I want to open this article with a simple, yet profound, statement from President Reagan “You can’t be for big Government, big taxes, and big bureaucracy and still be for the little guy.”
When I talk to Blue Collar workers I have found many of them do not spent much time following politics. They rarely know how government works from the federal level down to local government, yet they have a common thread as they often tell me, “Republicans ONLY care about the Rich.” It always breaks my heart to hear this because I know that it is the furthest thing from the truth; yet, a lot of the Blue Collar workers I meet truly believe this from the bottom of their hearts.
I could go back and explain how we got to this point, and I used to try. However, I find that I usually lose them as I dig into American political history. Lets face it, unless you’re really plugged into politics, a 10 minute dissertation is way too painful to the average “non-political” Joe.
This is where our challenge lies. How do we educate, but not lecture? How do we be informative, but not come across as combative, arrogant and preachy? How I have started talking about Republican economics is simply to tell of my Blue Collar struggles and their paycheck.
Long ago in Ohio I worked with my cousins and friends in the construction field and I found that it was a trade that would suit me. Soon after, I started to work for a masonry company and went to masonry school to be a brick, block and stone mason. A few years later I started working for a General Contracting company, and started to make the best money of my young life. One afternoon the boss asked me to work a Saturday to help keep a project on track and enticed me by saying, “I will pay you time and a half!” I jumped on the opportunity.
A week or so later I went to grab get my check so I could take my young wife out to dinner to make up for the prior Saturday. When I opened my check, it was smaller then my normal checks. I thought there must be some mistake and went to speak with the HR department. Betty-Joe from HR sat me down and listened to my bewilderment for a few minutes before finally cutting me off. She calmly explained it to me, “Aaron, I know this is hard to understand, but you made too much money this week. It pushed you into a higher tax bracket, and so you have to pay a higher percentage in taxes then you normally do, making your check smaller.”
I had taken economics in school and thought I understood government taxes, but that day solidified my realization that I deserved the money I worked for, not the government. I have always believed that taxes were the ultimate win-fall for the government, but now I knew how unfair the system was. I had worked hard, negotiated my wages, put in extra time, yet now that I had worked one day more the government needed more of my money. I remember thinking, that was MY money, MY time and I earned it; not the Government.
From then on whenever my foreman asked me to work on Saturday, I always said that I had prior plans, and couldn’t. This in turn, made the projects we were building take longer, stalling the projects opening and thus slowing the growth of the economy in our small town.
There was no financial gain for me to work harder, so why would I; especially since the additional work actually accounted for a loss to my paycheck. If I would have gotten the paycheck with the extra money instead of extra taxes; my wife and I would have supported a local restaurant, tipped the waiter/waitress a little bit more, and probably spent a little more money at the store. All of that was taken out of the local economy, because I refused to work harder to earn less.
As I moved through my life and I became a business owner. I found this reasoning also applied to business. With a normal business plan, a business strives to reaches different levels of success in order to reinvest into its self. Whither it is more efficient tools, a larger facility, or more employees; a business is reaching for higher benchmarks. During this struggle to grow, they always have to account for the constant draining of funds being pulled away from the business via the government and taxes. This constant draining is a roadblock that every determined job creator has to jump over to be successful.
Democrats try to put blinders on low-income employee to say, “the other guys can afford to pay a little higher taxes.” However, many times the ‘other guy’ in this statement is their employer or a corporation that with the ability to keep a bit more of THEIR profit could hire more employees. Just like when I couldn’t spend MY money on MY family with MY earnings, a company getting a higher tax bills can not spend or invest their money in their company, through pay raises (to the Blue Collar Workers), new equipment, or new employees.
These financial hurdles and roadblocks hurt Blue Collared Workers yet, the Democrats consistently want to raise taxes on income and businesses that directly impact Blue Collar Workers. The Democrat Party says it’s a huge supporter of the “little guy” and the “Blue Collar Worker” but then their economic plan completely rejects this point. Anyone who wants people and businesses to pay more, because of their hard they work cannot say they want everyone to succeed. This makes the Democrat platform either completely disingenuous or completely inept to basic capitalistic principles.
When I tell this story to Blue Collar workers, I watch as they put it into perspective and see the basic logic and reasoning. Many Democrat candidates demonize corporations, big business and “the Rich.” In all actuality they are really demonizing every worker who wants to work hard to succeed for their family. Every worker should be able to work hard to support their family and every corporation needs to work hard to reinvest into itself. This is how Republicans view the economic development with tax cuts in order to spur economic growth.
President Ronald Reagan implemented this strategy when he cut taxes across the board and created a boom in the economy in the 1980’s. He so eloquently said, “A rising tide floats all boats.” When I try to start with this quote, I am always accused of defending the “rich guy.” But when I start the story from the beginning, I find that this quote is a great closer because by then nearly all my Blue Collar friends have realized that Republicans are actually the party for the hard working Blue Collar workers, not the Democrats.
About the Author: Aaron Borders is a Financial Specialist and business owner in Arizona. Aaron was a Journeyman Mason and partner in a General Contracting and Construction business prior to the 2008 market crash. He got the proper education in order to help families and businesses with their Risk Management and Financial needs. He lives in Litchfield Park with his wife Shelly and three little boys, with a baby girl due in Sept. Aaron Borders is also a candidate for the Arizona House of Representatives in Legislative District 29. For more information on Aaron, please visit his website at www.AaronBorders4AZ.com.
