October 3, 2002
"I HAVE NOT YET BEGUN TO FIGHT":
WHY LAUTENBERG IS VULNERABLE (Patrick Ruffini, 10/02/02)Set aside for a moment Doug Forrester's chances on appeal, because he might not need it. I think I can make a pretty credible case that
Forrester can take Lautenberg, and here it is:On the whole, Lautenberg has been a pretty lousy politician. [...]
The hangover effect sets in early. [...]
The narrative just isn't good for Lautenberg. [...]
Forrester still has a message. [...]
Issue Three seems like particularly fecund territory, though maybe for slightly different reasons than Mr. Ruffini enumerates, and a way to get at some of the other issues with some subtlety. Mr. Forrester should seize on things like this profile... Lautenberg steps up for his political enemy (ROBERT COHEN, October 02, 2002, Newark Star Ledger):
If there were two subjects that dominated Frank Lautenberg's thoughts in the past few years, it has been a gnawing regret about retiring from the United States Senate and his personal hatred for his former colleague, Robert Torricelli.Now in one stroke, the 78-year-old Lautenberg may have the chance to run again for the Senate and replace his foe
...to make the case that for Democrats this election has become nothing more than a playpen in which they've twisted the law to allow Mr. Lautenberg to live out some petty personal vendetta. This approach has several benefits for Mr. Forrester:
Posted by Orrin Judd at October 3, 2002 9:11 AM
Comments
Content aside, I want to know who actually thought this guy was a poet. I mean what can you say about a guy who pens a pathetic rhyme like
"What kind of skeeza is Condoleeza"
Criminy! That's on the level of "There once was a man from Nantucket..."
« WHY DO WE NEED THE ONION?: |
Main
| AND SHOOTING SADDAM WOULD BE AN ASSASSINATION, WHOOPTY FLIP: »
