Civil Rights Activist, Rev . Jarrett Maupin will attend tonight’s Glendale City Council meeting and speak against keeping the Phoenix Coyotes NHL Team in the city. “We must stop the abuse of Glendale’s hard working tax payers, people of color, the jobless. We must work to find a solution, without the NHL, that helps the city and relieves some of the financial burdens her citizens are carrying,” Maupin says.
Glendale, AZ – Arizona Civil Rights activist, the Rev. Jarrett Maupin says he will be present at tonight’s Glendale City Council meeting to protest the city keeping the Phoenix Coyotes Hockey team and “bending to the will of NHL leaders and Investors with no love or loyalty” to the city and it’s residents.
Maupin labels the deals that prospective ownership and investors have pitched as unfair, “Glendale is not the NHL’s sugar-mama, poor folk in this city are not interested in being possibly paid back in the hereafter,” he says. With 11.9% of Glendale families living under the federal poverty level, the Preacher says city leaders must do what’s in the best interests of their poorest constituents. He hopes Glendale Councilman Sammy Chavira stands up for black, latino, and poor families with nothing to gain from making a deal. “As a firefighter he should understand that cutting city services puts people’s lives in danger, cutting city jobs takes bread off people’s tables, draining the city’s accounts harms the quality of life of poor and underserved residents the city should be serving first and who needs the help the most,” Maupin says.
Maupin will speak at tonight’s meeting to ask city leaders to move forward with a plan to solicit bids for an Arena Management contract. The Activist feels multiple events and varied use is the key to Glendale’s success: “Concerts, expos, sports events, fairs, and other entertainment events need venues. Multiple-uses mean thousands of revolving jobs. The potential for putting people to work, particularly the low-skilled, increases explosively.”
“This is about jobs and fixing a municipal budget weakened by exploitation,” Maupin says, “The NHL and investors will just keep on using Glendale, until they use it up. This cannot be, it is not fair.”
In the most general of terms, a conflict of interest is “a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgment or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest.”
In Arizona, there really are no rules governing legislative conflict of interest statutes. Essentially, as long as at least 10 people benefit from a piece of legislation, there is no conflict of interest. Should allegations of conflicts of interest arise, there’s really nothing anyone can do about it. Arizona is one of only nine states without an independent organization to oversee ethics comp
It is not uncommon for legislators to sponsor or vote on bills that affect their personal career industry. When you have a “citizen legislature” it’s impossible to not vote on bills that relate to education, doctors, lawyers, real-estate agents, landlords, etc. But what about political consultants? Does that pass the “citizen legislature” smell test?
The Arizona Republic pointed out earlier this year that there are a number of lawmakers who run or work for consulting firms whose scope of work remains unclear. The campaign disclosure forms do not require lawmakers to reveal their clients, making their potential conflicts of interest even murkier. But, some of these contracts are no doubt related to campaigns and public policy objectives.
House Minority Leader and potential Democratic candidate for Governor Chad Campbell lists “public affairs consulting” for Inspired Connections on his financial disclosure form. The “About Us” page for Inspired Consulting does not list Campbell as a member of their staff and it is unclear what his role is with the firm. Other state legislators who serve as “consultants” include Sen. Al Melvin, Sen. Steve Gallardo, and Rep. Ruben Gallego. Melvin recently made news by announcing he’s exploring a run for governor.
Former LD15 State Senator David Lujan (and good friend of Kyrsten Sinema) directed an independent expenditure effort against Republicans during the 2012 election cycle. “Building Arizona’s Future” spent over $700,000 in the last cycle defeating Republicans, funded in large part by national Democratic money from D.C. that Sinema helped direct into Lujan’s committee coffers. Lujan is now running for Phoenix City Council District 4.
This isn’t the first foray in the consulting arena for Campbell or Lujan. In 2007 Campbell and Lujan formed a political consulting firm with then Democratic legislator and colleague Kyrsten Sinema. It is unclear what Forza Consulting did or whom they represented, but according to records with the Corporation Commission the LLC still remains “open.”
Democratic Representative and rising star of the Left Ruben Gallego currently has the most prolific consulting background. Before being elected to office in 2010, Gallego previously spent time with Valley PR firm Reister, and also served as Chief of Staff for Democratic Phoenix City Councilmember Michael Nowakowski. He was also the Vice Chair of the Arizona Democratic Party. Gallego’s wife, Kate Gallego, is running for Phoenix City Council in District 8 to replace term-limited Councilmember Michael Johnson.
Ruben Gallego is listed as the Director of Latino and New Media operations for Strategies360’s Arizona office. Gallego works with Director of Arizona Operations Robbie Sherwood, a former reporter for the Arizona Republic and former Congressman Harry Mitchell’s Chief of Staff.
During the 2012 election cycle, Strategies360 was paid by the Yes on Prop 204 committee (“Quality Education & Jobs”) to handle communications on behalf of the union-funded campaign. Prop 204 proposed the single-largest permanent sales tax increase in Arizona’s history and was viewed by many as a “special interest giveaway.” Voters defeated the proposition nearly 2-to-1
Strategies360 was also paid at least $10,000 during the 2012 election cycle to handle “earned media outreach & strategic communications” for the Arizona Accountability Project (AAP). The AAP was one of the chief committees used to funnel liberal money into the last election cycle to defeat Republican candidates. AAP spent almost $600,000 last election cycle targeting Republicans including efforts against Jerry Lewis, Joe Ortiz, Frank Antenori, and John McComish. They also did work in support of Democrat Tom Chabin.
