« All I Want For Christmas - A John Kerry Adventure | Main | . »
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Smell From the Turnpike:
» More McGreevey Reax from Backcountry Conservative
Michele Catalano: So, let me get this straight. The governor of a state announces that not only did he have an adulterous affair (and it matters not whether it was a gay or straight affair) with an employee of his... [Read More]
» MCGREEVEY'S CORRUPTION IS THE PROBLEM from The Galvin Opinion
We told you so: The Galvin Opinion has commented before on McGreevey's crooked deals. This article, below, details the shameful administration of this Democratic governor. [Read More]
» McGreevey: The Virtue Filter Fails from DOUBLE TOOTHPICKS - Culture Wars & The Christian Worldview
We're hearing the governor is "courageous" for coming out of the closet. That may be, but he is a sniveling coward in the face of real moral choices. The dilemma: protect the state of New Jersey, or satisfy his sexual mores. McGreevey chose the la... [Read More]
» mcgreevey resignation from infidel cowboy
If the cause for resignation was homosexuality and McGreevey were brave, he would stay in office instead of running from anticipated pressure from hate groups. Being gay isn't a disqualification for office. If the cause were infidelity, hardly anyone w... [Read More]
» I concur. from The Bayou City Perspective
Spot-on. So, let me get this straight. The governor of a state announces that not only did he have an adulterous affair (and it matters not whether it was a gay or straight affair) with an employee of his office... [Read More]
Comments
well...the governor did not have to resign..there is no requirement to do so...he obviously did so to keep the spotlight off of the party as the elections close in. It is sort of a clever political move, even though I probably do not support him (I really have no knowledge of him, since I live in IL)
Posted by: jimf | August 13, 2004 10:22 AM
Can someone explain how the Gov's "I did all these bad things because I'm Gay." argument is significantly different from the Aryan Nation's "Gays are corrupt" position?
Is the difference that he's Gay or that he's a Dem?
Posted by: Andy Freeman | August 13, 2004 10:28 AM
Please. I think either party would do that in order to make sure his party held on to the office in that case.
But what do I know. I come Nassau Country that still reaks from what the Republicans did here.
Posted by: Drew | August 13, 2004 10:29 AM
He only outed himself to garner the built in defense of "gay bashing" when he is pursued by political opponents (ie, Republicans who all hate gays anyway...). He is a sleaze bag no matter his orientation and highlighting only shows it.
Posted by: Aaron | August 13, 2004 10:40 AM
Drew, I never said the Republicans wouldn't do that (and I know about shady Republicans, being a fellow Nassau County resident).
This would be wrong no matter which party did it. It's not an issue of him being Dem, it's an issue of the whole thing just freaking stinking.
Andy, first of all, I don't understand your inference.
Second, I don't think he's blaming his problems on "being gay" so to speak. I do think, however, that the gay angle is just a smokescreen.
Posted by: michele | August 13, 2004 10:41 AM
Aaron: "Republicans who all hate gays anyway"
You are a jerk.
Posted by: michele | August 13, 2004 10:42 AM
michele, I didn't take Aaron's comment that way. I think he was saying that because it's one of the left's mantras. Kind of like saying "All Republicans hate blacks and poor people" in jest.
Posted by: Sharp as a marble | August 13, 2004 10:46 AM
That stench is pretty indistinguishable from the one coming from Hartford, except that the media came down consistently on Rowland, while McGreevey's big announcement is being spun as some sort of profile in courage. Bah.
Posted by: Crank | August 13, 2004 10:46 AM
Michele-
I meant it in a sarcastic way - as Mr. Marble explained. It gives a built in defense against any attack no matter how credible.
Posted by: Aaron | August 13, 2004 10:49 AM
Can anybody explain what the rationale was for the November 15th move? I really didn't catch this. Is it as jimf said: to keep the spotlight off the party?
Posted by: Tyler | August 13, 2004 10:57 AM
Aaron, sorry. Knee jerk mood today.
Posted by: michele | August 13, 2004 11:01 AM
Aaron is right - McGreevey is dirty without the sexual angle. This Democrat voted for him last time, but I probably wouldn't have done so next year.
NJ is a pretty strong Democratic state - so a special election would just be a distraction from the rest of the fall election.
A Republican who needed to resign would do the same - preserve the party in office as long as possible.
Didn't Christie do more or less the same when she went to the EPA?
Posted by: Mark | August 13, 2004 11:08 AM
I'm surprised that no one is mentioning how after his bullshit mea culpa ("I'm a Gay American" .. "Oh how brave...but isn't he also up to his perfectly cut hair in a corruption scandal? Not that it matters, look at how brave he is") the media gave him a 35 second standing ovation. The IMPARTIAL no they are not dem supporting, liberal, media.
I'm not sure what disgust me more: The bullshit press coverage of this non apology, McGreasey's lies and subterfuge or the fact that 35% of the brain dead NJ residents don't think he should resign.
Christ, the first thing this moron did when he got elected was appoint the Poet of NJ, Mr Jews and Bush bombed the WTC Amir Baraka. Unreal.
