WyBlog, the best thing about New Jersey since the invention of the 24 hour diner.
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are "I'm from the government and I'm here to help." - Ronald Reagan
CH 2.0 Info Center
The Jersey Report
Labor Union Report
Net Right Nation
The Patriot Post Newsletter
Victor Davis Hanson
J! E! T! S! Jets! Jets! Jets!
NJ.com Caldwell Forum
The Caldwells Patch
The Jersey Tomato Press
"This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, social issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes."
#VRWC RSS feed:News Ticker Widget
Tonight Donald Trump will hold a campaign rally at the Ladd Peebles Stadium, home to the University of South Alabama's football team. Thirty to forty thousand people are expected to attend.
GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump is again moving his Friday evening rally in Mobile, Ala., to a venue with more seating amid overwhelming demand, according to a Thursday news report.
Trump had already moved from the Mobile Civic Center Theater to the center's main arena, which has a capacity of 14,000. Tickets for Trump's stop were selling so quickly, however, another venue move was needed.
"It's going to end up at 30 to 40 thousand people in Alabama," Trump said this week.
Ladd Peebles Stadium hosts the South Alabama Jaguars's home games, as well as two college bowl games a season. The sporting arena reportedly has maximum capacity of 50,000 people.
London bookmakers now have Trump's odds of winning the GOP nomination at 7 to 2, only slightly behind Jeb Bush.
Of course, Jeb Bush couldn't attract 40,000 supporters if he gave away free NoDoz.
"Right down the road we have Jeb," he said of the former Florida governor, who was hosting his own event in nearby Derry.
"Very small crowd ... you know what's happening to Jeb's crowd right down the street?" Trump asked. "They're sleeping now. I don't see how he's electable."
Of course Jeb's wimpy, whiny, guilty-white-"moderate" GOP establishment
losers supporters don't see how Trump is electable either.
One group is wrong.
I'm starting to think it's not Team Trump.
That is, Donald Trump is on to something. And as he racks up the crowds he's also slowly trading the bombast for sensible sound bites.
For example, here's how he answered the charge he's really a closet Democrat in a recent one-on-one interview with John Hawkins of Right Wing News.
Well, the first thing I'd say is Ronald Reagan was a Democrat, actually with a very liberal bent and he became a Republican conservative and he was somebody I knew and liked and got along with very well. But, you know, I think it's important to know I grew up…I started in Queens, but I moved into Manhattan as a young man into a small studio apartment in Manhattan. And everybody in Manhattan, you know, it's a Democrat area.
That's what they have. They have Democrats and …Republicans are……you can forget it. If you're the Democrat primary winner, you automatically win the election. So you grow up with that and, of course, I wasn't thinking very much in terms of politics. I was a businessman and the reason I gave to everybody was because it ended up that I was a world-class businessman. You know, I built a great company and when you're a businessman, you give to everybody. You don't say, "Oh, gee, I'm not going to give." You give to everybody. I think that hurdle has totally been passed, John. You know people understand it and they dig it. Actually they dig it. And I'm honest about it. I say, hey, look, and that's part of the problem of the system because if you look right now with Jeb Bush and all these guys, they've got all this money raised and everybody that gives them money has tremendous power over them. I mean they're like puppets. They're like total puppets and I don't need money. I use my own money and these people are totally controlled by their donors and their special interests and their lobbyists — and nobody knows the system better than I do. I mean I'm a professional at this system and it's a system that has to be changed.
The first step in solving the problem is recognizing that there is a problem.
The second step is putting yourself in a position to solve the problem.
Washington can't be fixed from the outside. But it's going to take an outsider to fix it. Which is why the outsiders are gaining so much traction. When you look at the latest opinion polls the establishment guys are taking a beating.
A month ago, what I'll call the Not-Washington Crowd of candidates — Trump, neurosurgeon Benjamin Carson and businesswoman Carly Fiorina, plus anti-establishment Sen. Ted Cruz — collectively got about 38 percent of voters, excluding undecideds, in the Huffington Post Pollster Average. Eight current or ex-governors got a combined 45 percent.
Now, the tables have more than turned. The Not-Washington Crowd has 50 percent, and the governors have fallen to 35 percent.
The biggest risers have been Trump, Fiorina and Carson, in that order. The biggest drops: Scott Walker, then Jeb Bush. (Everyone else in the 17-person field has been virtually flat.)
Voters have been drawn to Trump, I think, for a few reasons. To some extent, it's as simple as this: People are angry, Trump knows it, and he's s conducting a master class in Madison Avenue-style persuasion, as Dilbert creator Scott Adams recently detailed on his blog. (Who else but a cartoonist could explain this campaign?)
But the success of the other Not-Washington folks, at the expense of those long deemed front-runners, also looks like a considered vote of no-confidence in the governing class. A lot of voters no longer believe politicians can fix government. They see Trump's "Make America Great Again" ball cap and think the hat might be cheesy, but the slogan is dead-on. It's much the same sentiment, albeit not the exact playbook, that turned David Perdue into Georgia's junior senator last year.
America is on the ropes.
Trump's been on the ropes, and he's bounced back.
America will be great again. And Donald Trump just may be the guy who can make it happen.
Hillary's Clinton's email security plan: what happens in the bathroom stays in the bathroom.
The IT company Hilary Clinton chose to maintain her private email account was run from a loft apartment and its servers were housed in the bathroom closet, Daily Mail Online can reveal.
Daily Mail Online tracked down ex-employees of Platte River Networks in Denver, Colorado, who revealed the outfit's strong links to the Democratic Party but expressed shock that the 2016 presidential candidate chose the small private company for such a sensitive job.
One, Tera Dadiotis, called it 'a mom and pop shop' which was an excellent place to work, but hardly seemed likely to be used to secure state secrets. And Tom Welch, who helped found the company, confirmed the servers were in a bathroom closet.
Sure makes it easy to flush the evidence!
And talk about the shit hitting the fan...
Because, really, this stinks.
But now we know what Hillary means by "data dump."
Maybe she thought the Internet was just a series of tubes.
Gee, I'm on a roll here!
Sadly though, almost no one is surprised by Her Majesty's complete disregard
for even the most rudimentary security measures. It's amost like she
wants America to go down the drain.
Is there anyone in the Democratic Party who isn't old, white, and past retirement age? Because c'mon, Al Gore? For president? Again?
The best sign that Hillary is in trouble is that even Al Gore insiders are talking up a potential run.
