Arizona Politics for Conservatives: Sonoran Alliance
Arizona Politics, News, Commentary and Information with a Blatantly Conservative Worldview Presented by an Alliance of Writers, Activists, Consultants and Government Insiders.
Senator John McCain has spent over $16 million in an attempt to discredit his challenger, the consistent conservative, J.D. Hayworth. He has also undergone a case of the “6-year switch” where he disguises himself as a conservative in order to regain “his” seat in Washington. McCain has previously admitted lying during elections – and this game-changing ad highlights his lies during his Senate re-election campaign here in Arizona.
Support the ad by clicking here.
McCain campaign worker dresses up in a pig costume and tries to prank JD but the prank goes horribly wrong for this piggy.
This John McCain piggy went to JD’s press conference
This little John McCain piggy wanted pictures with JD
This little John McCain piggy got none
This John McCain piggy got spanked by a 5 year old ,
and cried “wee, wee, wee” All the way home.
I interviewed Dr. Barton before Shane started allowing me to post my interviews here. Dr. Barton is running for the House in LD 7. There are quite a few people running in that race. To me, Dr. Barton’s support for Prop. 100 and defense of high administrator pay categorized him as a bit of an educrat. I think Howard Levine had a good rundown on the things that LD 7 voters should keep in mind when going to the polls. I’m not in lockstep with Mr. Levine’s thinking, but it’s a good start.
Whoever wins in LD 7, House and Senate, rest assured, I’ll be watching them very carefully and will expose any movement to the left.
A couple of nights ago on Grassroots Interviews, I interviewed Ray Barnes. He’s termed out of the House and making a run for the Senate. The LD 7 Senate race has four Republican candidates: Barnes, the Sanctuary Six Nancy Barto, Bob Greene who was decertified for Clean Elections funding after they determined a number of his $5 qualifying contributions were forgeries, and TEA Party candidate Brad Buch. Nancy is NOT termed out of the House and I sorta think it’s bad form to challenge Ray “just because.” I was shocked to see that Ray consistently scores to the left of Nancy when you look at a composite of the scores from Goldwater, AFP, and Pachyderm. What was even more shocking to me is that Ray outscored David Burnell Smith (making a run for the House in LD 7 again) according to Goldwater for the year that DBS was in the House with Ray.
Ben Quayle has said repeatedly in this campaign that he’s his own man. His dad has said he wouldn’t have a role in Ben’s campaign. Yet, in his latest commercial, Ben cites the fact that his only experience is that he’s watched his father’s political career.
Considering Ben was just a teenager when his dad had to turn over the keys to the Naval Observatory to Al Gore, Ben must have a great memory.
Ben is right, though. The only rationale for his candidacy is the fact that his last name is Quayle. There is no other reason that someone who graduated from law school in 2002, and was not admitted to the Arizona Bar until 2009 (but claims to have worked as a lawyer in Arizona since 2006) should be running for Congress, especially with a string of one-year employment stints at various law firms around the country.
Ben is running simply because of his family’s name– and that’s been tolerable– it happens everywhere, and while it’s a shame, it’s a fact of political life.
But this has gone to a new level, an unacceptable level.
Papa Quayle serves as a Director of Cerebus, a private equity firm that happens to own Chrysler Motors. They received BILLIONS of dollars in bailout money for Chrysler. And that’s not the worst part. Dan Quayle and Ben Quayle went to Cerebus’s New York HQ, met with their executives– who are rich with government-bailout money— and got them to give nearly $50,000 to Ben’s Campaign for Congress.
Nearly $50,000 in dirty, government-bailout money, procured for Cerebus by a former Vice President, and funneled to his son’s congressional campaign. Outrageous. This isn’t a few dollars we’re talking about. At $42,000, Bailed-Out Cerebus is Ben’s biggest donor.
Here is the info on Cerebus: http://www.forbes.com/2008/12/09/chrysler-cerberus-bailout-oped-cx_dg_1210gerstein.html
Call Ben Quayle at 602-492-4236, and tell him to return donations from bailed out companies.
If a private company needs money so badly that they take from the taxpayer, they shouldn’t be giving to political candidates.
Former County Attorney Andrew Thomas Asks Goddard and Corporation Commission To Hold Tom Horne Accountable For Fraudulent ViolationsPaid for by Thomas for AG
PHOENIX, ARIZONA. August 5, 2010. Conservative Attorney General candidate Andrew Thomas’ campaign released a statement in regard to the gay marriage ruling in California.By Steven Robinson
Recently US Senate candidate Jim Deakin’s home went into foreclosure. Anyone aware of our nation’s tremendous financial problems can understand and even sympathize with Jim’s financial plight. No one wants to see anyone go through that painful process. However, in this case you must take a closer look to understand, that IN SPITE of his ‘conservative rhetoric”, Jim Deakin spends money just like the US government he is so fond of criticizing. That is to say, he borrows with the “promise to pay in the future” SO he can spend it today!! In this case, Jim does it with government underwritten loans. You only have to look at the public records to discover Jim and Adonia Deakin’s spendthrift habits.
