The إجر كرسي lunch

On Thursday, the day after the Kahlil Gibran Spirit of Humanity Awards, the Arab-American Institute's National Policy Council convened to discuss organizational strategy, followed by a luncheon at which we were to hear from various presidential campaigns on both sides of the aisle. Because the candidates themselves would not attend, but rather surrogate speakers, a colleague jokingly referred to this as the ijr kirsi lunch, quoting the Arabic expression إجر كرسي that translates to "leg of a chair", meaning someone who has subjugated himself to another and has no independent authority or power.

The group heard from 6 campaigns - 3 Democrats and 3 Republicans. On the Democrat side, we had the 3 most expected: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards. On the Republican side, we had a bit of a surprise - John McCain and Mitt Romney were represented, but not Rudy Giuliani. Mike Huckabee's was the 3rd GOP campaign to speak to us.

I will cover each of the 6 presentations in the order in which they spoke, and then give overall impressions. (continued...)

1) John Edwards, represented by David Bonior

It was a smart move on the part of Edwards to send former Michigan Congressman David Bonior, who is highly respected by the Arab-American community. Bonior was one of a small House delegation that traveled to Iraq in 2002 in a last-ditch effort to avert war. Recounting that trip, he emphasized the importance of a sustainable resolution to the Israel-Palestine conflict, recalling a visit to a high school in Baghdad where he said that every student knew of, and disapproved of, America's position.

While I certainly agree with the need to resolve Israel's land disputes with her neighbors on the basis of land for peace, as I have written repeatedly, the idea that the creation of a Palestinian state will diffuse the brewing civil war within Iraq is far-fetched. I argue this point in a Chronicles article coming up in the June issue, so stay tuned. This is the problem that presents itself when the likes of James Baker III weigh in on an issue - whether right or wrong, inside the Beltway his ideas become acceptable opposition slogans with little substance.

Bonior did his best to tout Edwards's mea culpa on the Iraq War, and promoted Edwards's pledges to shut down Guantanamo Bay and "say no to torture". He also mentioned Darfur, and efforts to increase sanctions on the Sudanese government.

2) John McCain, represented by Randy Scheunemann

Scheunemann knew he would be facing a less-than-receptive crowd, but AAI Chairman George Salem nonetheless gave him a very warm welcome. He touted McCain's support of Bill Clinton's ridiculous wars in the Balkans, with emphasis on the fact that the US intervened against the Christian Serbs. Paleoconservatives hate that.

He quoted from McCain's recent speech at the Virgina Military Institute:

"The war on terror, the war for the future of the Middle East, and the struggle for the soul of Islam — of which the war in Iraq constitutes a key element — are bound together. Progress in one requires progress in all...We must gain the active support of modernizers across the Muslim world, who want to share in the benefits of the global system and its economic success, and who aspire to the political freedom that is, I truly believe, the natural desire of the human heart."

Another neoconservative lullaby to put Americans to sleep. When it came time for questions, Samah Norquist (pictured at far right along with fellow Arab-American Republicans [rtl] Sherine el-Abd, me, and Hesham Mahmoud) kicked off by mentioning recent comments by Bob Novak, with whom she recently toured the West Bank, which run contrary to McCain's views. I followed up by recognizing Scheunemann's service to the GOP, but noted that as a conservative activist and a registered Republican I had issues with the fact that many influential policy-makers in recent years are not conservatives at all. He picked up on this question and said, "I believe you may be referring to the so-called 'neoconservatives'" and disparaged use of the term. I agreed and said, "exactly, that's why I didn't use the word."

Scheunemann said that McCain welcomes a wide variety of input, has based his foreign policy views on diverse opinions from Brent Scowcroft to Henry Kissinger, and that he has named Bob Kagan (whom he identified as associated with the neoconservatives) and Rich Williamson (a former Reagan-era State Department official). I was pleased that Scheunemann was so engaging, even if I don't think much of McCain's foreign policy leanings and have no reason to believe that the same individuals who have disproportionately influenced foreign policy in the Bush Administration would be pulled back.

He was met with shoutbacks from the audience when he asserted that cluster bombs are not illegal, which was inappropriate - however, I was surprised to see Scheunemann completely disregard the question posed by Virginia-based activist Marwan Burgan in the hallway after his presentation, which was something like, "Will Senator McCain at least agree to ask the Israelis to divulge the coordinates of the cluster bombs used in Southern Lebanon?"

Scheunemann was also wise to have preempted hostile questioning about McCain's Beach Boys karaoke appearance by mentioning that he "joked with his veteran friends" recently.

3) Hillary Clinton, represented by Bill Shaheen

Shaheen is an Arab-American, and a major player in New Hampshire Democrat politics. He was very loyal to John Kerry, but once Kerry bowed out for 2008, Clinton courted him aggressively and won him over.

He has a lot of credibility within the community and is respected for pride in his heritage. Shaheen reiterated time and time again that Clinton assured him that her #1 priority was Middle East peace and that is what convinced him to support her. He also touched upon the gender issue and said that as the father of 3 daughters, he felt extra motivation to help her become the 1st woman President of the USA.

4) Barack Obama, represented by Anthony Lake

Lake is very academic is his presentation, but hard not to like. Obama has done well by choosing some "gray hair" to compensate for the fact that he's completely unqualified to be President of the United States.

I was just waiting for Lake to quote Obama from the 2004 Democratic National Convention:

"If there's an Arab-American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties."

How comforting. Almost as comforting as that guy who ran in 2000 and said:

"Arab-Americans are racially profiled in what's called secret evidence. People are stopped, and we've got to do something about that. My friend, Sen. Spence Abraham is pushing a law to make sure that Arab-Americans are treated with respect."

Thanks to Nouri for linking to me on that one.

5) Mitt Romney, represented by Alan Philp

Philp was a very nice guy, but not an expert on foreign policy so it was hard for him to respond. Hesham Mahmoud asked the hot question on everyone's mind - why did Romney attack Nancy Pelosi for wearing a scarf over her head as she visited the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus? Philp and another Romney staffer seemed to disagree with the context, but philanthropist Assad Jebara stepped in and compared it to wearing a yarmulke in a Jewish synagogue. George Salem even brought up how his wife covered her hair as a sign of respect when entering the Vatican.

After Philp ran through a rather comprehensive package of fiscally-conservative measures, I asked the same question that I had posed to Scheunemann earlier, although in a slightly different form. I said something like:

"First of all, it's good to hear a Republican candidates talk about fiscal conservatism again! As a Republican activist, I find it disturbing when I hear some of my conservative colleagues defend the Iraq War by saying, 'we're doing good things over there, we're building schools...' Building schools? Federal tax dollars shouldn't even be used to build schools here in the United States, let alone in Iraq!

I think part of the reason for that is that political cover for these statements is given by well-placed people who influence decisions and don't really have any conservative credentials. Can you tell us Governor Romney's thoughts on that and perhaps provide for us, as your counterpart from Senator McCain's campaign did, the names of some individuals who Governor Romney plans to involve in his foreign policy efforts, since often times the track records of advisers reveal more about the policy than statements made during a campaign."

Philp couldn't really answer other than to say that Steve [last name] is Romney's chief foreign policy adviser. But I was intrigued by his statement that Romney seeks ideas and solutions not requiring congressional action. I suppose if Democrats keep control of Congress and Romney ascends to the White House, we will have some very active checks-and-balances.

6) Mike Huckabee, represented by Karen Johnson

Johnson was polite and willing to listen, but admittedly didn't know much at all about foreign policy, so it was hard to have a dialogue. She mentioned Huckabee's commitment to education though, so Rebecca Abou-Chedid, AAI's legislative liaison, engaged her on the possibility of fostering more content on the modern Middle East in school curriculae. She was quite receptive to the idea.

Huckabee has a shot at winning the support of Arab-American Republicans because he has been thus far the least hawkish announced GOP candidate, after Ron Paul, having remarked that he supports negotiations with "Iran and Syria" (here we go again).

All in all, it was nice to be engaged by these 6 campaigns and I personally learned a bit more about Romney and Huckabee. Although, the key objective behind all of this was to give Jim Zogby and George Salem the chance to ask, face-to-fact in front of the community, if each candidate would be willing to attend the AAI's National Leadership Conference in late October in Michigan. In 2003, we had the entire Democrat field, including personal appearances by Howard Dean, Joe Lieberman (who was impolitely heckled by some lady who wasn't even Arab-American), and others. Let's see if Giuliani bothers to show this year, since given his absence this time.