By Aaron Borders
I want to start this article with this thought in mind. Republicans don’t need to change their platform to bring in Latinos/ Hispanics to the GOP, they need to get their message to the Latino/ Hispanics people. I base that comment on my MANY conversations with Hispanic and Latino Arizonans. It seems that when I approach a Hispanic or Latino Voter I ask them what they think about the Republican Party. I usually get one of these two answers or both. “Republicans are racist and they hate Latinos/Hispanics”, or I get this,” you’re the first person that’s asked, I don’t even know what the Republicans believe”.
I grew up in a generation that didn’t see race as an issue at all. When I was a boy, Michael Jordan was the biggest basketball star, Tiger Woods was the biggest talent in golf, and Emmitt Smith was the best running back in the NFL. As I got older and I learned more about politics, I learned that Democrats opposed EVERY piece of civil rights legislation that our Congress has passed. Now I know you are reading this and thinking, ‘what do Latinos/ Hispanics have to do with the African- American Civil rights movement?’ Very simple, the same way the Democrats have sucked in the same people they fought to enslave (remember Lincoln was a Republican) and through big Government programs, they have destroyed their culture and family values. This is their plan for the Latino/ Hispanics population as well.
In the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s the African-American people were fighting for their civil rights and liberties. By in large, they were religious folks following Dr. Martin Luther King (Republican) and his quest for equality for his people. The African-American community had tight family bonds and values. ALL they wanted was to get equal pay and equal opportunity. So, with MUCH rejection from the “Dixiecrats” which were a proud group of Democrat segregationist and their supporters that had assumed control of the state Democratic parties in part or in full. They also opposed racial integration and wanted to retain Jim Crow laws and white supremacy. With great pressure from the Civil Rights Movement and the Republicans in Congress, a lot of civil rights legislation was passed into law. President Lyndon B. Johnson only went along because he saw the “voter loyalty” that came with it.
The Democrat Party continues to get the African-American vote solely out of loyalty to a Democratic President who signed Republican Civil Rights bills, they consistently vote against their own interest with blind loyalty. THIS is how African-Americans relate to Latinos/ Hispanics. With the Latinos/ Hispanics, however, it is just getting started. Here are a few examples.
Proposition 8 in California was a great illustration of what I am referring to. The LA Times recorded this, “California’s black and Latino voters, who turned out in droves for Barack Obama, also provided key support in favor of the state’s same-sex marriage ban. Seven in 10 black voters backed a successful ballot measure to overturn the California Supreme Court’s May decision allowing same-sex marriage, according to exit polls for The Associated Press. More than half of Latino voters supported Proposition 8.” It’s Amazing that something that is a core belief issue to African-Americans and Latinos who felt so strongly about same-sex marriage they, “turned out in droves” on an non presidential election year to oppose it, but; blindly voted for a party that openly supports it.
Here is another example, According to a Reuters report, “U.S. Hispanics — traditionally an anti-abortion group influenced by their predominant Roman Catholic faith. A 2007 joint survey by the respected Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and the Pew Hispanic Center shows that 65 % of first-generation U.S. Hispanics believe abortion should be illegal.” However, according to the New York Times, Nationwide Hispanics voted 67% in favor of Obama. Such a solid disconnect. An anti-abortion position is an unwavering position because there is a belief that legalized murder is taking place. Yet once again, the party that openly supports abortion and late term abortion was the party that got the anti-abortion Hispanic/Latino vote. Not to mention President Obama who openly supported infanticide as an Illinois State Senator.
I will give you one more example before I share with you what I feel the Republicans can do to fix this problem.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the number of Hispanic-owned businesses in the United States increased by 43.7% to 2.3 million, more than twice the national rate of 18% between 2002 and 2007. About 45.8% of all Hispanic-owned businesses were owned by people of Mexican origin. Hispanic-owned businesses generated $345.2 billion in sales in 2007, up 55.5% compared with 2002. The number of Hispanic-owned businesses with receipts of $1 million or more increased 51.6%— from 29,168 to 44,206 businesses between 2002 and 2007.These new data come from the Survey of Business Owners: Hispanic-Owned Businesses: 2007. Once again common reasoning would tell you these folks would vote for Pro-Growth Candidates and support Pro-Small Business policies. Unfortunately as I previously stated, President Obama, who is certainly not Pro-Growth (unless you’re talking about Gov. Regulation) or Pro-Small Business, got 67% of the Hispanic vote.
So what does this all boil down to? I refer to the second comment I get from Hispanics and Latinos when I ask them their thoughts about Republican Party.
First the Democrats have told the lie that Republicans are racist. Republicans know that’s not true but we haven’t adequately reached out to the Hispanic Voters and explained our history of, NOT being racist. The truth is that the Republicans want a secure border. Not only to keep U.S. commerce in the U.S. to grow our economy, but for the security of our Nation. We MUST explain that there is proof that Hezbollah and Hamas have infiltrated the Mexican drug cartels and a dirty bomb from them will not discriminate between Republicans or Democrats. Hispanic and Latino Voters MUST see these lies as a ploy to pit them against Republicans; at the risk of their families’ security.
Second, the Republican Party must work harder to explain their platform to Hispanics and Latinos. I don’t want to discount the work that the Arizona Latino Republican local groups have done, but as a party we must do more. As I have illustrated, there is a huge voter base that agrees with the Conservative Republican platform, they just haven’t been told by us what we believe. The Democrats tell them what we believe and most of the time the Democrats are the only one talking to them. So in essence, they only hear lies about how we are racist, then we don’t reach out to them for their vote, and that further solidifies the lie in their mind.
As a current candidate for the LD-29 Arizona State House, I have been blown away when I speak to Hispanic and Latinos Voters. For some of these folks I am the first Republican that has ever talked to them. Furthermore, when I explain our platform to them they almost ALL look at me confounded and say, “I didn’t even know I was a Republican.”
