Kelly Townsend, candidate for LD22 GOP legislator, as well as owner and founder of Greater Phoenix Tea Party Patriots has been the focus of some troubling ethical questions due in part, to her website.  Kelly, along with the 912 Tea Party Project Pinal County co-owners with Sassia Niederste-Hollenberg , Stephen (a candidate for Casa Grande School Board)and Melinda Kohut, have acted in ways that contradict the Glenn Beck’s 9 Principles and 12 Values prominently featured on the Pinal County website.

          On these two websites, some of the most incredible blogging activity has occurred over the past six months since JD Hayworth announced his candidacy for Arizona’s US Senate seat in Congress.  It has culminated over the past three weeks with some phenomenal attacks on numerous tea parties in our state, a blog post by a Senate candidate’s wife calling an avowed racist JD Hayworth’s “best friend’ and discovery that one of Jim Deakin’s strongest supporters, and wife of the co-owner of a Pinal County TPP website, pretending to be interested in endorsing a candidate.  Lastly we’ve discovered the completely duplicitous and hypocritical actions by two Tea Party websites and their owners.

           Beginning last April there was growing group Tea Party groups who started working together to form a coalition of Tea Parties for creating resources, sharing ideas and providing a stronger voice in Arizona.  While there was considerable difference as to the shape and form of this coalition, there was complete unanimity in recognizing the need for such an organization.  One of the key issues that developed was the recognition to determine a legal way to endorse candidates.  This culminated on August 2^nd, with a group of 16 statewide and national groups endorsing JD Hayworth for US Senate as the Tea Party candidate.  You would have thought all hell broke loose among Jim Deakin’s supporters, both on the blogs and in Deakin’s campaign.  Jim and his wife Adonia began making posts, attacking all this coalition, calling them “Fake Tea Parties”.  Also Deakin sycophants began making accusations of law violations and threats to file complaints with the Federal Elections Commission.

          One such supporter, Stephen Kohut, co-owner of the 912 Tea Party Project of Pinal County website, has been extremely vociferous, threatening to file complaints with the FEC.  So outspoken has Stephen been speaking out, that you’d almost forget that, at least according to his own words, Kohut did not ‘make up my mind’ until after the July 16-17^th, debates.  Stephen claimed on various Tea Party websites and in his voluminous comments on Sonoran Alliance that he was “undecided” as to his choice for the US Senate.  Kohut EVEN claimed that while his wife Melinda had decided to support Deakin, even contributing $500 to his campaign, he remained “undecided”. Yes, and I have oceanfront property in Quartzite, Arizona for bargain prices!

          With Deakin’s utter failure to garner any Tea Party endorsements, Jim has taken to condemning those Tea Parties who have endorsed JD Hayworth.  This is where it gets interesting.  Kelly Townsend’s Greater Phoenix Tea Party Patriots is a 501(c)4 organization, hence cannot endorse any candidates.  Also, Sassia Niederste-Hollenberg and Stephen Kohut’s 912 Project Pinal County Tea Party Patriots “claims” to be a 501(c)4 group.  ‘Claims’ is the operative word; for last March when I questioned them about a video of some Massachusetts independent ‘endorsing’ Jim Deakin prominently on their front page, and I then repeated my concerns with another question, they suspended me from the website!  Stephen recently called my questioning, “cyber-intimidation”.  Yet, since they weren’t even a 501(c)4 group, my question was irrelevant, EXCEPT they claimed then and now to be a 501(c)4 group!  Why would they make such false statements?

          Here are the facts: when I recently checked the AZ Corporation Commission’s listing of corporations, there was nothing for Kohut’s group at the time.  NOT until May 7^th did a reservation for a group, “Pinal County Tea Party Patriots” appear, reserved by Melinda “Mindy” Kohut.  The reservation expires on September 5^th and to date there appears that no corporation exists.  Then on June 8^th, Kelly Townsend filed for a registration of trade name for “Pinal 912 Tea Party Patriots”; thereby intertwining the two Tea Party groups completely together.  Yet they use their websites to take a cheap shot at the Tea Party groups that endorse candidates.

          Both websites and the Tea Party groups’ leaders, Townsend, Sassia and the Kohuts have been solidly supporting Jim Deakin.  So imagine my surprise last week to find out that Mindy Kohut asked two months ago to join this coalition of Tea Parties.  For the last two months Stephen’s wife, Mindy a contributor to Deakin’s campaign, has been a member of the website, but failed to acknowledge her support for Deakin by joining the Jim Deakin group.  So, while being a member of the Association that was seeking legitimate avenues for endorsing candidates, Melinda’s Pinal County Tea Party Patriots is strongly opposed to endorsements of candidates.  She pretended to support the concept of endorsing a candidate, which WAS an option for Tea Party leaders for ANY candidate, as a result of the Association.  Needless to say, her membership has been terminated.  Here’s the link to their page look for their statement on endorsing candidates: http://thepinalcounty912project.ning.com.

          It’s interesting that Kelly, the Kohuts and Sassia, along with Jim Deakin, want the exclusive right to define WHAT CONSTITUTES A TEA PARTY!  THEN they dare to condemn anyone or group that doesn’t fit THEIR definition!! 

