Maricopa County better not settle expensive lawsuits of cronies


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 3, 2012

Maricopa County manager David Smith proposing to settle million dollar lawsuits of cronies      

Greedy county officials should be forced to litigate their claims fully to reveal how worthless they are, instead of receiving million dollar settlements

 Maricopa County manager David Smith, the hatchet man for the County Supervisors, is proposing that the county settle the million dollar lawsuits filed by the Supervisors’ cronies against Maricopa County and its taxpayers for amounts of several hundred thousand dollars up to $15 million each. This is a bad, bad idea that will end up very costly to taxpayers. The greedy county bureacrats, who are suing the county over nothing more than “stress” from being prosecuted by Sheriff Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas, should be forced to plead their cases in a court of law, so taxpayers can see how sketchy their lawsuits are.

The Supervisors better do the right thing and not award their cronies million dollar settlements. Two of the lawsuits are from their fellow Supervisors Mary Rose Wilcox and Don Stapley! This is a blatant conflict of interest for them to award them huge amounts of money.

The Supervisors have already paid Judge Fields $100,000 of your taxpayer dollars for his lawsuit against the county. He received that money for his claims that he was stressed over Arpaio and Thomas attempting to prosecute him. That prosecution went nowhere since he was able to thwart it.  None of his assertions of stress were ever heard and tried in a court of law, the county simply $100,000 at him in a settlement.

Next, Judge Baca received a $100,00 settlement for her stress over being sued by Arpaio and Thomas. Stephen Wetzel, the county director of IT, received an undisclosed settlement amount.

This is not right. These officials should be forced to go through the regular court system like the rest of us. They should not be awarded hundreds of thousands of dollars for “stress” based on their claims that they were wrongly prosecuted. We will never know if they were wrongly prosecuted, because they were able to successfully thwart Arpaio’s and Thomas’s attempts to prosecute them. It is despicable that they they are being awarded hundreds of thousands of dollars for successfully avoiding prosecution!!! David Smith claims that the county is saving money by settling the claims, but the claims are so groundless the county would end up not paying any money if they were fully litigated. He knows this but wants to guarantee his cronies are vindicated, which in turn vindicates his legal attacks against Arpaio and Thomas. This sets a bad, bad precedent for future bureaucrats down the road to sue over “stress” and receive millions of dollars too.

If the greedy bureaucrats are awarded these lavish amounts of money, taxpayers will consider a citizens’ lawsuit against them. Tea Parties and organizations like the Goldwater Institute and Americans for Prosperity have grounds to sue them based on abuse of our tax dollars.

 The Arizona Republic has coverage.

ACTION ITEM:

Contact the Supervisors who will be deciding whether or not to award these outrageous settlements and let them know that you disapprove of them awarding large settlements to the other two supervisors and their cronies. Tell them these speculative claims need to be heard in a court of law where they will inevitably be DISMISSED.

Supervisor Andrew Kunasek
(602) 506-7562
akunasek@mail.maricopa.gov

Supervisor Max Wilson
(602) 506-7642
mwwilson@mail.maricopa.gov

Supervisor Fulton Brock
(602) 506-1776
fbrock@mail.maricopa.gov

Join Our Mailing List

Comments

  1. Are you kidding? This is one of the worst-managed counties in the nation right now, and those bozos are proposing handing over more money we don’t have to sleazebags trying to avoid prosecution? Is this Chicago??? Something seems really, really wrong where 3 county supervisors get to decide whether or not to award million dollar settlements to the other 2 county supervisors!!!!! Don’t expect any outrage from the Arizona Republic or other local media over this. They’re too busy fawning like lapdogs at the feet of the supervisors because the supervisors got crosswise with Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

  2. VOTE THEM ALL OUT! says:

    Don’t worry, the supervisors are on their way out. Brock has announced he’s not running for reelection. Stapley said he’s probably going to run for Congress instead. He sees the writing on the wall. Mary Rose Wilcox is in a safe gerrymandered district, so her corrupt self is regrettably not going anywhere. Anyone have any news on whether the remaining two have the nerve to run for reelection this year? If they vote in favor of large settlements for Wilcox and Stapley they may as well kiss reelection good-bye….

  3. Corrupt people like Smith, Wilcox and Stapley always end up doing themselves in. Have heard that Smith is going to be retiring soon – even though he’s one of the highest paid employees in the county (I think he’s #1 or #2). Not too hard to guess why. The level of corruption he’s built up around himself is too deep and the dominoes are starting to fall. Stay tuned, it will be an interesting year as the truth comes out.

