Standards of Service

One of the most disappointing effects of this whole illegal immigration fiasco is the self-centered sanctimonious attitude of those who have built a personal largesse in our commuities as business leaders and elected officials by using their status as conservative Christian leaders.  Most of these people have given to conservative organizations with a tax exempt status where they received recognition and a tax break or they have given to a political organization where they garnered personal power and authority, while parading their Christian conservative credentials to the public. 

Over the years, they have curried favor with the power brokers so they might gain even more personal wealth by conspiring in the violation of the rule of law and their obligation to defend the sovereignty of this country.  It is an abomination that in these times when our very existence as a nation is under attack from foreign and domestic forces, that they would take this opportunity to stand up and fight with those forces against the people of this state.

The citizens of Arizona are oppressed, as surely as if they were under the thumb of a foreign nation, by the illegal invasion that is advanced with the cooperation of our federal government and the business leaders who are supposed to be defending us.  It’s Time, to refer back to a statewide initiative passed under the direction John Shadegg, for Arizonans to Wake UP!

It is important to note that the standards of proper leadership in this country were well founded by the statements and actions of the men who started this United States of America with these words from the Declaration of Independence. 

“And for the Support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honour.”

A friend referred me to a portion of scripture this morning that speaks to the standards of service for Christian leaders – Nehemiah 5:14-19.  Here we we see one of the foremost principles of leadership. A leader must set the example at all times and under all conditions – even to the point of setting aside his or her own personal rights. Nehemiah did just that!

As governor of the province of Judah with authority from the Persian emperor, Nehemiah could have collected exorbitant taxes from the people and taken a huge cut for himself.

Furthermore, as governor he could have lived in luxury, had the equivalent of his own personal helicopter to avoid the travel inconveniences,  and just directed the project of rebuilding the wall without getting his own hands dirty. And finally, Nehemiah could have manipulated the project for his own advantage in order to make a name for himself – even inscribing his name in stone on the wall.

But Nehemiah did none of these things! He did not tax the people (30% of our state taxes are spent on those who invaded our land that these business leaders are using to increase their wealth) and he didn’t sit back and “call the shots” without working on the wall himself (These businessmen have done nothing to secure the border of to work for an improved system). And when he reprimanded the more wealthy people for selfishly taking advantage of the poor, he did not do so without selflessly providing for the less fortunate-out of his own pocket! Nehemiah denied his entitlements, WITHIN THE LAW, let alone outside the law, because his bottom line was not to make a name for himself or to gain personal fortune, but to be of service to his country and the people.

It’s TIme that these business and political leaders are held accountable for their actions.  This country will not continue to exist if we allow the Trojan Horse of this illegal invasion to go unchecked so that a few can line their pockets with more lucre.

If Mac Magruder, Jerry Colangelo, and others go through with their threats to destroy the very political and community leaders like Russell Pearce, Speaker Weiers, Randy Pullen, Don Goldwater, etc. who are fighting for the sovereignty of this nation and the enforcement of the rule of law, the people should consider what steps they should take in response to these nefarious actions – as alluded to in another article, can anyone spell boycott?

Perhaps It’s Time to implement the rebellion – not revolution – espoused by Thomas Jefferson.  The last rebellion against the political and business establishment was the election of Ronald Reagan that changed the course of history.  We are well past Jefferson’s recommended twenty year time period for such action.


  1. Iris Lynch says


    Further, the ‘good guys’, Goldwater, Pullen, Pearce, Andrew Thomas et al are absolutely maligned by the brainwashing media and the ‘economic terrorists’. Fortunate are we in Arizona and a few other states (Georgia is doing well) that we have these men who are willing to put their livlihood on the line. Yes, the opposition is so close to having achieved quasi-dictatorial ownership of our government, that they will only stop short of (?) to bring our ‘mavericks’ into line. Too late. The story has gotten out, even though it took two decades to overcome the wall of misinformation erected by the media and its bosses. Of course, there are still people who are wise to be fearful of the ‘economic terrorists’ as they can, and have, sued many a stand-up patriot, like rancher Roger Barnett. And even while winning such a suit, could lose everything. Our next law needs to take away the availability of frivilous lawsuits which are nothing more than a weapon to keep our mouths shut.

  2. Beware: The Pharaohs of slave labor and marketplace monopolies in Arizona are on the hunt. After having lost their place at the table in Republican circles, they also suffered a crippling blow to their power when their political puppet strings were snipped by the unruly masses. Their handpicked generals were inundated and paralyzed, completely unable to marshal any forces to keep the slave labor status quo.