As Republicans, we had better wake up as a party and invest in our message to the Hispanic and Latino Voters because they are us, they just don’t know it.
Aaron Borders is a Republican candidate for the Arizona Legislature in Legislative District 29. You can find out more about Aaron at his website at www.AaronBorders4AZ.com. You can also follow Aaron on Twitter and Facebook.
The public relations campaign to support Medicaid expansion frequently uses testimony by patients with serious medical conditions who have lost their private insurance. It is assumed that once they qualify for Medicaid, they will easily get their chemotherapy, hepatitis c treatment, or defibrillator battery replacement.
“The messages talk only about coverage, not care,” states Jane Orient, M.D., executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). “But the real question is whether Medicaid provides access to care.”
An internet survey of AAPS members shows that about 47% of respondents think that it is more difficult for a Medicaid patient, compared with an uninsured patient, to get an appointment with a primary-care physician. Only 26% thought that the uninsured had more difficulty. For specialist appointments, 44% thought uninsured patients were better off, and 32% thought Medicaid patients were better off. Only 2% thought that Medicaid patients had “no problem” getting an appointment with a specialist.
When asked, “How easy is it for a Medicaid beneficiary to obtain drugs, medical equipment, or diagnostic tests?”, 48% said it could be “extremely difficult,” 27% said “moderately difficult at times,” and only 13% said it was “no problem.”
Of 166 respondents, 96 were physician specialists, 63 primary physicians, and 7 emergency physicians.
Open-ended comments were overwhelmingly negative about Medicaid. Rural patients who are unable to drive or travel may have no access to care at all except through charity. Some areas have no hand surgeons, endocrinologists, dentists, or rheumatologists who will accept Medicaid. Many cardiology tests, even echocardiograms on inpatients, are questioned or denied. Many drugs, even common generics, are unavailable without jumping through bureaucratic hoops. Treatment for chronic pain is especially difficult. It may be very challenging to get non-emergency surgery approved, no matter how necessary.
“Medicaid ends up as a jobs program for administrators and quasi-medical professionals,” writes one physician. “Very little of Medicaid money actually goes to the ‘health care’ part of the equation.” Another said that “poor customer service is the norm” and “excessive paperwork is routine.”
Because it may cost more to file a claim than a physician can hope to collect, physicians may lose on every Medicaid patient, and lose less if they just see the patients for free.
Stating that “denials were much more common than approvals for appropriate treatment options and diagnostic studies,” one physician concluded that “to expand such a horrendous program is insane.”
AAPS, which was founded in 1943, is a national organization representing physicians in all specialties.
A CALL FOR A TRULY CONSERVATIVE APPROACH TO JUSTICE
By Gary Nelson
Government is not reason; it is not eloquence. It is force. And force, like fire, is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” – George Washington
I once heard a story about a couple who bought a large, aggressive dog with the intent of protecting their family from criminals. Tragically, however, the dog attacked one of their young children and nearly killed her, scarring her for life. Ironically, the very thing they hoped would protect them proved to be the source of violence far worse than they were ever likely to suffer at the hands of a criminal. The protector became the perpetrator, and their worst fears became reality.
The United States finds itself in a similar predicament today. Our vicious dog is a justice system which has become the most punitive in the free world. The “tough on crime” paradigm that has dominated our justice system for the past three decades has brought about the criminalization and incarceration of a radically disproportionate number of our citizens. We created it to ensure our safety, yet it now threatens greater societal harm than we ever imagined.
The perceived need to “crack down” on crime has resulted in severe punishments for crimes involving everything from assaults with firearms to personal use of drugs. Mandatory minimum sentences and “three-strikes” laws have drastically restricted judicial discretion, denying judges the ability to custom-fit sentences according to the circumstances of the offense or the needs of the community.
As a result, the United States of America imprisons a larger proportion of its population than any other civilized nation, including Cuba, China, & Iran. The number of Americans incarcerated has increased 400% since 1980, and it is estimated that over 30% of young adults now have criminal records.
The “Land of the Free” was rapidly becoming the “land of the imprisoned.” Recently, however, many have begun to understand that this trend has to change.
The implications for our nation’s future are profound. People with criminal records, including those only charged with misdemeanors, have an extremely difficult time finding work. The vast majority of employers will flatly refuse to hire anyone with a record. It is becoming increasingly clear that our over-dependence on punitive justice is creating a vast army of unemployable citizens destined to be dependent on government, or more crime, for their livelihoods.
As a veteran law enforcement officer and lifelong political conservative, I have come to believe that we conservatives have made a serious mistake in supporting the expansion of governmental power that is the inevitable consequence of “tough on crime” policies. We have embraced an approach to justice that has resulted in exponential increases in spending on corrections, courts, and police, as well as the criminalization and vocational incapacitation of 1 in 33 Americans. We have acquiesced to the erosion of individual liberty and the expansion of government power through over-regulation of nearly every aspect of our lives.
It is time for a return to a truly conservative, and American, model of justice. We must break our addiction to “crack-downs” and “get-tough” legislation, and move towards a restorative model of justice that provides real opportunities for the offender to return to productive citizenship.
It is for this reason I am pleased to be affiliated with Right On Crime, a campaign dedicated to “fighting crime, restoring victims, and protecting the taxpayer.” Endorsed by prominent conservatives like Grover Norquist, Marc Levin, and William Bennett, as well as eminent criminologists John DiIulio and George Kelling, Right On Crime is leading the way in returning our system of justice to a cost-effective, restorative direction. If you are concerned about the future of our nation and want to see “justice” once again be the focus of our legal system, I encourage you to visit RightOnCrime.org and get involved.
