Zarate On Property Tax Rebates: Ever the Hustle

Here is a column by my friend, Vince Zarate, that was just published in The Trentonian, a local daily New Jersey paper published in tabloid format. Vince was a State House reporter for the leading state daily, the Star Ledger, covering insurance issues, budget matters, and a host of other topics for the paper for many years. He is now retired and living in Bordentown, periodically writing an always witty column for The Trentonian. A list of his recent columns can be found here, or by going to the paper's home page, and simply typing Zarate in the search bar for the paper.

Here in New Jersey we have a gubernatorial election this fall which, along with Virginia, may be a first bell-weather indicator of the emerging state of the American political landscape in the wake of Democrat dominance in the 2008 Presidential and congressional races. Here in Democrat-leaning New Jersey, Governor Corzine, a Democrat, is having considerable political popularity difficulties, with the Republican candidate, former federal prosecutor Chris Christie, continuing to lead Corzine in the polls. The Quinnipiac University Poll out today even showing an increase in Christie's lead to 12 points, notwithstanding continuing popularity of President Obama (60%) in the state. He will be in New Jersey a lot this fall.

Here is Vince's take on the so-called "property tax relief" program, which has been a political football in the State since it's inception over thirty years ago. At the time, former Governor Brendan Byrne -- who had enacted the state's unpopular income tax in his first term -- was running for re-election in 1977, and engineered the delivery of everyone's property tax rebate checks in late October in an envelope with a return address clearly marked, from the "Office of the Governor."

The ploy worked and Byrne was re-elected.

But this year may prove quite different. During his campaign for Governor, Jon Corzine promised to reduce property taxes "40 in 4" or, by 40% in four years. It was a risible lie at the time. Property taxes have instead increased by an average $1,300, according to some estimates. And this year, the Democrat controlled Legislature passed and the Governor signed a $29 billion dollar budget with huge tax increases.

As the New York Times writer, David W. Chen starkly put it in the opening graf of his budget adoption story at the end of June:

TRENTON — New Jersey lawmakers passed a $29 billion budget largely along partisan lines on Thursday night that will increase taxes by almost $1 billion, eliminate property-tax deductions for the wealthiest residents and pare billions from health care, higher education and other programs.

Here is Vince Zarate's column:

N.J. Shenanigans Watch: The Old Rebate-Check Hustle
Published in The Trentonian: Monday, July 13, 2009

By VINCE ZARATE

One million taxpayers are going to get $1.1 billion in "property tax relief" checks just before the election, but it will not in any way, shape or form lower their property taxes — America’s highest.

So it goes with the old rebate-check hustle.

For 30 years now, politicians of both parties have been using rebate checks in an attempt to con folks into thinking they’re getting something for nothing.

Many caught on long ago that the state government's supposed generosity is an out-and-out fraud. The money for rebates comes out of the state income tax fund.

So the state government is "giving" taxpayers a rebate paid with the taxpayers' own dollars!

Pretty slick, eh?

The new state budget calls for 1 million checks, between $700 and $1,300 each, to be sent out to folks with taxable incomes under $75,000.

These checks are deceptively pitched as "property tax relief." The checks are said to be the state’s way of helping people cope with confiscatory local property taxes.

Ironically, those would be the very same local property taxes that politicians in Trenton have been promising to lower year after year — even as those taxes have gone right on skyrocketing year after year.

The rebate-check hustle was instituted way back in 1976 along with the state’s income tax to make that dreaded levy — which has since been hiked on multiple occasions — more palatable.

Ever since then, governors have been using the rebate check scam to prop up their own wobbling political fortunes — to pretend that they're Santa while their party cohorts in the legislature play the role of Santa's elves.

In the governor’s office, Jolly old Jon is touting the rebate checks as "real property tax relief" for the state’s most vulnerable. (By "most vulnerable" he means those most likely to support the ticket of his party.)

Behind the facade of this charade, however, is the never-mentioned reality that high property taxes are directly linked to the demands of unionized public employees — especially members of the powerful N.J. Education Association. (The very mention of the letters "NJEA" makes Garden State politicians break out in a cold sweat and start to tremble.)

A second never-mentioned reality is how the state has rendered local school elections meaningless and thereby denied local voters the means of controlling school costs.

And a third never-mentioned reality is how state-issued edicts have guaranteed that school costs will rise a minimum of 4 percent a year, driving up local property taxes.

The rebate hustle, in short, gives the Guv the opportunity to go around acting like St. Nick with a bag full of the taxpayers’ dollars.

As for property tax relief, well, as old St. Nick says: “Ho, ho, ho!”

