CAIR-AZ Update: If You Can’t Beat Them, Fundraise!

Earlier this week we at ArizonaInformer informed you on CAIR-AZ’s attempt to silence Free Speech by forcing the cancellation of Pamela Geller’s appearance at a Mesa Tea Party event.  The attempt turnout to be another Progressive Fail but that is not stopping the Organized Left.

CAIR-AZ President and Hamas apologist Imraan Sadiqqi sent out this email blast to fundraise for what looks to be an Anti-Semitism gala featuring members and fellow travelers from ISNA, the Muslim Student Association as featured speakers.

 

CAIR-AZ fundraiser

We have a feeling the event will largely promote the radical Islamist ideology this young woman promotes in this infamous UCSD video:

YouTube Preview Image

 

We will update you on this event as this situation warrants.

 

ArizonaInformer.com is a new media site with the main purpose to call out bias and activism by the local media, monitor Arizona’s institutional left, and reclaim our rightful place in pop culture.  It’s our primary mission to call out local hacks who mask as ‘journalists’, inform Arizonans with the Truth, and amplify the voice of Arizona Citizen Journalists — all with a heavy dose of snark.    We are factually correct and proud to be politically incorrect.  #War

CAIR Deploys Flying Monkeys Brahm Resnik, Stephen Lemons to Attack Pamela Geller Event in Mesa

We received a tip by an astute social media observer that the anti-free-speech group CAIR launched another assault on free speech in Arizona and has enlisted the assistance of  local reporters (and Progressive activists) Brahm Resnik and ‘Feathered Bastard’ Stephen Lemons.

Below is a screenshot of the initial call to arms tweet sent out by Imraan Siddiqi, Chairman of CAIR’s AZ Chapter:

 

CAIR AZ Gellar Tweet

 

This tweet was followed up by unindicted co-conspirator CAIR’s main account calling for the harassment of the High School hosting tonight’s Red Mountain Tea party event.

CAIR AZ Gellar 2

 

As of 12:30pm local time, Pamela Geller’s speaking event is still scheduled to go on despite the AstroTurf ginned up by the American political wing of  The Muslim Brotherhood in collusion with Arizona’s Democratic Media Complex.  You can follow the story by going HERE  to Pamela’s Geller site, AtlasShrugs.com

 

ArizonaInformer.com is a new media site with the main purpose to call out bias and activism by the local media, monitor Arizona’s institutional left, and reclaim our rightful place in pop culture.  It’s our primary mission to call out local hacks who mask as ‘journalists’, inform Arizonans with the Truth, and amplify the voice of Arizona Citizen Journalists — all with a heavy dose of snark.    We are factually correct and proud to be politically incorrect.  #War

The Establishment Trap

I was recently invited for coffee by a close friend and fellow Republican to discuss upcoming state legislative races. Well respected in both local grass roots circles as well as the so called “GOP Establishment,” he was chosen to reach out to me in hopes of convincing me to not get involved in several key legislative primaries. However, by the time we finished our second cup of coffee, he would not only fail to convince me to stay silent, but he would instead volunteer to help me in my efforts to inform GOP voters of the threat to our state. It took a simple history lesson to change his mind.

I take you back to the 46th Legislature. In 2004, a handful of so called “pragmatic” Republicans conspired with Democrats to give then Governor Janet Napolitano a budget that would increase state spending by more than $700 million, a 10% increase in spending in a year that saw little inflation (2%).

Worse yet, that budget created a $500 million budget deficit; in violation of Arizona’s Constitution which requires a balanced budget. Rightfully, fiscal conservatives were outraged at what was clearly an irresponsible budget. In response, conservatives recruited fiscally responsible primary opponents to challenge these fiscally irresponsible Republicans.

Then the “GOP Establishment” stepped in. They argued that we risked losing our legislative majorities by running more conservative candidates in the general. Even going as far as saying that even though these “pragmatic” Republicans may have strayed a bit and voted with Democrats for the big spending budget, at least they voted right on things like guns, faith and family issues. They used the old rationale of “even the worst Republican is better than the best Democrat any day.” Generally I would agree with that statement, however, it only holds true if those Republicans support the Republican platform and not the Democrat platform. In 2004, there were 39 Republicans in the House and 17 in the Senate. (In Arizona, you need only control 31 seats in the House and 16 in the Senate to maintain your majority.)

