Dear Friend,
When I endorsed Barack Obama on Monday, I was also endorsing a candidate with the power to transform America.
As President Kennedy said in 1960, "It is time for a new generation of leadership."
This campaign is about a new generation of leadership today. A generation ready to be part of something bigger than themselves. A generation ready to change the country, and a generation ready to change the world.
I'm doing everything I can to elect Barack Obama. With less than a week before my state and 21 others make their voices heard, there is no time to lose.
Please join me by making a $50 donation now:
https://donate.barackobama.com/newgeneration
Like my son Patrick and my niece Caroline, I have found a new generation of leadership for America in Barack Obama -- and I hope you have too!
Sincerely,
Senator Edward M. Kennedy
P.S. -- You may have already seen clips of my speech or parts of it on Monday. But take a look here. The energy in that room was amazing, and it's spreading across America:
https://donate.barackobama.com/newgeneration
Dear Friend,
What we do in Arizona this week can change America.
After Barack's overwhelming victory in South Carolina, the spotlight has turned to the 22 states -- including Arizona -- holding primaries and caucuses next Tuesday, February 5th.
Thanks to your work, we've built an unprecedented grassroots organization across the nation. But we only have one week left to make this happen.
Sign up to help Get Out The Vote for the Arizona primary on February 5th:
http://my.barackobama.com/AZgotv
People across the country are hungry for a different kind of leadership and a different kind of politics.
But they want to know where our movement is headed -- whether all the passion and support this campaign has generated can actually change the entrenched old ways of Washington.
You can answer right now.
Across the state, Democrats, Independents, and even Republicans have come together around this campaign because they know Barack Obama is the one candidate who can deliver the change this country needs.
But in this crucial last week before the primary, it's going to take a lot of effort and organization to turn our support into a strong showing for Barack next Tuesday.
Sign up to help Get Out The Vote for next Tuesday's primary:
http://my.barackobama.com/AZgotv
Thank you,
Raul
Raul AlvillarArizona State DirectorObama for America
P.S. -- If you're planning to vote early by mail in the Arizona primary, your ballot must be postmarked by this Friday, February 1st. If you miss this Friday's deadline, you can also bring your completed ballot to your voting location on February 5th.
Contact your county recorder office for more information
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
AZ Guardsman pursues rugby dream
|
By Air Force Capt. Bob Everdeen, Provincial Reconstruction Team Qalat
Oct 1, 2007 - 1:20:37 PM
Blackanthem Military News
FORWARD OPERATING BASE LAGMAN, Afghanistan – An Arizona National Guard Soldier assigned to the Provincial Reconstruction Team here has been accepted into the All-Army Rugby Training Camp program.
Spec. Christopher Eckerson, a former schoolteacher in Gilbert, Ariz., joined the Army as an infantryman in 2006. Prior to that, he spent four years in a Marine Corps commissioning program at Norwich University. Ironically, that program came to an end after he suffered a severe injury playing rugby. But that didn’t end his drive to continue his military service or pursue his dreams of playing rugby. He travels to Fort Benning, Ga., this month to try out for the team.
“They weeded through a lot of applications to find the best 36 players to invite to the camp,” Eckerson said. “Within a month, the best 25 players in the United States Army, Reserves and National Guard will be selected to represent the team to try and win the Armed Forces Rugby Championship.”
Eckerson’s rugby career started at Norwich University when rugby coach Robert Weggler saw him playing goaltender for the college’s soccer team. Weggler recruited Eckerson and provided him with training clinics led by several U.S. National team coaches.
“Our league was the hardest in the nation for Division I collegiate rugby,” Eckerson said. “We competed against Harvard and Dartmouth, teams that had great players and European superstars. I’ve also played with—and learned from—players on my team who have competed against international teams like New Zealand, South Africa and Australia.”
“Chris is a complete rugby player who has a mix of collegiate rugby and men’s rugby experience,” said Robert Weggler head rugby coach of Norwich University. “He is a winner with outstanding rugby skills and he is of great character.”
Eckerson attributes his skills and character to his military training and experience.
“I’m a better player because the military has taught me teamwork, discipline and commitment to success,” he said. “For training, I prepare myself to be able to sustain 80 minutes of running and physical contact. I hope to continue with rugby as far as I can and I’ll continue to play as long as my body lets me.”
