Jeff Flake announces for US Senate, Arizona CD-6 seat opens up

Congressman Jeff Flake has just announced his entry into the US Senate race to succeed Senator Jon Kyl.

This leaves Arizona’s 6th Congressional seat open. Given the district overwhelmingly favors Republicans, expect another stampede of candidates to run for the starting blocks.

Entrants include:

Senate President, Russell Pearce
Speaker of the House, Kirk Adams
Former State Senator Chuck Gray
2010 CD-6 candidate, Jeff Smith
Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu
Any number of other current and former state legislators and city councilman including Phoenix City Councilman, Sal DiCiccio
Any number of east valley political activists

With the urgency to raise money and establish a formidable primary presence, any state legislator will feel the urgency to enter the race quickly. Under Arizona’s resign to run law, resignations in the State Legislature would prompt another flurry of political announcements and appointments to succeed resigning legislators! The task of replacing state legislators would then fall to the elected precinct committeemen in those legislative districts and ultimately to the County Board of Supervisors.

Let the 2012 Republican Primary begin!

Alexander & Goldman show tonight: AZ sues the feds over immigration, who will replace Sen. Kyl & the Planned Parenthood stings

Join Brian Symes and myself on the Alexander & Goldman Show from 6-7pm AZ/MST as we discuss Arizona’s new lawsuit against the feds for costs due to their failure to enforce immigration laws. We’ll discuss this with Rey Torres of the Arizona Latino Republicans, who joined in the SB 1070 lawsuit defending Arizona. Did you know that Arizona has received almost $3.7 million so far in donations to help defend itself against the lawsuit?

Next, we will discuss who might replace Senator Jon Kyl, who just announced he will not be running for reelection in 2012.

For the last part of the show, we will tell you what’s been happening with the latest stings against Planned Parenthood, exposing that abortion mill for its willingness to perform abortions on underage girls who are abused as prostitutes.

Finally, we will discuss a new Social Media seminar/CLE we will be offering to attorneys and other professionals on February 4th, revealing all of our social media secrets. Lawyers will receive two credits, both ethics credits.

Please call in at 602.508.0960 and let us know your thoughts. Tune in locally to KKNT 960 AM or listen live online at KKNT960.com.
Last week’s show discussing the revolution in Egypt, and the left’s attempts to take God out of our public schools is archived here.




2011 CPAC Roundup

The Conservative Political Action Conference, an annual project of the American Conservative Union, took place in Washington, DC over the past several days.  Conservative luminaries from across the country came to speak.  This post provides you with a brief summary overview of the conference along with links to some of the speeches given and newsarticles covering the conference.

This year some disgruntled former CPAC board members and volunteers tried to paint the CPAC conference as having been infiltrated by…er… “those of an alternative lifestyle” (let’s say it that way.)  However, those folks weren’t even to be seen.  CPAC was a madhouse this year, much of the time shoulder to shoulder, standing room only by conservatives from all over the country, eastern establishment RINOs as well as true conservatives (westerners and old timers you and I would recognize as comrades).  So, let’s put the GOPride manufactured controversy in the trash bin where it belongs right now.

Rand Paul

TeaParty favorite and new Republican Senator from Kentucky, Rand Paul, gave a rousing speech to an overflow crowd.  Click through on the image below to see his speech.

YouTube Preview Image

 

Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney gave a great speech on family values and the importance of bringing real world experience in private enterprise to government.  However, he continues to be haunted by the specter legacy of RomneyCare in Massachusets as well as his connection to the Open Borders crowd, see William Weld Backs Romney for Oval OfficeWilliam Weld Finance Chair for Romney (see part about Weld being Clinton’s ambassador to Mexico.)  Weld was co-chair of Romney’s campaign in NY state and TA DA was also co-author of the Open Borders operating manual, the Council on Foreign Relations paper, Building a North American Community.  Romney’s republican advisor Weld also endorsed Obama over McCain.

 YouTube Preview Image

 

Tim Pawlenty

To chants of “T-Paw” from college Republicans from Minnesota, the former Minnesota governor gave a great speech on conservative principles.  Due to a rhetorical peculiarity in his speech, there was a humorous undertone that pervaded the speech as a result of some tete-a-tete with the audience.  Pawlenty asked, “On what planet does it make sense where bureaucratic regulation results in a better economy?”  To which someone at the back of the audience shouted, “Pluto!”  Then the next closest planet came into view when the former Governor asked, “On what planet does government management of healthcare result in a better healthcare system?”  As you might expect, some wisecracker yelled out the answer, “Uranus!” causing the governor and the audience to laugh.  Pretty much from then on the answer from the audience to every rhetorical question the governor posed was the name of the 7th planet.  :)

YouTube Preview Image

 

Orrin Hatch

Orrin Hatch spoke on a panel about the “Balanced Budget Amendment” he is co-sponsoring.  An undertone to the speech was about how Congress can’t muster the votes to pass it and, therefore, a new constitutional convention needs to be called to pass it.  Hatch was asked by a Utahn in attendance how anyone could trust what Hatch had to say when he voted for the first TARP bailout.  Reminiscent of the 2000 Utah Republican Party State Convention where the same occurred, Hatch was roundly booed by the audience.  Hatch responded at CPAC as at the 2000 Utah republican party state convention that he was “sorry” and that the audience didn’t understand the kind of pressure he was under.  At the 2000 Utah *county* convention, he was roundly criticized by the audience for appointing all of the Clinton federal judge nominees to which, in response, he wagged his finger at the audience saying, “You don’t understand the pressure I’m under.  You don’t know what it’s like.”  Utah GOP state delegates on Hatch, click here.