  4. These guys are scumbags, agreed. That said, “Common Sense”, you advocated to bring the unwinnable suits in the first place, corruption or not. This is what happens when you bring unwinnable suits, people countersue and the liable party settles.

    THATS COMMON SENSE.

    Get some.

    Maybe you learned your lesson now, but no thanks to you county taxpayers will be several million dollars poorer to pay for your lesson in common sense.

  5. Don't prosecute white collar crime says:

    That’s right Oberserve, it was not a good idea to prosecute Mary Rose Wilcox and Don Stapley and their accomplices in the judiciary. Even though it’s now become public that several county employees had received bribes from the Court Tower contractors, and have been fired from their jobs. You’re right, it was wrong for Arpaio and Thomas to have ever investigated the Court Tower. Wilcox and Stapley are better than the rest of us lowly peons. Wilcox received a loan at favorable terms from the radical left wing organization Chicanos por la Causa, then turned around and voted to award Chicanos por la Causa free grant money. She never recused herself from the vote for a conflict of interest. She should be able to get away with that and not prosecuted. Same with Don Stapley. He spent $70,000 in campaign funds on a campaign where he had no opponent, then turned around and spent that money on three luxury vacations for his family, expensive stereo equipment, massages, candles, etc. He shouldn’t have ever been prosecuted for that. They are above the law unlike the rest of us peons!

    • True Conservative says:

      I think the point is that you can investigate all you want, just don’t bring false charges based on political revenge.

      I’d love to see Wilcox perp-walked.

      Unfortunately, Arpaio and Thomas have given her de facto immunity because of their collective dishonesty and reckless abuse of police and prosecutorial power.

      Let’s be clear – Arpaio and Thomas never had any evidence. They never had a theory of law to back the charges. Their testimony at Thomas’ bar hearing proves that.

      They blew it in so many ways. Not only will the county pay to settle these lawsuits but now whenever real proof turns up Wilcox and the others will just scream “they’re doing it again.”

      It’s time to dump support for Arpaio and elect a real conservative who is a real cop.

      • Conservative American says:

        Didn’t you write this, “True Conservative”?

        “True Conservative says:
        February 2, 2012 at 9:34 pm”

        “When Obama gets it right, not only should all Americans say so, all patriots should say so loudly.”

        “I understand why Obama came after SB1070. Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans, and that caused the left to react in such a way that Obama was forced to respond.”

        “If conservatives in Arizona had calmly, rationally passed a fact-based law reasonably designed to address the genuine concerns associated with illegal immigration we could have avoided much of this nonsense.”

        Hey, that’s really “Conservative”, LOL!

        • TruConserv says:

          No, as a matter of fact, I did not.

          I wrote each of the statements, but not in the context you present.

          I wrote that Obama is worthy of praise for killing Bin Laden. You disagree.

          I do think that when the president gets it right, we should say so. It gives us credibility when we tell him – and the nation – that he has done wrong.

          If all you do is shout how evil the man is, your voice is effectively muted.

          Besides, real Americans want what is best for America. If Obama does something good, let’s encourage him to do more. For example, he is now deporting illegal aliens at a rate higher than any previous president. That still is not enough, but let’s give him credit for that work and try to drive him into doing what is right – sending even more home.

          That is what is best for America.

          When we are the voice of reason, then we become the voice of America. That’s the future I want.

          • Conservative American says:

            Yes, you did indeed write this:

            “True Conservative says:
            February 2, 2012 at 9:34 pm”

            “When Obama gets it right, not only should all Americans say so, all patriots should say so loudly.”

            “I understand why Obama came after SB1070. Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans, and that caused the left to react in such a way that Obama was forced to respond.”

            “If conservatives in Arizona had calmly, rationally passed a fact-based law reasonably designed to address the genuine concerns associated with illegal immigration we could have avoided much of this nonsense.”

            Now I’ve included the header with the date and time of your comments. Anyone who wants to see what you wrote completely “in context” simply has to visit the comments section of the following article which still appears on the front page of SA:

            Regarding that “scathing” Dept of Justice report
            January 31, 2012

            So, by all means, have readers view your words completely in their original context. See, TC, that’s a very simple and easy issue to deal with.

            Have a nice day, Miss Liberal! :-)

            • TruConserv says:

              So you admit that you think anything the president does, you will disagree with it.