Many of the party faithful bought the establishment’s argument, held their noses and voted for the fiscally irresponsible Republicans “for the good of the Party.” Deep down they hoped these “pragmatic” Republicans would realize the error of their ways and act “more Republican” and fiscally responsible if they got re-elected. As a result, the fiscally conservative challengers were defeated and the “GOP Establishment” candidates got re-elected.

What did voting for the establishment candidate get us? Over the next few years, more and more spending occurred and the budget deficit got bigger, ballooning to over $2.2 billion. Well at least it helped us keep our majorities in the legislature right? Not exactly, in the House the GOP lost six seats and our majority declined to 33 seats; dangerously close to the 31 needed to maintain majority control.

Then in 2008, “Pragmatic Republicans” did it again. Cutting a backroom deal in the dark of night with legislative Democrats and Governor Napolitano, four House and four Senate Republicans essentially voted to put Arizona on the verge of Bankruptcy. They left the State with no money in the Rainy Day Fund and a $3 Billion budget deficit. This time conservatives had enough.

A grassroots groundswell of conservative candidates filed to run for the legislature and challenge the big spenders of both parties. Once again the “GOP Establishment” clamored about “party unity, we’re going to lose our majority if we elect conservatives in the primary, think of the big picture and don’t get hung up on a single budget vote, etc.” This time, despite the GOP establishment spending heavily on their “pragmatic” candidates, the GOP primary voters weren’t going to listen.

Fiscal conservatives won primary after primary, soundly defeating establishment candidates in several key races. Instead of lining up behind the party’s nominees, the GOP establishment instead sided with Democrats by undermining conservative candidates in the general election. Establishment lackey and so called “political consultant” Nathan Sproul even penned an open letter to voters stating “In my opinion, the Republican Nominees are not reflective of the overall electorate.” His statement was quickly picked up by Democrats and used in mailers against conservatives.

Despite the “GOP Establishment’s” efforts to torpedo our candidates, we not only kept our majorities in the State House and Senate, but increased them! Keep in mind this was 2008, the year Barack Obama was elected President. Conventional political wisdom predicted a Democrat landslide nationally and the Tea Party was still more than a year from even coming into existence. Arizona was one of only two states in the whole country that saw Republicans add seats to their legislatures. The GOP Establishment was not only WRONG, they were DEAD WRONG.

Then came 2010; “the year of the Tea Party.” Both Establishment GOP candidates as well as Democrats were steam rolled by conservatives. Republicans obtained “Super majorities” in both houses of the legislature and it immediately led to a balanced budget in Arizona, the first in over five years.

Now we’re back to 2014 and here we go again. A new bunch of so-called “Pragmatic Republicans” have again voted with state Democrats to bring Obamacare to Arizona and once again bust the state’s bank by voting for fiscally irresponsible budgets. Where there was once $1Billion in the Rainy Day fund, now there’s essentially nothing. The budget is once again structurally unbalanced and we’re looking at huge deficits again in 2016 and 2017.

So guess what the “Establishment” is saying. Yep, you guessed it: “Don’t primary them, they only voted ‘wrong’ on Obamacare and the budget, but otherwise, they’re still better than Democrats. Don’t primary them for the ‘good of the party’ and so we don’t lose our majorities.“

Well I for one am not buying it. I’m not going to let history repeat itself. These turncoat Republicans, also known as “Legistraitors,” are causing irreparable damage to our states’ fiscal and economic future and they must go. We can’t let the financial disaster of 2004-2008 happen again. Reelecting these “pragmatic” traitors to the platform will spell fiscal disaster for Arizona. Ask yourself, do you want to go through what we had to go through back in 2009-2011? Huge budget cuts, a sales tax increase, selling our Capitol? Heck no!