          Now with Kelly Townsend working with and closely allied to the Pinal County group, it’s not too surprising to find that her actions also clearly violate the 912 standards.  For example, over the past eight months numerous groups formerly affiliated with Kelly left her organization.  In most every case she refused to let them keep their name, since SHE was the registered owner.  The key reason for leaving was simply that Kelly concentrated the control and authority in the hands of herself and the members of the board, Les White, Charles McCain, and Chris Rossiter.  For example, after a national group, Tax Day Tea Party, endorsed JD Hayworth, Kelly immediately contacted Robert Mayer, Roger Boone and Patrick Beck of the Tucson, Flagstaff and Bullhead City “Tea Party” groups and issued a press release claiming to be the four largest Tea Parties and that they were NOT endorsing JD Hayworth for the Senate seat.  This press release garnered widespread press attention, thanks to John McCain’s powerful influence.

Two interesting facts about this press release: 1. one members of Kelly’s Board at the time was NOT even informed about the press release, let alone involving her, leading up to the press release!  2. While Kelly’s and Roger’s groups could NOT endorse ANYONE due to their status, the Tucson group had made the decision NOT to endorse any candidate for any race, not just JD Hayworth for the US Senate.  Lastly, Patrick Beck did not EVEN HAVE a Tea Party group!  Sure, he had organized a rally for April 15^th last year that attracted 400 attendees in Bullhead City. However, there were NO meetings, until he set up an ‘association’ last May, and THEN only ONE!  This was a concerted effort to mute the impact of any endorsements for JD Hayworth.

          Lastly, Kelly Townsend shows complete hypocrisy on her website in what she allows or censors in the discussion groups.  Specifically, when there were very heated discussions regarding the Senate race, in the West Valley and the Greater Scottsdale groups, causing several members to complain and leave the discussion pages.  Kelly rightfully set up a Senate discussion group on June 10th, and after she complained to me about ‘strong language’ (not foul, just forceful) she told me in a phone call that in the new group, “almost anything goes”.  Then on June 14^th, I used the term “Deakinistas” in reference to the more rabid supporters, given to insults and personal attacks.  Kelly suspended me, and another person who used the term “Deakinasses” for 30 days.  BY contrast, Adonia Deakin post the MOST despicable of blogs, claiming that JD Hayworth asked his “best friend” David Duke to get his friends to call on his behalf!!  She also posted this on Smart Girl Politics and it was quickly deleted!  Kelly simply asked Adonia to ‘revise’ the post.  SO, Kelly doesn’t mind blatantly false and despicable posts in a completely disgusting display by the wife of Jim Deakin.  Yet she is “offended” by the term “Deakinista”!?

          You have to wonder, DO the Kohuts believe it proper to make false claims of support for the Association, or being “neutral” and criticize all Tea Parties who do not agree with them calling them “Fake”?  Does Kelly Townsend believe that it’s proper to control over 3-5,000 Tea Party members in over a dozen groups, with just 3-5 board members, not giving the leaders of the various groups say in thei leadership?  Further, does she possibly believe that no one can see through the flimsy claim that they don’t really moderate the blogs?  One thing is for certain:  the voters in LD 22 and the Casa Grande School District need to take a very close look at these candidates’ ethics.  BOTH should be subject to a MUCH closer scrutiny, based on their actions over the past six months.

Earlier today, Adonia Deakin, the wife of senate candidate, Jim Deakin, posted a despicable and disgusting entry on the Greater Phoenix TEA Party website under the title:

“Hayworth Begs BEST Friend KKK Leader David Duke to call on the Klan to beg Jim Deakin to drop out!”

By far, this is the most egregious and disgusting attack on former Congressman JD Hayworth I have seen this election cycle.

As a spokesman for the campaign, I will tell you in no uncertain terms that JD Hayworth denounces, repudiates and rejects anything to do with David Duke and anyone and any activities associated with David Duke.

Furthermore, I demand that Adonia Deakin apologize to Congressman Hayworth for her despicable and disgusting post on the Greater Phoenix TEA Party website and any other sites she has posted the same assertions.

Finally, I call upon Kelly Townsend, the administrator of the Greater Phoenix TEA Party website, a Jim Deakin supporter and a candidate for the legislature in district 22, to remove the post and to revoke posting privileges from Adonia Deakin on the Greater Phoenix TEA Party website.

I suggest that Adonia Deakin take up her issue directly with David Duke and leave the JD Hayworth campaign out her rampage. Our campaign will have NOTHING to do with David Duke and rejects, repudiates and denounces him.

On August 5th a post appeared on Sonoran Alliance titled, “LD4 House Race: What the heck is going on?” In that post, the writer asserted that the person behind the scenes of a website called “Crazy Jack Harper” was a reporter at the Arizona Guardian.

That is not the case and the post has since been “pulled.”

In researching their article, “Mad Arizonan” cited the domain name registry information listed for the domain name “CrazyJackHarper.com.” They even took a screen shot of that registrant information that included the name of the Arizona Guardian reporter.

