October 1, 2013 --
David R. Zukerman, LPR proprietor, has announced that he is a write-in candidate for the post of New York City Public Advocate.
Zukerman was a write-in candidate for the post in 2009 and did not intend to run again, until he saw an editorial in the New York Post, September 9, expressing unhappiness with the candidates on the primary ballot, whoever they are.
Zukerman is convinced that the ideal candidate will be familiar with, and committed to, the principles on governance set forth in the first half of Federalist Paper No. 57.
Additionally, Zukerman believes that the ideal candidate should have considerable experience in getting hammered by city government generally, and by parking violations and city marshals, in particular.
Zukerman has, indeed, been hammered by city government and, in addition, has gotten thrashed by banks, credit card companies and the local electric company. "Who else among the public advocate candidates has had his phone and electric service cut off?" Zukerman asks. In this regard, Zukerman sees his food stamp benefits card "as a plus."
Zukerman's experience at the hands of government bureaucrats includes receiving two stone-walling letters from Bill de Blasio, concerning the Dayton Seaside property tax manipulation. At the time, deBlasio was a HUD regional official. Apparently de Blasio, who has spent much of his career in government, has zero experience getting hammered by government officials -- and has little difficulty doing the hammering to others. With Joe Lhota, the people should expect simply another political hand forming an iron fist.
With de Blasio leading in the polls by a very large margin, as of September 23, Zukerman is convinced that he is uniquely situated to provide vital oversight, as Public Advocate, to a City Hall headed by a Mayor de Blasio. Zukerman has experience in dealing with de Blasio's apparent penchant for covering up deceptive tactics with a veneer of pretend-openness.
March 8, 1999, de Blasio, as a mid-level HUD official, sent Zukerman a letter on the Dayton Seaside property tax matter stating, in part, that HUD officials "are presently not involved in any discussion with any New York City officials...." The only way the letter could have been considered truthful was by careful reference to the word "presently" in de Blasio's letter. Clearly, HUD, holding two mortgages on three of the Dayton Seaside buildings, had been in contact with New York City on this property tax matter, except, perhaps, for the day de Blasio wrote that letter.
Indeed, HUD had agreed to take escrow money that had accumulated to pay pre-1984 taxes and give those escrows to New York City to pay post-1984 taxes on the Dayton Seaside buildings. Thus was created the spurious claim of tax arrears, on property taxes that were still not settled, used by NYC to force the buildings into bankruptcy. Note that it was not until the buildings were sold in bankrutpcy in 2001 that the property taxes on these buildings were settled by New York City.
Indeed, Zukerman has experience in seeing through de Blasio's pretend-openness that the candidates on the ballot for Public Advocate probably lack, and this experience justifies write-in votes for Zukerman's candidacy for Public Advocate.
Why are the principles of Federalist No. 57 vital to the well-being of the people of New York City, in 2013? Because Federalist No. 57 warns us about people seeking the "ambitious sacrifice of the many, to the aggrandizement of the few, is too much of this going on, today.
Consider grocery shelves, stocked with items coming in smaller packages bearing higher prices. Who benefits? Not the consumer.
Zukerman believes the people of New York City need a public servant who will stand up for the people against an overbearing mayor serving an overbearing establishment.
LPR expects that de Blasio's gift for demagoguery will lead to the "ambitious sacrifice of the many, to the aggrandizement of the [favored] few." As PUbli Advocate, Zukerman will maintain constant vigil to protect the people of New York City from the harmful effects of de Balsio's demagogic dissembling.
Zukerman would call attention to the write-in victory of Michael J. Jarjura in the November 2005 election for mayor of Waterbury, Connecticut. It can be done. All that is needed, in the race for New York City Public Advocate, are voters who agree that a public advocate should advocate for the public, not for personal ambition.