The District 40 Republican Primary

With the activity in Passaic and Bergen County Republican circles following the announced retirement of State Senator Henry McNamara, I wrote the following article for The Record that was published today.
--------------------


With McNamara's departure, a spirited race arises
by GEORGE AJJAN - Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Wyckoff politico Henry McNamara, a longtime District 40 state senator, dropped an electoral bombshell two weeks ago upon announcing his retirement. Because the district leans strongly Republican, McNamara's abdication has put intra-GOP machinations into overdrive, as ambitious Republican aspirants seek to fill the power vacuum left by his departure.

The first move played out in predictable fashion. Kevin O'Toole, an assemblyman from Cedar Grove, immediately announced his desire to assume the state Senate seat. Alongside O'Toole are allies Assemblyman David Russo of Ridgewood and Wayne Mayor Scott Rumana, who will seek to fill the Assembly seat that would be vacated by O'Toole. No surprises here. This arrangement had been anticipated and well plotted, particularly by O'Toole and Rumana.

Their political promotions, however, are far from guaranteed, because an aggressive slate of challengers has been organized to compete in the June primary, consisting of two Ridgewood residents – former Bergen County Freeholder Todd Caliguire and three-time candidate John Ginty – as well as Councilman Joseph Schweighardt from Wayne. All six of these contenders will have to shift into overdrive for a short and spirited campaign.

The Senate seat, which entitles the senator to block political appointments in his or her county, is a particularly ripe plum. If Caliguire is unsuccessful in challenging O'Toole, the clout of Bergen Republicans in Trenton will diminish. On the other hand, a victory by O'Toole would please Republican insiders on the state level by giving the GOP indirect influence on Newark politics, since O'Toole is from Essex County.

O'Toole has established a considerable profile for himself as a major player in the state GOP, but he is not without detractors. His critics view him as an "establishment" Republican who puts party maneuvering over conservative ideology. O'Toole has nonetheless proved his worth by putting his energy and talent to good use attacking Democratic excesses.

For example, during a hearing in Trenton last year, O'Toole rhetorically manhandled disgraced former Attorney General Zulima Farber as she bumbled her way through his sophisticated questioning to the delight of many in attendance, judging by the smirks on the faces of the press corps.

Furthermore, O'Toole has invested in young Republicans, even calling upon recent college graduates to serve as regional coordinators for his state Senate campaign.

Caliguire's persona

His opponent, Todd Caliguire, also has an impressive persona, which earned him the endorsement of The Record during the 2005 GOP gubernatorial primary. As a former freeholder, he set an example for ethical behavior and has consistently and articulately communicated the need to downsize government at the county and state levels.

However, Caliguire lost credibility in the eyes of many Republicans after a disappointing fund-raising effort in his race for Bergen County executive last year. He nonetheless still has a following in Bergen County, and given that nearly 45 percent of the primary voters are based in Bergen, compared to only 10 percent for Essex (the remaining 45 percent are in Passaic), O'Toole rightfully views Caliguire as a formidable opponent, despite already having won the backing of many key elected officials in all three counties.

Caliguire's running mate, Ginty, is a principled conservative who ran for the Assembly both in 2003 and 2005. Ginty deserves the admiration of Republicans for presenting himself as a candidate for the U.S. Senate nomination last year, attempting to inject some energy into the base that Tom Kean Jr.'s thoroughly uninspirational campaign did not.

Ginty, Schweighardt and Caliguire refer to their opponents as "Whitman Republicans," and criticize them for straying from conservative principles during the time that the GOP had full control of Trenton.

The other controversial candidate is Rumana, the popular mayor of Wayne who has struggled since being elected Passaic County Republican chairman last year with a strong mandate for change.

Rumana began with confidence and enthusiasm, but has neglected in recent months to effectively communicate with the county committee, which chose him as leader. Consequently, the GOP's candidate pool is anemic, even for freeholder, not to mention the Democratic-leaning Assembly districts covering more than half of the county, and Rumana has already given incumbent Sheriff Jerry Speziale a free pass for November.

At a minimum, the role of a chairman is to nominate candidates to carry the party banner, even when the odds are stacked against them.

Rumana's record

Rumana has proven himself as an elected official and would make a fine assemblyman, but Passaic County Republicans would taste a very bitter irony if they nominated as a candidate for a "safe" Assembly district a chairman who failed to find himself running mates in the less competitive ones. Rumana must deliver before the filing deadline for candidate petitions on April 9, and pledge to resign as mayor of Wayne if elected to the Assembly.

The stakes are high this week, as Bergen Republicans (in a proper grass-roots convention) and Passaic Republicans (in a cagey oligarchy) prepare to vote. The slate that wins those intra-party contests will have a significant advantage because it will be bracketed on the June ballot with the municipal candidates in each town.

So unless the losing slate recruits its own municipal running mates, it will face a very uphill battle.

All in all, this will be an exciting primary to watch, and one worthy of the attention of concerned citizens in Bergen, Passaic and Essex counties.

George Ajjan of Clifton was a candidate for Congress in the 8th District. He runs a political blog at www.georgeajjan.com.

O --- This article first appeared in The Record on March 27, 2007.

Swiss Cheese and Fudge

I have been consistently amazed that Bill Clinton, whose foreign policy in the Middle East ultimately achieved practically nothing, still has such a golden image in the region. Furthermore, I cannot fathom why Arab-American audiences clap like trained seals every time his name is mentioned.

The fact is, as far as the Middle East was concerned, Clinton was driving without a license. In an attempt to correct this, his successor George W. Bush decided to print his own license, and then proceeded to drive us all off a cliff. Compared to these two amateurs, I'll take George H.W. Bush as my chauffeur any day.

This is the point I argued in the February issue of the paleoconservative journal Chronicles, in an article entited "Swiss Cheese and Fudge".
---------------------------------------------
Swiss Cheese and Fudge - Clinton's Foreign Policy Legacy
by George Ajjan

The Democrats' sweeping victory in the recent midterm elections has sent political shock waves around the world, especially in the Middle East—the focal point of President Bush's foreign policy on which the November election was largely a referendum. Judging by the jovial mood with which the region greeted American voters' desire for change, it seems that Arabs in general have reached the oversimplified conclusion that Democrats serve the interests of Middle East peace better than Republicans. For example, the postelection analysis of Arab political writer Sami Moubayed quotes even a Syrian Baath Party leader who longs for "The America of Jimmy Carter and the one of Bill Clinton."

Clinton? While George W. Bush's wholesale adoption of dangerous neoconservative fantasies has certainly proved a dismal failure, those who long for the "good old days" of Clinton's peacemaking efforts need to refresh their memories with regard to the record. It is entirely likely that history will mark a pivotal turning point, vis-à-vis the peace process, at Clinton's victory in the 1992 presidential election, when third-party candidate H. Ross Perot took 19 percent of the popular vote and arguably deprived incumbent President George H.W. Bush of another four years to finish implementing his comprehensive Middle East vision. In retrospect, this appears a tragedy for the region, which has been locked in a downward spiral since George H.W. Bush left office almost 14 years ago. (continued...)

Instead, Bill Clinton ascended in 1993—not the Armani-clad, 21st-century global sophisticate, but the international neophyte who arrived in Washington wearing plaid short-sleeved shirts and a digital wristwatch. Clinton clearly lacked the experience of his predecessor, a seasoned diplomat and former CIA chief. Bush's resumé boasted several foreign-policy triumphs, especially the assembling of the coalition of more than 30 nations, including many Arab countries, that drove the Iraqi army from Kuwait in the Gulf War.