Last Friday, I received a phone call from that same reporter explaining that he was not the individual associated with the website. He explained, and I agreed that someone was falsifying that information probably to make him appear to be the mastermind behind the scenes. When we spoke on the phone, this reporter stated that the person(s) behind the site had changed the administrator again to another fictional name not associated with the Arizona Guardian. I asked the reporter to email me a statement regarding the matter and that I would issue my own statement clarifying that the post had been inaccurate. I never heard back from the reporter.

It appears that the individual(s) behind the scenes of the CrazyJackHarper.com website have duped a number of people including the writer of the recent post.

I am especially angry with those who put up the site. They obviously lied about their identity as the administrator and then libeled a reporter with the Arizona Guardian and ultimately, brought Sonoran Alliance into their deception by duping one of our writers.

Anything to do with that website will be removed and rejected from Sonoran Alliance.

A few posts down, a fellow contibutor who goes by Fredo, made some historical references to the voter initiative Prop 200 back in 2004.  I just felt it was incomplete.

So here’s, as they say, the rest of the story….. 

In Fredo’s post below (“Anti Prop 200 alumni, where are they now?”), he notes that while “everyone is acting tough on illegal immigration now,” back in 2004 several Arizona politicians opposed Proposition 200, which restricted public benefits to illegals and required photo ID to vote

 Fredo asks, “Will the voters care about politicians who supported benefits for illegals? They should at least know the facts.”

Here’s one ‘fact’ Fredo forgot to mention – one of those politicians opposing Proposition 200 in 2004 was J.D. Hayworth!                                                                    

J.D. now claims he’s a long-time advocate of cracking down on illegal aliens, but just six years ago (two years before the end of his public career), he opposed the anti-illegal immigrant Proposition 200.  He says 9-11 removed the “scales from his eyes“.  Wasn’t 9-11 in 2001?  Wasn’t Prop 200 in 2004?

 That’s a fact.  And facts are stubborn things.

 How’s does Hayworth explain his past opposition to Prop. 200? I’ve never heard him talk about it…truthfully.

Not many people have listened to Susan Bradford in her years long effort to get some traction behind her belief that Jack Abramoff is innocent.  Her personal mission to clear his name has evolved into a book designed to reveal that Abramoff was innocent and framed!  Framed, I say!  She calls herself an investigative journalist.  She has plenty of Abramoff apologies on multi-user open websites but her personal website is no longer operational.   

If Ms. Bradford is to be quoted, then it is only right that the readers of this site have a full view of her perspective.  Ms. Bradford’s enamored status of Mr. Abramoff has been going on for sometime.  So much so , that she felt compelled to write on his behalf.   

In Bradford’s letter to the judge, begging for leniency in Abramoff’s sentence, she described him as “noble, enterprising, and creative…” 

Two out of three ain’t bad.

She goes on to write of his love of country, fight for freedom, and his devotion to the conservative movement.  It all was a “whirl of activity” that caused him to “lose sight of the fine print” and that he ”perhaps stopped paying attention and made some bad decisions.” 

“Perhaps” he made some “bad decisions”…?  Really! Ya’ think? 

But if you thought her plea for his sentencing was just to take it easy on the guy…you are wrong.  She didn’t think he should be punished at all!  So much so that she said in her letter: 

Yes, he clearly broke the law, but hasn’t his unmitigated public humiliation around the world and decimation of his character been enough punishment?

OK, hold on because it gets worse.  She sees this guy as the remedy…not the epitome’ of the problem.  Don’t send him to jail, Your Honor…oh, no because according to Ms. Bradford:

Mr. Abramoff can do so much more good outside of prison than within it.

I’m not making this up.  The guy who is the poster-child for campaign corruption, who obviously felt his end justified his means, should be allowed to take a walk?  Because he will “fix” the problem?  How, by using his “enterprising” and “creative” ideas?  I think we already saw that in play…..maybe this is when the “noble” comes in.

And now, the Hayworth campaign is using the distorted perception of this woman to attack Jim Deakin and tie him to McCain in rambling writings and a graph that looks like people playing “The Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon” on crack.

The only thing this proves is that JD has not broken his connection to Abramoff.  He clearly is still on the side of the guy who provided him with tens of thousand of dollars, all paid to JD’s PAC.  What’s more…Team Hayworth doesn’t see why that is the wrong message to send to voters.  

This sort of desperate and distorted effort will only serve to cement the notion that Hayworth cannot accept responsibility for his own bad acts, sees a boogey man behind every corner, and has no filter when his own self interest is involved.  For whatever good he has or may be able to do, the voters will never trust him again.   

They just showed us all why.

Greg Patterson has a new post up on Espresso Pundit…

http://www.espressopundit.com/2010/08/unfit-to-serve.html#comments

Greg makes his case for why he is NOT voting for Andrew Thomas and IS voting for Tom Horne.

The sentiments expressed are echoed by long-time conservatives across the state.  These people understand Tom Horne is not a closet Democrat.  He is very much like many others of his generation who grew up in homes and areas where the Democratic party was very different than what it is now.  They also understand the reality of just who is Andrew Thomas.

Tom Horne served for years as a Republican, has fought the fight against Ethnic Studies and Bilingual Education, took the state to the highest court in the land when Napolitano & Goddard refused to combat the huge costs of illegal immigration in our schools.