The Armed Forces Rugby Championship tournament takes place Oct. 23-28 at Camp Lejeune, N.C.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Gabby Goes On Tour to Talk Down the Economy
"Fiscal Wake-Up Tour"
Visiting Tucson on Thursday, January 31st
David Walker, Comptroller General of the U.S. and director of the Government Accountability Office (GAO), will be in Tucson this Thursday to discuss the current economic downturn and the status of the federal budget. Please join me to hear Mr. Walker's first-hand perspective on the budgetary crisis and his recommended solutions.
Date: Thursday, January 31, 2008
Time: 10:00-11:30 a.m.
Place: YWCA Auditorium
525 North Bonita, Tucson (at St. Mary's Road and I-10)
RSVP: Call 881-3588 by 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, January 30th
Mr. Walker's presentation is part of the national Fiscal Wake-Up Tour that is being sponsored by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Brookings Institution, the Heritage Foundation, the Committee for Economic Development (CED), the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), the Association of Government Accountants (AGA), and AARP.
The Tour was recently profiled on 60 minutes. Click here to view the clip: http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2532398n?source=search_video. Also, below is a CNN article about Mr. Walker.
For more information, please call 881-3588. I hope to see you this Thursday!
Sincerely Yours,
Gabrielle Giffords
Member of Congress
CNN
One man's campaign against federal debt
By Kyle Almond
March 30, 2007
He has recently made stops in Iowa , New Hampshire and South Carolina , giving speeches and holding town hall meetings. But he's not seeking the presidency.
David M. Walker, the nation's top accountant, is instead touring the country to warn Americans about the consequences of a federal debt he says is on an unsustainable course.
Walker, who heads the Government Accountability Office (GAO), has visited college campuses, spoken to lawmakers in Washington and toured 19 states in the last year and a half.
He plans to continue through next year and is focusing on states that could affect the 2008 presidential race, in hopes that candidates will heed his message.
"If [the candidates] don't make [the debt] one of their top three priorities, in my opinion, they don't deserve to be president and we can't afford for them to be president," he told CNN.
The federal debt has soared during the last two decades -- from $2.13 trillion in 1986 to $5.22 trillion in 1996 and $8.51 trillion in 2006.
The federal debt now stands near $9 trillion.
The way programs such as Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare are structured, the government will incur an additional debt of $50 trillion during the next 20 years, according to GAO figures.
The $50 trillion total amounts to about $440,000 per American household, Walker said.
The primary drivers behind the additional rise in spending are the baby boomers, who start becoming eligible for Social Security in 2008 and Medicare in 2011.
"We are talking about an unprecedented change in the demographic landscape of America ," Walker said. "And we are not prepared for this oncoming wave."
The consequences of federal debt
The federal debt increases every time there is a budget deficit at the end of the fiscal year. A budget deficit occurs when the government spends more than it receives in revenue, as it has for the past five fiscal years and 16 of the past 20, according to the Office of Management and Budget.
The causes for such deficits range from tax cuts and spending increases to congressional earmarks in appropriations bills, costs associated with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and catastrophes like the 9/11 terror attacks and Hurricane Katrina.
The government makes up the difference by printing and selling Treasury bills and bonds, which are increasingly being bought by overseas investors looking to profit from the interest.
More than three-quarters of the federal budget deficit from March 2001 through September 2006 was underwritten by overseas investors, according to Christian Weller, the senior economist at the Center for American Progress, a Washington-based, left-of-center think tank.
Such financing is not necessarily a bad thing for the average American because it has helped keep interest rates relatively low, Weller said.
"The budget deficit brought in all of this foreign cash, and that foreign cash basically washed into the credit market, [making] it easier for homeowners and for others to borrow money," Weller said.
Observers are concerned, however, that interest rates could rise if the federal government doesn't show more fiscal responsibility.
For example, a country that typically lends money to the United States could begin charging higher interests rates on the loan out of concern for what it sees as an uncertain U.S. financial future, said Bill Beach, an economist associated with The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
"So we [would] all end up paying more for mortgages, more for cars and so forth," Beach said.
Beyond interest rates
In the worst-case scenario, other countries -- instead of just charging higher interest rates -- could decide to take their money elsewhere, which could spur inflation and increase financial uncertainty.