    Slave labor in Arizona has been the mother’s milk of these cheaters. They are so use to getting their way that they will stop at nothing to continue raking in the big bucks. Wink.

    Watch out! Under the guise of the AZ Chamber of Commerce, all wearing a crooked smile, they will mow you down, too! Wake up Arizona! Greasy Big Mac’s, cheap used cars, cut-rate, shoddy housing shacks, and a big pig drunk from sucking at the public tax trough will be on your television and in your living room soon. Wake up Arizona. The time to remain vigilant is now!

  3. Common Sense says

    Alright folks- Since you all insist on the relentless trashing of the business ‘elite’- let’s get facts straight. This bill will hurt all of Arizona’s jobs. This isn’t the Chamber of Commerce trying to protect crooked business.
    I am most concerned about the employer who does everything by the book. Imagine a general contractor who has a potential employee come to him with all necessary documents and paperwork. This potential employee happens to be hispanic. The employer 1) fears that even after said potential employee passes Basic Pilot and I-9, etc. hires said employee only to risk being informed later that the employee was in fact illegal, and he will be losing his license (presuming Goldwater/Pearce’s ballot initiative passes) or 2) fears that said employee has false paperwork- turns him away and gets slapped with a discrimination lawsuit. Small mom & pop’s would be crippled by thousand’s in attorney fees and losing their licenses for a few days.

    The law and the initiative don’t give guidance to this.

    Alright- tear me apart- as you will. I’ll take the venom in stride. I’m just asking you to take a look at yourselves and your own employees and ask your self ‘What if?’

  4. Fact vs Myth says

    Common Sense:

    I believe that you have common sense, but you do not have the facts about the Initiative. Have you even read the Initiative, or are you just going off the talking points of those who want to continue to hire illegals at less than the market should bear?

    The Initiative specifically PROTECTS business owners who use the Basic Pilot Program. the Initiative states that the employer must hire illegals KNOWINGLY to be at risk, and the Initiative specifically states that the use of the Basic Pilot Program is rebuttable proof that the hiring of any illegal was not done knowingly.

    Basic Pilot gives an answer within seconds for 92% of those submitted, and ups that to 99.7% within three days. An employer cannot terminate a person without just cause, however, the certification by a branch of the federal government that the person is ineligible for hire is just cause.

    The hysteria about this program is ludicrous as more than 15,000 corporations have been using this program for many months and the number is growing on a daily basis. In addition, there have been no discrimination suits against those employers who use the program. Again, employers call and verify the eligibility instead of trying to make the determination as to the reliability of the paperwork presented.

    Second, the small businesses in the NFIB and ASBA are generally in support of the Initiative as are many of the businesses in the Chamber of Commerce. Lets get real, the leadership of the Chamber are in partnership with McCain.

    In-n-Out hires properly, pays more than McDonalds, charges a little more for their product, and is a growing business. They put out a quality product, prepared and presented by the school age children of legal citizens, make a profit and give a reasonable employment opportunity to our youth. I think that is a wonderful business plan. Maybe Mac could follow suit and keep the moral high ground.

    Mom and Pop stores are not members of the Chamber and are the ones who are put most at risk by the illegal actions of the large corporations. Many of them have already been run out of business by these unfair labor practices.

    Where is your concern for all the other issues in the article. Are none of them of any consequence to you? The deaths, the property loss, the medical access loss, the 30% of the state general fund costs, the criminal activity where 80% of all new crime is being committed by the illegal aliens. Are these all inconsequential to you?

    Finally, what about the rule of law – a keystone of our Republic. If I am the owner of a delivery business, should my people be allowed to drive 80 on city streets, run red lights, run other vehicles off the road that cause injuries and deaths, simply because it will economically injure my bottom line financially if I am held accountable for their illegal actions. If I know that they are dangerous drivers, my insurance company will drop my coverage if I continue to keep them as drivers and that will put me at risk to lose my business. And, I will not be sued for discrimination under those circumstances if I terminate them.

    If we used the street where you live as a cut through, you would be the first in line to condemn my company and demand action by the law.

    Thats the real common sense.

  5. Thanks Fact: You got it right and I hope the readers take note of the actual facts. If you follow the rules, you are PRESUMED INNOCENT. You have to knowingly and repeatedly hire illegals in order to lose your license. In other words, you have to be cheating, get caught, and cheat again.

    That behavior is not defensible anyway.