Posted by: hen | August 13, 2004 11:11 AM
I will submit that McGreedy's outing of himself is a bald-faced attempt to shift the subject to 'it's only about sex, those dirty Republicans!' from I'm corrupt up to my eyebrows. I would suspect that a LOT of really dirty laundry would have, and still might, come out in that sexual harrassment suit.
Ever notice that when a Republican sex scandle erupts it's always about sex and when a Donk get's caught in a sex scandle it always involves taxpayer's money somehow? What's up with that?
Posted by: Peter | August 13, 2004 11:41 AM
Yeah, the MSM is spinning the "gay American" and downplaying the underlying corruption. Which appears to be extreme.
Posted by: Ray | August 13, 2004 11:51 AM
Like I have said on my blog, I knew McGreevey when he was the Mayor of Woodbridge (I lived in the small town of Carteret, right next to Woodbridge). The guy was always slime. When he was just a mayor he talked of being Governor and President. Power was his thing and now finally, his corruption caught up with him and he couldn't hold on any longer.
His actions yesterday were nothing but political. If he wasn't on the verge of having a sexual harassment lawsuit filed against him, we wouldn't have known about his homosexuality and Crank is right. The media is treating him almost like some kind of folk hero for having the 'courage' to speak in such frank terms. Hand me the barf bag please. His coming out in such a way was done to garner sympathy from his party base and to somehow blame it on others because they were going to come out and tell everybody anyway.
Anybody who believes the timing of his resignation wasn't an attempt to secure the Governor's mansion for the Democrats has their head up their butts.
The guy was dirt and the state is better off without him.
Posted by: Jay | August 13, 2004 11:56 AM
The state GOP is calling for him to resign now -- for some reason I don't think this is a good move. The guy's hanging himself. Don't get involved.
Posted by: Tyler | August 13, 2004 12:30 PM
This has got to be the strangest political season ever. Or at least, in my 36 years on this vale of tears.
The gov of my state--John rowland-- quits over ethics violations so basic that a kindegartner would feel uncomfortable.
The gov of NJ basically scripts s screenplay of largert than life foolishness and decides to live it out.
A Presidential candidate is caught in wholesale fabrications of his war record--a record he has predicated his campaign upon--and nothing happens.
politics is always surprising, but my...
Posted by: rod | August 13, 2004 12:45 PM
He'd be a great addition to the Kerry/Edwards team.
Posted by: Faith | August 13, 2004 01:21 PM
First thing in the office today from my boss was, "He's so brave." She changed her mind once she got the details.
I was happy to see that one of our local Philly rags got the opinions of people who live in the Gayborhood here, and they are pretty split. A few older men said that he is horrible for what he did to his wife and kids. One of my best friends here, a gay man, agrees that McGreevey is using the gay thing as a smokescreen.
And really, what if it had been a woman? That's how I'm explaining it to people. He ripped off the people of New Jersey to get some play. It doesn't matter if it was a man or a woman, it's wrong.
Posted by: Nathan | August 13, 2004 01:43 PM
Wow, that stench is rotten. And it's not the Jersey swamps that stink this time.
No, it's your shitty loser president.
President Bush's tax cuts have transferred the federal tax burden from the richest Americans to middle-class families, with one-third of them benefiting people with the top 1 percent of income, according to a government report cited in newspapers on Friday.
Posted by: ConservativeBasher | August 13, 2004 01:52 PM
May I ask what the FUCK that had to do with this post? Get your own blog if you want to bitch.
Some people.
Posted by: michele | August 13, 2004 02:00 PM
Well, that didn't take long.
Posted by: Ray | August 13, 2004 02:12 PM
Conservative basher doesn't read econopundit.
Chart it yourself. Tell him where he's wrong.
BTW, The rich didn't get the child care check. Is that included?
Posted by: Sandy P | August 13, 2004 02:20 PM
So how did the tax cut get in here? Oh, yeah, the mere fact that Dubya exists invalidates any complaint a conservative might have against a Democrat.
For the record, I changed jobs after 9/11 and took a huge pay cut. I was tickled to get my taxes cut - guess to a Democrat, a working stiff making $27k base pay is one of "the rich."
Posted by: Steve Skubinna | August 13, 2004 03:27 PM
I'm looking forward to grey-free hair, better eyesight, immediately dropping ten pounds and having kids that never talk back in a George-free America! Can I hear an amen brothers and sisters?
Posted by: Darleen | August 13, 2004 03:56 PM
Now, totally on topic
Could someone explain to me why the sleaze's wife was standing next to him at the media lovefest and just didn't haul back and slug him????
Good god, talk about a male in need of a good Bobbiting.
Posted by: Darleen | August 13, 2004 04:00 PM
> Andy, first of all, I don't understand your inference.
When the AN says "Gays are corrupt", we pretty much agree that that's a bad thing.
The NJ governor is blaming his corruption on being Gay or claiming that being Gay excuses said corruption. He's being praised, however, the message is the same "Gays are corrupt".
I'm asking why the same message gets a different response.
Posted by: Andy Freeman | August 13, 2004 04:07 PM
Darleen - I am pretty darn sure she knew he was gay. Hell, a lot of people in NJ knew he was gay.
