Justified Right

Guido Goes To College Too, MTV

 

Now comes MTV, in the bigoted footsteps of a show like the Sopranos, with a new show called “Jersey Shore.” It will exploit the worst and most mythological stereotypes about Italians in New Jersey, produced no doubt by people who or neither Italian nor from the Jersey Shore.  

One of the last stereotypes our American pop-culture still believes it is OK to exploit is that of the Italian American – if he’s rich he’s a mobster, if he’s poor he’s too stupid to be a mobster, but in a lovable, illiterate, Joey Tribbiano from “Friends” sort of way. In the movies, Guido never goes to college.  

Why are stereotypes and wiping them out important? Because a stereotype impedes assimilation.  

What is most important to any ethnic group, Italians included, is to assimilate into America – to be thought of as Americans first and our ethnicity second.  That being true, each ethnic group has to obliterate old stereotypes. Culturally you can master the language, clothing, education, business and politics, but a stereotype will be the last lock on the door to assimilation if you can’t pick it.  There will always be something that says “outsider” about a group with a widely accepted stereotype.  

Unfortunately in Pop Culture, it’s Ok to stereotype Italians, because our “identifier” has changed.  We are no longer branded with real names like Galileo and Da Vinci; instead we are identified with fake names like Corleone and Soprano.  

What caused this shift in identifier for Italian Americans?  The movie The Godfather.  

In real life, organized crime had many ethnicities: Dutch Shultz, Bugsy Segal and Meyer Lansky were Jews.  Dion O’Bannion and Bugs Moran were Irish.  Of the Midwest Crime wave including John Dillanger, “Pretty Boy” Floyd, “Baby Face” Nelson, “Ma” Barker, Bonnie & Clyde and “Machine Gun” Kelly, none were Italian. Movies reflected that.  

Then came The Godfather. So successful was it that everyone tried to copy the genre.  After The Godfather more than 400 feature films have been made where the mobsters are JUST Italian, despite the historical inaccuracy.                         

Add to that the TV shows and endless parade of advertisements showing Italians as criminals and clods, and suddenly people forget Marconi invented radio telegraph but remember Moltisanti on the Sopranos fenced radios.  

This stereotype is still “OK” in Hollywood. No other ethnicity suffers from their hurtful stereotype being politically correct.  Imagine an HBO series today about a Step ‘n Fetchit Black family, a drunken Irish family, cheap Jews or dumb Poles.  Those wrong stereotypes haven’t been wiped out, but they are universally reviled and controlled by making a pariah of anyone who uses them.  Yet portraying Italians as murderous, awful, immoral criminals will get you an Emmy.  MTV is counting on that bigotry for their new show.  

I’m not saying other ethnicities don’t take it on the chin – they do.  But when we catch someone being insensitive to Blacks, Jews, Gays, etc., we make them pay for it.   

Don Imus got punished heavily for his “nappy headed hos” joke.  Here’s something no one considered:  

At that year’s Academy Awards, the song that won was called, “It’s Hard Out Here For A Pimp.”  The song uses the word “Hos” 4 times, “Bitches” 8 times and the word “Niggaz” too.  

America awarded that song an Oscar.  Not one girl’s basketball team complained about it.  

Since we are giving lyrics of such “creative genius” as “Bitches, Hos & Niggaz” the Academy Award, the highest accolades we give in American Popular Culture, are we really going to pretend to be surprised when a 60 year old man says it  on the radio, or worse yet, a 6^th grader on a school bus?  

His own remarks were not Don Imus’ fault – they were our fault for lavishing praise on that song.  

Will stereotypes like we will see in “Jersey Shore” really hurt Italians? Is it just “fun” (you know, like white people used to think Step n Fetchit was fun)? It’s not our stars like Scalia and Giuliani who are at risk; it’s ordinary Italians who have to use the Court system who will get hurt by the stereotype.  

Twenty years ago when I was in law school, three students were in the booth next to me at a campus restaurant.  One said, “In criminal law we’re studying a case where all the defendants had these looooong Italian names…they were sooooo guilty!”  I wonder where that student is today – a judge? A prosecutor bringing charges against Italians because their long names make them soooooo guilty?  

There was a criminal indictment in New Jersey a few years back where several Italians were arrested, and they all had nicknames in “quotes” between their first and last names.  The problem?  The Defendants didn’t really have those nicknames.  The prosecution invented them and put them in the indictment, in an attempt to sway the jury who likely believe, as that law student from 20 years ago did, that Italian = guilty.  