Herman Cain

Conservative black radio show host, Herman Cain, gave a *fantastic* speech regarding the evils of political correctness and what being a real American Patriot means.  A highlight of his speech was his elaboration of liberal tactics he calls SIN tactics.   Liberals have no strategy except for their end goal of turning the nation into Europe and will use their SIN-tactics of “S”hifting the subject, “I”gnoring the facts and “N”ame Calling in order to achieve their goal.

 YouTube Preview Image

Ron Paul

The runaway draw to CPAC this year was last year’s CPAC Straw Poll winner, Texas Congressman Ron Paul.  The Paulites dominated the convention.  The line at Paul’s book signing weaved through every row of the exhibition hall, out the door, filling the exhibition hall foyer.  Two hours after his speech, the line was still 200-300 people long, weaving through the exhibition hall. 

The Donald Trump issue and Cheney controversy has been exaggerated by the media.  It was a bigger deal outside of CPAC and on the TV than it was at the conference itself.

Here are some articles.  Paul’s full speech, “The Brushfires of Freedom,” is below.

Politico: In Straw Polls, Smart Money is on Ron Paul

Fox: Ron Paul Brings Down the House at CPAC

Slate: Two Pauls are Better than One

Time: Before His Arrival Ron Paul Is Everywhere at CPAC

Wall Street Journal: Ron Paul on Egypt: “People Don’t Like Us Propping Up Dictators”

Salon: Ron Paul Fans Making CPAC Their Own

YouTube Preview Image

Teaparty, y’all!

Photo of the day: US Congressmen Gone Wild!

(Photographed above are Congressmen Chris Lee (NY-26) and Jeff Flake (AZ-6))

Both self-photograph.

One answers the call to be wild. The other answers the call to be in the wild.

One goes on Craig’s List. The other goes on the GOP short list.

WHAT PART OF “WRONG” DON’T THEY GET?

NEW NAME, OLD OWNERS, SAME STORY

The saga of reforming the probate courts in Arizona is focusing on Maricopa County lately.  The anger families and victims of the court ordered abuse are feeling has reached a fever pitch and came to an interesting point earlier this week.  This is from a website dedicated to Arizona Judicial Reform:  ”The Hits Just Keep On Coming…OR…How to Legally Abuse, Extort, and Violate the Law While Making a Fortune!“  The current practices are anything but our finest hour and do not resemble “justice for all”.  It is worth reading.

 BLAST FROM THE PAST

It seems Judge Donohoe, of Andy Thomas fame, has his hands all over this charade of justice called “probate”.  He was charged with corruption and bribery by Thomas.  Of course, Donohoe suggested the role of the judiciary was sacrosanct and adamantly admonished the County Attorney for even suggesting that he would impose politics into his rulings.

He has become a sort of cult figure for some who opposed Thomas and holds a similar level of oppositional esteem by those who see him as the poster child for judicial arrogance.  Watching the video below of Donohoe in action will certainly improve the ranks of the latter group.

Well, it’s interesting how things in life have a way of taking a turn.

Background: an adult was ordered by Donohoe to be evaluated to determine competency by a physician of the courts choosing. Never mind no evidence was ever presented to the court indicating he was incapacitated or that he was sitting in the courtroom demanding this stop, or that this private citizen had a long time, well-known and highly respected physician who was prepared to testify to his competency.  There was, however, admitted hearsay of a distant relative…what ever happened to the “clear and convincing evidence” standard?

So, the attorney of this private citizen, whose only wrongdoing was having the combination of money and maliciously greedy relatives, asked via subpoena for the Dr.’s involvement in prior cases with the court and previous rulings.  Is she fair and equitable or does she make her living with these reports and declares 90% of her cases as incapacitated?  Hey…makes sense to ask.

The Dr. immediately resigned from the case.  Judge Donohoe didn’t like it that his ‘go-to-girl” for competency matters was miffed. 

So, being the purveyor of all things truthful….he did what he had previously declared to be an affront to justice.  He had their lawyer arrested in court.  How dare anyone question his hand-picked expert? He demanded the attorneys disclose information that falls under attorney-client privilege.  The first guy up refused.  Pink handcuffs and off to jail for him.  

Say, hey Judge, whatever happened to ARS 12-2234

  • 12-2234. Attorney and client
  • A. In a civil action an attorney shall not, without the consent of his client, be examined   as to any communication made by the client to him, or his advice given thereon in the course of professional employment.

Apparently Judge Donohoe doesn’t need no stinkin’ statutes!  Watch the videos …. video 2 has the arrest of Joel Sannis, video 9 is attorney Sandy Slaton giving him heck!  All the videos are chilling.  To imagine in a court of law, in the USA, a private citizen can have their attorney arrested and held in jail for failing to disclose to the judge who said what in developing the case.

How much was that lawsuit Donohoe filed against Andy Thomas and what was it for?

WHOSE GUARDING THE HEN HOUSE?