    You hear the AZ Repugnant quoting all of these business owners talking about how “they do it all right but what if we get fooled by documents that check out alright? We’ll lose everything… Boo Hoo Hoo”. That’s a lie and its not by accident that they keep using these quotes to try and scare people. If you do it right and the system is fooled by fake documents, you are PRESUMED INNOCENT because you did it right.

    You don’t turn people away because “you fear” fake paperwork. Use the system, check the number. If its good, you can hire. If its bad, you can’t. Its that easy!

  6. Frank Soto says

    Actually Tim, you should re-read the bill. You are NOT presumed innocent, that is what is wrong with the bill. If you used the pilot program, that is an AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the charge, to demonstrate that you did not “knowingly” or “intentionally” (note that these are two separate mens rea terms, and carry different requirements and sanctions). And what is this “repeatedly hire illegals” Tim? The bill specifies no amount. It seems to me from reading the bill a few times that it is possible to lose your license if you 1) allegedly hire an illegal immigrant 2) are unable to prove your affirmative defense (an affirmative defense moves the burden of proof from the government to the defendant, fyi) 3) fail to file a “quarterly report” of all your hirings, etc., at the business where you previously allegedly hired an illegal immigrant. I could be wrong about this possibility, but from my reading of the bill, I don’t think it would be precluded.

    I think a bill like this is important, but this is not that bill. Like everything else, the burden of proof should be upon the government to prove either knowingly or intentionally, the bill as worded is quite muddy on this point. You like to put PRESUMED INNOCENT all in caps Tim, but the fact is YOU AREN’T!

  7. Frank,

    The term presumed innocent in a court of law means that in a trial the prosecution must prove that you are guilty, not that you are innocent no matter what the prosecution presents.

    An affirmative defense against a charge of robbing a Circle K in Phoenix at 10pm last night is that you have proof that you were in New York City at the time of the robbery. You have a plane ticket receipt and a friend in NYC who says you were there. Now it is up to the prosecution to prove that your affitmative defense is not true and that you were indeed in Phoenix at the time.

    The same thing would occur in the case of hiring an illegal. The prosecution says you knowingly hired the illegal and you present the I-9 and the records showing that you called the Basic Pilot Program for employment eligibility. Now it would be up to the prosecution to prove that your submission of proof is forged or falsely presented.

    There is no law anywhere that says an innocent person cannot be charged with a crime. It happens every day and is the reason that we have people declared not guilty every day by judges and juries.

    However, just because there is a charge, you are presumed innocent by the jury unless the prosecution presents unrebutted evidence in a trial to prove your guilt. HB2779 provides an affirmative defense specifically identified in the law against the charges and would be in the same category that you were in NYC at the time of the robbery.

    So, you’re both right, but Tim is righter. The reason you can’t go further in that area is that some employer somewhere will try to falsely document that he called Basic Pilot when he did not do so, just as some defendents will falsely claim they were in NYC when they were not. It goes from an alibi to an affirmative defense when you present the airline ticket – stamped as used by you – and the testimony, pictures, other evidence that you could not have committed the crime.

    Forget the mumbo jumbo put out by those who are supporters of continuing the current system of violating our laws with impunity. It just will not work anymore. Follow the law and your business should prosper if it provides a service at a reasonable price for the quality, because the playing field will be the same for everyone.

    When everyone is paying the going rate for labor by competing for skilled legal employees, Mom and Pop small businesses will have the opportunity to compete against large corporations and franchisees. Mac Magruder, obviously, does not want that competition.

  8. Frank Soto says

    Actually GOP PK, you have confused the difference between an affirmative defense, and an elemental defense. If you are a lawyer, go back to your 1L crim law class:

    The prosecution has the burden of proving the “elements” of a crime: the actus reus, mens rea, and any attendant circumstances. An arrested person is presumed innocent on those elements, and thus the government has to carry the burden. The defense then has two (well more, but let’s keep it straight forward) modes of “attack.” They can attack the elements. So in your robbery example, they would be attacking the actus reus of the crime. That is NOT an affirmative defense, it is an elemental defense. They are saying: “well, I couldn’t have done the actus reus, even if I had the mens rea (say you actually were planning to rob it the next night).” One would also attack the attendant circumstance, since being present is required for robbery. Again this is NOT an affirmative defense.

    The typical affirmative defenses are: insanity, duress, necessity, etc. An insanity defense SHIFTS the burden to the defense. You have to affirmatively prove (hence an affirmative defense) each element of your defense now, just like previously the government had to prove the elements of the crime.

