the way that you almost always respond, which is to pout or whine like a petulant child.  If you want to be treated like an adult, start acting like one.  Being cute might get you onto News12 NJ, but it doesn't earn you any credibility points here.

The reason why you like Rothman less and less is because you know that if he beats Pascrell, he is going to be one of the top opponents for either Rob Andrews or (excuse me while I try to contain my laughter) Steve Sweeney and at your core, you are nothing more than a Norcross machine suckup.  

Your tirades against Rothman's choice are just a convenient talking point, because you aren't willing or able to do the work to find real reasons to support Pascrell over him, particularly considering that you were the one who had to shame Pascrell into being the last Democratic congressman to agree to sponsor the DOMA repeal legislation.  Until you can reconcile that contradiction, you would be best served to remain quiet, because every other word that you type here reduces your credibility significantly.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 17:50:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bertin... (4.00 / 2)

Stop being a Rothman lapdog.  You are more than entitled to you opinion, but it seems like the only time you ever say anything is to either 1) defend Rothman from people who think he made a terrible decision.  2)insist that Bill Pascrell isn't progressive and might have lost a primary to Michael Wildes and 3) Try to justify Rothman's not running in the 5th by suggesting Connie Wagner would be better.

You are talking about the credibility of other's when you refuse to look at issues objectively yourself.  Rothman was entitled to run, you are entitled to support him, but lets get something straight: Rothman runninng against Pascrell is bad for the party.  It's not the end of the world, but it certainly doesn't improve New Jersey's Democratic congressional delegation.  The ideas that Rothman running against Pascrell is good for the party and that Pascrell is "not a real progressive" are completely ridiculous.

---

by: Erik Preuss @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 18:46:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Does a real progressive... (0.00 / 0)

...vote to ban late-term abortions?

I write about numerous topics here.  I have written more than my fair share about marriage equality, progressive public education reform, redistricting, and about the dynamics in CD5 and CD9.  If you want to challenge my objectivity, please feel free to make that argument, but your statement has no merit unless you are willing to support it.  And calling me Rothman's lapdog is just a personal attack that has no place in discourse amongst progressives.

Saying something is good for the party can have a multitude of meanings.  I am sure that the BCDO would prefer to have Connie Wagner and Steve Rothman running for Congress in CD5 and CD9 than Steve Rothman and Bill Pascrell, while I am sure that the PCDO would prefer to have Pascrell running in CD9, because Clifton, Passaic, and Paterson are where their countywide races are won and lost.  And if Connie Wagner and Steve Rothman replace Scott Garrett and Bill Pascrell, there can be no doubt that both the NJ Democratic congressional delegation and the congressional delegation as a whole will have become significantly more progressive.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 19:04:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Does a real progressive vote for job killing (0.00 / 0)

"trade" agreements?  I think that's far more important on the "progressive" scale than a rarely used medical procedure.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 19:07:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't know (0.00 / 0)

Do they?  Give us a list of every Democrat who has ever voted for a job-killing trade agreement (I will let you be the judge of which trade agreements kill jobs and which trade agreements don't) and I am sure that we will find some very progressive Democrats on that list.

Now give us a list of Democrats who have voted to ban late-term abortions (I am sure that NOW and NARAL would not appreciate the degree to which you dismiss a woman's right to choose to make her own medical decisions, including but not limited to "rarely used medical procedures".) and I am sure that you will find far fewer, if any, progressive Democrats on that list.

Obviously, no one issue defines whether someone is a progressive or not, but there are some that are more disqualifying than others.  Considering the degree to which the organized labor movement focuses more on their own issues of concern than issues of concern of other sectors of the progressive movement, I think that most progressives would agree that protecting a woman's right to choose is more sacrosanct than protectionism.

I don't know if you ever watched the TV show, West Wing, but for many progressives, it is like scripture, and the Bartlet White House, especially its Communications Director, Toby Ziegler, were as free trading as they came, while under no circmstances would they ever compromise on a woman's right to choose.

I don't expect that to matter to someone as dogmatic as yourself, but I think that it will matter to many others here.  If you want to prove me wrong, why don't you post a diary and ask readers to vote on which issue is more important to them.  I am confident that a woman's right to choose will win.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 19:29:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Spoken like the true social elitist (0.00 / 0)

you are.  An almost never used medical procedure is more important than the hollowing out of the middle class, and trade agreements which protect capital but subject labor to the vissitudes of the free market.

