(It's Gaelic for, "May you leave without returning," a totally appropriate wish for the subject of this post - this will probably be it for the "Irish thing" today.)Andy Warren’s campaign for the Democratic nomination to run against Mike Fitzpatrick for the PA 8th District U.S. House seat continues to reach new depths. Now, as a commenter reported at Above Average Jane’s site last Tuesday:
Andy Warren, not content with having his subordinates slander (Patrick) Murphy in blog commentary, has now recruited someone to challenge his signatures."Also, on Wednesday (from the Courier Times):
Patrick Murphy, a Democratic candidate for the U.S. 8th District congressional seat, which is held by Republican Michael Fitzpatrick, is being challenged by a Bensalem voter. Murphy's petition challenger is Jane Faust, a Democratic voter from Bensalem, according to Larry Otter, the attorney representing some Cleansweep candidates in the court actions. Otter confirmed that Faust is the same former Republican committeewoman convicted in 1996 of forging signatures and consequently barred from holding elected office.(For anyone unfamiliar with the PA Cleansweep slate of candidates, it should be pointed out that they formed as a result of outrage over the now-infamous PA legislative unvouchered-expense pay raise from last summer.)
I cannot find a link at the moment, but I remember reading Josh Nanberg, Patrick’s media contact, stating that there are approximately 11,000 signatures in question, but Patrick has substantially more than that to get on the ballot even if the signatures in question are found to be invalid, which is HIGHLY unlikely.
Andy, if this is the best that you’ve got, then you’re even more of a pitiable candidate than I imagined (and while this “dirt” plays out, you draw attention to Bucks County’s Red Cross shelter from your web site – is this your version of “good cop, bad cop”?).
Give up.
8 comments:
You need 1000 valid (or unchallenged) signatures to get on the ballot. Patrick collected over 2200. They are challenging enough to kick him off the ballot, which is more than 1200.
This woman is a crook and her attorney, Larry Otter, is a staunch Andy Warren supporter.
Obviously Andy doesn't truly beliven in the merits or chances of success of his own campaign because he seems fit to act contrary to the will of local democrats and try to knock the endorsed candidate off the ballot so he can get a free ride.
This is Republican dirty tactics 101 and Andy is once again proving that he is not worthy of a spot in our efforts to build a better democratic party when he is so intent on tearing down the future of our party--Pat Murphy.
This is Josh Nanberg, Patrick's Campaign Manager.
I don't generally comment on the blogs (since it makes me a bit of a lightning rod), but just want to clear things up.
On March 7, I delivered to Harrisburg 2,211 signatures, more than twice the 1,000 that Patrick needed to put his name on the ballot. As with all of these things, there is an error rate to be expected and, knowing that Andy had Larry Otter in his corner, we wanted to have as large a cushion as possible. You see, Larry Otter is known for challenging people's petitions. It's his hobby.
In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, there is a 7 day challenge period in which a qualified elector (so in this case, a Democrat from the 8th Congressional District) may challenge any candidate's signatures. Generally, this is only done if there are serious problems with the petitions and a reasonable chance that the challenge will result in a candidate not appearing on the ballot.
In this case, the challenge was just malicious.
In order to have Patrick Murphy's name removed from the ballot, Mr. Otter (who is acting as attorney for Jane Faust, the petitioner) will have to prove in a court of law that more than 1,200 individual signatures are invalid.
This will not happen.
The Warren camp sees the writing on the wall. They know that they can't win if there's anybody else on the ballot. So this is where they're putting their resources.
The actual petitioner, the woman who is so offended by our campaign's signatures, is Jane Faust.
Jane Faust is a convicted criminal.
Jane Faust was convicted of voter fraud.
Jane Faust, when running for REPUBLICAN COMMITTEE WOMAN in 1996 falsified her petitions.
Jane Faust was sentenced to 4 years disenfranchisement, one year probation, and is forever prohited from holding an office of trust or profit (including Committee person) in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
She has also been charged more recently with assaulting a police officer, but that's neither here nor there.
This is who the Warren camp chose as the person to represent them in making the case against Patrick Murphy.
As Andy likes to say, it's lunacy.
As things stand now, we will be required to appear in Commonwealth Court in Harrisburg on March 30 to answer the challenge. At this point, the Warren camp will have accomplished their goal: They will have forced us to waste precious resources--time and money--in order to defend what is, at best, a frivolous law suit.
The attorney that we've retained is very good, but not cheap...and this certainly wasn't in the budget for the campaign. I highly doubt that it's coincidental that they did this just as another fundraising quarter was coming to a close (meaning that when the serious political followers and donors look to see who's got the money to be considered a "top tier" candidate, we'll have a disadvantage).
Let me be clear. This suit will not deter us. If the Warren camp's intention is to question our character, bring it on.
If their intention is to make us look incompetent, bring it on.
If their intention is to get us out of the race, by hook or with a crook, bring it on.
