Talk:Bob Menendez

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tjm58 (talk | contribs) at 18:36, 1 November 2012 (→‎heh, the controversies go much deeper than that). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Problems with Kean Jr Campaign Staff Editing This Page

Re: RobbyKyer-- it has already been proven by BlueJersey.com that several changes have been made to this article by Jill Hazelbaker, the Kean campaign press secretary. They traced it back to the IP address, 70.90.20.85 (http://www.bluejersey.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2542).

This article has a problem with anonymous editors, and single issue editors such as RobbyKyer, inserting only POV propaganda against unfavored targets. Check their contributions, they contribute only to articles that harm Bob Menendez. Abe Froman 17:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, my opinion on the issue is irrelevant, as that would be bias. All I have added are cited quotes from mainstream and objective newspapers (Some would say the NYT is liberal-leaning) about the the topic of this article. If you would like to "help" Menendez, then search for your own information and quotes. If your so offended, counter the information with your own. --RobbyKyer (from Kean Jr. campaign) 18:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The quotes are unguided missiles in what was a well-flowing article. If they cannot be integrated, and anonymous editors resist their condensing, remove them. Abe Froman 19:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The quotes and allegations have nothing to do with the Kean campaign. None of those quotes were released or created by his camp. Many of the quotes are also from newspaper articles dated before the campaign kicked off. To imply that those quotes are a direct result of Kean's "electoral ploy" is biased and misguided. --RobbyKyer (from Kean Jr. campaign) 14:27, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hatchet Job

This article has become a hatchet job. I believe it should be reverted to before the anon and new editor began their campaign. The corruption allegations are untrue, New York Times and Newark Star Ledger reporters covering the case 26 years ago disagree with them. [1][1] The four assistant United States attorneys who prosecuted the case in question 26 years ago called Menendez's behavior in the case "gutsy" and "courageous." The prosecutors say Menendez was never in legal jeopardy. [2].Abe Froman 13:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC). If the section goes back in, be ready to support it.[reply]

Restoring FACTS

Every quote under "charges of corruption" is cited and sourced, FACTS from mainstream newspapers. The public has the right to know what newspapers report about Bob Menendez. The four prosecutors, by the way, are public Democratic supporters and fundraisers, so while what they say can be posted, it cannot replace or supercede newspaper quotes. It is completely justified to have cited newspaper quotes on the article. Please refrain from deleting factual information.

--RobbyKyer (from Kean Jr. campaign) 15:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The NYTimes article in question does not charge Menendez with corruption, it states that New Jersey has had corrupt politicians, none of them Menendez. This is a guilt by association hatchet job. Abe Froman 15:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Menendez Opposes Workplace Raids on Illegal Immigrants

Menendez has opposed workplace raids designed to locate illegal immigrants. He has even played the race card in this instance, although the raids were merely conducted to assure that people are obeying the law. Senator Mendendez should represent all of the legal citizens of New Jersey rather than assuming that he must pander to all Latinos, including those who are violating America's laws. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.144.245 (talk) 23:19, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Politics NJ Is Not a Reliable Source

re: RobbyKyer's contributions: Citations in the hatchet-job section of the article rely on a blind link to an advertisement on a political blog, www.politicsnj.com . This does not meet the conditions set in WP:CITE and WP:RS. Passages anchored by politicsnj should be removed because they are not cited correctly, and the source is unknown and unreliable. Abe Froman 15:29, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen many problems with other article in blind links to www.politicsnj.com, which I agree should refer to specific articles as described in WP:CITE. As long as the criteria of attribution is met, there is no reason to treat PoliticsNJ-sourced articles any differently than those from any other source which is also compliant with WP:RS. Alansohn 16:30, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PoliticsNJ actually can be a reliable source, but unfortunately they don't seem to maintain an archive, so all article links simply go to the homepage even after the article is no longer there. I wonder if there is a way to solve this problem, perhaps with the cache or something?