And isn't asking people to vote somewhat hypocritical, given your disdain for democracy?

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 19:37:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So slandering... (0.00 / 0)

elected Democrats with a progressive voting record has a place in discourse among progressives?  

"and at your core, you are nothing more than a Norcross machine suckup."  If you are going to throw barbed comments at people left and right you shouldn't be surprised when you get it back.

My point is that when it comes to any of the forums regarding the fifth and Steve Rothman, all you do is throw Bill Pascrell and his supporters under the bus while treating Rothman like a saint.  You speak of discourse yet you refuse to have it with anyone else; despite the fact that every single person on Blue Jersey have basically the same set of political beliefs.  

---

by: Erik Preuss @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 19:16:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Jay... (0.00 / 0)

...is a Norcross machine suckup.  He worked for Rob Andrews when he ran against Frank Lautenberg and refuses to organize progressive Democrats against the Norcross machine.

I have never worked for Rothman.  I defend him for the reasons that I have provided.  You have provided no arguments that could justify calling me a lapdog.  I have also never treated Rothman like a saint, especially since Jews like he and I don't believe in sainthood.

And I do not throw Pascrell's supporters under any bus.  I simply disagree with them, more often than not being far more agreeable in the process than you have been with me.  I have also advocated for members of Pascrell's staff, some of whom are friends of mine.  

I believe that if Pascrell negotiated a deal with Rothman and ran in CD11, Rothman could retain some of them if Pascrell was unable to defeat Frelinghuysen.  Unfortunately, Pascrell is more committed to feeding his own ego than he is to his loyal staff upon whom he depends far more than most electeds.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 19:38:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bertin (4.00 / 1)

"Jay ... is a Norcross machine suckup."

I think that's over the edge of referring to each other fairly civilly here. I don't think it's the only comment people have made the last few days that's over the edge. But let's try to curb name-calling.  

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 20:01:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Seems to me most of the comments over the edge are coming from one person. (3.33 / 3)

---

by: Matthew Jordan @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 20:34:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

feel free to edit my comments (0.00 / 0)

You can replace...

you are nothing more than a Norcross machine suckup

with

you are more beholden to the Norcross machine than progressive values

You can also replace...

is a Norcross machine suckup

with

is more beholden to the Norcross machine than progressive values

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 22:47:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I can justify calling you a lapdog (0.00 / 0)

When you blatantly lie about Bill Pascrell's voting history.  You have yet to make a fact-based argument to substantiate anything that you have said about Bill Pascrell.  I never claimed that you worked for Rothman or said you didn't have a right to support Rothman.  But when you go on a blog for DEMOCRATS and say things--such as "Bill Pascrell is not a real progressive"--that are patently false, then you leave yourself open to being called a lapdog.  You have provided no fact-based

And you do throw Pascrell's supporters under the bus when you trash a congressman that by almost every account--excluding your own--is a passionate, well-liked progressive.

And now you are suggesting Pascrell run against Frelinghuysen???  It seems to me that if one incumbent Democrat was going to run against an Incumbent Republican, it should have been the Democrat who was redrawn into the district of an incumbent Republican.

Also you know that I did not use "saint" in a religious manner.  My apologies if thats the way you took it.    

---

by: Erik Preuss @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 20:11:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

show me the lies (0.00 / 0)

Pascrell voted for a ban on late-term abortions, was the last Democratic congressman in NJ to agree to sponsor the DOMA repeal legislation, and had to be shamed into doing it by the same Blue Jersey blogger who has been attacking Rothman every chance that he gets even thought Rothman was not nearly as resistant and slow to support this legislation than Pascrell.  I think that by most progressive standards, Pascrell is not a progressive.

There can be no doubt that he is a Democrat and a well-liked one at that.  If labor issues are your only/top priority and you don't care about LGBT issues or a woman's right to choose, then by your definition, Pascrell might be progressive.  I just don't think that most progressives, who don't have an agenda of their own or an axe to grind and look at the issues fairly can say that Pascrell is a progressive.

The reason that I think that Pascrell should run against Frelinghuysen in CD11 is because he is the strongest candidate we could possibly get to run in that district, beating Frelinghuysen in CD11 will be no easier/harder for Pascrell than beating Rothman in CD9, and Rothman is not necessarily the strongest candidate that we could run against Garrett in CD5.  I believe that Connie Wagner has the potential to be a stronger candidate, because she can attract the kind of national attention/dollars that Rothman cannot.  I believe that Wagner could be a congressional version of Elizabeth Warren.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 23:00:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

they don't vote (0.00 / 0)

for late term abortions if that is the will of their constituency.  