Arizonans know Carmona’s loyalty is to President Obama and Harry Reid
PHOENIX – Richard Carmona knows that he can’t be honest about his liberal political leanings since they are so out of step for Arizona. He’s worked hard to avoid taking public positions, trying to hide from voters that he’d be a reliable vote for Obama’s liberal agenda. The latest example is Carmona’s attempt to hide who he would support as his Democratic leader in the Senate – which would be his first vote.
Before new members are sworn in, they elect their party’s leadership. For Democrat Richard Carmona, there’s little doubt for whom he’ll cast his vote — Harry Reid.
Like President Obama, Senator Reid personally recruited Richard Carmona to join him in Washington. Both did so knowing that Democrat Carmona would be a reliable rubber stamp vote for their liberal agenda. In fact, Reid is so confident in Carmona’s vote that he and his Senate Majority PAC hassunk more than $400,000 into his race. Additionally, the Democrat’s Senatorial Campaign Committee has spent over $500,000 to date in Arizona for Richard Carmona.
“Richard Carmona is bought and paid for by Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid, because his Super PAC has sunk over $400,000 into Carmona’s campaign” said Andrew Wilder, communications director for Flake for Senate. “Does anybody believe for a moment that Carmona isn’t expected to repay Harry Reid’s generous investment in his campaign by supporting him as his party leader? Either Dr. Carmona is incredibly naïve or he thinks Arizona voters are dumb.”
It’s understandable why Democrat Richard Carmona is embarrassed to be open about supporting Harry Reid. Because not only did Reid personally write the $1.76 trillion, job-killing healthcare bill, but under his leadership, the Senate has failed to pass a budget – perhaps the single most important task of the legislative body – in over 1,200 days. Carmona is on the hook to reward that record of failure, enabling Reid to continue in his role as Leader. That’s not what Arizona voters want and it’s not what America needs.
Here are some of highlights of the man that Richard Carmona would elect as his leader in the Senate:
Harry Reid Told Senator Joe Lieberman, “I Can’t Stand John McCain.” “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., defended Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman on Wednesday after the former Democratic vice presidential nominee accepted a speaking slot at next month’s Republican convention in Minnesota. ‘He has a close personal relationship with John McCain. I don’t fully understand why he does,’ said Reid, who said Lieberman called Tuesday from the Republic of Georgia to alert him to the move. ‘I told him last night, “You know, Joe, I can’t stand John McCain.” He said, “I know you feel that way,”‘ Reid said.” (Molly Ball, “Reid Shares Senate Ideas,” Las Vegas Review Journal, 8/21/08)
Harry Reid Said That He Couldn’t Understand How A Hispanic Could Be A Republican. “U.S. Sen. Harry Reid on Tuesday slammed Republicans for blocking comprehensive immigration reform and told Hispanics they shouldn’t be treated differently because ‘their skin’s a tone darker’ than that of America’s early European immigrants. ‘I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican, OK,’ Reid said, speaking to Latino supporters whose votes he needs to win re-election in November. ‘Do I need to say more?’” (Laura Myers, “Reid: How can Hispanics be Republican?,” Las Vegas Review Journal, 8/11/10)
Harry Reid Called Opponents Of President Obama’s Health Care Bill “Evil Mongers.” “Nevertheless, the Senate majority leader invoked the e-word himself last week at an energy conference in Las Vegas, where he accused those protesting President Barack Obama’s health-care proposals of being ‘evil mongers.’ So proud was he of this contribution to the American political lexicon that he repeated it to a reporter the next day and noted the phrase was ‘an original.’” (Bill McGurn, “Harry Reid’s ‘Evil’ Moment,” Wall Street Journal, 8/18/09)
Thankfully, Arizonans have a better choice. As a member of the House of Representatives, Jeff Flake has a proven record of holding both parties accountable on issues such as runaway government spending and the corrupt practice of earmarking. In the Senate, Flake would continue to be a check and balance on both parties in order to fight for Arizona.
Stay up to date on Richard Carmona’s campaign to be a rubberstamp for Democrats’ liberal agenda in Washington by visitingwww.RubberstampRich.com.
For more information on Jeff Flake and why he’s running for the U.S. Senate, please visit his website at www.JeffFlake.com.
I have to agree — those plans are working just fine — if what the President wants to do is reduce the number of makers and boost the number of takers. On that score, Obama has made undeniable progress from Day One of his administration.
As evidence –
See the chart below, which shows the Labor Force Participation (LFP) Rate. This statistic answers the following simple question:
What fraction of our total civilian working-age population is actually employed?
In this statistic, people are counted as either working or not-working. It doesn’t matter whether they’re looking for work or not. That makes this statistic harder to “fudge” than the widely reported “unemployment rate”. While there are month-to-month variations, note the steady, linear decline in the trend lines since Obama took office in January, 2009. Well done, Mr. President!
This is The Obama Factor. It’s a phenomenon, a statistical trend, and a chart we should all demand to see every time the state-controlled DMC reports the usual unemployment rate statistic. If the DMC doesn’t oblige, continuing the malpractice of what it still calls “journalism”, you can find the chart at this link.
Do Obama’s re-election prospects get worse as the LFP rate continues to fall? One might think so, but the answer is No. Perversely, his prospects actually get better! There are two reasons:
First, all those newly unemployed people are prime candidates to become new Obama model-citizens. He convinces them they are victims of the vilified “1%”, he offers them extended unemployment benefits with more borrowed money, and, with high confidence, he chalks them up as Obama-voters come election time.
