Liberal supervisor candidate Lilia Alvarez: Vote for me or I’ll sue you

Most of the public has had enough of all the lawsuits filed involving Maricopa County government.  That’s why it’s so hard to believe that one person at the heart of the expensive, lawsuit free-for-all is actually asking the taxpayers she previously targeted in a lawsuit to put her into office.

Lilia Alvarez is running for Maricopa County Supervisor in a Republican-leaning district despite her litigious history against the taxpayers of Maricopa County.  Alvarez is the wife of Randy Parraz, the radical, left-wing, rabble rousing, Arpaio-hating failed political hopeful.  Despite the fact that Parraz was even rejected by the Democratic party for being too extreme (Parraz got a woeful 15% of the vote in the Democrat U.S. Senate primary and finished a humiliating fourth place in a four candidate race), his anti-Arpaio shenanigans ensure that he remains a media darling.

All this may explain why we have heard so little in the media about supervisorial candidate Lilia Alvarez’s connection to the county fueding that was so costly for taxpayers.  What’s worse is that Alvarez touts herself as a “fiscal conservative” and is actually trashing her opponent Andy Kunasek for all the taxpayer money that was wasted on lawsuits.  That’s like torching your own house and then criticizing the fire department for showing up and putting out the fire!

No doubt Alvarez already has her union lawyer hubby ginning up another lawsuit against the voters for when she loses.  If she were honest she wouldn’t tout herself as a fiscal conservative, instead her campaign slogan would be: “Vote for me or I’ll sue your pants off!”

Wes Is NOT Worthy

Anyone who thinks they will be casting a vote for a Republican if they vote for Wes Gullett for Phoenix Mayor is vastly mistaken.  Wes is a top supporter of liberal Democrats like Raul Grijalva, Harry Mitchell, Ed Pastor, Tom Daschle, and David Obey.  Wes gave Raul Grijalva $1,000 the same week Grijalva called for a boycott against Arizona over SB 1070, and Wes DID NOT EVEN DEMAND A REFUND!  (Check it out by going to the FEC website and typing Gullett in).

Well Wes, better late than never, if you are really a Republican why don’t you demand a refund of the money you gave to Raul Grijalva to help him keep his Congressional seat so he could continue his radical left-wing assault on Arizona and America??!!  All told, Wes has given nearly $20,000 to liberal Democrats in the last few years.

Wes is also a big contributor to the Arizona Democrat Party, shelling out $500 for them during Napolitano’s reign of error. (Search here). Oh, almost forgot—Wes has so many left-wing flaws that his support for Janet Napolitano almost gets lost in the shuffle.   Napolitano almost bankrupted our state, but there was Wes cheering her on.  Anyone who thinks this uberlobbyist insider will actually cut government needs to face the facts.

Gullett has also admitted working for the Service Employees International Union, which organized the 1070 boycott of Arizona.  

Gullett has also fought to maintain taxpayer funded welfare benefits for illegal aliens, as well as to keep it nice and easy for them to vote illegally (probably for lefties like Wes.)  Fortunately the voters of Arizona passed Proposition 200 in 2004, despite Wes’ urging a NO vote on this.  Wes thought that illegal aliens should be able to collect welfare from you and me, and not be bothered with things like having to show a real I.D. (NOT a matricula consular) at the polling place.

Wes should not be rewarded for being a RINO—his voter registration is the ONLY thing Republican about Wes.  There’s a word for such a shameless play–dishonesty.

Those who are tempted to vote for him should also consider what his real ambition is, and that is the Senate seat that Senator McCain will leave in 2016.  The timing would be perfect for Wes if he could just get elected Mayor—he could spend four years boosting his profile and getting good press from his left-wing buddies at the Republic, then run.

Senator Gullett would make even the most hardcore JD Hayworth supporter pine for the conservative by comparison days of John McCain as our senator.  Gullett is a VERY close confidante of Senator McCain, having worked for him and managed his campaigns. 

Let’s not kid yourselves, when we settle for RINOs we just encourage more of them.

NO Wes for US Senator, NO Wes for Mayor.  NO MORE RINO’s!

Board of Supervisors joins Team Obama’s legal assault on Arizona

After Barack Obama took office his subordinates at the Justice Department wasted little time in launching a legal assault on Sheriff Joe Arpaio, announcing two probes in March 2009.

The grounds for the probes are highly questionable.  One of the investigations apparently centers around the complaint that Arpaio’s jails aren’t sufficiently friendly to non-English speaking criminals, almost all of whom are here illegaly.  The other investigation is looking into claims of racial profiling by Arpaio in conducting his saturation patrols that have been successful in rounding up illegal immigrants.  Of course, the people clamoring for that investigation are members of the open borders crowd.

After a year and half of these “investigations,” it’s clear that Team Obama has crapped out, producing nothing of substance.  So our left-wing Maricopa County Board of Supervisors comes to rescue, offering to use their subpoena powers under state law to give the feds materials that they have no right to.