Bush's true international genius, though, lay in his astute recognition of the war's aftermath. He knew that the routing of any Arab army by a Western power would have humiliating effects on the Arab psyche and disastrous long-term consequences, including the appeal of Islamic extremism. So Bush Senior wisely sought to offer the Arab leaders who backed him against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein a redemption of Arab dignity in the eyes of their people: a comprehensive "land for peace" proposal, allowing the Arabs a chance to stand together in making accords with Israel, bury the conflict definitively, and at last bring peace to the Middle East.

To garner the necessary commitments, Secretary of State James A. Baker III busily shuttled between Israel and her Arab neighbors Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Palestine, constructing the framework for such unprecedented negotiations. The Madrid Peace Conference convened in October 1991, only eight months after the Gulf War ended, with a clear vision of regional peace unseen since.

By 1992, however, the Madrid plan had lost momentum as Bush's reelection looked increasingly tenuous. Clinton prevailed that November and immediately sought a separate legacy for himself as a trailblazing peacemaker. He abandoned the comprehensive Madrid solution and chose to handle each Arab nation’s dealings with Israel disjointedly.

Clinton started by secretly whisking (see footnote) Palestinian negotiators off to Oslo to engage their Israeli counterparts. The subsequent 1993 White House handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat introduced Palestinian sovereignty on the path to a two-state solution. Having then destroyed, like a bull in a china shop, the Arab unity that Bush and Baker had delicately cultivated, Clinton next checked off an Israel-Jordan peace treaty on his to-do list. Several years later, he finally got around to contemptuous Syria, which had bitterly resisted Clinton's divide-and-conquer approach.

Ostensibly, his multitrack strategy seemed promising. But for all the accolades which the mainstream media heaped on Clinton for his supposedly tireless peacemaking efforts, what did he really accomplish? In the twilight of his tenure, Clinton's efforts to reach an agreement between Israelis and Palestinians infamously failed—despite the charming photos of Prime Minister Ehud Barak and then-democratically elected Palestinian President Arafat interacting like old college buddies at Camp David—largely because the deal Clinton constructed had more holes than Swiss cheese. Even with just a few weeks left in the White House, he continued to urge the two leaders to return to Washington, presumably so that they could sign a treaty on a timeline best suited not to the millions of people it would affect, but to Clinton's own legacy and ego.

On the Syrian track, Clinton demonstrated equally irresponsible behavior. Shortly before his death, Syrian President Hafez Assad traveled to Geneva to meet his American counterpart after lengthy preparatory negotiating sessions, only to snub the final proposal after discovering that Clinton had misled him on the extent of Barak's willingness to make concessions. Considering that Clinton actually told his negotiating team to "find me a way to fudge" the details of the final arrangements for the Golan Heights, as author Clayton Swisher reveals in his book, The Truth About the Camp David Accords, the failed outcome hardly comes as a surprise.

In terms of Middle East peace, the impudently careless Clinton left the White House practically empty-handed. The United States had switched from George H.W. Bush's comprehensive peace strategy to a divisive nation-focused tactic under Clinton—implemented in a shifty and dishonorable manner at that—and the results were horrendous. The Middle East looked a lot worse in 2001 than it had eight years earlier, regardless of the altruistic international reputation that the Democrats seem to enjoy.

Justly levying such criticism on Clinton, however, is certainly not the same as suggesting that all Republicans make good foreign policy, for after Clinton came George W. Bush. Every bit the international novice as his predecessor, Bush dramatically changed American policy once again by bringing into prominent advisory roles certain disaffected liberals commonly called neoconservatives, whose mission was to control the Middle East by exacerbating division among and within Arab countries.

Bush's advisors rejected his father's holistic view of the region and even Clinton's segregated nation-based approach to peacemaking. Their method, known as taefi in Arabic, stoked conflicts between competing subnational religious and ethnic groups as the Shiites, Druze, Sunnis, Alawites, Kurds, Maro­nites, etc. Given the neocons' objectives, their scheme had convincing historical precedent: The Ottoman Turks successfully ruled the Middle East for centuries with a sectarian administrative system of millets.

However, the Ottomans won at divide-and-conquer playing in their own backyard and, frankly, because they knew what they were doing. The neocons do not. They sold their ill-conceived plot to the American public wrapped in flowery rhetoric about democracy. But controlling the Middle East by exploiting sectarian rivalries requires substantially more than trite platitudes and shallow analyses rubber-stamped by untrustworthy exiled Arab yes-men, such as the Department of Defense's former Iraqi pet, Ahmed Chalabi. Thus, their policy has precipitated the glorious "new" Middle East that we see today, with Iraq descended into civil war, Iran swaggering with impunity, democratic elections having either endorsed dictatorship (Hosni Mubarak’s landslide in Egypt) or legitimized terrorism (Hezbollah's and Hamas's big electoral wins in Lebanon and Palestine), and provocative Syria smugly gloating after correctly predicting America's failure on all of the above.

Rank-and-file Republicans should have resisted the neocons' foreign-policy ploy anyway, given our difficult experience with taefi politics in America's urban environments, where black, Hispanic, Asian, and other ethnic groups vie for power. Typically, GOP candidates would be lucky to earn 30 percent of the vote in such locales. This does not exactly demonstrate mastery of sectarian politics, even in U.S. cities where people speak English and pray on Sunday. Whence, therefore, came the arrogance to expect a winning taefi strategy in an infinitely more complex environment such as the Middle East?

Sooner or later, especially in the aftermath of their bruising defeat last November, the Republican base is going to realize just how badly they have been led astray. Looking toward 2008, therefore, the wily neocons may abandon the faltering GOP and look for a new home among the Democrats. There is no reason to believe that the hawkish likes of Hillary Clinton, emboldened by the midterm electoral outcome, would not take Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, and other neocons into her inner circle. Woe to that Baathist who longed for Bill Clinton, because his Swiss-cheese-and-fudge approach could quite possibly return—only this time, with a vengeance. If it does, woe to America as well.

George Ajjan is a Republican member of the Arab American Institute's National Policy Council.

O --- This article first appeared in the February 2007 issue of Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture.

footnote - Suggesting that Clinton "whisked" the Israeli and Palestinian negotiators off on his own initiative was incorrect on my part. The contacts may have been more organic at first, but my thesis still stands - Clinton abandoned the comprehensive formula of HW/Baker and we are all paying the price.

Ballot access for the 2008 GOP Presidential hopefuls

As I have discussed here before, I will be a strong supporter of Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel should he seek the GOP nomination for President, and thus have concerns about the ease of gaining ballot access in New Jersey and the process that might entail.

I communicated with NJGOP State Chairman Tom Wilson on this topic, and he informed me that no decisions have yet been made with respect to ballot access, but that a group had been assembled to discuss the various options and then present them to the 42-member Republican State Committee for a vote before September. Obviously time is of the essence for potential candidates like Hagel who will not have the manpower and financial resources of John McCain, Mitt Romney, and most especially Rudy Giuliani.

So I contacted my friend Michael Illions, a pro-wrestler also known as "The Commish", who is the head of GOPUSA-NJ Conservatives with Attitude, an influential group of activists known for their monthly brunches that have featured prominent conservative office-holders, pundits, authors, etc. Illions and his colleagues have endorsed California Congressman Duncan Hunter, who faces similar challenges to Hagel.

My pitch to Illions was: let's write an editorial together, though our interests and our views occasionally diverge on certain points, to shed more light upon the machinations that will affect ballot access in the Primary next year. We wrote it up and the Asbury Park Press ran the piece today.
--------------------------

Early primary can boost conservative Republicans' impact

by GEORGE AJJAN and MICHAEL ILLIONS, 03/22/07

The presidential primaries of 2008 have created the most exciting political climate that America has witnessed in decades. Neither party has an incumbent president or an ordained successor running, making the nomination wide open. Extraordinary media coverage has accelerated the process and raised the stakes tremendously for presidential contenders.