              You further admit that when the president does right, it should not only be criticised as bad, but as evil as well.

              Basically, you admit that you have no credible voice in this debate. You are a rudderless reactionary and how you stand on an issue has nothing to do with right or wrong, fact or logic, it’s just about what you perceive your “opponent” as doing.

              You are the poster-child for what is wrong with the wingnut nation. That you would whine about someone stating that he would stand behind his president when he does right, such as killing Bin Laden (whom you would prefer was still alive?) demonstates the depths of ignorance in which you live.

              That you fail to understand that nature of politics, and how actions bring reactions, reminds us all how you are simply out of your depth on these issues.

              That you oppose the idea of enacting rational, fact-based legislation reasonably designed to solve whatever problem is being addresses just drives home the undeniable truth that you have made yourself into a clown.

              • Conservative American says:

                I freely admit that you wrtoe this, TC:

                “True Conservative says:
                February 2, 2012 at 9:34 pm”

                “When Obama gets it right, not only should all Americans say so, all patriots should say so loudly.”

                “I understand why Obama came after SB1070. Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans, and that caused the left to react in such a way that Obama was forced to respond.”

                “If conservatives in Arizona had calmly, rationally passed a fact-based law reasonably designed to address the genuine concerns associated with illegal immigration we could have avoided much of this nonsense.”

                Have a nice day, TC! :-)

    • Oberserve says:

      I never said don’t bring suit. But you are mixing corporate and criminal law. You apparently don’t know what the standard is to prove corporate fraud or breach of contract. The bar is inordinantly high.

      I said don’t bring an UNWINNABLE lawsuit, which is EXACTLY what Arpaio, Thomas, et al did. That only shows their and YOUR ignorance and incompetence.

      And now we all have to PAY for YOUR ignorance and your and their incompetence. So, thanks but no thanks for your concern.

    • Conservative American says:

      Now True Conservative’s remarks have to be put in the context that she is an Obama liberal, and no “Conservative, despite her user name. Don’t take my word for it. Read her own words:

      “True Conservative says:
      February 2, 2012 at 9:34 pm”

      “When Obama gets it right, not only should all Americans say so, all patriots should say so loudly.”

      “I understand why Obama came after SB1070. Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans, and that caused the left to react in such a way that Obama was forced to respond.”

      “If conservatives in Arizona had calmly, rationally passed a fact-based law reasonably designed to address the genuine concerns associated with illegal immigration we could have avoided much of this nonsense.”

      Those “conservatives in Arizona” are just awful, aren’t they, “True Conservative”, LOL!

      Have a nice day, Miss Liberal! :-)

      • TruConserv says:

        Every day you find a way to prove you are a spineless liar.

        Taking a series of quotes, out of context, to make them seem like one continuous statement is pretty low, even for you.

        You are not a conservative. You are a partisan.

        Rather than lead your life based on set of principles, you gauge your reactions based on what your “opposition” does. You are intellectually rudderless.

        Indeed, when pressed, you still refused to acknowledge that Obama killing Bin Laden is worthy of praise.

        The only reason I care about your simple minded approach to life is that it tarnished true conservatives. When you act like Obama is 100-percent evil, and that is ascribed as (R) or (C) thought, then mainstream Americans think we are all nuts.

        Mainstream Americans will side with (R) and (C) ideology when that ideology is presented in a fact-based, rational manner. When you tell people Obama is the Devil and Mexicans are invading us so as to rape our children, the wingnuts drive people away from our movement.

        My point remains valid and unchallenged by ConAm: when act according to our conservative principles and refuse to pander to the extreme right, we will prevail. That ConAm disagrees simply proves he is no conservative, just a rudderless wingnut railing against the world.

        • Conservative American says:

          Well, TC, you wrote this:

          “True Conservative says:
          February 2, 2012 at 9:34 pm”

          “When Obama gets it right, not only should all Americans say so, all patriots should say so loudly.”

          “I understand why Obama came after SB1070. Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans, and that caused the left to react in such a way that Obama was forced to respond.”

          “If conservatives in Arizona had calmly, rationally passed a fact-based law reasonably designed to address the genuine concerns associated with illegal immigration we could have avoided much of this nonsense.”

          It speaks for itself and none of your after-the-fact “explanations” are going to alter one iota what you put in writing. Anyone who wishes to put your words “in context” simply needs to go to the comments on this article which is still on the front page of SA:

          Regarding that “scathing” Dept of Justice report
          January 31, 2012

          I encourage readers to go have a look for themselves so that your words can be put completely “in context”.

