Littell asks state GOP for ban on outside work

Why would NJGOP staff take sides in primaries - does demosntrate a conflict of interest.

Pulaski must work for NJGOP to be that vicious to a person who has worked vary hard for the GOP. 

Issue is debatable - tone of response too harsh.

People that work for state committee should not work in a primary against another GOPer.

Bergen Prince is correct, in addition,  the shameless tactics of some GOP egomaniacs, who practice crude politics is reason Republicans are leaving the party in droves.

Oroho won the primary, give him the seat now. Littell is clearly unable to do the job, unless it involves voting with the Democrats which he is excellent at.

Sadly, Ginny Littell has now managed to politically mimic the peculiar testosterone-related phenomenon sometimes associated with the ardent fans of a winning sports team – engaging in anti-social behavior following the victory. Thus, by this letter, Ginny has tagged herself as this year's classic "sore winner."

The following may come as a shocker to some -- given the salvos aimed this way just a few short months ago -- but in stark contrast to Ginny’s broadside, stands a recent action by Bill Winkler, the consultant for the Oroho team.  Very early in the morning on primary election day, Bill sent a gracious "win or lose" e-mail to both Guy Gregg and Dick Kamin, acknowledging the competitiveness of the race, and even attached a funny video clip reminder of a common battle yet to come (2008).

Of course, Ginny could point out that her battle is hardly done. She’s currently pushing very hard to become the county chair of Sussex, and she is actively supporting the candidacy of Peter Mancuso to replace Tom Wilson as the State Republican chair.

Hence, her thoroughly overblown "resentment" aimed at Todd Riffle for engaging in a small research contract for Guy Gregg, way back in December, and reported in Gregg’s first ELEC report. Riffle did absolutely no additional work for the campaign thereafter, despite repeated claims to the contrary by Ginny, et al.

She and the campaign systematically squeezed every bit of political benefit they could from that, including launching a series of highly personal attacks on Todd. He held his fire throughout, as perhaps he should have. My own view is that it is certainly commendable for a young guy whose wife is having a baby to feel obliged to provide for his family.

If the State Committee wants to ban outside work by employees, they should do so, and employees should have that understanding when they sign on to a restrictive contract. 

Ginny obviously understands family fealty, having repeatedly (and falsely) claimed, including in this latest missive, that there was a coordinated campaign to malign her husband on health and age grounds. The sad truth is that Ginny never missed an opportunity to bring that subject up, and she extracted whatever political gain she could from it.

But the clear implication in her letter that Todd was hired to gather ammunition for an attack on Bob’s health and age, is really shameful. She knows better.

And her statement that there was an inherent conflict in Todd doing $2,500 worth of work, really rings more than a bit false. Some wag might even be tempted to say that in crying conflict, the ex-lobbyist is making a Hamburg Mountain out of a molehill.

by Trochilus