Because why re-enact Bush vs Clinton when you can generate Real Excitement with Round 2 of Bush vs Gore? Florida, here we come!
Supporters of Al Gore have begun a round of conversations among themselves and with the former vice president about his running for president in 2016, the latest sign that top Democrats have serious doubts that Hillary Clinton is a sure thing.
Gore, 67, won the popular vote in the 2000 election, and has been mentioned as a possible candidate in every contested Democratic primary since then. He instead spent much of the 2000s focused on environmental campaigning and business ventures. He has largely slipped out of public view more recent years.
"But in recent days, they're getting the old gang together," a senior Democrat told BuzzFeed News.
"They're figuring out if there's a path financially and politically," the Democrat said. "It feels more real than it has in the past months."
Democrats: yesterday's candidates, tomorrow!
In other words, they're fresh out of new ideas. Bring on the retreads!
Or rather, trade one old tired retread (Hillary) for another (Gore, or Biden).
Because, all that talk about "diversity" nonwithstanding, they're really the party of Old White Folks Who Want To Be President.
Hillary Clinton? Old white gal (67).
Bernie Sanders? Old white guy (73).
Jim Webb? Old white guy (69).
Lincoln Chaffee? Old white guy (62).
Joe Biden? Old white guy (72).
Al Gore? Old white guy (67).
Martin O'Malley? Middle aged white guy (52).
Elizabeth Warren? Old white gal, pretending to be Native American (66).
That Obama fellow sure seems like a one-off, eh? Maybe, even a token minority dude to fool the low-information voters. Two terms for the young, hip, black guy, and it's right back to their stronghold of old white people.
Meanwhile, it's the Republicans who demonstrate actual diversity in their candidates. Five minorities (African-American, Indian-American, Latino). And no one over the age of 70. Heck, they've even got seven folks younger than me running. Plus a woman who's actually got real world experience working with, and for, average Americans.
But let's not jump to conclusions. I'm sure not all Democrats are closet
racists. Just the ones who pick their presidential candidates.
Democrats are worried that the furor surrounding Hillary Clinton's private email server will be prolonged and intensified after her sudden move to hand it over to the FBI.
The Clinton campaign's decision to give up the server and a thumb drive containing backup copies of emails left Democrats scratching their heads as to why the former secretary of State had resisted for months turning over the server.
Coupled with new polls that suggest Clinton is vulnerable, Democrats are nearing full-on panic mode.
"I'm not sure they completely understand the credibility they are losing, by the second," said one Democratic strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "At some point this goes from being something you can rationalize away to something that becomes political cancer. And we are getting pretty close to the cancer stage, because this is starting to get ridiculous."
Buying a book on how to permanently delete emails probably didn't help her cause either.
So as the FBI zeroes in, Huma Abedin lawyers up.
Politico reports today that Huma Abedin has a team of lawyers on the case as she comes under scrutiny from both Congress and federal judges probing the evasion of FOIA demands during Hillary's tenure — and Abedin's unusual financial arrangements at State.
And don't forget Cheryl Mills and her bald-faced pledge to delete all of her emails in defiance of both congressional and court orders.
A fish rots from the head. And they can smell the rot in Camp Chappaqua all the way down in Joe Biden's Vice Presidential vacation retreat.
Vice President Joe Biden is using part of his vacation in South Carolina this week to sound out friends and family about a presidential bid, as some Democrats press him to enter the race and give the party another option in the face of lingering controversies involving Hillary Clinton.
From his vacation spot on Kiawah Island, Mr. Biden is giving the strongest signal yet that he is actively considering making a third run at the presidency. He is asking political allies for advice and gauging the strength of Mrs. Clinton's campaign as he weighs his options, people familiar with the matter said. Mr. Biden is expected to announce his decision next month.
"He's taking input from a lot of people he cares about and respects," said James Smith, a South Carolina legislator and Biden supporter who said he has urged the vice president to run. "He knows where I stand. It's just got to be his decision."
Because one septuagenarian white guy in the race isn't enough.
Joe Biden isn't the Democrats' Great White Hope. He might be testing the waters, but it's Elizabeth Warren who's standing by, patiently waiting for The Call.
Warren bowed out of this race months ago in deference to Hillary. But now that Hillary is mortally wounded, I can already see the "heroic" press conference. I could write the script.
Elizabeth Warren will step up to the podium and say, "I've been a fighter for underdogs my entire life. I've fought for women, African Americans, Hispanics, gays, unions, the poor, the working class, mothers on welfare, children without enough food to eat. In light of Hillary Clinton's distractions, I have decided for the good of this country and my party to re-think my decision. I believe my party needs me. I believe my country needs me. Consumers need me. The working class needs me. So…I've decided to enter the race for president of the United States."
And just like that … Hillary is done.
Warren fires up the Democrats looney-lefty base even moreso than Barack Obama. She can preach about the "War On Women" far better than Hillary ever could. And she embodies all the Democrats' perpetually angry grievance groups in one (admittedly fake) bundle of populist mendacity. But what else would you expect from the self-appointed grandmother of Occupy Wall Street, right?
Forget Bernie Sanders. Elizabeth Warren is the perfect purveyor of the Moocher Class mantra — Free Stuff for us! That's why all my ultra-liberal friends, who currently voice tepid but as of yet unwavering support for Hillary Clinton, swoon with dreamy eyes whenever her name is mentioned. Elizabeth Warren is the Democrats' new, and definitely improved messiah.
She'll lead them to the Promised Land. Or so they'd like to believe.
Funny thing though. Wasn't that Obama fellow supposed to do that too?
The latest Fox News national poll finds another reshuffling in the race for the 2016 Republican nomination, as Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker gets a post-announcement bump and businessman Donald Trump claims more of the spotlight.
Among Republican primary voters, Trump captures 18 percent. He's closely followed by Walker at 15 percent and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush at 14 percent. No one else reaches double-digits.
Support for Trump is up seven percentage points since last month and up 14 points since May. He's also the candidate GOP primary voters say they are most interested in learning more about during the debates.
Now, you may not like Donald Trump. I'm certainly not a fan, for a whole host of reasons not having anything to do with his current populist rhetoric. But he's out there telling people what they want to hear. He's saying things that need to be said. He's resonating with a whole lot of voters.
And the establishment, on both sides of the aisle, is scared of that.
The GOP shouldn't be.
In fact, they should embrace Trump.