Second, once these folks say they are no longer looking for work, they no longer count as “unemployed”. Consequently, they contribute to a drop in the commonly reported unemployment statistic.
This is terrific news for Obama — a double win — as long as voters remain stone-cold ignorant of The Obama Factor.
As an aside, if you are an Obama believer who is currently unemployed but still looking for work, you could help the president’s “job numbers” if you would just stop looking for work two to three months before the election. If only half of the unemployed-but-still-looking would do that, the official unemployment rate would drop to between 4% and 5% just before the election. Wouldn’t that make a great campaign talking point for your beloved leader?
But I digress.
If Democrats/Progressives manage to re-elect Obama, The Obama Factor trend will continue — possibly accelerating. One day soon there will be so many takers that they can out-vote, out-shout, and out-threaten the makers. As the takers demand more and more, the makers produce less and less as they lose their remaining incentive to generate new jobs, products, services, and income only to see it confiscated. Eventually, many of them go on a virtual “strike” as the industrialists did in Ayn Rand’s newly relevant novel Atlas Shrugged. Soon thereafter, the Democrats/Progressives run out of other people’s money, borrowing power, and resources.
There will then follow some combination of rationing, civil unrest, martial law, tyranny, and virtual slavery to The State. The only alternative will be starvation or imprisonment in The State’s prisons and gulags. It has happened many times in many places. WesternFreePress.com recently interviewed three direct eye witnesses (here, here, and here).
Preposterous you say? Such a disaster could never happen here? Stick around. It’s on its way (before 2027) unless we act to stop it. And Obama recently laid more critical groundwork for this nightmare with his stealthy signature of the National Defense Authorization Act. That law gives him dictatorial powers over American citizens when and if he chooses. These powers violate (at a minimum) the Fifth and Sixth Amendment protections in the Constitution. But Obama has told us not to worry because he won’t use those powers unless he really has to. Small comfort.
This November, we have one last solid chance to reverse The Obama Factor, turn the economy around, and restore Constitutionally protected freedoms. Here’s hoping we score an electoral victory large enough to effect those changes as well as overcome the Left’s continuing attempts to commit vote fraud.
As one of the Republican candidates for President has said, the 2012 election is the most important US election since 1860. Those who again fall for Obama’s rhetoric, voting for him again despite his record, must share responsibility for the all-but-certain national mega-disaster that is headed our way.
It’s time for another round of America’s favorite political quiz game, “Who’s that Politician?”
For 100 points and a trip to Arizona: “This Grand Canyon State resident was one of 31 congressmen to vote to refuse to certify Ohio election results in 2004, and in 2008 was rated the most liberal congressman in the country by the National Journal. He even co-chairs the House Progressive Caucus with Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN).”
The correct answer is Rep. Raul Grijalva (minus 100 point for anyone who answered Gabrielle Giffords. She’s far more moderate in both her politics and persona). In spite of this deeply liberal worldview (and voting record to match), he has handily won re-election in his D+6 District since his first foray into Congress back in 2002. There are various reasons for his electoral success. I would speculate that part of his success is simply due to his visible contrast to the rest of the Arizona political class. In a political climate defined by the politics of immigration restriction, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) is an anomaly. Rather than embrace the “stand with Arizona” motto of the tea party, he opted to organize a “big-business” boycott of the very state he represents in Congress. When SB1070 author and now former State Senator Russell Pearce (R-AZ) was pandering to neonazis and racists, Grijalva was organizing for the pro-reconquista group MEChA. If nothing else, Grijalva has been the voice of the disaffected fringe left of Arizona – such political posturing is bound to attract some political support, even as it alienates other potential allies.
A more likely (admittedly partial) explanation of Grijalva’s political success is his strong support from Veteran’s Groups. His record on veteran’s issues is indeed very commendable; he’s filed and/or supported many bills on behalf of Veterans over the years, including the popular REVAMP Act, a bill designed to repair crumbling Veteran’s facilities. Certainly, focusing constituent services on veteran’s assistance is a praiseworthy trait. Alas, “one-issue” voters do not a Republic make, and Grijalva’s attention to this issue can’t conceal his far left-of-center beliefs on other issues.
Enter Blanca Guerra, Arizona co-leader of Café Con Leche Republicans. She’s pro-immigration reform, but doesn’t embrace Rep. Grijalva’s economic extremism. She’s socially conservative with private sector experience and business acumen. She’s even able to neutralize Grijalva’s pro-veteran bona fides, as Blanca is a veteran of the United States Air Force. Grijalva’s renown and the overall partisan nature of the 7th CD will certainly be difficult to overcome. Nonetheless, Grijalva’s intemperate and ill-fated response to SB1070, when combined with his virulently left-wing ideology, could allow a Republican the opportunity to oust him from his seat. Needless to say, we’re very proud of Blanca here at CCLR, and we’d love nothing more than to see Blanca’s campaign send shockwaves throughout the Arizona political establishment. Here’s your chance, Arizona GOPers: let’s give Blanca the support she needs to win this thing!
Arizona TARS Double Membership in 2012
Dissatisfaction With Economic and Jobs Outlook Under President Barrack Obama a Driving Influence
Phoenix, AZ, March 19, 2012: Arizona Federation of Teen Age Republicans (AZ TARS) has had over a 90% increase in membership over the past year. The Organization has also seen a large increase in the number of student run Clubs chartered this year as well, touting a 100% increase in the last 6 months. Most new members and clubs registered have been due to the increasing unpopularity in Arizona of President Barrack Obama and his policies that affect teens.