          Have a nice day, Miss Liberal! :-)

          • TruConserv says:

            So you admit you cobbled together these quotes, and only now reluctantly admit to piecing them together.

            At least you tell one truth today.

            Sadly, it just proves you can’t be trusted.

            • Conservative American says:

              I freely admit that you wrote this, TC:

              “True Conservative says:
              February 2, 2012 at 9:34 pm”

              “When Obama gets it right, not only should all Americans say so, all patriots should say so loudly.”

              “I understand why Obama came after SB1070. Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans, and that caused the left to react in such a way that Obama was forced to respond.”

              “If conservatives in Arizona had calmly, rationally passed a fact-based law reasonably designed to address the genuine concerns associated with illegal immigration we could have avoided much of this nonsense.”

              And anyone who wants to put your words completely in context can do so by viewing your comments in this article which is still on the front page of SA:

              Regarding that “scathing” Dept of Justice report
              January 31, 2012

              I encourage readers to see your comments on that article and see for themselves, in context, what you wrote.

              Have a nice day, TC! :-)

              • TruConserv says:

                Ah, yes, the cut-and-paste defense.

                Not only can’t you be trusted to tell the truth, you can’t even be counted on to defend yourself intellectually. You’re a coward.

                We’ll call this another TKO, you having failed to intelligently or effectively defend yourself.

                You may stop dancing now, ConAm, you have made my point and now I get to move on.

              • Conservative American says:

                ROFL! :-)

                You just can’t seem to manipulate around the fact that you wrote this, can you:

                “True Conservative says:
                February 2, 2012 at 9:34 pm”

                “When Obama gets it right, not only should all Americans say so, all patriots should say so loudly.”

                “I understand why Obama came after SB1070. Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans, and that caused the left to react in such a way that Obama was forced to respond.”

                “If conservatives in Arizona had calmly, rationally passed a fact-based law reasonably designed to address the genuine concerns associated with illegal immigration we could have avoided much of this nonsense.”

                Nor can you come up with evidence that I “demonized” Hispanics, particularly Mexicans. That makes your unfounded accusation nothing more than a classic liberal smear job, doesn’t it. Where’s the proof?

                You’re long on liberal propaganda and short on facts, as always, LOL!

  6. Conservative American says:

    Now TC is very concerned about dishonesty, She wrote this:

    “Unfortunately, Arpaio and Thomas have given her de facto immunity because of their collective dishonesty…”

    Oddly, however, she isn’t concerned about “dishonesty” when it comes to the investigation and lawsuit brought against Sheriff Arpaio.

    Now here is a PDF of the actual lawsuit:

    http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/8091/0902justice-department-lawsuit-on-arpaio.pdf

    Immediately under the name of Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General, appears the name of Dennis K. Burke, the former U. S. Attorney in Arizona.

    What do we know about the honesty of Dennis K. Burke, the man going after Sheriff Arpaio. Is he honest?

    “Former Ariz. US Attorney admits leaking memo smearing Fast and Furious whistle-blower
    By Matthew Boyle – The Daily Caller Published: 12:54 AM 11/09/2011 | Updated: 2:16 PM 11/09/2011″

    “Former Arizona U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke, who resigned in August, admitted late Tuesday that he leaked a document aimed at smearing Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent John Dodson, an Operation Fast and Furious whistle-blower.”

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/09/former-ariz-us-attorney-admits-leaking-memo-smearing-fast-and-furious-whistle-blower/

    Well, my goodness, that isn’t very “honest”, is it? But TC isn’t at all concerned about that dishonesty.

    Then we have this:

    “Erroneous Gun Letter Based on U.S. Attorney, Documents Show
    QBy Jonathan D. Salant – Dec 2, 2011 3:56 PM MT”

    “Burke, in early February, insisted in an e-mail to top Justice officials that any allegations that the bureau allowed weapons bought in Arizona to reach Mexico were “categorically false.” He requested that such a statement be part of the written response to Grassley and it remained in the letter through numerous drafts, documents show.”

    “In fact, the agency lost track of guns in the program. Two of about 2,000 guns that the ATF allowed to be carried away were found at the scene of the December 2010 murder of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry in Arizona, according to a congressional report released in June.”

