Perhaps to the bankers and global policy makers, the merging of the hemispheric economies is just another step forward in their grand design for a globally managed Uberstate.  Who knows.  My last posting provided some evidence that could be the case, after all, the FTAA and the Summit of the Americas do exist and have a well developed framework.

But is there another agenda at work here?  Is something akin to the relationship between Israel and Palestine over territory evolving here?  The tactics we’re seeing in Arizona now, bear an uncanny resemblance to scenes all too familiar from other regions of the globe in terms of tactics,  rhetoric and reaction.  No, there is no full scale violence [yet], but there is a hot cauldron at a rolling boil in the American Southwest.  The elements look familiar.

To those of you who say, “… its a single issue … what about ___”  I ask you to name one major facet of public policy in Arizona, or one major facet of the state’s budget that doesn’t in some way touch on the subject of the border or illegal immigration.  Then, as I briefly wrote about in my last blog, there is the hemispheric aspect of a European Union model for the Americas.  And tonight, there is the issue of a Hispanic Homeland – Aztlan.

These following quotes and links are from a widely read party organ of the Aztlan movement in Southern California.   Spend some time on their site.  You’ll feel the Marxism and anger, and the distortions of what you may think you know.  You will look through the lens they see Borders and Immigration.  Pay attention.

There was an outrage in Arizona at the death of rancher Rob Krentz.  But look at the quote below, then open another tab via the following link.  You decide.

[the ]“death near Douglas, Arizona of a rancher named Rob Krentz by an unknown assailant or assailants has been blown out of proportion…”

http://www.aztlan.net/arizona_racist_kills_latino_over_immigration_law.htm

Here is something that is part of the Raza curriculum [you maybe be paying for this in a Charter School near you].  Notice again the disturbingly familiar distortions of history that echo in other strife torn corners of the globe.

Today, no informed Mexican, on either side of the present border, recognizes the legitimacy of this “shotgun treaty” and considers the entire US Southwest (Aztlan) to be stolen land.

http://www.aztlan.net/mexican_american_war_has_not_ended.htm

The U.S. Department of Education funneled nearly $8 million in taxpayer grants to the group for a nationwide charter schools initiative.

Its called The National Council of The Race.

Do you have such a lobby?  And don’t think for a minute that major politicians from both parties haven’t paid their respects to this group.  Bush addressed them and Obama is courting them … and Juan McCain is fully on-board with their agenda for Amnesty.  Don’t you doubt it for a minute.

My last posting provided the “International Perspective” on the Southwestern Border of the United States.  This brief collage provides perhaps another agenda for La Reconquista de Aztlan.  Watch the video and decide.

But you will ultimately have to decide to look at the evidence [and there's a mountain more], or simply say “… all they want is an opportunity” and vote with your eyes closed.

COMMON SENSE

“In the following sheets, the author hath studiously avoided every thing which is personal among ourselves. Compliments as well as censure to individuals make no part thereof. The wise and the worthy need not the triumph of a pamphlet; and those whose sentiments are injudicious or unfriendly, will cease of themselves, unless too much pains is bestowed upon their conversion.”

  July 4th, 2010

Celebrating the Declaration of Independence

Happy Birthday, America

Conceived in liberty, born in conflict, the United States of America has stood as a beacon of hope for mankind the world over, ever since that fateful day 234 years ago in Philadelphia, when courageous men signed the Declaration of Independence. They came from all walks of life, but shared one thing in common, a burning desire to be free, and to confer that freedom to all of their descendants, whether by family ties or those bound by the unity of their American citizenship.

The road we have walked as American has rarely been smooth or straight. We have been challenged and tested many times in many ways – by wars, natural disasters, disease, economic chaos, political strife, and yet the underlying documents that bind us have prevailed until now.

 Today, we stand at crossroads as we face a new kind of enemy, more insidious, and in numerous ways, more insidious than any we have ever known. The enemy is among us, having insinuated its way into the highest offices of the land, threatening our liberty and the very foundations that have made us the nation we have become.