Strategies360 was involved in the 2012 election to defeat Sheriff Joe Arpaio and is currently involved in the present effort to recall Arapaio. Recently, Gallego appeared at a “Respect Arizona” rally (the group organizing the recall). Also present at that event was Minority Leader Chad Campbell.
During 2012, Gallego even helped lead the efforts of the group opposing Arpaio, Citizens for Professional Law Enforcement PAC. Arpaio’s campaign manager at the time, Chad Willems, questioned the financial motivations of Gallego and others:
“This is just another group out there of people lining their pockets,” Willems told HuffPost. “It seems like a full-time employment group for these guys.”
Gallego’s reach into the far-Left elements of the Democratic Party are deep. He even served as the professional consultant for Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona during the 2012 cycle, orchestrating their attacks against pro-life Republicans. His firm was paid nearly $5,000 in consulting fees, and they were paid more than $20,000 to handle the mail program attacking several Republican lawmakers and candidates.
Let me be clear: there’s nothing illegal about what Gallego or his firm is doing. Consultants on both sides of the political spectrum are involved in these sorts of efforts every cycle. Some would argue this is no different than the efforts of the Senate President and the Speaker of the House and their Victory Funds last cycle. That’s a fair comparison, but unlike Gallego (and possibly other legislators), the President and the Speaker were not financially compensated for their involvement.
Current Arizona statute provides for a one-year ban on former legislators serving as lobbyists after they leave the legislature. Specifically, ARS 38-504(a)(b) state that for one year, a former public officer, including legislator, shall not represent another person for compensation before the legislature concerning any matter with which the legislator was directly concerned and personally participated.For two years after he or she leaves office, no public officer, including legislator, may disclose or use for personal profit information designated as confidential. Further, section c states:
A public officer or employee shall not use or attempt to use the officer’s or employee’s official position to secure any valuable thing or valuable benefit for the officer or employee that would not ordinarily accrue to the officer or employee in the performance of the officer’s or employee’s official duties if the thing or benefit is of such character as to manifest a substantial and improper influence on the officer or employee with respect to the officer’s or employee’s duties.
When legislators like Gallego are using their positions of influence to help direct thousands of dollars in independent expenditure efforts designed to defeat their colleagues and change the partisan make-up of their chamber, while simultaneously making money off of these efforts, how is that not a conflict of interest?
Terri Proud, a former legislator, claims that she was taken out of context in an article that appeared in the Arizona Daily Star, written by a student at the University of Arizona. The backlash to this single article resulted in the well-respected director of The Arizona Department of Veteran’s Services being asked to resign by the Governor and sent a shock wave through the veterans community.
Proud claims the “student journalist” misrepresented herself as from the Arizona Daily Star and took her comments out of context. Proud is not against women serving in combat and simply posed a valid question as to how the military would accommodate women in combat, when the VA is still struggling to accommodate women vets.
Proud claims her comments were not conveyed correctly, “Regardless of the reason, the result devastated the life of Col. Joey Strickland who did not deserve such careless treatment. The Governor’s office should check facts before drawing conclusions.”
Strickland has been a strong supporter for veterans. As one Tucson vet put it, “Strickland has been our go-to guy whenever we needed help and his sudden removal is disturbing.”
Proud commented, “If the Governor has it out for me, or has something against former legislators finding jobs, then I was not aware of it until now. As a legislator, I met the Governor only once.” Her office did not contact Proud for comment on the April 2nd article prior to requesting Strickland’s resignation only a day after it was published.
Proud has been a vocal advocate for women while in the legislature. It was her bill that found support for homeless women vets. Nobody wants to talk about real issues facing women. Women vets have had a difficult time in Arizona; it’s not all VA centers that even offer health care for women vets. A subject that most don’t usually hear or talk about, but a reality for women vets today. Everyone should be concerned about the double standards in existence.
Strickland was an avid supporter for Arizona homeless vets and helped open many veterans homes in the state, he was concerned and worked on issues affecting disabled vets as well as elderly vets and Native American veterans.
The position offered to Proud at Veteran Services was as an administrative assistant in the Military Relief Family Fund, Homeless Veterans and Overseeing Women Conferences. It paid $40,000 per year.
Proud is asking the public to support Strickland who was appointed to the post by then-Gov. Janet Napolitano and who helped establish Arizona as the most veteran supportive state in the union for education, jobs and wellness. He is very highly respected for his 29 honorable years of service to his country in the United States Army and for his service as director of The Arizona Department of Veteran’s Services. Strickland should not have been removed, Brewer overreacted. Contact the Governor’s office at (602) 542-4331 to let them know Strickland should be brought back.
Unlink Governor Brewer’s media campaign funded by huge corporations and special interest groups, the opposition to expanding Medicaid dependency in Arizona is almost entirely grassroots driven – and there’s good reason for the disparity. The Arizona Medical Industrial Complex stands to gain hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer dollars. This begs the question, “just how much will Medicaid expansion cost Arizona taxpayers?”
Here are two graphics provided by the prestigious conservative organization The Heritage Foundation. Please feel free, to download these and email them to your legislators.