While we are on the subject of The Honorable Judge Gary Donohoe, he is not the only Donohoe to be employed by the Maricopa County Courts.  Sean Liam Donohoe was sworn in as a deputy of the court on 6/28/10 .  Don’t they do background checks? 

http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/docket/CriminalCourtCases/caseInfo.asp CR2007-006149-001.

 

Jon Kyl to retire. What next?

Now that it’s official that Senator Jon Kyl will not seek re-election, there’s a whole lot of political conversations taking place.

Going back to my political chessboard analogy, several elected and former elected officials are beginning to telegraph their next move on Arizona’s playing field. Here’s a quick assessment of the situation.

First the Democrats. As the new year began, I predicted that Kyrsten Sinema would be the voice and face of the Democratic party here in Arizona. She has. Her media exposure is up, she’s photogenic and she’s got her soundbites down to an art. Following closely behind is her colleague from Tempe, Senator David Schapira. He’s taken a lead on legislation and has also earned considerable media attention. Would either Sinema or Schapira have a chance for a US Senate seat in 2012? Probably not but let’s remember that a lot can happen between now and November, 2012.

Should House GOP members “drop the ball” on what they promised their constituents, voter attitude could quickly sour against Republicans. Another factor would be who Republicans nominate as their candidate for President. An old ill-tempered Washington insider-incumbent would snuff out the spark generated by the TEA Party revolution and give Obama the hope he craves to win a second-term. Regardless, Sinema or Schapira probably would not fair well in Arizona’s conservatarian political climate. Napolitano may also return to Arizona but a US Senate campaign would require a massive political makeover and a dose of voter amnesia to take place.

Let’s turn to Republicans.

Congressman Jeff Flake is clearly the front runner. Every political pundit knows he’s been chomping at the bit for years. He has the attitude for the job too – he’s always the first one from the delegation to head back to DC and the last one to come home. Most political consultants will tell you this race is his to lose. But Flake has some political liabilities and they’re big ones with Arizona conservatives. First, he has supported lackadaisical immigration reform. He prefers to call it “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” but many call it “Amnesty.” He’s buddied up with other amnesty advocates like Congressman Luis Gutierrez and made it clear that he wants a variety of immigration reforms in place.  To his recent credit, he voted against the DREAM Act. However, among social conservatives, Flake did vote to repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as recent as this last December. And as early as this week, Flake voted to renew provisions of the Patriot Act.

Then there are the political insiders who know the “Flake Political Machine.” Just as ruthless as the “McCain Mafia,” Jeff Flake’s people are hard-core, hard-ball, scorched-earth troopers. Case in point: the 2008 legislative district 18 GOP Primary challenge against Russell Pearce by Flake’s brother-in-law, Kevin Gibbons. Watch for Flake’s arch-defenders to wage political warfare on any challenger.

This leaves Congressman John Shadegg, who as early as the 2008 election cycle was showing disdain toward returning to Washington, D.C. Many remember he even indicated he would not seek re-election in 2008 but then changed his mind. Many pundits have long thought he would not seek a US Senate seat but then as recent as last fall, said he would consider it. There’s no doubt the backroom conversation is taking place or has already taken place between Shadegg and Flake. Among more conservative Republicans, Shadegg’s one political liability, TARP, is probably more forgivable than Flake’s open embrace of comprehensive immigration reform. Since the TEA Party’s rise, he’s been constantly reminded of that vote. And since then he’s publicly stated that he regretted making the vote. The question now is whether two political powerhouses would be willing to duke it out in the public arena. My guess is that Flake walks out of that backroom conversation smiling.

Who else could be taken serious entering a GOP Senate primary? Dean Martin, Trent Franks, Grant Woods? Each name carries some weight but would they consider challenging a colleague? Money would also be an issue. Woods, who ranks in the negatives with conservatives, would be tapping donors from the same pool as McCain and Flake. Martin, a darling among conservatives, would need to retool his fundraising abilities. That leaves Congressman Franks, who almost every conservative adores, to have to resort to hardball tactics against Flake’s machine. Anyone who knows Trent Franks, knows that hardball politics is not his character.

Would JD Hayworth consider another run against “The Establishment” candidate? I would venture to say yes. He’s the freshest candidate from a statewide Senate primary and he’s proven he can raise millions of dollars not only in state but across the country and in a short amount of time. And let’s not forget that JD’s no one to turn down a good political challenge against someone who is diametrically opposed to his position on immigration. If border security (whatever happened to McCain’s 10-Point Plan?) continues to experience the violence of drug cartels, armed confrontation and even murder, don’t rule a JD Hayworth candidacy out. Some conservatives might even call this political matchup a JD vs. McFlake redux.

Given that Flake enters the race for US Senate, that leaves a vacuum in the east valley which is even more complicated by the addition of a new congressional district. Former State Senator Chuck Gray has expressed serious consideration to fill either Flake’s vacant seat or the new congressional seat. TEA Party candidate, Jeff Smith, is also taking a serious look at entering either race. And don’t rule out a possible candidacy by Arizona Speaker of the House, Kirk Adams, who is proving himself worthy while serving in his current position. Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu has also been mentioned but given his focus on cleaning up Pinal County politics and fighting drug cartel runners, will likely remain serving as Sheriff. Other potential names include Pinal County Supervisor Bryan Martyn and Phoenix City Councilman Sal DiCiccio.