However, several things would need to happen -- such as a series of international crises or a collapse in U.S. home values -- for countries to move their investment out of the United States , according to Beach.
Meanwhile, as a result of existing debt, the United States has less money to spend on infrastructure, technology and education -- improvements needed for the country to remain competitive in the global market, Weller said.
"With the government running massive deficits and spending large amounts on debt service, we have less money available to address those concerns, to really face the challenges of the future," he said.
Though economists of different political persuasions agree the federal debt is a growing problem, the solutions they recommend differ. Some ideas include caps on government spending and repealing certain tax cuts.
The GAO's Walker believes reforms of health care and programs like Social Security are the most important steps.
"The fact is that we could eliminate the Iraq war tomorrow. We could eliminate every dime of pork-barrel spending. And we wouldn't come close to solving our problem," he said.
Walker said it is necessary to balance the budget within the next five years, make a down payment on the $50 trillion imbalance and begin reforming government programs.
"It's going to take us probably 20 years to do all the things that need to be done, " he said. "But we need to get started now because the clock is ticking and time is working against us."
Visiting Tucson on Thursday, January 31st
David Walker, Comptroller General of the U.S. and director of the Government Accountability Office (GAO), will be in Tucson this Thursday to discuss the current economic downturn and the status of the federal budget. Please join me to hear Mr. Walker's first-hand perspective on the budgetary crisis and his recommended solutions.
Date: Thursday, January 31, 2008
Time: 10:00-11:30 a.m.
Place: YWCA Auditorium
525 North Bonita, Tucson (at St. Mary's Road and I-10)
RSVP: Call 881-3588 by 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, January 30th
Mr. Walker's presentation is part of the national Fiscal Wake-Up Tour that is being sponsored by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Brookings Institution, the Heritage Foundation, the Committee for Economic Development (CED), the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), the Association of Government Accountants (AGA), and AARP.
The Tour was recently profiled on 60 minutes. Click here to view the clip: http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2532398n?source=search_video. Also, below is a CNN article about Mr. Walker.
For more information, please call 881-3588. I hope to see you this Thursday!
Sincerely Yours,
Gabrielle Giffords
Member of Congress
CNN
One man's campaign against federal debt
By Kyle Almond
March 30, 2007
He has recently made stops in Iowa , New Hampshire and South Carolina , giving speeches and holding town hall meetings. But he's not seeking the presidency.
David M. Walker, the nation's top accountant, is instead touring the country to warn Americans about the consequences of a federal debt he says is on an unsustainable course.
Walker, who heads the Government Accountability Office (GAO), has visited college campuses, spoken to lawmakers in Washington and toured 19 states in the last year and a half.
He plans to continue through next year and is focusing on states that could affect the 2008 presidential race, in hopes that candidates will heed his message.
"If [the candidates] don't make [the debt] one of their top three priorities, in my opinion, they don't deserve to be president and we can't afford for them to be president," he told CNN.
The federal debt has soared during the last two decades -- from $2.13 trillion in 1986 to $5.22 trillion in 1996 and $8.51 trillion in 2006.
The federal debt now stands near $9 trillion.
The way programs such as Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare are structured, the government will incur an additional debt of $50 trillion during the next 20 years, according to GAO figures.
The $50 trillion total amounts to about $440,000 per American household, Walker said.
The primary drivers behind the additional rise in spending are the baby boomers, who start becoming eligible for Social Security in 2008 and Medicare in 2011.
"We are talking about an unprecedented change in the demographic landscape of America ," Walker said. "And we are not prepared for this oncoming wave."
The consequences of federal debt
The federal debt increases every time there is a budget deficit at the end of the fiscal year. A budget deficit occurs when the government spends more than it receives in revenue, as it has for the past five fiscal years and 16 of the past 20, according to the Office of Management and Budget.
The causes for such deficits range from tax cuts and spending increases to congressional earmarks in appropriations bills, costs associated with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and catastrophes like the 9/11 terror attacks and Hurricane Katrina.
The government makes up the difference by printing and selling Treasury bills and bonds, which are increasingly being bought by overseas investors looking to profit from the interest.
More than three-quarters of the federal budget deficit from March 2001 through September 2006 was underwritten by overseas investors, according to Christian Weller, the senior economist at the Center for American Progress, a Washington-based, left-of-center think tank.