Kahlil Gibran "Spirit of Excommunicated Libertarian Conservatism" Awards

I returned late last night after an amazing 2 days in Washington, DC for the annual "Kahlil Gibran Spirit of Humanity Awards", sponsored by the Arab American Institute. For starters, I was quoted, along with my Arab-American Republican colleagues Sherine el-Abd and Hesham Mahmoud as well as Democrat Samer Khalaf, in the Record in a piece by Herb Jackson.

Arab-Americans marked what one North Jerseyan called the "feel-good day of the year" (that was me) and another called their version of the Oscars with a black-tie awards gala in Washington on Wednesday, honoring leaders and groups who promote the common good...Attendees from North Jersey said the dinner highlights the diversity of Arab-Americans, who come from many countries, span the political spectrum and are as likely to be Christian as Muslim.

"It's like a pilgrimage for me," said Sherine El-Abd of Clifton, a member of the Arab American Institute's board of directors who has been attending the dinners since they started in 1999. "It's a time when you get really energized, and emphasizes the pride we have in our heritage." Hesham Mahmoud of Rutherford was most excited about the chance to hear a speech from [Nebraska Senator Chuck] Hagel, a conservative and critic of the war in Iraq.

...Mahmoud and El-Abd are active in Republican politics, and Samer Khalaf of Paramus is co-chairman of the Arab American Democratic Caucus. He said he has seen a change in political attitudes toward Arab-Americans in the past eight years.

George Ajjan of Clifton, a Republican who ran unsuccessfully for Congress in 2004 against Democratic Rep. Bill Pascrell of Paterson, agreed. "Issues that are important to Arab-Americans are important to all Americans," Ajjan said. "Just because Arab-Americans have emotional feelings about the Middle East, it does not mean we're not as concerned about tax cuts, health care, civil rights and other things."

That quote encapsulates one of the best lessons I've learned from AAI President and co-founder Jim Zogby who, along with AAI Chairman George Salem and many others, is largely responsible for putting Arab-Americans on the map politically. Four years ago, when a number of the Presidential candidates came to Michigan for the AAI's Leadership Conference, Jim corrected one of the Democrat candidates' campaigns, who told him "first we're going to talk about our issues, and then we're going to talk about your issues (meaning Patriot Act, Middle East Peace Process, etc)." Jim bluntly responded, "Your issues are our issues, and our issues are your issues." (continued...)

Without a doubt, the remarks made by Hagel, whose status as a favorite in the Arab-American community cuts across partisan lines, were the highlight. He began by joking that he "always savor(s) the opportunity to be with George Salem's rich and influential friends. For those of you who are not rich and influential, I am sorry you are here."

He described Arab-American input into the political process as "part of the arc of wise counsel that American leaders listen to" and then made one of his very few characteristic references to the Iraq War during the evening by saying, "it will matter little how many US marines or paratroopers we put in any country." Endorsing an expansion of regional dialog to include "Iran and Syria" (yawn), he said, "I've never found a situation in which things get better if you don't deal with them."

Hagel scored a very big hit with the audience by recounting his run-ins with the so-called "Israeli lobby" (that term has about as much finesse as the word "neoconservative"), in particular with one journalist who suggested that his support for Israel was not strong enough. Hagel asked rhetorically, "How do you measure my support?" He then mentioned signing lobbying letters, casting votes, or things he said publicly. The response was that the concerned parties "Can't count on [Hagel] as an 'automatic'". He asserted:

"I am a supporter of Israel, but first I am an American Senator. No relationship should ever be founded on holding hostage other relationships. Why can't I have a relationship with Israel not at the expense of my friends in the Arab world or the Muslim world. Why must it be a choice? It is not a choice."

The rest of Hagel's talk, which was delivered in a very personal way and not from notes, was more anecdotal and philosophical in nature:

"The history of man is clear on one point – the human condition has always driven events – bondage, poverty, despair. When man is without dignity, little else matters...God didn't put us on this Earth to hurt each other, that was our choice...It is man made in its challenge, and it will be man-made in its answer...We are making a better world...every human being on the face of the Earth should have the opportunity to do more than just exist."

He then surprised everyone with a personal anecdote that has to rank as one of the greatest moments in the history of the Gibran Awards. After joking that his mother only allowed "one lawyer per family, one politician per family", he talked about how his younger brother Jim was killed in car accident 6 months after he and his brother Tom had returned from Vietnam. On his brother Jim's tombstone is a quote from Gibran himself, from A Tear and a Smile. Hagel then suggested that it was a bit bizarre that they picked an Arab for their brother's tombstone. Since the family was Catholic, it would be more expected to pick something from St. Francis or a Pope.

Perhaps Hagel did not recognize the fact that Gibran was a Catholic himself [insert standard argument here about how not all Muslims are Arab, not all Arabs are Muslim], but this was corrected by one of the evening's other award recipients, Theodore Cardinal McCarrick, who pointed it out.

However, technically speaking Hagel was correct, because as very few people know, Khalil Gibran was excommunicated from the Catholic Church after the publication of Spirits Rebellious. The Maronite authorities later rescinded his excommunication and he was given an elaborate funeral.

Why would such a great man be excommunicated from the Church? Well, the quote selected by another star of the Arab-American community, Washington Post Middle East correspondent Anthony Shadid, illustrates Gibran's controversial views rather well.

"I love you when you bow in your mosque, kneel in your temple, pray in your church. For you and I are sons of one religion, and it is the spirit."

Not exactly Catholic dogma. Gibran was a classic Syrian nationalist, and a secular hero in the mold of Antoun Saadeh, founder of the Syrian Social Nationalist Party (SSNP) or Abraham Mitrie Rihbany, who wrote The Syrian Christ and was chosen by various Syrian-American organizations to represent them at the Paris Peace Conference following WW I. How interesting that 3 of the most prominent Syrian nationalists were all "Lebanese"...

Gibran wrote extensively on his political ideas, as the following quote may sound familiar:

"Are you a politician asking what your country can do for you or a zealous one asking what you can do for your country?"

He was a conservative...

"I believe that even as your fathers came to this land to produce riches, you were born here to produce riches by intelligence, by labor...to be a good citizen is to produce wealth by labor and only by labor, and to spend less than you have produced that your children may not be dependent on the state for support when you are no more,"

a libertarian...

"And what is it to be a good citizen? It is to acknowledge the other person's rights before asserting your own, but always to be conscious of your own. It is to be free in thought and deed, but it is to know that your freedom is subject to the other person's freedom,"

and, as I mentioned last year as I quoted Gibran's piece To Young Americans of Syrian Origin, an inspiration to Arab-Americans:

"...stand before the towers of New York, Washington, Chicago and San Francisco saying in your heart, 'I am the descendant of a people that built Damascus, and Biblus, and Tyre and Sidon, and Antioch, and now I am here to build with you, and with a will.'

It is to be proud of being an American, but it is also to be proud that your fathers and mothers came from a land upon which God laid His gracious hand and raised His messengers.

As for the event itself, there are several other individuals who graced the stage that I should mention. First is New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson. He spoke first and basically pandered, mentioning bluntly that he would close down Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib prisons. He also said he would "look into" problems with the Patriot Act. Look into? Excuse me, but are Sections 213, 215, 216, and 505 buried under 50 feet of solid rock? Richardson spoke a bit of Spanish for good measure and then apologized for his last name.

Although, in his defense, I have to say I respect Richardson's diplomatic credentials and familiarity with international affairs, even if I don't necessarily agree with his actions or positions. He's a Democrat President I could probably live with.

Then came California Senator Dianne Feinstein, who I must admit, was quite good, at least as far as liberal windbags go. She was way better than Princess Pelosi was in 2004, for example. Feinstein won over the audience by speaking forcefully against cluster bombs:

"I'm not here to talk to you about cluster bombs, we will lose that fight, but I will be back next year, and the year after that, and the year after that…we will ban cluster munitions!!!"

Feinstein prasied Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for making repeated trips to the region, and for expressing her willingness to meet with Iranian diplomats at the ministerial level. She distanced herself about 8 picometers from the status quo in Washington by stating that she supports the diplomatic engagement of "Iran and Syria" (surprise, surprise), saying, "I really believe in this kind of diplomacy – sitting down at the table with someone with whom you disagree."