Other political seats that may likely change hands include Fulton Brock’s supervisorial district, Don Stapley’s supervisorial district and Maricopa County Sheriff. Conventional political wisdom is that Russell Pearce will seek Sheriff Joe’s seat once Arpaio retires.

All this makes great political theater right here in Arizona. Over the next few months, expect to see campaigns forming including Presidential campaigns. For those who live for high political drama, the stage is being set. Now it’s only a matter of time until the characters take that same stage.

And one last thing before I forget to mind my political manners, let me thank Senator Jon Kyl for his sacrifice and service to this great State of Arizona.

Handicapping the race to replace Kyl

What an exciting morning in Arizona politics!

We’d be remiss if we didn’t start any discussion of the 2012 Senate race by thanking Jon Kyl for his years of service.  His departure will brings down the curtain on a long and successful career in politics.

Governor Jan Brewer, who would be the most formidable candidate, seems happy with her job, and her retirement four years away.  Resigning to run for the chance at a six year term, however strong she would be, can’t hold out too much appeal for her.  The same is true for the rest of the statewides.  While all of them seem to be eyeing the governor’s race in 2014, resigning midway through their term for a chance at the Senate seems unlikely.  In the case of Tom Horne and Doug Ducey, they have been in their present jobs for less than two months.  And while Bennett for Senate has a nice ring to it, he simply isn’t running. Anyone jumping from the legislature seems a bridge too far.

The usual suspects for a Senate race come from the Congressional delegation.  While we have three great stars in our freshman class, they too have been in office for just over a month.  David Schweikert is a great fundraiser, and with another term under his belt would have been a part of any conversation for this office.  Ben Quayle has the name recognition and could probably put together the money, but he risks overreaching here.  Paul Gosar…look, it’s just not happening.  McCain’s expected departure in six years means that anyone who takes a pass won’t have to wait forever.

So let’s talk about who might be in:

Jeff Flake is a handsome, intelligent, and telegenic leader on spending issues.  A lot of the institutional money will line up behind him, and he’ll be the only LDS candidate running, an important voting bloc in a statewide race.

Downsides include his full throated support for “comprehensive immigration reform,” which means “amnesty” to a significant part of the base.  His ten year tenure in Washington won’t help, and his votes for the bailout and TARP, as well as a carbon tax will be something he’ll need to explain.

John Shadegg

Shadegg waited 14 years for this race, only to retire in 2010.  This was a costly mistake.  His 14 years in Congress will not help, nor will his votes on the bailout and TARP.  He seems to have no money in his Congressional account, and does not have an obvious perch or constituency to raise the money.  It’s really hard to see how he becomes a factor in this race.

JD Hayworth

Talk about bad timing.  His race against John McCain earned him ten million dollars of negative advertising in every corner of the state.  His final result against McCain was very disappointing, especially when one considers that so many of his votes were actually Anti-McCain and not Pro-JD.  He has his fanbase, which I think is more than Shadegg can say, but Flake’s is larger.  JD also must have some serious negative approval ratings, and it’s hard to see where his money comes from now that McCain is not his only opponent.  If JD had held his powder for two years, he’d be a frontrunner for this seat.

Paul Babeu

A Sheriff of a county with 400,000 people would not ordinarily be part of this conversation.  But the newly crowned “National Sheriff of the Year” has the highest statewide and national profile of anyone considering the race.  This is mostly driven by his outspoken support for the rule of law, and his opposition to the drug cartels and human smugglers that have made Arizona their playground.  His public identification with secure borders and frequent television appearances have made Babeu a well known name among people who will vote in primaries.

Simply put, he owns the immigration issue.  And that is the biggest issue among a substantial part of Arizona Republicans.  It is also Flake’s biggest vulnerability.  It’s my perception that he’s talked about the issue in a way that has not turned off independent or more moderate Republicans, which means his appeal is not limited.

For all the talk surrounding Babeu as a future candidate for statewide or Federal office, he really seems to like the job he has.  Of the four mentioned, he’s probably the least likely to run.  But there are a lot of people hoping he doesn’t close the door.  And a lot who think if he does run, he’d be successful.

What do you think?

Kyl to retire: Let the Stampede Begin

Politico.com is reporting Senator Jon Kyl, the second ranking GOP  Senator, will not seek re-election.  Speculation has been mixed on whether the junior Senator of Arizona would retire with the possibility of a GOP led Senate in 2012.

This opens the door for the bevy of potential candidates, from both parties, to start their races.  Will the remnants of 2010 be enough for JD to jump in or was he too damaged?  Is this the time for Shadegg to return to office or will Flake give legs to the talk that he is waiting for the chance to move over to the “other” chamber?

On the side of the Dems…it is a safe bet Nappy stays out.  Her polling numbers are abysmal.  What about Glassman, Chernei, will Kirsten Sinema use her Sunday Square Off residency to jump up a notch?

What say you?

One thing is for sure…2012 starts today.

Higher education taxes would not answer Arizona’s real challenges

by Matthew Ladner, Ph.D.
Goldwater Institute

Criminologist James Q. Wilson relates a cautionary tale about the decline of American cities in his classic book, Thinking About Crime. After the completion of the Interstate Highway System, Americans had the option of working in a major city but living out in a suburb. With each resident that moved away, the cities lost tax revenue and faced a choice: cut spending or raise taxes on those still living in the city. If cities cut services such as police protection, people did not like it and were more likely to move to the suburbs. If cities raised taxes, people did not like it and definitely moved to the suburbs. Major cities needed a third option. They needed to figure out how to provide city services more efficiently.