Before the legislature attempts to pass a huge tax on Arizonans, they need to remember Arizona’s Constitution requires a 2/3 majority vote to pass any tax hike. Currently, the Governor would like to redefine the hundreds of millions of dollars as needed as a fee in order to avoid the 2/3′s requirement. Any legislator needs to know they will be violating the Arizona Constitution if they pass this huge tax hike without the 2/3′s requirement.
If you would like to have Americans for Prosperity speak to your organization about why expanding Medicaid dependency is bad for Arizona please contact Americans for Prosperity through www.ArizonaTaxpayers.org.
You hopefully read the email I sent Thursday asking you to join our boycott of businesses which support the pro-amnesty, pro-illegal immigration Phoenix New Times. As a “free” publication, they are 100% funded by advertising revenue… which ultimately comes from businesses where WE spend our hard-earned money!
There is another reason why responsible businesses MUST pull their ads from the New Times:
According to reports in the Associated Press and many other news agencies and sites, for at least THREE YEARS and possibly longer, the Phoenix New Times and their parent company, Village Voice Media, have been complicit in something even worse… something even dirtier and darker than supporting illegal immigration and amnesty for criminal illegal aliens:
According to prosecutors, the New Times company REFUSED TO STOP RUNNING ADVERTISEMENTS THAT ARE A FRONT FOR PROSTITUTION AND OTHER SEX CRIMES!
And who is paying to advertise alongside those who would exploit women and children in our society? Car dealers, movie theaters, retailers and restaurants that you and I go to!
Can you believe what arrogance and greed it must take for prosecutors to show the Phoenix New Times company evidence that 50 cases of sex trafficking from 22 states have originated on their pages…
…and they still refuse to stop running the ads promoting such terrible criminal behavior?
Is it any wonder they oppose Sheriff Joe Arpaio so much, when he’s not just America’s toughest lawman, but also one of the leading law enforcement agents in the nation in the fight against human trafficking!
Now, what happened when confronted by our proposed boycott of their advertisers? Last week, New Times editor-in-chief Rick Barrs went to our Ban Amnesty Now page on Facebook and called our 29,000+ Facebook members “racists”!
Did he express any concern about the hateful actions of his staff, or the remorse for the prostitution or sex-trafficking businesses run on their advertising pages? No. He ranted that we were racists.
Today, what we need most is YOU! Please join me today in signing this petition against the New Times Company:
Calling on law enforcement to investigate whether the New Times has knowingly profited from a criminal enterprise;
Calling on all responsible Arizona businesses to cancel their advertising in this ultra-liberal, pro-amnesty business with alleged ties to prostitution and worse; and
Pledging to boycott businesses who continue to advertise with the Phoenix New Times.
Fellow conservatives, we must stand up to pariahs in society like this… The media and blogosphere is coming around to see our side, and we need your support!
Writes Greg Patterson in The Espresso Pundit, “The [Ban Amnesty Now] boycott is unlikely to actually drive New Times out of business, but he will hurt them and he may even manage to tip the balance and finish them off.”
When you think about the New Times, never forget: according to prosecutors, for THREE YEARS, they knew their ad pages were being used by the worst sexual predators in society to sell women for sex…
…and not only did they do nothing, but they repeatedly refused to take down these ad pages because of the millions of dollars they were making!
Remember every crude, vicious attack the New Times has unleashed on conservatives like Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Senator Pearce, Governor Brewer and others. Remember the years they have spent ranting and raving against those who oppose amnesty and illegal immigration, and the campaigns of hate they wage even on citizens and groups who oppose them. Remember every vile word, every vicious hit piece, every slated attack…
…and now please join us in righting a wrong by signing this petition so that law enforcement acts quickly, and legitimate businesses stop sharing advertising space with the worst sex offenders plaguing our society!
Republicans who tune into KFYI-550 on any weekday morning between 7-10am will hear the daily critique of Republican elected officials by the nearly famous Barry Youn(g). This has been going on for several months now with little critical attention paid to any of the other parties elected and unelected. For example, how often has the “nearly famous” Barry Young show given any critical analysis to Pearce challenger, Jerry Lewis or known domestic violence state legislator, Daniel Patterson?
We have decided to ask our readers to participate in a simple poll, “Has KFYI’s Barry Young gone too far” because the perception is that Young has become gratuitous in his attacks on Republicans.
Here is your chance to vote in the poll but more importantly (and stay on topic!), voice your opinion on whether or not certain local conservative talk show personalities have become part of the circular firing squad.
If you want to vote, the poll is on the right sidebar.
Update: Sonoran Alliance is not part of any boycott efforts.
It was at the Independent Redistricting Commission hearing that SaddleBrooke resident Vince Leach rose to speak before the Commission. Leach spoke to the cover-ups and legal battles in which the Commission is currently engaged (as reported by numerous news media). Leach urged the Commission to be transparent and focus on the real issue: redistricting.
Leach mentioned to the Commissioners that the Commission’s budget, for the ten year cycle, is $10 million as recommended by the Department of Administration and reported by the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC). Leach was concerned that the last Commission cycle budget was $6 million but had to be increased to $9.5 million due to lawsuits filed against the Commission’s redistricting. Would this year’s budget also see a 58% increase, to $15.8 million, due to lawsuits filed against Commission decisions and backroom machinations?