Feinstein endorsed the Arab Peace Initiative, and spoke about the briefing given to the Senate by General Petraeus. Feinstein said it was the largest attendance of any confidential briefing she's ever seen, and that virtually every Senator was there.

Finally, she said that she hopes the US "learns from preemptive war – it's the wrong thing to do." Hopefully Ms. Feinstein herself will learn that voting to authorize preemptive war, as she did back in 2002, and then pandering with criticism when it's politically safe to do so years later after thousands have died, is also the wrong thing to do.

AAI Chairman George Salem spoke about his work with the Aspen Institute, and mentioned that the organization was involved with the granting of $300 million of microloans in the West Bank and Gaza. He then introduced Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs Dina Habib Powell, who led a business delegation to Lebanon, bringing executives from Cisco (CEO John Chambers) and Intel (which has extensive operations in Israel), as well as Occidental Petroleum CEO Ray Irani and Yousif Ghafari, a successful businessman from Michigan who now serves the United States as a diplomat to the UN (and whose family supported my campaign in 2004). Powell boasted that she met with Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora and "the entire cabinet" (and by "the entire cabinet" she means, the members of the cabinet that we like, not the Hezbollah ministers who were democratically chosen.)

A contrasting view of Lebanon was given by Anthony Shadid, as he spoke about his coverage of the Summer War of 2006, particularly the attacks on Qana, which he described as "supported by the US and tacitly accepted and encouraged by some in Lebanon itself." Shadid is terrifically humble, he referred to his role as journalist by citing the proverb: A donkey that carries Jesus on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem still comes back a donkey.

Shadid mentioned 2 bad predictions he made: one was just before 911, when he told a colleague that the bin Laden threat was overrated, and another earlier last summer when he told his ex-wife that Beirut was the safest it had been in 30 years. The Pulitzer Prize winning journalist then launched a discussion of the destruction he'd witnessed in the region, saying, "I've covered the repercussions of those mis-predictions...we've lost sight of the humanity of the Middle East."

With that, I strongly agree. But despite the turmoil overseas, the Kahlil Gibran Spirit of Humanity Awards remains, for proud and fortunate Arab-Americans, "the feel-good day of the year."

ps
Dina Habib Powell wants everyone to know that she used to bring leftover mloukhia to school for lunch and that she is a good friend of Hillary Clinton's aide Huma Abedin.

pps
I know, خليل should be spelled Khalil, but Gibran himself spelled it Kahlil.

Debunking Guy Talarico

Apparently feeling the heat for his controversial decision to dump 2 incumbent office holders from "the line" (which doesn't seem to exist anymore, but that's another story), Bergen County Chairman Guy Talarico sent a letter to county Republicans this week explaining the rationale behind his course of action. I provide excerpts below along with my comments indented:

"Please allow me to take a moment and communicate to you my position on recent controversies affecting our organization. For the second year in a row there is an attempt to splinter our Republican party to the benefit of the Democrats."

Well, I can't disagree with that!

"...Prior to the last state-wide redistricting, Bergen County had four Republican State Senators. We currently have two! If Bergen County surrenders this Senate seat to Essex County, the largest county in the state would be reduced to one Senator. Furthermore this situation could jeopardize Senator Gerry Cardinale. Democratic Chair Joe Ferriero has promised to spend millions of dollars to defeat State Senator Cardinale."

This entire line of argument is flawed. (continued...)Talarico suggests that a victory by Kevin O'Toole, who lives in Cedar Grove, would serve as a catalyst for Bergen Republicans to lose all their clout in the County. True, the scenario he depicts is a possible one. But what Talarico fails to mention is that with a strong effort in Districts 36 and 38, where he has lifted barely a finger to recruit and support candidates against incumbents Joseph Coniglio, Paul Sarlo, Bob Gordon, and Joan Voss, who have been served subpoenas and could be in legal trouble, could increase the current 2 State Senators to 3, and as a bonus give the NJGOP clout in Essex County politics.

"The morning after Senator McNamara's decision not to run, Kevin O'Toole who is the Chairman of Essex County Republican Organization and Scott Rumano (note: his name is spelled Rumana), who is the Chairman of the Passaic County Republican Organization published a press release announcing their candidacy for office. They autonomously staked a claim to these seats...Many people have said that a conversation with the Bergen County Chairman prior to their announcement about candidates in Bergen would have been the appropriate course of action. Needless to say, I was never approached by the other Chairman and have once again been confronted with difficult decisions not of my own making."

Too often our County Chairs think they are more important than the democratic process and should have veto power over every political aspiration. Can Talarico honestly claim that he didn't expect that Kevin O'Toole would announce his candidacy for the D40 Senate seat, and that Rumana would seek to fill his Assembly spot? This has been well-planned for years, and was shelved as a turn-key solution to be implemented immediately following McNamara's retirement.

Besides, since when is announcing candidacy for a primary "autonomously staking a claim"? Kevin O'Toole is not some bozo who just rolled into town. He's a respected legislator who has represented the district for years and has earned the right to launch a confident candidacy for a vacated State Senate seat. Dozens of elected officials from Bergen County seem to agree and have given him and his team strong endrosements.

"However the choice for me is clear, whether you support me or not. I am attempting to protect the Bergen County Organization's line, as well as the interest of all Republicans in Bergen County. We cannot have the Essex County Chairman representing us in Trenton. We will be better served by Todd Caliguire, a Ridgewood native, who will have Bergen County's interest at heart far better than would Essex County's Kevin O'Toole."

Fair enough. But as I argued earlier, if Talarico's goal was 'Bergen First', why ditch David Russo? The Chairman has the right according to the by-laws to give "the line" to whichever 3 candidates he chooses. How THEY wish to affiliate is their own business and represents their own interests. If Talarico is so concerned about Bergen County's interests, he should have give the 3rd slot to Russo, not Joseph Schweighardt.

"How can we support what O'Toole and his cronies are doing to the party right now such as putting forth opposition slates for county tickets and numerous municipal seats forcing Republican organizations to spend time and money they can little afford on internal battles?"

I'll give Talarico one thing: it takes guts to put something this ridiculous in writing. It is Talarico who put forth opposition municipal slates (including Democrats in Oakland) because O'Toole was so well-respected in D40 that the chosen municipal candidates in Franklin Lakes, Oakland, and Midland Park chose to bracket with his team on the "Bergen County Conservative Regular Republicans" line, not Talarico's.

"Even the County Clerk has joined their forces. Our freeholder candidates, chosen by you, the County Committee, were outraged to learn on Friday, April 20th, that Kathe Donovan rejected their petition for a slate to run with the municipal and state candidates who requested to be bracketed with the BCRO under our slogan 'Republicans for Responsible Government'. We are preparing a law suit now to fight her arbitrary and capricious decision and Bob Yudin said it best when he said that 'Kathe is favoring the O'Toole slate because Caliguire defeated her last year in the primary for County executive. The form we filed is a Request For Position On Ballot. I have a copy of what we filed last year and it is the same form.' Once again, Kathe has chosen to attempt to undermine the interest of the BCRO."

I do not know the legal ramifications of Donovan's decision, but I do hope that the candidates chosen by the County Committee in the convention are in fact permitted to bracket together and form a line. O'Toole recruited Freeholder candidates not to defeat those chosen by the Bergen County Committee (Paul Duggan, Charlie Kahwaty, and Bob Yudin) but merely to strengthen his ballot position. The convention results should be respected and I hope Donovan has the integrity to recognize that.

I would further hope that the O'Toole team does not obstruct this from happening - they have done their homework and will still win the primary fair and square, earning the right to run on the November ballot with Duggan, Kahwaty and Yudin (although don't expect them to shed a tear for him if he doesn't make it, because Yudin did not endorse them) against the Democrats.

"The attacks seem to be coming from many directions but they are really just coming from Essex County with the ultimate winners the Democrats. Trust me, I recently learned a lesson about people with a contrary agenda, the hard way. I brought in Joe Caruso, a Passaic County resident, and Chairman of the Red Faction to help us with the Finance Committee. Every time we worked together on an activity it was only about the Red Faction, not the BCRO. When it came time for him to pick between the interests of Bergen County or other Counties and his Red Faction he did not choose Bergen, even condemning me for supporting Bergen. He endorsed the Chairman of Passaic County and the Chairman of Essex County."