    Do you see the difference? I would be suprised if this law passes constitutional muster, but that will have to be waited for until next term (hopefully, if you even care, I predict that the 9th Cir will hold it unconstitutional because of improper burden shifting, and SCOTUS will deny cert.).

  9. Its a distinction without a difference in this case. The Initiative will be the law and the law will say that the use of Basic Pilot eliminates the “knowingly” standard which would result in the loss of the business license.

    You have to include the “knowingly” standard in this case, which is not included in the criminal laws you use in all of your explanation.

    This is a different standard than used in criminal law, unless you use the insanity plea.

  10. To go a little further, the element of the prosecution is that you have illegals working for you. To use your example, you have two courses to proceed. You can prove that the people working for you are legal and therefore the prosecution is wrong or you can meet the standard within the law and prove that you did not hire them “knowingly” with the law stating that use of the Basic Pilot Program is proof that you have met that standard.

    It is still simple due to the construction of the law and the methods you can use to protect yourself from losing your business license.

  11. Passonate Moderate says

    The Liberty Tree needs to be refreshed from time to time with the blood of tyrants and patriots.

  12. I think that you are right GOP PK that the intention of the bill is as you stated it to be. I think the problem comes in in that the bill itself used the words “affirmative defense.” If I was to be one of the lawyers bringing in a lawsuit against this particular bill (I am not, just fyi :)) that is how I would go about it.

    Yes Passonate (sic) Moderate, it does seem to be in vogue these days to quote Jefferson, or modify his sayings. I am interested however in what you actually mean by saying that.

  13. Frank,

    What about the initiative? It is more clearly written than what could be gotten througn the legislative process and answers most if not all your concerns.

  14. Common Sense says

    I think that Frank Soto, as an attorney, has done an excellent analysis. I have read the bill several times, which is why I have many concerns about it. I’m even more concerned about the initiative, which is more archaic than the bill that was signed into law.

    GOP PK- please keep in mind that the Basic Pilot program has a 4% error rate. 4%. Would you be willing to risk your job on a flawed system? Please re-read the bill. Just because you enter a name into the Basic Pilot program does not mean that you are free and in the clear if you have an illegal that you hired that was cleared through the system as a legal employee.

    If someone files an anonymous complaint against you (maybe its a disgruntled former employee or a competitor), the AG’s office by law has to investigate this complaint. Which by the way, the AG’s office is also lacking in crucial funding to investigate …but that’s another flaw in the bill.

    So now, as a small business owner, you have a complaint filed against you- you thought that you did everything by the book, and you hire an attorney to protect you and your business. Attorney’s aren’t cheap- and next thing you know, you have a $25k attorney bill. What sort of impact do you think that has on a mom and pop business? The big corporations can absorb this- but a small business? This is crippling!

  15. The perfect defense for an employer is the truth, isn’t it? So, rather than focusing on the minimal standard employers have to meet, perhaps the focus should be on how to determine the truth of someone’s immigration status? I have some insight to offer here having worked extensively in immigrating primarily Hispanic people as a result of the 1986 act.

    In addition to completing the I-9 and calling the Basic Pilot Program, my advice for employers would be: educate yourself on understanding the coding imbedding in the documents, study the history of different types of documents that prove legal status over the past 20 years, understand the major methods of immigration, conduct at least 2 interviews with a prospective hire and compare stories making a time-line of events, learn a minimal Spanish vocabulary relating to your business and the legal immigration process to keep your translator accountable, set aside enough time, and keep meticulous notes.

    After doing all that, I was able to determine someone’s status with 99% accuracy. If ICE is unable to help with understanding the documents, you may have to seek and hire a former ICE officer for some consulting work. That would be cheaper in the long run versus attorney’s fees for a violation.

    I’m not taking sides in the Wake Up debate, only offering another viewpoint to the discussion that might prove helpful.

  16. First of all, the Basic Pilot Program does not currently have a 4% error rate. THey made a presentation to the legislature and they validated that they are able to give an okay to hire on 92% of the submissions within 20 seconds. Then they are able to give an okay on 90+% of the balance within three days. That is a rate of over 99.6%. Maybe what you meant is .4%

    If you think the law is ambiguous in any area, I therefore assume that you support the initiative. As posted above, the initiative is clearer than could be accomplished through the legislative process.

    The Initiative will be the law, because it was passed by the voters and the law will say that the use of Basic Pilot eliminates any liability to the “knowingly” standard if the employer uses the Basic Pilot Program. This will prevent any legal action which would result in the loss of the business license.