The impact of this groundbreaking scenario presents a major opportunity for New Jersey. In the past, Republican and Democratic voters in the Garden State picked their preferred presidential nominee on the June primary ballot as a mere formality, at a late stage when the likely candidate was all but certain. This time, however, New Jersey voters could affect the viability of both parties' contenders in 2008, thanks to the decision to move the presidential primary to Feb. 5.

For the state Republican Party, this move could be a windfall. While the state GOP has struggled in recent years, the intense media coverage of the primary is certain to increase the political awareness of many New Jerseyans holding conservative views, thus widening the pool for recruitment of new activists whose energy we need in the party in order to rebuild.
However, we may not have the opportunity to tap that rich reservoir if competition is dampened by the process — determined by our state party leadership — that governs ballot access for presidential contenders.

The group of potential nominees contains, in addition to the two or three front-runners on the Republican side, numerous candidates who have announced their candidacies or are expected to do so shortly. While these second-tier contenders lack the financial resources and political organizations that characterize the front-runners, many compensate with specific planks that may appeal to sizable portions of the Republican base, such as military expertise, immigration stances, pro-life credentials and foreign policy acumen.

In the context of an early primary, exposure of these ideas and skills could propel any of them to become a major contender. Thus, all of the candidates deserve a fair shot at the GOP nomination. The process that determines ballot access in New Jersey must offer a level playing field to everyone. Presently, the process has not been clarified; however, one could speculate it ultimately would embody one of several scenarios:

In the most simple, transparent and preferable mechanism, any Republican candidate could get on the ballot by presenting a sizable number of petition signatures from registered Republicans in New Jersey, perhaps 1,000 statewide, or 100 in each of 13 congressional districts. This method represents a sufficient workload that would preclude frivolous candidates from ballot access. But it would give all serious hopefuls a fighting chance, therefore maximizing the competition of ideas and offering the most choices for Republican voters.

In a more complicated scenario, each candidate would need, in addition to collecting signatures for his or her petition, to assemble a slate of delegates that would ultimately attend the Republican National Convention to cast New Jersey's votes, should he or she emerge victorious. This would entail circulating a separate set of petitions for the delegates themselves.

Such a process embodies a significant handicap for second-tier candidates, who rely on favorable response to their convictions and principled stands to keep their presidential aspirations afloat, rather than armies of staffers paid to drive around town collecting hundreds of signatures. So instead of focusing on ideas to make life better, these candidates would be forced to concentrate on tasks designed to make life difficult.

For this reason, delegates should not be on the ballot in the primary, or at least not connected with any specific candidate. As an alternative, the GOP chairman in each county could nominate delegates to the Republican National Convention and those delegates would be required to cast New Jersey's votes in a manner proportional to the results of the presidential primary.

In either case, the Republican base, particularly those of us supporting second-tier candidates, needs to know as quickly as possible the process so we can plan accordingly. We appreciate the establishment by Republican State Chairman Tom Wilson of a committee to study the options and present recommendations to the Republican State Committee for a vote. We urge him to continue to communicate with transparency and timeliness all activities that may affect the ability of any Republican presidential contender to compete in New Jersey.

The more successful the state GOP is at creating an active, exciting and issue-based presidential primary, the more successful we will ultimately be at building the Republican Party in New Jersey by harnessing the minds of Garden State citizens dedicated to conservative principles.

George Ajjan of Clifton is a former Republican candidate for Congress in the 8th District. Michael Illions of Woodbridge is head of GOPUSA-NJ Conservatives with Attitude.

O --- This article first appeared in the Asbury Park Press on March 22, 2007.

Senegalese visit to Borough Jeep in Wayne

Several weeks ago, I got a call from the Embassy of Senegal in Washington, DC - specifically from my friend and advisor Alhousseynou Diallo, the Economic Counsellor. He informed me that a delegation of high-ranking customs officials would be travelling to New York to meet with their American counterparts and discuss bilateral trade.

As an auxiliary component of their trip, he wanted me to organize a presentation on used automobile valuations, and I was happy to oblige. I immediately contacted Joe Franchina at Borough Jeep Chrysler in Wayne, which has been owned by the Hagedoorn family (Prospect Park Hollanders) for over 80 years, and they agreed to host the delegation.

It was a fantastic event, especially given the weather conditions and the excitement with which these dignitaries played in the snow! Samantha Henry at the Herald News covered the event, as seen below.
---------------
Senegal eyes ties with Jersey car dealers

Wednesday, March 21, 2007 By SAMANTHA HENRY - HERALD NEWS

partial scan with photos

WAYNE -- A light snow was dusting the lot at Borough Jeep Chrysler, when a beat-up minivan with diplomatic plates rolled up. It discharged a delegation of port officials from the West African nation of Senegal.

"Welcome, Senegalese friends!" said George Ajjan, a former Republican congressional candidate-turned-entrepreneur, greeting them in French.

Ajjan, 30, of Clifton, had arranged the delegation's March visit to forge better trade ties between New Jersey and West Africa and to capitalize on what Ajjan said was the growing popularity of American SUVs there. "You mention Cadillac Escalade or Hummer to them, and they're beside themselves," Ajjan said. "Rap videos are popular, and Senegal is behind the U.S. and France as the third rap capital of the world."

A Senegalese member of the delegation agreed. "They see everything on TV -- rap music, black culture," said Al Housseynou Diallo, first economic counselor at the Senegalese Embassy in Washington, D.C. "It's popular, especially with young people."

In trying to find ways to export American cars, Ajjan said he came up against the dominance of French car makers in Senegal, the preference for diesel-fueled vehicles, and the high tariffs on American imports. The per capita income of Senegal's 12 million people was $709 in 2005, according to the U.S. State Department.

Ajjan decided that the first thing to do was persuade Senegalese trade officials to lower import taxes. "We're pricing American cars uncompetitively, by basing the tariff on the highest price," he told the group, explaining to them in French about ''le Kelley bleu book,'' -- or the Kelley Blue Book -- and American methods for pricing used cars. "It's an opportunity to build a bridge to Africa," said Joseph Franchina, sales leader at Borough Jeep Chrysler.

Africa isn't the only place where American popular culture -- arguably one of the nation's biggest exports -- may be contributing to a demand for cars that might not otherwise be practical in countries where unleaded gas is exorbitantly expensive. Vecdi Ugurlu, who owns King Motors Inc. on Route 46 in Little Ferry, said American cars -- especially SUVs -- are also catching on in his native Turkey. "Cadillac Escalade, Hummers, all these cars are popular over there, because people have such love for America," he said.

Ugurlu said a Lincoln Navigator, which sells for about $65,000 in the U.S., retails for $175,000 in Turkey, after taxes and shipping costs are factored in. Only a select clientele can afford them, according to Ugurlu, but selling just a few can be lucrative. "It's all image, it shows they are rich," he said. "Here in America, you don't see the difference, because money doesn't distinguish -- if you have credit here, and a steady income, you can drive the same truck as a rich man. But in Turkey, it's impossible to drive the same car, or eat at a fancy restaurant, as a rich man."

Ugurlu said selling cars overseas is a complicated business -- different countries have varying import restrictions and tariff structures. But despite the obstacles, he's seen a number of North Jersey car dealers testing the waters of the international car market via the Internet. "We have buyers all over the world from our Web site," Ugurlu said. "Today, you can get on the Internet and see cars anywhere, transfer funds, and do legal matters. After they wire the money in, we take the car to the port and ship it to them."

Understanding the cultural nuances of international buyers is also important, both Ugurlu and Ajjan said. Ugurlu said in many countries, high mileage on a used car rarely factors into the price, the way it does in America. In Senegal, Ajjan discovered that few prospective buyers are interested in test driving a car, but will insist on a pristine spare tire as a condition of sale. After his presentation to the Senegalese at the Wayne dealership, several of the customs officials seemed persuaded that lowering tariffs and allowing more American cars into Senegal would make a market of willing buyers.