“Young adults are among one of the Nation’s most unemployed demographics and are keenly aware of the hardships their families are seeing due to the lagging economy”, Executive Director of AZ TARS, Dusti Martin said. She also noted that, “These students are motivated. They are dissatisfied with the current Administration and its agenda and they are determined to make a difference. We have not seen a membership increase like this in Arizona in over a decade.”
Arizona TARS was started in the 1970′s by State Adviser Lois J. Fitch to educate and involve students in their local, state and national civic processes. The National Teenage Republicans was started 10 years earlier in the 1960′s and is also seeing a dramatic increase across the nation. Notable former AZ TARS include Congressman David Schweikert and former State Treasurer Dean Martin as well as many other locally elected officials.
Population of Arizona? 6,392,017 souls or approximately 11 people per acre when spread out over the entire state.
Number of husband and wife households in Arizona? The 2010 U.S. Census counted nearly 1.15 million husband and wife households in Arizona. Number of same-sex households in Arizona? The 2010 U.S. Census counted nearly 21,000 same-sex couples in Arizona.
So how does that work out? About 1.83% of couples identified in Arizona by the U.S. Census Bureau are same-sex. Think about that. What does that figure suggest for the overall GLBT population of Arizona? Even being generous and posting that figure at 3% still only yields less than a single legislative district (there are 30 of those).
So what prompted this article? The fact that in spite of numbers so statistically small, the Associated Press, FoxNews Phoenix, ABC15, and the Arizona Daily Star actually expended time and space reporting this minor factoid. And, I’ll bet this isn’t over. By the end of the news-day today several more of Arizona’s MSM will have carried the same story. And by the end of the week, they’ll be editorials, commentary (like this one) to fill a book!
Why? How is a small stadium (about the size of Chase Field) of people among so many more millions a “news story”? How about how many children have a father living in the same household or how many female veterans are homeless in our state? Priorities. What’s important. That’s what the media reports. If they are simply keeping score then the numbers aren’t encouraging and perhaps don’t warrant the amount of attention given to GLBT issues in the media.
Are they a viable component of Arizona’s population? Absolutely. Do they receive more than their share of attention and political clout disproportionate to their numbers? Absolutely. In our state today aren’t there more important issues to address such as the growing influence of Chinese investment in U.S. resources?
And of course, maybe we should be paying attention to that whole Debt-Ceiling issue now raging in Washington. After all, $0.40 of each dollar spent by the federal government daily is borrowed. How sustainable is that?
(picture courtesy of the website Global Cocktails)
There are more important issues today than tracking same-sex couples, so why does the media expend the energy on this issue? How much energy and capital is expended on the GLBT community in Arizona and why given what a small segment of the overall population they truly are.
Devastating photos of the once booming American city Detroit, Michigan were brought to my attention yesterday. Watch this video as photographers Yves Marchand and Romain Meffre reveal the Ruins of Detroit.
What would lead to such devastating outcomes? I would argue several factors.
1. Industrial Exodus: Probably the most dramatic and immediate factor for the decline as major companies either went out of business or packed up operations and moved to more favorable business climates. One thing I cannot document without detailed research is whether the companies moved to other states or oversees altogether. I would presume that the majority of these companies moved to southeast Asia where labor is cheaper.
2. Impact of Unions: Most likely the rising influence of unions over the last few decades probably led to an increase in the cost of doing business. This probably forced these companies to relocate to right-to-work states or oversees where labor is cheaper.
3. Increase in Corporate Tax Rates: Another indirect result of raising taxes on Michigan-based companies, the cost of doing business increased on these companies which led to their demise or departure to more tax-friendly business climates.
4. Decline of an Ownership Society: As government and business interests conflicted, more people lost their jobs and ended up dependent on government to survive. With no personal investment in owning property, the result is no pride in ownership.
5. Inherently Doomed Public Education System: a union-controlled public education system with a voracious appetite for a rapidly declining tax base and no desire to be innovative is probably the major reason for a population of individuals who lack even basic math and reading skills. (I’d like to see how the private schools are doing in comparison.)
Now it’s your turn. I’d love to read other’s thoughts and comments about what happened in Detroit and especially how Arizona is different in the factors I’ve mentioned.
Rural Arizona can be proud of several legislative teams now serving in the Arizona Legislature. One particular newly-elected triad arrived this last Monday from Eastern Arizona and was welcomed by constituents from across their district.
Senator Sylvia Allen (re-elected) and newcomers Representatives Brenda Barton and Chester Crandall conducted their own lunchtime gathering on the House lawn immediately following the Governor’s State of the State address. With food (Malachi Meats) specially brought in and served for the occasion, the Legislative District 5 Republican team entertained supporters from across their district.
One of the larger legislative districts in Arizona, LD-5 covers a significant portion of Eastern Arizona including Navajo, Apache, Gila, Greenlee and Graham Counties. Constituents made the trek from as far as Winslow, Concho, Morenci and Safford to have lunch and show their support for the new Republican team. (In the past, LD-5 have has a mix of conservative Democratic and Republican teams representing it.)
Sally Nabor, a resident and community activist, drove from Morenci to lend her support for the team. Nabor, who has lived throughout the district, was the first female truck driver for mining company, Phelps Dodge. Now she works in the community and spends her summers as a camp host in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest. Sally has been involved in politics for years and even served a term as President of Flagstaff Republican Women. These days, she’s considering a run for her county board of supervisors.