---

by: kfoster @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 03:53:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Cheap shot? (3.00 / 1)

The shots didn't come until Rothman's politically selfish decision.  I had no particularly negative opinion of either Rothman or Pascrell until then.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 13:13:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He can still change his mind . . . but won't (0.00 / 0)

If he had wanted to do what was good for the party, he would have taken on Garrett.  Obviously, he's only interested in doing what's best for Steve Rothman.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 13:32:54 PM UTC

Gussen didn't even have the decency (0.00 / 0)

to let his fellow dems in Teaneck know - they had to read about it on Facebook.  Gussen would be a frightening candidate. I would not support him if you paid me 3 million bucks.  Yikes.

One Vote.  Yours.  It really does matter.

---

by: carolh @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 17:20:49 PM UTC

Had to kill some comments here (0.00 / 0)

One of our commenters - most likely inadvertently - guessed at the real name of a user who posts anonymously. I had to eliminate that comment, which unfortunately also removes posted comments written in reply to that comment. I saved those replies, which I'm sending back to their writers in case they'd like to repost.  

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 19:29:56 PM UTC

oh? (0.00 / 0)

and what about here
http://www.bluejersey.com/diar...

3 comments missing. and what's .33/3 mean if you go to recent comment section of my profile?  i failing grade? i'm not trying to provoke anyone

"the black sheep can wear the golden fleece and hold a winning hand" Tim Hardin

---

by: gary stein @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 19:38:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Gary Stein (0.00 / 0)

In the diary you're asking about, you were troll-rated (by 3 users) for hijacking the thread.

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 20:03:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

thanks rosi (0.00 / 0)

now i know.  

"the black sheep can wear the golden fleece and hold a winning hand" Tim Hardin

---

by: gary stein @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 20:26:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

are you referring to liz? (0.00 / 0)

I just read her diary and she refers to herself as the Municipal Chair from Teaneck.  If it was her intent to be anonymous, I don't think that she would have disclosed this information.

I would like to repost my comment, but it doesn't make sense without Carol's comment.  Can you repost that as well, possibly replacing the name that Carol used with liz?

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 00:06:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Liz (0.00 / 0)

Actually, she referred to herself as a municipal chair. I don't believe she mentioned which town.

I'm not reposting any comments. The original comment and the replies have been sent to the writers to repost (without the Liz reference) as they wish. If I were to post their comments again, they would appear under my byline, and how confusing would that be?

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 01:19:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

you're right/wrong (0.00 / 0)

She doesn't mention Teaneck by name, but says that her town was split between the 5th/9th district, which is basically the same.

That said, in her comment in the diary that you wrote about Adam Gussen, Liz clearly states that she is the Municipal Chair of Teaneck.  I guess that she probably wrote this after you deleted the comments.

I assumed that you could just restore the original comments under the byline of the original writer, but in lieu of that, if you could send my comment to me, I would appreciate it.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 01:57:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Poor Rosi (and I mean that) (0.00 / 0)

it's like she's cleaning up other people's vomit but the person doing the vomiting is like "oh as a courtesy can you show me the chunk of vomit before tossing it?"

Stop vomiting, bertin!

activist for hire.

---

by: Jay Lassiter @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 15:07:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No... you stop! (1.00 / 1)

I was not the one who outed liz.  I commented on that comment, but when the original comment was deleted, my comment was deleted as well.  I was just defending the original commenter.

Some of us here would like to have a serious conversation about this important race and other issues.  Just because you are not one of them and would prefer to videotape yourself dancing doesn't mean that you should bring the level of discourse here down further than you already do.

If there is anyone whose contributions are vomitous, it is yours on News 12 NJ, where you are clearly there as eye candy to boost ratings, not unlike a naked weathergirl, without anything of consequence to say about anything.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 15:54:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

commenters here bore everyone (0.00 / 0)

with itty-bitty bickering.
Look folks, I'm sure you think this is important.

I'm sure it's important to you.

But it's going to turn everyone else away from this site.

If you want folks to know your tedious personal business, yell into your cellphone on the train like everyone else.

---

by: sayitaintso @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 20:35:51 PM UTC

there is no winner with this bickering (4.00 / 2)

with Farmer, who was AG under Christy Whitman this was a GOP win.