Ride his wave. Harness the energy he's unleashing, and direct it into a dagger aimed at the heart of the Obama - Clinton progressive juggernaut.
Democrat policies are failed policies. And right now Trump is highlighting one of their more spectacular failures — unfettered illegal immigration coupled with law-flouting "sanctuary" cities. It's a deadly combination, and Kate Steinle's murder is the straw that broke the camel's back.
The fact that San Francisco democrats are unrepentant, doubling down on their sanctuary policies while reflexively calling for more useless gun control laws, only serves to further highlight how out of touch they are with average Americans.
So instead of bashing Trump, somebody had better figure out how to get him and his followers on board their bus.
What I'm trying to make clear is that while Donald Trump's prospects of either winning the GOP nomination or becoming the next president approach zero, there are an awful lot of people out there who have proven open to voting for non-viable fringe candidates. And if Donald Trump were to run as a third-party candidate and get even half of Ross Perot's numbers, then it is difficult to see how any Republican nominee could beat any Democratic nominee in 2016.
So before we go any further, consider: Donald Trump--the Donald Trump--holds in his hands something like veto power over the Republican quest to win the White House. Sit with that for a moment.
There are only two reasonable conclusions to be drawn from the Trump Contingency: (1) Democracy doesn't work and we all need to get behind Sweet Meteor of Death 2016; or (2) To the extent that Trump is standing in front of any sort of movement, that movement needs to be co-opted, not vanquished, if Republicans want to have a chance of victory this cycle.
If you want option #2-and I understand if you prefer #1-then you have to start by figuring out what Trump is selling that attracts voters. And this doesn't seem like rocket science.
Indeed. Trump is selling the one issue that overwhelmingly resonates with GOP primary voters. Immigration.
In 2012, the entire Republican field was caught by surprise when it turned out that immigration was the defining issue of the primary campaign. Without anyone having noticed, immigration displaced abortion as the major litmus test for GOP candidates. And then, to show that 2012 wasn't an aberration, two years later an unknown, unfunded, econ professor bushwhacked Eric Cantor by 11 points in a Republican House primary in Virginia. His primary issue-indeed, just about his only issue-was immigration.
So Republican strategists (and their candidates) ought to understand that Republican voters care a lot about immigration. And yet, the attitude of the GOP establishment towards these folks seems to be, as Mickey Kaus jokes, they just "cling to their rage about immigration because they can't get what they really want: Low capital gains taxes."
To say that the GOP establishment is out of touch is an understatement.
They lost to The Worst President In History, twice.
And they're on track to lose to the Worst Secretary Of State Ever.
Unless they get off their rocking chairs and give the voters what we want.
Here's a hint. What we don't want is a xenophobic nut. We want a candidate who'll treat immigration like the serious issue that we believe it is. Which means doing 5 things:
1. Embrace the immigrant heritage of America.
2. Distinguish between legal and illegal immigration.
3. Make the case that the rule of law still means something, no matter what John Roberts says.
4. Articulate that whatever benefits immigration may have, it comes with costs, too, as we see in the murder of Kathryn Steinle.
5. Explain that the simple logic of labor markets suggests that whatever we ultimately decide to do about immigration policy, the time to liberalize immigration is not when the real unemployment rate is (at the very least) north of 10 percent. Because when you add workers to an existing surplus of labor, wages will go down. If the people at the Chamber of Commerce, Facebook, and the Democratic National Committee want to embiggen the labor pool, the least they could do is wait until the employment market tightens and labor shortages are a constraint on growth. To insist on amnesty now isn't just bad economics. It's rent seeking by powerful interests.
Instead of calling Trump "crazy," we need a candidate who'll co-opt Trump's message. Emphasize positive immigration reforms. Make Democrats defend their sanctuary cities and their eager willingness to ignore the rule of law.
Democrats own him. Democrats created him.
Right now Donald Trump is the only candidate speaking out against him.
That has to change. A better candidate could ride Trump's wave into the White House.
The GOP needs Donald Trump. More importantly, they need to find a way
to work with him, to keep him in the fold, to use him as an asset. Because an
awful lot of voters are fed up with politics as usual. So why not give them
what they want?
It's the tale of two Hillarys.
Some of you work too hard. You need government to save you from free enterprise.
And then some of you don't pay enough in taxes.
Left unanswered? How working less translates into more tax payments.
Oh, right, she's gonna tax the other guys.
Hillary's economic populism is a disjointed bunch of rubbish. She's trying to steal Bernie Sanders' thunder, but all she's accomplished is to make him look sane by comparison.
Here's the first part of her economic plan. Work less. Let government do more.
"Many Americans are making extra money renting out a spare room, designing websites, selling products they design themselves at home, or even driving their own car," she said, according to MarketWatch. "This 'on demand' or so-called 'gig economy' is creating exciting opportunities and unleashing innovation, but it's also raising hard questions about workplace protections and what a good job will look like in the future."
She cited the need for paid family leave, earned sick days, fair pay, and fair scheduling — all workplace protections that contractors don't receive.
Sit on your ass, light up a Camel, and collect welfare. It's what Hillary's government wants you to do.
Seriously. This is exactly the kind of thinking that kills good things.
"Oh, you.ve got something nice there. Seems to be working all right, but here, let me just add a few regulations for your own protection."
And the next thing you know, you.ve got a taxi commission. Or a board that dictates what you can do with your property.
Either way, it's all about less freedom and more government.
Yup. Hillary loves her some more government. Except the oversight part. She's really not a fan of that. I imagine that Inspectors General will become an endangered species in her administration.
Anyway, her second point involves how to pay for more government.
Can you guess she wants to raise taxes?
Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton on Monday took a giant step toward letting Democratic voters know she's representing the progressive agenda, calling for tax increases and more regulation on Wall Street -- while making a play for a liberal base that has been gravitating toward Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Clinton also vowed to increase taxes on large corporations and the country's highest wage-earners, an apparent effort to recapture her party's progressive base now captivated by surging primary challenger Sanders and the reformer agenda of Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who is not a 2016 candidate.
Clinton specifically vowed to revive efforts to institute the so-called Buffet Rule, which is essentially a 30 percent "millionaire tax."
"Those at the top have to pay their share," Clinton said during her roughly 35-minute speech at the New School, a New York City college and bastion for progressive ideals. "Wealthy financiers pay artificially low tax rates."
Speaking of wealthy financiers, how's Chelsea's husband doing these days?
Rumor has it he won't be paying anywhere near 30% in taxes!
