Ted Cruz Endorses Lonegan For Congress In New Jersey’s 5th District

HOUSTON, Texas – U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, R-Texas, today announced his endorsement of New Jersey's conservative standard-bearer Steve Lonegan who is running for Congress in New Jersey’s Fifth District.

“Steve Lonegan is a tireless advocate for our founding principles who has proven his willingness to boldly take his message directly to the people of New Jersey, and I am proud to endorse him to become the next Member of Congress from the Fifth District,” Cruz said. “I have known Steve for many years, and look forward to working with him to grow jobs, expand freedom, and ensure the security of the American people.”

Lonegan graduated from William Paterson College with a B.A. in business administration, and went on to earn his MBA from Fairleigh Dickinson University.  He is the former Mayor of Bogota, NJ and was the Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in the 2013 special election.

The endorsement by Senator Cruz is only the latest in a string of endorsements coming to Lonegan from state legislative leaders like Bergen County's Senator Gerry Cardinale and grassroots organizations representing Second Amendment voters, property taxpayers, Pro-Life and traditional values.  Conservatives continue to rally to Steve Lonegan as their best chance to elect an alternative to the warmed-over Clintonista policies of liberal Democrat incumbent Josh Gottheimer.

Later today, Lonegan will be meeting with conservative leaders in Washington, DC, including Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform.  For more information on Steve Lonegan's campaign for Congress, visit www.Lonegan.com.

Gas-tax repealers pass Black-Lives Matter bill

Last week, the New Jersey Senate passed legislation that will throw EVERY police officer who has to make the decision to use deadly force in front of a state-appointed special prosecutor.  Under this legislation, a police officer who arrives at a school shooting incident in the nick of time and uses his firearm to stop a would-be mass murderer of children will be presumed to have done something wrong and then tossed in front of a persecutory special prosecutor. 

This legislation -- S2469 -- could not become law without the support of two Republicans, Jennifer Beck and Gerald Cardinale.  Without their votes, the bill would not have passed the Senate.

The premise behind this legislation is that county prosecutors -- just by existing within the borders of a particular county -- have too close a relationship with the police officers of that county and therefore cannot objectively investigate an incident when a police officer makes a mistake or oversteps his or her authority. 

While this might be argued for states that elect their prosecutors, such as Pennsylvania, where police unions are active in that political process; in New Jersey all prosecutors are appointed by the same person -- the Governor.  So whether you are a county prosecutor, appointed by the Governor, or the Attorney General, also appointed by the Governor, you do not run for election and there is no potential for that kind of conflict.

If a county prosecutor is too conflicted to investigate a matter within his jurisdiction simply because he or she lives and works there, then the whole idea of county prosecutors needs to be scrapped and replaced with something like the United Kingdom's Crown Prosecution Service, where attorneys are appointed to prosecute on a case-by-case basis.  But the idea of dragging a police officer in front of a special prosecutor, simply because that officer did precisely what he or she was supposed to do in a deadly situation, is preposterous. 

All this legislation will do is to create a species of state prosecutor whose worth will be determined by the number of police officers' scalps collected and careers destroyed.  It will deteriorate the quality of police organizations  and with that, the safety of every community in New Jersey.

The Assembly might consider a "sensitivity training" amendment for special prosecutor designees.  It would include eight weeks of putting on a police officer's uniform, strapping on a sidearm, and engaging in day-to-day police work like traffic stops and domestic calls.  Call it prosecutors' boot camp.   

Just why two Republican Senators -- Beck and Cardinale -- would cross party lines to vote for this misguided legislation is open to question.  We suggest that it is because they find the contemplation of labor unions and working people disagreeable.  Senator Beck is a career  politician and lobbyist, while Senator Cardinale is a politician with a profession, as well as the owner of a luxury property in the Caribbean. 

