Arizona TARS Double Membership in 2012

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.


The Tail Wagging the Dog; Same-Sex Couples in Arizona

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)

 The point?

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.



Lessons from the Ruins of Detroit

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.

The ‘A-B-C’ Republican team from LD-5 arrives at the Arizona Legislature!

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.

LD-5 ABC TeamSenator 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.

LD-5 LunchShirley 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.

Representative Brenda Barton & Sally NaborBarton, 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.

Senator Sylvia AllenMonday’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!?

A Tale of Two Headlines

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 Real Reasons Behind Washington’s Attack on Arizona’s 1070

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.

Voting was never a root canal

Emil FranziOnce 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.