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-02/erroneous-gun-letter-based-on-u-s-attorney-documents-show.html

    Well, that’s not very honest, is it? But TC doesn’t have any problem with the dishonesty of those going after Sheriff Arpaio.

    Things got so bad for Burke that he ended up resigning as U. S. Attorney in Arizona. TC, however, believes that Burke’s actions against Sheriff Arpaio are completely credible, honest, integrity based and without any political motivation.

    Well gee, TC, isn’t that a bit of a double standard?

    • TruConserv says:

      Again, you prove yourself to be a foundamentaly dishonest person.

      I joined you in holding disgust for Burke, but recongnized that the actual investigation was run by line-level attorneys. Burke’s signature on the report is ministerial. This makes the case easily distinquishable from Arpaio and Thomas scandal where those two directed, over the objection of their subordinates and against the advice of their peers the continued harrasment and eventual false charging of their political rivals.

      Further, unlike the Arpaio and Thomas affair, where arrests where made in an absence of a theory of law or allegation of fact to substantiate the charges, the DOJ report clearly enounciates how Arpaio engaged in illegal racial profiling.

      I don’t seek to dismiss any claims against the supervisors based on Arpaio’s bad reputation; rather, I recognize by the derth of information provided that they were brought by political malice.

      In contrast, you can’t defend Arpaio’s actions, so you seek to slime the political bosses in hopes of also discrediting the career officers of the CRD.

      One of us follows the rule of law, the other simply engages in mudwslinging. Hint: you are the one with dirty hands.

      I know you don’t understand much of what is going on in the world around you, but that is no excuse for blindly making things up and trying so hard, but so poorly, to mislead readers.

      There is no double standard on my part, just an understanding of the legal system and basic logic. As a contrarian, you’ll find some wingnut reason to whine, but it won’t do you any good. Even if you don’t understand it, you are indeed making an ass of yourself.

      • Conservative American says:

        What happened with you concerns about “honesty”, TC?

        Dennis Burke went after Sheriff Arpaio. His name is on the lawsuit, right under that of Thomas E. Perez, as U. S. Attorney in Arizona. You can see that for yourself in this PDF of the actual lawsuit:

        http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/8091/0902justice-department-lawsuit-on-arpaio.pdf

        Is Dennis Burke, the man after Arpaio, an honest man?

        “Former Ariz. US Attorney admits leaking memo smearing Fast and Furious whistle-blower
        By Matthew Boyle – The Daily Caller Published: 12:54 AM 11/09/2011 | Updated: 2:16 PM 11/09/2011″

        “Former Arizona U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke, who resigned in August, admitted late Tuesday that he leaked a document aimed at smearing Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent John Dodson, an Operation Fast and Furious whistle-blower.”

        http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/09/former-ariz-us-attorney-admits-leaking-memo-smearing-fast-and-furious-whistle-blower/

        “Erroneous Gun Letter Based on U.S. Attorney, Documents Show
        QBy Jonathan D. Salant – Dec 2, 2011 3:56 PM MT”

        “Burke, in early February, insisted in an e-mail to top Justice officials that any allegations that the bureau allowed weapons bought in Arizona to reach Mexico were “categorically false.” He requested that such a statement be part of the written response to Grassley and it remained in the letter through numerous drafts, documents show.”

        “In fact, the agency lost track of guns in the program. Two of about 2,000 guns that the ATF allowed to be carried away were found at the scene of the December 2010 murder of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry in Arizona, according to a congressional report released in June.”

        http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-02/erroneous-gun-letter-based-on-u-s-attorney-documents-show.html

        The above prove, with irrefutable facts which are a matter of public record, that Dennis Burke is not an honest man and that he is entirely lacking in intergrity and ethics. So much so that he resigned as U. S. Attorney in Arizona.

        Who appointed Burke as U. S. Attorney in Arizona? B. Hussein Obama appointed him. Who was Janet Napolitano’s chief of staff when she was Governor of Arizona? Why none other than Dennis Burke!

        Despite all of this, you claim that the investigation and lawsuit against Sheriff Arpaio were honest, objective, ethical, integrity based and politically impartial.

        I guess we shouldn’t expect anything else from a liberal Obama supporter who wrote this:

        “True Conservative says:
        February 2, 2012 at 9:34 pm”

        “When Obama gets it right, not only should all Americans say so, all patriots should say so loudly.”

        “I understand why Obama came after SB1070. Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans, and that caused the left to react in such a way that Obama was forced to respond.”