For a list of these Legistraitors and their relationship to the Coalition of Corruption that is bankrupting Arizona and bringing failed Washington D.C., big government, policies to our state go to The Alliance of Principled Conservatives website at

http://www.apcarizona.com/Primary_AZ_Legislator.php

By Frank Antenori

 

Liberal Hypocrisy in Academia Targets Condi Rice

Condi Rice Condoleeza Rice Rutgers University

Former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice

by Bob Quasius – Liberals in academia are at it again! A year after Condi Rice accepted an invitation to speak at Rutger’s commencement ceremony, liberals launched a nasty smear campaign to humiliate Condi Rice, seeking to force Rutgers to withdraw the invitation.

How dare this intelligent and successful conservative black woman invade sacred liberal turf!

The Rutgers University administration bravely refused to buckle to pressure. However, in the end Condi Rice decided to put the graduating students’ interests ahead of her own, and bowed out gracefully. She showed us once again that she is a class act. Her statement from her Facebook page puts Rutgers liberals to shame:

“Commencement should be a time of joyous celebration for the graduates and their families. Rutgers’ invitation to me to speak has become a distraction for the university community at this very special time. I am honored to have served my country. I have defended America’s belief in free speech and the exchange of ideas. These values are essential to the health of our democracy. But that is not what is at issue here. As a Professor for thirty years at Stanford University and as it’s former Provost and Chief academic officer, I understand and embrace the purpose of the commencement ceremony and I am simply unwilling to detract from it in any way. Good luck to the graduates and congratulations to the families, friends and loved ones who will gather to honor them.”

It’s not hard to see why Rutgers wold want Condi Rice as their commencement speaker. She’s an awesome speaker! Her commencement speech at SMU was both inspiring and uplifting, as all commencement keynote speeches should be.

It’s also not hard to see why she gracefully bowed out. Commencement is for the graduating seniors, not the speakers. At Princeton University she gave the commencement speech despite objections from liberals, and the result was noisy protests by hundreds.

Princeton University Condi Rice

Noisy Protest at Condi Rice Speech, Princeton University , 2005

A similar speaking engagement at Boston University likewise drew protests, and one professor even quit.

What was Condi Rice’s offense?

Rutgers liberals demanded the university administration un-invite her in order to humiliate her. What was Condi Rice’s offense that merited public humiliation? The Rutgers Faculty passed a resolution demanding Rutgers un-invite Condi Rice, including phrases like:

“played a prominent role in his administration’s efforts to mislead the American people about the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and the existence of links between al Qaeda and the Iraqi regime”, ”

“the lies thus promoted led to the second Iraq war, which caused the death of over 100,000 men, women and children, and the displacement of millions of others.”

“as a public institution of higher learning, should educate its students about past historical events, not pretend they never took place,”

“Rutgers “should not honor someone who participated in a political effort to circumvent the law.”

Did Condi Rice Lie About Iraq?

Condi Rice has often been excoriated by liberals for “lying” about Iraq, but did she really intentionally lie? In an interview with NPR in 2011 she admitted she was wrong:

“The intelligence was as clear as any intelligence I’ve ever seen and I’ve been in this business a long time. … When you had intelligence assessments that said Saddam Hussein has reconstituted his biological and chemical weapons and could reconstitute his nuclear weapon in a year if he got foreign assistance — by the end of the decade if he didn’t — I’ve actually never seen clearer indications than that.”

“The problem is, the intelligence wasn’t right.”

However, there’s a huge difference between repeating bad information from others and deliberately lying, as the Faculty resolution states. The National Security Adviser and Secretary of State don’t produce intelligence information; they consume intelligence produced by the intelligence community. Condi didn’t make up lies about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction; she repeated what she was told by the intelligence community.

Moreover, at the time there was certainly a credible belief that Iraq had WMDs as Saddam Hussein had used WMDs in the past, constantly obstructed UN inspectors, and constantly mentioned WMDs in secret communications with his leadership.

Apparently either Saddam Hussein himself believed he still had WMDs or he wanted others, principally the Iranians, to believe he still had a WMD stockpile. There are also credible theories Saddam’s WMDs were quietly sent to Syria for safekeeping.

Is Condi Rice a politician?

