For the first time, the full field of three Republican Senate candidates met tonight to debate.
The forum, held at Fairleigh Dickinson University’s Madison campus, was moderated by Star-Ledger conservative columnist Paul Mulshine. Candidates Joe Pennacchio, Murray Sabrin and Dick Zimmer spent their time addressing the issues and laying out some stark differences in policy– for the most part, anyway.
A question from former Bergen County Freeholder candidate Deirdre did spark a heated argument between the two longer standing candidates, Joe Pennacchio and Murray Sabrin.
Woodbyrne asked whether the candidates would pledge to stop making personal attacks on fellow Republicans. Sabrin responded that he would continue to campaign against what he saw as failed party leadership in Trenton.
Pennacchio said that he had issued his own similar clean campaign pledge months ago and kept to it.
“We made it public and we encouraged all candidates to sign that pledge,” he said. “Today none have. And it’s funny, because I was the proud recipient of some of Murray’s promises: distortions, name-calling, because he believes in practicing politics instead of delivering a principled message.”
Sabrin, in turn, brought up Pennacchio’s “A Nationalist Agenda” – a few policy papers that had Pennacchio put together and promulgated back in 1991. That treatise resurfaced after Sabrin publicized them last month, calling it a “fascist manifesto.” In response to Pennacchio, Sabrin brought the papers up tonight.
“Joe Pennacchio wrote a tract 17 years ago and he claims in this campaign he’s a Ronald Reagan democrat and Ronald Reagan Republican,” said Sabrin. “Yet in this tract he calls Reagan economics ‘voodoo economics.’”
“Murray, Murray, Murray,” said Pennacchio. “No wonder the Bergen Record called you a ‘loose cannon.’”
Zimmer, the candidate who came in to the race too late to experience much of the antipathy between Sabrin and Pennacchio, sat helplessly between the two.
But Zimmer’s entrance into the race less than two weeks ago has drawn criticism from his fellow candidates, including from Sabrin, who requested that the FBI investigate him. And tonight, his very recent status as a Washington lobbyist was fair game for his opponents.
“I’ve begun my campaign with a promise to campaign on the issues. I have not attacked wither of my opponents on a personal basis,” he said.
Unlike the debate between Pennacchio and Sabrin in Gloucester County last month, the candidates, for the most part, did not take similar positions on some hot button issues.
On abortion, Sabrin said that the federal government ought to leave the decision as to whether or not to allow the procedure to the states.
Pennacchio said that he supports an amendment to the constitution that bans abortion outright in all 50 states, and that states that legalize gay marriage can’t be trusted on the question of abortion.
“It’s difficult to say send it back to the states. You don’t have to look any further than the taking apart of marriage,” he said.
Zimmer, for his part, said that he believes that a woman’s right to an abortion should be maintained, though he advocated mandatory parental notification for minors and a ban on partial birth abortion (which he voted against in 1996 but changed his mind in 1997, just after leaving office).
“As somebody who believes the government should play the least possible role in our personal lives, this should, except in cases I identified, remain the decision of the woman, her doctor and her spiritual advisor,” he said.
The three candidates also presented different opinions on the federal budget.
Sabrin criticized Zimmer’s focus on eliminating earmarks, saying that the federal government requires the elimination of many agencies and large bureaucracies.
Zimmer acknowledged that eliminating earmarks won’t be enough, but said that the government needs to eliminate programs like the Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska to gain credibility first.
Pennacchio said that the United States should look into reallocating defense funds by lowering its presence in places like Europe and South Korea. He also criticized Lautenberg for New Jersey’s drop in the amount of money it gets back from the federal government since he originally took office in 1983.
“I have a novel idea – why not stop sending it down in the first place,” he said.
Pennacchio said that developing energy independence is the cornerstone of his campaign, and that he would support drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. But he said that the nation needs to put more resources into developing alternate forms of energy.
In fact, all three candidates did something quite unusual for Republicans: they praised France (for embracing nuclear energy, which supplies 80% of that nation’s power).
“This anti-nuclear hysteria is causing us to be more dependent on foreign oil,” said Sabrin.
Zimmer said that he would not support drilling for oil in ANWR, and said that the best policy is conservation of resources. The federal government, Zimmer said, should provide research subsidies for alternate form of energy like solar and wind.
That drew criticism from Sabrin, who said that Zimmer was advocating those measures to benefit his lobbying firm’s clients.
“Dick Zimmer has been a lobbyist for a number of years and he wants to put more of our tax dollars into energy,” he said.
On immigration, all three candidates said they favor eliminating birthright citizenship and building a border fence.
None of the candidates would give a straight answer to an audience member’s question about which Democratic presidential candidate they’d prefer in case John McCain doesn’t win the general election.
“You’re asking me if I prefer to get hit by a truck or a bus,” said Sabrin.
South Jersey Democrats will back Rob Andrews' return to the U.S. House of Representatives, but some members of the party leadership aren't ... >
There's something missing from the Republican Convention. There is a need for a camera behind the curtain where speakers greet ... >
Barack Obama offers a hard-left vision for America. He would take NJ's disastrous economic policies national, and the resulting economic ... >
Selecting the next NJN anchor will certainly be a different process than what happens at the major networks, local affiliates and other public ... >
Tibet – the broad, high plateau between India and China – is bigger than Western Europe and the source of the great rivers of Asia: the Indus, ... >
For the past few weeks, I've watched with fascination as politician after politician have appeared on a beach or a boardwalk and declared their ... >
To view a larger version of this cartoon, click here. >
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, on Meet the Press, made a statement that incurred the wrath of members of the Catholic bishops club. She dared to say that ... >
And now we go back in time, to Mr. Dembo's eighth grade science class and JHS 278, and a sixteen millimeter film about the seasonal migration of ... >
Sounds like Dr. Murray Sabrin was the W-I-N-N-E-R!!
and poor Dick Zimmer was the L-O-S-E-R tonight!