There have been times past when our patriotism has waxed and waned, when the pedestrian burdens that life imposes have distracted us, when we have become complacent in the assumption that all we enjoy is the normal human condition, but it is not. Our liberty was hard won, and must be fought for to maintain.

We are reminded, today, of an immigrant to these shores – Mr. Thomas Paine, a man of modest means who became an anonymous pamphleteer, in a role we well know. Mr. Paine cloaked himself in anonymity to avoid the hangman’s noose. Not all of brave signers of the Declaration of Independence were equally fortunate to survive the Revolution without having to wear the necktie of death. We at   C O M M O N  S E N S E are similarly anonymous, but for reasons that we wish only our ideas to be challenged, and this is best accomplished without the publication of persona.

Throughout the year, we normally ask you to examine just facts and events using your intellect. Today, on our Nation’s birthday, we would like to pull at the heartstrings of your emotions.

Feel free to read the Declaration of Independence http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/  and then take a moment to see and hear the debut of one of our nation’s most stirring anthems. Written in 1917 by Irving Berlin, it was first performed by Kate Smith on Armistice Day, November 11, 1941, just a bare two weeks before the infamous attack on Pearl Harbor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnQDW-NMaRs As you hear the words, join us in wishing America a grand happy birthday, with many happy returns.

God Bless America.

 ______________________________________________________________________

Who the author of this Production is, is wholly unnecessary to the Public, as the Object for Attention is the Doctrine itself, not the Man. Yet it may not be unnecessary to say, That he is unconnected with any Party, and under no sort of Influence public or private, but the influence of reason and principle.

Philadelphia, February 14, 1776.”

Scottsdale, Ariz. – Arizona businessman and political activist Robert Graham released another video this week, all about unifying behind the right candidates at the right time.  Graham has been working hard over the last several months raising money and awareness for conservative candidates all across the country.  In doing so, he has been spreading his message for victory to fellow conservatives in 2010: Rise up, Unify, and Fight.

In the video, available online at www.GrahamForArizona.com, Graham exhorts fellow Conservatives to work with him in finding candidates who can not only win in November, but who will represent the ideals and principles which the United States was founded upon.  He calls on friends and neighbors to make phone calls, knock doors, and even make monetary contributions to campaigns able to take back some power from the Obama administration.

“For too long, the Federal Government has been out of touch with the citizens it is supposed to represent,” said Graham.  “I will be working non-stop until election day to make sure we have a government that is of the people, by the people and, more importantly, for the people.  In order to be effective, though, we as Americans need to rise up, unify, and fight for the ideals we believe in.”

Today, the Presidente of Mexico, Felipe Calderon spoke to a joint session of Congress. During his speech, he insulted the State of Arizona.

To add insult to injury, Congressional Democrats stood up and applauded when President Calderon made the comment.

It was akin to having a neighbor come into your home and insult one of your children in front of the entire family.

¡President Calderon, Lea la ley!

Many presidents have been remembered in history as promoters of doctrines, defined formulations to project their vision of governance, nationally and internationally. We are now living under the new parameters of the “Obama Doctrine.” President of the United States, Barack Obama, graduate of Harvard Law School, once editor of the Harvard Law Review and occasional Law instructor violated every single lawyerly and law court professional code of conduct, and the fundamental pillars of Rule of Law in his first public articulation of the lens through which he evidently views the world: “I don’t know the facts, but the police acted stupidly.”

This concise sentence of the ideology of arbitrary and dangerously malleable “impressions” and “feelings” over facts, actual investigation and the truth, combined with a corrosive foundational distrust of police as an institution and as individual professionals, presuming guilt until proven innocent, has been applied in full force from President Obama on down through myriad United States Departments of the Obama Administration to Arizona for Arizona’s SB 1070.