Folks may be unhappy with Rothman's decision, but since most of his old district moved, I can understand the decision. I too wished he would go and fight to get rid of Garrett, but it is Rothman's decision, he had a valid reason and we have to respect that he wants to go with the bulk of his old constituents.

Aggressive.... what you would expect him to be?

Arrogant? C'mon ... cut the bull.

It's a lousy situation, you've got a couple of good men, so let the voters decide.

Meanwhile, let's encourage Connie Wagner.

"Discrimination caused by ignorance and fear is a tax on human progress" - Barbra Casbar Siperstein

---

by: Babs NJSD @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 21:47:11 PM UTC

Agree (4.00 / 1)

If Rothman had decided to run against Garrett, I'd have been down front in the cheering section. Would have been an awesome thing to do, given that Joe Roberts during redistricting argued that CD5 is not a fair-fight district.

But there's just a huge gulf between being ready to cheer somebody entering a very uphill race and talking like they're scum of the earth if they don't.

This is really about unfortunate circumstances. We lost a district, then we lost the map. IMO, not a reason to hurl acid.  

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 22:32:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

mostly agree (4.00 / 1)

I agree that it would have been a gutsy move for Rothman to accept the hand that he was dealt and run against Garrett, but I think that it would have prevented the opportunity that we now have to elect our state's first Democratic congresswoman in decades, which should be exciting all progressives right now.

I know that some people here disagree with me, but I think that replacing Garrett and Pascrell with Wagner and Rothman would make our state's Democratic congressional delegation and our congressional delegation as a whole more progressive.  And if Pascrell was willing to run in CD11 instead of CD9 and could beat Frelinghuysen, it would be even more amazing, because it means that we would be replacing Frelinghuysen and Garrett with Wagner.  Making lemonade out of lemons doesn't quite capture the magnitude of something like that, but it is the first phrase that comes to mind.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 23:13:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'd like to rate this comment a 10 :) (4.00 / 1)

One Vote.  Yours.  It really does matter.

---

by: carolh @ Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 22:35:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree Carolh! (0.00 / 0)

That would have been wonderful!

---

by: CyberKat @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 13:38:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Primary is Between Rothman And Pascrell, it does neither of them any good to.... (4.00 / 1)

......get nasty on their behalf.   It only creates ill will and resentment amongst people who should be friends and allies since we likely agree on 90% of all the issues.

All of the folks who have posted here are people whom I have come to respect and admire......let's let go of the negativity.  Please.

As I said above, I was disappointed that Rothman didn't choose to go for broke and take the opportunity to politically destroy Garrett.  It would have been a battle royale which I believe we could have won...and even won big....and that it would have sent a natonal message to boot!

But guess what, I believe Connie Wagner, should she choose to accept this Mission Possible....can do the job as well and maybe better that Steve would have!

Meanwhile, it looks like there will be a primary campaign between Rothman and Pascrell and we should let THEM compete as civilized gentlemen and mutually respectful colleagues on the various MERITS of their positions.   If either one of them gets as stupidly ugly and nasty as some of the silliness voiced herein, I dare say that that one will lose my vote!

Again, let us not descend into petty personality conflicts......I've done more than my share of that here and have come to the conclusion that it is not productive and ultimately depresses voter turnout....and participation on this site.....all of which is precisely what the Republicans who drew this map wanted to happen!   Think!

Let's focus on making SURE that Obama gets all of NJ's electoral college votes and on getting rid of Scott Garrett.........AND on increasing the number of registered Democrats in NJ and getting them ALL out to vote in November!!!

---

by: Nick Lento @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 02:06:27 AM UTC

my thoughts exactly (0.00 / 0)

What he is doing is such a coward's way out that it's sickening and I agree with your commentary 100%.

---

by: kfoster @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 03:43:36 AM UTC

Rothman knew... (0.00 / 0)

4 months ago that his district was going to be merged into Passaic County, which is why he was able to secure all of those clingon Bergen County pols on his list.

To Lefkovic and the rest of you Pascrell traitors...this is a fight that should not even be happening.  The NJ Dems should have filed a lawsuit in Federal Courts to block this map on the grounds that it fails the test of minority voting rights in the state, based on the Voting rights Act.  This district was gerrymandered based on orders from Governor Jaba The Hut and his political cronies, like Norcross and DeVincensio.  "Joey D" wanted Pascrell out of his county (Essex).

