Once again Oro Valley is conducting a mail-in election. And once again I will tell you why the concept is fundamentally wrong.

It makes voting easier? Check Iraq or Afghanistan or lots of other places trying to build democratic regimes where they still shoot at you for making the attempt. Voting was pretty damn easy here for quite a while.

My liberal Democrat radio co-host Tom Danehy, who shares my opinion on this subject, reminds us of a news clip from a Philippine election in which an official with a ballot box is being chased by a group of thugs. Not shown is the part where they succeeded and killed him. I witnessed a few years back huge lines in Rocky Point when they were holding something unusual in Mexico – a real election. People wanted to be part of it.

We had it pretty soft. Having to actually leave home and go to a safe polling place isn’t exactly a root canal.

Voting by mail does make it easier – for the election bureaucracy. They prefer to use the money involved to hire a few more permanent employees rather than go through the hassle (for them) of using Election Day temps.

The costs involved are clearly increased in some areas (postage) and decreased in others (poll workers), but that should never be a deciding factor. Ahead of even cops, courts and armies, choosing who’s in charge is the first and most primary duty of government.

At-home voting destroys the secret ballot. Why do you think we have those little booths and curtains? So husbands can’t muscle wives or wives husbands. Mailing out ballots is an invitation to cajole by anyone from the family patriarch and union boss to your mama.

It’s also quite obviously a fraud magnet. Why the same Republicans who are convinced thousands of illegal aliens are voting at the polls are ignoring a system that eliminates their having to go there to do it is beyond me. I recognize that most voting systems are legit, but it doesn’t take much dog barf to ruin an otherwise great burger.

While supposedly being in the best interest of individual voters, the at home ballot can screw them in two ways by returning it too early or returning it too late.

Return it too early and you may learn something that would’ve changed your mind about a candidate or an issue. The elimination of late information was sold as a virtue by advocates of early voting because it would eliminate last-minute smears. It also eliminates last-minute facts. Which is why many folks hold onto their ballot until the last minute.

Only return it too late and it doesn’t count. One stat I have never seen election officials produce is how many ballots get tossed every time for late delivery.

But my greatest complaint is that the entire concept (beyond taking care of the ballots of those physically unable to get to a polling place including those who are out of town) is totally demeaning to the election process.

What advocates are really saying is “we recognize this voting thing is really not important to you. You’re right — it’s no big deal. We want to make it so easy it won’t inconvenience you at all.” Turnout is not increased by telling people voting is not worth much effort.

Election days used to be local and national events. They were part of that Norman Rockwell kind of glue that helped hold the country and its culture together. To eliminate them is to eliminate one more part of what made America a great nation.

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.

Sonoran Alliance was featured on this Sunday’s edition of 12 News’ Sunday Square-Off. That’s right, yours truly made my debut appearance on the show in which I had the opportunity to represent conservative Arizona bloggers and activists.

Brahm Resnik hosts this weekly show which is always fast-paced and quick thinking. My two co-guests were Katie Hobbs from the liberal blog, Democratic Diva as well as a Democratic candidate in LD-15, and Casey Newton from the Arizona Republic. The show will actually not show tomorrow morning because it is being pre-empted by another show but you can view it online right here on Sonoran Alliance.

The insurgency against “fundamentally changing America” has begun!

With the victory tonight in Massachusetts, the “Progressive’s” effort to “fundamentally” socialize America has been derailed!

Democrats (and even incumbents) across the country need to be very afraid as conservatives and independent voters who are now leaning right of center, are out for “political blood.”

Here in Arizona, even our own incumbent Republicans should not take it for granted that they are in good favor with the voters. Governor Brewer should expect to face an extremely difficult primary by challenger John Munger and man on a mission, Dean Martin, who has been warning for over a year of the impending Arizona budget doom.

Democrats in supposedly “safe” districts should now take heed as insurgent-backed conservative candidates like Ruth McClung and Janet Contreras wage ground-level campaigns against incumbents, ultra-liberal Raul Grijalva, and deeply submerged, Ed Pastor. The best and most tangible consequence of the Massachusetts miracle would be for both these women to receive the full-fledged support of tea party activists and anyone intolerable of the status quo.

Kirkpatrick, Mitchell and Giffords can also expect the same type of beating from whoever wins the GOP primaries in their districts.

If fiction can become cold hard reality in a place like Massachusetts – the bluest of blue states in the union – it can even happen in Arizona’s purple districts.

Finally, Senator McCain should not take it for granted that “this is his time” despite his best efforts to give the perception he is leading the charge. This is no longer his battle. This is the people’s battle now – those who have tirelessly worked, protested and waited for battleground days as today. The people want fresher angrier people from among their midst to wage this war of ideas. Old warriors step aside. New warriors have arrived and it is their time.