The Daily Targum, Rutgers student newspaper, opined those with ‘questionable politics’ should not be invited as commencement speakers. In fact the editorial said they don’t want politicians as commencement speakers at all. ‘Questionable politics’ is liberal doublespeak for “conservative” and moreover politicians are often invited as commencement speakers.

Where was the The Daily Targum and Rutgers Faculty when Elizabeth Warren and other liberals were commencement speakers? Elizabeth Warren is certainly a politician with baggage after misrepresenting herself as Native American to gain affirmative action benefits in academia.

Who gets to decide whose politics are questionable? Condi Rice is widely respected, and has often been prodded to run for public office. However, she’s adamant she doesn’t enjoy politics, explaining:

“I didn’t run for student council president. I don’t see myself in any way in elected office. I love policy. I’m not particularly fond of politics.

She’s widely admired in Republican circles and would have been a slam dunk as Mitt Romney’s running mate, but she wasn’t even on the list because she didn’t want to run. She’s willing to help Republican candidates in an advisory role, but she is totally disinterested in running for public office.

So Why the Controversy?

Controversy about commencement speakers is nothing new. A survey by the Young America’s Foundation found of the top 100 universities listed by U.S. News and World Report, 62 have selected liberal commencement speakers and only 17 selected conservatives (the ideological leanings of the rest was unclear). Clearly, not many universities are willing to invite conservative commencement speakers!

However, usually conservatives are targeted for protests, though there are exceptions. Obama himself was once targeted, not long after becoming president, but by students, not faculty.

Hillary Clinton has been a commencement speaker numerous times, but how often has academia complained? Hillary Clinton has been embroiled in numerous major scandals, such as Whitewater, turning $100,000 profit on a $1,000 commodities investment despite 1:250 million odds and no knowledge whatsoever of commodities investments. Add to this TravelGate, Vince Foster, and Benghazi and it’s plainly evident Hillary has monumental scandal baggage.

Now why don’t we hear Academics objecting to Hillary Clinton commencement speeches? Answer: she’s a liberal and so too are most academics. Rutgers in particular is a notorious  bastion of liberalism in a deep blue state. Ditto for Princeton and Boston University, the scene of other Condi Rice commencement protests.

The truth about Condi Rice

Condi Rice has enjoyed an extraordinary career in academia and in public service. She obviously is extremely bright, as evidenced by earning her PhD in international relations at age 21, despite all the disadvantages of growing up in Birmingham during segregation. She is probably one of our brightest ever Secretaries of State.

This quote reflects Condi’s outlook in life and awesome success despite her humble origins and status as a minority woman:

“The essence of America – that which really unites us – is not ethnicity, or nationality or religion – it is an idea – and what an idea it is: That you can come from humble circumstances and do great things.”

There are no major scandals in Condi Rice’s past, and in the one legitimate are of criticism about the Iraq war she repeated information from others, and in my honest opinion she was misled. At least she’s honest enough to admit she was wrong. However it’s obvious she was misled.

So what? We’ve all been misled at some point in our lives. Does that make her any less of a success story? Not hardly! In truth, she’s a conservative and extremely successful black woman, and that upsets liberal notions of victimhood. It’s no coincidence conservative women and minorities often complain about the unduly harsh scrutiny and criticism they receive from liberals.

Can we get Condi Rice back as Secretary of State?

Sadly, since Condi Rice left office our foreign policy has been in full meltdown. Major wars are brewing in Eastern Europe and the Middle East.

Hillary Clinton and John Kerry are two of the worst secretaries of state in U.S. history. Hillary Clinton’s tenure was truly “amateur hour” at the State Department, and John Kerry is proving just as inept.

I would love to see Condi Rice back at the helm at the State Department. However, there’s not much chance Condi will return as long as our incompetent-in-chief, Barack Obama, is president.

Editor’s Note: reposted from Cafe Con Leche Republicans – original link.

####

Bob Quasius is the president and founder of Cafe Con Leche Republicans.