"We live the American life," said Papa Moussa Sy, an airport customs official in Senegal, through a French translator. "If it happens here in the morning, we have it in Senegal by the evening."

Reach Samantha Henry at 973-569-7172 or henrys@northjersey.com.

Wanted: home in FLOW area, contact Paul DiGaetano, senator@d40.nj.us

By now, anyone who cares to know has discovered that Republican Hank McNamara, State Senator of NJ's 40th District, has announced his retirement, leaving an open Senate seat in a solidly Republican district that covers Southwest Bergen, central Passaic, plus 2 conservative towns in Essex County.

With less than 4 weeks before the filing deadline by which any potential candidate must submit his or her petitions to seek the Republican nomination in the June Primary, and only 2 weeks before the Bergen County Republican convention, at which the County Committee members award "the line", one can only recall the words of Homer Simpson, "Oh, I see. Then everything is wrapped up in a neat little packAGGGGE...Really, I mean that. Sorry if it sounded sarcastic."

Of course, I am referring to the long-expected news that Assemblyman Kevin O'Toole will position himself to assume McNamara's seat (a boon for the GOP as that would give senatorial courtesy to block juicy appointments in Essex County, as O'Toole lives in Cedar Grove), while Assemblyman David Russo will retain his seat, and popular Wayne Mayor but simultaneously struggling freshman Passaic County GOP Chairman Scott Rumana will seek the Assembly seat vacated by O'Toole.

How the Passaic County GOP will award the line to its sitting Chairman remains a mystery and frankly raises eyebrows. If additional candidates wish to present their credentials given this opening, how will they be given the opportunity to do so? By random coincidence, I happened to speak with one such individual last night, who has aspirations to hold office in this district, but as a loyal Republican chose not to wage a divisive primary. But seeking an open seat in a "safe" district is not disloyal, far from it. To be clear, nobody has the right to "inherit" a seat and that most certainly applies to Scott Rumana.

I am waiting for "I told you so" emails from longtime Rumana detractors who insisted that he only sought the Passaic County GOP Chairmanship for his own gain, to "give himself the line" and then wash his hands of party-building responsibilities.

But were they right? Is "the fix" in???

A lot of that depends on the conditions surrounding McNamara's decision to step down and how he might use his influence with the Bergen GOP County Committee to affect a successor, as well as the interest and ability of former District 36 Assemblyman and Majority Leader Paul DiGaetano to make the long-rumored move to the 40th District and get back into the Trenton game.

[note - the rules for residency are unclear and I don't know if it is already too late for a potential candidate to "carpetbag" - although the petition instructions state that a candidate must "satisfy the citizenship and residency requirements by election day" - any guidance on this would be appreciated, as this whole part of the post may be rendered inapplicable]

Unless things have changed since 2005, when DiGaetano and O'Toole landed on bad terms after O'Toole did not back hometown candidate DiGaetano (who lives in Nutley), this could be a race with bitter personal overtones should DiGaetano make the move. However, McNamara (who attended Rumana's recent wedding) has a chummier relationship with DiGaetano, and they definitely share one common ally - former Passaic County GOP Chairman and [...never mind] Peter Murphy (see how nice I am?), whom Rumana bluntly defeated by proxy in last year's Chairman race by a wide margin. No doubt that he's hungry for revenge, and smiting Rumana's Trentonian ambitions would be a delectable payback from his perspective.

Could we be looking at a messy primary in which an O'Toole-Russo-Rumana ticket gets the line in Passaic (40% of the GOP primary votes) and Essex (10%) counties - O'Toole doubles as Essex GOP Chair, and potentially in Bergen (the remaining 40%) versus a DiGaetano-name-name ticket running "off the line"? As we saw in 2005, when DiGaetano won "the line" in Bergen County and nonetheless finished a disappointing 4th in the Gubernatorial Primary, this has diminished somewhat as a determining factor. Although, that was a high-profile race with lots of money floating around thanks to ridiculous matching funds laws that bloated the campaign trésors of 7 GOP candidates; this time around, the turnout will be far lower and with municipal candidates sharing "the line" in key towns like Wayne, it will be tough to win in an "off-the-line" scenario. 4 weeks to recruit and file competing municipal slates is a tall order to fill.

And, might there be a Presidential overtone? DiGaetano has backed Rudy Giuliani, while O'Tools is with John McCain.

In any case, Scott Rumana must address the following factors:

1. Communicate clearly and openly to the County Committee how he plans to recuse himself from the nomination process for the open Assembly seat in District 40 once he presents himself as a candidate.
2. Establish a mechanism through which other contenders for the open Assembly seat may present their credentials for fair and timely consideration on "the line" in Passaic County.
3. Pledge to resign as Mayor of Wayne once he assumes the Assembly office, should he ultimately emerge victorious, thus taking a stand against dual office-holding.
4. Commit to finding candidates to fill ALL slots for his counterpart positions in Districts 34, 35, and 36. Rumana cannot shirk his responsibilities as Chairman, which most certainly includes fielding candidates in difficult districts, because he himself decided to become a candidate in a Republican-leaning one. (this is why County Chairs should not be office-holders or office-seekers, it presents too many conflicts of interest!)

Finally, there is the possibility of another ideologically conservative ticket forming in District 40, although perennial candidates Joe Tomanelli and John Ginty have been silent thus far.

Long overdue documentary on Arab-Americans

A couple weeks ago I received an email telling me about a project underway that is long overdue - a professionally-made, star-studded documentary film about the experience of Arab-Americans.

The brains behind the project, Abe Kasbo, CEO of the public relations and marketing firm Verasoni Worldwide, has an outstanding media background and production skills to give this project the finesse it deserves. Upon hearing about the project, I immediately contacted "Halabi Abe", to brainstorm a bunch of great content that the project might include.

We had the chance to meet last week, when Abe gave me his latest updates - he has extensive support from the Arab American Institute (AAI), a number of Arab-American celebrities, and has some great roadshows planned to raise money to complete the project (this is mostly a labor of love) - and to film key sites, most notably the St. Jude Hospital in Memphis, founded by famous entertainer Danny Thomas. St. Jude's fundraising organization is called ALSAC, which stands for American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities, and that's a fact.

In addition to modest financial contributions, Abe is looking for anyone who has video footage of old haflat or maharajanat, and he can be reached by email.

A Hagel-icious soufflé takes time to prepare

Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel, a Republican whom I have said I would work to elect should he choose to run for President, has postponed his decision on his political future until later this year, or - as he joked in closing - "before St. Patrick's Day next year."

Describing the Iraq War as "most divisive and difficult issue since Vietnam", he also offered the following from his prepared remarks:

"Burdened by two wars, faced with dangerous new threats and global uncertainty, beset by serious long-term domestic problems and divided by raw political partisanship — America now reaches for a national consensus of purpose...

I believe the political currents in America are more unpredictable today than at any time in modern history. We are experiencing a political re-orientation, a redefining and moving toward a new political center of gravity. This movement is bigger than both parties. The need to solve problems and meet challenges is overtaking the ideological debates of the last three decades."

In the question-answer portion, Hagel made the following remarks (quotes may not be exact):

"I am not an anti-war candidate - I have never been anti-war...to consider me an anti-war candidate is just not correct."

To clarify, he suggested that a nation's national security is not just the strength of its military, but also includes economic as well as social factors. He further mentioned that Reagan's withdrawal of US Marines from Beirut and Eisenhower's reluctance to militarily escalate in South-East Asia did not classify them as "anti-war" Presidents. Although, the disdain for the current Administration's policies was clear when he talked about "wise, smart use of military power".