After concluding his remarks, Leach returned to his seat in the “overflow” room. Before he could sit down, Ray Bladine, Executive Director of the Commission, confronted Leach, accusing him of providing false numbers. Leach provided a copy of the JLBC report, verifying the Department of Administration ten year $10.2 million budget recommendation.
Bladine, in spite of having seen the JLBC report, countered that the numbers were false. He accused Leach of presenting misleading material, which Leach denied. Bladine then stated, “Now I know what I am dealing with,” or words to that effect. When Leach asked Bladine to explain his comment, Bladine refused, repeating, “Now I know what I am dealing with.”
Bladine then placed his hand against Leach’s shoulder not once but twice. Leach told Bladine to take his hand off Leach’s shoulder, his voice loud enough to draw attention and witnesses to the confrontation.
Bladine was interviewed regarding the incident. He denied any confrontation with Mr. Leach but admitted putting his hand against Leach’s shoulder. Bladine further stated that this year’s budget appropriation was $3.5 million. He neither acknowledged that Leach was discussing the 10 year cycle not just a single fiscal year nor admitted that the Department of Administration had made a budget recommendation for $10 million.
It seems unusual that an Executive Director of the IRC would not know that the Department of Administration had recommended a budget of $10.2 million budget for the ten year redistricting cycle. This is public information.
Jay Heflin with The Hill is reporting that Congressman and former US Senate candidate, J.D. Hayworth, has been chosen to be a national advocate for the TEA Party. For those who have followed Congressman Hayworth’s career, this is an excellent choice by leadership of the TEA Party movement
In 2009, prior to Rick Santelli’s famous words on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile, Hayworth was instrumental in giving rise to the Arizona TEA Party by lending his voice and by giving voice to leaders here in Arizona. As a broadcaster at KFYI, Hayworth promoted grassroots and TEA Party gatherings across Arizona including the famous 6,000 person march on the Sate Capitol on April 15, 2009.
Now as the TEA Party continues to make progress in States like Alaska, Delaware, Kentucky and Nevada, Hayworth’s understanding of the issues and his political redemption from a Congress that once lost its way will give further credence to this important American political movement.
This has been circulating for awhile and it’s interesting no one is talking about it. So let’s talk.
Eric Ulis was charged with a domestic violence charge and had to attend Domestic Violence Diversion classes. The last time I recall a candidate involved in a domestic violence dispute, that candidate/legislator had to resign his post in LD 11.
It’s amazing to me that Republicans in LD 8 would stand for a candidate that A) was a democratic nominee for the Washington State AND California State legislatures/assemblies respectively, B) was endorsed as that democratic nominee by the Washington State Labor Council/AFL-CIO, Teamsters, Service Employees Council, to name a few, and the big one for me C) has twice had domestic problems, once in Sacramento and in the City of Phoenix.
What is the Arizona business community thinking when they include him in the infamous 12 in 10 fundraiser, that included democrats, for this guy and the Arizona Chamber endorsed him! Belly up to the bar, Chamber, and admit you made a mistake.
Identify which state THIS quote is referring to:
“In other words, the activists were like the civil rights demonstrators who sat down at segregated lunch counters throughout the South and refused to leave until they were served. Their goal was not really to get breakfast. It was to end segregation.”1
How about THIS state?’
We’re being very methodical, “We’re asking to have this assessed. The fact is, if we chose to ignore what happened in the South in the 60s, we’d still have the kind of discriminatory laws that were being proposed back then. 2
The first quote was aimed at the state of ISRAEL , the second at the state of ARIZONA.
Dishonest Hysterical Projection:
BOSTON (AP) – They gather on statehouse steps with signs and bullhorns, risking arrest. They attend workshops on civil disobedience and personal storytelling, and they hold sit-ins and walk out of class in protest. They’re being warned that they could even lose their lives.
Students fighting laws that target illegal immigrants are taking a page from the civil rights era, adopting tactics and gathering praise and momentum from the demonstrators who marched in the streets and sat at segregated lunch counters as they sought to turn the public tide against racial segregation. “Their struggle then is ours now,” said Deivid Ribeiro, 21, an illegal immigrant from Brazil and an aspiring physicist. “Like it was for them, this is about survival for us. We have no choice.”
To paraphrase Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey, “With hysterical reporting like that, that’s why the Boston Globe and the Associated Press (AP) are losing all credibility.”
“You can add this to the list of very bad things the new Arizona Immigration Law is being compared to: Terrorism. Jesse Jackon appeared on MSNBC today and told Contessa Brewer that the new law, allowing police to require proof of citizenship from anyone they “suspect” of being an illegal immigrant, is the equivalent of ‘terrorism for the innocent…”
Can Arizonians find any worldly equivalent to that toxic combo of sympathetic press and rabblerousing claims? How about: “Palestinian Genocide – Apartheid Israel starving, killing Asian infants – UK-US-backed Racist Zionist Apartheid Israel kills 7 Palestinian infants DAILY.”