Democrat lawyer Tom Irvine, who’s made a killing off of the boondoggle Court Tower project, and $175,000 a year board attorney Wade Swanson seem to be at the heart of this, writing a letter to the Obama Justice Department saying the Board would use its power to compel the Sheriff to turn over materials that the Justice Department can’t otherwise get. 

As taxpayers we’re actually paying these lawyers to team up with Obama and Co. in their continuing attack on Arizona and the fight against illegal immigration.  And even worse is their argument for getting involved.  They claim that by aiding the Obama Administration in their attacks on Arpaio they will actually SAVE the taxpayers money.  That sounds like the famous Vietnam War era quote about having to destroy the village in order to save it.

Incredibly enough, the Board is always complaining that Arpaio abuses his power!  What do they call this end around the rule of law?

As unpopular as Barack Obama is in Arizona, with his lawsuit against the state over Senate Bill 1070, it’s hard to see the political wisdom of getting into bed with him.  It appears the Sups are blinded to political reality by their hatred of Joe Arpaio.

More praise for Romley–from Kyrsten Sinema

Rick Romley has run a campaign for the Republican nomination for County Attorney that seems more appropriate for someone seeking the DEMOCRAT nomination for County Attorney.

Now as he engages in an 11th hour, transparently political attack on Sheriff Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas, about the only people cheering him are Democrats.  Once again Kyrsten Sinema applauds Romley.  Our faithful readers will remember that Sinema also praised Romley for his amnesty plan for illegal aliens.

Here’s a little bit of friendly advice to Mr. R: when you’re running in a Republican primary against a competitive opponent who is clearly trying to get to the right of you (which Romley has made a far too easy task), it’s probably not good when the most far left political figure in the state is singing your praises.

More Democrats endorse Rick Romley

Democrats have been lining up behind temporary Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley in his race against conservative Republican Bill Montgomery.  As if Republicans needed any more reasons to dump Romley, today Romley garnered additional Democrat support in the form of Linda Valdez and the rest of her liberal colleagues on The Arizona Republic’s editorial board.

The Republic’s list of picks is lousy with RINO’s, from Romley to Tom Horne, Paulina Vasquez Morris to Susan Bitter Smith.

This is hardly surprising–when a left-wing newspaper gives advice to Republicans on who to pick in their primary, one would expect they would go with the most liberal candidates.

For that reason it’s hard to see this endorsement helping Romley or any of these others.  Republican primary voters pay a lot of attention and they’ve certainly sniffed the Republic out.  They’re unlikely to take their marching orders from the lefties at the Republic.

Republic still in the bag for Romley

Under pressure, the Republic’s Michael Kiefer has finally started covering the County Attorney race between conservative Bill Montgomery and RINO Rick Romley.

While the Republic is no longer ignoring the race, their “coverage” does not inspire a lot of confidence that the newspaper is committed to fairly representing the race to its readers.  In other words, they’re still in the bag for Romley.  Take this morning’s article about Bill Montgomery, let’s dissect it piece by piece.

Opening line: “Bill Montgomery’s biggest task in his bid for Maricopa County attorney may be to convince voters that he is not a clone of former County Attorney Andrew Thomas”

Huh?  Andrew Thomas has fans and detractors, but he was elected County Attorney twice, and polls show him as the favorite to be our next Attorney General.  Kiefer may not like him, but the voters appear to.  Bill Montgomery is not Andrew Thomas, but is this really the concern that Kiefer makes it out to be?

Kiefer is also taking pains to dull the significant differences between Romley and Montgomery on illegal immigration enforcement.  Another line from Kiefer:

“Romley has also pointed out problems in the highly contested new immigration law, Senate Bill 1070.” 

Pointed out problems?  Romley called for Governor Brewer to veto SB 1070, and said it was “tearing our community apart.”

More Kiefer:

“Romley set more stringent standards in charging the people arrested in Arpaio’s crime sweeps.” 

In reality, and as Arpaio and others have pointed out, Romley is creating artificial barriers that make prosecution impossible.  In layman’s terms, he’s refusing to enforce laws targetting illegal immigration, not “setting more stringent standards.” 

Romley just isn’t a believer in a robust state effort to combat illegal immigration.  He didn’t do anything in the 16 years he was County Attorney before while the problem festered.  But instead of just saying he isn’t going to enforce the law, he puts up phony roadblocks on issues that were never a problem before.  It gets Romley to where he wants to be–no enforcement–while at least giving him some legal reason, albeit a phony one, to justify it.  And of course, being of the same mind, the paper covers for him.

Combined with their previous effort to ignore the race, the current coverage reveals the Republic’s bias.  But the message is getting through to the public–one candidate wants to do something at the local level about illegal immigration, and one candidate doesn’t.

Arizona voters rejected the DREAM Act

The Republic ran a pro-DREAM Act propaganda piece that they tried to pass off as a news story yesterday.  The online version, which did not even include any of the opponents’ arguments against the DREAM Act and appeared online Thursday, is here.