Anyone dreaming of a blockbuster Unity Ticket (Hagel teaming up with former Republican and Reagan Administration official Jim Webb, the newly-elected Virginia Senator, for example) had their hopes quashed. Hagel made sure to accentuate his affiliation with the Republican Party. Very pleased to hear that.

"Well, I think I've made it pretty clear, and I think my record is rather clear - I am a Republican."

He talked about his first ballot, cast from Vietnam in 1968, in which he "didn't vote for Humphrey" and "probably" voted Republican down the line.

"I have based my entire political life on the party that I thought I shared most of my political philosophy, and that is the Republican Party...I have been disappointed in my party over the past few years...I don't see that same party today [referring to his description of the 1968 GOP] and I would like to continue to influence my party to get it back to where it was when I first joined."

He also spoke about the unprecedented attention to the Presidential race and the early onset of primary fever:

"I do fear we are doing damage to our system...we are captive to ideologies and I believe that will change - the American people will demand it."

On that note, what are the strategic implications of Hagel's decision to postpone? Well, on the whole it's a a smart move, because of the intense competition in the Republican field right now. Hagel, whose foreign policy views differ substantially from the rest of the announced candidates (with the exception of Ron Paul, who is a hero in his own right), would have gotten lost in the sauce.

His moment of opportunity may present itself if Iraq continues to deteriorate to the degree that even the mainstream of the GOP base looks at him as a sage for his ongoing criticism of the "stay the course" approach that McCain, Giuliani et al will sink defending. Meanwhile, a steady stream of favorable mainstream press coverage will likely continue, as Hagel's delay will only serve to whet the appetites of the press, which makes pets out of Hagelicious mavericks (like the McCain of yore).

Of course, Hagel's decision to delay is nonetheless a big gamble, because while all the rest of the candidates, including the other 2nd tier contenders, go about the business of building organizations, Hagel's non-committal to the race precludes him from doing that. For example, an activist like me, who would be more than delighted to criss-cross New Jersey speaking as a surrogate for Hagel at every GOP event I could get to, has little choice but to sit on his hands and wait, while other candidates continue to devour the attention of potential primary voters.

Frank Lautenberg's nightmare hotel

If NJ Senator Frank Lautenberg (D) ever has occasion to stay in a hotel in NYC, perhaps he'd like to try the Essex House on Central Park South, which was devilishly acquired by an international investor group in 2005. I passed by there today en route to catch up with my dear friend and adopted older sister, Syrian reformer extraordinaire Hind Kabawat.


I was going to go inside to have a look, but there seemed to be lots of skinheads hanging out in the lobby.

All in all, it seems like a fine hotel, but I definitely wouldn't stay there during an election year.

Note the American flag in the background. Always a good reminder.

el brusco alcalde attacks the Taxrebels

Back in December, a Republican activist from Burlington County named William Monk contacted me to discuss the possibility of recruiting candidates for State Assembly and State Senate in 2007 who would run on an innovative platform proposing out-of-the-box solutions to the Garden State's fiscal woes. In the subsequent months, at considerable expense of his own time and money, Monk plugged away at the project and when I had the pleasure to meet him at Jay Webber's Reagan Day last month, he was all but ready to launch the organization, called Taxrebels, devoted to reducing the burden of New Jersey property taxes.

After the launch, Monk emailed a group of about 20 individuals who had interest in the Taxrebels project to solicit their feedback on the website and the potential elements of the platform, most of whom had spent years pondering solutions to the tax burden that hampers New Jersey. One such proposal concerned consolidation of smaller municipalities, studied at length by Cherry Hill resident Eli Hiller, who noted in testimony to the NJ Legislature's Joint Committee on Government Consolidation and Shared Services:

"New Jersey has five layers of local governance, including 21 of the smallest counties in the United States. We have 12 forms of municipal government totaling 566 distinct entities, ... 651 school districts including charter schools, 208 local public authorities and 232 special taxing districts, of which 184 are fire districts.

These 1,678 units of local governance have produced mind boggling excesses that no other state experiences...New Jersey has 39.85 local government workers per square mile, the most of any state and double the U.S. average...They consume more than 90 per cent of annual New Jersey property tax collections in salaries."

Hiller is passionate about consolidation, to say the least. When the idea was questioned by some of the Taxrebels group, Hiller responded:

"The mindless leading the blind...is my reckoning of the anti-consolidation residents of New Jersey who sit on the thrones of their postage stamp sized fiefdoms. I would like to know from these 'tin-horn dictators' how they propose to reform property taxes if not by reducing the choking number of entities of New Jersey government."

Enter Señor Esteban Lonegan, the Mayor of Bogota, who retorted:

"You are clearly a big government advocate and supporter of collectivism.

Why don't you move to Newark and live your dream? Hey, only one police and one fire chief and 1 Mayor for 250,000 people. You would be happy there.

You could also try Cuba. They adopted your socialist model 50 years ago."

This, coming from a man who believes that the Mayor of a town of 8,000 residents should have veto power over the advertising strategy of a publicly-traded corporation with a market capitalization of $53 billion. So I guess Lonegan, apparently oblivious to the irony, is opting out of the Taxrebels.

No love lost there. But the discussion has continued and is bearing fruit. Here are some of the other highlights and food for thought.

Jerry Cantrell of Silver Brigade adds:

"I've recently had this same discussion with several of our elected officials. Most recently Senator Adler (D) in his Cherry Hill office last Friday and Senator Connors (R) this morning. These are two of the 10 out of 40 who voted No on the 2007-8 NJ Budget. It took three Rs to put the budget to vote and 12 of them voted for it along with 36 Ds. Out of control taxes aren't controlled by one party folks..."

Greg Cinque noted:

"Towns don't need to be merged. Ownership needs to be consolidated. The State owns the schools and pays the bills. Eliminate duplication of local administrations. Eliminate ineffective local school boards populated with guilt ridden parents manipulated by slick school superintendents looking to build their fiefdoms...New Jersey is obsessed with local control. It is nuts. It is also the seed of corruption in NJ. Grassroots corruption starts at the local level in NJ. It is the training ground. Just look at local planning and zoning boards as one example."

The very powerful Teacher's Union, NJEA, came under fire as well. Eli Hiller suggested a major legal effort against them:

"The NJEA and every one of its 616 locals will assure that by withholding campaign funds, launching a campaign to unseat the legislator who had the temerity to suggest corrective action, etc.

The NJEA can be neutralized by a class action lawsuit in which the NJ DoE would also be named as a defendant. There are according to a March, 2006 US Census Bureau report 170,642 K-12 school teachers in New Jersey earning $10.4 billion in annualized salary. That does not include benefits and approximates 50% of public education expenditure. Interestingly, although the NJ population had no significant population increase from 2005 to 2006, the school teacher increase was 6,156 or 3.7%.

The purpose of including the NJ DoE is to gain discovery of the doubtless many, many documents produced by the NJEA attempting to thwart any reasonable idea that would advance public education and thereby, the public interest.

I truly believe a lawsuit with a huge number attached would scare the hell out of the NJEA..."

Seth Grossman, Executive Director of Liberty and Prosperity (which, followed by the words "for all" is New Jersey's state motto - as almost-Senator and Governor Doug Forrester frequently noted), cautioned against such a course:

"The NJEA collects $850 dues each year from 110,000 active members, and they have about 90,000 retired members who voluntarily pay dues. They also shake down the folks who supply school textbooks and supply and have a budget of about $90 million each year. They can afford a lot more legal talent than we.

Also, New Jersey judges from the Supreme Court down are appointed by the politicians controlled by NJEA...The fact is that we are facing POLITICAL problems, not legal problems. Lawsuits are OK if they are part of a POLITICAL strategy to bring down the folks who are oppressing us, but they are worthless if you thing they will change things by themselves."