Horne is a highly ethical, professional and accomplished attorney with the skills, experience, and the ability to serve this state well.  

As for Thomas…well as Greg put it…

… this is the only time that I have found a nice guy who is bright, isn’t overtly corrupt,  understands the issues and is generally with me but whose judgment is so bad that I would vote for any other candidate.” 

I have to admit that this is a strange way to be threatened. Yesterday, I received a message from a Jesse Mathewson on my Facebook page. This is what he had to say:

=====================================

Jesse Mathewson July 30 at 4:12pm Report

http://sonoranalliance.com/2010/07/09/jim-deakin-%E2%80%9Ctea-party-activist%E2%80%9D-or-mccain-wannabe/

# Jesse Mathewson Says:

July 30th, 2010 at 4:10 pm

The following line, “On April 7th, Jim’s Cochise County volunteer coordinator, Jesse Mathewson, also a blogger with the Examiner.com called the “Cochise County Libertarian Examiner”; wrote the following blog titled “Just another typical dirty Washington politician, JD Hayworth cannot play nice”. Here’s the link: http://www.examiner.com/x-18115-Cochise-County-Libertarian-Examiner~y2010m4d7-Just-another-typical-dirty-Washington-politician-JD-Hayworth-cannot-play-nice. This is a pretty serious charge, if it were true. However, it’s not.”

Is full of holes and untruths…

First I have NOT been the volunteer coordinator for several months.

While this is a blog, the Examiner is a local news source – qualifying as news, as the articles written are cited, sourced and verified (OR they are not paid as such.) And I get paid – well…

Lastly, I have asked for refutations to be submitted…so far no real proof has been submitted and my editors after reviewing my facts and proof allowed the article to remain. (yes I can get reviewed by outside editors…another simple proof that this is NOT a blog as this is.)

So – I am requesting politely that this article be amended, or I will file a civil libel suit pursuant to ARS 12-653.02 and 12-651

=====================================

So I responded as follows:

=====================================

Shane Wikfors July 30 at 10:09pm

Jesse,

What exactly are you contesting?

When did you ask for refutations to be submitted? To whom did you make such claim other than a comments box on the blog?

Shane

=====================================

Jesse then responded as follows:

=====================================

Jesse Mathewson July 31 at 7:51am Report

I appreciate your response and will proceed accordingly.

Jesse Mathewson

and,

Jesse Mathewson July 31 at 8:28am Report

So that I am sure the title is correct on the application for civil complaint or petition pursuant to ARS 12-284 as a result of being falsely linked to a political campaign as a “coordinator” in any capacity (which I am not and have not been for a period no less than 5 months) – Your name is Dennis ”Dionysus” Shane “Rogue” Wikfors, you are the owner and operator of Sonoran Alliance a blog that allows others to contribute material. You are also the current field director for the JD Hayworth campaign correct?

Again I appreciate your response (though negative) to a clearly worded legal request to remove certain incorrect and libelous statements from your blog. As a result of these written statements I am filing a petition of grievance for damages sustained as a result of the libelous writing to my character which as a professional writer, columnist and independent journalist has had negative monetary affects on my career.

By law I am required to request that you remove said libelous sections again pursuant to ARS 12-653.02 and 12-651 as well as case law which can be found – Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co., 1995 N.Y. Misc. Lexis 229 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. May 24, 1995), applied the standard publisher/distributor test to find an online bulletin board liable for post by a third party. Because your blog does not allow posts from anyone without contact or name information it is my belief that you do know who Radical American Patriot is and as a result this would not fall under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996.

As I have on numerous occasions corrected this libelous statement, “Jim’s Cochise County volunteer coordinator, Jesse Mathewson,” and have made it very clear that I do not work in any official capacity at this time (nor from February when I first began writing articles directly including JD Hayworth) As a result of comments both from yourself, and those you allow to post on your blog Sonoran Alliance, have continued to state this as fact even after being clearly corrected in the matter. The statement was posted July 9th 2010 in an article titled (Jim Deakin: “Tea Party Activist” or McCain Wannabe?). I did request via comment on the article as well as a direct communication to yourself that this be amended, however, at that time you responded negatively to this request.

And so it is that by law if this column is not corrected and or retracted I will be filing legal action against yourself, Dennis Shane Wikfors – and involved parties. For any further contact please email me directly as I am removing you from my contact list on facebook at this time.

Jesse Mathewson

520-249-8495

jesse.mathewson@hotmaill.com

=====================================

So there you have it. Sonoran Alliance is being sued. From what I understand, Jesse does not like a certain post that appeared on Sonoran Alliance on July 9th, 2010 in which it stated,

“On April 7th, Jim’s Cochise County volunteer coordinator, Jesse Mathewson, also a blogger with the Examiner.com called the “Cochise County Libertarian Examiner”; wrote the following blog titled “Just another typical dirty Washington politician, JD Hayworth cannot play nice” (see link above).

The post was written by one of our anonymous writers, “Radical American Patriot.” Apparently Jesse’s grudge has to do with the fact that he was described as being the Cochise County volunteer coordinator for Jim Deakin’s campaign. According to the following screenshot of the Examiner, in which Jesse wrote on September 22, 2009, “My name is Jesse Mathewson, I am the volunteer coordinator for Jim Deakin’s Cochise County campaign.”