According to a press release put out by the ACLU, Beck and Cardinale casts their votes on behalf of that organization as well as Black Lives Matter Morristown, Black Lives Matter Paterson, Black Lives Matter New Jersey, the Drug Policy Alliance, Garden State Equality, New Jersey Citizen Action, and the New Jersey Policy Perspective.  Beck and Cardinale stood with the far-left to screw working police officers and their families.

Addiego fights for Vets, Cardinale's croc tears

Burlington County's Senator Dawn Marie Addiego made sure that the TTF agreement included more than a handshake for veterans.  She resisted the demands to screw veterans, by NJ101.5's Bill Spadea and the Koch Petroleum lobby group, Americans for Prosperity (AFP). 

Instead, Addiego fought for veterans.  She made sure that the compromise contained a $23 million income tax cut for veterans who were honorably discharged from active duty military service or from the National Guard/ Reserve.  

Some of the bigger hand-jobs out there suggest that a conservative Republican should never vote for a tax cut because, so the argument goes, some future legislature (Democrat or liberal Republican) could undo those tax cuts.  This argument is sheer assbanditry.  One might as well argue against life itself because  eventually, we all die anyway.

Let them try to take this away from veterans.  A tax cut passed is better than one just talked about.  We fight the battles as they come.  We always have. Some of us always will.  One step at a time.  Let others give up.

We also heard from Senator Gerald Cardinale today.  His detachment from conservatives continues.  It began with his votes on behalf of illegal immigrants, to extend taxpayer-funded benefits to those in the United States illegally.  The Senator defended his vote to continue to attract illegal labor to compete with American workers by telling the Star-Ledger (11/24/13): "I’ve always sort of had this penchant for bringing people into the mainstream of the economy, and I think this fits that category.  Let more folks get into the mainstream of the economy and they’ll be doing better."

Senator Cardinale has been a legislator in New Jersey since 1974.  He predates the creation of the Transportation Trust Fund (TTF).  The gas tax has not been increased since 1988.  There have been no adjustments for inflation.  The last time the gas tax took in enough money to fund New Jersey's transportation needs was in 1990.  After that, the Legislature put it all on the taxpayers' credit card and piled on the debt year after year.  For eight of those years -- 1994 through 2001 -- the Republicans held WIDE MAJORITIES in BOTH chambers of the Legislature AND the GOVERNOR.  Did they notice the TTF debt?  Did they do anything about it?  Nope.  Jack Dick!

During that long stretch, the federal benchmark for inflation, the COLA (cost of living adjustment) went up many times:  4.0% in 1988, 4.7% in 1989, 5.4% in 1990, 3.7% in 1991, 3% in 1992, 2.6% in 1993, 2.8% in 1994, 2.6% in 1995, 2.9% in 1996, 2.1% in 1997, 1.3% in 1998, 2.5% in 1999, 3.5% in 2000, 2.6% in 2001, 1.4% in 2002, 2.1% in 2003, 2.7% in 2004, 4.1% in 2005, 3.3% in 2006, 2.3% in 2007, 5.8% in 2008, zero in 2009, zero in 2010, 3.6% in 2011, 1.7% in 2012, 1.5% in 2013, 1.7% in 2014, and zero in 2015.  But the price we paid to maintain our roads and bridges remained the same.  Didn't legislators like Cardinale ever wonder how?

Does Senator Cardinale even care?  We have remarked before on the practice, by so many legislators, of leaving New Jersey with their pension and moving to low tax states after they retire.  Lots of New Jersey legislators own homes outside New Jersey.  Senator Cardinale owns a luxurious resort on the Caribbean Island of St. Martins.  A pool, private beach, horseback riding, water sports, and nearby French gourmet restaurants and Parisian style shopping.  That's not our description of the place, it's the Senator's. 

Part of the TTF compromise is the elimination of taxes on retirement income for those residents of New Jersey.  Senator Cardinale could vote to give retirees in New Jersey an average $1,200 tax cut.

He said he won't.  But there is still time.