Where has the color blind society gone?

WASHINGTON — The estimated time when whites will no longer make up the majority of Americans has been pushed back eight years — to 2050 — because the recession and stricter immigration policies have slowed the flow of foreigners into the U.S.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jO8jbAnwaP-wLfs93UGI-l_-llMgD9CKM8VG0

It was once said, by the losing side of the last major debate over immigration,  ‘… they who control a nation’s immigration policy control the future of that nation.’

That was said in 1924 just prior to the passage of the Immigration Act of 1924.   Many are unaware that in the nearly two decades leading up to this legislation , the issue of immigration had been building to a crescendo of national passion and debate.  So what’s changed?

Consider carefully the policies, cultural practices, religious orientation, and achievements of the United States prior to the last huge wave of population migration onto our shores.  This flood of humanity, many responding to the words on the Statue of Liberty, lasted for just a bit more than one generation, about 30 years.

During that time our population grew dramatically and peoples mostly from Eastern Europe and the Mediterranean region fled oppression and  sought new political expression within our borders.  Certainly they did not assimilate immediately.  However, its been now about three generations and look at the changes in our policies, cultural practices, religious orientation and society today.  The wave of immigration shown in this chart certainly changed America.

Notice the absence of illegal immigration since President Reagan's limited amnesty program in the 1980's

Now consider the abortion chart below (provided courtesy of the Alan Guttmacher Institute, special research affiliate of Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

This graph is a link to source.

There have been more than 32.5 million abortions in the twenty one years since the U.S. Supreme Court legalized unrestricted abortion on January 22, 1973.

This graph is a link to original

Next consider the chart of illegal immigration into the United States – presently supported by some U.S. Senators from border states and entirely supported by the previous U.S. Administration.

Next consider the chart of illegal immigration into the United States – presently supported by some U.S. Senators from border states and entirely supported by the previous U.S. Administration.

Unlike any culture in history, we are aborting our children.  Have we bought into the Self-Hate so much that we are committing a protracted national and cultural suicide?

America can you handle the CHANGE?  You’ll have to.  Consider once again that we are aborting our native born population and importing their replacements.  The numbers speak for themselves.

Presently the Department of Homeland Security estimates the population of individuals residing within the United States now to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 12 million souls.  This does not include children of undocumented residents.  They are counted as legal citizens under a Supreme Court interpretation of the Constitution.

A glimpse of the past is necessary once again here.  In 1964 the Republicans passed the Civil Rights Act, and under Republican President Richard Nixon the first Affirmative Action programs were instituted in 1971.  There are 2 cases ruled by the SCOTUS that directly shaped the outcome of these actions;   Griggs v. Duke Power Company in 1971 and  the University of California v. Bakke in 1978 in which a minority student was admitted to the university’s medical school with a C+ undergraduate grade average over a non-minority student who held an A- undergraduate GPA.

The entire point of this trip down memory lane is to understand where we are as a people today.  To understand why the Associate Press in conjunction with other mainstream media chose to highlight the story that is linked to in the opening paragraph of this blog.  Why does it matter when the whites become a minority?  If we are moving towards a color blind society, it should not.  Yet there it was in big headlines on Yahoo.

Please understand, Veritas is not really concerned about daily life in the North American Union much after 2040.   For me the point is moot.   My hope is to bequeath to posterity an  independent, sovereign and color blind United States in which the innocent unborn native population will realize the American Dream.   Unchecked immigration is no substitute for a healthy birthrate.

Really think about it.  Has immigration become a substitute for a natural birth rate?  And consider the impacts of a generation of immigration, remembering the first huge wave of immigration from Eastern Europe and the changes it has wrought in all sectors of our society and has influenced our view of government and society.

So what might the United States look like in 3 generations following the mid-1980s, or a decade before there is no more ethnic majority?  And what cultural, political and religious changes will their posterity on our shores bring?    Here are the sources for the look of the future.

by Mark Flatten
Goldwater Institute
 
The operators of Tucson International Airport have scrapped the use of racial preferences in awarding concession contracts. That is in sharp contrast to efforts by the City of Phoenix to preserve race-based programs at Sky Harbor International Airport.
 
The Goldwater Institute reported in October that the Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) program at Sky Harbor has allowed lucrative airport concession leases to go to a small group of political insiders. The owners of companies deemed “disadvantaged” are often little more than a name on the lease, brought in to meet requirements for participation by minority and woman-owned businesses that are set by Sky Harbor officials.

Among the biggest beneficiaries of the program at Sky Harbor is Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, owner of a DBE-certified business which is part owner of a Chili’s restaurant franchise in Terminal 4.