Many people who obtain loans do so with the intent to pay down the mortgage and in time, own the home free and clear. Their goal is to have a home that is debt-free, with no monthly payment. In theory the federal government would ALSO operate this way, keeping the debt in check, allowing for some valid reasons to borrow, such as war. However, we know that our federal government has borrowed so much money over the last 40 years to finance outrageous spending, guaranteeing re-election by ‘buying’ support of the voters and the companies to whom they dole out this money. (The Taxpayers future earnings)
So let’s get back to Mr. Deakin. As Jim has stated, he bought his current residence in 1995. He paid, $148,659 with a VA loan for just over $141K, was for a very nice home in North Phoenix. Unfortunately Jim endured a divorce and he refinanced the home into his name. The new loan for $164,400 closed in August 1999, borrowing $25,000 more equity, perhaps used to buy out his ex-wife. Nothing unusual with this loan.
In 2001, Jim married Adonia, and just one year later, in August 2002, Jim and Adonia obtained a $20,000 Home Equity loan (HELOC) in both their names. Again, there is nothing unusual about this loan; people have used their equity for a variety of purposes. There is one interesting note: Adonia’s home on East Sequoia Drive was paid off two months later. We don’t know whether these funds were used to pay off Adonia’s loan, just that the loan was paid off. More on that later.
However, less than 18 months later, in January 2004, Jim again refinanced, borrowed an ADDITIONAL $32,000 more, with a $216,000 loan. More significant about this loan is that Jim obtained financing as a “Single man, his sole and separate property”! NOW the financing activities are getting curious; after all, isn’t Jim married!?
Then, in May, Jim obtained another equity loan (HELOC), THIS time for $54,000, and again as “his sole and separate property”. Weren’t Jim and Adonia married? It’s Confusing, to be sure. Yet the critical point is that again, Jim is borrowing on his ‘future ability to pay’; and with another $54K to spend.
In May 2005 Adonia sells the home on East Sequoia Drive, she had originally purchased in 1997, and had refinanced in 2000. This is the loan that was paid off in 2002. So, when the home sold, a very nice home at that, Adonia cleared over $100,000 at the sale, perhaps more.
Then, in June 2007, Jim and now Adonia, refinanced again! This time the loan is a WHOPPING $376,000!! After paying off the existing liens, Jim borrowed an additional $106,000! Again, it’s based on Jim’s ‘future ability to pay’.
So here is the situation, In FIVE short years, beginning in August 2002 through June 2007, Jim and Adonia borrowed an total of additional $212,000. Furthermore they received another $100K from the sale of Adonia’s original home. NOW, after MORE THAN DOUBLING the mortgage loan balance, Jim Deakin NOW tells us HE and Adonia are “upside down” in their mortgage!? Well no wonder! They’ve spent over $300,000 in FIVE short years; by borrowing most of these funds, based on Jim’s ‘future ability to pay’! This is a 130% increase in his debt over five years. When you contrast this with the National Debt over the same time period, the is ONLY a 10% increase! Yet Deakin wants to lecture the Congressman about spending? I guess Jim knows how to better manage our country’s finances.
Yet, JUST WHO does Jim Deakin blame for HIS financial difficulties? In his first press release to Fox10 here is what Jim says: “Small businesses have been struggling because of the burdensome taxation and regulation implemented by both of my opponents.” What? How did taxation and regulation cause Jim to borrow and spend so much? He then says, “HUD amendments enacted by my opponents and the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act allows greedy bankers to create the derivatives market resulting in the crisis we have all experienced since 2008.” SO THE ‘GREEDY BANKERS’ made him do it!?
No, Mr. Deakin looks for sympathy as he seeks to walk away from his obligations. His home is in foreclosure, NOT because of the economy; BUT due to his irresponsible borrowing!
One thing is for certain; Jim understands and shares the Democrats’ HUGE appetite for debt! Clearly he borrows and spends money like, well like “like a drunken sailor”; or rather “like a drunken Congress” to coin a phrase! IS ANYONE beginning to question Jim Deakin’s claims of being conservative?
This begs the question; will Jim Deakin add insult to injury and avail himself of Obama’s government programs to get “Free Money” with subsidized interest and a lower monthly payments, defer part of the principle balance, partial loan forgiveness, or some other taxpayer subsidy? Is this what Deakin means when he calls himself an “individualist”? Is THIS why Jim let his mortgage get so far behind in the first place? Does the term “Huckster” come to mind? ‘Inquiring minds’ want to know.
From the beginning, JD Hayworth has been there for the Arizona TEA Party movement, giving them a voice and credibility. Now it’s time to get solidly behind JD Hayworth as he takes on the Establishment and the effort to restore our Constitutional Republic.
Even back on November 16, 2006, Mark Levin was trying to warn us about John McCain!
My biggest objection to Jim Deakin is where has he been for the last 20 years?