I’m not sure what to think about this. Especially considering that Jesse wrote a post in which he claimed I wrote for Seeing Red AZ and was spearheading an effort for individuals to remove their names from Jim Deakin’s petitions. All patently false.

Maybe I should counter-sue Jesse for the article he wrote on May 5, 2010 in which he told multiple lies about yours truly. I’m preparing my briefs.

This is great! Hat tip to Seeing Red Arizona for this post! (I’m going to repost it in entirety here on Sonoran Alliance) All credit to Seeing Red Arizona!

By Steven Robinson

Since I first joined Arizona Tea Party and Greater Phoenix Tea Party networks, six months ago, I have found blogging to be both exhilarating and exhausting.  I’ve enjoyed it, been extremely upset and energized by what others post.  People can be as anonymous or open as they choose, for a variety of reasons.  Most often it is to protect their privacy from those who would use deign to harm them.  However, most everyone who are members those two Tea Party sites, and others, plus anyone following the US Senate race on these sites are familiar with many Jim Deakin supporters; and most certainly are well aware of one JPD.  I became aware of his blogs shortly after JD Hayworth entered the race four months ago, when this person began accusing Hayworth of being nothing like a “Consistent Conservative”.  JPD has called JD a “progressive”, “porker”, “earmark lover” among many other claims.  He has misrepresented votes on bills as something they are not, being a very active member of Jim Deakin’s campaign though probably not in an official capacity.  That is simply to provide cover for this nameless, faceless attack dog for Jim Deakin, who indeed loves this ‘cover of darkness.

I have to thank JPD for these accusations though; it made me dig into JD’s congressional record to research his votes.  What I found out by reviewing American Conservative Union, National Journal and “Ontheissues.org” among others was that NOTHING could be further from the truth!  JD’s record of supporting tax cuts, border enforcement and other key issues were so fundamentally solid that one rating service went so far as to describe JD as a “Hard Core Conservative”!

So, I do understand why JPD chose to misrepresent JD’s record, HE supports Jim Deakin and when JD Hayworth entered the race, whatever support Deakin envisioned would come from the conservative camp dried up like a lonely poppy plant in the scorching Mojave Desert.  This is exactly why Chris Simcox exited the race and supported JD.  Yet Jim Deakin had no intention of leaving the race, and very much needed whatever exposure occurred from the blogosphere.  However, JPD was certainly NOT justified in his misleading, lying and distortion-filled attacks on JD’s record.  He simply lied on behalf of Jim Deakin and that is unacceptable!

What always troubled me about JPD’s attacks, were that he did NOT simply focus on JD Hayworth’s record.  He began attacking JD’s supporters and especially me since my posts early on were disproving JPD’s and other supporters of Jim Deakin to be blatantly false!  Yes, JD voted for “No Child Left Behind” and the “Patriot Act”; and well meaning patriots can disagree without being disagreeable about their constitutionality.  But more than that, JPD and other like-minded supporters began making personal attacks, questioning my integrity, and calling me names. They were also getting control of groups like ICaucus and the Arizona group of Resistnet, then banning me for trumped up reasons.  I was even viciously attacked by a LD3 candidate who strongly supported Jim Deakin for a perceived attempt to derail his campaign!  In that case NOTHING could be further from the truth!  Ultimately due to his false claims I researched his records and found out that he was NOT qualified to run in the LD3 GOP legislative race and he had to withdraw.  I don’t know, but it’s even possible that he could be prosecuted for filing a false affidavit with the State of Arizona.

When I began blogging, I had chosen to be anonymous, using the name “Radical American Patriot”. Shortly after, I decided that I was willing to stand behind my words, and began using my real name and my picture.  I must confess that I was really ‘hacked’ that JPD would make his sneak attacks and run back and hide in his hovel, smirking about how he got someone good!  Now what I say next is really despicable.  JPD was being fed information from either Les White or Kelly Townsend of Greater Phoenix Tea Party website about me and their site!  He recently posted a comment on some website, stating that Suzanne and I had been reinstated.  What? I had NOT received notice to that effect, so HOW did JPD know other than Les or Kelly told him?  Further, somehow they found out information on an unaffiliated Tea Party in Phoenix and ALSO revealed private information about this Tea Party to JPD! In my opinion these two, as well as JPD are thoroughly discredited by their actions.  It truly bothers me when people make vicious personal attacks from their anonymity. So I decided to do some research into JPD, and HERE IS WHAT I FOUND!

JPD is none other than Joseph Peter Danielek, residing in Avondale, Arizona.  He has a son named S***** (I will not reveal his name, he is not involved, unless he’s using an alias as well.). His wife, Carlene recently joined ICAUCUS, under the name “Carlene D”.  I even believe that she has joined in the past two or three days again, under simply “Carlene”. Joseph Peter recently stated that he is 54 years old and that is correct.  To his credit a friend of mine who had spoken with him at the Bullhead City Tea Party, thought he looked much younger.  Unfortunately, she said he looked “unkempt”, like he could be someone who sat in his mother’s basement all day in his underwear, blogging, hacking and whatever computer geeks do all day, besides making money!  Oh well, there’s much more research I could do to find out if he owns his home, works for someone, etc.  My point simply is to inform people about two matters.  JUST WHO is Jim Deakin’s greatest promoter, propagandist and prevaricator; and ALSO you can’t trust the Greater Phoenix Tea Party website with ANY personal information!  Be careful about joining that site, because, IF they will ‘provide’ personal information when such actions suits them.