While pandering to the home crowd is one of the oldest and most effective tricks in the book, the fact is that these are neighboring counties and most people barely know the difference. It's not as if Bergen, Passaic, and Essex Counties have such divergent lifestyles, demographics, and interests that they need to assert their independence from each other. Quite the contrary. The fact that state and federal legislative districts cover parts of multiple counties means that there should be more coordination, not less.

As for Caruso, he is an autocratic County Chairman's worst nightmare - a guy who acts autonomously, gets results, and doesn't care whose ego he bruises or whose toes he steps on. We need more in-your-face activists and fundraisers like him.

"Joe Ferriero and the Bergen Democrats have proclaimed their intent to control all the State Senate seats in Bergen County. Kevin O'Toole and his cronies are helping him achieve that goal. In this light our decision moving forward must be made with the preservation of the Republican Party in Bergen County as our paramount concern."

Very poor. Again, O'Toole is no Johnny-come-lately. Does Talarico really think that he will successfully convince Bergen County Republicans that a longtime GOP Assemblyman is in bed with Joe Ferriero?

further comments:

One has to wonder how much Todd Caliguire, John Ginty, and Joseph Schweighardt actually approve of what Talarico is doing. They have been doing very little as of yet to advance their agenda and recruit supporters to their candidacy, which is puzzling considering that O'Toole is working his tail off! Other than the new finance committee that Talarico has launched, I cannot see any substantial grassroots support for this futile decision on the part of Talarico to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars that would otherwise have gone to Districts 36 and 38 (to win the senatorial courtesy that Talarico so covets) plus key municipal races. What a shame.

Sleep in the car, or sleep in the house?

At tonight's meeting of the Passaic County Board of Chosen Freeholders, the hot agenda item was the proposed sale of the Passaic County Golf Course. Herald News reporter Ashley Kindergan gave a good breakdown of the relevant numbers, and a recent Herald News editorial blasted the idea:

"Passaic County has a $33 million budget gap. The county's Board of Freeholders proposes selling the county's only public golf course in Wayne to the Passaic County Improvement Authority in order to help close that gap.

The deal sounds tempting, and might even be profitable. But right now there are just too many questions unanswered to give this project the green light."

See also the commentary of Matt Caruso on this.

A number of citizens, mostly Republican activists from Wayne organized by Attorney Mark Semeraro, turned up to speak their minds and point out the fiscal irresponsibility of the proposed transaction. They were less than welcome, judging by Freeholder Director Elease Evans' selective enforcement of the 3 minute time limit for public comments.

Several people spoke and spoke well. Wayne Mayor, soon-to-be-Assemblyman, and Passaic County GOP Chair Scott Rumana politely took the Board to task in saying, "You can't do this. You may find a loophole that will allow you to do it, but it's unethical." It was a pleasure to see the Party Chairman leading the charge and stimulating some activism on a key issue.

The best remarks were those of Wayne Councilman Joe Scuralli. He gave the Board an earful and a lot of technical mastery, criticizing their fiscal short-sightedness by stating, "Liquidation is a tactic that bankruptcy lawyers use...this is a classic ponzi scheme." Evans immediately cut him off after that. (continued...)

Semeraro himself read a strongly-worded letter from Assembly Minority leader Alex DeCroce (who faces a primary challenge from Jay Webber and Larry Casha) that referenced a lawsuit he and Joe Kyrillos filed against former Governor Jim McGreevey several years back, that makes bonding to cover current expenses illegal.

Among the other speakers were Wayne Councilman Joe DiDonato, Freeholder candidate Joe Stinziano (aka "Stinz"), Wayne Republican club president Ray Romitelli, and former Wayne Councilman Bill Van Gieson.

The reaction of the Democrats on the Freeholder Board, as well as their unelected lackeys, was predictable and pathetic. Their first line of defense was to once again consult the paleolithic fossil record and bring up the debt associated with the PCUA and Governor Whitman's pension fund bonding. Then, County Counsel William Pascrell, III, star of My 3 Sons and one of the great legal minds of our time, took a swipe at Rumana and DeCroce, accusing them of "throwing barbs". He described as "irresponsible and reprehensible" the mere suggestion of anything illegal. Billy3 warmed our hearts by saying that his daughter knows that illegal behavior leads to incarceration. He did not specify, however, whether the youngster believes that 2 wrongs make a right, which seems to be the example set by his sugar daddies on the all-Democrat Freeholder Board who buttress all of their fiscal ineptitude by citing shortcomings of long-gone GOP officials.

Elease Evans was hot under the collar as usual and quite annoyed at the nerve of anyone to dissent. She made it clear that "we are not hurting the taxpayers. The taxpayers will not pay a dime for this." The title of this post relates her characteristically snotty rebuttal to Romitelli's rhetorical question, "would you sell your car to make this month's mortgage payment?" But the best was Freeholder Pat Lepore, who chided the speakers for "political grandstanding" during "campaign season". Hello, it's April, not October. He blamed Rumana for approving $100M of debt on his watch when he was a Freeholder back in the 1990s. Thus, the budget shortfalls are due to "legacy debt" and "fiscal difficulties due to rules coming out of Trenton." For Rumana and the Republicans to criticize, according to Lepore, is "the pot calling the kettle black."

Both Billy3 and Lepore questioned the validity of the criticisms because no alternative cost savings were suggested. Here's one: let's start by having each Freeholer list, by name, 10 county employees that should be laid off.

Chapeau to Freeholders Jim Gallagher and Terry Duffy for voting no on this lunacy.

Interviewed by Used Car News

A few weeks ago, in Senegal, I got a call from a Detroit-based business editor named Jim Stickford, who writes for Used Car News, an automotive trade journal that covers behind the scenes trends in the industry. He had seen the previous Herald News article and wanted to do a follow-up story. Here is the outcome.
----------------
Dealer Finds New Market in Africa
By Jim Stickford

New Jersey-born George Ajjan has found a market for American-made used cars in Africa. The 30-year-old former Republican congressional candidate originally planned on being an exporter when he first visited Senegal. He soon learned the local population was in love with American SUVs.

Ajjan, speaking from Senegal during a recent visit, said the Senegalese fascination came from seeing tricked out sport utilities on MTV. The vehicles also enjoy a good reputation for quality and durability. Ajjan changed his business plan and became an importer of used American vehicles to Africa. (continued...)

He can buy a 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee in New Jersey for $10,000. Shipping and insurance add another $1,500 before the SUV reaches Dakar, Senegal's capital and main port city. Once it reaches the country, the cost can soar. Senegal assesses a 59 percent tariff on the value of an imported vehicle. The tariff is meant to prevent the country from being a dumping ground of older, more beat-up cars. It is based on a vehicle's highest value as listed by Kelley Blue Book.

That can be a problem when the government values Ajjan's $10,000 Cherokee at $13,000. That's why Ajjan recently had a trade delegation from Senegal visit Borough Jeep-Chrysler in Wayne, N.J. He wanted to explain how cars are valued and what the difference is between Kelley Blue Book's highest retail value and a vehicle's wholesale value. Joseph Franchina, a sales leader at Borough Chrysler-Jeep, hosted the Senegalese visitors. "We talked about how placing the tariff based on the retail value makes a vehicle too pricey," Franchina said. "We explained the difference between the retail price, the private party price and the wholesale price of a car."

Franchina said the event was part of an effort to create a bridge so that they could do more business in Senegal. He promoted the idea of basing a vehicle's tariff on Kelley Blue Book's listed private party value, which more closely reflects the wholesale value. Once the customs officials add the tariff, then an importer can sell in Senegal, after paying licensing fees and taxes.Since Senegalese licensing fees are based on engine size, this can add another $400 to an SUV's cost.

Ajjan finds buyers first and then finds SUVs to fit their orders. He takes an advance payment of up to 20 percent before the vehicle ships. The rest is paid on arrival. This export method benefits Ajjan because it avoids customs if the vehicle is sold to the buyer while in port. Then it is the buyer who pays to get the car out of customs. The buyer benefits because he gets some control in picking a car. A Senegal native is probably better at navigating the system anyway, Ajjan said.

There are challenges despite the SUVs' popularity. For one, diesel is the preferred fuel over there. Also, consumers are scared off by the higher costs of filling up a V-8 engine and are concerned about the availability of parts. While Ajjan eases their concerns about fuel costs, he has to admit parts for American vehicles can be hard to come by. Ajjan said he's been pretty good at providing the basics, like air and oil filters. But if the SUV's paneling is damaged, those parts are rare and expensive. "I try to mitigate these factors by emphasizing the fact that these are vehicles built less than five years ago," Ajjan said. "Senegal's big industries are fishing and mining and their road system is rough, so tough SUVs are needed." Franchina said the strong influence of the Chinese creates challenges as well.