LegisTraitors Drunk with Power Demand Increase in Deficit Spending

LegisTraitors(picture from Arizona Capitol Times)

Drunk with power, or simply dazed from visions of hundreds of thousands of campaign dollars dancing in their heads, Jeremy Duda from the Arizona Capitol Times, captures Heather Carter, Ethan Orr, Kate Brophy McGee, Doug Coleman, Rob Robson, and Jeff Dial leaving the House before the gavel to make their case to spend-increase-expand with money we lowly taxpayers have not even made yet.

Geez Louise Republicans! The budget you passed in the Senate only has a $400 million structural deficit. That is just not enough!  The Coalition of Corruption including these six and all the Democrats (again) want bigger government – more agencies – increased spending – and to expand on the expansion of last session.  If we are going to borrow money to pass a democrat budget then let’s go all the way!

No money into the rainy day fund. No money to buy back our buildings. No money to decrease our debt. Actually they are demanding that money is spent that does not exist.  In their power-induced-drunken-state the LegisTraitors are blind to the plight of Arizona taxpayers preferring to prioritize the interests of the crony capitalists who bankroll their campaign committees.

The amendments and increased spending requested by the Coalition of Corruption has been scored by the non-partisan JBLC to give Arizona a $1 Billion deficit by 2017. This is “recurring spending” meaning the spending will occur every single year.  

So another day and no budget for Arizona.  The taxpayers, small businessmen, and Principled Conservatives will have to wait and see who is offering what to whom before we will know what is being shoved down our throats this year.  Will there be a fundraiser with a gift-in-kind equal to the amount it takes to educate one child for half a year in a Charter School?

Will we see a new traitor or will the traitors have a traitor? And how much does a LegisTraitor vote go for?

The vote is tied at 30-30. It will be an interesting day.

Stay tuned.

Christine Bauserman
Chair, Alliance of Principled Conservatives

SB 1062 Analysis – Winners, Losers and Who Gets Stuck with the Bill

By Bill Beard

Politically it would seem that for the vast majority of folks in Arizona the signing of SB 1062 will lead to a lot of trouble. Every day that Governor Brewer waits to sign or veto this bill only prolongs the agony and entrenches all sides against each other. We still have an economy on shaky ground. Unfortunately the only winners in this will be attorneys for both sides that will rake in the big bucks. The other winner would appear to be the discrimination lobby consultants that will be able to squeeze out more dollars to muddy the water and further antagonize all sides.

Those ‘for’ the bill are well intentioned. The political wisdom of dragging the rest of us into this isn’t clear. The average outside observer could have seen this coming. In an attempt to secure Religious Freedom they have set things on a course where reputations will be damaged and leave the taxpayers hurting. The average guy and gal that earns a living related to tourism for business or pleasure will see smaller paychecks. I’m not exactly sure who would be against Religious Freedom but this approach seems doomed. A better alternative to alleviating the possibility of someone suing a business owner for discrimination because they don’t like gays or pick your cause du jour would have been a simple Tort Reform bill that allowed the marketplace to decide the wisdom of anyone denying anyone else the ability to do business. The court system does not need to be involved.

Politically this issue has gone beyond the intent of the supporters. At this point it will only be a loser for folks running for office this year. Forget any merits of the bill. If you have an R after your name you will have to address this in your campaign. Whether you run for Dog Catcher or Governor this issue will come up. Regardless of the real issues of your campaign you will need to take time to explain your position on the bill. Why you agree or disagree with the intent, the politics or the inevitable lawsuits. When the average citizen is more concerned with their personal economy your campaign will spend valuable time addressing this issue.

The average guy out there will not see this as a Religious Liberty issue. For them it will further separate them from their elected representatives. It will only add to the idea that the representatives just don’t get what’s going on in their lives. They struggle daily with paying bills, feeding the kids or trying to figure out where the money will come from to pay for the broken washing machine or car repair. They will get stuck with the bill for the attorneys, the bill for the loss of their representatives focus on keeping the economy moving forward and the bill for time defending what their leaders have done to their friends and family in the rest of the country. So much for of, by and for the people.