Neither will the Clinton Foundation, aka Hillary and Bill's personal slush fund. See that's the thing with Hillary. She talks a good game. But she adamantly insists her rules don't apply to her.
In her world taxes are something people who are not named Clinton pay.
So let's recap Hillary's plan to save our economy.
Step 1: Regulate your new home business into the ground.
Step 2: If by some miracle step 1 doesn't kill you, tax you into oblivion.
Remember when America was the Land Of Opportunity?
Yeah, me neither.
At this point it's probably easier to list the Republicans who aren't running for president.
Four years late, and a few scandals later, Chris Christie finally decided he's got what it takes to beat Hillary Clinton. Because apparently he says what he means and he means what he says.
That's his official campaign slogan, anyway.
In Real Life he sends a somewhat more muddled message. Unless he actually kept that promise he made to lower my property taxes, and I'm just too stupid to see how he did it. Maybe I only imagine I'm paying more than ever each quarter.
Christie is very good at talking the talk. Heck, go back and read my posts about "Governor Awesome" from 4 or 5 years ago. Because yeah, I bought into his hype. Until he let me, and everyone else, down.
Is he a better governor than Jon Corzine was? Sure.
But that's kind of like saying one root canal is better than two.
Then again, he's not the worst person running. That distinction still belongs to Donald Trump. So, since someone asked me this morning, here's how I see ranking the 2016 field.
1. Ted Cruz
2. Marco Rubio
3. Rick Perry
4. Carly Fiorina
5. Bobby Jindal
6. Rand Paul
7. Chris Christie
8. Jeb Bush
9. Rick Santorum
10. Mike Huckabee
11. Lindsey Graham
12. George Pataki
13. Ben Carson
14. Donald Trump
If as expected Scott Walker jumps in, I'd slot him at #2 and bump everyone else down a notch. Word is that John Kasich is also going to declare (hey, why not make it an even 16!) in which case he'd fall between Jeb Bush and Rick Santorum.
Quite frankly though, the GOP needs to whittle this list down PDQ. Keep the top 3 (or 4 if Walker gets in) and relegate the rest to angling for VP or a cabinet slot. Too many candidates dilutes the message. And it lets the media play them against each other instead of contrasting them with the Hilldabeest. The last thing we need is a repeat of 2012's circular firing squad, er debates. By the time Mitt Romney emerged from that guantlet he was damaged goods, and we got stuck with 4 more years of Obamunism because of that.
So my dream ticket right now is Cruz / Fiorina. Ted Cruz embodies everything our Founding Fathers stood for, and he's not beholden to the GOP establishment. Carly fights, and she doesn't come off as a bully like Christie does.
What we need is for Reince Priebus or Mitt Romney to drag the other candidates
into a room and explain the facts of life to them. Get them out now for the good
of the country. Rally the party behind a team that can win. And then
go out there and win one for the Gipper.
Apparently Hillary's Hordes can't afford the rents in New York City on the meager salaries she pays them. I think there's a campaign slogan (or 3) in there somewhere, but I suppose irony is lost on Democrats.
Anyway, if you're a big Hillary booster, and you've got a spare room or an extra couch, you're invited to "host" one of her staffers, for free.
Hillary Clinton wants your cash -- but her staffers just want a place to crash.
Apparently facing a space crunch at their new 2016 headquarters in New York City, the Clinton campaign has started asking supporters to pony up their Big Apple pads for the cause. An email sent Wednesday asks them to sign up to "host" Clinton campaign workers arriving to the city.
"Do you have a spare room — or just a spare couch! — where a new staffer could stay?" Marlon Marshall, director of State Campaigns and Political Engagement at Hillary for America, asks in the email.
Marshall, who did not respond to requests by FoxNews.com for comment, said in his email pitch: "You and I both know that finding a place to live in New York can take longer than an afternoon of apartment hunting." But he wrote that the campaign needs its to start "right away" at the Brooklyn HQ.
He then promised that the to-be bunkmates will most likely "be working long days, so they really just need a place to sleep, and they'll be so grateful to be staying with someone who shares their beliefs and their goals."
I think they're just grateful to finally be out of mom's basement.
And hey, isn't there a big old house up in Chappaqua with lots of extra space?
But really, what could be better than a zealot for Hillary haranguing you day and night? I'm expecting all my progressive friends to sign right up, just for the chance to rub elbows with someone who works next to a guy who met Hillary once, and promptly got sent to the back of the line.
And she's not about to spend her foundation's millions on something as mundane as a few motel rooms. Unless Bill can visit with the more comely lasses...
Then can you imagine how Hillary could expand this "hosting" program once she's elected? Everybody gets his own illegal alien! Bring them out of the shadows and into your living room, where they'll share their beliefs and goals, and hopefully not help themselves to the silverware.
In other news, it's time to dust off the Third Amendment. Because one more
thing Hillary's homeless hordes don't have are brown shirts and fancy arm
bands. Yet. Those will be issued after her coronation, when it's
too late for America.
One uses money from unsuspecting donors and questionable accounting tricks to fund the lavish lifestyles of its leadership team while devoting mere pennies to charitable work.
The other pretends to help people with cancer.
Wanna guess which one the feds took down for fraud?
In 1984, the American Cancer Society forced James Reynolds out of a job. He had led the respected organization's Knox County, Tennessee, office, but ACS accused him of sloppy record-keeping and of stealing a vintage car donated for an auction. Reynolds was apparently undeterred. He promptly opened up a new charity, giving it a name that was shamelessly similar: the Cancer Fund of America. He'd go on to found several other similar charities.
On Tuesday, the Federal Trade Commission announced charges against Reynolds and several aides, alleging that the organizations were charities in name only. In fact, the government says, the four organizations stole $187 million between 2008 and 2012 in donations, which they diverted into "lucrative employment for family members and friends, and spent consumer donations on cars, trips, luxury cruises, college tuition, gym memberships, jet ski outings, sporting event and concert tickets, and dating site memberships."
Less than 3 percent of the money raised went to patients, the FTC said. All 50 states and the District of Columbia joined the FTC in the charges.
Scumbags to be sure.
Now contrast James Reynolds with Hillary Clinton.
The Clinton Foundation's finances are so messy that the nation's most influential charity watchdog put it on its "watch list" of problematic nonprofits last month.
The Clinton family's mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.
The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.
In all, the group reported $84.6 million in "functional expenses" on its 2013 tax return.