The need to do more with less represents the challenge facing Arizona now. The path advocated by the O’Connor House and Expect More Arizona in calling for a third tax increase for education represents the same danger that confronted major cities in the late 1950s. Adding even more taxes will put Arizona on a path to decline that limits our economic growth and quality of life.

I admire Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and I have friends involved with both projects and they are good people who sincerely wish to improve Arizona’s education system. Arizona, however, has lost more than 300,000 private sector jobs since the downturn began. We have raised both property and sales taxes already. Arizonans cannot afford to pay higher taxes.

Arizona’s K-12 system has some of the lowest test scores in the country on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Our schools employ one non-teacher for every teacher, when the ratio in 1950 was more than two teachers for every non-teacher. Our community colleges graduate only a tiny minority of students after three years. Arizona’s universities also do very poorly on the graduation front as well, and have bloated up their administrative budgets.

It will take resolve to redirect ineffective education spending into the right places. But if we fail to meet this challenge, history may judge us little better than it judges the city fathers of Detroit circa 1960. We need courage and imagination to find a better way for Arizona.

Dr. Matthew Ladner is vice president of research for the Goldwater Institute.

Learn More:

Goldwater Institute: Community colleges have administrative bloat and low graduation rates

Goldwater Institute: Administrative Bloat at American Universities: The Real Reason for High Costs in Higher Education

Arizona Republic: Campaign stresses Arizona duty to fund education

Does the Arizona Legislature Really Believe in State Sovereignty?

by Nick Dranias
Goldwater Institute

The National Debt Relief Amendment would amend the U.S. Constitution to require any increase in the federal debt be approved by a majority of state legislatures. This would bring planning, transparency, and accountability to any more federal borrowing. The amendment would force the federal government to make the case for adding debt early in the budget process to secure approval by 26 states. Congress could never again impose a multi-trillion dollar mortgage on our children with a last-minute scramble to raise the debt limit.

So why are some of Arizona’s most conservative state senators refusing to allow a full vote on the NDRA? They have been led to believe the false claim that any convention of the states to propose the NDRA under the authority of Article V of the U.S. Constitution would “runaway” and that our Constitution would be rewritten. But during the Constitutional Convention, on September 15, 1787, the Founders specifically rejected efforts to change Article V to allow for an open or “general” convention that could rewrite the entire Constitution. Instead of giving Americans this wide-open ability to rework the Constitution as a whole, the Founders kept the current limited language that only allows us to propose amendments, and requires any amendment proposed by an Article V convention to be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

Some people have also made the claim that there was a split among the Founders on this issue, and that James Madison feared the Article V process. But the actual historical record shows that the Founders unanimously supported the use of the Article V amendments convention process by the states. In Federalist No. 43, James Madison urged the states to ratify the Constitution because Article V “equally enables the general and the State governments to originate the amendment of errors.” Alexander Hamilton argued in Federalist No. 85 that a second constitutional convention was unwise and unnecessary because Article V gave states an adequate ability to propose specific amendments to the Constitution “to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority.”

Article V gives the states ultimate authority over the federal government by giving them the power to amend the U.S. Constitution—the very document that defines the federal government. That power must not be abandoned by any genuine champion of state sovereignty.

Nick Dranias holds the Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan Chair for Constitutional Government and is director of the Joseph and Dorothy Donnelly Moller Center for Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute.

Learn More:

The Online Library of Liberty: The Records of the Federal Convention for September 15, 1787

The Online Library of Liberty: The Debates in the Several States Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution (See pages 356-358)

Speaker Kirk Adams calls on ABC News 20/20 to retract hoax

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 4, 2011

STATE CAPITOL, PHOENIX (Feb. 2, 2011) – Arizona Speaker of the House Kirk Adams is calling on ABC “News” to apologize for and retract a fake news story the show produced about Arizona’s new immigration law for the purposes of entertaining viewers with a “Candid Camera” style set-up.

The segment, filmed with actors in Tucson, insinuates that a restaurant security guard can simply deport someone who “looks Latino.” In fact, the law specifically forbids racial profiling. Additionally, a federal judge suspended the portion of the law that would have allowed law enforcement to inquire into status only after a lawful encounter and probable cause.

“This is an outrageously inaccurate portrayal of SB1070 by ABC News. So 20/20 is now Candid Camera?” said Adams, who voted for and helped pass SB1070 last year. “This is shameful and irresponsible, another example of the East Coast elite media twisting the facts and attacking Arizona. ABC News should retract this phony stunt and apologize for misleading the public.”