Representative Brenda Barton issues statement on recent Facebook post

As many are aware, some recent comments of mine on Facebook have touched a sensitive nerve with many people.  Additionally, many have simply taken my posting out of its contextual environment.  Had I chosen my words differently, or had the President offered to use the power of his office to lessen or mute the public impacts of this impasse in Washington, we might not be having this discussion.

Let me clarify that I never used the word or said that President Obama was “Hitler.”   That was a creative assumption of the Capitol Times reporter, who also reported that I referred to our government as a “Constitutional Democracy.”  I would never use that description because, we are in fact – through law and history – a Constitutional Republic.

What I did suggest, rather directly, was that the National Park Service enforcement personnel (referring to them as “thugs” for their reported behavior) were simply following orders of “their leader” – and I used the German phrase for emphasis, Der Fuhrer.  I am referencing the Presidents behavior as indicated by his actions. The Merriam-Webster New Collegiate Dictionary defines “Fuhrer” as “(2) a leader exercising tyrannical authority.”

Consider that the Affordable Care Act  (ACA) originated in the U.S. Senate.  The U.S. Constitution directly states that laws establishing new revenues must originate in the House of Representatives, so the House closest to the people can decide if they want to pay for the new spending.  The way the ACA was established was in direct contradiction to the Constitution.

President Obama has unilaterally changed the ACA several times, through waivers and exemptions, without returning it to Congress.  A president changing established law unilaterally?  Is that Constitutional or “exercising tyrannical authority”?

Consider the reports of the U.S. Park Service Supervisor in Washington, who spoke to the media and said that the Park Service was told to “make things as uncomfortable as possible.”  I ask you, who has the authority to give such a directive?

Please remember, that someone in the Administration directed the IRS to seek out and harass conservative groups and groups identifying themselves with the Tea Party.  Is that not “tyrannical authority” and did it not seem that IRS office personnel obeyed enthusiastically? What President of the people orders the NSA to spy on his citizens and sends the IRS against his enemies?  Is this not behavior in accord with tyrannical authority?

Arresting veterans for visiting their war memorials? Prohibiting Catholic priests from volunteering to perform the Mass for our Catholic men and women in uniform?  Closing businesses on federally leased land?  When did volunteering to minister to our armed forces become a bad thing in America?  How would you classify that; Constitutional authority or Tyrannical authority?

And tell me, how many times in eight years did the Progressive Left and the media depict President Bush with a funny little black mustache, or worse? Yet there was no indignant outrage shown by those who are today outraged at my choice of words. Actions speak louder than words; President Obama’s actions are what I have to base my observation of “tyrannical authority” on.

Nancy Pelosi has called conservatives “terrorists” and “legislative arsonists.” If I had simply said “the leader” in my Facebook post, would we be having this community discussion today?  My purpose was to bring to the public’s attention the actions and behaviors of our president and his administration since this government shut-down began.
For the record, I was suggesting that President Obama was behaving as a tyrant.  Didn’t the Founders of our country call their king a tyrant and worse?

The Declaration of Independence asserts that a government derives its powers and authority from the consent of the governed, and that governments are instituted among peoples to protect the people’s inherent rights endowed by their Creator. President Obama’s actions contradict these fundamental and foundational cornerstones of our Constitutional Republic.

Give yourself an Obamacare / Medicaid Expansion Waiver

Who wants Obamacare?

Capitol Hill employees say “NO”.  Members of Congress and Hill Aides say “NO”.

IRS employees say “NO”.  IRS Employees Just Say ‘No!’ to Obamacare.

Teamsters Union says “NO.”  Union Bosses:’ObamaCare Will Destroy Health of Americans.

Brewer & the 15 Rogue Republicans say “YES”.

Join URAPC and say “NO.”  Sign the petition and give yourself a waiver.

Waivers are flying out of the Obama office for everyone BUT the Alliance – precinct committeemen, hard-working taxpayers and small business owners. Calling or writing your Representatives will not help you. This is you against your government – so help yourself and fill up a petition. Give a friend a petition.

Right now – this is your only power.  It is true – YOU and “We The People” can stop Obamacare and the Medicaid Expansion in Arizona.  When the signatures are validated – it stops.