Finally, it is worth noting that several of the participants in the discussion noted that they received more favorable feedback on these issues from Democrat legislators than Republican ones, and some suggested that the effort should not be limited to one party. This is good and bad news for William Monk's original idea of using Taxrebels to change the Republican Party's platform on these issues. One the one hand, some of those involved have little faith in the GOP. On the other hand, the fact that he is proposing running off-the-line candidates suggests that the goal is change from within.

The future's bright, politicsnj's orange

What a surprise yesterday when I made the daily rounds of my favorite internet sites, and discovered that politicsnj.com, an addictive site run by a mysterious sandwich-eating guru self-named "Wally Edge" that covers the inner workings and personalities of politics in New Jersey (a bit like what I do for Passaic County - except statewide, with better sources, and with more attitude) had completely changed its look.

Before I could absorb the new content, the greyed-out site was mostly covered by a letter that popped up, superimposed on the faded background, giving a pleasingly sentimental history of politicsnj's role as spirit-guide of Garden State political junkies for the past 7 years.

The new layout looks great, despite a certain feeling of nostalgia for the less slick look of the previous site. Content wise, Wally's pulled a coup by getting former Governor Christie Whitman (R), former US Senator Bob Torricelli (D), and others to sign on as columnists. Long gone are the days when Wally Edge conducted job interviews for potential employees of politicsnj, like well-missed reporter Steve Kornacki (who is now back), by instant messenger!

Many people may not realize the most delicious irony associated with this recent transition - the NY Observer, which has purchased politicsnj, is published by Jared Kushner, son of Charles Kushner. The cat is out of the bag, as the Asbury Park Press, courtesy of the AP, noted today, and was prominently linked by politicsnj itself. This may bother some Republicans, given Charles Kushner's affinity for NJ Democrats, but if they're silly enough to squawk about it, then they probably deserve the mockery they will surely endure from Mr. Edge.

I personally am a fan of the Observer, since one of my other daily site visits is the blog of reporter Phil Weiss, who has started making major waves in Jewish circles with his analysis of the changing disposition of American Jews toward Israel, and how that affects their political activities. Despite Phil's liberal leanings, he has been twice published in paleoconservative jounral The American Conservative in recent months, including a February article on Jimmy Carter's controversial book Palestine: Peace, not Apartheid. When I noted this irony to him, he remarked:

"The interesting thing to me is that as a lefty I am now in bed with paleos and realists who understand how destructive [the Iraq War] is. I was for impeaching Clinton, by the way."

Phil has taken a lot of heat, especially from American Jews who don't share his views, but I believe he is going to make a major impact.

In any case, congratulations to politicsnj on their re-launch as well as to the Observer for their fine acquisition, and of course thanks to Wally Edge for the reciprocal link to this blog.

Lincoln Chafee does not have a sarcastic bone in his body

This has been a very political week for me. Last night was the latest installment - the annual banquet of the New Jersey chapter of the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC).

The keynote speaker was former Rhode Island Senator, Republican Lincoln Chafee, whom I was pleased to support in his (unfortunately) unsuccessful reelection effort last year.

Chafee is an extremely soft-spoken man, but the content of his speech had the otherwise distracted and boisterous audience spellbound. He surprised me by not focusing on an I-told-you-so critique of the Bush Administration's Iraq policy, which Chafee had every right to give as one of only 23 Senators to vote NO on the authorization for the Iraq War (a pathetic measure enacted because Congress doesn't waste its time reading those pesky footnotes of the Constitution like Article I, Section 8 which give CONGRESS the power to declare war). Instead, he chose to remind the audience of just how little progress has been made on the Israel/Palestine issue, especially since all our favorite think-tank heroes and their media stooges were giddy at the time telling all of us that "the road to Jerusalem goes through Baghdad".

Chafee recalled his questioning of Paul Wolfowitz during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, telling last night's crowd that he was amazed that, even just a few months after the invasion of Iraq, the Israel-Palestine issue was the first thing that Wolfowitz mentioned.

CHAFEE: It seems to me that we've thrown a rock into the pool that is the Middle East, and just for the sake of my question, if all goes well with restoring order in Iraq, what is their strategic vision of the ripples that now are going out from this rock?

What is their strategic vision in the Middle East now?

WOLFOWITZ: I'd say several things. I think some of them hopefully will happen even perhaps before some of the other results are achieved inside Iraq.

I think one of the ripples is a positive impact on the Arab- Israeli peace process, and clearly we need it, we need to move that process forward.

I think we have credibility, enormous credibility, not that we didn't have it before, we have it even more than we did before. I think the removal of Saddam Hussein as somebody who was providing $25,000 to every terrorist family, there's already signs that that is having a positive impact.

...It's hard to say exactly how. It's not a domino affect. It's not Iraq affects the country next door which affects -- it's not a physical thing. It's a physiological and political and sort of morale impact, which can be large.

Then Chafee quoted from a speech that President Bush made to the American Enterprise Institute (where neocon Kool-Aid is manufactured), in which the President stated:

Success in Iraq could also begin a new stage for Middle Eastern peace, and set in motion progress towards a truly democratic Palestinian state. (Applause.) The passing of Saddam Hussein's regime will deprive terrorist networks of a wealthy patron that pays for terrorist training, and offers rewards to families of suicide bombers. And other regimes will be given a clear warning that support for terror will not be tolerated. (Applause.)

...For its part, the new government of Israel -- as the terror threat is removed and security improves -- will be expected to support the creation of a viable Palestinian state -- (applause) -- and to work as quickly as possible toward a final status agreement. As progress is made toward peace, settlement activity in the occupied territories must end. (Applause.)

Chafee also recalled the story about the forgotten shoulder-shrugging Middle East envoy Ambassador John Wolf, that I covered in an earlier post.

All in all, I have to give Chafee credit for speaking the truth and brilliantly debunking the ridiculous policies that have led the US into this mess. The American people are worse off not having him in the Senate to expose Wolfowitz and his ilk for what they really are. I find it amazing that he was able to point out all these facts without displaying even the slightest bit of sarcasm. The man does not have a sarcastic bone in his body! I respect him for that, although admittedly I prefer the cocky I-told-you-so attitude of my paleoconservative pals (as seen in the latest Chronicles issue and just about every hilarious column from Taki Theodoracopulos.)

Chuck Hagel in NJ: 0 delegates down, 78 to go

With delight, I attended yesterday afternoon a talk by Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel (R) at Rutgers University, co-sponsored by the university's Middle Eastern Studies department and American Iranian Council, entitled "21st Century Challenges". The lecture's primary focus was US policy on Iran, about which the Senator spoke at length and with refreshingly little cliché.

I will go point by point through some of the more important elements of his speech (note: quotes are not exact word-for-word), and give some comments on each, followed by an overall appraisal of the event in the backdrop of Hagel's position as a possible 2008 Presidential contender.

1) Iran is causing the deaths of American soldiers in Iraq...

Early in the speech, Hagel listed the issues driving America's poor relationship with Iran. No surprises, except perhaps his endorsement of the idea that Iran bears responsibility for the deaths of US soldiers through its financial and material support of insurgents. In a speech widely critical of the Bush Administration's Middle East policy, this element, seemingly lifted directly from the White House playbook, seemed a bit out of place.

Chris Floyd, a staunchly anti-Bush journalist often quoted by libertarians like Lew Rockwell, offers a critical view of this assertion. Libertarians in general consider the media's willingness to endorse such evidence as a signal that war with Iran cannot be avoided - they see strong echoes of the lead-up to the Iraq War. The fact that an articulate critic of the Iraq War like Chuck Hagel cites these factors will trouble them, and it indicates that the debate has already been framed with this component built into the thought process of most Americans as they ponder a course of action concerning Iran. (continued...)

2) Iran's cooperation with the US was self-serving...