The potential market is strong because Senegal is a stable country, Ajjan said. The recent presidential election went off without any problems.

Aspiring to a "cagey oligarchy"

The GOP Primary contest in NJ's 40th District, the germination of which I discussed in a Bergen Record op-ed last month, has morphed into a full-blown intra-party battle that stakes the political future not only of the candidates, but several key insiders as well.

Recap: the resignation of longtime D40 Senator Hank McNamara prompted incumbent Assemblyman Kevin O'Toole to launch his candidacy for McNamara's vacated slot, accompanied by Assemblyman David Russo and Wayne Mayor Scott Rumana. Shortly thereafter, 0-for-his-last-2 former Bergen Freeholder Todd Caliguire announced his opposition to O'Toole, joined by 0-for-his-last-3 conservative activist John Ginty and incumbent Wayne Councilman Joseph Schweighardt.

The O'Toole team emerged, not surprisingly given the fact that 2 of the 3 are presently incumbents in D40 and the 3rd is the Mayor of a town which comprises nearly 1/3 of the GOP Primary voters, as the early favorite. Accordingly, since O'Toole doubles as Essex County GOP Chairman (Verona and Cedar Grove are in D40) and Rumana doubles as Passaic County GOP Chairman, the O'Toole team won "the line" in the "cagey oligarchies" that award it in those 2 counties.

Things got interesting, however, when it came to the traditionally more democratic process of awarding "the line" in Bergen County. (continued...)On the night of the Bergen GOP convention, which took place on March 29, the County Committee voted to endorse countywide candidates: Harry Shortway for Sheriff with 199 votes, Paul Duggan for Freeholder with 206 votes, Charlie Kahwaty (to whom I am admittedly partial given overlapping familial trajectories: Aleppo - Central Falls - Franklin Lakes) for Freeholder with 190 votes, followed by 0-for-his-last-2 Bob Yudin for the 3rd Freeholder slot with 178. Bergen County Chairman Guy Talarico's favored candidate, Lloyd Winans, trailed way behind with only 58 votes.

No conventions were held for the Assembly districts, even in D40 where 2 full slates were competing based upon the opening of the all-important Senate seat (which carries with it the ability to block in-county appointments and therefore influence others). Apparently, I was incorrect when I wrote in the Record that the Bergen GOP would sponsor a "proper grassroots convention" for D40. In fact, the track record shows that the Assembly/Senate Districts have not been historically included in the convention process.

To be clear: this is unacceptable. Regardless of past precedent, McNamara's retirement made this Primary completely different from any in recent memory, and since the convention mechanism was already in place for the countywide candidates, it should without question have been adapted to D40. Given the high stakes for Bergen County (which wants to keep a 2nd Bergen-based Senator in addition to Gerald Cardinale from District 39), the County Committee should have had the all the more opportunity to express its will.

But that was not to be. Talarico simply awarded "the line" to the Caliguire slate, in a move that made the "cagey oligarchies" of the other 2 counties appear models of transparency. In making this autocratic move, Talarico cited the ever-invoked bylaws (side note: my admiration to Passaic County Republican legal adviser Tom Segreto for posting the PCRRO bylaws online -a first), which he asserted gave him as Chairman the sole authority to designate the official GOP organization endorsements for the Primary. According to his logic, he backed the Caliguire team because Todd Caliguire is from Ridgewood and therefore his victory would ensure continued senatorial courtesy for Bergen Republicans.

Yet, in doing so, he jettisoned incumbent Assemblyman David Russo, who also lives in Ridgewood, as does John Ginty. If Talarico's goal was "Bergen First", then he could have made a statement by offering "the line" to the 3 Ridgewood contenders. His reluctance to do so his illustrated the flaws in his logic and consequently Talarico's actions have come under intense scrutiny. Some former political allies have attacked him with gusto, including former BCRO Finance Chairman Joseph Caruso, who resigned in protest of Talarico's maneuvers:

"Your decision to instigate and encourage an unnecessary and disastrous Primary Election in District 40 demonstrates to me that you have a far different agenda than the one I originally understood. There is no way a Primary in District 40 makes strategic sense for the GOP.

It is difficult to understand how we can allow two hard-working and valuable incumbents – who have generously supported the Bergen GOP financially -- to be challenged by candidates who have demonstrated repeated failure at the polls. The Primary battle that you sanctioned in District 40 has succeeded only in further dividing the party and diverting time, money and attention from real opportunities to mount challenges in other districts and towns...

I do not wish to waste my time and effort bolstering personal agendas and feeding vendettas. Nor do I wish to watch the money I have helped raise for the BCRO -- which has amounted to a considerable sum -- be squandered beating up on fellow Republicans...I do not wish to be party to efforts that only make the Democrats' job easier in November."

Then this week, a coalition called "Anybody But Guy", led by Fair Lawn Councilman Ed "Steady Eddie" Trawinski and NJ Christian Coalition head Bill Thomson, began circulating a petition to try to force Talarico's ouster.

Personally, I find Talarico's decision illogical and unbefitting what used to be one of the finest GOP organizations IN THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES. If he has, as Caruso suggests, been "feeding vendettas" against O'Toole and his running mates, so be it. What he should have done was announced a convention for all Bergen GOP County Committee members in the towns of D40 (Mahwah, Franklin Lakes, Oakland, Wyckoff, Midland Park, Ridgewood) to vote for 3 out of the 6 candidates who presented their credentials to the Chairman. That's called democracy. If he as the Chairman wanted to influence the process, he would have been entirely within his rights to have sent a letter to all of those County Committee members strongly expressing his reservations about O'Toole, etc. and endorsing Caliguire's team.

But Talarico didn't do that, probably because he knows that the Caliguire team would have had a snowball's chance in hell to have won the line. I'm not saying that just to throw flowers on O'Toole and his running mates, but simply because O'Toole in particular has worked his tail off to win this Senate seat with a strong mandate. Have a look at the list of endorsements that he and his team compiled, and that is just a partial one. Wow. Within the district itself, just about everybody except the town of Wyckoff endorsed the O'Toole team. That's an impressive ground game.

Watching O'Toole in action of late reminded me of something a relative of mine had told me 3 years ago when I told him I had sought O'Toole's support for my congressional campaign. He said, "Well, I haven't seen O'Toole in a political context, but as an attorney, he's a scorched earth litigator." In other words, look out Guy Talarico, Kevin O'Toole wants the Senate seat and will take no prisoners. Others seem to realize this and have deferred to him - consider that the Passaic County Executive Committee voted UNANIMOUSLY to award "the line" to O'Toole for State Senate, even while former Freeholder candidate Victor Rabbat, who lives in Wayne, presented himself as a 3rd candidate, and while the committee had dissenting votes for the 2 Assembly seats, prompted by North Haledon Mayor Randy George.

In Bergen County, the O'Toole team seems to have accepted Talarico's authority with respect to the bylaws and not opted to bring the BCRO to court to demand a convention. Instead, they have chosen to politically annihilate him. While Freeholder candidates Duggan and Kahwaty endorsed O'Toole's team, even seeking the ability to split their bracketing by district (illegal since it's a countywide petition), O'Toole went and filed competing Freeholder candidates, not to defeat Duggan and Kahwaty (not sure if they care much for Yudin since he didn't endorse them) but rather to strengthen their ballot position. But that's not all. The most impressive flexing of political muscle was translating the endorsements in Franklin Lakes, Oakland, and Midland Park to convince the municipal candidates in those 3 towns to file on the "Bergen County Conservative Regular Republicans" line (O'Toole's team). This has effectively nullified "the line" that Talarico gave to Caliguire's team.

In Passaic County, none of the 4 towns included in District 40 saw competing municipal slates filed, although 2 opposing Freeholder candidates have presented themselves and aligned with the Caliguire team (Claire Wollock from Wanaque and Jeffrey Miller from Wayne), largely suspected to be the proxies of delusional ex-Chairman Peter Murphy. Under that same category, file Rabbat, a close friend of former Chairman Mike Mecca. I suppose the logic is that Rabbat, being a Wayne resident, can focus his attention on Passaic County exclusively and make the case for senatorial courtesy (which currently doesn't exist since the Passaic County GOP has no elected resident in Trenton at all). If Rabbat peels off enough votes, he would split the vote with O'Toole and thus propel Caliguire to victory. This can only be described as an electoral Hail Mary pass.