The establishment has a different plan. They believe you should let the Medicaid Expansion go into effect in January and then they want you to work really, really hard to get Republicans elected in 2014 and then they want you to believe those Republicans will vote this all away.

I do not believe that.

And what about the next session?  What will happen then?

What will the Governor agree to just to get her education agenda passed?
Will Brewer call a “special session” put in new leadership and pass the Obamacare Exchanges?
Will Brewer run for Governor again?
Will Brewer offer amnesty to the illegals in AZ?

Who do you believe?

Give yourself a waiver – sign the petition.

www.urapc.org

 

URAPC Response to Brewer’s Team

On Wednesday the Governor and her allies wrote a letter to Secretary of State Ken Bennett asking him to “offer an assessment of the long-term viability of the referendum application and the sample petition on which URAPC relies.”

The URAPC referendum application was accepted by the Secretary of State’s office on June 25th at 1:28 pm. The Secretary of State’s office issued referendum number, R-01-2014, which is on the bottom of every URAPC petition making URAPC the valid committee and ours the only valid petition to refer the Medicaid expansion and the associated bed tax to the 2014 ballot for a People’s Veto. The issuance of the number is the Secretary of State’s statement that the petition was accepted. That is the job of the Secretary of State’s office.

The rest of the letter is viewed by URAPC as an act of desperation and a continuation of the deceitful practices the opposition has chosen to utilize. The Secretary of State is not a lawyer and he does not issue legal opinions. The opposition admits to their deceit at the end of the letter when they ask the Secretary of State to write an assessment and then say that “the courts, rather than your office, must ultimately decide the legality of URAPC’s actions to date.”

They are hoping you will not read the lengthy legalize and instead be confused by semantics and insinuation by one of their high priced “legal guns.” If lawyers knew everything we wouldn’t need judges and juries now would we?

For the record, the URAPC attorneys reviewed the letter and found it laughable. URAPC attorneys will do their work in the courtroom and will not participate in the political circus of propaganda, chicanery and deceit led by the Governor and her team at Restoring Arizona. The Governors Team is free to continue their “pen pal” relationship with the Secretary of State. While they do that, URAPC will continue to gather signatures.

We thank the Secretary of State’s office for agreeing with URAPC in their official statement: “spokesman Matt Roberts said Wednesday that the office would not get involved.“These things fall out of jurisdiction of the Secretary of State’s Office,” Roberts said. “These would be for courts to decide.”

While URAPC appreciates the concern for our volunteers in the summer heat, we would like to note that just a few weeks ago they predicted we would be unable to find volunteers due to the 100 degree temperatures. Instead they now find themselves faced with a clipboard and pen equipped army at malls, restaurants, and shopping centers across the entire state of Arizona. Our opposition attempted to deceive the public with a “fake” petition drive but failed.  They couldn’t find enough people willing to take their money to gather signatures and convince the citizens of this state to help the health care industry become the largest corporate welfare recipient in history.

The letter from the Governor’s Team is just another failed attempt to confuse and discourage our volunteers; this is just the beginning. The arrogance is blatant. We may be lowly precinct committeemen, small businessmen, and hard-working taxpayers but we can read the Arizona Constitution which affords us the right to veto legislation. Throughout history when the people stand together they have prevailed against the arrogance of the elite and powerful, from the time of Goliath to the British Crown.

To our loyal and hardworking volunteers: Do not be distracted. These attempts are intentionally designed to stall principled conservatives from gathering signatures while you search for answers to erroneous questions. This is just the beginning of a well funded campaign to misinform and confuse, and its right out of the playbook of liberal Chicago style politics.

URAPC challenges you to instead help us show the elite, the establishment, and the arrogant, that our voices still matter in Arizona by raising your personal goal by another 200 signatures. If we can submit 200,000 signatures the chances of a court case will dwindle.

URAPC would like to request a letter of our own from Ken Bennett, not in the capacity of Secretary of State, but as soon to be gubernatorial candidate. We, the Principled Conservatives of Arizona, would like a letter stating where you stand on the Medicaid Expansion and the implementation of Obamacare in Arizona.