We have enough signatures. We have enough support (at the recent endorsement meeting, we beat Andy by more than a 2-1 margin for the endorsement). And we are ready to take on Mike Fitzpatrick in November and return the district to Democratic control.
Thanks for all of your support,
Josh
Josh,
Thanks very much for taking time to respond and clear up any misunderstanding on this. Thanks for the anonymous comment also.
I'm not trying to be cute here, but I don't know which Anonymous comment I made...
Josh,
Sorry...I was referring to sem1480 (which wasn't really anonymous anyway, I now realize - please just chalk this one up to "user error"). Thanks.
Bob,
I found it convenient that you attacked Patrick Murphy and his supporters, including me, without presenting evidence of our alleged malice. What did we do exactly? Point out how Andy Warren switched parties so he could run as a Democrat in the primary in the hope of opposing Fitzpatrick (with whom Warren shared a record of voting the same way 100 percent of the time when they were both county commissioners, making your comparison of US to Republicans actually kind of comical itself)? Point out the fact that Larry Otter, working on behalf of your campaign, apparently challenges petitions for a hobby and Jane Faust, another person working for your campaign, was convicted of voter fraud? (Josh Nanberg pointed that out, actually).
Warren, on the other hand, has questioned whether or not Patrick Murphy should be allowed to run for the nomination as a Bucks County resident since he lived for a time in a district in Philadelphia. Here is Patrick’s response:
As a child, I spent my summers fishing in Tyler State Park. I played hockey in Bristol, and I began college at Bucks County Community College. And when I returned from the military, I chose to make my home in Bristol.
Warren has also made an issue of Murphy’s voting record. This is Patrick’s response:
When I was younger, I didn't vote as often as I should have-but I came back from (serving in) Iraq with my eyes opened; I have not missed an election since I got back to Pennsylvania, and I never will miss one again.
Both of those responses are good enough for me.
As far as your candidate is concerned…well, let’s just say he has a record of “tossing gasoline on fires,” so to speak (particularly when he worked for PennDOT). This is an excerpt from a highly thorough post on Andy Warren from the blogger Above Average Jane:
"PennDOT district executive Andy Warren says cooperative communities are far more likely to get road projects approved. The difference between Bucks County and Montgomery County is the difference between civilization and anarchy." Later in the same article "Bucks County is innately more civilized than Montgomery County -- it's that simple," said Warren after last week's so-called 'historic' conference that brought together five Bucks townships to start a dialogue for the first time over what to do with traffic, namely trucks. As an afterthought, the Bucks resident and former county commissioner urged a reporter to add to his quote, 'he said with a chuckle."" later in same article "So is Warren implying that Woodhaven Road residents -- who have sought to shut down the proejct -- are engaged in anarchy? "That impression has often crossed my mind," he said" (4/30/04)
I know people who would suffer REAL PAIN in the event that the Woodhaven Road construction project is finally approved and scheduled to commence. Warren should think about that. Given that Warren said that, it makes me wonder just how quickly he would uncork some emotionally charged remark that the Republicans would use against him in the general election (and we know how quickly he would sink in the polls if that occurred).
You also mentioned Warren’s support of Bush’s impeachment, which I think is the correct position (obviously, or else that banner and other related links wouldn’t be here). However, I’ve never been a “single issue” candidate on anything. I reiterated a few days ago the notion that we should be concentrating more on the election (put forward by Arianna Huffington and others with similar beliefs), and as much as I’d like to see Bush held accountable right now, I reluctantly have to agree with that. Patrick is by no means ruling that out, but only saying that he wants to take a cautious, deliberate approach to this. I think that’s prudent.
I’ll admit that I’m not 100 percent impartial on this, but it would still be nice to see your camp putting forward some original ideas on improving Bucks County and addressing the needs of its residents instead of bashing everyone in sight. We’re fighting back out of self defense because it’s necessary due to your campaign. I think most voters can plainly see the difference between the two approaches, borne out somewhat by the fact that Patrick recently received such an overwhelming endorsement from the party to run against Fitzpatrick in the fall.
Bob:
When I write something, I do put my name on it. See above. I am not now, nor have I ever been "sem1480"
As long as we're putting our names on things, though, when will Andy either a) admit his complicity if not outright encouragement of the challenge to our petions or b) disavow the challenge and publicly ask his supporters to drop this nuisance suit?
Bob-
Your sort of tactics really are more appropriate for the Republican Party. There is more than enough info out there about your candidate to paint a clear picture of him; and he's a loser (on more than one level). Just the connection to Jane Faust (appropriate name) is enough to turn my stomach.
I don't live in PA; but I'll be watching the race, hoping that our party is rid, in May, of your candidate and your ilk. In any case, the simple fact that the REAL Democratic candidate will have had to divert important resources to deal with your candidate's hijinks clearly reveals where your loyalties lie. And they're not with the party.
Post a Comment