Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About Chris Cillizza  |  On Twitter: The Fix and The Hyper Fix  |  On Facebook  |  On YouTube  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed

N.J. Senate: Keeping Their Options Open

Now that Rep. Bob Menendez has secured a Senate appointment, attention turns to the New Jersey Democrats who were passed over for the job by Gov.-elect Jon Corzine and who have previously floated the idea of running in next year's primary.

Leading that list are Reps. Rob Andrews and Frank Pallone, both of whom released non-committal statements on their political plans this afternoon.

First, Andrews: "I will consult with my family, friends and supporters in order to determine the best way to advance... .the causes and ideals to which I have devoted my efforts in Congress."

Then Pallone: "I have been preparing for a primary, and now will weigh my options of whether to proceed."

Not exactly the unified front national Democrats were hoping for following Menendez's formal ascension to the Senate. But it's not the worst case scenario for Democrats either since neither Andrews nor Pallone entered the primary today.

Both men will spend the next week or two sounding out influential leaders in the state and nationally about whether a primary run against Menendez, the new incumbent, is doable. It's likely that both will ultimately decide not to run, as national Democrats want to make Menendez's path as easy as possible between now and next November when he will face state Sen. Tom Kean Jr. (R) in the general election.

For now, the wait-and-see approaches adopted by both Pallone and Andrews should keep the political waters in New Jersey boiling over the holidays.   

-- Chris Cillizza

By Chris Cillizza  |  December 9, 2005; 4:51 PM ET
Categories:  Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Left vs. Lieberman
Next: Panel Offers "Incremental" Changes to '08 Democratic Calendar

Comments

Dear Impeach Bush,

You may not be aware of this, so I will break this news to you gently--Newt Gingrich is no longer in office. He was removed due to ethical issues, among which were the concerns over his handling of his personal life. For future reference, you should be directing all diatribes to "Tom DeLay." He's the new scapegoat, although I'm not sure he's been able to find a woman to have an affair with him. But, hey, don't let that stop you from flinging an accusation.

Just wanted to bring you up to date. :-)

Posted by: AR | December 12, 2005 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Right wing zealots cant seem to come to grips with facts. New Jersey had Chritine Todd Whitman as a two term governor. Whitman was a Republican. Prior to Whitman, with a break between I think, New Jersey had Thomas Kean as a two term Governor. By my count that is 16 years of GOP governors in the past 25 years. So how could someone say 40 years of Democratic control. Facts dont lie, and the truth can not be hidden. GOP propaganda at its best IMO.

I know why dont we attack modern day womanizers such as Gingrich.. I wonder if that was part of his Contract with America... it must have been under the section called infidelity. While we are at it lets play the gay bashing game the GOP loves to play, only this time lets go ahead and out them as the hypocrits they are. If your really bored, lets put together another version of the game of monopoly. This one will be called the "Culture of Corruption" The goal is the bribe your way to winning Boardwalk and Park Place only the name has been changed to Duke Street and Delay Congressional Way

Posted by: ImpeachBushNow | December 12, 2005 2:48 AM | Report abuse


Think about it, how long have the Democrats been in control In N.J.? What are the schools like? War zones?
The Dem's are more interested in playing footsie with the union, than in offering safety and a quality education to N.J. children.

In fact let's look at the 40 years of conrtol over the entire government the Democrats have had, still are schools continue to go down hill and every election they cry how aare schools are failing and how we need them to save us. They have'nt saved us in 40 years what makes you think they are going to start now?
They hate "No child left behind" as it gives poor and minority children the same chance for a quality education as the children of wealthy famlies.

It guarantees testing to see that each child that needs help gets tutoring. It requires teachers to be proficient in the field they teach.
It provides vouchers, so that children trapped in failing schools are able to seek a quality education elsewhere.
But there ya go, if you educate the poor and minorities in the same way you educate the rich, who will the Democrats trot out everytime they want to publicize their compassion for the poor and down-trodden?
Democrats motto: Keep them uneducated and loyal, throgh them a (bone) raise of the minimum-wage every few years to show them we are fighting for them.