Airport operators in both Phoenix and Tucson suspended their use of “race-conscious” methods after a 2005 federal court ruling required detailed disparity studies to justify using race as a factor in awarding concession contracts. If airport operators cannot meet their goals through race-neutral means, they can resort to “race-conscious” preferences based on race and gender, if they can prove those methods are necessary to offset the effects of discrimination.

Even though Tucson did not attempt to preserve the preference program it had been using before the court ruling, it still has a goal that 16 percent of airport concession sales will be attributed to firms owned by minorities and women. But airport operators will achieve that goal without resorting to preferences that take race or gender into account, according to Paula Winn, spokeswoman for the airport authority.

Phoenix, on the other hand, has gone to great expense to justify the preference program at Sky Harbor. Phoenix officials commissioned a disparity study in 2007 that to-date has cost taxpayers more than $600,000. The study results are due in December. While the study has been underway, Phoenix extended leases issued while race and gender preferences were in effect.

Regardless of the study results, on the 2010 election ballot Arizona voters will have their say in whether or not government offices can use race and gender preferences in contracting.
 
Mark Flatten is an investigative reporter for the Goldwater Institute.

by Matthew Ladner, Ph.D.
Goldwater Institute
 
I received the following question after last week’s article explained that (once again) Arizona scored below the national average on the Nation’s Report Card, this time in Math: 
 
Do these test scores take into consideration the massive influx of students who do not speak English and who do poorly on tests?
 
Before I break the data down by ethnicity and other student groups, I want to note that the JLBC reveals that total inflation adjusted spending per pupil increased by more than 20 percent between fiscal year 2000 and 2009 alone.
 
Ok, buckle up for a ride through the scores, it is going to get rough.

• In 1992, white Arizona students scored 2 points below the national average of white students; in 2009 they scored 5 points below the national average. Five points represents about half a grade’s worth of learning. Essentially, white students in Arizona are about half a grade behind white students nationally.
• Arizona’s African American students scored 6 points ahead of the national average for African Americans in 1992. In 2009, they tied the African American national average.
• In 2003, Arizona’s Asian students scored 2 points below the national average for Asian students. In 2009 they scored 10 points below their national peers, or a full grade level behind. Over the course of this decade, Arizona’s American Indians doubled their learning gap from 5 to 10 points, and are now also a full grade behind other American Indians.
• In 2000, Arizona’s ELL population scored 4 points below the national average, but in 2009 they scored 17 points below the national average. Immigration obviously played a role. But, if you examine the trend for non-ELL students you find that they scored 4 points behind the national average in 2000, but 7 points behind in 2009.

Some of the gaps grew larger while scores actually improved, but the overall trend is unmistakable: Arizona isn’t keeping pace for any student ethnic subgroup. Are demographics a challenge? Yes. But they are no excuse.
 
Dr. Matthew Ladner is vice president for research at the Goldwater Institute.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/134080

Take these two items together and consider how the individual in the White House views Israel.  This is being posted so folks who wish to can consider how events like these may impact them.  The White House is stalling on Afghanistan and the dollar is still in ICU.  And, why on 9/11 there was no mention in the U.S. media of the words “Muslim”, “radical”, or “Islamic.”

by Matthew Ladner, Ph.D.
Goldwater Institute
 
This summer, Goldwater Institute Senior Fellow Dan Lips and I published an article in the journal Education Next explaining why a student’s race, ethnicity or family income are not accurate predictors of their future academic success. We were very pleased when the Chancellor of New York City Schools, Joel Klein wrote a letter in response to the article.
 
Here is an excerpt from Klein’s letter:

In “Demography as Destiny?” (features, Summer 2009), Matthew Ladner and Dan Lips argue that Florida’s reforms–school accountability, literacy enhancement, student accountability, teacher quality, and school choice–have helped students there achieve record academic success. Florida’s results support school-focused reform strategies, such as those we’ve implemented in New York City. New York City’s progress in narrowing the achievement gap confirms that policymakers and advocates can no longer use demographic factors like race, ethnicity, income, or zip code to excuse differences in educational achievement between high- and low-needs students…We still have a long way to go, but it’s clear that even the most disadvantaged students can achieve at high levels when provided with a strong education.

Joel I. Klein
New York City Schools Chancellor

Klein led the Clinton administration’s anti-trust action against Microsoft and currently heads the nation’s largest school district. Teacher’s unions and other anti-reform groups face a growing and philosophically diverse array of critics who will not accept the sorry state of American schools. Liberals, conservatives and libertarians can all agree: Getting better results for the amount of money this country spends on education is critical for America’s future. Increasing parental choice is a key ingredient to an overall K-12 improvement strategy, and has growing support among the entire political spectrum.
 
Dr. Matthew Ladner is vice president for research at the Goldwater Institute.