Shirley Dye, made the relatively shorter drive from Payson. Also a political activist, Shirley serves in several capacities including on the board of the Rim Country GOP and Payson TEA Party. During the event, she welcomed the A-B-C team and noted the many things her organizations are doing to win conservative voters.
Globe-Miami was also well represented by Pamela Burruel who actually resides near Roosevelt Lake. Pamela has been hard at work registering Republicans as the President of the Cobre Valley Republicans Club. During the last election cycle, this conservative champion traveled throughout Gila County to get Allen-Barton-Crandall the votes they needed.
The small town of Concho was even represented by Republican Barry Weller, another Republican outstanding in his community. Weller a former Navy nuclear operator, is especially interested in Arizona’s energy and utility policies. He attended the entire day’s event not only to support his legislators but also to talk energy policy with other elected officials.
During the gathering, Sonoran Alliance spoke with Representative Barton and Senator Allen. When asked what they thought would be the most important legislative issue this session, they both agreed that the State budget would dominate all legislative priorities.
Barton, stressed the critical situation of our current demand on resources and services. “We simply don’t have enough money to meet every need,” she explained. “This will be a tough time for everyone as we make cuts all around.”
Asked about her legislative priorities, Representative Barton listed the budget, taxes and regulations as her top goals. “We’ve got to make it easier for small businesses to recover and start hiring people again,” she said.
Barton also pledged to represent rural Arizona as her secondary set of goals.
Senator Sylvia Allen agreed with Barton’s assessment on the state budget. “Taxes and regulation on businesses need to be addressed in order to start moving the economy forward again,” she said. “We need to attract new business and protect existing business if we want to jump start this economy. Reducing taxes and regulation are a good place to start,” Allen asserted. The second term senator also recommended appealing to California business to relocate to Arizona instead of leapfrogging to Texas.
Other legislative priorities for Senator Allen include reestablishing a balance between federalism and state sovereignty and allowing the State of Arizona to use its own resources without heavy-handed federal regulations.
Monday’s event also marked an important turn for the Republican party in rural Arizona. The Fifth Legislative District has not had three Republicans represent the district since redistricting occurred in 2001 nor prior to that. And the 2010 election cycle also saw changes occur in other rural districts such as LD 23 and 25 where Republicans had a clean sweep.
If rural Arizona politics are becoming more Republican in recent elections, then LD-5 is a good example of the conservative leadership rising from within the district. The legislative triad of Allen, Barton and Crandall represent such conservative values and the voters who elected them have sent a message that rural Arizona will be heard and effective.
There was much fanfare this week as the Census Bureau unveiled the official Census figures before the end of the year, as required by law. Everyone here in Arizona was paying particularly close attention. There was certainty that Arizona would pick up one legislative seat to nine, and who knows perhaps a 10th?
Of course, as has been well detailed, there was a slowdown in settlement here in Arizona by illegal aliens after the 2004 proposition requiring employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens and requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration. This law perhaps single handedly derailed any opportunity, in fact most certainly prevented Arizona from picking up two additional seats instead of just one.
What can’t be explained however, is the incredible drop in population from the July 2009 estimates from the US Census Bureau when contrasted with the Official Census as of April 1, 2010; the figures that were just released this week. Here are the gory details:
According to Quick Facts, Arizona’s estimated July 2009 population was 6,595,778. The population change was 28.6%, a very healthy increase. HOWEVER, the “Official” Census figures showed Arizona’s population on April 1st this year to be only 6,392,017! This is a precipitous drop of over 203,000 people in Arizona, and only a 24.6% change from 2000! Now when you compare the difference for any other state in our region, or across the country, no other state had any population drop! Oops! The exception is Michigan, which did show a loss of 83 thousand people in the same time. That’s not surprising, since the auto industry has been demolished by the Obama and the Unions. Now just NW of Arizona in Nevada, the fastest growing state in the nation; in spite of the Nation’s highest unemployment rate at 14.3% STILL gained 57 thousand people in this same time that Arizona lost. The facts don’t lie, so WHY would there be such a change? Don’t take my word for it look at the websites and compare the figures for yourself.
Well, obviously the answer is wrapped around the most significant legislation in 2010, SB1070, which required the state police departments and County sheriff’s offices, to verify identity and citizenship of anyone who is stopped for some other violation. Certainly this legislation pushed the Illegal Immigration battle to the forefront of the National debate. However, the Legislature did NOT EVEN PASS the law until April 19th and the governor signed it on April 23rd! So IF the Census bureau figures are based on April 1st population and they show such a huge drop in population BEFORE April first, ISN’T it the cruelest of April Fool’s jokes?
Now, WHO would EVER question the integrity of the Census Bureau? Well let me remind you of one crucial fact: The Obama administration took the control of the Census away from the Commerce Department, moving it to the White House. So I ask, WHO would EVER question the integrity of the White House!!??
Yes, there were recent news reports that we’d lose population due to SB1070, perhaps as much as 100K (Many in Arizona might say, ‘Good Riddance!’). But 200K? And BEFORE the bill even passed? Give me a Break! Why should we trust a bureaucracy and the Political Party that encourages IRS to investigate Non-Profits who oppose abortion, and prosecutes actors while ignoring the Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner? This is the administration that is ready to hire over 16,000 new IRS agents to enforce the Health Care bill, threatens to shut down the Internet and demands that Fox News and Glenn Beck to be silenced. Why WOULD we trust anything they tell us?
SO, while we were indeed in the hunt for that elusive tenth Congressional seat, perhaps even passing Washington, and having indeed passed Massachusetts and Indiana in population; this White House controlled Census now shows us losing 203K in nine short months. All BEFORE SB1070 became law. Who woulda thunk it!?