As long as the people believe the Democrats lies, they will remain poor and uneducated
Did you know that George Washington Carver was a Republican? Or that Jackie Robinson was a Republican aand treated as poorly by the Democrats as they are treating Condi Rice and Lt. Gov. Michael Steele? Or that Richard Pryor was a Reagan Republican?
Or that the judge that stood up for Rosa Parks, against death threats from Democrats, was a Republican?

A great article to read anytime, and especially for those interested in Black History is at this link:

www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/larryelder/2005/11/17/175888.html

It's by Larry Elder and the title is: "Black support for Bush drops to two percent"

If you are black, this is a must read, if you are not, you can learn something of the truth.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 11, 2005 7:43 PM | Report abuse

N.J. has proven over and over at the ballot box they like corruption.
The Democrats and the mob seem to "swing' hand in hand in N.J. and I see no sign of this ever changing.
Just as I never think we will see a fiscally responsible California.
Democrats just can't let go of the feed bag, and certain areas of the country are mentally dependent on their "welfare" state.

I might be proved wrong if we had the purple finger rule in America.

Posted by: Merna | December 11, 2005 7:14 PM | Report abuse

You realize that none of those Founding Fathers could get elected today. Washington had extramarrital affairs, slaves, bad teeth, and syphillis. Hell, even FDR in a wheelchair couldn't get elected in the age of telepolitics. Jefferson had sex with his slaves (what ever happened to good old fashioned family values??), while Adams was considered kind of an uptight bore who made unpopular decisions based on principle. Ben Franklin was a notorious womanizer, and Alexander Hamilton was gay, not to mention anti-democratic. Today we call those people "out of touch" with the voters of [fill in state or district].

Nor were they infallible--they gave us a Constitutional amendment process for a reason, though they also made it difficult for a reason.

According to the Senate page Chris linked to on appointed senators, the Constitution simply gives state legislatures the power to let their governors appoint senators to vacant Senate seats. Perhaps this was a nod to the fact that those legislatures elected the Senate directly until the 17th Amendment in 1913. It's probably time for that to change. I mean look how Alaska changed its law just before the 2002 elections so that Frank Murkowski (R) would get to appoint his own successor in the Senate instead of outgoing Gov. Tony Knowles (D) who'd have had that right up til that point. If the state legislatures won't mandate these vacancies be filled by special elections rather than gubernatorial appointments, perhaps it's time to tighten up the 17th Amendment and force that to happen.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | December 10, 2005 3:11 AM | Report abuse

The Founders of This Nation

At the birth of this nation, we were blessed with some of the greatest minds this country has known. Men such as Washington; Jefferson; Adams, and others with the same dedication to personal and religious liberty. Their vision and dedication to the forging of the constitution of the United States was a brilliant feat, and has been proven by the test of time for over two hundred years. It has made of this country the envy and commanded the respect of most of the world. (At least until recently, before the Bush invasion of Iraq, and of thinking in his "born again" idiocy, that it is his duty to police the world.)

We don't have to guess what James Madison would think about the Supreme Court justices Renquist/Thomas/Scalia approach to tearing down the wall between church and state, and their contempt for religious liberty, because Madison told us himself in a letter to Edward Livingston in 1822: "Every new and successful example therefore of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civic matters is of importance. We are teaching the World the great truth that Governments do better without Kings and Nobles than with them. The merit will be doubled by the other lesson that Religion flourishes in greater purity, without than with the aid of Government."

--------------------------------------------------

To which I humbly say "Amen"

Warren Ogren

10035 N Ogren Road

Hayward, WI 54843

warogren@cheqnet.net

715-634-5751

Posted by: Warren Ogren | December 9, 2005 6:44 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company