Cambridge, Massachusetts was the first city to discover Obama’s penchant for pre-judging police comportment with Obama quickly raising what normally would have been a sooner forgotten the better local kerfuffle to a national issue by publically coming down on one side, solely based on race, because Obama admitted he didn’t “know the facts.” He saw “black” and “white cop,” and jumped all over it by his use of  White House bully pulpit – the press conference.

Arizona is the first state to discover the Obama Doctrine as applied to illegal immigration issues:

President Barack Obama: “In Arizona if you don’t have your ID… it’s ‘Adios amigos!”

The Secretary of Homeland Security and former Arizona Governor:

John McCain: “Have you had a chance to review the law?
Janet Napolitano: “I have not reviewed it in detail. I certainly know of it.”
John McCain: So you are not prepared to make a judgment on it.”
Janet Napolitano: “Ahhh … I BELIEVE it’s a bad law …I BELIEVE it mandates and requires…”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/05/17/napolitano_admits_she_hasnt_read_arizona_law_but_says_she_wouldnt_sign_it.html

United States Attorney General Eric Holder: The nation’s highest law enforcement officer:

Congressman Poe: “Have you read the Arizona law?”
Eric Holder: “Ah … I have not had a chance to … I’ve glanced at it. I have not read it. Um.”
Congressman Poe: “Even though you have not read the law, do you have an opinion whether it’s Constitutional?”
Eric Holder: “Ah …I’ve not really … I’ve not been briefed yet.”
Congressman Poe: “Are you going to read the law?
Eric Holder: “I’m sure I will read the law … in anticipation of that briefing. They will put that in front of me and I will spend a good evening reading that law.”

http://cspan.org/Watch/Media/2010/05/13/HP/R/32846/Holder+we+are+on+the+right+path+against+terrorism.aspx  at 2:45:05

United States Department of State:
Assistance Secretary of State Michael Posner, formerly of the Open Borders- promoting “Human Rights First” organization apologizes to the Chinese for something they hadn’t even mentioned, the Arizona SB l070: “We brought it up early and often.”

State Department Spokesman P.J. Crowley in defense of Posner’s surrender style of negotiating with our enemies:  “Have I read the law?  No.”

The Obama Doctrine: Facts are to be ignored. Only the political and ideological goals of the Progressive Left Agenda matter. Police are not trusted, because they harbor bigotry.

Is it any surprise that with the willingness of the President on down through his administration to criticize a state law that they “don’t know the facts” about, that agitators feel they have a green light to harass Arizona?

First San Francisco, now Los Angeles Democratic Party politicians have held publically announced they intend harm to the state of Arizona by punishing Arizona economically first with bans on city employee on city business to Arizona and second trying to widen that to the general public to boycott Arizona. Political pressure has been put on sports franchises to boycott, to change venues, to hurt Arizona and Arizona businesses as much as possible through loss of income.

If successful, a boycott will only serve to force Arizona businesses, already squeezed by the economic slide, like restaurants, shops and hotels to lay off more employees, and by the law of unintended consequences, more illegals will be the first out of work, literally forced more by the economic impact of boycotts than SB1070 to move out of state. That’s the short term effect, the long term effect is more insidious and dangerous to the nation’s integrity.

President Barack Obama, by engaging in this rhetoric, while comforting the President of Mexico that he sympathizes with Mexico’s political position over American citizens is engaging in incredibly divisive leadership. Leadership as a quality is neutral; the results depend on where the people are led, set by the character of the leader – led to greater achievement or led down to the pit.

It is worse than ridiculous that Democrat Party city mayors in California, and now in Ohio, are actively promoting economic damage against another state. If not stopped in its tracks, it’s setting the stage for more comprehensive strife and national disunity. At the same time, this has been a more sustained public poisoning of distrust against police. Arizona police and sheriff departments haven’t done anything, yet their thoughts, their motives, their impartiality has all been publically denigrated – judged by a less than impartial pubic and highly partisan jury, guided by the POTUS himself. Every law enforcement officer in the state of Arizona knows he or she is going to be dragged out as Exhibit A if they make one misstep, say one wrong word, one arrest the day SB 1070 goes into effect that will bring down the legal carpetbaggers like a flock of vultures on their heads.