"It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons," said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government watchdog group where progressive Democrat and Fordham Law professor Zephyr Teachout was once an organizing director.
Hmm. Her charitable foundation raked in hundreds of millions of dollars too.
And spent most of it on "administration, travel, salaries, and bonuses" while devoting just 6½ cents of every dollar to actual charitable work.
In July 2013, Eric Braverman, a friend of Chelsea Clinton from when they both worked at McKinsey & Co., took over as CEO of the Clinton Foundation. He took home nearly $275,000 in salary, benefits and a housing allowance from the nonprofit for just five months' work in 2013, tax filings show. Less than a year later, his salary increased to $395,000, according to a report in Politico.
Braverman abruptly left the foundation earlier this year, after a falling-out with the old Clinton guard over reforms he wanted to impose at the charity, Politico reported. Last month, Donna Shalala, a former secretary of health and human services under President Clinton, was hired to replace Braverman.
Nine other executives received salaries over $100,000 in 2013, tax filings show.
Yeah, I'd call that "lucrative employment for family members and friends," wouldn't you?
But wait, there's more! Like the income the Clintons "forgot" to report.
The Clinton Foundation reported Thursday that it has received as much as $26.4 million in previously undisclosed payments from major corporations, universities, foreign sources and other groups.
The disclosure came as the foundation faced questions over whether it fully complied with a 2008 ethics agreement to reveal its donors and whether any of its funding sources present conflicts of interest for Hillary Rodham Clinton as she begins her presidential campaign.
The money was paid as fees for speeches by Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton. Foundation officials said the funds were tallied internally as "revenue" rather than donations, which is why they had not been included in the public listings of its contributors published as part of the 2008 agreement.
And what 3 names sit atop the board of directors at this bastion of philanthropy?
Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and Chelsea Clinton.
They're ostensibly "unpaid." But they live large on the foundation's dime.
While IRS filings show the Clintons do not receive a salary, compensation comes through other means, such as travel, speaking fees and consulting contracts.
Speaking of speaking fees, well, they're not exactly chump change.
Former President Clinton was the biggest earner for speeches, giving three that brought in anywhere from $500,000 to $1 million.
Both he and his wife gave a smattering of speeches to foreign companies and other organizations for anywhere from $250,000 to $500,000. Bill Clinton spoke to Thailand's Ministry of Energy, China Real Estate Development Group, Ltd, and Qatar First Investment Bank; Hillary Clinton spoke to Goldman Sachs, Citibank and JP Morgan Chase, among others.
Those speeches are merely the tip of the iceberg.
Hillary Rodham Clinton and former president Bill Clinton earned in excess of $25 million for delivering 104 speeches since the beginning of 2014, a huge infusion to their net worth as she was readying for a presidential bid.
Now a cynic would call that "influence peddling."
And if it were being done at the "James Reynolds Foundation" the FTC would call it fraud.
Instead our palace guard media yawns, the feds look the other way, and the low-information voters will swoon over the coronation of our first woman president. Then you'd better watch out America. Becuase once she's back in the White House, Hillary Clinton is really gonna cash in. The phrase you're looking for is "pay to play" and it's a game the Clintons practically invented.
Don't say I didn't warn you.
You know where they have Mandatory Voting? Cuba. Iran. The old Soviet Union.
Obama's kind of places, for sure. Because the party in power always "wins," with 99.9% of the "vote."
So it comes as no surprise he's floating the same compulsion here.
They say the only two things that are certain in life are death and taxes. President Barack Obama wants to add one more: voting.
Obama floated the idea of mandatory voting in the U.S. while speaking to a civic group in Cleveland on Wednesday. Asked about the influence of money in U.S. elections, Obama digressed into the topic of voting rights and said the U.S. should be making it easier for people to vote.
How much easier can it be? You register. You show up. You vote.
Just ask Australia, where citizens have no choice but to vote, the president said.
I did not know that Australia was fascist. You learn something new every day. Remind me not to move there.
"If everybody voted, then it would completely change the political map in this country," Obama said, calling it "potentially transformative." Not only that, Obama said, but universal voting would "counteract money more than anything."
Because we need more uninformed nincompoops deciding the outcome of what'll essentially devolve into a beauty contest.
Freedom means the right to abstain from action, including voting. We don't have a "none of the above" option on our ballots. So boycotting the polls on election day is the next best thing. You'd think a Constitutional Scholar would grasp that concept.
You'd be wrong. The only thing Obama wants to do with the constitution is shred it.
But he's got that "change the political map" thing right. So you gotta give him points for chutzpah. Dragging all those apathetic slackers out of mom's basement and welfare queens out of their nail salons on election day will undoubtedly serve the interests of the Party of Government, ie the Democrats. People who work for a living already vote. It's consumers of government who sit on the sidelines, content to wallow in their government cheese.
They just sort of assume the gravy train will roll on unabated. It must've really burned President Jarrett's shorts when that assumption didn't work out last November.
Not to mention that his "counteract money" line is mendaciously disingenuous coming from a guy who raised and spent more than a billion dollars on each of two presidential campaigns, mainly from untraceable foreign sources.
By the by, who spends the most on our elections? Liberal interest groups funded by the likes of George Soros and Tom Steyer. I'll bet Dear Leader "forgot" to mention that. And of course the public employee unions, who can't spell Republican let alone vote for one.
Mandatory voting? It's an idea so dumb, so antithetical to the Founding Fathers' notions of Liberty and personal responsibility, that only a power-mad narcissistic megalomaniac could embrace it.
Which of course means that Maxine Waters or Bernie Sanders has already
put forth the requisite constitutional amendment requiring it.
For 8 years Harry Reid was the ultimate obstructionist, blocking every Republican amendment, refusing to hold votes on legislation passed by the House, and nuking the filibuster to get Obama's radical judicial nominees confirmed to the DC Court of Appeals.
So naturally, after he got his ass kicked Tuesday, he wants to "work together" with Republicans.
Hey Harry, in the immortal words of Dick Cheney, go fuck yourself.
I hope Mitch McConnell assigns Reid an office in the basement, next to the trash compactor. And then promptly forgets that Dingy Harry even exists.
The American people didn't give the GOP a Senate majority so we could work with Democrats. They could have elected more Democrats if that's what they really wanted. Nope, they gave us the majority to stymie Obama at every turn until 2016 when we can get ourselves a Real President again.