How hard is it to refute that claim? The “Occupied Palestinian Territories” of which Gaza is a big part, “have an estimated 4% population growth rate today, well beyond the United States, far beyond European growth rates, surpassing Israel’s population growth rate. “Even in the absence of such migration, the population in the occupied territories will grow nearly 4 per cent. The occupied territories have one of the highest rates of natural increase in the world, a consequence of a low crude death rate (around 6 deaths per 1,000 persons) and a very high birth rate of about 45 births per 1,000 persons. http://www.un.org/popin/regional/escwa/popbull/bull43/chapter2.htm
The current world experts on genocide are the surviving Jews and Rwandans, having been at the receiving end of the real thing. The U.N., it’s mandate written to “stop genocide,” spent quite a bit of effort twisting itself into pretzels to avoid using the mandate trigger of “genocide” to mobilize UN resources against the Hutu extremists, as 800,000 Tutsi Rwandans were massacred – a noticeably abrupt DECLINE in a population, yet makes no objection to the use of the same mandate trigger term to mobilize the UN against Israel, based on the human tragedy of … a robustly growing population of healthy, well-fed people for proof of … “genocide.”
To again paraphrase Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey, “With hysterical comments like these, that’s why the U.N. is losing all credibility.”
Boycott Fevah: We’re going to select some things we think we can do to hurt them, but hold on to what we need from them so our comfort levels aren’t affected. The ‘match and the thermometer’ sort of ’fever’.
“TURKEY said on Friday it was considering scaling back its relations with ISRAEL to a minimum… Turkey’s Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc also said Turkey was assessing economic and defense deals with Israel in the clearest sign yet it may significantly reduce its ties with once close ally Israel. “We may plan to reduce our relations with Israel to a minimum, but to assume everything involving another country is stopped in an instant, to say we have crossed you out of our address book, is not the custom of our state …We are serious on this issue. New cooperation will not start and relations with Israel will be reduced,” said Arinc. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3899043,00.html
“LOS ANGELES CITY COUNCIL called for the city to “refrain from conducting business with the state of ARIZONA including participating in any conventions or other business that requires city resources, unless SB 1070 is repealed.” The resolution was introduced by council members Reyes and Hahn. LA’s top policy analyst… identified $56 million in Arizona-related investments … recommended that the council suspend travel to Arizona, refrain from entering new contracts and review current contracts.
The city must now decide which of those contracts can be broken without risking a lawsuit.
The city’s proprietary departments — namely, the Water and Power and Harbor departments and Los Angeles World Airports — have another $51.8 million in affected contracts. The city does not have the authority to direct its proprietary departments to terminate those contracts; it can merely request that they do so. “We asked our city to officials to find out what contracts we have right now that we could actually terminate and have a bit of a financial impact,” Hahn said. “It is about $7 million or $8 million. We’re asking them to terminate those contracts, where possible and feasible.”
How the White House Projects its Annoyance to the entire World:
Arizona Governor Gets Few Results From Meeting With Obama …
Citing scheduling issues, Obama initially declined to meet with Brewer this week while she is in Washington for a Council of Governors meeting. But as criticism grew over Obama’s seeming snub, he made time on his calendar. While Obama is pushing for a multi-layered approach to immigration, Brewer is advocating for a policy that will secure the border first.
On Thursday, neither side backed down from their approach. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/03/arizona-governor-gets-results-meeting-obama/
President Obama snubs Prime Minister Netanyahu …
President Obama snubbed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in several ways during his visit to Washington this week. The Obama administration is miffed by what it sees as Israeli intransigence … The White House denied Netanyahu the red carpet treatment generally afforded to visiting heads of state. The Israeli prime minister and Obama didn’t pose for photos together, and Netanyahu was excluded from dinner with the president Tuesday night.
When Netanyahu wouldn’t agree to concessions, Obama left a meeting with him, though he invited Netanyahu to stay at the White House, talk to Obama advisers and “let me know if there is anything new,” a U.S. congressman who spoke to Netanyahu, told The Times of London. “It was awful,” the congressman said.
One Israeli newspaper called the meeting “a hazing in stages,” conducted in such an adversarial environment that the Israeli delegation eventually left…”
While Governor Jan Brewer and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sit on the White House curb, they could commiserate. It seems Arizona isn’t the only state in the world that has illegal immigration problems. Evidently, these two horrid racist states are actually pretty good places to get good paying jobs, even if one is illegal:
“Some 80,000 foreign workers, most of them illegal aliens, live in Tel Aviv, making up about a quarter of the city’s population, the immigration police said yesterday.”
The attacks on Israel are cut from the same cloth as those against Arizona. The battle is being waged in the court of public opinion, not in actual courts, where a fair and impartial deliberative process would conclude that Arizona is acting lawfully under federal law, just as Israel acted lawfully under standard international Maritime law. The purpose of the process right now as Arizona and Israel are being pilloried in the national and international media is to influence public opinion, to “sway the jury,” to literally prejudice as much of the public as possible against duly elected state governments upholding laws, while studiously avoiding actual courts with impartial judges.
When, not if, these issues finally go to court, and only AFTER a campaign of hardening public opinion, and a search for “sympathetic courts,” the public will be then be encouraged to pressure the judges, the advocates, the jury if they do not deliver a “correct conclusion.”
The media deliberately selects terms to lead a report, and by that to coach readers. The continued standard media reporting on Arizona’s SB1070 can’t go two sentences without the obligatory “racist” worked in there somewhere. The continued usage of the words, “Israeli commandos assault” rather than the correct terminology of “Israeli naval boarding party” influences the reader to a negative assumption of Israeli aggression, especially when coupled with “humanitarian aid” and “peace activists” instead of the dead give-away: ‘Al Qaeda.’ This reporting also depends on a general audience level of ignorance of maritime life, rules and international protocols.