One would not expect a Republican Senator mulling a run for the White House to acknowledge Iran's cooperation with the US (Taliban, etc.), although it does reflect reality, as I discussed on this blog in the context of the 2006 midterm elections. Hagel asserted that states acting in their own interests was a good thing, because it is predictable if not agreeable. He is right. Erratic behavior, Hagel said, was the true cause for concern.

3) Iran is not a monolith...

Bravo, Chuck! The Senator went on to explain the separation of powers in the Iranian government and noted its complexity, as well as the difficulty of understanding such an "opaque" political structure. Once again, I almost felt as if Chuck had read the analysis of the recent Iranian elections that I posted here in late December.

4) Iranians have a positive attitude toward the West...

This reminded me of a quote from the British Ambassador to Iran, Geoffrey Adams. I could not locate it online but may have read it in the onboard magazine of BMED airlines (my London-Dakar travels), a British Airways franchise partner which flies regularly from London to Tehran. (Think: should anyone be surprised that Tony Blair will not support military action against Iran when the UK's national carrier operates practically daily flights to Iran's capital?)

Anyway, the point is, when someone begins by saying, Iranians have a positive attitude toward the West..., as Hagel did, hold your breath. The next phrase might be, ...so regime change will be a 'cakewalk'. (read that link and laugh like hell, because you'll cry if you don't!) OR, the next phrase might be, as it fortunately was in the case of Hagel's speech, ...but they will close ranks and support their government if their nation is threatened recklessly.

5) We must find new and imaginative ways to reach out...

Hagel specifically proposed the establishment of a consulate in Iran, not a full blown diplomatic presence in the form of an embassy, but rather a consular office that would facilitate people-to-people contact and "public diplomacy" (quick, somebody call Karen Hughes!!!) in the form of student exchange programs, etc.

During the question portion which followed the talk, I had planned to ask (but was not called upon): Would you support the establishment of a full-blown embassy, which, as CATO institute scholar and my fellow Chronicles contributor Ted Galen Carpenter has argued, would enable the US to spy on Iran more effectively and gather solid intelligence - because if we don't do so, decision makers in Washington will likely get their information on Iran from the brain farts in Richard Perle's next book.

6) The State Department has become adjunct to the Israeli Foreign Minister's office...

Wow. A very bold statement by Hagel bound to further raise the ire of the "Jewish Lobby" (yawn...), but it does express his strong belief in a comprehensive solution to problems in the Middle East. Hagel mentioned this theme several times - comprehensive, he said, in the sense that all tools should be used to achieve American foreign policy objectives (diplomatic, political, economic, and military), but also comprehensive in the James Baker sense of addressing the Arab-Israeli conflict holistically as both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush have proved too lazy and too incompetent to do.

7) ...'take these things off table before we even talk to you', that is international blackmail...

Clearly a Hagel presidency would seek to undo the hubris of the Bush Administration. Hagel spoke enthusiastically about the talks on Iraqi stability that will be attended by all the stakeholders, including Iran, Syria, and the US sitting around the same table. I think he is misreading the dynamics at play there, but more on that in a later post...

On the whole, I very much enjoyed the event. It's no secret to readers of this blog and my other articles that my views coincide strongly with Senator Hagel's, so the talk was basically music to my ears.

There were, however, several causes for concern. First of all, the Senator, while demonstrating an excellent knowledge of specifics, tended to drag on when answering questions. Although, this can be attributed to the academic nature of the event and the audience. Secondly, it doesn't help the Senator's conservative credentials (miles ahead of Giuliani's or McCain's in reality) when Lyndon LaRouche supporters consider Hagel events as ideal recruitment ground (they were there passing out literature).

For me, the time for boyish excitement about how much I agree with Chuck Hagel has passed. That does nothing for the man. He is in a political vice right now. Despite his very mainstream favorable press coverage coming fast and furious and thus increasing his name recognition with likely voters in the General Election, he's first got to win a Republican Primary. In order to ascend sharply amongst likely primary voters he will have to wait for "stay the course" types like McCain/Giuliani and to a lesser extent Romney to melt each other down and the GOP base to look for new solutions - but for early primaries like we have here in NJ, this delay is a liability because collecting signatures for 3 convention delegates and 3 alternates in each of 13 congressional districts (6 * 13 = 78) is no easy task and will require a formidable organization.

Although the plus side is that non-affiliated voters in NJ (like some of the, shall we say, "eccentric" individuals who attended yesterday's talk) have the right to cast a vote in the primary (hence the "registered Republicans" here who are liberals that wanted to cast a vote for McCain in the 2000 Primary).

Giuliani has sucked so much oxygen out of the room in New Jersey, it's hard to describe. Plus, McCain and Romney have good fundraising teams of proven party insiders behind them up here. Hagel is behind the ball. Timing will be everything, especially as it pertains to Republican patience for the Iraq War.

Guy Gregg's State Senate campaign kickoff

Last night I had the pleasure of driving out to Sussex County to attend the campaign kickoff for one of the finest elected officials serving the people of New Jersey: District 24 Assemblyman, soon to be District 24 Senator, and eventually to be (hopefully) New Jersey Governor, Guy Gregg.

Gregg, a Republican who represents District 24 , took over for another admirable elected official, Richard "Dick" Kamin, 13 years ago. Though I don't live in District 24 and the issues facing Republicans in Sussex, Hunterdon, and western Morris Counties diverge from the party-building crisis facing the Passaic County GOP, I have great admiration for Guy Gregg - his principles, leadership style, approach to campaigning, and belief in party building.

Back in 2004, during the Republican National Convention, I ran into Gregg at a cocktail party at the posh flat (sorry: fancy apartment) belonging to Andy Unanue of Goya fame. Incidentally, 2007 District 26 Assembly candidate Larry Casha, contending with Jay Webber and Alex DeCroce, also attended that event - but more on that later. Anyway, taking time away from courting the big money people circulating at such gatherings, Gregg spent a good half an hour with me discussing strategy for my campaign against Bill Pascrell. He also offered to make the drive down to Passaic County anytime I needed him to stump for me, or M.C. an event, etc.

Try to appreciate how much a first-time Republican candidate, whose own party chair endorsed the Democrat opponent (!!!), appreciated the guidance and support of a legislator from a safe and distant district who had absolutely nothing to gain personally by helping out. The point is, Guy Gregg knew I wasn't going to win. But he also knew that for the Republican Party to have long-term viability, veteran legislators had to take the time to invest in the development of younger candidates who stuck out their necks and "took one for the team" - I discussed this in my December opinion piece in the Record. Unlike the "wily curmudgeons" that populate the State Senate, Gregg understands how party building works and gives more than just lip service - he puts his time and talents at the disposal of others who have little to offer him in return.

I further recall seeing Gregg during one of the conservative activist breakfast meetings organized by Alan Ashkinaze. His ability to deliver a concise and compelling message about the need for small government and property tax relief stands apart from many other Republican candidates who give lip service to such matters. And though Gregg is a committed social conservative, he wisely focuses his message on the fiscal matters of primary importance to most New Jersey residents.

Last week, at Jay Webber's annual Reagan Day celebration, I ran into Gregg, knowing that he was seeking a seat in the State Senate, and told him that I was behind him 100%, adding, "You should be the one running the state party and YOU should be the one running for Governor!" It was then that he invited me to last night's kickoff event, at the Adam Todd restaurant on Route 206.

What a crowd. The turnout was outstanding and the energy was high. Serving as M.C. for the evening was Gregg's wife Linda, and joining him at the podium were fellow legislators Rick Merkt and Michael Doherty, as well as conservative hero and longtime Gregg ally Bret Schundler. What a pleasure to see Bret again!