Press reporters won’t help the Italian American in Court either, with newspapers insisting that all Italians must have a middle name in quotes.  Locally where I live there was a trial involving a man the Press called James “Jimmy” (last name).   Is “Jimmy” such an unusual aberration of the name James that it requires quotation marks, or are the marks just a media signal to the jurors that the defendant must be guilty because he’s “mobbed up?”  

That the characters on MTV’s “Jersey Shore” are Italian themselves, as were many actors on the Sopranos, only highlights the depth of the problem.  Hollywood has so engrained in the minds of America that there is a sexiness to the murderous, killing gangster or the dumb lovable “Guido” that it’s easy to recruit such useful idiots from our own ranks.  That the actors are Italian doesn’t make it OK – it makes it worse.  

Let’s just hope the show doesn’t win an Emmy, further solidifying the bigoted Italian stereotype into American Pop Culture.

The Church's Association With Kennedy, Or Not

Ask the average person what their First Amendment rights are, and they are quick to list Speech, Religion, Press, Assembly and Petition the Government.  Those are specifically expressed in the language of the First Amendment.

The Supreme Court has held that within the right to Assemble is another right, equally as important as the other First Amendment Rights:  The “Right to Associate.”

The cases in which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Freedom to Associate was in NAACP vs Alabama (the state could not subpoena the group’s list of members) and The Boy Scouts of America v Dale (the Boy Scouts do not have to admit Gay and Lesbian members).

The right to Associate exists because it is understood that political progress and even enjoyment of life can be tied to a person’s association.  To split like-minded people apart is to divide their power (divide and conquer).

This is the proper background to view Bishop Thomas Tobin’s decision to not let Congressman Patrick Kennedy receive communion because of the Democratic lawmaker's support for abortion rights.

Kennedy does not share the belief system of the Catholic Church on either the moral front or the political front.  Why Kennedy would want to belong to a religion he disagrees with is a mystery anyway.

The Church not only has the right to suspend Kennedy form communion (a form of minor excommunication), they could have, and should have, gone further and ex-communicated him completely.

History Lesson for Chris Matthews

While Chris Matthews doesn’t make my leg tingle (sorry Chris – you won’t live that down until President O is out of office), he’s not completely objectionable like other hosts on MSNBC.  Chris is the only one who routinely has on guests who disagree with him.

 

On yesterday’s show he made a mistake - a mistake of omission for not telling all the facts. 

 

There’s a 40 year old chestnut on the left that they love to tell – that Democrats were the ones who championed the 1964 Civil Rights Act into law, over Republican opposition.

 

That wrong fact was challenged on the floor of Congress yesterday when Representative Virginia Foxx (R North Carolina) said this:

 

The GOP has been the leader in starting good environmental programs in this country, just as we were the people who passed the civil rights bills back in the sixties, without very much help from our colleagues across the aisle.

 

By the way if you’re wonder what environmental programs were started by Republicans, look up “Environmental Protection Agency” which was proposed and signed into law by President Nixon.

 

Chris Matthews, seeing truth finally entering into the civil rights debate, took exception to Representative Foxx claiming it was Republicans who passed the Civil Rights Act.  Chris put forth this fact in response:

 

Well here are the facts. 46 Democratic senators voted for the Civil Rights bill, 46 and 27 Republican senators. Well that's the numbers.

 

Uh, that’s not quite all the numbers Chris, is it?  Chris didn’t tell you how many members each party had in the Senate back then.  If you think that’s not important, let me play the same trick on you Chris did by telling you how many Senators voted “No” on the 1964 Civil Rights Act:

 

23 Democrats voted no, 6 Republicans voted no.

 

Nearly 4x as many Democrats opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act as did Republicans!  But don’t let me play the same trick on you that Chris did.  His numbers and my numbers don’t tell you the real story.  The percentages do.  Let’s look at the percentages to see which party was united in passing the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and which party had a huge bloc who wanted to kill the bill.

 

In the Senate, 80% of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act, while only 69% of Democrats did.

 

In the House, these were the Republican votes for and against:  136 for (80%), 35 against (20%).

 

The House Democrat votes were 165 for (63%) and 91 against (37%).

 

You have to wonder how Democrats have traditionally been credited with passing the 1964 Civil Rights Act when 80% of Republicans were for it compared to only 63% of Democrats.  I blame bad media and bad school teachers.