Police departments have for years been running “sensitivity” classes, revamping their hiring, their training, all to address complaints and concerns about how they conduct their public duties. But when was the last time any of those who’ve complained actually praised the concrete improvements? Americans may not see anything special about the typical American policing, so it’s easy to focus constantly on faults, but if they were to compare the average American police officer against his or her Mexican counterpart, they will be surprised. Compare against the average British officer, the average Russian officer, the average Indonesian police, the average Kenyan police … the list goes on and on. American police are head and shoulders above their international counterparts, but when was the last time anyone gave them credit for their high commitment to professionalism?

The President of the United States has a Constitutional duty to “preserve domestic tranquility.”

Obama is not silent on the deterioration of national dignity; he is encouraging agitation between states and mobilizing Federal offices in a joint punitive approach against Arizona and all its legal citizens, a population of all “colors,” languages, cultures and creeds, more diverse in “American Roots” than most other states. His Constitutional duty is to see FIRST to the needs of the lawful citizens, NOT to pander to a foreign government, which holds national interests different than our own. His duty is not to encourage or ignore destructive squabbling between states, but to provide leadership to prevent that or discourage such negative behaviors.

 Obama did not come out and rebuke California politicians for their provocative rhetoric and abusive administrative actions; he’s encouraged them by criticizing Arizona – for something that hasn’t even as yet been implemented. He is corrosively continuing his public denigration of our police as an institution to whom the important task of providing local domestic security falls, while stoking agitation that will put the police literally in harm’s way. President Obama’s doctrine should be focusing like a laser beam on doing his constitutionally mandated job to “preserve domestic tranquility” as he fulfills his duty to “provide for the common defense” by credibly securing our national borders.

We have a message for Rick Romley. This h’yar is Arizona, a true Western state. We don’t cotton to no dandies in these parts, but wow, what a dandy he is!  Rick Romley, reaping the benefit of years of betrayal to the Republican Party stood before the LD 8 crowd last week, extolling his virtues as County Attorney. Polite applause turned to groans and muted boos as they learned he had asked Governor Brewer not to sign SB 1070, Arizona’s new law that requires enforcement of Federal legislation on the books since 1946. Romley does not support law enforcement, but wants to be elected County Attorney!

We have to admit that Romley looked magnificent. Central casting could not have done better selecting an actor to play the archetypical politician. Hi s exquisitely coifed white hair frames well chiseled features. When he smiles, which is frequent, his teeth transmit beams of light. From head to toe, Romley seems to be a man who cares well for himself. His dark, well fitted and apparently very expensive suit blended perfectly with a blindingly white shirt and very stylish tie. Even his shirt cuffs looked custom made. The shine on his shoes nearly cast reflections on the ceiling; they were that radiant, but it was his collector quality cane that mesmerized us. Museums with collections from 18^th century royalty might be forgiven for such opulent displays of luxury, but we wonder about a man who purports to protect the public from those who would deliver us harm.

We do not question his sartorial taste. What we do want to know is what is in the mind of a man who spends so much time and care on himself, and whether there can possibly be a moment or two he could spare to think of us, his constituents. Given his stand on 1070, we have serious doubts.

Move along boy, afore ya git hurt.

The killing of Arizona Rancher Robert Krentz and the wounding of Pinal County Deputy Sheriff Lou Puroll, at the hands if illegal immigrants, has put a laser like focus on the reaction of Hispanic citizens who profess their rights are being violated by Arizona’s new law (the law does not take effect until July).

 There is no doubt that there are those race exploiters who are taking advantage of the situation and inflaming passions. People like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Raul Grijalda, and President Obama come to mind. But, this is in keeping with the history, traditions, and practices of the progressive-socialist Democratic Party since its inception: the Democratic Party can never escape its racist heritage.