And nobody is freaking out about that more than the climate change clowns. Upcoming Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman James Inhofe (R-OK) doesn't buy their globull warming bullshit. He's not gonna give the EPA a blank check. He'll almost certainly pass legislation enabling the long overdue Keystone XL pipeline project. And when it comes to oil and gas exploration, he'll be all "drill, baby, drill" on their anti-energy eco-obstructionism.
No more Solyndras. No more green energy boondoggles. Maybe even a return to sensible coal usage, because cheap electricity is good for the economy.
Senator Inhofe, I have one simple request. Please give us back our incandescent lightbulbs. Please?
All of the GOP candidates who won Tuesday ran on repealing Obamacare. So repeal it. Make Obama squirm. More importantly, make Democrats running in 2016 squirm too.
Obama won't sign a repeal. So let's defund as much of this atrocity as we can. And push free-market health care ideas — association health plans, real choice instead of mandated coverages so folks can only buy insurance they actually need, and most of all, tort reform.
Along with defenestrating Obamacare the GOP Senate needs to rein in this lawless president's Executive Order excesses. Yeah, amnesty for illegal aliens, I'm looking at you. We ran on stopping amnesty, and stop it we must. Everywhere that amnesty was an issue on Tuesday, the pro-amnesty candidate lost. That's a mandate.
You what's really dead now? The "war on women." The GOP wave carried more women into Congress than at any time in the history of forever. Young women, women of color, women veterans. Republican women are empowered, passionate, dedicated, and ready to help move America in the right direction. They don't think with their vaginas. And that makes feminists sad.
I like it when feminists are sad. I like it even more when they lose elections.
Speaking of losing elections. Hillary Clinton was the kiss of death. Every candidate she campaigned for? They lost. Every. Single. One. The entire Arkansas congessional delegation is now in Republican hands. Wendy Davis crashed and burned in Texas, and her old state senate seat went to a Tea Partyer.
So when I heard Mara Liasson spinning these defeats by saying all those candidates now "owe her" I had to burst out laughing. A bunch of losers "owe" Hillary. Yippee! With that kind of support, how could she not win the White House?
Meanwhile, the good news for Republicans just keeps rolling in. Martha Coakley conceded in Massachusetts. The Bay State has a Republican governor again. And nationwide the GOP controls more statehouses than ever before.
Yessiree, no matter how you slice it, the voters firmly repudiated progressive policies. The rain tax gave Maryland a Republican governor. Intrusive regulation and burdensome taxes do not make people happy.
Republicans need to capitalize on these sentiments. Yes, get stuff done. But, and this is key, get our stuff done. Show America that our ideas are superior to Obama's. If the last 6 years teaches us anything, it teaches us that progressive politics leads to misery, despair, and weakness. America can, and must, return to her rightful place as a shining city upon a hill whose beacon light guides freedom-loving people everywhere.
Now is the time. This is our destiny. We have the tools. We must not fail.
Please tell me this isn't degrading, and racist.
First lady Michelle Obama has a message to black voters: Don't worry about what candidates have done or said — just vote for the Democrats.
On TV One, a network operating under the motto "Where Black Life Unfolds," the first lady told "News One Daily" host Roland Martin, "And that's my message to voters, this isn't about Barack, it's not about person on that ballot — its about you. And for most of the people we are talking to, a Democratic ticket is the clear ticket that we should be voting on, regardless of who said what or did this — that shouldn't even come into the equation."
In the full audio of the interview, Michelle Obama gives everyone who votes permission to eat fried chicken.
Martin asked (at 7:15), "So can we, if we go out to the polls, can we, say, we have a souls to polls on Sunday, can we do soul food after we vote?"
Obama responded, "Absolutely. I give everyone full permission to eat some fried chicken after they vote. Only after, if you haven't voted… You make a good point. Because I am, I do talk about health. But I think that a good victory for Democrats on Tuesday, you know, should be rewarded with some fried chicken."
Nevermind that black unemployment is higher than the national average.
Nevermind that black children are trapped in failing inner city schools.
Just vote for Democrats, then reward yourself with fried chicken. And collard greens. Maybe wash it down with a Colt 45.
And if by some chance you're a black pastor who dares to wander off the plantation and endorse, gasp!, a Republican? Yeah, you need to die. Because it's not racism when Michelle Obama uses blatantly racist stereotypes, and it's not lynching when black Democrats threaten to kill a black man who thinks for himself.
I wonder, does FLOTUS' dispensation extend to folks in Utah who are voting for
Still undecided? Really?
Annoy a liberal, vote Republican!
Ask yourself this, are you more likely to be infected, beheaded, or audited today than you were 6 years ago? Yeah, me too. Barack Obama said his policies are on the ballot. Make sure he hears your voice.
And now, the envelopes please!
For Caldwell mayor, re-elect Mayor Ann Dassing! She's held the line on taxes while enhancing municipal services. And she put real professionals to work in town hall. Why mess with success?
For Caldwell council, elect John Cascarano and Kris Brown! They're on the Dassing team for a reason, they're committed to keeping Caldwell's small town flavor while moving us strategically into the future.
For Essex County District 4 Freeholder, elect Richard Leonard! Because Lenny Luciano couldn't find Caldwell on a map, and Joe D already has 8 other lapdogs on the board.
Speaking of Joe D, does he really deserve an unprecedented 4th term as County Executive? Why, because he hasn't built enough monuments to his own munificence yet? Retire the double-dipping campaign-finance-skirting grand poobah of mini golf. Please.
On Question #1 (bail "reform"), vote NO. Preserve your constitutioal right to bail. Allowing a judge to arbitrarily lock you up indefinitely with no bail is just about as un-American as you can get.
On Question #2 ("open space"), vote NO. More than 30% of New Jersey is already off-limits to development. That's more land than in the entire state of Delaware. And every dollar constitutionally dedicated to feel-good boondoggles is one less dollar we can use to reduce our debt, balance the pension system, or lower our taxes.
Nationally, it's time to send Dingy Harry Reid back to the back benches. You have been paying attention to Ten Buck Fridays, right?
Every GOP Senate pickup counts! That means your votes are needed for David Perdue in Georgia, Dan Sullivan in Alaska, Joni Ernst in Iowa, Tom Cotton in Arkansas, Thom Tillis in North Carolina, Bill Cassidy in Louisiana, Cory Gardner in Colorado, Scott Brown in New Hampshire, Ed Gillespie in Virginia, and yes, Jeff Bell right here in New Jersey.