    So, since you want to eliminate illegal hiring practices, I assume that you are in support of the initiative and would like to get some signature petitions to make sure it gets on the ballot. YOu can get those at

  17. kralmajales says

    This is open warfare on the very prominent and important business constituency of the Republican party. Common sense is right, this will cost jobs, growth, development, and the economy of Southern Arizona, which is primarily built on developing land and building houses for retirees and those others who move here.

    The wall will hurt trade with Mexico which brings millions and millions into S. Arizona businesses.

    Businesses know this. The kept silent for years because they were Republicans and none of the nutty proposals you all floated had much of a chance of really being enacted. They knew that tough on immigratin meant Republican office holders, which also meant less regulation, lower taxes, and business friendly zoning.

    Until…you bit the hand that feeds ya.

    Open warfare. I may stop writing and just watch.

  18. kralmajales,
    You appear to be the only one that can sense the tragedy for what it is. The “Employer Sanction” measure will hurt the AZ economy and will probably hurt more natural Americans who now enjoy being on a payroll than those Illegals that came to get a job. There is a fine difference between being on the payroll versus holding a job. The latter involves work. Employer sanctions is nothing more than shameless pandering to the lowest instincts of the Xenophobes. If indeed our only concern were the illegality of the illegals, our legislature could have easily written an Arizona Guest Worker Law that included a time limited identification card,in connection with a certificate of gainful employment coupled with a Guest Worker Health Insurance Premium Policy, paid for jointly by the employers and guest workers, collection of proper withholding taxes and a sunset clause at which time the worker must return to his/her homeland. That would have solved the need for unskilled laborers, the seasonal need for the agriculture business, a screening mechanism against criminals and it would have ended the chaos of undocumented disorder, slave labor and human smuggling and the construction of a fence or wall that is nothing more than a waste of resources.

  19. Party Platform Guy says

    In this case the last shall be first.

    We all know you are a European Socialist, so your recommendations come from that perspective. Thankfully, America was founded on the premise that government should only do what the individual cannot do. All of the socialist health plans are in rigor mortis and so are their patients who need timely care.

    We are also a country founded under the premise of following the rule of law. If you don’t like a law, you have the right to try to change it, but until that happens, you have the legal, ethical and moral responsibility to follow it.


    It is really interesting that you and the open violators of employment laws are to the left of EJ Montini. I never thought that would happen, but read his article in todays Repugnant. Read it online so as not to give them any money.

    If these businesses were interested in solving the problem, they could have pressured for legislative action fifteen years ago to secure the border, ten years ago to implement a temporaty worker program that worked, and five years ago to stop city councils from violating federal law with their Sanctuary City pollicies.

    If these upright(?) business leaders would have done that, they and the citizens of this state would not have the problems now. They would have benefitted from larger tax cuts in the interim.

    Instead they chose to violate the law and thought that their influence in the political process put them above the law. They were right for a long time, but the people are fed up at this point and they have brought their house of cards to accounting.

  20. Frank Soto says


    What’s with the Ad Hom? Why does it matter what perspective someone comes from, do you not believe that truth exists outside of individual people’s worldviews? I don’t think it matters what perspective someone comes from, they have the ability to be right just as often as you do (and probably much more so than I!).

    This seems to me to be such a difficult and sensitive issue that both sides need to come together and work towards a solution, but instead we just attack each other. I think the hardest thing for me is I wonder what I would have done if I would have been many of these illegal immigrants, and frankly, I would have done the same thing they did. Maybe you think that is immoral of me, I guess. I do have to wonder though about the whole “let’s shed blood thing, quote Thomas Jefferson” attitude that so many Republicans on this site are quoting (see above!), and then turn around and say “follow the law!” Um, which is it?

  21. When you are participating in political debate, it always matters what the perspective of the other debater is coming from. Many times that colors everything the person says and is critical to how they got to their conclusion.

    Neither Thomas Jefferson nor I advocated the shedding of blood. If you read my post, I stated rebellion and that the last rebellion of the people was the elction of Ronald Reagan. The last I checked that was done without bloodshed.

    The problem is that the current system has caused thousands of people to shed their blood to get here, and thousands more shed their blood by the criminal activities of those who have violated our sovereignty and rule of law by coming here illegally.

    To reduce the shedding of blood, follow the law. It will work 99% of the time and those two are not in conflict with each other.