To watch the hoax, go here: http://www.breitbart.tv/mall-cop-hoax-abc-news-sends-actor-posing-as-security-guard-to-challenge-az-illegal-immigration-law/

Latina Women stand up against La Raza’s hate

Latina women stand up against La Raza’s hate and exploitation and reclaim our country’s public schools for all children
By Loretta Hunnicutt

“We’ve been hearing in the news about a commission or a study to see how to improve Raza Studies. The only commission that should be coming out of here is how to expand it and how to export it. And everything else is unacceptable.”  ~ Dr. Roberto (Dr. Cintli) Rodriguez, Ethnic Studies Professor University of Arizona

Arizona’s HB2281 was passed as a result of classes geared only to Mexican American students in Tucson Unified School District. Tom Horne recognized that the students in these classes were being indoctrinated rather than educated. They separated students by ethnicity and Americans have rejected that sort of segregation since the famous Supreme Court decision in Brown vs. Board of Education. Tucsonans United For Sound Districts is a nonpartisan organization that was invited by two TUSD’s School Board members to weigh in on the subject of Ethnic Studies for elementary and secondary students and HB2281.

In an email from one Tucson Unified School District Board member, TU4SD was told that we needed to bring a “diverse group” to the school board meeting at which the subject of HB2281 and the “Ethnic Studies” classes would be discussed. The implication being that one, the Board would not listen to a bunch of angry white people, and two, we did not have a diverse membership and our group was merely made up of angry white people.  Those two basic assumptions reflect the simple minded reliance on stereotypes by the liberal elite and the media which is merely a tool for the ruling elite.

I hate to admit it, but when I received that email I allowed myself a hearty but short laugh. They don’t get it and I am afraid they never will, but there really is nothing funny about such ignorance. They don’t want to believe that good doesn’t come in one color, and anger isn’t held only by one ethnicity or socio-economic class.  As a matter of fact, it is the angry adults of TUSD’s Ethnic Studies program who are targeting children of one ethnicity and exploiting them for their political purposes that brought us before the TUSD School Board on the night of December 14, 2010. It was the night that two very brave and noble Latina women stood up against hate and exploitation and reclaimed our country’s public schools for all children.

Despite the harassment and threats by Mexican American/Raza Studies proponents previously experienced by Tucsonans United for Sound District’s advisory Board members Gabriela Saucedo Mercer, and Emily Jernee they stood before the Board and stood for up for the belief that separate is inherently unequal.  These amazing women endured the abuse and heckling to deliver the message that Americans love our children, all of our children and we will not allow hate and fear mongers to win their hearts and minds. The following is Gabriela Saucedo Mercer’s address:

My name is Gabriela Saucedo Mercer and I am a member of the Advisory Board for Tucsonans United For Sound Districts.  I come before TUSD Governing Board on behalf of a community that values its public schools and whose taxpaying members work hard every day to support those schools.

I come here tonight on behalf of the parents and students at those schools who depend on you and your good judgment to protect their classrooms.

I come to you on behalf of countless educators and school staff that tell members of the community that they are fearful of losing their jobs because you appear to be unwilling to use good judgment.

Most importantly, I come to you on behalf of a sometimes frightened and almost always invisible community of private individuals, parents, students, and teaching professionals who have been silenced by this Board, district employees. Since Tucsonans United first began its involvement with the ethnic studies issue we have met with many victims of the District’s Raza/Mexican American program’s systematic abuse have sought us out to share how they were punished because they dared to question that program. We ourselves have experienced firsthand the successful attempt by this Board and Raza Studies supporters to silence individuals who would come before it as we have to simply join Mr. Michael Hicks and Dr. Mark Stegeman in their request for a review of Raza/Mexican American curriculum and pedagogy.

We heard from those you ignored. We have done the job you were elected to do. The parents who have related their experiences have trusted this district for years. The teaching professionals to whom we have spoken with us have served this district faithfully for a great many years. They cared for our community’s children, and due to their efforts to protect those children they were systematically terrorized by your staff. Children are recruited and encouraged to engage in the intimidating behavior as well. At least two adults have related to us information about the witch hunt conducted by children to discover and expose “racists” among the teaching ranks.

When we first came before the Board, we predicted correctly that you, La Raza/Mexican American Studies staff and ethnic studies proponents will take every opportunity to marginalize us with the one accusation that ends all attempts to engage in a reasonable discussion. You have labeled us racists.

We will not be silenced, we will not be marginalized, and you will not succeed in making us one more victim of false accusations. We will continue to act responsibly even if you do not. We will continue to engage the public in a free exchange of ideas while you will not. We will continue to work to preserve our public schools while you work to deprive children in TUSD schools of the quality education they deserve.

The following is Emily Jernee’s address:

My name is Emily Jernee and I am also a member of the advisory board for Tucsonans United for Sound Districts. I am here today before you to offer my perspective of the ethnic studies program based on my education that I have been blessed to receive throughout most of my life. I lived and attended school in Mexico for 11 years. I embarked on my education in Mexican primary school and proceeded through to high school. It was there that my teachers taught me to love my Latina AND American ethnicity.

In my primary through middle school education we were issued government approved books and curriculums. We took History, Geography, and Ethics classes.  In History they taught us primarily about Mexico, it was events from the days of the Spanish discovery all the way to present day. We were never taught about imaginary countries like Aztlan. As a matter of fact all my Mexican teachers always told us about how in 1848 Santa Ana sold Mexican land to the United states and how we would always remember how Santa Ana was  a disgrace and a coward. In Geography we were taught the locations of every state and their capitals.  It wasn’t until I moved to the United States that I actually heard of the land of Aztlan for the first time. None of my schools ever mentioned this fictional place. We also had Ethics which we started in grade 4; these classes helped us to be well versed on how our government system worked and our rights, such as our right to an education. In high school, considered of great importance was Pythagoras’s theorem, derivatives, and the bases of Calculus, but they also taught us about confidence and how to be empowered with the knowledge of how our government works and how WE can be a PART of it rather than a victim of it.