— Retired reporter Vince Zarate of Bordentown covered the N.J. State House for the Star-Ledger. He’s looking forward to finding a rebate check in his stocking by the fireplace.

Way Beyond Dreamy . . .

Evan Thomas of Newsweek actually tells the furrowing-legged Chris Matthews* and the other Kool-Aid® drinkers over at MSNBC that, unlike Ronald Reagan -- who was just a parochial, chauvanistic, provincial American -- that Obama is above America, and -- get this -- even "above the world."

Then, Thomas actually comes right out and says that Obama is now "sort of God." Here's the exact quote:

"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."

No, I'm not kidding. Evan Thomas said that.

He even claimed that this is Obama's task . . . his "job!"

Listen! (Video via, NewsBusters & MediaResearch Center)





Boy . . . we mere mortal Americans are in big trouble! Looks like we may have a few tasks to perform -- starting with cancelling any subscription to Newsweek.

UPDATE: 06/07/09 Apparently not wanting to be outdone by some cuckoo publisher of an American "news" magazine that has headed south for the duration, a French restauranteur has claimed "I saw God before me" when he eyeballed Michelle Obama in his Paris eatery last night!

"I saw God before me," he said, "because I saw this smile that a million people have seen around the world. I saw her (Michelle) radiant. ... It's idiotic, but it's like that."

Okay. I'll agree with the "idiotic" part.

*Oh. Sorry about the failure to issue the obligatory Olbermann-Content Alert in posting the "furrowing-up-my-leg" video.

Is He Trying To "Out-Biden" Biden?

(Updated: 06/04/09)
Here is the exact quote from this White House interview with the French "CANAL+" reporter, Laurence Haïm. (Go to 2:17 of 9:48 in the video).

"Now, the flip side is, I think that, the United States and the West generally, we have to educate ourselves more effectively, uh, on Islam . . . uh, and uh . . .

One of the points I want to make is is that if you actually took the number of Muslims - Americans, you know, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.

And so, you know, there's got to be a better dialogue and better understanding between the two people."

Really? We'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world, based on the number of Muslim Americans?

One of the largest? Well, according to NationMaster.com found here with a hat-tip to the Gateway Pundit post on the subject, maybe not so much.

Not even close!

In fact, based on the Nation Master chart, we're way down at number 41, with a Muslim population they estimate of only 4,140,277 Muslims in our entire country! But is their estimate too high?

According to the 2007 Pew Trust survey of Muslim religious affiliation, however, their estimated total number of Muslim Americans was only 2.35 million. Let's say it has increased to 2.5 million in the past two years, although that presumption may even rest on shaky grounds.

In his Cairo speech this morning the President claimed there were 7 million Muslim Americans, and his senior aide, Valerie Jarrett who is traveling with him on this trip abroad, specifically upped that number to 8 million in an interview on Fox News Channel immediately following his speech!

From his speech (at 10:52 on the time clock):

The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores -- and that includes nearly 7 million American Muslims in our country today who, by the way, enjoy incomes and educational levels that are higher than the American average.

Where do they get these numbers? And why can't they even agree as amongst themselves?

Here is the relevant paragraph from page 3 of that Pew study:

The U.S. Census does not ask about a respondent’s religious affiliation in its national surveys; as a consequence, there are no generally accepted estimates of the size of the Muslim American population. The Pew study projects approximately 1.5 million adult Muslim Americans, 18 years of age and older. The total Muslim American population is estimated at 2.35 million, based on data from this survey and available Census Bureau data on immigrants’ nativity and nationality. It is important to note that both of these estimates are approximations. (emphasis added)

Is the suggestion that no one can specifically prove (or disprove) the precise number of Muslim Americans what emboldens President Obama to make the laughably wild claim that the actual is nearly triple this best estimate by Pew?

Going back to the NationMaster numbers chart, the country cited with the largest number of Muslims living there is Indonesia with 213,469,356 Muslims, or more than 50 times the number of Muslims that the United States has according to Nation Master -- or almost 90 times the Pew estimate!

And, if you measured Muslims as a percentage of the total population, the United States would be even further down on the list, because there are many much small countries with a lower total number of Muslims, but which comprise a significantly higher percentage of the total population of those countries.

For example, consider Lebanon with 2,678,212 Muslims, out of a total population of 3,925,502. Muslims, therefore, comprise over 2/3rds of the population. But in the United States with a population of over 300 million -- 306,584,217 this morning, according to the Census clock -- only about one out of every 74 people here are Muslim -- using the Nation Master numbers --(4.1 million). And using the upwardly adjusted Pew estimate -- 2.5 million -- it is 1 in 122.

Just for the sake of comparison, if out "enhanced" Pew numbers -- 2.5 million -- is accurate, we'd be down at number 54 on the list of nations with Muslim populations on the Nation Master chart.