Democrats Lesniak and Gill flip out at the mention of God

People of faith must look to Senator Sweeney for protection

Last week, the New Jersey Senate Commerce Committee held a public hearing on Bill S1398. This bill forces insurance companies to pay for fertility procedures for lesbian couples planning to bear children and increases the cost of health insurance for everyone to pay for it.  Remember always that EVERY mandate, be it ever so noble, increases the costs to those who can only marginally afford the insurance premiums they are already paying.

After taking testimony from those in support of the bill, fairness and basic democratic standards demanded that testimony be allowed from those who opposed the bill. You would think that people who run under the banner of the "Democrat" Party would behave democratically.  Unfortunately, this was not the case.

John Tomicki with the League of American Families, and Reverend Brad Winship with Evangelical Civic Outreach asked to testify in opposition.  The session ended with the committee reluctantly hearing Mr. Tomicki's explanation of the unintended consequences of the legislation.  When Reverend Winship was fewer than three sentences into his introduction, the Chairwoman, Senator Nia Gill silenced the pastor, saying, “We are not here to have a religious ––––– [pause], because there is a separation between church and state.” 

Wow!  Did the Senator miss the entire civil rights movement?  Has she forgotten that the civil rights movement in this country -- like the emancipation of women and the abolition of slavery before it -- were moral imperatives, informed by conscience and led by religious folk.

Reverend Winship had opened with a quotation from Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.: “The church is to be the conscience of the state.” Senator Ray Lesniak, responded saying, “The church is not my conscience in terms of a senator, and I don’t think it should be the conscience of any of us. We have a separation of Church and State in this country, and it should not be our conscience.”

Senator Gill agreed, “Because there is a separation between church and state. And I am here to make sure we have that State discussion, and your religious discussion you can have with the individual members, if you think it is necessary to inform their opinion.”

Senators, have you forgotten that Rev. King appealed to America's better nature through religion?

Does Senator Lesniak forget when he brought religious leaders into the State House to participate in the debate to abolish the death penalty?  Did he just use them as a convenient window dressing?

Senator Gerald Cardinale spoke up in defense of Reverend Winship by informing the committee,    “It is clear in our society that there are many centers of influence.   Because someone’s beliefs derive from a religious background does not make them any less valid concepts as to the individual who is testifying than if they came from a legal background, or from a constitutional background, or from some other background… – The First Amendment should give him a right to speak however he has derived the thoughts he wants to express.    Were he from the Communist Party, I believe he would still have a right to speak with respect to the beliefs he derives as a Communist.”

But Senators Lesniak and Gill would not be moved.  They are attorneys, and they argue that civil law alone determines what is moral and that individual conscience and how it is derived must be suppressed or at least denied a voice.  Their argument is not unlike those expressed by other attorneys back in 1933 when the Enabling Laws were being debated in the Reichstag.

We all remember the legal cynicism expressed by Senator Lesniak when he claimed -- so long as there was no law that expressly forbade it -- pay to play was quite fine and he would do it.  But that is like saying it is OK for the Senator to sleep with his best friend's 18-year-old kid, just because no law says he can't.  Just because something is legal, that doesn't make it ethical.

And isn't it this absence of ethics that has corrupted our political system?  Those legions of lawyers endlessly searching for a legal loophole that will allow people to do bad things under cover of law. 

Slavery was once THE LAW in America.  If a clergyman like Brad Winship would have addressed the honorables in the 1850's on the subject, he might have been similarly barred from testifying and been told by an "honorable" member:  "The church is not my conscience in terms of a senator, and I don’t think it should be the conscience of any of us. We have a separation of Church and State in this country, and it should not be our conscience."

Slavery was not undone by THE LAW in America.  In fact, it was coddled by THE LAW and upheld by the United States Supreme Court.  Slavery was defeated by an uprising of conscience led by people of faith and informed by Judeo-Christian values.  Religion defeated slavery.