After all this, I can conclude by saying that I love the United States and Mexico. I have seen much of the materials from the “Raza studies,” and I as a Hispanic who is not self-loathing find the Raza Studies to be loathsome. It is contains much incorrect information that I was not taught in school. I was never taught to hate Americans of any color; as a matter of fact we loved America so much that it was obligatory to take English classes almost daily for all 11 years I was there.

This issue is about the future of the children and our beloved America because this is a great and tolerant country as are every school district in it, except TUSD, We should strive to end hate not teach it. And in the words of Martin Luther King, “Silence is Betrayal,” and WE will not be silent.

Gabriela is currently running as a candidate for the U.S. Congress. Emily is an eighteen year old student at the University of Arizona. As a democrat, I can proudly say that both are women of amazing grace and their love for children and our great country is evident in everything they do. Please visit Tucsonans United for Sound Districts at our website www.TU4SD.com for more information.

For the full story click here

Clinton vs. Reagan – A Special Event Fundraiser

You are invited to attend

A Special Event Fundraiser for the Arizona Democrats & Republicans

To Celebrate the Opening of Downtown Phoenix’s New Power Dining Spot

Join Us for a Pre-Opening Happy Hour

WHEN: February 19, 2011, 3-5 PM

WHERE: CityScape, 2 East Jefferson Street, #150, Phoenix
(Northwest Corner of Jefferson and 1st Street – Map)

COST: $20 Per Person
(Includes select drinks and a sampling of hors d’oeuvres. 100% of the proceeds will benefit the Arizona Republican and Democratic Parties.)

ABOUT: Quality Food. Premium Drinks. Lively Bantor. Dine In. Take Out. Or, enjoy a drink at the bar. Get used to hearing the words, “Welcome Back.”

Space is limited! First to call gets a spot.
RSVP REQUIRED
Call (480) 751-2176 for your reservation.

(Download the flyer)

A Conservative Response to January 8, 2011

Conservative reflections on January 8th
Tuesday, February 1, 2011.

By Emil Franzi

Special to The Explorer – Explorer News

Jan. 8th will never be the same again in Southern Arizona. While the tragedy at Safeway had a national impact, it will always have a special place in the hearts and souls of we who live here.

Responses local and national have ranged from noble and intelligent to repulsive and confused, representing the best and worst in human nature. The best were well reported. Many of the worst have been allowed to slide.

Narcissism hit bottom with the memorial service turned tacky pep rally. Commemorative T-shirts? An incoherent invocation from a pseudo-Shaman? Boo the governor? Cheer the sheriff? I expected beer vendors next. While President Obama and the other officials handled it well, I suspect many family members of victims quietly felt the same.

Some believe our atmosphere has been so fouled by militant political speech, specifically from the right, that even if this killer never heard any, some process of osmosis motivated his deranged brain. That, and the easy availability of firearms, has been the focus from much of the left, chanted with standard hoary hyperboles. As when similar tragedies occurred, some simply ignored facts. Others basely pimp partisan advantage.

Americans are strongly divided over many issues. Periods when they weren’t, even briefly, are rare. Maybe the day after Pearl Harbor. There are few periods in our history when we weren’t vitriolic and “uncivil” starting with the Declaration of Independence. It’s the American way, and the way of a free society. Watch Question Time in the Brit or Australian Parliaments, or check the Knesset. The only thing different is conservative rhetoric just won a big victory over leftist rhetoric. What the left really doesn’t like is this time theirs didn’t work.

There were exceptions. Those who condemn the hardball campaign against U.S. Rep. Giffords ignore that she and her support groups were slightly better at it.

FBI stats for the past 50 years tell us that gun ownership increased while violent crime went down. That may or may not be cause and effect but it negates gun proliferation as a cause argument. This nutter had a stack of drug arrests. Had someone charged him with a felony or ordered a mental evaluation referral, he would’ve been barred from legal purchase. He could still have easily acquired an illegal weapon the same way he acquired his illegal dope – illegally.

More important is where, with no means of support and living with his parents, he got $500 to buy a Glock from anybody. Those blaming his actions on abstract forces should focus on the parents who ignored his many busts, his expulsion from college, and the skull shrine in their backyard. Don’t feel sorry for them; they were the real enablers, not Sarah Palin.

Hoplophobia is again rampant. The same pathetic and baseless fears that disarmed Wilbur Wildcat and stopped the traditional contest for the Kit Carson Rifle between the UA and UNM is back. Dillinger Days is modified to not somehow stimulate the addled. Otherwise rational City Council members accommodate irrational neighbors who fear the sale of ammunition at the new WalMart. All avoid the real problem, the evil sicko who commits the crime and those who directly aid him including they who act as his PR staff.

Sadly, this tragedy will repeat. There will be copycats. Massive publicity given this perp guarantees it. We already know the response if the next incident revolves around a Democratic official. But what if a Republican, or an entertainment or business figure, or just a group of innocent people is targeted? Who or what will be blamed besides the killer?

Leftist hate speech? Violent movies? Video games? Target Stores? Bullet Trains? Tombstone re-enactments?