Is it me or should Jersey Joe be running in the Democratic Primary, not the Republican Primary?
Way to go Murray!
Thank you Dr. Sabrin for sticking up for our Constitutional Rights!
Joe is in the "right" primary
For all Murray's criticism of the NJGOP, the reason that Joe is still there is the blue collar people. We have patiently built strength against the coat and tie types. These are the people with their $50 per plate fund raisers who are pick up and hold a seat or two in Democratic controlled towns. They are recruiting committee people for the June election to challenge County Chairs.
Where are Murray's people the rest of time?
Is it objective description of the debate?
There was no opinion of Dr,. Sabrin on the federal budget listed. This is presumable his strongest card. Jersey Joke was amusing when he stated: “I’ve begun my campaign with a promise to campaign on the issues. I have not attacked wither of my opponents on a personal basis.” I have yet to hear him talking about the issues. However, wasn't it Jersey Joke suing Zimmer in court or am I imagining things? Now, isn't it personal attack on a candidate Zimmer? So Jersey Joke broke his own pledge. It is a joke indeed. Does anybody taped that debate? Can we watch it anyplace? How about Wally Edge posting the video of it? Let's be fair Wally.
Wiel
Get Your Facts straight. The Pennachio campaign challenged the petition of Andy A for US Senate. That was a legal procedure, not a personal attack. Not one person signed that petition knowingly for Dick Zimmer. Don't try to spin that into something else. Joe was a gentleman the whole time the State GOP disrespected him and tryied to put up other lame candidates. I don't see you talking about how Zimmer's owm attorney worked in Cahoots with the Hunteron County Chair to con that convention last week. They were exposed and Joe still holds the county line there anyway.
Pennacchio came across as the worst statist
I was at the debate and must say that Joe Pennachio came across as the one most likely to expand federal government powers. He clearly wishes to shift to or keep federal government power in areas like health insurance, abortion, marriage, medical marijuana, energy, and civil rights. He does not meet any definition of conservative. The Republican ideal of "the least government governs best" seems to be far from his mind.
I was at the debate: here's how I saw it.
Pennacchio - He comes to a debate at a University with an audience filled with educated people, and he does little more than spit out sentence fragments filled with mindless rhetoric. for instance... He referred often to the "we put a man on the moon so we can do anything" argument when referring to the need for energy independence. When trying to elaborate on the issues he clearly displayed a lack of knowledge as to how markets work, and didn't offer any insight as to how any of his talking points could be accomplished with the current level of deficit spending. He didn't offer any significant plans to cut spending either.
Zimmer- lobbyist. enough said
Sabrin- was consistently interrupted by the moderator because he was the only one who actually knew what he was talking about. As in: he understood the issues and had responses that required the entire period of time given for answers. (and he answered those questions well)
many of the questions lacked substance: for example, "will you pledge to be nice?" (no negative attacks) was thrown out there. I must say i cringe every time I hear those questions because it robs the people of actually hearing the candidates speak about something that actually matters. People vote on the issues, don't they?
So challenging somebody in court is not an attack.
PC517, I learned something new today. "That was a legal procedure, not a personal attack." I see. So Zimmer is still friends with Jersey Joke.
Challenge
The challenge was to Andy A.'s petition, it had NOTHING to due with Dick Zimmer.
Response to eliminate_apathy
You misquoted me. In fact, you didn't get my point at all. If you have been following the campaign and reading some of the press releases that have been sent out, you would see that it hasn't been solely about the issues. Obviously, I was at the debate and had a very different take on it. Candidates must be held accountable for the manner in which they run their campaigns. I wrote many press releases when I worked in the U.S. Senate - none of them ever called someone a "loser." Vicious personal attacks have no place in politics - that's what robs people of the chance to hear where candidates stand on the issues. Eliminate apathy? Ask the taxpayers - you eliminate apathy by focusing on the issues, not personally attacking the other candidates. Unfortunately in New Jersey, it seems to be the norm. If everyone was dedicated to focusing on the issues, all three Senate candidates would have made the pledge. If you want to further discuss the issue with me, I don't anonymously post, you are welcome to contact me.
It is the economy stupid and finances, stupid
Somehow, Matt Friedman missed that portion of the debate. Unless, they were not debating economy at all, were they? In case they were, this is anti-Sabrin reporting. Is this the line of the Wally Edge to campaign against Dr. Sabrin? Hm, I wonder why? Affraid, that Frank will not do too well in the fall against Dr. Sabrin?
Sabrin's got it
I also heard that Murray destroyed the others with his knowledge about the economy. I feel this should have been covered in the synopsis of the debate posted above.
response to the response
I assume you were the one who asked the question... I understand your concern for campaign ethics, and nobody likes to hear somebody name-calling.... I perfectly understand your point, and I perfectly understand how political campaigns work. But, when you decided to raise these issues in the middle of a debate, did it not follow with an onslaught of personal attacks of each candidates' pasts? You provided them with an opening to continue a childish fight (not unlike the ones we see at the presidential campaign level) that until that point was not an issue at that particular debate. If a person who has not been following the campaign closely were there, they were robbed of time they could have spent listening to how the candidates plan to fix the problems New Jersey as well as the rest of the United States face. I don't care if somebody called somebody a loser. What would a signed pledge even legally do? I know enough about those candidates to know who will be the best thing for washington. I can only hope that at some point the masses will stop voting on such petty media headlines.
video
Is there a video of the debate anywhere?
Proven again...
Murray is a good debater. Well he does teach and speak for a living, so that helps. :p
But he really knows the issues.