Christine Bauserman
Frank Antenori
Ron Gould

 Paid for by United Republican Alliance of Principled Conservatives R-01-2014

 

Brewer and the Rogue Republicans versus Reagan and the PCs.

Brewer and the Rogue Republicans versus Reagan and the PCs.

Recently Governor Jan Brewer sent an email to “Fellow Republicans”. The drumbeat is old. She takes credit for every piece of legislation the conservative super-majority had to drag her kicking and screaming to sign. She continues a litany of the same old tiring message blatantly treating the precinct committeemen like uninformed, low information voters. Bolding words and underlining and underlining and underlining she once again goes on a tirade of how she only wants to help ensure that crony-capitalism rules the day in Arizona completely ignoring the fact that Obamacare in no way fits in the Republican Party platform. Invoking the words of Ronald Reagan she ignores his conservative message along with the message in the resolutions that every legislative district in Arizona, but one, passed.

Glaringly absent in the Governor’s repertoire is SB1070. SB1070 is the landmark legislation of Arizona that encompasses our true individualistic spirit and the Governor does not mention it once. State sovereignty exists in the fiber of every Principled Conservative but is lacking in the Governor. She has the audacity to claim that the super majority win in 2010 was due to her one cent sales tax increase, Prop 100, instead of the tireless work of the PC’s fueled by the energy of SB1070!

The Governor rants for 453 words attempting to justify why she had to shove Obamacare down our throats, completely ignoring Ronald Reagan’s simple statement, Government’s first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.

The PC’s question if she read the resolutions where they state, “Supporting the big government takeover of our health care system, even for a short term gift of federal funds, does NOT reflect the values of the Republican Party or the interests of the taxpayers of Arizona.”

She cannot win on the issues so she tries to bedazzle with facts and gloomy predictions of sickness and death when we believe in the Ronald Reagan idea that, “We should measure welfare’s success by how many people leave welfare, not by how many are added.

She predicts State ruin and attempts to bedazzle with facts throwing around “millions” and “billions” and attempts to differentiate between State and Federal taxes when all the Principled Republicans are asking is what happened to the Ronald Reagan idea, “The problem is not that people are taxed too little, the problem is that government spends too much.

The GOP PCs understand this and included it in their resolutions, “The long term and evolving costs of the Obamacare Medicaid Expansion will surely bankrupt Arizona just as surely as Obamacare will bankrupt the USA.”

She then proves that she has not lost her mastery of deceit by stating the fact that “Arizona’s Medicaid program is NOT Obamacare” when she knows full well that she is implementing the Federal Medicaid Expansion, aka Obrewercare and it IS Obamacare. Does she expect us to forget the emails, letters in the mail and herself in interviews telling us we have to accept “Obamacare as the law of the land?” We made it clear we understood this to be an untruth and we said, “The US Supreme Court explicitly ruled that each State is free to reject implementation of the Obamacare Medicaid Expansion and Insurance Exchanges.”

The PCs reject Brewer’s socialized medicine but embrace Reagan’s conservatism believing that “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth!

The PC’s could not have been clearer “We urge Governor Brewer, and all Republican legislators, to hold the line against enabling the socialist takeover of our health care system and insurance industry by rejecting the Medicaid expansion.”

When one reaches the end, one cannot help but wonder why this letter is addressed to Republicans when she has gone so far left that she is proving Ronald Reagan correct when he said, “The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”

So now she demands we “move on” and attempts to lay guilt on the heads of the PC’s she has tramped all over. Her arrogance would astonish if we had not recently witnessed her suspending the rules and rolling our conservative leaders. Governor Brewer, the 20% carries more weight if it entails throwing someone under the bus.

Let us not forget the ending of the Pima GOP resolution:

“Governor Brewer is correct that “elections have consequences”. She is wrong in believing that it means that we must roll over and forsake our core values as the Arizona Republican Party whenever Republicans lose a national race.”

“Stand your ground. Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.”

John Parker, Battle of Lexington, 1775.

 

Governor Brewer – you fired the first shot. The PC’s pleas to not fire fell on deaf ears. It is indeed time for you and your band of rogue republicans to “move on”.

 

Christine Bauserman

www.urapc.org