A Coast Guard or Naval officer or seaman of any country with a navy recognizes the Israeli protocols awere perfectly normal procedure when dealing with a vessel that refuses to cooperate. If anything, our Coast Guard and Navy would fault the Israelis for having been under-armed, naively arriving with paintball riot control gadgets instead of standard boarding armaments. Our Coast Guard absolutely does not board with such ineffectual arms ANY vessel that is not cooperating when told to heave-to. They take NO risks like that or assume anything. Violent pirates, terrorists and vicious drug runners can be packed into the most innocuous sailing, fishing trawler, or top–of the line yacht, as the Israelis just discovered, the hard way - as Arizona ranchers have found, also the hard way, packed into apparently helpless stragglers at their own watering troughs.
The “humanitarian flotilla,” stuffed with picked out of the trash expired medicines as props, Leftist ‘activists’ and Al Qaeda terrorists hot to get a piece, literally, of any Israeli, was a trap.
What law enforcement officer in Arizona isn’t thinking right now about the promises of civil rights challenges and calls for “civil disobedience” to the very first arrest under SB1070 made that reveals an illegal alien, and of what possible pre-meditated entrapments of officers by colluding legals to provide material for lawsuits to undermine the law, actions meant to harass Arizona police and their ability to do their lawfully appointed jobs? They haven’t done anything wrong, yet they’ve been already labeled as ‘racists’ and ‘fascists,’ smeared from not only coast to coast but all the way to China by our very own State Department.
Out of state supporters of ‘doing nothing about illegal immigration,’ muster in Phoenix, throwing bottles at police, screaming and yelling, justifying vandalism and defacement for their “cause.” Governor Jan Brewer, like Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is depicted on placards as a Hitler, a holocaust-promoter … one of the world’s most cynically cruel twisting of reality, of decency, ever.
Arizona calls for a wall and border troops and is vilified just for the TALK of it. Israel builds a wall to stop suicide bombers and is heaped with scorn and criticism. Meanwhile, next-door Egypt, which is never criticized for building a wall between it and Gaza, is having its own Gaza problems: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8665674.stm
This week though, as a public gesture of solidarity for the “peaceful humanitarians,” ‘a boat-load of Ghandi … with clubs and brass knuckles” as Jonah Goldebrg noticed, who broke international maritime law by failing to heave-to at a weapons blockade, after days of ignoring Israeli orders to halt, and beat the tar out of a lawful boarding party with a on–record pre-meditated warlike intent to lynch the Israelis, Egypt opened its closed border fence with Gaza … and got what for it immediately in exchange? Gaza Palestinians shot and killed an Egyptian border guard. http://article.wn.com/view/2010/06/03/EGYPTOPT_Gazans_take_advantage_of_open_Egypt_border/
Where’s the international outrage about the violent comportment of the “Gazans?” Anyone going to sit with the grieving Egyptian family over their loss? Anyone able to explain why an Egyptian soldier is dead?
Israel is one of a number of countries, like India, Cyprus, Morocco, South Korea and critically, Egypt, which have even more aggressively extensive border fences or walls designed to totally control unauthorized human incursions. But only Israel is condemned for containing Gaza, not fellow-container Egypt. Only Arizona is condemned, not California, a state which erected a border fence to control Mexican incursions that forced the majority of the illegal migration away from California and thru Arizona in the first place.
Why does Turkey suddenly care? It’s a weapons blockade, the only reason Turkey would need to run that would be to run arms into Gaza; they can get everything else in without encountering the blockade. So, Turkey’s meddling agenda is not in Israel’s interest at all. Iran has stated a public policy to wipe Israel off the map. Having Iran installed in Gaza, which it is through Hamas, was not prevented by Israel, all they have done so far is contained its spread out of Gaza. Even with a fence, Israel suffers with rocket attacks from Gaza, over 2,000 rockets shot over from Gaza into Israeli towns and cities like Sederot. Meanwhile, as Democrats in cities like San Francisco and Seattle are sheltered by distance from it, Arizona suffers from the drug crime, murders and kidnappings – uncontained Mexican drug cartel criminal activity which continues to move steadily into the state, which can land in any Arizonan’s home or property at any time of the day, any day of the week. Why are California lawmakers interfering with Arizona’s attempts to restore the peace in Arizona? What is their real agenda?
When Mexico’s President Calderon meddles in American affairs and demands Arizona keep its border open and that US National Guard troops are not to stop illegals, “just drug and gun runners,” he wants what benefits Mexico, not what benefits the United States or the state of Arizona. Calderon’s self-serving plan ignores America’s needs and priorities to keep out any criminal gangs and foreign terrorists who search for easy illegal entry into the USA, as they would be blocked trying to enter legally, worse, allows for further advancement of these terrible elements into the United States. Since when should the USA destroy its integrity as a sovereign nation to please another nation? Since when should Israel destroy its integrity to allow for further advancement of terrible elements into it?
In Arizona and across the country to protest Arizona, signs are waved that say, “I didn’t cross the border, it crossed me,” and “Reconquista!” What’s the difference in tone , historical accuracy and purpose between that and the claims that Israel has no right to the land it sits on, even though the prophet Nehemiah rebuked the Geshem the Arab, Tobiah the Jordanian and Sanballat the Gazan 2,500 years ago that “You have no share in Jerusalem or any claim or historic right to it.” (Nehemiah 2:20).