        “If conservatives in Arizona had calmly, rationally passed a fact-based law reasonably designed to address the genuine concerns associated with illegal immigration we could have avoided much of this nonsense.”

        My goodness! Aren’t those “conservatives in Arizona” just awful! They are responsible for forcing your hero, B. Hussein Obama, against his will, to go after SB1070. Obama, of course, never would have gone after SB1070 if those “conservatives in Arizona” handn’t FORCED the poor man to do it!

        Your love affair with Obama and his minions, and your disdain for those “conservatives in Arizona”, prove that you are not a “True Conservative” at all but rather a “True Liberal”.

        Have a nice day, Miss Liberal! :-)

      • TruConserv says:

        If I type slowly, will you better understand?

        No, of course not. You’re just a cut and paste troll.

        The two cases are not remotely alike.

        Burke’s signature was ministerial. He played no role in the actual investigation of Apraio.

        Thomas and Arpaio were hands-on in their scandal.

        The DOJ investigation was conducted by career line-level attorneys who served under both (R) and (D) administrations. These professionals made the determination that Arpaio engaged in the worst racial profiling in US history.

        In contrast, subordinates and peers told Arpaio and Thomas they had no case, no proof, no theory of law to substantiate their charges. Non-political attorneys were then excluded and only those politically connected to Thomas were allowed to continue on the case.

        The DOJ case presents a detailed report, based on three years of investigation, that leads to the inescapable conclusion that Arpaio broke the law.

        In contrast, Thomas and Arpaio were unable, when asked under oath, to produce one bit of evidence or even a color-able theory of law that would support the arrests they made.

        Finally, Arpaio and Thomas earned a bad reputation AFTER it was proven they manufactured phony charges against their political rivals. In other words, these cases were independently revealed to be bogus, malicious and made in bad faith.

        In contrast, you want to invoke Burke’s bad reputation BEFORE the merits of the case are measured. You have no proof for any of your black-helicopter conspiracy claims, but you continue to cut and paste them all the same. Indeed, you make no effort to defend Arpaio, largely because you can’t.

        cue more cut and paste …

        • Conservative American says:

          The problem is that you keep trying to ignore the facts. It’s not “cut and paste”, it’s restating the facts which you have thus far sought to ignore. Here is fact. You wrote this:

          “True Conservative says:
          February 2, 2012 at 9:34 pm”

          “When Obama gets it right, not only should all Americans say so, all patriots should say so loudly.”

          “I understand why Obama came after SB1070. Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans, and that caused the left to react in such a way that Obama was forced to respond.”

          “If conservatives in Arizona had calmly, rationally passed a fact-based law reasonably designed to address the genuine concerns associated with illegal immigration we could have avoided much of this nonsense.”

          Now all of your liberal intellectual verbiage doesn’t change what you wrote.

          Furthermore, I challenge you, yet once again, to show where I “demonized” Hispanics, particualry Mexicans. You can’t. It’s just a classic liberal smear job with no basis in fact. Your written words are, however, a fact.

          Have a nice day, TC!:-)

  7. Conservative American says:

    Now TC wrote this about Obama: “If Obama does something good, let’s encourage him to do more. For example, he is now deporting illegal aliens at a rate higher than any previous president. That still is not enough, but let’s give him credit for that work and try to drive him into doing what is right – sending even more home.”

    Should we give Obama credit “for that work”?

    “The president is suggesting that deportations are up. Not so fast.”

    “The number of deportations in 2009 and 2010 is higher under the Obama administration than at any other time, but it’s not because of increased enforcement. The higher numbers reflect many removal cases that were already in the pipeline, leftovers from Bush-era enforcement.”

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/05/21/4-obama-immigration-claims-just-arent-true/

    • TruConserv says:

      What’s your point?

      I’m not here to defend Obama. I’m on record hoping he gets booted out.

      My point remains, when Obama does good, we should recognize it so as to be seen as credible.

      You disagree. You think that no matter what the president does, he should be attacked.

      The OPINION you quote as NEWS may take a basis in truth, but it gets no traction because it comes from a person who, like you, disagrees with anything Obama does, no matter what he does.

      Claiming you’re not a reactionary by citing a reactionary does nothing to buttress your case. It simply proves mine.

      However, I’m sure you will disagree …

      • Conservative American says:

        Actually, TC, you are on record as having written this:

        “True Conservative says:
        February 2, 2012 at 9:34 pm”

        “When Obama gets it right, not only should all Americans say so, all patriots should say so loudly.”

