To the Editor:
Many of you don’t know it, but on June 26th there will be a Republican Party Primary to decide the Republican Party Congressional candidate to oppose Nita Lowey in the 17th Congressional District this Fall.
One candidate, Joe Carvin, has the full support of the Westchester and Rockland County Republican parties, having been endorsed at their convention on March 27.
The other candidate, Jim Russell, secured a sufficient number of signatures to get his name on the ballot to oppose Mr. Carvin in the June 26th primary.
One has to wonder whether or not the people signing Mr. Russell’s petitions to get him on the ballot were aware of his background and of the stir he caused in 2010 when the Republican Party correctly withdrew their support for his candidacy because of the anti-Semitic, white separatist views Mr. Russell expressed in a 2001 essay.
Peter Applebome of the New York Times wrote a story about Mr. Russell on September 26, 2010 headlined: “How Far Is Too Far?” describing an infamous 2001 essay in which Mr. Russell seemed to embrace, among other things, racial separatism, eugenics and an assortment of historical and literary figures with anti-Semitic or Nazi ties. It also turns out that he has attended gatherings of groups with white nationalist views.
Has Mr. Russell renounced his writings since the 2010 election? Sadly, the answer is a loud and brutal NO!
I could quote in nauseating detail the hate spewing from Mr. Russell’s mind, but I don’t want to give it any more distribution than it already has. You can read the source material for yourself at this web site.
Suffice it to say, Mr. Russell wasn’t a fit candidate in 2010 to represent the Republican Party and he certainly is not in 2012.
This time out, Republicans can do the work of lawyers and courts. They can vote Jim Russell off the November ballot by voting for Joe Carvin in the Republican primary June 26.
And let’s be clear: Mr. Carvin represents everything Mr. Russell has denounced.
Mr. Carvin is married to an African-American and has mixed race children.
Mr. Carvin is friends with people of all religions and races – Protestants of all sects, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Mormons, Hispanics, Blacks, Indians, Chinese, Japanese, really, the people of the world.
He is comfortable working with, talking to, and having as friends, Americans of all political persuasions, and won his last race as Rye Town supervisor by a 2-1 majority in a Town with 2-1 Democratic over Republican registration.
The eyes of the County, the State, and, yes, the Nation will be on this June 26 Republican primary. Republicans, drown out the bigot, Mr. Russell, with a resounding vote and your vocal support for a Republican and American whom we can be proud of in Congress, Rye Town Supervisor Joe Carvin.
Dick Hubert
Rye Brook
On a separate note, if you cited President Obama's middle name with the intent to imply that he is a Muslim, that is factually incorrect. He is a Christian. Moreover, even if he were a Muslim, that would be wholly irrelevant. The U.S. is a country established on, among other basic principles, religious freedom. Muslims can be good citizens like any other American. Muslims can contribute in all walks of life, including in positions of leadership.
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-01/wall_street/31112566_1_trade-deficit-kirsten-gillibrand-town-supervisor
http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/ http://www.gainesville.com/article/20120615/NEWS/120619753/-1/entertainment?Title=Walt-Boyer-Agenda-21-is-insidious-socialism-in-disguise Agenda 21 is nothing but a socialist undertaking to have local governments become dominated by UN programs under the banner of sustainable development and protecting the environment. Read folks.... If Carvin wants an Agenda 21 he is in no way a Republican!! BTW: Rye is on the website already!! http://local2012.iclei.org/add-your-city/whos-already-in/?city=rye&country=United+States
Perhaps there was a scheduing conflict, perhaps Mr. Carvin had never committed to attend the event, or perhaps there were other technical issues that precluded his appearance e.g., the RFA event was the wrong forum for such discourse. A debate-setting or panel-type discussion would probably be conducive for such discourse. I'm not familiar with the event in question other than your description of it as a "meet & greet." Finally, there are cases where a messenger can be as important as the message. Occasionally, a messenger can be so deeply flawed that even if he espouses a message, that message becomes associated with the messenger's flaws. Any group tempted to endorse Mr. Russell on grounds that he might be the "more conservative" candidate faces that prospect. His flaws--specifically his past writings--would taint whatever message he carries, along with the reputation of any groups that back him. Endorsement of Mr. Russell would amount to a self-inflicted wound.
We have enough college to know that Anthropology clearly reveals Human genealogy, traditions, language and customs are passed down from the family, clan, tribal unit to the next generation. That is not Eugenics. So, I urge all good folks to vote your concious on June 26th, Republican Primary and focus on the general election. All else are just distractions, in my informed opinion.
Just for the record, Mr. Carvin was the first candidate to accept RFA's invitation, and he did so enthusiastically. It wasn't until he attended a meet the candidate night that was hastily set up for a few days earlier by Vinny Reda that we received a terse note from Carvin's manager. It just said he wouldn't be coming after all, due to a conflict. They have had no contact with us since that time. Leaves one wondering, doesn't it? Especially since Reda has warned candidates in the past to have nothing to do with any conservative tea party groups. A candidate meet and greet is actually a great forum for debate among the candidates. If Mr. Carvin wanted to confront Mr. Russell, it would have been a perfect setting for it. Lastly, RFA's meet and greet was merely an opportunity for the public to do just that with the candidates who are vying to represent them. Presence or absence of any candidate did not imply an endorsement. The event was merely a forum for them to meet the public, give their statements and be quizzed on their platforms. That would have included cross candidate discussion/debate if it was desired.
If only Obama would allow us to see every paper he and his wife ever wrote for school, his entrance applications, how his education was financed, his grades, etc. I suspect that this discussion about a white Republican man's one paper would be a non-starter. Let's also not forget Obama's allegiance to Rev Wright's anti-Ameican, Anti-White church and all the hate speach he supported via his presence. Carvin supported THAT? All I've ever heard bad about Russell is that he wrote I paper with a thesis. No one has ever shown me that this was the way he lived his daily life until he decided to run for public office. Thank you all for what you have written above and how it caused me to deeply consider my options. I will now vote for Russell.
The difference in policy between Mr. Carvin's more conservative positions and Rep. Lowey's more liberal ones is smaller than the gap between tolerance that should be possessed by all political candidates and Mr. Russell's racialist views. If. Mr. Russell wins, the Westchester and Rockland County GOP are very likely to continue to disavow any association with Mr. Russell.
Mr. Russell is the one who published racialist comments and that's solely his problem. For that reason, the Westchester and Rockland County GOP leadership have rightly rejected his candidacy. On June 26, all Republican primary voters will have the opportunity to do the same.
Let's be serious. We are a one-party system here in Rockland County. Reda & company have to go. With Carvin saying he will endorse Lowey makes him no different.