It’s not hard to image the screams of outrage if America publically insisted, say, France to allow Libya to dictate how France patrols its border, or if America told Mexico that Guatemala should dictate Mexican border policing protocols or that Mexico should cede land to El Salvador “for peace.” That would be declared patent nonsense, but the same is dumped on Israel daily and ominously has become part of the standard rhetoric against Arizona.
Arizona and Israel share another commonality: The Obama Administration.
While Obama intones “I am the president,” and doesn’t “do” boycotts, feigning neutrality, he is found in venue after venue complaining about Arizona’s law, “believing” it to be “flawed.” While he tasks his Attorney General to announce intents of legal challenges, before even reading SB1070, Obama uses media time to praise sports teams for taking a political stand against the law, and he is deliberately silent on his political party’s destabilizing implementation of boycotts which are designed to encourage broader boycotting, and purposely inflict measurable economic harm on a fellow state in the Union.
President Barack Obama has instructed the Justice Department to examine the Arizona law that he said last week threatens to “undermine basic notions of fairness.” He also is pressing anew for national immigration legislation, saying, “If we continue to fail to act at a federal level, we will continue to see misguided efforts opening up around the country.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/27/eric-holder-federal-gover_n_553978.html
“Misguided” and “undermines basic notions of fairness”? Arizona used Federal law. But then on close inspection, Obama isn’t saying it’s “unconstitutional,” is he? Eric Holder’s comment was “ahh .. ahhh, ” but he expects to challenge SB1070 in court. So, while Obama murmurs general platitudes out of one side of his mouth, his subordinates and his political party in lockstep slam it from all directions, as he then praises all public posturing against it out of the other side of his mouth.
Since Obama is ignoring his Constitutional duty to “preserve domestic tranquility” between the fifty American states, why would anyone believe he is capable of or interested in preserving international tranquility between America and her traditional allies, such as Israel? He claims Israel is an American ally, but then broadcasts a different tone, which isn’t any solidarity.
As for Israel and the flotilla, Obama takes the, “will withhold comment while he’s waiting for the facts, but the Israelis acted stupidly.” That sure charmed the Cambridge Police Department; it’ll go over just as well with the bruised and battered Israelis, it’s just as ‘soothing’ to Arizona law enforcement officers like Sheriff Joe Arpaio who will have the entire force and weight of an Obama Administration bent on finding ‘racism’ on his head the hour SB1070 actually takes effect in July if any deputy or officer so much as sneezes wrong.
State Department ‘Travel Advisories’ : Israel and Arizona
The Obama and Democratic Party-administered U.S. State Department headed by Hillary Clinton doesn’t inspire much confidence in their sincerity of their support of Israel as an ally, with a former US Ambassador grandstanding as a flotilla participant, and Hillary Clinton herself having once schmoozy-kissed for the international media the wife of since deceased Yasser Arafat, the corrosive architect of the suicide bomber and the Intifada. A quick handshake from the US First Lady at the time would have been too cordial a greeting for a woman who was living high on donated millions, meant for “humanitarian aid” for Palestinians.
What sort of iron stomach does one need to be able to be in the same room as people who have killing Jews and Muslims as their resume ? Before Bill Clinton pulled him out of obscurity, resurrecting Arafat’s rancid career against Israel, Arafat had already made himself an unwanted violent government-undermining threat in Jordan, “chased out” and then in Tunisia, but who criticizes those nations? Only Israel received condemnation and exhortations and immense pressure to accept Arafat as a credible “peace partner” when nothing in his past substantiated any trace of “peaceful” attributes in the man.
Now, Hillary is Secretary of State, and on the news criticizing Israel:
“In an extraordinary interference with the sovereignty of a democratic society and its right of self-defense, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton said Wednesday that the United States wants “a prompt, impartial, credible and transparent investigation. … We are open to different ways of assuring a credible investigation, including international participation … ” (Anne Bayesky, FORBES).
Hillary’s brand of international diplomacy applied to ARIZONA:
“In an extraordinary interference with the sovereignty of a democratic society and its right of self-defense” …
State Dept. Spokesman P.J. Crowley … disputed the notion that Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner was apologizing to China … But he echoed other top Obama administration officials in describing the law as a gateway to “racial profiling”… Posner told … that the U.S. delegation brought up the Arizona law “early and often,” as an example of a trouble spot Americans need to work on. “It was mentioned in the first session, and as a troubling trend in our society and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination or potential discrimination…” http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/18/state-department-defends-official-expressed-regret-chinese-arizona-law/
While Chinese officials were picking their dropped jaws off the floor, Mexico issued a media grandstanding “Travel Advisory” to Mexicans who had any reckless thoughts of entering the Grand Canyon State to ominously warn Mexican citizens about the “heightened risk of being asked for your ID or passport in Arizona,” while Americans traveling to Mexico face robbery, carjacking, kidnapping and murder. Separate out the Mexican drug cartel-generated crime stats like “kidnapping” from Arizona, and one discovers it’s one of the safest, calmest places to be in the world, illegal or legal. Where was Secretary of State Hillary Clinton defending Arizonans by telling the Mexican government to “stuff the phony posturing”?