        “I understand why Obama came after SB1070. Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans, and that caused the left to react in such a way that Obama was forced to respond.”

        “If conservatives in Arizona had calmly, rationally passed a fact-based law reasonably designed to address the genuine concerns associated with illegal immigration we could have avoided much of this nonsense.”

        You claim that Obama should be praised because there have been a record number of deportations of illegal aliens while he has been in office. However, you conveniently forgot to mention this:

        “The president is suggesting that deportations are up. Not so fast.”

        “The number of deportations in 2009 and 2010 is higher under the Obama administration than at any other time, but it’s not because of increased enforcement. The higher numbers reflect many removal cases that were already in the pipeline, leftovers from Bush-era enforcement.”

        http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/05/21/4-obama-immigration-claims-just-arent-true/

        How is it that you defend the progressive liberal Democrat, B. Hussein Obama, and his minions, at every turn while being critical of “conservatives in Arizona” and yet you go by the misleading user name of “True Conservative”? Clearly, you are a “True Liberal”, LOL!

        Have a nice day, TC! :-)

        • TruConserv says:

          With every post you simply remind us that you can not be trusted to present the truth.

          Before you told lies about me being a paid propagandist. In post after post you repeated you libel, fully aware you were lying, but unconcerned about the truth.

          That is the ultimate proof you are no conservative – you lie too easily and too often.

          • Conservative American says:

            Nice try, TC, but you can’t evade the facts with your liberal verbiage. You wrote this:

            “True Conservative says:
            February 2, 2012 at 9:34 pm”

            “When Obama gets it right, not only should all Americans say so, all patriots should say so loudly.”

            “I understand why Obama came after SB1070. Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans, and that caused the left to react in such a way that Obama was forced to respond.”

            “If conservatives in Arizona had calmly, rationally passed a fact-based law reasonably designed to address the genuine concerns associated with illegal immigration we could have avoided much of this nonsense.”

            Squirm as you may, like a worm on a hook, you simply can’t make what you wrote go away.

            Furthermore, you claim that I “demonized” Hispanics, particularly Mexicans but can’t offer a shred of evidence to back up your accusation. That makes it nothing more than a classic liberal smear job. That is understandable because you are a “True Liberal”, LOL!

            Have a nice day, “True Liberal”! :-)

  8. Conservative American says:

    “True Conservative” wrote this about me: “Morons like you acted went about demonizing hispanics, particularly Mexicans…”

    I have challenged “True Conservative” repeatedly in this thread to back up her attack on me by quoting me where I have “demonized” Hispanics, particularly Mexicans. You will notice that she has failed to do so.

    You aren’t being “dishonest” like Dennis Burke, are you, TC? Where is the proof of you allegation against me, or don’t you have any?

    That’s alright, TC. We understand that you are a liberal and that liberals abhor the truth. We know that liberals like you and Dennis Burke feel it sufficient to engage in smear tactics. That’s your substitute for the truth. You’re simply being the “True Liberal” that you are, LOL!

    Have a nice day, Miss Liberal! :-)

    • TruConserv says:

      You have spent the better part of three months stalking me, trying to re-fight every discussion, posting lie after lie about me, and now you want to claim I am the one who abhors the truth?

      I have no interest in playing your cut and paste games. I have repeatedly provided you proof on any number of issue, only to see you continue on whining about it never having been brought forward.

      You know what you wrote, we’ve discussed at length before. Just because you want a rematch to reclaim your honor does not oblige me to give you such an opportunity.

      Rail on wingnut. Tell your lies. Rail on.

      • Conservative American says:

        Oooooh! NOW I understand. You think that your honor is at stake. It isn’t!

        SA is a political blog with political discussions. It isn’t a battlefield of honor. Lighten up, TC!

        TC has honor. There, I said it. We don’t debate “honor”, we debate politics. That’s all.

        You honor is, and always will be, intact. Honor is self-determined. As long as YOU believe that you have honor, then you have honor.

        Take it easy, TC. There’s nothing “life or death” here. The whole thing just isn’t that heavy! Have fun!

  9. Jean McGrath says:

    One of the comments decried the lack of conservative opponents in the race for Supervisor. Both Brock’s district and Stapley’s have credible Republican opponents and I am running in District 4 against Max Wilson on a platform of reduced spending, lower taxes and fewer regulations.
    Jean McGrath http://www.votejeanmcgrath.com

Speak Your Mind

*