  22. nightcrawler says

    This bill needed to be drafted in conjunction with a guest worker program. All of you who pontificate about bureaucracy can be assured that the result of all of this window dressing will be a very large public expenditure and a redirection of the AGs office from handling true crime cases to handling a burger flipper and/or gardener without the proper paperwork. This is not efficient for anyone. A guest worker program must be the next step in order to avoid an economic collapse in this state. I have said it before, this legislation will be far reaching. The Arizona economy has a history of boom and bust, witness the late 1980s and the savings and loan fiasco. You get bet the big corporate strategic planners are watching this closely. I read some where (sorry no link) Microsoft is opening offices in Canada to offset the risk of unfavorable immigration legislation. It is not just about the unskilled folks. It is about the educated future leaders of this nation. Bottom line the baby will be thrown out with the bath water. It is all about the hassle factor. Businesses just won’t put up with it and we will all lose. Again, a guest worker program must accompany this bill to be effective.

  23. Frank Soto says

    You are right GOP PK, but it appeared to me that PPG was dismissing an argument not based on its factual basis, but because of the person who said it.

    See comment 11 above about TJ. Maybe a more authoritative source:

    I actually thought it was called the “Reagan Revolution” not the “Regan Rebellion.”

    I agree with you GOP PK, I just don’t know which direction that necessarily leads. If the government grants amnesty as the law… If the government ‘opens the borders’ (which I am not advocating for FYI), then that is the law. How do you decide which laws you are going to be for and against? I don’t know that it is as straight forward as you are saying.

    I would have to say that 99% is WAY overstated, but that’s because I believe that abortion is murder (which I believe you do as well). The law is you can abort your unborn child… hm, probably not a symmetrical argument, but you get the point :).

  24. Frank,

    RvW allows abortion – which I strongly disagree with – but but does not mandate it. where the rule of law comes in, I also do not believe in bombing abortion clinics that shed more blood. To go back to my post, work to change the law if you disagree with it, which I do with RvW.

    If the government grants amnesty, it is the law and I will follow it, while working to change it. These employers willfully violated the law and want to be held blameless and considered righteous while continuing to violate it.

    It was called the Reagan Revolution – also bloodless, but I was referring to the Jefferson quote whereby, I believe, either word can be used.


    I support a guest worker program where needed. We currently have a guest worker program, but those people are not here illegally. I don’t know who is pontificating more on this issue, but I do know that our system only works when everyone plays within the framework of laws that are passed or not passed with the will of the people.

  25. nightcrawler says

    PS I found the link. I read it in the Washington Post.

  26. To complete the Jeffersonian quote… “What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants…”

    But here is the rest, and maybe the most relevant to some of this discussion… “It is its natural manure.”

  27. Frank Soto,(post # 20)
    Thank you for coming to my defense. I hope I’ll be able some day to reciprocate the favor.
    I was always under the impression that this BLOG site is of conservative nature and designed to discuss conservative matters of conservative’s concern.
    For this fact alone ad hominem attacks should be frowned upon.
    Now then, being called a European Socialist is not something that bothers me, I’ve been called worse.
    What it really indicates is that the caller ran out of arguments germane to the discussion, and had nothing else to contribute but a retort to an ad hominem attack. Funny indeed as he opened the discussion by initiating the post in the first place.
    I always get a kick out of posters that hide themselves behind pseudonyms like “Party Platform Guy” sort of given themselves an aura of holy sophistication, but without substance. I admit I have no idea how much he knows about the Republican Platform, but I was in New York when it was drafted, when it was read and when it was approved.
    I know the Republican Platform.
    Calling me a Socialist just tells me and everyone that knows me that the platform guy has no concept of socialism and absolutely no inkling about my philosophical beliefs.
    It is likely he is confused with Hillary’s social Medicare adventure or only heaven knows what goes on within his imagination.
    Let me get back to and addressing the root of the discussion, as I understood it; the Illegal Immigration Dilemma.
    It began when under the administration of L.B.J. the heretofore U.S Immigration policy that was based on an established “Quota System” was kicked into the ash can and replaced by a bleeding heart “Let us unite families” concept.
    That, and in connection with a totally inept bureaucratic Immigration and Naturalization Agency [INA] was the foundation of unrestraint influx of willing workers of Hispanic origin to migrate to the United States. Keep in mind, the United States had JOBS, Hispanics needed work. Physical law dictates (whether one likes it or not) that any vacuum will be filled.
    Now then, and without picking apart the abundant nonsense PPG expounded in his original post let me get back to what I said, and why.
    The loving Christian Religious Right that wishes to bring every Zygote and every frozen embryo inside and outside of a Petri dish to full term is terribly upset when a Hispanic mother needs the service of a hospital to deliver a baby, and they lament with no end the cost burden it imposes on the American tax payer. We have all heard this over and over again.
    So I suggested in my previous post that any (we have to agree we need one) guest worker program includes a provision that absorbs undue health care expenditures for “Non American Users” of our health care system funded by the beneficiaries, who else?.
    And what does the Platform Guy do? He picks on me for that. Duh?