Oh, one more thing. To ease crowding at the polls, Governor Christie has
instituted a new voting procedure. Republicans vote tomorrow, Tuesday, November
4th. Democrats vote Wednesday. Your cooperation is appreciated.
My sample ballot came in the mail yesterday. And lo and behold, Lenny Luciano (and his excellent driving skills) is running for re-election to the Board of Chosen Freeholders. Has it been 3 years already? Wow, let's Google him to see what he's accomplished.
Uh, maybe not. Because there's not one positive news story about him. His little brushed-under-the-rug late-night car vs tree episode is all that comes up. (Plus my "where's Lenny?" post on him being awol for a crucial George-Norcross-enriching vote.)
The guy's a big fat zero. So naturally he'll be re-elected, because he's a Democrat, and the sheeple in this county wouldn't vote for a Republican if his name was Jesus Christ.
Must be nice Lenny. Schoolteacher by day, no-show Freeholder by night. Two government jobs, two pensions accruing, zero accountability, and a guaranteed lifetime sinecure.
Your tax dollars at, uh, work folks.
Here's an idea. There's a guy named Richard Leonard running against Lenny.
Mr. Leonard is running what can charitably be called a stealth campaign,
he's so under the radar that I've never heard of him and I follow this
stuff pretty carefully. But what the heck, he might inject some much needed
fresh air into Joe DiVincenzo's rubber stamp Freeholder Board. He's a Realtor,
so he's got some actual private sector experience to share. Let's take a
chance, vote for Richard Leonard for Freeholder.
Jeff Bell reminded Democrats why they're the party of government dependency, and they really don't like it when they hear the truth. Because it's not as if they've elevated pandering to an art form or anything, right?
In an interview with the Asbury Park Press editorial board, Bell said the reason he trails Booker with women voters isn't because of his socially conservative views, but because of the "the rise in single women."
"Single mothers particularly are automatically Democratic because of the benefits," Bell said in the interview. "They need benefits to survive, and so that kind of weds them to the Democratic Party."
Bell went on to say that unmarried women without kids also tend to vote Democratic.
"If you take married women, they aren't that different from married men. So it's really a problem with the decline in marriage rates. The Democrats do benefit from that," he said.
Sandra Fluke, please call your office…
I mean really, how could anyone object to Bell's statement? Every Democrat since FDR has made it his mission in life to ensure the government handout gravy train is never derailed. LBJ's Great Society was explicitly created to keep Blacks voting Democrat "for the next 200 years."
You're just not supposed to mention that in polite company.
Hence, the Star-Ledger is outraged!
Which reminds us of Mitt Romney's 47 percent moment. Remember when he argued that people were not voting Democratic because they preferred where the party wanted to take this country, or rejected the Republican vision, but because they are paid off with benefits?
Bell's comment also fits the Republican attitude that it is single mothers -- not the men who fail to support them -- who are the problem in this country.
Whack that straw man! Single mothers aren't "the problem." Policies which keep single mothers dependent on the government, there's the problem.
Alas, to a liberal it's never been the Democratic Party's legacy of failing to solve society's ills (has anyone seen Camden lately?) That's always someone else's fault. Nor can they bring themselves to mention Booker's unremarkable record as mayor of Newark, where he spent most of his time enriching his cronies while the murder rate soared. Nope, the Real Problem is that Jeff Bell exposed the culture of dependency for what it is, bribery, and that makes him "anti-woman," as if he wouldn't promote economic policies that might actually result in women (and men) being better off.
Maybe they don't want a candidate who would only make their daily struggles more difficult. Harping on the gold standard, Bell's big issue, doesn't exactly strike a chord with women who can barely feed their families.
Sheesh. I'll grant you economics is hard (which is probably why all those guys at the Ledger went into journalism). But try to keep up. We're now in the sixth year of a presidency that has done nothing but make everyone's daily struggles more difficult. Obama is printing money like it's going out of style; more dollars chasing fewer goods means prices keep rising (have you heard what hamburger costs these days?); and with a regulatory climate that destroys good-paying jobs wages have remained stagnant.
Cory Booker wants to continue those policies. Because they include free birth control. Which, come to think of it isn't working, otherwise we'd have fewer single mothers.
We're now in the 51st year of the vaunted War on Poverty. Guess what? Poverty won. Einstein said the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing while expecting the result to be different. So I'll ask you, who's really going to help single mothers? The guy endorsing the same-old, same-old? Or the guy with new ideas?
Jeff Bell for U.S. Senate. Because Cory Booker (and the Star-Ledger)
want to keep you poor and stupid.
If you're wondering why the media keeps hyping Bridgegate, wonder no more. Chris Christie's short-lived stint as the 2016 presidential front-runner is now over, and Hillary Clinton is once again safely back on top in the polls.
A national Quinnipiac University poll released today found Governor Christie trailing Hillary Clinton by 8 percentage points in a hypothetical 2016 presidential matchup just a month after the two were virtually tied with the former first lady.
"Christie's 2016 presidential drive is stuck in traffic, sideswiped by Bridgegate," said Tim Malloy, the assistant director of the polling institute.
Christie, a Republican, was supported by 38 percent of voters, while 46 percent supported Clinton, a Democrat.
CNN reported on Monday that Christie told supporters at gathered by a billionaire supporter in Florida over the weekend he was going to pause any effort to look at the White House this year.
Even so, Christie does better against Clinton than other potential Republican nominees.
The media created Barack Obama, and shepherded him into the White House. Now they're working overtime to ensure Hillary Clinton succeeds him. Chris Christie was their darling while he trailed her, because who doesn't like a moderate Republican sacrificial lamb. But as soon as he drew even with Hillary the long knives had to come out.
Nevermind that Christie has denied knowledge of, or direct involvement in, Bridgegate. Nope, he's gotta be lying, mostly because liberals can't believe a Republican would tell the truth. And it carries no weight that he immediately sacked the people responsible, even as the media ignores the fact that no one has been held to account for any of Obama or Clinton's myriad scandals.
The only thing that matters to the mainstream media is advancing the
Progressive (aka Marxist) cause. Chris Christie stood in their way,
and so he had to be neutralized. That's really all you needs to know
Chris Christie's coattails turned out to be shorter than a list of Barack Obama's successes. Thanks to his landslide victory over Barbara Buono exactly one Assembly seat flipped Republican, and the State Senate remains firmly under Steve Sweeney's iron boot.
