Marks & Pappas argue: Far-Left Democrats are preferable to Moderate Republicans

A precedent is being set within New Jersey’s Republican family. It is the precedent of fratricide. That if you disagree on issues of substance – or even those of perceived “loyalty” to a national figure or, dare we say it in New Jersey, the national party platform (for there is none here) – then it is okay to kill your fellow Republican outside the arena of the primary.

The tradition of old was that these matters were settled in the internecine contests in June and that afterwards both winners and losers joined together in commonality to defeat the real enemy, the common foe. This method was created by men who had been to war, who had trained hard, unit pitted against unit, who had their likes and dislikes even within their own unit, but who understood that they had to put all that aside and fight together – if they wanted to survive.

But the draft ended a long time ago – before many in politics today were even born – and military service is no longer the commonplace it once was. Now we hold grudges, nurse them, fondle them, and make them the reason why.

And so we come to Martin Marks and Harry Pappas. They have formed a third ticket in the District 21 Assembly race. Like the Democrat Party candidates, they are running against incumbent Republicans Jon Bramnick and Nancy Munoz.

Marks is a former Republican mayor and Pappas is a former Democrat county chairman. Both have publicly stated that their campaign is about defeating the incumbent Republicans. Marks and Pappas acknowledge they have no chance of winning themselves and indeed they have not even taken the necessary measures to mount a serious campaign in terms of resources, organization, policies, or time.

Marks and Pappas are present in the race for the purpose of killing the Republicans. And in killing the Republicans, Marks and Pappas will play an important role in electing Democrat candidates Lisa Mandelblatt and Stacey Gunderman.

They are not just any Democrats. They are pink pussy-hat wearing members of Action Together New Jersey – a far-Left organization that supports the policies of the so-called “Jihad Squad”, so often criticized by President Donald Trump. They support Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ Green New Deal and are actively cohabitating with an Islamic group that campaigns for the anti-Semitic BDS Movement. This group has been designated a “terrorist” organization by one of America’s closest Islamic allies – and we have just sent troops there and they are actively engaged!

How can helping to engineer the election of two such dangerous, far-Left Democrats be thought of as a “conservative” act? It is an act of delusion by anyone advancing it.

Whether you like him or not, Jon Bramnick is the Republican Leader in the Assembly, and as such, he is our Colonel. If you have a disagreement with your commanding officer, you do not replace him by allowing the enemy to kill him.

Harry Pappas is clearly a fellow-traveler of the Left. His actions on behalf the Democrats are transparent. Worse is the so-called “idealism” expressed by Martin Marks. This “idealism” is like that of Jane Fonda, who hated the policies of her country so much that she called for the execution of American military personnel.

In killing the candidacy of Nancy Munoz, Martin Marks will be derailing one of the most important issues on the agenda of social conservatives: The Human Trafficking and Child Exploitation Prevention Act. Assemblywoman Munoz is the legislation’s prime sponsor in the Assembly and its most outspoken proponent.

Both the U.S. State Department and the United Nations have warned about the rise in human trafficking and the sexual exploitation of women and children. These and other national and international agencies have warned against the kind of porous borders created as the result of policies like Governor Phil Murphy’s illegal Sanctuary State scheme.

Due to the hard work of legislators like Assemblywoman Munoz – and activists like Rev. Mandy Leverett, Rev. Greg Quinlan, Rev. Dominick Cuozzo, Rev. Phil Rizzo, Gabriella Brandeal, Josh Jalinski, Barb Dedeyn, Theresa Yarosh, and many others – the Human Trafficking and Child Exploitation Prevention Act has enough bi-partisan support to become law. The defeat of Assemblywoman Munoz at the hands of Marks & Pappas/ Mandelblatt & Gunderman would be a horrible set-back for those currently enslaved or about to be enslaved by human traffickers.

Martin Marks should have taken this into consideration before launching his petulant jihad against those with whom he has some disagreement, on behalf of those with whom he agrees on nothing. As in the Vietnam War – to any thinking man – the sins of your own should always be preferable to the tyranny of others.

Rev. Mandy Leverett has been working with victims across New Jersey – from all walks of life. Marks should have talked with her and met some of those victims before deciding to bring down the Human Trafficking and Child Exploitation Prevention Act.

But all that is past now. Martin Marks has done what he has done –aided or guided by ex-Democrat Party boss Harry Pappas. The question now becomes… Who will follow him? Who will compound this?

A precedent is being set within New Jersey’s Republican family. It is the precedent of fratricide.

Why would Pappas & Marks choose a Liberal group to host a debate?

Harry Pappas is the former chairman of the Union County Democrat Party machine. Martin Marks is the former Mayor of Scotch Plains. They are candidates for two Assembly seats in a six-person race in District 21.

Some have said that Pappas and Marks are acting in concert with far-Left Democrat candidates Lisa Mandelblatt and Stacey Gunderman. They say that Pappas and Marks want to skim enough Republican votes away from incumbents Jon Bramnick and Nancy Munoz so that the Republicans lose.

The latest thing to raise an eyebrow or two is the debate that Pappas and Marks agreed to participate in with the Democrats. Pappas and Marks say they’re “conservative” – but why would anyone calling themselves “conservative” agree to a debate hosted by a Liberal group like the League of Women Voters?

The League of Women Voters (LWV) hasn’t hosted a Presidential debate since 1984, when Democrat Walter Mondale faced-off against incumbent Republican Ronald Reagan. That’s because the LWV isn’t only concerned about getting more people out to vote – it takes ideological positions on controversial issues.

The League of Women Voters is a pro-abortion, anti-Second Amendment, pro-illegal immigration, pro-ObamaCare organization. Here is just a sampling of what you will find on the group’s website:

League Joins Amicus Brief in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission: The case involves a bakery in Colorado which refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple citing religious objections. The brief that the League joined argues that allowing the bakery to refuse service violates public accommodations laws and opens the door to discrimination of other groups.

League Urges U.S. House to Pass Clean Dream Act: Members of the League's Lobby Corps will be visiting with members of the U.S. House urging passage of the Dream Act of 2017. The legislation will ensure that the 800,000 "dreamers"--young immigrants brought illegally to the U.S. by their parents--can establish legal residency within the country.

We believe that the proliferation of handguns and semi-automatic assault weapons in the United States is a major health and safety threat to its citizens… Strong federal measures to limit the accessibility and regulate the ownership of firearms by private citizens is necessary for consumer safety.

The League of Women Voters United States (LWVUS) and the League of Women Voters of Oregon (LWVOR) filed an Amicus Brief in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Juliana et al v. United States. The Leagues continue to support the 21 young people from across the United States who have filed a landmark constitutional climate change lawsuit against the federal government, via the Eugene, Oregon- based organization, Our Children's Trust.

“Besides Planned Parenthood, the bill has drawn opposition from groups such as the Pennsylvania Medical Society, the state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and the Pennsylvania League of Women Voters.”

To mark the 41st anniversary of the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, the League of Women Voters of Texas guest blogged on the new abortion restrictions in their state.

So why are Pappas and Marks participating in a debate hosted by such a biased Left-wing organization? If they truly are conservatives, like they claim, they will demand a neutral host. But if they are shills for the Democrats… well, we will know soon enough.