  28. Party Platform Guy says


    Are you insulted because you were identified as European or because you were identified as having socialistic tendencies in this matter? I didn’t think you thought you would believe being European was an adhominem attack. I thought you were proud of your heritage.

    You are in favor of a law that mandates government parameters of individual employer agreements with their employees. That sounds like socialism and therefore is not an ad hominem attack just a statement of fact.

    Being in New York City when the Platform was passed, but probably not when it was drafted, is fine but does that mean anything as far as your support of it? It seems I have read other places of your disregard of major parts of it and therefore you would not be called a Platform conservative.

    One of the historical highlights of our country is that the market conditions determine the employer/employee relationship. Some people work for certain employers, ie; government, for less money than they might make in private enterprise in order to have the benefits of insurance and perceived stability. Others want to make more money and do not feel they need the benefit package that the government provides.

    Therein lies free choice in a free enterprise system. For the govennment to mandate those parameters is socialism – more accurately fascism which I believe you are also knowledgeable about. Just in case someone else might misunderstand, a definition of fascism is “A philosophy or system of government that is marked by stringent social and economic control.” Like mandated health care provisions.

    As to your statement re: the Hispanic mother needing medical care, all conservative, or as you state, loving Christian religious right person (speaking of ad hominem), believe she should have proper medical care. However we do not believe her relatives should risk her life and the life of the baby to bypass medical facilities in Mexico to violate our sovereignty so the baby will be an anchor baby.

    Those actions have created the current mess where there are no OB GYN doctors south of Tucson available to serve the Americans who need those services and has resulted in the closing of emergency services and hospitals in that area.

    It is apparent that with the population growth in Mexico – not even counting the illegal exodus of the invaders to the US – that there are adequate medical facilities to safely deliver children in Mexico and it should not be the responsibility of the American taxpayer to subsidize the medical costs of a foreign nation.

  29. Frank Soto says

    “Therein lies free choice in a free enterprise system. For the govennment to mandate those parameters is socialism”

    Isn’t that exactly what this bill is doing? Mandating the parameters of who an employer can employ? Aren’t you now arguing against your own statements?

    I would support an employer sanctions bill, but not this one for the reasons laid out above. I personally think that a “fines” type sanction is much more effective, because it is not as drastic, not as cumbersome, and works into the market, instead of taking the business OUT of the market.

    That is interesting about the OBGYN down south, I had not heard that there were none south of Tucson.

  30. This bill only says to hire people who are legally entitled to be in this country, and therefore, eligible to work here. It does not set the parameters of the employer/employee pay or benefits. We have never thought that an employer could hire anyone he wanted to do any job they want. We do not let an employer hire a ten year old to handle molten steel in a steel factory.

  31. nightcrawler says

    GOP PK,

    I do agree that for thousands of years people have used the church and its congregations for less than pious purposes. Clearly, hypocrites should be identified. Many wear their faith on their sleeves as a fashion accessory, even within our own party right here in Arizona. It is all about networking and vote gathering. My point is that guys like Mac and Jerry have done a world of good in this community and should not have their faith called out into question. I’m not suggesting that you have said so, but others have insinuated it. That is the reach.