The picture of our killer on the cover of Time magazine all but guarantees a sequel. And please note, I never used the creep’s name.

Hear Emil Franzi and Tom Danehy Saturdays from 1 to 4 p.m. on KVOI 1030 AM.

Another County employee files complaint against corrupt Supervisors for harassment

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona

Friday, February 4, 2011

Supervisors’ attorneys sent letter to Sheriff’s employee to intimidate him as a witness to County feud
Employee calls out Supervisors on pattern of leaking information to friends in media before releasing it to public in order to spin news

Maricopa County Worker Files Claim Against County
Arizona Republic
February 3, 2011

Another county employee has filed a claim against Maricopa County related to the years-long legal battles between the Sheriff’s Office, the County Attorney’s Office and county administrators.

Bob Rampy, a commander in the sheriff’s technology bureau, filed a notice of claim Wednesday requesting $750,000 in damages for what he alleges was a concerted campaign to damage his reputation by representatives of the Board of Supervisors.

Rampy’s claim revolves around a letter between lawyers for the Sheriff’s Office and the Board of Supervisors, and whether a county representative intentionally shared the letter with the media in an effort to tarnish Rampy’s reputation.

The letter was written in September 2010, as the political and legal campaigns between county agencies were reaching their apex. The federal government had just sued the Sheriff’s Office in an attempt to access records in a civil-rights investigation and threatened to pull millions in federal funding from the county if Arpaio did not comply.

Supervisors and sheriff’s officials were publicly sparring over allegations of misspending in Arpaio’s office.

With the contentious relationship between county administrators and sheriff’s officials serving as the backdrop, Julie Pace and David Selden, attorneys for the county, wrote a letter to lawyers for the Sheriff’s Office asking if Rampy had used a county-owned SUV to conduct surveillance on county officials.

The sheriff’s lawyers responded with a resounding ‘no’ and claimed the initial letter had one purpose: “to harass, intimidate and defame a material witness (Rampy).”

Attorney’s for the Sheriff’s Office also asked Pace and Selden to maintain all communication about the offending letter, including any with The Arizona Republic.

The Republic wrote a story about the county’s letter, in which a sheriff’s attorney reiterated his stance that Pace and Selden were misguided. The New Times ran a story on the exchange a day later which quoted Cari Gerchick, a county spokeswoman.

Rampy’s notice of claim asserts that Maricopa County administrators and their representatives harmed his reputation, inflicted emotional distress, forced him to incur legal fees and contributed to his “adverse health effects.”

County Manager David Smith said he had not seen the claim notice Wednesday afternoon.
“I’m not going to be surmising on the value of anything right now,” Smith said. “We’ll treat it like all the others.”

The county’s potential liability costs stemming from the legal and political battles between the Board of Supervisors, Sheriff Joe Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas now stands at more than $106 million.

Arpaio said the notion of making financial claims against the government is not in his nature, but if Rampy believes he has been mistreated, he is in his rights.

“I’m probably the only guy left that’s not filing (a lawsuit),” Arpaio said. “I’m not going to go overboard and say, ‘People are crazy, they’re all suing, they all want taxpayer money.’ They have a right to sue. It doesn’t mean I have to agree with it.”

Just last week, Thomas and Sheriff’s Chief Deputy David Hendershott — who is on paid administrative leave pending an internal investigation into his conduct — filed $37.5 million in claims tied to the battles. In that same claim, former Deputy County Attorney Lisa Aubuchon amended an earlier claim of $10 million to $22.5 million.

And more notices of claims against the county and state are expected.

Join Our Mailing List

Senators & Presidents – President’s Day Event

Sticks and stones may break their bones

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona
February 3, 2011

Sticks and stones may break their bones

 
 

Our law enforcement officers, first responders one and all, put their lives on the line for us every day. They have to deal with dangerous situations that most of us would be very glad to avoid at all costs. What we fail to remember sometimes, is that the uniform does not change the fact that these people are first and foremost, human beings, just like the rest of us.  

 Is it not enough that they have to face danger without having to endure mindless abuse as well? Just imagine the kind of mentality that leads some people to hurl invectives at the police officers who serve and protect us, but perhaps those nitwits identify with the bad guys, and see law enforcement as the enemy. Now our first law enforcement guys and gals cannot even be sure it is safe to eat in a restaurant. Something is wrong with this picture. 

 

Let us know what you think. It’s your call. This memo below was sent today to all Sheriff’s employees:

Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 3:03 PM
To: Sheriff
Subject: E-mail for all Sheriff’s Employees

Please give special attention to the message below from Chief Brian Sands. 

It came to our attention that earlier today, one of our District 1 deputies, while on a lunch break at a McDonald’s restaurant in the Mesa area, was verbally harassed by a number of food handlers there. 

Workers saw the uniformed deputy, proceeded to verbally harass him in Spanish spewing hateful comments towards him and the Office and Sheriff as a whole.  The deputy refused to take the meal, fearing contamination.  Finally the deputy contacted the corporate office to brief them on what had occurred.

After a review of the facts with this deputy, and in light of the fact that we have conducted employer sanctions cases against a McDonald’s restaurant in the past which resulted in a strained relationship between the fast food chain and this Office, I am suggesting that all employees who wish to eat at a McDonald’s restaurant, do so with caution.

Chief Brian Sands

Enforcement

MCSO

star