 Hispanic writers like Ernest Portillo Jr, in the Arizona Daily Star (5/2/2010), quoted legal immigrants saying that the intensity of anti-immigrant sentiment is growing. The intensity of anti-illegal immigrant is growing but just about everyone I’ve talked to is very positively pro-immigration as long as you follow the rules. As Dennis Miller once said, “We don’t mind you visiting us, just sign the guest book.”

 The biggest issue with those who disagree with the new law is that Hispanics will have to have identification to show law enforcement. If anyone is stopped by a law enforcement official for a violation of motor vehicle law, he or she has to provide a driver’s license. Federal law requires any foreigner to carry identification. Why are illegal Hispanic immigrants not protesting federal law? Ignorance and misinformation are the tools of the progressive-socialist radicals managing the protest.

If I write a check for groceries, the vendor always asks to see identification. I leased a sump pump from Home Depot the other day and was asked for my driver’s license and a credit card. What’s the big deal about showing identification?

 The big deal is that illegal immigrants cannot show they are in the country legally. The big deal is Hispanics traditionally vote with Democrats even though, like Blacks, the Democratic Party, treats Hispanics badly. The Democratic Party would like nothing better than to have illegal immigrants voting Democratic. This was proven by the use of ACORN activists by the Democratic Party during the presidential election in numerous instances of fraud.

 The Wall Street Journal article, “Killing Stokes Immigration Debate,”(5/2/2010) described a young 20 year community college student living in Mesa who was protesting the law because his family had been living illegally in Arizona for ten years. The student claimed his family will have to leave Arizona. Probably so, as he self-identified and admitted his family was here illegally. The student talked about moving to California or New Mexico. What he did not talk about was correcting the problem.

Hispanic immigrants who came to the United States legally have nothing to worry about. Only those Hispanic immigrants who came here illegally should be worried. Since there are anywhere from 12 to 20 million illegal immigrants in the United States, I’m not surprised that they are reacting.

 The repeated failure of the federal government to secure our borders makes the federal government complicit and responsible for the death of Robert Krentz and the wounding of Deputy Sheriff Lou Puroll.

 The Arizona law mirrors federal law. Why didn’t Hispanic activists react to the federal law? Primarily because the federal government did not enforce it. Arizona intends to enforce the law: thus, the reaction primarily by radical progressive-socialists and illegal immigrants.

 President Obama has called the Arizona law misguided. Does he also call the federal law misguided? Is this why his administration refuses to enforce it? Then, again, Mr. Obama has an aunt living in this country illegally.

 American citizens of Hispanic descent have started voicing their disapproval of the race exploitative reaction to the law by illegal immigrants and progressive-socialist radicals. They or their ancestors came to the United States legally and they think illegal immigrants should follow the same rules. My mother immigrated to the United States over sixty years ago. My wife immigrated to the United States over forty years ago. They followed the rules. So must Hispanic immigrants in this country illegally.

 There are two Hispanic communities in this country: the legal community and the illegal community. The legal Hispanic community must not allow itself to be emotionally swept up by race exploiters.

 As Americans, we must stand for border security and promote legal immigration. As Americans, we cannot tolerate murders or shootings of innocent people by illegal immigrants. As Americans, we must eliminate the illegal immigrant issue, thoughtfully and legally. The Arizona law is a sensible first step in the process.

This is an excellent article, hence my reprinting in this venue.  But first let me explain the title of this post.

The title quote for this reprint by Ro Chambeau as posted in the Gila Courier on May 2 comes from the moderate republican state representative from Yuma, Bill Konopnicki as quoted in the New York Times.  Here’s the complete quote:

“One of those moderates, State Representative Bill Konopnicki, Republican of Yuma, said planned amendments to address legal and other concerns never materialized. In the end, he said, “everybody was afraid to vote no on immigration. “We are going to look like Alabama in the ’60s,” said Mr. Konopnicki, who is facing a tough election ”

And after reading the following along with the actual text of the new law, you decide if the May Day protests in cities everywhere by amnesty and open border activists are warranted or not.