So, from now one, when you see JPD on any post, you’ll know who he is and why he makes the claims he does.  I suspect that he will disappear into the woodwork, just like Jim Deakin plans to do after this election.  Neither of them will have any future in the Republican Party here in Arizona, maybe with the Green Party, or any party supporting Jon Lovitz!  But neither of them has any future here on any political level.  They will have to ask themselves, was it really worth it all, becoming pariahs in the political community JUST to get John McCain re-elected?

          On the eve of the long awaited, much anticipated debates between the GOP candidates for US Senate, Arizona will be introduced to the third, virtually unknown candidate, Jim Deakin. This third candidate, with absolutely no political experience, no history of public volunteer service, or any activism in the Republican Party is poised to appear on the statewide stage, and hence a profile on the national stage as the country begins to focus on this race. With the televised debates on July 16^th and 17^th, this Senate race takes on national implications as the 2008 GOP candidate for President John McCain battles in the first truly competitive race he’s ever faced, NOT in a general election but in the Republican Primary on August 24^th. Of course, the real challenge is not from this unknown political neophyte but the broadcaster turned Congressman and then KFYI afternoon talk show host, JD Hayworth.

          Much has been already written about this race, featuring the most Progressive Senator in the GOP, John McCain, author of the now discredited McCain-Feingold “Campaign Finance” law, two failed “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” legislative attempts, commonly known as “Amnesty”, AND co-sponsor of  last year’s “Cap & Trade” legislation with his good friend, Joe Lieberman; whose explosive temper and legislative bully tactics are legendary, as well as feared, in the halls of Congress.  Facing him is the solidly conservative six term Congressman JD Hayworth, who literally wrote the book on stopping illegal immigration, “Whatever It Takes”.  Recruited and endorsed by fellow conservatives and allies in the Illegal Immigration fight, Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Senators Russell Pearce and Ron Gould, Hayworth is no stranger to the vicious attacks he now experiences from the McCain Campaign.  Finally, the race comes into much sharper focus with the passage of Pearce’s SB1070 Bill that now is not only the focus in Arizona but Nationally with the protests and counter protests and the Justice Department’s recent lawsuit against the State of Arizona.  Clearly the battle lines are drawn and the stakes are extremely high.

          This brings us to this third candidate, Jim Deakin who barely qualified for the ballot with the lowest petition signature count of any statewide candidate; in spite of 16 months of campaigning throughout the state.  It’s understood that Jim would not even be in the debates were it not for McCain’s insistence that he be included.  In the first poll where Deakin is even listed, the June Rasmussen poll, Deakin garnered only 7% in that June poll.  One suspects that much of that support results from the extremely negative attack ads against Hayworth, so people who will NOT vote for McCain, perhaps chose Deakin because they were indeed influenced by the misleading ads from the McCain Campaign.  So while Deakin claims to be the “Tea Party Activist”, it’s quite understandable why McCain chooses to “Puff up” the Deakin Campaign.

          Speaking about the polls Jim Deakin recently spoke to a group of Republicans at an LD 6 meeting where he was asked about his claims over the previous months that he had 20% support regardless of the polling.  When asked how he came up with that number, Deakin declared that in addition to the 7% in the June Rasmussen poll, another poll had a combined 14% for “other/undecided”!  Say What?  How does he justify those numbers?  This is certainly ‘accounting’ that would make Bernie Madoff or Enron’s Ken Lay proud!  Here is the link to the You Tube video page where Jim ‘explains’ these numbers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NRhOxVDuwk.

          Certainly, we would expect this type of ‘analysis’ from the McCain campaign.  After all, when running his infamous “Snakes in Guam” ad campaign, McCain conveniently forgot that he voted for the same bill.  But, I will give Jim the benefit of the doubt, after all when you don’t have the facts on your side, you’ve got to be creative! However, at this SAME meeting Jim accused JD of voting for Cap & Trade legislation in 2005!  Now that would be newsworthy if it were INDEED true!  Here is the link and the video, followed by the real explanation of this vote. It will show Jim to be either completely dishonest or incredibly incompetent, for his completely inaccurate ‘information’ regarding this bill HR 6, “The Energy Policy Act of 2005”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfmaMJCzrgQ.

          Now, here’s the real story on this Section 752 of HR 6.  For years the EPA has instituted limits on pollution emissions from all sources.  These limits were restrictive and jobs killing regulations.  Indeed no one would argue with the need to control pollution, just the level of restrictions.  Due to technological improvements, “mobile pollution emitters” were maintaining standards well below their limits.  Businesses asked for and received permission to “trade” these credits to “stationary pollution emitters”.  Since all this was occurring at the regulatory level, Congress desired to be informed about what the EPA was indeed doing.  Is Jim correct in calling it a ‘pilot cap & trade’?  Technically yes.  Did THIS bill authorize or give legislative authority to the program? Not in the least!  Read the section for yourself: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109:6:./temp/~c109rf11gE:e756711:.  This Section 752 simply required the EPA to report to Congress about the program!  Simply put, this bill put the “light of Congress” on the program.  It was a “Sunshine” provision to require full disclosure to the already existing program.  While their may be problems with some provision in this bill, Section 752 is NOT one of them.  So ask yourself, “Is Jim dishonestly reporting or incompetently comprehending this bill?”  You decide.