Thanks Governor, you're really a team player. So hurry up and switch to the other team already, because you sure aren't helping the Republican cause. Last year you did more to ensure Barack Obama got re-elected than you did for a single down-ticket Republican. Oh, Ken Cuccinelli thanks you for your help too; way to impress all the idiots who chose you to head up the Republican Governors Assocation. You do realize that in order to have a Republican Governors Association you need to actually elect Republican governors, right?
And please, spare us your delusions of presidential grandeur. I'd prefer not to lose the House and miss out on flipping the Senate just so your ego can strut across a faux-bipartisan national stage.
Last night was the very definition of a pyrrhic victory. You might have won,
but New Jersey, and America, lost. Big time.
I was tied up with Real Work this morning, but better late than never, here's a quick list of the coveted WyBlog endorsements for today's election.
Tom O'Donnell and Pat Capozzoli for Caldwell Council!
Chris Christie for NJ Governor. But not for president.
Marie Lanfrank and Charles Alberta for Caldwell - West Caldwell Board of Education.
"Yes" on Public Question #1 (Veterans raffles).
"NO" on Public Question #2 (Constitutional Amendment for minimum wage).
And, from outside my district, here's some folks I'd support if I lived where they do.
Phil Orphanidis for West Orange Board of Education.
Chris Mulhall for Mayor of Honey Brook, PA.
Rob Hermansen for Mahwah, NJ Council.
Ken Cuccinelli for Virginia Governor.
Back to our local races, even though it's like peeing in the wind given how
most Essex County voters are genetically incapable of voting for Republicans,
anyone with a brain will refrain from voting for the three stooges —
Codey, McKeon, and Jacey — and instead will pull the levers for
Laura Ali and Angelo Tedesco. Why? Because Joe D doesn't want you to,
The two ladies running for Caldwell Township Council are emphasizing a platform of "civility." As in, they'll be the "nice folks", keeping rancor out of the public eye.
But make no mistake, rancor will still be on the menu. Only it'll be unleashed behind the scenes. Because as Democrats, Grace Kerrigan and Maureen McNish are only interested in one thing — power.
As in, the power to fire township employees.
The Democrats on our council want that power; nay, they crave that power the way a shark craves fresh meat. Earlier this year they tried to override an ordinance formally investing that power in the hands of our Borough Administrator.
Democrat Councilman Edward Durkin felt that the mayor and council should be involved in the decision making of hiring and firing.
"I would like to know who works in town," noted Durkin. "If I pass them in town, I would like to know who they are if they work for the borough," Durkin said. Fellow Democrat and Councilman Frank Rodgers agreed with Councilman Durkins' opinion.
How disingenuous can these gentlemen be? They can easily "know who works in town" by visiting town hall more than twice a month. No, what Mr. Durkin and his henchmen desire is to fulfill a vendetta the Caldwell Democratic Party has nurtured since 2010. They want Gordon Lawshe's head on a platter.
Whether you personally like Mr. Lawshe is immaterial here. He's an employee of the Caldwell Comunity Center, and as such his employment is subject to oversight by Director Rob Paterson and Borough Administrator Paul Carelli. Political interference in municipal hiring decisions reeks of cronyism and corruption. The ordinance which passed in August puts the council firmly outside of the employment process, which of course is where they belong.
But it passed with Mayor Dassing casting the deciding vote. Meaning a 5-1 Democrat council majority can revoke that ordinance at the first opportunity.
So, if you vote for Kerrigan and McNish, you are in effect voting to politicize borough hiring decisions, and you're complicit in putting Gordon Lawshe on the street.
Can you imagine the free-for-all if the Democrats get their way? Suppose a hypothetical Chris Wysocki got pulled over for speeding 4 times last year. He decides to run for council, and maneuvers his fellow councilmen into firing the police officers who cited him.
Yeah, that's good government!
Well, what the Democrats plan to do in town hall is no less execrable.
Back in July I overheard a rabidly partisan Democrat plotting to "put our people back in town hall." Need I remind you what his people did the last time they ruled Provost Square? Or would you enjoy seeing more eyesores like those multi-family monstrosities at the corner of Lane and Bloomfield Avenues erected on the vacant lots around town?
So let me ask you. Should these guys really be put back in charge of awarding no-bid contracts in the dark of night?
Mayor Dassing has presided over a rebirth of Caldwell government. Our town is now run like a business, with solid financial controls and a definitive set of checks and balances. Why would we throw all that away just to settle some silly personal score, against a guy who's actually doing a good job?
Re-elect Councilman Tom O'Donnell. Elect Pat Capozzoli. Keep Caldwell
government open and above-board. Send the Democrat Machine a message
— your mendacity isn't welcome here. Because we're better
The choice this Tuesday couldn't be clearer. A vote for O'Donnell and Capozzoli is a vote to keep taxes low. A vote for McNish and Kerrigan is a vote for unlimited spending with zero accountability.
Consider the ladies' recent interview with the Jersey Tomato Press.
As per the borough budget, both candidates said a low tax levy is good but they are not focused solely on a zero tax levy.
"I think we are obsessed with a zero budget," said McNish. "Sometimes harm happens with a zero budget. I was trained with (Caldwell - West Caldwell school business manager) Ron Skopak that we always have to be saving for the future. It's a real concern of mine that we are so concerned about zero budget we are not looking ahead about the infrastructure of the town."
Kerrigan added, "We need to keep taxes low but in an intelligent way. We want to approach the budget intelligently, and see what is needed for the future while balancing out the taxes."
Let's break that down. During her 9 year tenure on the Board of Education, Ms. McNish never met a tax she couldn't hike, a budget she couldn't inflate, and an expenditure she considered too lavish. She directed a tsunami of taxpayer money into the coffers of the teachers union and our students have the drop in test scores to prove just how effective all that cash really was.
As for our town's infrastructure, Tom O'Donnell spearheaded a massive road upgrade and repaving project in the Cedars. He successfully renegotiated the police contract, putting two more officers on the streets. He brought the Faloni property saga to an amicable conclusion. And he did it all without breaking the bank. That sounds like good planning to me; perhaps Ms. McNish could ask her friends on the Board of Education to take a page or 2 from Tom's playbook.
Pat Capozzoli is Tom's kind of guy, no-nonsense, results oriented, fiscally prudent, devoted to making Caldwell the best darn town in New Jersey. They're the right team for us. On November 5th please vote for Tom O'Donnell and Pat Capozzoli for Caldwell Township Council.