One has to wonder whether principled, thoughtful conservatives like Caliguire, Ginty, and Schweighardt feel entirely comfortably pinning their hopes for electoral success on the half-baked strategies of Peter Murphy, when he barely qualified 2 Freeholder candidates (I am told most of the signatures were from Totowa) and couldn't even manage to recruit competing municipal slates. Even if Scott Rumana is as rotten as his detractors say, shouldn't there be a handful of people in Wayne who'd stand up to fight him? Ginty faces a particular irony, since the very people with whom he has aligned himself in 2007 were attempting to discredit him back in 2005 when he also ran for the same Assembly seat, only then they attacked Ginty on O'Toole's behalf! You gotta love politics.

Further complicating their lack of ground game is the fact that Rick Shaftan, the Garden State's go-to guy for insulting GOP voter intelligence with ethnically offensive ragsheets, is reportedly supporting the O'Toole team (while we are on the subject, so is Alcalde Lonegan - they were both seen at a recent monster O'Toole fundraiser that probably netted 6 figures). I suppose someone else will have to be hired to compute the least common denominator for this race.

Frankly, Talarico's logic in pushing this entire primary escapes me, and I am inclined to concur with Caruso's sentiments. Though he has been polarizing as a Chairman of the BCRO, I always liked Talarico since I first met him during my campaign in 2004. At a time when my GOP County Chairman was actively working for my Democrat opponent, I looked over to Bergen and saw a Chairman that, at least, stood up for local Republicans. I recall speaking with Talarico after the 2004 annual Arab-American Institute's Candidates Night, when he bore the distinction of being George W. Bush's bearer of glad tidings to the community. Rather than focus on safe socially conservative positions that would have at least tempered the audience's hostility to Bush's Middle East policies, Talarico instead read through the standard talking points and got heckled. It was like a bad episode of "Shoot the Messenger". He shouted back, "I would expect you would show some respect as I'm reading a statement from the President of the United States!!!" He was right. In other cases I came to appreciate his disdain for "sanctimonious liberals," as he called them.

But how can Talarico, in good conscience, force a primary in a safe GOP district, to spite incumbents that have been quite generous to local Bergen candidates, when other arguably winnable contests have been abdicated? The waste of resources is beyond comprehension. O'Toole plays to win. He and his team are raising money like mad, and they are going to spend it. We're talking well into the 6 figures. Imagine that money that could have been diverted to municipal races in towns like Little Falls, where the Democrats have been encroaching. Not to mention District 36, which only 2 years ago was held by a Republican. Talarico could manage to find only one candidate for the Assembly, Carmen Pio Costa (whose dad just dropped out of the GOP primary against Jay Webber, Alex DeCroce, and Larry Casha in District 24), in an area where the Democrats could be quite vulnerable.

Speaking of District 36, the other person who really surprised me in this situation is Paul DiGaetano. In 2005, DiGaetano actually held this seat, which he gave up to run for Governor in the GOP Primary. Only 2 years later, we cannot even find a candidate to win, let along just to "take one for the team". I find this particularly disappointing because I always respected DiGaetano as someone who would do the right thing for the Republican Party. When some in the Passaic County GOP wanted to muzzle Sheriff's candidate Mark Michalski and I 3 years ago, and allow the Democrat incumbents to run unopposed, DiGaetano spoke out against that and expressed his belief that the GOP was not well served by empty slots on the ballot. Thus, I find the abdication of D36, of all places, troubling - particularly since it has been suggested that DiGaetano is working actively behind the scenes to help the Caliguire slate (and it's no secret that he is close to Peter Murphy and had a major falling out with Kevin O'Toole in 2005).

DiGaetano has no shortage of smarts and skills - it's no wonder that even Bret Schundler said in one of the 2005 gubernatorial primary debates that if elected he would choose Paul DiGaetano as his Lieutenant Governor - but if indeed DiGaetano has interest in being NJGOP State Chairman, failing to find a successor for his own Assembly seat is not a great closer.

I wrote earlier about the possibility of DiGaetano moving to District 40 to get back at O'Toole and get himself into a safe Senate seat. That was not to be, and instead he seems to be backing Caliguire's ambitions. It's unclear to me how much influence he has on Talarico and how much DiGaetano's maneuvering lead to the awarding of "the line" to the Caliguire slate. My gut says, their marriage is one of convenience, as it has also been rumored that DiGaetano's behind-the-scenes operative Kevin Collins is interested in being Bergen County GOP Chairman, which would mean a face-off with Talarico.

Regardless of all this gossip, the main point is: there should have been a convention for District 40 in Bergen County on the night of March 29. Period. I have been advocating grassroots conventions for the County Committee for a long time now, which is not to say that these processes are flawless and the answer to all of our prayers. Conventions give the County Committee members purpose. The more they feel that they have a genuine purpose, the more engaged they will be. The more engaged they are, the more involved they will be in recruiting and promoting candidates in their neighborhoods. This is a long-term building process. Holding a convention ad-hoc just for the sake of saying "we held an election" is a waste of time.

Case and point: the idea was floated to Talarico that a District 40 convention would be held for all the GOP County Committee in all 3 counties, with the agreement of the other Chairs (O'Toole and Rumana) - but Talarico apparently rejected the proposal. 2 comments on that: first, as said before, shame on him, he should not have behaved so autocratically. Secondly, equal shame on O'Toole and Rumana. If they were willing to hold a convention for District 40, this suggests the ability to organize one swiftly. Why then, did they not do so anyway regardless of Talarico's objectives? If giving the County Committee a voice is the desired goal, and it was within their means to do so, then there should be no discussion. It's the right thing to do for the Republican Party. For a Chairman to want to hold a convention in a limited fashion only when he knows the outcome will anoint him personally with a strong mandate is selfish. This is yet another example of why elected officials should not be County Chairs. There will always be conflicts of interest.

As for the rest of Passaic County and the GOP's candidates, Rumana managed to present a decent slate. I am still not 100% pleased, but our ticket is not the disaster I had feared. The idea that Rumana has been a total failure and should be recalled is ridiculous. No wonder Peter Murphy's pathetic petition effort has been such a dismal failure. Anyway, in District 34 we have 2 candidates from Montclair - the radical Reverend Clenard Childress, accompanied by Robert Bianco. Sadly, Senator Nia Gill will run unopposed. Ditto for John Girgenti. However, Paterson Board of Education President Chauncey I. Brown, III has submitted petitions for Assembly in District 35. Assuming he survives the rumored court challenge, he will head the GOP ticket in Paterson, Haledon, North Haledon, Prospect Park, Totowa, and Hawthorne. Look out Nellie Pou. Brown III's ties in the black community, coupled with hostility to Pou within the Passaic County Democrat Party, could make things very interesting. In a sense, I may have to backtrack and state that this lone candidate situation may actually help, because it facilitates bullet voting for Brown III.

Surrogate Bill Bate has a challenger in the name of Jeremias Batista, while Sheriff Jerry Speziale faces an opponent, Ricardo Perez. This will be their 2nd face-off, as Perez previously ran against Speziale in the Democrat primary of 2001. I have not met either of this individuals so I can't say much for the moment.

Finally, I'd like to close by addressing some of the feedback I received from last month's op-ed piece in the Record, partly recapping what I noted in the comments section. Probably the most hilarious feedback I received was an angry reader accusing me of being "bought off" by Peter Murphy!!! I told the individual:

Go to google.

type in "12677-050".

Click "I'm feeling lucky".

Also, click here, here, here, and here.

I was further accused of "attacking" Scott Rumana. Attacking? I have voiced criticisms, and I will continue to do so. As I recently told a key political ally of Rumana's, responding to his assertion that much more activity is happening in the Passaic County GOP than in the past 10 years, "yes, that's true, and it's terrific, but that will not stop me from levying constructive criticism."

Also, the line "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" was intended to inform, not endorse. The fact is, I happen to like and respect Governor Whitman. Like her or not, she was a winner! I greatly appreciate what she did to help me 3 years ago in my race. Attacking her is unwise, especially in the context of a County Committee convention, because many of those voting have been lifelong Republicans who appreciate a personable, dynamic, and accomplished former Governor who proved the ability to win statewide.