          Lastly, Jim has a propensity of deliberately and falsely accusing JD’s campaign of doing ‘dirty tricks’; specifically Deakin accused JD’s of promoting a “Signature Withdrawal” campaign to recruit people to take their names off Jim Deakin’s petitions.  On April 7^th, Jim’s Cochise County volunteer coordinator, Jesse Mathewson, also a blogger with the Examiner.com called the “Cochise County Libertarian Examiner”; wrote the following blog titled “Just another typical dirty Washington politician, JD Hayworth cannot play nice”.  Here’s the link: http://www.examiner.com/x-18115-Cochise-County-Libertarian-Examiner~y2010m4d7-Just-another-typical-dirty-Washington-politician-JD-Hayworth-cannot-play-nice.  This is a pretty serious charge, if it were true.  However, it’s not.

          Here are the facts: on April 5^th, a former Deakin supporter wrote an e-mail to the campaign informing Jim of her intention to withdraw her signature from Jim’s petitions and encourage others to do so at the American Citizens United meeting on Wednesday the 7^th.  The campaign responded to her e-mail.  Rob Haney, a notary, was recruited to notarize the forms for those who also decided to follow this lady’s example.  The meeting began at 6:30PM with discussion regarding this “Signature Withdrawal” program.  JD Hayworth was scheduled to speak, but had not yet arrived.  Other candidates then spoke, and JD, who arrived late, spoke sometime after 7:30.  The meeting ended around 8:30PM.  Yet, just six minutes later, Mathewson, writing from Cochise County describes what allegedly happened at this meeting, falsely attributing it to the Hayworth Campaign!  In his post Jesse claims that he read blogs and Tea Party discussions regarding about this meeting earlier that day. Now I’ve check all the Tea Party discussion groups, and there were NO discussions regarding this event, which hadn’t even taken place!  Yes, there was one blog describing the process on “Seeing Red AZ” blog website.  Yet, the Deakin campaign made a post accusing JD’s field director Shane Wikfors of writing the blog, yet HE doesn’t even write for that blog!  In further accusations Jim Deakin posts the on his Facebook page; and inserts Wikfors name into the byline.  The blog is still at the website on April 6^th.  Shane Wikfors name is nowhere to be found.  The fact is Jim, through his surrogate dishonestly attibutes the actions of one disgruntled former supporter to JD and his campaign.  Sounds like John McCain to me.

          This is a very detailed explanation to be sure.  But it illustrates the point as to just how Jim Deakin will act to denigrate JD Hayworth.  Yet he goes even further; for on April 15^th, at the Bullhead City Tea Party rally he states in front of a small group of supporters and one JD supporter, that HE had the video from the meeting SHOWING JD promoting this very campaign!  One week later, when this same supporter challenged Jim online, to either produce the video or resign; Jim ignored his request for THREE weeks!  And only then, he denied ever making that claim, accusing the supporter of lying!

          So one must ask if this is what you would expect out of one who claims to be a “Tea Party Activist”, yet admits he entered the race BEFORE the Tea Party movement began in earnest.  Or are these, and many more campaign faux paus, simply the bumbling efforts of a woefully unprepared and incompetent campaigner, to keep alive any glimmer of hope for his virtually impossible nomination?  Certainly John McCain has nothing to fear from Deakin, with his vast war chest, including over $20 Million left from his failed Presidential bid. Jim might shave off some of the conservative vote that would otherwise go to Hayworth.  Just how much, and whether it WILL work to keep McCain in office will be determined in the Primary election.  This much is certain to me: If John McCain, via his surrogates did not put Jim Deakin up to running for the US Senate in anticipation of a Hayworth run, it’s Only because even HE was not that astute!

Did any of you see this blog today?  Self proclaimed “New Media/Blogger, Political Activist, and Sexy Young Senior”, Barbara Espinosa has fired the first shot across the bough in the CD 3 race.

In today’s blog she wisely points out that even given Quayle’s vast campaign war chest, it’s not pulling him away from the pack.

AMERICAN FREEDOM

ARIZONA CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 3

The Arizona Guardian poll just came out that has Vernon Parker within striking
distance of the former Vice President’s son, Ben Quayle. How can striking distance be good news? He doesn’t have a famous last name and the former Vice President isn’t out raising
money or campaigning for him., and the Quayle campaign has spent, over $1 million to elect Dan Quayle’s son to Congress. $1 million and he is barely winning.

This means your hard work is paying off. It also means that you want a true conservative to represent you in congress. if Vernon has the resources to get our message out, we will win on Election Day!

That is why I am contacting you today, I am maxed out, I can’t do anymore, so I’m asking you to help Vernon Parker be the next congressman for Arizona.