 

If Chris Matthews still isn’t convinced the 1964 Civil Rights Act was a Republican accomplishment, he should consider these facts:

 

·        Senate Democrats filibustered the bill.  The left leaning Wikipedia calls it a “brief filibuster.”   If by “brief” Wiki means 3 months and the longest filibuster in Senate history, then yeah, you can call it “brief.”

 

·         Senator Richard Russell, (D-Ga) led the filibuster, and he said:  "We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our states."

 

·        Senator Robert Byrd, the Democrat who was a recruiter for the KKK, talked for 14 straight hours against the bill.

 

·        Republican Everett McKinley Dirksen championed the cause to break the Democrat filibuster, with 82% of Republican voting to break it and only 66% of Democrats.

 

Immediately after Rep. Foxx made her comments yesterday, Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-Ca) either made a blunder or proved that Democrats intentionally revise history.  He said:

 

"It was over the objections of people like Jesse Helms from the gentlewoman's state that we passed that civil rights legislation."

 

Civil Rights legislation was passed in 1964 and 1965.  Jesse Helms took office in 1973.

 

Another reason people black and white associate the Civil Rights Act with Democrats is because President Johnson was a Democrat, and in America we tend to credit/blame presidents for everything while ignoring the work of Congress.

 

For a more recent example of the crediting/blaming presidents instead of Congress, see President Obama’s endless complaints about the economy over “the last 8 years.”  He, the media, and many people fail to consider that in January, the Democrats will enter their 4^th straight year of control of Congress, and it’s Congress who spends the money, not the President.

 

Hasan - A Muslim of Convenience

Have you ever heard of a “cafeteria Catholic?” It is one who does not follow all of the Church’s stated doctrines, instead picking and choosing which doctrines to follow or not, as if deciding which foods he likes while standing in line at a cafeteria.

 

Muslims come in the “cafeteria” variety too. 

 

Surely there are Muslims who are genuine and put great effort into following their religion correctly.  Kareem Abdul-Jabbar seems to be a shining example of Muslim sincerity.   However, as with other religions, there are some who use certain elements of Islam as a political tool rather than a spiritual way of life. 

 

The most famous “cafeteria Muslim” is the boxer Muhammad Ali.  Modern day “pop history” romantically paints Ali as a man who stood for his religious beliefs in refusing to fight in Vietnam.  If you believe that, you’re allowing the left make up history as they go along (as usual).

 

Ali was not standing for strong religious conviction; rather, he was cowering behind mere religious affiliation to avoid the inconvenience of going to war.  In the 1960’s, Ali was a “Muslim of Convenience.”

 

Cheating on his wife and boxing for the white man’s money were also things forboden by Muhammad Ali’s religion in the sect of the Nation of Islam.

 

Yet because Ali found cheating on his wife and boxing so much more enjoyable than going to war or Islam, he kept doing them.  That prompted Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad to kick Ali out of the Nation and strip him of the name Muhammad Ali for his transgressions, retuning him to the name Cassius Clay.

 

Even that didn’t stop Ali from committing those sins against his religion.  Got sincerity?

 

The only truth one can divine from Ali’s actions is that he wasn’t a true follower in the Nation of Islam  – he hid behind Islam to avoid fighting for America, but cast it aside rather than give up sexual promiscuity and boxing for money.  He was a “cafeteria Muslim” to the Nation of Islam.

 

As it turns out, Ft. Hood terrorist Nidal Malik Hasan may be a “cafeteria Muslim” too.

 

Reports indicate that he spent plenty of time in a strip club called Starz, complete with drinking and raunchy lap dances.  The radical jihadist form of Islam outlaws these things.  The general manager of Starz relates that Hassan stayed at the strip club for as much as 7 hours straight.   That’s not a casual brush with debauchery – 7 hours is a Larry Flynt sized commitment to sexual immorality.

 

How are we to reconcile Hasan’s supposedly ultimate act of loyalty to Islam through martyrdom with that deed being preceded by sins against Islam? (We have to label his martyrdom attempt “epic fail” since he is still alive.)

 

Hasan isn’t the first to lust in strip clubs before yelling “Allahu Akhbar” and committing mass killings.  Reports from all over the country indicate the September 11 hijackers spent a great deal of time at strip clubs, buying pornography and sleeping with prostitutes before September 11.

 

One theory suggests that since Islamic Jihadist believe that if they die while killing infidels (meaning you and me) all of their sins are washed away, so they can go ahead and sin with impunity.  Jihadist plenary indulgence = prostitutes are fun!