He and I both were discharged from the US Navy in 1989. (He entered in 1985 and I entered in 1983.) Immediately after I got out of the Navy, I went to college, worked part time, raised my children and got involved in fighting liberals and progressives – even in my own party! I even got elected to the County party twice. For the last 20 years, I have been involved in conservative political activism. I was the President of the UA Students for Life, an employee and Director of Arizona Right to Life, founder and board member of the Christian Coalition, grassroots coordinator for Americans for Prosperity, founder and board member of the Arizona Taxpayers Action Committee, and in general an activist with the conservative wing of the Republican Party. During that entire time, I have NEVER seen Jim Deakin involved at any level.
All of a sudden he pops up and self-proclaims himself to be the Tea Party candidate (which he isn’t) expecting everyone to follow him. I have met many conservatives over the years but Deakin was never one of them.
In my opinion, Jim Deakin is nothing more than a political opportunist taking advantage of tumultuous times and not letting a good crisis go to waste. When I’ve met with candidates, I always ask them one question: Are you running to be somebody or are you running to do something?” Jim Deakin is clearly running to be somebody.
As a lifelong conservative activist, I can spot a conservative.
Jim Deakin needs to realize his political naivety, inexperience and selfish ambitions and step aside from the Senate race. If he really wants to run for public office, I suggest he run for school board or the Legislature. For Jim Deakin to run for US Senate is irresponsible, reckless and will leave the conservative movement in Arizona damaged for years.
A few posts down, a fellow contibutor who goes by Fredo, made some historical references to the voter initiative Prop 200 back in 2004. I just felt it was incomplete.
So here’s, as they say, the rest of the story…..
In Fredo’s post below (“Anti Prop 200 alumni, where are they now?”), he notes that while “everyone is acting tough on illegal immigration now,” back in 2004 several Arizona politicians opposed Proposition 200, which restricted public benefits to illegals and required photo ID to vote
Fredo asks, “Will the voters care about politicians who supported benefits for illegals? They should at least know the facts.”
Here’s one ‘fact’ Fredo forgot to mention – one of those politicians opposing Proposition 200 in 2004 was J.D. Hayworth!
J.D. now claims he’s a long-time advocate of cracking down on illegal aliens, but just six years ago (two years before the end of his public career), he opposed the anti-illegal immigrant Proposition 200. He says 9-11 removed the “scales from his eyes“. Wasn’t 9-11 in 2001? Wasn’t Prop 200 in 2004?
That’s a fact. And facts are stubborn things.
How’s does Hayworth explain his past opposition to Prop. 200? I’ve never heard him talk about it…truthfully.
Not many people have listened to Susan Bradford in her years long effort to get some traction behind her belief that Jack Abramoff is innocent. Her personal mission to clear his name has evolved into a book designed to reveal that Abramoff was innocent and framed! Framed, I say! She calls herself an investigative journalist. She has plenty of Abramoff apologies on multi-user open websites but her personal website is no longer operational.
If Ms. Bradford is to be quoted, then it is only right that the readers of this site have a full view of her perspective. Ms. Bradford’s enamored status of Mr. Abramoff has been going on for sometime. So much so , that she felt compelled to write on his behalf.
In Bradford’s letter to the judge, begging for leniency in Abramoff’s sentence, she described him as “noble, enterprising, and creative…”
Two out of three ain’t bad.
She goes on to write of his love of country, fight for freedom, and his devotion to the conservative movement. It all was a “whirl of activity” that caused him to “lose sight of the fine print” and that he ”perhaps stopped paying attention and made some bad decisions.”
“Perhaps” he made some “bad decisions”…? Really! Ya’ think?
But if you thought her plea for his sentencing was just to take it easy on the guy…you are wrong. She didn’t think he should be punished at all! So much so that she said in her letter:
Yes, he clearly broke the law, but hasn’t his unmitigated public humiliation around the world and decimation of his character been enough punishment?
OK, hold on because it gets worse. She sees this guy as the remedy…not the epitome’ of the problem. Don’t send him to jail, Your Honor…oh, no because according to Ms. Bradford:
Mr. Abramoff can do so much more good outside of prison than within it.
I’m not making this up. The guy who is the poster-child for campaign corruption, who obviously felt his end justified his means, should be allowed to take a walk? Because he will “fix” the problem? How, by using his “enterprising” and “creative” ideas? I think we already saw that in play…..maybe this is when the “noble” comes in.
And now, the Hayworth campaign is using the distorted perception of this woman to attack Jim Deakin and tie him to McCain in rambling writings and a graph that looks like people playing “The Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon” on crack.
The only thing this proves is that JD has not broken his connection to Abramoff. He clearly is still on the side of the guy who provided him with tens of thousand of dollars, all paid to JD’s PAC. What’s more…Team Hayworth doesn’t see why that is the wrong message to send to voters.
This sort of desperate and distorted effort will only serve to cement the notion that Hayworth cannot accept responsibility for his own bad acts, sees a boogey man behind every corner, and has no filter when his own self interest is involved. For whatever good he has or may be able to do, the voters will never trust him again.
They just showed us all why.