NYTimes opinion articles used as fact

re: RobbyKyer's contributions: Three citations on the hatchet-job section of the article use The New York Times op-ed page as fact. This is not in accordance with WP:RS, so the passages should be marked as opinions or removed. Abe Froman 15:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having read through WP:RS several times in the past, and reviewing it again now, I see no criteria that excludes use of items from an otherwise reliable source simply because it is an editorial or opinion item. If there are specific issues regarding the attribution or the manner in which the source is being used, they should be addressed on an item-by-item basis. Using WP:RS as a blanket justification to remove material is unjustified. Alansohn 16:30, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

in response

Opinions expressed in newspaper and blog articles are relevant to this article. Hence the title of the section - "charges of corruption" which does not state that the quotes are facts, just instances of allegations. Completely justified in keeping the section alive and well.

--RobbyKyer (from Kean Jr. campaign) 16:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The passages from NYTimes' op-ed must be marked so. Otherwise they are treated as facts by disinterested readers. Please mark them before I do. Abe Froman 16:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

a charge would be a formal accusation, not an editorial

Hatchet Job

The hatchet job op-ed quotes against Menendez were condensed into a single paragraph, but anon's have seen fit to restore the unwieldly and clearly biased passage. The previous condensed version was superior, and easily readable. It should be restored. Abe Froman 16:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dont delete quotes

Just because you dislike what mainstream newspapers and newssources say about Bob Menendez does not mean you have the right to hide it from the public. All quotes are cited and sourced.

If you feel it is biased, add your own cited quotes in favor of Menendez, but refrain from deleting the sourced quotes I posted.

--RobbyKyer (from Kean Jr. campaign) 17:14, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The quotes are unrelated to each other, blatantly POV, and do not belong as 20% of the article's content. Clean it up, before I do. Abe Froman 17:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV Editors

This article has a problem with anonymous editors, and single issue editors such as RobbyKyer, inserting only POV propaganda against unfavored targets. Check their contributions, they contribute only to articles that harm Bob Menendez. Abe Froman 17:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, my opinion on the issue is irrelevant, as that would be bias. All I have added are cited quotes from mainstream and objective newspapers (Some would say the NYT is liberal-leaning) about the the topic of this article. If you would like to "help" Menendez, then search for your own information and quotes. If your so offended, counter the information with your own. --RobbyKyer (from Kean Jr. campaign) 18:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The quotes are unguided missiles in what was a well-flowing article. If they cannot be integrated, and anonymous editors resist their condensing, remove them. Abe Froman 19:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The quotes and allegations have nothing to do with the Kean campaign. None of those quotes were released or created by his camp. Many of the quotes are also from newspaper articles dated before the campaign kicked off. To imply that those quotes are a direct result of Kean's "electoral ploy" is biased and misguided. --RobbyKyer (from Kean Jr. campaign) 14:27, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: RobbyKyer-- it has already been proven by BlueJersey.com that several changes have been made to this article by Jill Hazelbaker, the Kean campaign press secretary. They traced it back to the IP address, 70.90.20.85 (http://www.bluejersey.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2542).

POV passage removal (again)

I have removed the POV passage until the www.politicsnj.com quotations are properly cited, with one click to the material. Currently the click goes to politicsnj.com alone. This violates Wikipedia:Citation. The passage was also removed because throwing random quotations up on the page does not make an article. I tried to integrate the quotations into a coherent paragraph, but POV editors insist on damaging the article by reinserting the random quote chaos. Address these two issues, politicsnj.com citation and quote integration, before restoring this tendentious material. Abe Froman 15:01, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Passages from www.politicsnj.com have been removed until proper citation found. Please refrain from blatantly deleting and censoring other properly cited quotes from mainstream newspapers from this article. It is unclear where my analysis or opinion is played out in this article. All I am doing is showing the public what newspapers have reported and editorialized about Menendez. If you wish to censor properly cited newspaper quotes, then I will continue to revert them back. Thank you for your understanding. --RobbyKyer (from Kean Jr. campaign) 15:17, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The quotations must be integrated into a coherent paragraph instead of the current stochastic laundry hit list. Take a shot at it. Abe Froman 15:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A list is much more clear than a vague paragraph. --RobbyKyer (from Kean Jr. campaign) 17:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The paragraph, as it stands, includes the allegations RobbyKyer is desparate to make while allowing the article to survive in a readable format. Please do not revert to that awful list. Abe Froman 19:30, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Residency and marital status