  32. Platform Guy,
    First let me tell you that I felt more amused than insulted. Should I ever need to be reminded what I am, all I need to do is look at my mail. There is not a day in the week when I don’t receive a plea for support. From the White House to the Reagan Ranch, from the RNC to the CRNC, from Republicans running for State, County, City or Federal office from Arizona to Illinois and other places in between, they all know what I am. And if it is not a letter of solicitation, it’s a thank you card for a contribution from a week ago that I get.
    I know who I am and what I am, you do not.
    I hardly slept a wink last night, I could not figure out what I may have said nor done that prompted you to confuse me for a Socialist.
    Finally it dawned on me. You must have found out that I own a pick-up truck without a gun rack.
    I was willing to let it go with that. But now you challenge me, and you challenge a suggestion that I made, a suggestion, if it were implemented would knock the wind out of the major argument that you and Mr. Pearce continuously make. Namely that “Illegal Immigration” is costing us American tax-payers tons of money.
    The cost of education argument is bogus; firstly because the education system is largely funded by real estate taxes, therefore whoever sends kids to school has to live somewhere and is taxed by the system either directly or through rent paid to a landlord. I will skip over another funding mechanism namely the proceeds from school trust land that came to us courtesy of the Federal Government that acquired that land for next to nothing from you know whom.
    As far as ELL program is concerned, it is pricy but it is a federal mandate and let’s no lay blame on innocent children. If you don’t like it, like I don’t like it let’s talk to the guys we send to Washington to do something about.
    Next, the cost of the Illegals health care; OK, I made a suggestion and you call me a Socialist. You and other in your camp repeatedly cite the burden that we, American tax payers, have to suffer because of Illegals that come here to work and take undue advantage of Services.
    You even named your post: “Standards of Service”. You berate me with lofty words like: “free choice in a free enterprise system”. It may have escaped your attention that the Government already mandates parameters, as you call them that obligate an employer to collect withholding taxes, social security taxes, and Medicare taxes from their employees.
    You call me a Socialist for suggesting a measure that would essentially have the illegal beneficiaries of health care recipients pay for such service through payroll deductions rather than society at large pay for it. You have a strange way to define socialism.
    I have a problem with anyone using the phrase “Anchor Baby” and the fact that it has been coined by individuals who are generally found in the Right to Life corner and against a women’s right to make her own decision concerning her own health just does not give me comfort.
    Tell me, do you have a problem with the Government to mandate parameters for consultation between a health professional and a patient that includes watching ultra sound presentations, sonograms, waiting periods, spiritual counseling and any number of road blocks designed to more dramatize an already difficult situation. Or is that OK? And if it is OK by you, would you call it Socialism, Fascism or Talibanism?
    It has become clear to me that only the captains of commerce and industry, those that make economy economical are the ones that really care to put to the fore a workable solution to end the chaos of undocumented aliens prancing about our turf.
    All others, the bellyachers and the handwringers have nothing to contribute. They misuse this chaotic situation as the Maypole around which they can rally their minions.

  33. Party Platform Guy says


    Not to jump in too quick, however, to your last poat.

    Right now W is looking for any support he can get and the RNC, which shut down its small donor marketing program, is also. I’ll make you a deal, send me some money and I will send thank you cards, certificates, electronically signed letters, pictures, or whatever you want. Of course, I will also tell you how badly I need your next contribution.

    On to some of the facts – over fifty percent of the state general budget is for education, with much more than 30% of that for illegals, so my posting that we are paying large dollars for education was correct. In addition, it is a fact that the majority of the illegals have a large number of school age children – much more than the number for citizens, live in housing with much lower tax liabilities, have multiple families living in that one low value home, and therefore, they disproportionately use the service compared to the contributions even if you wrongly just look at real estate taxes.

    ELL is not only pricey, but the statistics are that the Native American and Black school children have lower reading scores that the Hispanic school children. Therefore, we are taking funding and school time from the children of American citizens in order to give extra time and attention to illegals.

    As for the Health care situation, why mandate it only for the foreign nationals, why not mandate it for all employers for all employees. To do otherwise would discriminate against American workers.

    We already require consultation with a health professional for every other type of surgery. The abortion was the only exception for years and years. Also, are you aware that a school nurse could refer a twelve year old to Planned Parenthood for a “procedure” without the parents knowledge. Yet that same school nurse could not give an aspirin to a child with migraines with the parent knowledge and doctor’s prescription.

    You may have a problem with the term “anchor baby”, but it is the term most commonly used across the board to describe a situation where a person is brougnt past medical facilities to get just across the border so the baby will be an anchor for the mother etc to come here.

    Horst, the bottom line is that you agree much more with kral who is self identified as supporting our opponents than you agree with the mainstream of the Republican Party. That is not a surprise, not a judgment, not an ad hominem attack, just a fact. Think about that.

    Just so I do not make you think I am picking on you, as you asserted previously, I will stop trying to show you areas where there may be more information than you are aware of or are using to present your case. It has been interesting.

    PS: Let me know if you want to send some money so I can send you some thank you cards and letters.

  34. Hey, maybe this is a bit offf topic but in any case, I have been surfing about your blog and it looks really neat. impassioned about your writing. I am creating a new blog and hard-pressed to make it appear great, and supply excellent articles. I have discovered a lot on your site and I look forward to additional updates and will be back.

Speak Your Mind


judi online bonanza88 slot baccarat online slot idn live situs idn poker judi bola tangkas88 pragmatic play sbobet slot dana casino online idn pokerseri joker123 selot slot88