By the way, this is the first, as far as we can tell, law to protect Arizona from the financial and social ravages of illegal immigration the Yuma lawmaker has voted for since taking office in 2002.  He was an active vocal and financial opponent of the Protect Arizona Initiative which required voter ID.  He has repeatedly attempted to water-down Arizona’s employer sanction laws.  We suppose he’s trying to spiff up his image in keeping with his claim of being a “Constitutional Conservative” who “… will continue to protect Arizona’s border.”  (yeah, he’s saying that)

So here’s Mr. Chambeau’s excellent piece from the Gila Courier. . . .

“If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you’re mis-informed.”  — Mark Twain

David Muir

ABC News Saturday anchor David Muir said the following while introducing a story on yesterday’s nationwide protests of Arizona’s SB 1070:

[the "angry" protests are underway] “…all because of that tough new Arizona law that allows police to stop anyone suspected of being in this country illegally…”

That is a misstatement.  The law has no such provision.  Sorry ABC.

This is what the law says:

B.  For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person.  The person’s immigration status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to 8 United States code section 1373(c).

“lawful contact” has subsequently been changed to read “lawful stop, detention, or arrest” ie enforcement of city, county, or state laws.

The new law also states

This section shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration, protecting the civil rights of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of United States citizens.

I don’t see anything there about harassing people who take their kids out for ice cream as President Obama warned of.  But if you do and I missed it, feel free to comment.

Meanwhile, check out this controversial law that is sure to spawn protests across the nation:

“Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him.”

Is this Arizona’s next crackdown?  New Mexico trying to up the ante?  Texas trying to stop the flow of illegals and drug smugglers?  Nope.  It’s federal law in place since 1952.  How racist is that?  George Will cited the law in his column.

So, maybe Congressman Raul Grijalva should call for a boycott of America.  Perhaps Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik should call federal immigration law “racist” and “stupid”.  Perhaps Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, and their ilk should comically characterize the feds as “Gestapo officers asking ’show me your papers’ “  Perhaps even the President of the United States Barack Obama should call federal immigration law “misguided”.

Finally, I really have to wonder about the Arizona Republic.  Their article about the Pinal County Sheriff’s Deputy who was shot by drug smugglers was headlined “5 attackers are hunted after ambush of deputy”.  Really?  That’s the best you can do?  How about this:  “Pinal deputy shot–drug smugglers suspected”.  In fact, the article did not even mention until the fourth paragraph (it’s not even on the front page, you had to turn to page 6 of the newspaper) that the deputy had been shot.   In that fourth paragraph, buried on page 6 of the newspaper, the reporters first mentioned that a helicopter had come under fire BEFORE they mentioned that a Pinal Sheriff’s Deputy had been shot and wounded.  It wasn’t until the 19th paragraph until the article mentioned that up to 30 rounds were fired at the deputy.

Maybe I watched Planet of the Apes too many times but whenever I see the Buz Mills commercial this image comes to mind:

Compare that to a screenshot of the Buz Mills commercial:

I almost expect the late great Charlton Heston to walk up besides Buz.

For Immediate Release: Monday, March 15, 2010

“Leftist media attacks can’t mask the absurdity of Massachusetts’s action”

Phoenix, AZ—When the Massachusetts Supreme Court handed down a decision defining marriage as “the establishment of intimacy,” millions of Americans read of the news with disbelief. Among them was conservative Arizona U.S. Senate candidate J.D. Hayworth, who accurately defined the ruling as “absurd”.

In response, former Congressman Hayworth offered an interpretation of the Massachusetts ruling. In it, Hayworth said, “I can make the point of absurdity with an absurd point: If you really had affection for your horse, I guess you could marry your horse. But it’s just the wrong way to go, and the only way to protect the institution of marriage is with the federal marriage amendment that I support.”