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have so much in common right now, Phoenix and Tel Aviv should be declared sister cities, Prescott and Jerusalem should swap keys as the historical capitals, and declare Arizona and Israel solidarity as fellow “pariah states” in this “International Conspiracy of Hypocrisy.” 3
3 “International Conspiracy of Hypocrisy,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
STATEMENT BY JOHN MUNGER ON CLEAN ELECTIONS PR PLAN
(PHOENIX, AZ) January 29, 2010 – Republican Gubernatorial candidate John Munger released the following statement:
After suffering a crippling defeat in federal court, the Citizens Clean Elections Commission has decided to spend $2 million of its $12.6 million 2010 budget on a public relations campaign designed to promote itself as having been created “by the people, for the people.”
No amount of whitewashing can cover up the recent U.S. District Court ruling that Arizona’s Clean Elections Act violates the free speech rights of traditional candidates through the use of matching funds. And there’s no getting around the fact that the “people” who ultimately benefit from the Act are professional politicians who use it as a money trough to fund their election campaigns.
$2 million can buy a lot of PR. But Arizona voters are smart enough to look past the hype and see the scam that “clean elections” has unfortunately become.
I watched the comment fly all day on the Mecum post (below) and have to admit that I agree with a lot of what our readers have said on both sides. But allow me to clarify even more.
The word “lynch mob” came up several times and I would have to agree with those who brought it up that we need to be careful not to become one.
We know nothing about the relationship betweet Mr. Mecum and the woman mentioned in the complaint. It could have been an acquaintance or even romantic situation but that is none of our business. If Brett was infatuated to the point of pursuing her or in today’s politically correct language “stalking” her, she obviously didn’t harbor the same feelings and felt compelled to file a complaint with the authorities.
I am surprised that he felt that Voter Vault was the most appropriate way to find out how to get in contact with her. Why not use Facebook, the phonebook or the Maricopa County Assessor’s website which contains the names and addresses of individual homeowners? Unless she was a renter, he could have stayed within the boundaries of the law by accessing another source of data. However Commenter #29 has a point if that is what the Voter Vault agreement actually states. As a precinct committeeman, I’ve had to sign a non-disclosure usage agreement to access voter data. And it’s hard to argue with the fact that the law states that it is a class 6 felony. Of anyone who should know the terms and conditions of using Voter Vault and it’s proper usage, you would expect it to be a party official. Right?
Let’s face it, incidents like this whether fabricated, conspired or true, are a serious public relations problem for the Arizona Republican Party. I would presume that the State Executve Committee would investigate and make a decision whether there are personnel issues it needs to address and whether it needs to take actions to avoid further public relations or even liability issues. Any inquiry by the EC should be thorough and deliberative and avoid embracing a lynch mob mentality.
I don’t know if Brett has “enemies,” as he claims, who want to destroy his career. We know very little about the woman Brett was pursuing. Could she have been a Democrat trying to set him up? Thus far, she hasn’t stepped forward to verify her story. That leaves it up to MCSO to make a determination.
To the broader question. This is where I would really love our reader’s feedback. Should incidents like this ever be posted on Sonoran Alliance? I decided to allow the post to stand because it was not merely a disagreement over policy matters. In the past we have covered stories about Republicans who have been caught doing illegal or unethical activities. Commenter #9 alluded to Mark Sanford, Larry Craig and Mark Foley – all Republicans who did something that got them into trouble and hurt the party (and probably cost elections from a collateral damage standpoint).
Would our readers prefer NOT to see posts that reveal Republicans who break the law or act unethical? Is it better if we sweep it under the carpet, look the other way or just remain silent? Does our silence equate to condoning these acts and ultimately causing more damage? Democrats are always quick to remind us about the log in our own eyes whenever we point out the splinter in theirs. Has anyone in our party ever thought about getting our own house in order or, do we always want to respond with, “well, they do it too?”
Back to the question. Are posts like the Mecum post from the “genre” of the circular firing squad or do they really have a value in the long-run? Do they hurt us more than help us and do they restore credibility to our principles and agenda? I always believed that we were the party of reason, consistency and moral absolutes. If we can’t strive for those ideals then what’s the point of trying to make our lives and country a better place?
Now it’s your turn…
He’s deeply involved with gubernatorial candidate and Mayor of Paradise Valley, Vernon Parker. Simultaneously, he’s handled various aspects of Sheriff Joe’s political campaigns.
Most recently, he hosted a fundraising event at his posh Paradise Valley home to benefit conservative radio host and former congressman, J.D. Hayworth.
Suddenly, he pops up as the public relations guru to handle controversial Mayor of Phoenix, Phil Gordon, who is now under the microscope of government watchdogs and the press over his relationship and potential conflict of interest girlfriend, Elissa Mullany.
Gordon, who began dating Mullany March, 2008, two months after separating from his wife of 15 years, appointed Mullany to three city commissions over the period of 2004-2007. Now the Mayor has hired Jason Rose to help him get out of hot water over the relationship and potential conflicts of interest.
All this brings into question why would a public relations guru like Rose go to work for a Democrat like Gordon? Given Rose’s longstanding relationship with Sheriff Joe Arpaio and JD Hayworth, how does he manage to juggle his professional relationships between two diametrically opposed camps? One thing is clear, he is a master of political maneuverings and machinations and only he knows how to maneuver through them without becoming the target.