Does that mean that Governor Whitman is beyond reproach? Absolutely not. A debate about the disposition of the NJGOP during the Whitman years is a healthy one. Yes, there is a segment of the Republican base that resents Whitman. But my gut feel says that these individuals, in a primary, would probably not be voting for the "establishment" anyway. Attacking Whitman will not gain more votes, in my opinion. I basically gave this feedback to Todd Caliguire directly at one of the Tuesday Group breakfast meetings in 2006.

Additionally, the contrast of 'Whitman Republicans' and 'Reagan Republicans' is ridiculous and not compelling. The Caliguire team even tried to use a ballot slogan with Reagan's name. Caruso lashed out at this once again, in a stinging press release:

"Frankly, after what I have seen of the financial acumen of the chairman and of Todd Caliguire and the campaigns he has run, their claim to be the Reagan Team is an insult to Ronald Reagan and to good Republicans everywhere. Ronald Reagan didn't pile up campaign debt, didn't get his party evicted from its headquarters, and didn't leave behind unpaid campaign bills.

Ronald Reagan was a great man of principle, honesty and integrity – unfortunately the same can't be said of Talarico and Caliguire. It's really a desperation tactic for Mr. Caliguire, who lost election last year by nearly 53,000 votes to claim to be a descendent of Reagan. Comparing Todd Caliguire to Ronald Reagan is like comparing Nancy Pelosi to Thomas Jefferson; it's a deceitful joke.

I would hope that Caliguire's running mates – if they had real concern for the Republican Party and their political futures -- would abandon this self-destructive initiative. They have nothing to gain by supporting Caliguire in another failed venture.

Ronald Reagan was all about winning and helping Republicans win. I don't see any effort by Caliguire or Talarico to help Republicans win anywhere, especially in Districts 36 and 38, where the GOP has great opportunities. The last thing President Reagan would endorse would be a self-centered campaign in a Republican District that will do nothing but weaken the Republican Party."

In the end, O'Toole and his team will likely emerge with a strong mandate from the GOP primary, and they will cruise to election in November. They have the money to do a massive mail, radio, and even TV campaign if they wished it, plus a ground game unparalleled. It's hard not to be impressed with how hard O'Toole is working to win this seat, and win big. 45% of the voters will come from Bergen, 45% from Passaic (and 2/3 of those from Wayne), and the final 10% from Essex. Essex will break 9:1 for the O'Toole team, which is a safety net to put them over the top even if Bergen splits 50/50 and Rabbat somehow manages to pull 15% in Passaic County.

Talarico will therefore have been marginalized and discredited, and the final nails will be driven into Peter Murphy's political coffin. He will have lost another proxy battle in the Passaic County GOP, but furthermore will have lost strong influence on a sitting State Senator. He will have nothing. Free beer only goes so far. Once his foot soldiers realize that he can no longer affect the disposition of HR departments in government agencies, their willingness to put up yard signs on his behalf will mysteriously vanish.

Less than 7 weeks to go. Stay tuned.

حقاً قام في افريقيا

As I have mentioned before, I have been enjoying attending the Maronite church here in Dakar, and this Passion season was the first time I experienced Holy Week in a rite other than the Melkite one. May God forgive me.

Palm Sunday, or شعنينة, demonstrated once again how "les Libano-Syriens" here have retained a strong attachment to their origins. As is customary, everyone showed up, especially the children, in their finest clothes. Shanineh has always been a bit of a day to show off, if I dare say.

On "Sad Friday" I also had the opportunity to attend. The place was packed - I got the feeling that this service has a particularly high profile each year. A Senegalese Minister was in attendance (cannot remember which Ministry), plus the Ambassador of Lebanon (and several other diplomats from that country), the Russian Ambassador, and the Romanian Ambassador. A high ranking Catholic clergyman from the Diocese of Dakar also played a prominent role in the service.

The highlight though, I must say, was a wonderful rendition of the Melkite hymn "al-yom uliqa" by a, male cantor (a difference from the version by Sister Marie Keyrouz) with the lights turned off.

Unfortunately for me, I misread the schedule and thus missed the midnight mass for Easter Sunday. No hajmeh this year!

ציר הרשע וציר אי-הדיוק

You can bet that the phone lines between Washington and Tel Aviv were burning up in the aftermath of Princess Pelosi's dabbling in Middle East diplomacy, as she told Syrian President Bashar Assad that "peace with Israel is essential to a U.S.-Syria relationship. We conveyed to him Prime Minister's Olmert's overture for peace talks when Syria". My advice to Her Highness: if you want to have a career in diplomacy, run for President, or get a degree from JHU SAIS.

No time was lost by special interest groups back at home keen to embarrass the Princess. For example, my friend Mark Meyerowitz, a libertarian-leaning Republican who has presented himself as a candidate for NJ State Assembly in District 27, facing off against the double-dipping duo of Mims Hackett and John McKeon, forwarded me a circular from the Republican Jewish Coalition. Blasting Pelosi, it referenced a statement released by the office of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert:

The Prime Minister emphasized that although Israel is interested in peace with Syria, that country continues to be part of the axis of evil and a force that encourages terror in the entire Middle East.

What was communicated to the U.S. House speaker does not contain any change in the policies of Israel, as was communicated to other foreign leaders."

Congratulations to the former Mayor of Jerusalem, he has just joined the Axis of Inaccuracy, an elite group of politicians and especially journalists who mistakenly refer to Syria as a member of the "Axis of Evil". (continued...)

Background:

Bush used the term "Axis of Evil" in his 2002 State of the Union address, courtesy of neocon speechwriter-in-chief David Frum. He named North Korea, Iran, and Iraq and then said, "States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world."

On numerous occasions, the press asked Bush's press secretaries if Syria was a "new member of the axis", and each time, the question was dodged.

First reference, April 13, 2003:

Q: Yes, sir. Now that there's a vacancy on the axis of evil, is Syria a good candidate?

THE PRESIDENT: We will deal with each situation as it arises. We're making progress on the Korean Peninsula. Everybody knows our position, which is that we expect there to be a nuclear weapons-free Peninsula. The good news is it's a position shared by the Chinese; it's a position shared by the South Koreans; and it's a position shared by the Japanese. So we've got common interests, and working together, I am very hopeful we'll be able to achieve those interests, diplomatically.

Second reference, April 15, 2003:

Q: Ari, is Syria part of the axis of evil?

MR. FLEISCHER: The President was explicit in his State of the Union in 2002 about North Korea, Iran and Iraq. Syria is indeed a terrorist nation, but to be precise, that is how the President has approached it.

Third reference, February 15, 2005:

Q: The President has spoken repeatedly about an "axis of evil." With Syria's suspected increased involvement in terrorist activities, are we now looking at a "quadrangle of evil"?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think you're looking at exactly what I said yesterday and exactly what I said today. And I think that's how you should look at it. I know there's an interest in this room sometimes of trying to interpret things beyond what is said, but I would encourage you to look at exactly what was said and report what was said.

Also, John Bolton made a speech called "Beyond the Axis of Evil", in which he discussed the threat of Syria, Libya, and Cuba.

By incorrectly mentioning Syria in this regard, Olmert joins as a member the likes of John Simpson of the BBC (Syrian President Bashar Assad himself earns auxiliary membership for not correcting Simpson during their interview), the New York Times (also an auxiliary member because to their credit they printed a correction after they first joined the Axis of Inaccuracy), and - sad to say - Wayne Allensworth for his March 2006 Chronicles piece.

The pitch vails in Damascus

It seems many have been waiting for me, an American Republican of Syrian extraction, to comment on the visit to Damascus of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, the highest-ranking Democrat in Washington, who is constitutionally 3rd in line to fill the White House. London-based Syrian editorialist Rime Allaf chided me, "are you also outraged by Nancy Pelosi's visit to Damascus? Or did you notice the Republicans that went there just before her? :)"

Well, let me begin by saying that Pelosi's visit, as usual, illustrates how Washington politicians use foreign nations and issues as wedges to achieve their own political objectives. Pelosi will play both sides - during the trip, while the foreign media follows her around with baited breath, she will say, 'we need to talk to Syria because the Bush Administration screwed up Iraq so badly', but then once she returns stateside and she has to respond to all the angry emails and phone calls her office received, she'll wrap herself in the flag and defend herself by claiming, 'we did talk to President Assad but only to lecture the rogue about Hamas, Hezbollah, foreign fighters, etc.'