“But sadly, the liberal media, intent on defending the ultra-leftist, progressive politicians in Massachusetts, are attacking me for standing up once again for family values and for rejecting this absurd court ruling,” said Hayworth. “But they don’t intimidate me at all. I know right from wrong and as a staunch defender of the institution of marriage, I know I can count on millions of supporters across America to stand with me when our values are under attack – and when I am under attack for standing up to defend those values.”

# # #

This dramatically caught my eye especially since my church, Central Christian Church, strongly encourages its members to conduct small group meetings. Say this isn’t so and that the Town of Gilbert will quickly abandon this policy if it is so. Thank GOD, literally, that we have the Alliance Defense Fund based right here in Arizona!

The city of Gilbert, Ariz., has ordered a group of seven adults to stop gathering for Bible studies in a private home because such meetings are forbidden by the city’s zoning codes.

The issue was brought to a head when city officials wrote a letter to a pastor and his wife informing them they had 10 days to quit having the meetings in their private home.

Pastor Joe Sutherland had been told in a letter from code compliance officer Steve Wallace that the people were not allowed to meet in a home for church activities under the city’s Land Development Code.

(Read the full article at World Net Daily)

For Immediate Release: Saturday, March 13, 2010

PHOENIX, Ariz. (March 9, 2010) … Pamela Gorman, candidate for Arizona’s 3rd Congressional District, has received the endorsement of the 500,000-member Concerned Women Political Action Committee based on her proven conservative leadership.

“On the issue of life, the traditional family and fiscal conservatism, Pamela Gorman’s record in the House of Representatives has been exemplary,” said Penny Nance, CEO of Concerned Women PAC. “Concerned Women Political Action Committee endorses Pamela Gorman for Congress because of her strong leadership in the state legislature. I am convinced Pamela will be a strong principled leader in the U.S. Congress.”

As a former state senator, Gorman took the lead in stopping one of the largest tax increases in Arizona history and worked to pass one of the largest tax cuts. She has opposed wasteful spending in both parties and is a committed defender of right-to-life values and the second amendment which earned her an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association.

The Anthem resident and mother of a teenaged son, Gorman is seeking the congressional seat currently held by John Shadegg who is retiring at the end of his term. “Receiving this important endorsement from one of the premier national organizations promoting Conservative candidates is a huge honor. But, to receive it in a crowded primary like mine, says a lot more,” she said. “I am grateful for the endorsement and humbled by their confidence in the work I will do when I get to Washington.”

Concerned Women PAC, established in 2002 by Founder and Chairman Beverly LaHaye, is affiliated with Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee, the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization with more than 500,000 grassroots members nationwide.

For more information on Gorman, visit www.gorman2010.com

A few days ago I posted a piece (CELEBRATION, ANYONE?) that featured the following paragraph:

“Black History Month reminds me of that portion of an application form that asks for the race of the applicant; race is not supposed to matter but everyone knows that it does—especially to Liberal policy-makers and administrators. Despite the Civil War, a civil rights movement, several acts of congress, amendments to the constitution and ongoing preferential treatment Liberals are still convinced that new and institutionalized racism is the cure for past racism. They must believe that new injuries cure old injuries.”

The Census Bureau provides for us another example of the “Liberal policy-makers and administrators” that I wrote about in that paragraph. Question #8 of the 2010 census form asks: “Is Person 1 of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?” If the answer is ‘yes’ there are several boxes for you choose from that identify the specific type of “Hispanic” that you are. Among the selections are “Mexican”, “Mexican Am.”, “Chicano” (Does anyone know which country “Chicanos” come from?), “Puerto Rican” and “Cuban”. By the way, can someone explain to me what the difference is between a “Mexican” and a “Mexican Am.”?