The print version included a few words about the opposition (though not from any identified critics), but it still missed the key arguments against the DREAM Act.

The Republic’s print headline was telling: “Momentum Builds for DREAM Act.”  That is clearly not the case in Arizona.  In 2006 Arizona voters rejected in-state tuition for illegal aliens by passing Proposition 300, which prohibits in-state tuition, by a whopping 71-29% vote.  Incredibly, this was never mentioned in the article.

The reporter also did not really get the basics about the DREAM Act right.  The DREAM Act would make illegal aliens entering universities lawful residents, which would force states to give them taxpayer subsidized in-state tuition if they are a resident of the state. 

Of course, there was no coverage in the article about what programs would have to be cut or taxes raised to pay for this federal mandate.  With Senate Bill 1070 the Republic has not been so shy about calling it an “unfunded mandate.”  Why the difference in characterization?  Could it be because the Republic supports the DREAM Act and opposes 1070?

The bottom line on the DREAM Act is this: at a time of 10% unemployment, it forces local taxpayers to subsidize a university education for illegal aliens.  These taxpayers, some of whom never had the luxury of a college eduction, will be subsidizing illegal aliens and then having to compete with them in an extremely difficult job market.

Republic’s black out of County Attorney race, part II

As this blog has pointed out, the Republic just isn’t covering the County Attorney’s race, and people are starting to talk about it.  The New Times’ Ray Stern weighed in on the curious lack of coverage today in his blog.

As Stern points out, this stands in contrast to the Republic’s treatment of the County Attorney’s race in 2008.  As you may remember, the Republic was hot to help Janet Napolitano’s lawyer, Tim Nelson, defeat incumbent Andrew Thomas.  The little known Nelson needed to raise his name ID in that race to improve his chances, and the Republic was all too happy to help him with extensive coverage.

This time, the Republic is very much of the same mind as interim County Attorney Rick Romley politically, and Romley enjoys good name ID from his 16 years as County Attorney.  Of course, news coverage of a race tends to negate name ID, which probably explains why the Republic is mum on this race.  The Republic is hoping that if it simply does not talk about the race, Romley can eke by on name ID, despite his soft on illegal immigration policies that might otherwise spell doom in a Republican primary.

The Republic really doesn’t have a reason for not covering the race.  The contrasts between Romley and fellow moderate candidate Boyd Dunn on one side, and conservative Bill Montgomery, are stark.  And they involve the type of red meat, hot button illegal immigration issues that sell newspapers.  Besides there is no denying the importance of the office.

From a news and business standpoint, the Republic should be covering the race.  Stern speculates that the Republic’s political agenda, i.e. their desire to see Romley reelected, is getting in the way.  The difference in coverage between 2008 and 2010, and the likely reasons, are not lost on people, and it’s hurting the Republic’s credibility.

Republic’s black out of County Attorney race coverage continues

The Maricopa County Attorney’s race is one of the most important races this election season, yet it has received almost no coverage from The Arizona Republic.  It’s a critically important office, but it’s an interesting race also because it pits conservative Republican Bill Montgomery against a couple of RINOs, Rick Romley and Boyd Dunn.

Since being appointed temporary County Attorney, Romley has rolled out the red carpet for illegal aliens in Maricopa County with his amnesty plan.  Boyd Dunn rolled out some red carpet of his own.  He’s the Mayor of Chandler, which has long been a sanctuary city despite Dunn’s weak, 11th hour attempt to change this in order to cover up a bad record with “tough on illegal immigration” talk  in an election year.

Montgomery had a pretty powerful hit on Romley last week, pointing out how many opponents of our employer sanctions law are raising money for Romley and how Romley seems to be responding to their desires by scrapping workplace enforcement of immigration laws.  Unfortunately this was not enough to break through the Republic’s embargo on press coverage of this race.

With decent name ID, the less news about the race the better for Romley.  This is surely why Romley is ducking debates.  Is the fact that Romley’s soft on illegal immigration policies are in line with the Republic’s views driving the Republic’s coverage, or lack thereof, of the race?

 

Sandra Day O’Connor: Arizona must show it is NOT bigoted after passing 1070

Sandra Day O’Connor yucked it up with former Clinton flak George Stephanapoulos on ABC’s Good Morning America today.  Though she refused to answer Stephanapoulos’ direct questions about whether she would have voted for SB 1070 or whether it was constitutional, she left little doubt what she thought:

“SB 1070 has been enacted, and I think what we have to look at now is, what does Arizona do now? How do we put a good step forward to show that Arizona is not as a whole, a biased state. And that we appreciate and respect the Hispanic population in our state very much.”

Maybe Justice O’Connor can use her elite Stanford Law School education to educate us on how we might possibly prove a negative–that we are NOT a bigoted state.  And why in the world do we have to apologize essentially for passing this law?  There is nothing bigoted about it–as Russell Pearce says, illegal alien is not a race.