Posted by: Kate | August 13, 2004 04:15 PM
Could someone explain to me why the sleaze's wife was standing next to him at the media lovefest and just didn't haul back and slug him????
Watching Mrs McG reminded me of this exchange in the movie "Halloween" between Dr Loomis (Donald Pleasance) and the nurse while on their way to pick up Michael Myers:
"Give him Thorazine."
"He'll hardly be able to sit up!"
"That's the idea."
My question: how is it possible that a 47-year-old man who's apparently had numerous sexual affairs with other men get to be governor without anyone noticing his homosexuality? I mean, he's the governor of New Jersey -- a state of over eight million people right across the river from the largest media market on earth. Why would the state Dems support a guy with such huge skeletons in his closet? Is it possible none of them knew?
Incredible.
Posted by: RMc | August 13, 2004 07:33 PM
He volunteered to step down. He easily could have announced that he was not seeking reelection in 2005. Out of all the scandals, the sexual harassment one is the only one to touch him personally. Many governors, particularly if the affair involved someone of the opposite sex, would have stayed and fought it out. If I was a resident of Jersey, I do not know how I would feel about this man as my governor anymore, but he did not have to step down.
I wish both sides would admit that they are motivated by politics. Republicans want him to step down only so they have a chance of getting a republican in office in 2004, and democrats want him to wait only so they can hold on to the office for at least another year. I wish both sides would stop trying to sound righteous.
Posted by: twoghosts | August 13, 2004 07:51 PM
Twohosts
I don't give a flying fig that he was a democrat..considering the last bi-sexual politician who decided to indulge his gay side was a Republican, Michael Huffington. I don't even really care what his sexual orientation is. However, he is using the "gay" coming out as a "third rail" issue (and look how the MSM is willingly indulging him). He betrayed his wife (regardless of the gender of his paramour on the public payroll) he's pissed on his kids (that's my #1 hot button) and he is unfit to be governor based just on how he's managing this.
My sister-in-law lives in Jersey and she's speechless over this (really, no small feat!)
Kate ... I wasn't there, I have no idea of their courtship/marriage, but even if he had gay affairs, it looks like he could also function as a straight.. he's BI for crissakes, and (speculation here) probably told her he loved her and was going to be faithful. This has little to do with orientation..the guy has a zipper problem. People like that should just NOT get married. OR have children.
Posted by: Darleen | August 13, 2004 09:00 PM
-- Out of all the scandals, the sexual harassment one is the only one to touch him personally.--
Give it time, the Feds could also be after him.
Posted by: Sandy P | August 13, 2004 09:25 PM
Darleen,
I understand what you are saying, but cheating on a spouse, however morally repugnant, is not grounds for dismissal. Placing his paramour on the payroll is a matter worth exploring and one which could have led to serious consequences including his removal, but in most cases elected officials stay and fight these things. He did not have to step down, so the timing is his to call.
Sandy P,
You might be right. In time he may be implicated in some of these other scandals. But that time isn't today. He's under no obligations (yet) to step down tomorrow or November 15.
I do not support what he did, and if these larger accusations are true he deserves to leave sooner rather than later. But as of today the main reasons most have to argue over the specific date are all partisan, IMO.
Posted by: twoghosts | August 13, 2004 10:18 PM
Have you guys considered that this might be a Torricelli redux? Perhaps, he is under presure from the NJ Dem Party to step down, so as to avoid a special election...thereby keeping the power in the Democrat ranks for awhile longer.
Posted by: cheshirecat | August 13, 2004 11:43 PM
Please. Everyone knows the reason he's waiting until November 15th is because it's a birthday present to me.
I told him he had to leave office before I turn another year older.
Oh, wait. Then he'd have to leave on November 14th.
Never mind.
Posted by: Meryl Yourish | August 14, 2004 12:01 AM
Hm. Elected official puts an adulterous lover on the public payroll...
..and said lover was manifestly unqualified for the position, which involved the safety and security of the citizenry...
...and the elected official comes clean only with the threat of blackmail....
..and to gain sympathy publicly comes out of the closet...
...thus forcing both women he married and both his children to take AIDS tests in the light of media attention.
Clearly, this guy has the credentials and character to work for the Kerry campaign.
Posted by: newshound | August 14, 2004 12:53 AM
twoghosts - get thee over to buzzmachine and search yesterday's archives - it's not about the affair.
That he's gay just adds a little tittilation (sp) (don't go there) to the story. Doesn't matter man, woman, it's his dealings and carelessness for the people of NJ.
Posted by: Sandy P | August 14, 2004 04:24 AM
"I understand what you are saying, but cheating on a spouse, however morally repugnant, is not grounds for dismissal."
If (as is evidently the case) he considers his marriage vows to be meaningless, why should his taking an inaugural oath be imagined to carry any weight?
Posted by: John "Akatsukami" Braue | August 15, 2004 10:12 AM
Ha! NJ is well known for out in the open and behind the scenes stunts like these. It's just everyday stuff.
Posted by: tnfz paul | October 20, 2004 05:03 AM