Once again, here is the YouTube clip highlighting the relevant portion of his interview:



There it is!

" . . . one of the largest Muslim countries in the world . . ."

What world is he talking about?

Joker Joe Joltin' BO's "Mo?"

UPDATE, below (hint - Pandora's Box"):

Apparently Joe Biden's public gaffes and his private antics within the White House have become enough of a problem that the Obama administration has publicly let the cat out of the bag to Newsweek journalist, Richard Wolffe, who has been given significant interview access in the White House, including with the President himself. He has a new book set for release on June 2nd, to be entitled:

Renegade: The Making of a President

Well, here's a little beauty for you . . . that new book according to Fox News reporter, Bill Sammon, includes details about how President Obama has actually had to privately dress down Joe Biden for his lack of discipline, including for having made what the President viewed as out-of-line comments during cabinet meetings.

Sammon's FOXNews.com article today is:

Obama 'Distracted' by Biden's 'Indiscipline,' Book Asserts

The president is so "distracted by his vice president's indiscipline" that he has been forced to rebuke privately Vice President Biden, according to a new book by Richard Wolffe

Thursday, May 21, 2009 President Obama is so "distracted by his vice president's indiscipline" that he has been forced to rebuke privately Vice President Joe Biden, according to a new book by Newsweek journalist Richard Wolffe, who interviewed Obama a dozen times.

"He can't keep his mouth shut," Wolffe quotes a "senior Obama aide" as saying of the gaffe-prone Biden in "Renegade: The Making of a President," set for release June 2.
. . .

(more)

You have to read the whole thing. Sammon gets into a few of the juicy details, including about the dressing down.

Well, something just seems wrong with that book title, no? Hmmmm . . . let me think . . . okay.

Here it is . . . my recommended alternative title for Wolffe's book:

Judgment: The Selection of a Vice-President

There. Now it makes much more sense!

UPDATE: Joe has blurted again, this time in favor of the position taken by his predecessor, Dick Cheney! As pointed out by the U.S. Editor for the British newspaper, the Telegraph, Joe, who confirmed he was "out of the loop," has now said:

"But, look, what the president said is that this is going to be hard. It's like opening Pandora's Box. We don't know what's inside the box."

He also said that "to the best of my knowledge" the number of prisoners "who are a real danger who are not able to returned or tried" has "not been established" by the Obama administration.

So he basically just confirmed his predecessor Dick Cheney's analysis that the decision was taken "with little deliberation, and no plan". (emphasis added to identify quotes)

Yep. Thanks, and a shout out to Joe from Dick Cheney will no doubt soon be forthcoming! Makes you wonder if there is a woodshed on the grounds of the United States Naval Observatory?

One, Two, Three . . . Currahee!

I found this CBS video, via Allapundit at HotAir, who got it via This Ain't Hell. Tigerhawk has it posted as well.

Meet Lt. Brian Brennan of Howell, New Jersey.

Honestly, folks, this CBS News story video will take your breath away.

(Unfortunately, we could not figure out how to set the embedded video so that it did not begin playing automatically when you linked to this site, so the link just above is to the CBS video site for the clip.)

Brian Brennan's website -- Brian Brennan Stands Alone Trust, can be found here.

One?
The Photo: Below - Two Versions, One "high-res"

Updates: 05/09/09 and 10, below:

That's it? . . . One unclassified photo?

Update: 05/09/09: Very late yesterday afternoon, Friday, May 8, 2009, the White House released a very limited "internal review" (ht. ABC coverage) attributed to the White House Counsel's Office about White House involvement in the scary flight incident, addressing "the facts and circumstances that led to the flyover of New York city on April 27, 2009." The memo states that the Deputy Director of the WHMO claimed to have notified Caldera on three occasions, twice verbally and one by e-mail, about the details of the flight, and suggesting that Caldera might want to run it past Deputy chief of Staff, Jim Messina, and Press aide, Robert Gibbs.

With respect to Director Caldera's actions, it then states, "Ultimately, the Director did not notify Messrs. Messina or Gibbs about the flyover."

The unsigned memo also goes on to address what were identified therein as perceived ambiguities in the reporting structure of the White House Military Office, and makes the suggestion that "structural and organizational ambiguities exist" therein, that can affect that "organization's ability to operate effectively."

The unsigned internal memo was dated May 5, 2009, three days prior to it's release.

Should we assume it was the White House version of a "per curium opinion" on the topic?

If so, that would not only make it unsigned, and therefore unattributable to any one person, but would also make it the agreed upon position of the White House.