 

Another theory suggests that since Jihadist believe that God will reward their martyrdom with 72 virgins in heaven, they’re just getting themselves in shape for heaven’s orgy.  Jihadist plenary indulgence = prostitutes are practice!

 

What is clear is that Islamic Jihadists are political, not religious.  They pretend a rigorous religious commitment to incite others to fanaticism, but in reality they are religious fakers.  Saddam Hussein epitomized this practice.  Who could forget his rallying his sons to fight to the death, but when he crawled from his rat hole he announced, “I am willing to negotiate.”  What a faker.

 

Some of America’s politically correct insanity may have let Hassan slip through the cracks because the Military was afraid to offend his “Muslim faith.”  That thinking has to end.  Guys like Hassan have no genuine Muslim faith – only Jihadist political aggression.

 

Profiling a Muslim for Jihadist beliefs is not targeting Islam or any sect of the religion.  It’s targeting someone who is doing Islam all wrong.  It’s targeting him for the misuse of Islam for political gain at the expense of American lives, which has nothing to do with religion.  Investigating Jihadism insults no religion, but is a warranted investigation into the murderous bastardization of Islam into a political tool, which all good Muslins should applaud. To remain vigilant, America must target and investigate “Muslims of Convenience.”

Obama's Pet Goat

This is the best cartoon of the day.  If you don't understand it, you must be watching mainstream media. Congrats to the cartoonist, Eric Allie.

The No Class Yankees

He’ll cheat without scruple, who can without fear.”  Ben Franklin

 

Yankees were at one time the “classiest” team in baseball.  It’s what I liked about them.  Short haircuts.  No facial hair.  No names on the back of the jerseys.  It was often said of the Yankees that they were all business – they came to your park, beat you in baseball and left.  Very professional.

 

That’s changed.

 

I’m not complaining about the money spent on mercenaries to build dream teams.  That fits well with the free-market, capitalist ideals I love so much.  The bought player is reminiscent of the romantic western gunslinger riding from town to town, hired by the local sheriff to handle the bad guys he can’t. 

 

Besides, since the coming of free agency every team buys the best players they can.  The Yanks do a pretty good job of raising and keeping home grown talent anyway, like Jeter, Posada, Rivera and Pettitte.

 

What has me irked (for starters) is the Yankee treatment of Pedro Martinez, and the organization is at fault for allowing people to bring the “Who’s your daddy” signs and display them (pox on the New York Post for doing the same).

 

In 2004 after losing a game to the Yankees, Pedro Martinez said this:  "They beat me. They're that good right now. They're that hot. I just tip my hat and call the Yankees my daddy."

 

Permit me to interpret for those of you who went through the New York City school system:  Pedro was being humble.  He was being a good sport.  He was paying the Yankees respect and a compliment.  If Yankee fans and the New York Post don’t realize that, I ask, who’s your English teacher?

 

So what is the reaction of Yankee fans and the NY Post to someone who is being humble and complimentary?  Rub his nose in it!  Humiliate the guy!  Demoralize the man who pays you a compliment! Good grief.

 

Interesting message they’re sending to youth baseball.  Next season when the Little League team I coach lines up after a game to shake hands with the other team, instead of saying “Good game” I’ll have them be like Yankees and ask each player, “Who’s your daddy?”  Maybe we’ll get covered in the Post.

 

Yankee fans and NY media this week sank to the lowly depths of acting worse than Philadelphia Eagles’ fans, who notoriously booed and threw snowballs at Santa Claus during a halftime show.

 

The other thing irking me is that the Yankees are, for the past decade, a team littered with cheaters.  CHEATERS!  That’s right – steroids are CHEATING. The Yankees who profited from them were CHEATING CHEATING CHEATING.

 

Clemons. Pettitte.  Giambi.  Rodriguez. Neagle. Knoblauch. Grimsley.  Stanton.  Justice. 

 

The men named in steroid reports are accused of cheating to win, no differently than if my Little League team was to cork their bats.  While some of them juiced for others teams, several of them were juicing for the Yankees the year they won the 2000 World Series.

 

Steroids are like a government stimulus/bailout/cash for clunkers deal all rolled into one:  It’s against the regular rules, it gives you an artificial performance spike and you pay for it later.

 

The problem is the Yankee cheaters are not “paying for it later.” A few wrist slaps here and there, but their records stand – records achieved against men who followed the rules.

