Pallone throws Andrews under the bus

"I've often wondered why smart people say such irrational things." (4.00 / 1)

Me too!

The flag amendment was supported by Andrews, Rothman and Pascrell in addition to Pallone.  Sires probably would have voted "yes" as well if he had been in the House at the time.  So, Shadegg is more of a Democrat than any of them???

"Shadegg is more of a Democrat" than anybody is a really nutty thing to say.  He votes your way once and now he is your exemplar???

The regular contributors on the blog who haven't drank the Kool-Aid in one camp or the other should try to keep the level of debate up rather than have it go even lower.  There are still over two weeks to go!

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Fri May 16, 2008 at 17:13:35 PM CDT

Menendez voted "aye" as well. n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Fri May 16, 2008 at 17:17:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

well (4.00 / 3)

i think the point was is it is dumb of Pallone, a United States Congressman who has supported and served with Andrews for nearly 20 years now, to call him a Republican all of a sudden, if he beats Lautenberg, he'll have a problem. If Andrews beats Lautenberg, how does he defend his attack on Andrews when he is facing Dick Zimmer or another Republican in the general?


help mobilize the progressive vote - Visit www.pdamerica.org

---

by: vingopal @ Fri May 16, 2008 at 17:51:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

thank you (0.00 / 0)

thank you for paying attention.

---

by: Juan Melli @ Fri May 16, 2008 at 18:10:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

My Impression id That Pallone is Rightfully Disgusted With Andrews (4.00 / 1)

And I can't blame him a bit.

Unless Lautenberg has some kind of total disabling collapse (but not bad enough to drive him to resign or be replaced)  I don't see how Andrews can win.

If Lautenberg decides to unleash the "nuke" in his arsenal (and risk offending/exposing/embarrassing the various machines throughout the state) which is to attack Andrews on the ethics/character issues vis a vis the moral legitimacy of the way he entered the race; that would cost Andrews 20 additional points off the top.

The story isn't that complicated; it's true and most people (who aren't working for Andrews or predisposed to like him because they've been long term fans) will "get it".

Say what you will about Frank Pallone; but he ain't "dumb".

---

by: Nick Lento @ Sat May 17, 2008 at 21:57:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

lol (0.00 / 0)

Please adjust your snark-o-meter.

---

by: Juan Melli @ Fri May 16, 2008 at 18:09:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Isn't It Andrews That Threw The Whole NJ... (4.00 / 1)

...Democratic Delegation "under the bus" when he filed (after explicitly agreeing to refrain from entering the primary) at the last minute to freeze everyone else out and to catch Lautenberg flat footed?

I don't need to make that case all over again, do I?

No one has been able to refute the fact that Andrews' whole candidacy is based on deception.  Yes, it's legal; but it's also unethical and sleazy on its face.

There's no way he's going to win.  

 

---

by: Nick Lento @ Fri May 16, 2008 at 19:14:55 PM CDT

Re: (0.00 / 0)

You might think running for office is sleazy, but others think that's what democracy is. You can ask the same question over and over, but there's nothing to refute.

You have to get over the fact that the seat does not belong to Lautenberg nor is it owed to him by anyone. He should fight for it and convince the voters that he deserves it, and if they agree, he'll have the privilege to represent us for another 6 years.

---

by: Juan Melli @ Fri May 16, 2008 at 19:55:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It's not owed to Lautenberg (4.00 / 3)

But in any group such as our delegation, where people have interests both in common and at odds, it is, er, incumbent on one to keep ones word. Not only for the benefit of those you made a promise to and of one's own reputation, but to the society in general that depends on the environment in which people's word counts for something.

Aside from that, though it's going too far to say that the job is owed to someone, I don't think you throw out incumbents who are doing a good job with out an unusually good reason. If Andrews were as much of a star in the real world as he appears to be in his own mind, that might be enough of a reason. He isn't, though, and he's got no one to blame but himself for being judged by harsh standards.

---

by: Dvd Avins @ Fri May 16, 2008 at 20:12:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Andrews deserves it (4.00 / 2)

Pallone is absolutely spot on.

And it's easy to point to one bad vote.  But when all is said and done, Pallone is far more progressive than Andrews.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Sat May 17, 2008 at 16:57:49 PM CDT