Friday, October 20th, 2006...6:06 am
Hayworth Synagogue Follow-Up
I’m finding out a few more fascinating facts about J. D. Hayworth’s latest publicity fiasco.
Apparently, although Hayworth had been telling the press that he was planning to visit Scottsdale’s Temple Beth Israel, he had privately told some near him that he wasn’t planning on going. He had lined up his two surrogates, the ones that spoke so well on his behalf, some time ago.
This is too bad, really. I’m not sure what he was so worried about, if he had stood up in front of the congregation and said, “You know, I didn’t know enough about Henry Ford’s history and how hurtful it was to your community. I’m sorry.” I think he would have found them quite forgiving. Something about being in a house of worship does that to people. Heck, this even did wonders for George Wallace, and Hayworth didn’t even do anything half as bad as Wallace did.
Instead, he played this weasely game. He wanted to look like he was asking for forgiveness, while all along looking to bail. Is he that afraid to admit that he made a mistake? If he had appologized back when this thing broke, this story would just be the whinings and rantings of people like me. Now, his stubborness just seems to be dragging this whole thing out.
Somebody was eager to point out to me that the two speakers, Jonathan and Irit Tratt, are Jewish. Well, I didn’t think that Hayworth’s campaign would send a couple of Methodists in to talk to a Jewish congregation. Although, sending these two folks didn’t seem to be the brightest idea either. The audience found their statements insulting no matter what their faith was, and any chance that Hayworth had for anything resembling reconcilliation was out the window.
To make things even more fun, it turns out that Jonathan Tratt was indicted back in 2000 for a bookmaking operation run out of a Scottsdale deli. J. D. knows how to pick ‘em.
3 Comments
October 20th, 2006 at 8:58 am
Jonathan Tratt was indicted back in 2000 for a bookmaking operation run out of a Scottsdale deli.
Devil’s advocate: do we know for sure that this is the same guy?
I almost had a pretty good scoop on the dark criminal past of Don Chilton until the Paine camp told me that no, that’s a different guy…
October 20th, 2006 at 3:55 pm
I wondered about that too.
It seems right - the ages and locales match up, but I’m not sure it’s the same Jonathan Tratt. At least not sure enough to go with it.
Doesn’t matter though, what the guy on the state did was bad enough without the bookmaking indictment.
No need to pile on after the whistle has blown.
October 20th, 2006 at 11:23 pm
The numbers trend doesn’t look good for JD. He’s in deep trouble. If this wave is as big as some are thinking, he goes along with possibly Renzi and Kyl.
All three are still UNDER fifty percent.
Leave a Reply