If Rothman thinks that all the Jews in Bergen County are going to support him, he is a fool.

(BTW...I'm a Jew)

---

by: jerseyjack2000 @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 03:56:49 AM UTC

Agreed. (4.00 / 2)

As someone who is in Pascrell's district but will not be next year, I don't have a dog in this fight.  If I did, I'd support Pascrell.  As I don't, I still support Pascrell.  Pascrell and Rothman are BOTH great Congressmen.

But I find that Rothman's decision stirs more questions in me than anger.  I really question any legislator who is willing and able to pick up their house and move to a new one just to stay in their district.  I questioned state legislators who did it last year (many Republicans, but some Democrats too- Ralph Caputo comes to mind), I dislike it in Rothman, and I'd disapprove of it in Pascrell too.  If the point of running for office is to represent your district, then you should represent the district you are in.  And what does it say to voters, especially in this economic climate, when you do that?

Rothman's decision reeks of desperation to stay in office, not represent his district.  It also reads like he's abandoning his constituents because it's now more difficult for him to try and represent them.  So instead, he is going to send one of his fellow Democratic House members up the (Passaic) river for a chance to stay in office.

He's also abandoning his party.  Instead of seizing the opportunity to knock out a Republican and tip the balance even further in the progressive direction, he's trying to knock out a fellow Democrat.

OK, yes let the voters decide- but let them decide between Rothman and Garrett.

And really- what's the major difference between Rothman and Pascrell on their voting records?  

Joey
http://twitter.com/joeygillis

---

by: joeygillis @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 05:01:13 AM UTC

How... (1.00 / 1)

...does it make it harder for him to represent most of his constituents when most of his constituents are in CD9?  My numbers could be off, but they are close enough, but I think that 60% of his former constituents are in CD9, 20% are in CD8, and 20% are in CD5.

It would be one thing if he was moving somewhere that he has never lived before just so he could remain in the district, but he lived in Englewood long enough to serve that town as its Mayor for two terms.  I don't know when he moved to Fair Lawn (or why for that matter, since Englewood is a much nicer town), but I do not believe that the remainder of his political career should be determined by his street address.  A Congressman represents over 700K people.  In most cases, that includes more than the town in which he or she lives.

I really wish that a population of otherwise highly educated people could stop buying into talking points that have more of a place in a schoolyard than a political campaign where courage and cowardice should only be defined by what someone does in office, not the personal choices that he or she makes.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 13:09:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I often agree with you .. (3.00 / 1)

But I have to take an exception to your comment that "Englewood is a much nicer town" than Fair Lawn!  Was that comment really neccessary?  It had nothing much to do with the rest of the comment, and I do not appreciate having aspersions cast on a town I have chosen to live in for nearly 40 years!  I like Fair Lawn and I think it's quite a nice place to live.  I will refrain from casting aspersions back at Englewood, except to say that I prefer Fair Lawn on many levels.

That said, I am quite upset about being unceremoniously shoved out of CD9, without so much as a by-your-leave, and I am deeply disappointed that Congressman Rothman is abandoning us to Scott Garrett of all people!  I sincerely hope that Connie Wagner decides to take up the challenge.  I could really get behind that effort.  But I will support whoever runs against Garrett - as I have for years, even though I didn't previously live in the district.  I just think Scott Garrett is bad for NJ and I don't think he really represents our state as a whole.

---

by: CyberKat @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 13:49:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Fair Lawn is a nice town (1.00 / 1)

I spent most of my childhood visiting family there.  Saying that Englewood is a much nicer town says more about Englewood than Fair Lawn.  I am sorry if this comment insulted you, but its parenthetical placement should have made it clear that it was not a key point to the comment, but just something that has always puzzled me.

I cannot figure out for the life of me why someone would move from Englewood to Fair Lawn.  I could be wrong, but it is possible that Fair Lawn has better public schools since a significant percentage of Englewood's population sends their children to private school.  I do not know when Rothman moved there nor do I know how old his children are, but I guess that if someone wanted to live in a town with a large Jewish population and better public schools (assuming that my guess about this is correct), Fair Lawn would be a good choice.

But on further reflection, that doesn't really make any sense either.  He could have just as easily moved to Tenafly, which is as nice as Englewood with better schools (I think) than Fair Lawn.  I guess that this will always be a mystery until Rothman himself explains why he made the move that he made and he is under no obligation to do so.  It is just something that I am curious about.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 15:18:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]