It is monstrous for Senators Lesniak and Gill to argue that religious values have no place in democracy, and that the wording of our First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” must be interpreted to mean that the state is prohibited from hearing any testimony that involves a morality that is higher than civil law.  This is the atheistic interpretation of the Constitution warned about by liberals of faith, including Pulitzer Prize winner Chris Hedges, the author of "America's New Fundamentalists:  When Atheism Becomes Religion."

After being denied the opportunity to freely express his views to those in power,  Pastor Winship explained: “I did not expect to be shut down in my introduction – even before explaining why evangelical pastors are opposed to the bill.  Every time I tried to speak, I was interrupted by the assumption that I was not, and would not, be addressing the bill. It was apparent that Chairwoman did not want discussed any ethical opposition to the bill."

He continued, “I had to stop speaking because I realized that whatever I said was a catch-22 situation.  If I answered her charge that I was not dealing with the bill, I was not dealing with the bill; if I went on to speak about the misplaced ethical foundation of the bill and the damage it would bring, I was not dealing with the bill. To remain silent was personally irksome.  However, in this situation, I felt the best approach was to keep quiet and let the chairwoman expose her intolerance.”

It is worth noting that both Senators Gill and Lesniak were very close to a fellow attorney/politician whose opinions they were happy to hear on issues that came before the Legislature.  The man in question was a pedophile.  Later, he was convicted of a sex crime, though not disbarred.  In the future, we hope that Senate President Steve Sweeney will ensure that Senators Lesniak and Gill extend the same courtesy to average citizens who come before them.

Beck & Doherty join left wingers to oppose tax cut for retirees

At yesterday's back to back press conferences at the State House in Trenton, GOP Senators Jennifer Beck and Mike Doherty joined with Democrat Senator Ray "Lord of Ass" Lesniak and Democrat Assemblyman John Wisniewski in opposing a plan that would give retirees an average $1,200 tax cut and phase out that destroyer of small businesses and family farms, the estate tax, while preventing an increase in property taxes to pay for local road and bridge repairs and maintenance. 

Beck and Doherty have their own plan, also supported by GOP Senator Gerald Cardinale, that freezes property tax relief to local governments for seven years and borrows heavily to run the state deeper into debt.  The Beck plan makes no tax cuts -- something the state teachers' union agrees with -- and leaves New Jersey's tax structure the worst in the region for retirees and the worst in the nation to grow a business and create jobs.

By refusing to fund roads and bridges through a petroleum-based user tax, the Beck plan gives out-of-state drivers a free ride while pushing the costs of maintenance and repair onto property taxpayers and future generations.  Groups  like AFP, which is funded by the petroleum industry, support Beck and Doherty, as do liberal organizations like the New Jersey Education Association and the Sierra Club.

When it comes to opposing the phase out of the Estate Tax, Liberal Assemblyman Wisniewski and talk show host Bill Spadea are both adamantly opposed.  They part company on a user tax on gasoline, with Wisniewski in support of an increase in the current tax, whereas Spadea would rather see no tax on gasoline at all and instead a substantial property tax increase to pay for roads and bridges.

All this is bound to have ramifications for the 2017 elections -- with the primaries now less than a year away.   How would retired voters behave if individual legislators voted against their $1,200 tax cut?  What would the effect be if it failed to become law and the state's retirees saw their $1,200 tax cut taken away?

In Jennifer Beck's District 11, 48 percent of all registered Republicans are aged 60 or over.  Just 20 percent are under age 45.  66 percent of Republican super voters (3 of 4 or above) are aged 60 or over.

42 percent of all registered Republicans in Mike Doherty's District 23 are aged 60 or over.  Just 21 percent are under age 45.  58 percent of Republican super voters (3 of 4 or above) are aged 60 or over.

In Senator Cardinale's District 39, 47 percent of all registered Republicans are aged 60 or over.  Just 18 percent are under age 45.  64 percent of Republican super voters (3 of 4 or above) are aged 60 or over.

Can these legislators afford to vote against a tax cut for retirees?