The whole thing is a thumb-in-Bush's-eye political move for her, and of course the Syrians took full advantage of it and gave her red carpet treatment.

The sad part is, Pelosi's magnanimity will only increase the mis-formulated and unfortunately widely believed Arab view that Democrats are saints, as I indicated in my February article in paleconservative journal Chronicles. Furthermore, I nearly vomited when Syrian President Bashar Assad told Diane Sawyer a few months back that former President Bill Clinton "is admired in our region and respected". I pity any Arab blind enough to deify a man whose only accomplishment in the Middle East was [hold your breath] a peace treaty between Israel and Jordan. (continued...)

With respect to Pelosi specifically, boy, does this lady like to hog the spotlight. It was equally magnanimous of President Bush to make such a fuss over her on his first State of the Union address since starting the humble-pie diet, but she views herself as quite the American Princess. She might have been elected by her colleagues as Speaker of the House of Representatives, but Nancy Pelosi only serves in Washington at the pleasure of a mere 600,000 residents of Northern California. She ought to remember that as she parades around the Hamidiyeh Souq like a head-of-state wanna-be.

Now, back to Rime Allaf's teasing comment about the Republicans in the delegation. I think the high profile of the Speaker of the House conducting such a visit, and the fact that she's the first woman to hold the post, has made this whole visit much larger than what it is. This is Syria, not Iran, not North Korea. Congressional delegations of both parties have been camping out in Damascus for ages, and the US, despite having withdrawn its ambassador Margaret Scobey after the (former Lebanese PM Rafik) Hariri assassination, still operates an Embassy in Damascus. Compare that to Tehran, which has had no formal diplomatic ties with the US in almost 30 years.

Southern California Congressman Darrell Issa, an Arab-American himself who probably has more frequent flyer miles resulting from trips to Damascus than any of his colleagues, reinforced this point after his meeting with Assad today, one day after Pelosi's. Among Issa's remarks were:

"That's an important message to realize: We have tensions, but we have two functioning embassies...I have no illusions. We have serious problems to be resolved but we will resolve them."

In addition to Issa, 3 other Republicans visited with Assad in advance of Pelosi, including Frank Wolf of Virginia, who came out bluntly against Bush and said:

"I don't care what the administration says on this. You've got to do what you think is in the best interest of your country."

But you gotta love the way he and his colleagues, Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania and Robert Aderholt of Alabama put up Ronald Reagan as a shield against RINO-hunters. What would Reagan do? seems to have greater grassroots appeal to conservatives these days that the old saying, What would Jesus do? Their joint statement said:

"We came because we believe there is an opportunity for dialogue. We are following in the lead of Ronald Reagan, who reached out to the Soviets during the Cold War."

Back to Pelosi though, as I indicated earlier this is all about a domestic power play. Touting the Iraq Study Group, masterminded by Bush family consigliere James A. Baker, III was all the more to get under the President's skin. Naturally I agree with the general consensus of the Iraq Study Group, as far as it concerns a "Madrid II" comprehensive Bakerite approach to the region. But as far as the majority of its recommendations go, it does not exactly tip the scale. Sure, it ruffled a few neoconservative feathers in DC, but as Andrew Bajevich from the Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy explains in The American Conservative:

"By the time George W. Bush became president, Republicans and Democrats alike subscribed to a common set of dubious assumptions: that the Persian Gulf represents a vital strategic interest, permanent and inescapable; that Gulf nations are incapable of managing their own affairs; that the United States, therefore, has no alternative but to determine the fate of this region; that American power and prestige, guided by distinguished statesmen in the mold of James Baker and Lee Hamilton, will suffice to do just that; that peace and prosperity for all lie just around the corner, if only Americans will persist a bit longer.

Here lies the ultimate purpose of the Iraq Study Group: to shield these assumptions from critical scrutiny. Perpetuating the Great Game of the modern Middle East ensures that the flow of oil, arms, and contracts continues without interruption."

In this regard, Pelosi is no hero, she's just describing the same decrepit scene with different colored sunglasses.

The controversial visit was the topic of an outstanding NPR segment, which featured an excellent array of contributors: my friend Joshua Landis, who runs syriacomment, the foremost Syria blog; Michael Young, the Libano-centric journalist and editor of The Daily Star; plus Hassan Fattah, an Iraqi who covers Syria for the New York Times; Brian Darling from the Heritage Foundation; and Charles Kupchan, who worked for the Clinton White House.

Listen to it on the above link, it starts at about halfway through. Fattah begins by strongly endorsing Pelosi's visit as a "victory" for Syria, and mentioned the weakness of the Syrian opposition, members of which Pelosi met at a dinner. Young, a contributing editor for the libertarian magazine Reason (to which I subscribe), feeling obvious angst over the disintegration of a multi-lateral anti-Syria international foreign policy consensus with which he is quite enamored, refers to Pelosi's visit as a "fools errand" and says that it "trashes" Bush's efforts to save Lebanon. Young, who is half-American, pays particularly attention to the investigation of the murder of former Prime Minister, and highlights Syria's suspected role. He played his cards (not a particularly good hand given recent regional trends) reasonably well until he pulled out the kamanja and attacked Pelosi by playing a swooning lick of المقام العراقي:

"I really don't understand what kind of message she's sending when she goes to Damascus, when she walks around Damascus as if she were in any normal capital in the world - a very friendly visit by the Speaker. What kind of message does that send to the families of Americans whose sons have been killed in Iraq?"

Brian Darling, upset about the Democrats' political maneuvers to embarrass the White House on Iraq and clearly still acquiring a taste for the humble-pie diet, touched upon the constitutionality of Pelosi's efforts:

"We have a President, and his name is George Bush...we need to speak with one voice as a nation, and that voice should come from the President of the United States, not members of Congress...it's inappropriate for any member of Congress to go over there in a diplomatic mission. If these are fact-finding missions, that's one thing, that's completely appropriate. But if members of Congress are going over and trying to engage in diplomacy, that's the realm of our Secretary of State."

I agree with the spirit of Darling's remarks, but in all fairness, not his characterization of Pelosi's trip. There is no evidence that she engaged in any diplomacy with Syria, in fact her remarks were almost as trite and meaningless as the ones she made at the Arab American Institute's Kahlil Gibran Spirit of Humanity Awards in 2004. She left Damascus saying:

"We came in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace...as a mother I will exhaust every remedy for peace."

Charles Kupchan slapped Darling by bringing up Bob Dole's efforts in Kosovo as Senate Majority Leader. In my own view, it is not inappropriate for any member of Congress to do anything pertaining to the role of Congress as described in the US Constitution. Visiting Syria, or any other country, and discussing matters with the head of state does not require approval of the Executive Branch, especially as Congress has jurisdiction of the regulation of trade with other nations according to the Constitution. I touched upon these topics in more detail in an article written for the English-language Syrian magazine FW: in its inaugural issue, particularly as it relates to US sanctions on Syria.

Speaking of which, the likes of Darling didn't seem to mind when Congress butted its nose into Executive jurisdiction when their actions concurred and were designed to further humiliate Syria.

Young then returned to the Lebanese issue, and suggested that there is still a strong international consensus against Syria, and touted the Bush Administration's approach toward Lebanon as "a remarkable success". This is simply wishful thinking. The fact is that progress on multiple fronts in the Middle East cannot hinge upon Lebanon. Furthermore, it is foolish of the Bush Administration to make Lebanon, a tiny country of approximately 10,451.999 square kilometers (think: Connecticut), the centerpiece of its Middle East policy and tout it as the major lever of success. Lebanon has great potential and many strong points, but in terms of regional political trends it will always be a peculiarity due to the confessional nature of its population, and most especially, its political constitution.

Landis injected his usual dose of regional reality that has become somewhat of a trademark for his appearances on such programs.

"The Lebanese would like to have American Policy on hold until the Lebanese situation is solved. America can't do that. It would be unwise to do that...This is a Lebanese problem. It's an extension of the civil war...but if America tries to hold its foreign policy and negotiations on things like Iran, on peace with Israel, on influence on Iraq in abeyance until Lebanon solves its problems, we could be here for many more years. And there is no indication that American policy, which has been to try to force Syria to leave, to completely disband its influence on Lebanon, has been successful so far. This is another Syrian foot in the door, and we have to figure out a way to come to an accommodation."

There is much more to say that I will fold into an upcoming Chronicles article.

p.s.
If you're still trying to figure out the meaning of the title of this post, don't bother. Just go have a سفن اب.