Gregg's remarks were concise and focused. He touched upon the familiar themes that have characterized his legislative career: small business ownership and small government. He got most fired up, however, when discussing how the GOP majority of the 1990s lost its way. He spoke about his disappointment in seeing his Republican colleagues these days vote for tax increases and support Democrat legislation. "We do have to work with the other party, but we DON'T have to accommodate them and we DON'T have to AGREE with them!" He spoke in an optimistic way about his belief that New Jersey's best days lie ahead, and that with good legislators, we could turn the ship around and not only stop the outflow of families and professionals from the Garden State, but actually attract those who have left us to return.

He mentioned that he looked forward "to serving the residents of this district in its entirety for decades to come." When greeting him after his speech, I said with a smile, "I interpret that to mean that you will win State Senate in 2007 and run for Governor in 2009." Well, I'd be on board.

Finally, I should mention that one of Larry Casha's allies, a friend and a well-respected individual, approached me with feedback on my depiction of Casha's speech at the Passaic County screening. I mentioned "cue cards" which was the wrong term - "index cards" would have been more appropriate and accurate to say, as Casha did hold these in his hand so that he could occasionally refer to them during his remarks.

The good, the bad, and the 2007 Passaic County GOP screening

On Tuesday night, the Passaic County Republican Party held its screening for candidates seeking the official party endorsement in the June Primary election. By all accounts, the evening was a disaster and does not bode well for Chairman Scott Rumana's image. When I asked a staunch ally of his to rate the success on a scale of 1 to 10, he joked, "Zero...but on the positive side, nobody died."

First of all, attendance was low. Of the 400+ actual elected and appointed members of the County Committee, only 90 or so turned up (plus about 20 additional people who were not on the County Committee). This did not represent a quorum, and therefore a planned initiative to amend the bylaws in order to shorten the gap between the date for official party endorsement and the petition filing date was not even presented. This complicates matters because it puts Rumana and his team under the gun to recruit a number of candidates for various posts.

Former Little Falls councilwoman Jayme Alfano, who has signed her actual name to comments on this blog criticizing Rumana's leadership, wrote me the follwing:

"I am so sick of hearing people blame the president and the wave for Republicans losing. LF lost because we have no leadership and that is why we are in the mess we are in with the county. Scott needs to STOP pointing blame, take accountability and lead. There wasn't even a quorum there last night. Pathetic."

Ashley Kindergan of the Herald News, who has taken over for Paul Brubaker, has covered the fallout in today's paper:

"Republicans are short on candidates to run in the November elections, now that a freeholder candidate backed out of a race hours before he was supposed to speak in front of Passaic County committee members.

On Tuesday, in a screening meeting of the Republican County Committee, Russell Bleeker, did not appear as scheduled. Instead, officials said, Bleeker left a message on attorney Mark Semeraro's cell phone about an hour and a half before the meeting saying he had to drop out because he was worried about his business interests if he ran...

Rumana and other party officials said no one could have predicted that Bleeker would drop out. Semeraro said Bleeker was 'enthusiastically pursuing' the Republican nod right up until he dropped out."

So now the GOP is left with no Sheriff candidate (by design - more about that below), no State Senate candidate in District 34, no State Senate OR Assembly candidates in District 35, one empty Freeholder spot, and one endorsed candidate (2006 nominee Arthur Soto) rethinking the viability of his run.

This must be rectified immediately, and as I wrote earlier, a stronger effort to communicate with County Committee members over the past few months might have generated enough excitement and interest to spur more quality candidates to present themselves. We have a real crisis, because in the 6 towns of District 35, more than 1/3 of the county, loyal Republicans may go into the ballot box and see:

Sheriff - BLANK
State Senate - BLANK
State Assembly - BLANK
State Assembly - BLANK
Freeholder - Arthur Soto?
Freeholder - ???

Unacceptable. We cannot concede more races than we contest, even in towns like Hawthorne and Totowa.

Now, as for the Sheriff's race - in principle, I am against having empty slots on the ballot. We went through this in 2004, when I (to a far, far lesser extent than GOP Sheriff candidate Mark Michalski) faced pressure not to run against the Democrat incumbents. Among those taking my side: former Assembly leader Paul DiGaetano, who shares my disdain for conceding races without even fielding a candidate. The idea that an incumbent will "stay home" or "go to sleep" is a flawed one. First of all, an incumbent like Speziale who yields power on the local level and wins by very wide margins, has 2 principal opponents, neither of which is represented in the person of his challenger from the other party.

An incumbent's main opponent is his own performance in the last election. Incumbents love to tell people that they increased their share of the vote in each subsequent election, therefore suggesting that they have become more and more beloved by the people they represent. Logically, therefore, an incumbent whose numbers slip looks foolish because he appears to have lost popularity. So incumbents, driven at the most basic level by egoism, work hard to keep their numbers up, even with lame partisan competition.

In Speziale's case, his other main opponent is Bill Pascrell. The Sheriff trounced the Congressman in 2004 when they were both on the ballot (which pleases me from a certain angle, especially since Pascrell thugs stole not only my yard signs - which they tried to blame on Speziale incidentally - but even the Sheriff's yard signs as well). Riding the demagogic, I mean, Democratic wave of 2006, Pascrell managed to increase his share of the vote by a few points relative to 2004 - which puts Speziale under pressure to do the same.

However, Speziale (who rather fancies himself) knows that even his proven electoral clout will not be sufficient to drive more turnout in an off-off-off year than what he saw in the Presidential contest of 2004. And Pascrell knows that too. So raw numbers will not be a fair basis for comparison. However, percentage points would be. If Speziale had an opponent, even a weak one, he would presumably work day and night to best his 75% result of 2004. Hence the wisdom, loathe as I am to use the term, of allowing him to run unopposed, as 100% will suit him just dandy. Proponents of this view couple it with the suspicion that there is little love lost between Speziale and his running mates, Freeholders Terry Duffy and Pat Lepore (if you doubt it, check out this video), and thus the Sheriff sees little value in expending his considerable electoral war chest on their behalf.

Back to the screening - there were, however, a few bright spots to report. First, Assembly leader Alex DeCroce, who represents District 26, strongly endorsed Rumana and publicly addressed the need to investigate why a promising Freeholder candidate would drop out in such a manner.

More prominently though, was Passaic County native and 2nd time contender for office in District 26, my fellow Hopkins man Jay Webber. While his opponent Larry Casha read from cue cards, Jay took command from behind the podium and won over the crowd not only with his eloquence on the issues, but by touting his Passaic County roots: he is from Clifton, and his Mom from Paterson. His parents (who served at length on the County Committee) and grandmother still reside in Passaic County, and as a longtime GOP volunteer and staffer for former Congressman Bill Martini, Jay even handed out "Rumana for Council" cards during the Chairman's first campaign in 1994, when Jay was living in the AMRs.

Finally, plans are on track for a party convention in Passaic County for the Presidential contest, as covered by Ms. Kindergan earlier in the week.

"At its executive committee meeting earlier this month, the Passaic County Regular Republican Organization considered holding a convention in June to allow Republican Party committee members and members of municipal Republican clubs to vote on their favorite Republican presidential candidate. The state primaries will likely occur in early February. The executive committee, which consists of municipal party leaders and other party officers, will likely vote on the idea at its March meeting.

Some local leaders think the effort will draw marginalized or less active Republicans into the fray...

The successful candidate would get an endorsement from the county party. If the county's plan works as it is supposed to, the party will get an influx of fresh faces mobilized to work in local races...

Some even hope the process could expand further, and that a convention-style process could help the county committee to choose freeholder candidates in coming years."

This is absolutely a step in the right direction and is the best move Rumana has yet made. Despite the cynical attitude of his critics, including his predecessor who discounts the importance of the Presidential race even at this early stage, the Chairman should absolutely move ahead with any and all efforts that connect highly-motivated issue-oriented conservative voters scattered around Passaic County with the need to support Republican candidates at the local and county levels. This is one of the critical ways to widen the volunteer pool and fundraising base.