Tag Archive: LD25

Responding to Assemblyman Carroll on National Popular Vote legislation

On Thursday, I wrote about Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll’s remark to PoliticsNJ on the National Popular Vote legislation currently before the state legislature. He responded with some more thoughts on that soundbyte and other reasons for his opposition over at his blog.

Carroll argues that while the Electoral College is not perfect, it is preferable to the popular vote alternative. I disagree.

If you’re interested in diverging points of view on this legislation, please read more below the fold.

An interesting observation from Michael Patrick Carroll

Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll, via PoliticsNJ:

The President of the United States is the President of the United States, not the president of the people of the United States. The point is, the states mean something.

I get what you’re saying, Assemblyman, but I still disagree.

If it’s the will of the states that interests you more than that of the people, think about this: the majority of our states are overlooked under this broken system. Both parties’ resources and attention are heaped upon a dozen or so swing states. This is because candidates are seeking an Electoral College victory — not a victory of all fifty states (and even less so of the people, if that’s your interest).

So, it would be in the interest of all fifty states — not just the people — to sidestep the Electoral College with National Popular Vote legislation.

Pick Your Map-Changer

Ok, I’ve managed to build a short list for Blue Jersey map-changers.  In LD1, we have Jeff Van Drew for State Senate.  In LD8, we have Fran Bodine for State Senate.  In LD21, we have Gina Genovese for State Senate.  Finally, in LD25, we have Dana Wefer for Assembly.

Check below the fold for more info.

Hurling Hypocritical Insults Is Not Bestowing Credit

While DBK discussed where the science is, I want to make another point about Assemblyman Carroll’s post about global warming, where he gives “credit where same is due,” however backhanded it may be.

So, when one confronts an intellectually honest argument which actually arrives at a totally unexpected – that is to say, correct – conclusion, on an otherwise usually hysterical blog, one must bestow credit where same is due.


Among the global warming solutions the [Blue Jersey] contributor advances: nuclear power.

(!) Wow. Who would have suspected that?

Kudos to the author. As a general rule, self-appointed “environmentalists” tend to oppose nuclear power based upon wholly speculative possibilities of harm. (Those harms are not impossible, but if the risks associated with global warming are considered essentially certain, same must be considered against the purely hypothetical risks associated with building more nukes). To discover common sense in a wholly unanticipated location is truly refreshing…. [Emphasis added]

Well, contrary to what Carroll writes, advocating nuclear energy is not a completely novel idea for enviromentalists. It’s been an active discussion that came to a boil last year, prodded by people like Patrick Moore. And you’d be surprised at the number of liberals working to expand nuclear energy — not “nukes” — to growing Eastern countries like India to prevent them from becoming addicted to MidEast oil.

So, no, discussing nuclear energy is not liberal heresy. Maybe Carroll didn’t notice the conservationist debate on energy is changing because he’s too busy whining about what he thinks they believe. Carroll is incredibly disrespectful of those he disagrees with, even when he agrees with them.

The credit Carroll extends to “the suddenly sensible left” is incredibly condescending and meanspirited. He opens the post trying to discredit Blue Jersey as a place for “bloviating,” anger, and intellectual dishonesty — the very “invective” that he simultaneously decries.

It’s terribly insulting to me and others who foster and actually allow a discussion on our site. Carroll says Blue Jersey’s diarists “rarely even so much as acknowledge the humanity of their adversaries.” This is simply not true. I’ll disagree with policies or political tactics, but I’ve never called someone a Nazi — perhaps the most degrading comparison — like Carroll has.

Carroll whines like a baby about other people and then indulges himself in insulting others. Watch him cry now that I’m lashing out at him for a post in which he agrees with us — like I should thank him for a compliment after he punches me in the face.

Assemblyman Pampers Wets Himself … Again

I make a point to read many of the angry left blogs; it pays to know what the adversaries are up to.

Assemblyman Mike Carroll … our #1 fan:

Mostly, they’re up to bloviating, at best, or, more often, committing the electronic equivalent of bellowing. They rarely even so much as acknowledge the humanity of their adversaries, let alone that dissent from their leftist orthodoxy might, conceivably, be based upon serious thought. I sometimes wonder: where is the leftist George Will or Bill Buckley, an erudite, competent writer who skewers his adversary with logic rather than invective?

Now, as a rule, I — unlike Carroll — try to stay away from personally insulting someone I disagree with, though I can’t help it if my disagreement is what a person takes offense to.

But for Assemblyman Carroll Pampers, I’ll always make an exception.

Now, back to Carroll’s question. He asked, “where is the leftist George Will or Bill Buckley, an erudite, competent writer who skewers his adversary with logic rather than invective?”

Oh, yes. Buckley. Rick Perlstein recently highlighted some of his “logic rather than invective.”

This logic followed William F. Buckley, who, in a July 20, 1967 column titled “KING-SIZED RIOT IN NEWARK,” imagined the dialogue between a rioter and a magistrate:

“You do realize that there are laws against burning down delicatessen stores? Especially when the manager and his wife are still inside the store?”

“Laws Schmaws. Have you never heard of civil disobedience? Have you never heard of Martin Luther King?”

Nope, no invective there.

I’ll get to the rest of what he said about climate change and nuclear power later. For now, can someone ask his nanny to put him down for a nap in his glass nursery?

Quote of the Day

Dana Wefer (albeit from many days ago):

The first question that must be asked is why New Jersey, especially as an overall progressive state, has such a poor record of putting women in office.  There are, of course, the usual factors that apply across the board: women have more difficulty raising money, women may be discouraged from running for office or encouraged to run for offices regarded as embodying female attributes, and some studies show that women are at a 10% disadvantage just because of their gender.  These factors apply equally in Kansas and New Jersey though, so why does New Jersey do so much worse than Kansas when it comes to electing women to office?

Sign the pledge. Draft Dana.

Draft Dana for Assembly

Dana WeferI’ve watched for two years now as Dana Wefer has struggled to bring good government to the citizens of Morris County.  For two years in a row, she has logged more miles, shaken more hands, and tallied more votes than any Democrat running for Freeholder in Morris County in decades.  There is no doubt in my mind that, were she to run for Freeholder this year, she would break her own records once again.

But, as badly as she is needed to help within Morris County, there is somewhere she is needed even more – in Trenton.  As an Assemblywoman.

New Jersey has a shortage of women who are willing to step out in front and lead the parade. Yes, the Assembly isn’t quite the “good ol’ boys club” it used to be, but it is in desperate need of fresh faces, strong young voices, and new ideas.  Dana, I believe, is more than qualified to be the first of our next generation of Democrats that will make New Jersey proud.

If you want to be a force for change in New Jersey, then join me by signing this pledge and convince Dana to run.

Somebody give the baby his bottle!

Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll, last Wednesday:

But you get the point; [Blue Jersey is] long on insult, short on analysis. One’s opponents are never merely wrong, you understand; they’re “evil”, “practically salivat(ing) at the idea of revenge killings”. They’re “slime”. Our commentator engages in some psychobabble pseudo-analysis, averring that people who happen to disagree with him have “… this need to over-compensate for something” or are “insecure with (themselves)”. Glad that’s clear.

Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll, yesterday:

NJ Governors boast a long tradition of high-handedness, arrogance, imperiousness, or simply outright contempt for the Legislature.  But today’s gubernatorial performance set a new record for insult, whether intended or incidental.

Place your bets now on whose incivility blowhard Carroll will whine about next week.