Conflicting headlines today in two local new sources:
“Hispanic buying power hits $34B in Arizona.” This appears in the Phoenix Business Journal written by Lynn Ducey and details the influence of the Hispanic community in Arizona.
The second headline is from The Arizona Capitol Times: “Latinos face cultural, structural barriers in building wealth.” Written by Alyssa Newcomb, this article details the financial barriers and hardship of Latinos seeking to save and build wealth.
The first article touts how the Hispanic community is growing in influence among the business community:
“What this shows is that we not only matter, but we matter more every day,” said Hispanic Chamber Interim President and CEO, Gonzalo de la Melena.
The later article bemoans the difficulties Hispanics face in the financial services industry due to citizenship, culture and language barriers. Here’s a quote from that article:
According to a Filene Research Institute report by Barbara Robles, a former Arizona State University professor who is now a senior researcher for the Federal Reserve System, the gaps on a series of median financial indicators continues to widen as the population ages.
The sharp divide between the net worth of Latinos and the rest of the population creates a group that is poorly equipped to deal with emergencies or retirement. Robles’ report says that for every dollar of non-Hispanic white net worth, Latinos hold only 40 cents.
“The border remains a military zone. We remain a hunted people. Now you think you have a destiny to fulfill in the land that historically has been ours for forty thousand years. And we’re a new Mestizo nation. And they want us to discuss civil rights. Civil rights. What law made by white men to oppress all of us of color, female and male. This is our homeland. We cannot – we will not- and we must not be made illegal in our own homeland. We are not immigrants that came from another country to another country. We are migrants, free to travel the length and breadth of the Americas because we belong here. We are millions. We just have to survive. We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It’s a matter of time. The explosion is in our population.“
Professor Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas at Arlington, founder of La Raza Unida Party; 1995
Here are a couple of little known quotes on immigration from another point of view.
“In recent years a new International System has been developing, oriented toward the establishment of norms and principles of universal jurisdiction, above national sovereignty, in the areas of what is called the New Agenda…we have to confront ….. what I dare to call the Anglo-Saxon prejudice against the establishment of supra-national organizations.” — Mexican President Vicente Fox Club XXI, Hotel Eurobuilding, Madrid, Spain 5/16/02
“I have proudly affirmed that the Mexican nation extends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders and that Mexican migrants are an important – a very important – part of this.” – Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo, Chicago on July 23, 1997
“The effort to unite the economies of the Americas into a single free-trade area began at the Summit of the Americas which was held in December 1994 in Miami. The heads of state and government of the 34 democracies in the region agreed to construct the Free Trade Areas of the Americas (FTAA) in which barriers to trade and investment will be progressively eliminated. They agreed to complete negotiations towards this agreement by the year 2005 and to achieve substantial progress toward building the FTAA by 2000.” So begins the history of what President George W. Bush called “The Century of the Americas” (Summit of the Americas, 1994).
Lets now consider some of the following goals and objectives of the FTAA as taken from their website:
Share best practices and technologies with respect to increasing citizen participation in the electoral process, including voter education, the modernization and simplification of voter registration…” [remember motor-voter and the ubiquitous early vote by mail]
Support initiatives designed to strengthen linkages among migrant communities abroad and their places of origin and promote cooperative mechanisms that simplify and speed up the transfer of migrant remittances to their country of origin. [do you get the idea that because Mexico is bankrupt and ungovernable, remittances from the U.S. are about all that's keeping that country stable?]
Support programs of cooperation in immigration procedures for cross-border labor markets and the migration of workers, both in countries of origin and destination, as a means to enhance economic growth in full cognizance of the role that cooperation in education and training can play in mitigating any adverse consequences of the movement of human capital from smaller and less developed states into … [I think you get the idea where that one goes]
Strive to ensure that migrants have access to basic social services, consistent with each country’s internal legal framework… [now you know why AHCCCS is subsidized by the Federal government to some extent]
In Mexico’s official “National Plan of Development 2001-2006″ specific strategies for expanding the nation’s political reach far beyond the U.S. / Mexico border are outlined. Through out the lengthy document, globalization is frequently referenced, however again, the devil’s in the details. To achieve their national plan, the government of Mexico reliles on those of its peoples migrating into the United States who, in 2002 sent back to Mexico over $14 billion dollars of hard U.S. currency. These remittances as of 2006/07 were Mexico’s #1 source of foreign capital, replacing tourism and oil. This of course isn’t counting drug money pouring into that country.
In 2001 the Mexican National Congress established dual citizenship for all Mexican national living abroad, legal or otherwise. In the words of Mexican Congressman Manuel de la Cruz, an American citizen elected to the Mexican National Congress in 2002 and residing in California, “There are 23 million Mexicans in the U.S. that need a voice in Mexico.” (Washington Times, Ken Bensinger)
In a 2000 FoxNews interview, Mexican President Vicente Fox made Mexico’s intentions crystal clear:
“I’m talking about a community of North America, an integrated agreement of Canada, the United States, and Mexico in the long term, 20, 30, 40 years from now. And this means that some of the steps we can take are, for instance, to agree that in five years we will make this convergence on economic variables. That may mean in 10 years we can open up that border when we have reduced the gap in salaries and income.”
Now does it all make more sense? Now do you have an idea why the Obama Administration is suing the State of Arizona? Now do you know why our Southern Border is open and our Federal government has no intention of doing anything unless they achieve an Amnesty Program?
And why John McCain is needed back in the U.S. Senate? Is it beginning to make some sense? Its not about race and its not about human rights – its about globalism and the Free Trade Area of the Americas.
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!