 

Major League Baseball moralizes with Pete Rose over a bet.  How dare they?  How dare an organization that spent half its life not allowing black men to play but allowing cocaine junkies to play moralize with anyone?  I’ll take Pete Rose as a player and role model over the juiced Yankee cheaters any day.

 

After the Barry Bonds steroid scandal broke, we were rooting for Alex Rodriguez to take back the home-run crown.  I’ll never forget the look on my little boy’s face when we heard the news that Alex used steroids, or the way he said, “Oh no, not A-Rod.”  I must admit to less shock – I should have expected cheating from a man who showed only Clintonesque fidelity in marriage.  Why should I think he’d be true to the fans?

 

What an awful message to kids that in the same year A-Rod was suspended for prior (2003) steroid use he gets a World Series ring.  Cheaters prosper.

 

For years baseball wrongfully used an asterisks in the record books for the wrong reason against Roger Maris.  Until they do the right thing and use it against the Yankees and the rest of baseball’s cheaters, I’ll just keep calling them cheaters.

 

We have now placed our faith and hopes with someone new to clobber the home run record and make baseball pure again.

 

We need a hero.   We root for the hero and he’s not a Yankee.

 

He’s Albert Pujols.

Politics Are Back To Normal In NJ & Elsewhere

Add this to your political fact book:  The “Obama Bounce” only exists when Barack Obama is running.  It disappears when he is not.

 

The pundits who guessed Virginia would be a “Blue State” post-Obama can quit their jobs now.  Stick Virginia back in the swing-state category, and with tonight’s 17% margin of victory by Robert McDonnell, expect the Republicans to be swinging all night.

 

The bigger story is New Jersey.  The Garden State at one time had gone 8 out of 10 Presidential Elections for Republicans, but since the Democrats ran the table the last 5 Presidential elections in row, pundits declared New Jersey a “Blue State.”  After the Democrats still managed to win the Governorship after Jim McGreevey resigned in shame and then Barack Obama cleaned McCain’s clock by 15% here, no one was sure if there was a Republican left in New Jersey.

 

Until tonight.  Proving late Senator Moynihan’s old adage that “All politics is local,” Republican Chris Christie upset Democrat John Corzine as well as the Tea Party crowd and the “Throw the Bums Out” crowd by beating Independent challenger Christ Daggett.

 

Even Obama’s appearances in Virginia and NJ didn’t help the Democrats. 

 

People voted issues tonight – so politics is truly back to normal.

Please Buy This Song and Help My Daughter Raise Money for Charity!

Please excuse this commercial and this short break from politics, but I need to ask readers for a favor.

My daughter Annalisa, age 15, has recorded an original Christmas song entitled, "There's Still Christmas."

It was written years ago by a friend who died of brain cancer.

Annalisa has recorded it and is using sales of the song to try to raise $100,000 for the Ronald McDonald House by Christmas.  The website tells the story of her and the songwriter.

You can download the song for only $1.25 by going to her website, www.TheresStillChristmas.com.  

The website accepts Visa, Amex, MasterCard, Discover, Amex, Pay Pal and eChecks.  The song is emailed to you with a download link. Payments securely handled by Pay Pal.

Please pass along a link to Annalisa's website in all your emails, and post a link to it on your blogs, your Facebook, MySpace and Twitter pages!

Thanks so much for your support of Annalisa's project, and I hope you enjoy the song!

A “Daggett” To Chris Christie’s Heart?

What do they call it in New Jersey when 44 politicians are arrested for corruption at the same time?  Thursday.  Jersey politics are so dirty it can make a Chicagoan wince. 

 

With public affairs in such sorry shape, the Garden State grows some nasty tasting political campaigns.  Jersey’s gutter politics used to be defined by Republican Pete Dawkins calling Senator Frank Lautenberg a “swamp dog” back in 1988. This year Democrat Governor Jon Corzine broke open the sewer pipes of political advertising, actually making juvenile “fat jokes” about his Republican opponent, who struggles with obesity.

 

Let’s recap how the Tea Party movement coupled with the anti-incumbent movement may backfire and give the Jersey Democrat his second term.

 

Governor Jon Corzine and Republican challenger Chris Christie are in a race too close to call.  The Real Clear Politics composite of several respected polls gives Christie a statistically insignificant 1% edge. The fly in Christie’s campaign victory ointment is that Independent Chris Daggett is polling over 11%.