At midnight today, a new FEC reporting period will begin. Before the next reporting period comes to a close, I ask that you make a special donation of $250, $150, $100 or any amount you can afford through his campaign Web site – www.parker2010.com Vernon doesn’t have the former Vice President out raising money from AIG, banks that have received bailout funds, special interest groups, unions, Washington, D.C. in crowd, but Vernon does have you. As the poll results below show, it is not going to matter how much Ben Quayle’s family raises and spends for him. This Congressional Seat is one that cannot be bought conservative values and accomplishments will win at the ballot box.
Barbara L. Espinosa
Scottsdale, AZ, United States
New Media/Blogger, Political Activist, Constitutionalist, Conservative, Sexy Young Senior

Barbara Espinosa Caricature

Being the pro-McCain contributor on a blog that is administered by a paid Hayworth staffer might seem uncomfortable.  It isn’t.  I have known Shane for a few years and we have a mutual respect for the other’s positions, even if we do not agree.  Shane has made no secret of his work for and endorsement of JD.  Unfortunately, I do not have the same luxury of being able to be so forthcoming; something about a little oath I took that limits me from certain behavior.  Hence, the pen-name Molly Pitcher and the persona that allows me to exercise my First Amendment rights without concern to any violation. 

There is a post on this site entitled, “Who’s the Real Lobbyist?  John McCain or JD Hayworth?” submitted by DSW.  The comments are closed.  That is too bad.

I am posting my views and the McCain response.  Because of the limitations I have on public expression, I understand fully how frustrating it can be to have the ability to express your views stifled or limited, even when it is for a personal cause, therefore comments will be open.  When you have the truth on your side, why be afraid ?

• First item, the Time Magazine is a direct quote from an Obama campaign memo NOT Mark Halperin’s words.  Really? Obama?  The guy who brought us socialism?  Internal campaign memos are now your big gun?  From the campaign that is pushing back on McCain comments daily, I would suggest you reconsider the use of an old OBAMA memo as evidence of anything but attempts to disingenuously influence the American public into electing the worst POTUS we have ever had.  God save America!  

I respectfully submit the following questions to Team Hayworth and ask for a reply.

• Congressman Hayworth claims he registered as a lobbyist to help out an unnamed “hometown friend.” Who is this friend, and when and how was Congressman Hayworth approached to do this lobbying?
• What is Congressman Hayworth’s current relationship with this “hometown friend?” 
• Exactly what was Congressman Hayworth asked to accomplish for the Wealth Transfer Group?                                                                 
• Which of Congressman Hayworth’s former House colleagues, and/or his colleagues’ offices and Committees did he lobby, and what did he ask them to do on his client’s behalf?
• What if any actions did he take on behalf of Wealth Transfer Group?                                                                                                                                                                      
• What was the result of Congressman Hayworth’s lobbying efforts, and where does the issue stand today?                                                                                                                                                                       
• Did Wealth Transfer Group pay Hayworth for anything other than his lobbying activities? Was Congressman Hayworth given any other asset or monetary reimbursement for doing this work, including any “success fees”?                                                                                                                                                                       
• On his lobbying registration forms, Hayworth identifies himself as president of The Great 48th Group, a company he formed in 2007 — a year before he registered to lobby. Who were The Great 48th Group’s other clients, what did they pay Hayworth to do, what actions did he take on their behalf, and how much did they compensate him for his work?
• Did Congressman Hayworth do any “consulting work” for this or any other clients that did not trigger the lobbying registration that Hayworth filed?                                                                                                                                                                       
• Did Hayworth lobby or consult either for or against any legislation currently pending in Congress? If so, what is his position on that legislation?

 Comments are on and we are waiting.

In addition to being one of the biggest RINOs and ultra-liberals in the State of Arizona, Grant Woods has always been a cancer in the Arizona Republican party. So it should come as no surprise that I have no problem publicly announcing how much I despise the guy.

Here’s a quote from the latest issue of Newsweek in which Grant Woods suggests driving a stake through the heart of JD Hayworth.

“The idea that a man like John McCain has to deal with a Bozo like J.?D. Hayworth is really offensive,” says former state attorney general Grant Woods. “To have just a caricature of the opportunistic, bombastic politician throwing grenades at him at this stage of his career is really a sad commentary. Someone needs to drive a wooden stake through this guy’s heart.”

Incidentally, I did a word search of the Newsweek article and found no reference to Grant Woods joking about the comment – contrary to how the Phoenix New Times reported on their blog – “Woods joked…”

And yes, maybe political newcomers may see this as one paid consultant beating on another paid consultant but the fact of the matter is that this battle between cultural conservatives and RINOs has been going on a long time here in Arizona and it will always be deep, personal and a battle for the soul of the party.

Here’s a quick plug for our new friends over at Gilbert Watch. If you live in Gilbert, you should be reading their blog every day.

Take a look at their latest post about the Ground Zero Anti-Tax Rally scheduled this Saturday at the Gilbert Municipal Center from 10 AM to 3 PM.

There will be plenty of people there expressing their view on tax issues including that of Gilbert and the State of Arizona. Several candidates will also be in attendance including US Senate candidate, JD Hayworth.

Please show your support for this important rally and GilbertWatch.com