I have restored, yet again, the fact that Menendez lives in Hoboken, NOT Union City. See his campaign website bio where this is clearly stated. I have also restored his marital status as divorced. This is well-known and not disputed as far as I am aware. I have no idea why either of things has been changed. -- Jim Miller 21:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kean campaign reps editing this article?

I saw this post at a blog, and thought that the matter discussed bears watching/investigation here, if true. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 18:16, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Political beliefs

Would anyone be interested in working to create a section on "Political beliefs" for Menendez? Kean has one. Mistermind 15:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph

Do they have the right photograph in the "House of Representatives" section of this article? It doesn't look like him, and the caption says he was speaking in Texas, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense either. -- Fogelmatrix 16:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the following link for the provenance of the image. Alansohn 05:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Yorker column on this article

"Dirty WikiTricks" Bwithh 20:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming

Someone moved this page to Robert Menéndez; I've moved it back here. He himself doesn't seem to use an accent in the name, and it seems a bit presumptuous for us to change the spelling used by the subject... Shimgray | talk | 14:56, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Defending reverted edit

I had edited this article to reflect that, in spite of helping Sen. Clinton, he eventually endorsed the Democratic nominee, second, that his efforts and postures have not been "anti-Cuban" but "anti-Castro" and third that he cut a TV spot for a public official indicted for corruption. I reedited this last reference to keep it strictly neutral. Pr4ever (talk) 11:21, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recall?

Should probably be something about this on the page, but I don't know enough about the situation. GreenReaper (talk) 16:32, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

heh, the controversies go much deeper than that

The controversy section seems to just list incidents of the slandering of Menendez by his Republican opponents. There are some other controversies surrounding Menendez that are very interesting -- such as proven (and in some cases admitted) links to Cuban Exile terrorism and drug trafficking. Menendez is a friend to Eduardo Arocena (and publicly donated to Arocena's defense fund while he was on trial) of the Omega 7 Cuban Exile terrorist group. Some of his close affiliates in the Cuban Exile community have also been alleged to traffic large amounts of cocaine. Factcheck has confirmed several of the core points of said allegations, which were originally put forth by the Republican Tom Kean in NJ: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2006/sopranos_lite_casting_menendez_in_a_culture.html. Most significantly, Arocena has been convicted of over 20 counts of felonies, including first-degree murder. Also a lawyer for the government of Venezuela, in the course of seeking the extradition of the notorious terrorist and mass-murderer Luis Posada Carriles, cited the admission of Menendez's own office that he received money from a collaborator and financial patron of Posada (see http://venezuela-us.org/2011/03/14/el-paso-diary-day-25-of-the-posada-carriles-trial-follow-the-money/). 74.102.158.68 (talk) 18:05, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


About the Daily Caller story, i believe it is newsworthy, and as the DC has been an acceptable source on other BLP it dont see why it isnt here. HOWEVER, is there a way to WORD the accusation to better placate those that do not want it on here? perhaps "The Daily Caller website has accused the Sen. of blah blah blah an accusation his staff has flat out denied"Tjm58 (talk) 18:36, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "New Jersey Senator's Rival Faults Him in 80's Corruption Case, but History Disagrees", Jim Dwyer, New York Times, June 25, 2006
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bob_Menendez&oldid=520933503"