If you answer ‘no’ to question #8 question #9 then, allows you to declare what race you are. A few of the options include “White”, “Black”, “African Am.”, “Negro”, “American Indian”, “Chinese”, “Japanese”, “Filipino”, “Vietnamese” etc. Apparently none of these groups was special enough to merit a whole question just about them—they had to be lumped in with the “White” people. Let the healing begin!

The concept of being judged not be the color your skin but by the content of your character was a fundamental component of the Civil Rights movement that I once supported but, it is not a component of modern Liberal philosophy. Liberals are obsessed with race and skin color. I wouldn’t mind their obsession if they quietly kept it to themselves but, they keep forcing it on the rest of us. They’re not interested in simple equal protection of the law for all people. Instead, they want to engage in social engineering by redistributing wealth and bestowing rewards and preferences on some groups based upon their victim status and voting value to Liberal politicians.

If Liberals were really ‘liberal’ in the true meaning of the word they’d quit asking the rest of us intrusive and insulting questions that keep the nation racially divided. Leave us alone!

Whew! Black History Month ended just in time to give Americans—exhausted from a month of vigorous celebrating—time to recover. Promoters of Brown History Month, Yellow History Month, Red History Month, White History Month and Green History Month will continue to have to wait for a month of their own. There was a time when we celebrated the birthdays of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln in February but Liberals put an end to that (be warned, they’re still working on exterminating Christmas). I wonder what Barack Obama does during Black History Month—since he’s only half black maybe he only celebrates half the month?

Black History Month reminds me of that portion of an application form that asks for the race of the applicant; race is not supposed to matter but everyone knows that it does—especially to Liberal policy-makers and administrators. Despite the Civil War, a civil rights movement, several acts of congress, amendments to the constitution and ongoing preferential treatment Liberals are still convinced that new and institutionalized racism is the cure for past racism. They must believe that new injuries cure old injuries.

While we’re on the subject of needless celebrations maybe it’s time we resurrect one of the ancient celebrations and replace Black History Month with it. The Romans had some exciting ones to pick from and none of them have yet been ruined by Liberals. We could have it in February and best of all, all Americans could participate—not just the preferred few.

The latest leftist assault is the condemnation of Tim and Pam Tebow for their audacity to be part of a pro-life commercial scheduled to air during the Super Bowl.  Sports pundits, political talking-heads, and news reporters are all over this story.   Liberal “women’ s groups” have asked CBS to deny Focus on the Family the right to buy air time to broadcast the ad and sports analysts are denouncing the Tebow  effort as damaging to his career.  One writer likened Tim Tebow to a full-time evangelist moonlighting as a football player.  Did he think that was insulting?

I could go on and on about what sort of false religion and destructive values are being exploited every day in pro-sports…. But I digress.

Apparently that writer has no idea the call on the life of the Tebow family and has no understanding of service to something greater than you.  Tim Tebow could no more turn his back on the opportunity to tell the world the miraculous truth of his healthy birth than a sports writer could turn away the scoop of a lifetime.   It is what he was put here to do.  And he knows it. On Florida game days, the most frequent Google search is for whatever scripture Tebow has on his eye black.

With that said, all the hyperbole about this being a sporting event and not a religious venue is a distortion of the truth.  The faulty premise is in the concept that the sanctity of life should be viewed only as a religious cause; it should be a humanitarian cause.  Protecting the life of the unborn, giving hope to women and families who are facing odds they see as insurmountable, and telling the truth where a lie has been accepted is not religious. If there were a call for aid to the people of The Sudan, or any region were genocide is practiced, would it be religious or humanitarian? It may be the love of Christ that empowers them but since when is love a religious act not to be confused with the real world?

An unborn child is a life, a real person with a real soul.  Life does not spontaneously occur and that which is not alive cannot become alive; it is formed and developed just as the unborn child is within the womb of the mother.  We all grow, change and have different stages of our being.  Such is the reality of life…and it starts at conception.