 

The only conclusion the polls give is that most New Jersey voters want a new governor.  But even though Corzine’s approval ratings have been stuck in the high 30’s for most of the year, thanks to his $30 million personal bankroll coupled with the surprisingly strong showing by Daggett, Corzine could still win.

 

Christie was leading this race by as much as 14% over the summer.  His campaign mantra was bad times under Corzine—highest taxes in the country, highest unemployment in the region, 450,000 New Jerseyans voting with their feet and moving out of the state.  Christie offered an 88 point plan to turn New Jersey around that was short on specifics but generally promised lower taxes, lower government spending and an improved business climate. 

 

It was working. Then came September.

 

Corzine charged that Christies’ plan to make healthcare more affordable by allowing competition from out of state insurers and reducing mandated coverage was “anti-woman.” Corzine alleged that Christie would take away women’s access to mammograms and that new mothers would be kicked out of the hospital hours after delivering babies.

 

Suddenly the campaign was not about taxes, spending, unemployment and the economy, but mammograms.  Christie surrendered his double-digit lead among independent women to Corzine.  Corzine’s numbers stayed in the high 30’s to low 40’s, but Christie came down to the low to mid 40’s and stayed there. 

 

On September 30, the day before the first televised debate, Independent Daggett unveiled a plan to reduce property taxes 25% by expanding the state’s 7% sales tax to goods and services currently not taxed, and increasing tolls on New Jersey’s highways.  After a credible debate performance, Daggett’s numbers shot from the mid single digits to as high as 20% in some polls, most of his support taken from Christie. 

 

For the first time all year, the fight was on.

 

Christie, who receives state matching funds and is therefore limited to spending just under $11 million against Corzine’s personal fortune, spent precious resources fighting off Daggett’s surge. He characterized Daggett’s plan as “Corzine-lite.”  Daggett’s numbers started to come back to earth and 60% of his voters told pollsters that they were likely to change their minds before Election Day….most in favor of Christie.

 

Corzine counter-punched with more negative attacks on Christie and also by relying on the star power of President Obama and former President Clinton to rally New Jersey’s large but sometimes too lazy to vote radical left wing.

 

But one of those Corzine ads backfired.  Coupled with an unflattering picture, Corzine accused the obese Christie of “throwing his weight around.” The state Democratic chairman Assemblyman Joseph Cryan mused at a rally, "What would it feel like if the next governor weighs 350 pounds?"

 

Voters and the media pushed back on the personal attack, and Christie, who has been sensitive about his weight, used the attacks to humanize himself, culminating in a very funny and self-effacing appearance on Imus.  Fox News’ Neil Cavuto declared it a game changer and predicted Christie would win because of how well he performed on Imus.

 

With apologies to Cavuto and Imus, the final game changer could be Jon Corzine's interview with the NY Times wherein he called his terribly unpopular scheme to sell NJ's highways and increase tolls by 800% "an idea that worked."  In that moment of candor, Corzine may have wasted his $30 million campaign.

 

Why raise this unpopular and dead issue again?  Perhaps sensing victory was at hand, Corzine was imagining that after an election win he could declare, "Even during the last days of the campaign I spoke in favor of an asset monetization plan.  The voters gave me a mandate to do it." 

 

But the negative reaction was swift and fierce. Union workers and Democratic political appointees at the NJ Turnpike Authority were throwing pro-Corzine flyers in the trash.  Down line Democrat candidates who recently were warming to Corzine were again running for cover.  Republicans have spent the final days of the campaign talking up what voters least liked about Corzine – his “sell the Turnpike” plan.

 

The momentum appears to be with Christie, but the impact of President Obama’s 11th hour appearance for Corzine has not been reflected in the polls yet.

 

As Daggett leaning voters are reconsidering their choice, Republicans are accusing The NJ State Democratic Committee of making automated calls into Republican areas urging voters to vote for Daggett.  That is fueling lingering suspicions among Republicans that Daggett’s campaign has been nothing but a stalking horse for Corzine all along, designed to siphon the Tea Party votes and New Jersey’s perennial “Throw the Bums Out” votes away from Christie.

 

The Quinnipiac University and Monmouth University polling teams have both been working through the weekend with reports expected to be published by noon on Monday.  That will give us a better idea whether Christie will keep his lead, or if the four horsemen of his political apocalypse will be mammograms, weight jokes, an Obama bounce and Chris Daggett.

 

Contributing to this article was two Jersey Boys - Art Gallagher of More Monmouth Musings and Tommy De Seno of Justified Right.