Gee, the White House had previously said that Deputy chief of Staff, Jim Messina would be conducting that internal review, not some unidentified member of the Counsel's Office.

Where are the results of Messina's investigation?

ABC's Jake Tapper and Megam Chuchmach have posted about the resignation of the Director of the White House Military Office, Lou Caldera over the incident for which he had previously apologized.

And, in addition, the White House also released only ONE photo, obviously one taken from the accompanying F-16.

Here it is . . . the one photo.

So . . . where are the photo(s) taken from inside Air Force One during that flight?

Free Republic has held a funny "photoshop" contest of the incident, which is now up to about 600 pages long!

Finally, the Washington Post reports, per Scott Wilson, that the official estimated cost of the incident has now risen to $357,000, based on a letter from Sec. Defense Robert Gates to Senator John McCain in response to a McCain inquiry.

Below is the official "high resolution" version, from the White House site, here. Click on the photo to expand it to full size. It is also obviously an "uncropped" and "un-brightened" version, like the one above was.

That is a portion of Hudson and Essex counties in New Jersey in the background, including Liberty Park and Jersey City. In the upper left-hand corner, you can see the distinctive Newark Bay Bridge (officially the Vincent R. Casciano Memorial Bridge), and the railroad bridge just above it, connecting the cities of Newark and Bayonne via I-78 crossing Newark Bay. Above the cockpit are connectors like the General Pulaski Skyway, Routes 1 & 9, crossing the Passaic and Hackensack Rivers connecting Newark and Jersey City, and leading to the Holland Tunnel. Harrison and Kearney are in the background. Also visible are the NJ Turnpike connectors, eventually leading to the Bergen county area of New Jersey, I-80, and the George Washington Bridge.

The New York areas of Governor's Island, Brooklyn and the lower tip of Manhattan would have been quite clearly visible from the port windows you can see on that right side of Air Force One.

White House: Flight Photos NOT To Be Released

The Obama White House has officially refused to release the "photos" they said were the reason for the low-level flight of Air Force One around the New York harbor area, including over the area of Jersey City in New Jersey, forcing panic among many residents, and office workers as well.

As was reported in today's New York Post:

"We have no plans to release them," an aide to President Obama told The Post, refusing to comment further.

The sole purpose of the secret photo-op, which sent thousands of New Yorkers running for cover, was to take new publicity shots of the presidential jet over the city.

"The photos . . . are classified -- that's ridiculous," Councilman Peter Vallone Jr., said.

The photos have not technically been "classified," a White House aide said, but they are being kept from public view.

They are not classified, and yet the White House still refuses to release them? And they refuse to answer any more questions about it?

The whole story has been shrouded in secrecy from the beginning, even to the point of local officials being threatened with retaliation, if they let it out!

It is getting more and more suspicious.

Ask yourself this -- Who in their right mind would arrange for a large passenger jet and two F-16 Fighters, to fly up to the New York harbor area, circle around the Statue of Liberty area at a low altitude with one of two F-16's tailing the large jet, just to "update" a few file photos -- and unclassified photos at that?

That story is simply absurd on it's face. Especially in a post-9/11 world!

So, the question becomes, what really occurred because that story simply does not hold water.

I can think of two possible general reasons for failing to release the unclassified photos:

1. There are no photos, making the "cover" story a flat-out lie, or,

2. Many or most of whatever "official" photos were taken, were of what was going on inside the plane, and as a result would show exactly who was on board.

As for that second possibility, consider this . . . perhaps the passengers were a group of Obama supporters and/or contributors, who were being politically rewarded for their help in the campaign.

Lots of seats, no? Like the Clinton era Lincoln's Bedroom sleepovers, but on steroids. How many people can stay over in the Lincoln Bedroom? How many people can board Air Force One? Hmmmm . . . .

Who knows? In that case, I'd guess they probably took some pictures of their own as well!

The latter is a very logical possibility, because it would explain all the facts as we know them so far, including:

a. the extreme demand for secrecy in advance;

b. the lack of any coherent public explanation as to why the flight was taken in the first place;

c. consistent a little bit with the "cover story," because there indeed would have been some "file" photos taken of the occasion, ones that the White House would definitely NOT want to get out;

d. their adamant refusal to release any of the photos, even though they admit they are not classified;

e. the refusal of the White House to entertain any further questions about it, clearly indicating they have something very embarrassing to hide, and,

f. it would also explain why they strangely went out of their way at first to point out that it was not "officially" Air Force One . . . but a "back-up," and that it is only AF-1 when the President is on board, thus "minimizing" the PR problem, should it come out!

The fact is that they have gone silent, leaving the public to guess. Have you got a better possible explanation? We'd love to hear it. Feel free to comment.