Such financing is not necessarily a bad thing for the average American because it has helped keep interest rates relatively low, Weller said.
"The budget deficit brought in all of this foreign cash, and that foreign cash basically washed into the credit market, [making] it easier for homeowners and for others to borrow money," Weller said.
Observers are concerned, however, that interest rates could rise if the federal government doesn't show more fiscal responsibility.
For example, a country that typically lends money to the United States could begin charging higher interests rates on the loan out of concern for what it sees as an uncertain U.S. financial future, said Bill Beach, an economist associated with The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
"So we [would] all end up paying more for mortgages, more for cars and so forth," Beach said.
Beyond interest rates
In the worst-case scenario, other countries -- instead of just charging higher interest rates -- could decide to take their money elsewhere, which could spur inflation and increase financial uncertainty.
However, several things would need to happen -- such as a series of international crises or a collapse in U.S. home values -- for countries to move their investment out of the United States , according to Beach.
Meanwhile, as a result of existing debt, the United States has less money to spend on infrastructure, technology and education -- improvements needed for the country to remain competitive in the global market, Weller said.
"With the government running massive deficits and spending large amounts on debt service, we have less money available to address those concerns, to really face the challenges of the future," he said.
Though economists of different political persuasions agree the federal debt is a growing problem, the solutions they recommend differ. Some ideas include caps on government spending and repealing certain tax cuts.
The GAO's Walker believes reforms of health care and programs like Social Security are the most important steps.
"The fact is that we could eliminate the Iraq war tomorrow. We could eliminate every dime of pork-barrel spending. And we wouldn't come close to solving our problem," he said.
Walker said it is necessary to balance the budget within the next five years, make a down payment on the $50 trillion imbalance and begin reforming government programs.
"It's going to take us probably 20 years to do all the things that need to be done, " he said. "But we need to get started now because the clock is ticking and time is working against us."
Obama Shalacks Lady MacBeth in her rubber slippers
Friend --
Barack Obama won an overwhelming victory in South Carolina on Saturday.
People came out in record numbers and voted for change. Now, after four early state contests, Barack has the most votes, the most delegates, and the most diverse coalition of supporters we've seen in a long time.
But this is no time to rest -- the stakes will be even higher one week from tomorrow.
On February 5th, 22 states, including Arizona, will hold primaries and caucuses.
We have exactly one week to prepare. You can help Barack compete on the biggest day of the campaign by signing up to help Get Out The Vote in Arizona:
http://my.barackobama.com/AZgotv
Here are a few details about our victory in South Carolina. According to the official results and CNN exit polls, Barack won:
* 55% of the total vote, more than twice as many votes as any other candidate
* 57% of voters who had never voted in a primary
* 66% of voters who had never voted before at all
* Every type of community -- urban, suburban, and rural
* 58% of voters between ages 18 and 64
* 67% of voters between ages 18 and 29
The clear lesson from South Carolina is that voters are ready to bring this country together and solve the problems that matter to ordinary Americans.
This election isn't about race or gender, income level or education level.
It's about the past and the future.
The moment to act is now. We're campaigning from Alaska to Georgia, from California to New York.
Your support right now is more important than ever. Sign up to volunteer in Arizona and help Get Out The Vote:
http://my.barackobama.com/AZgotv
Thank you for your support,
David
David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America
P.S. -- If you haven't had a chance to watch Barack's victory speech from Saturday night, watch it here:
http://my.barackobama.com/scvictoryspeech
Donate
Visit: AZ.BarackObama.com | Email: Arizona@BarackObama.com
Barack Obama won an overwhelming victory in South Carolina on Saturday.
People came out in record numbers and voted for change. Now, after four early state contests, Barack has the most votes, the most delegates, and the most diverse coalition of supporters we've seen in a long time.
But this is no time to rest -- the stakes will be even higher one week from tomorrow.
On February 5th, 22 states, including Arizona, will hold primaries and caucuses.
We have exactly one week to prepare. You can help Barack compete on the biggest day of the campaign by signing up to help Get Out The Vote in Arizona:
http://my.barackobama.com/AZgotv
Here are a few details about our victory in South Carolina. According to the official results and CNN exit polls, Barack won:
* 55% of the total vote, more than twice as many votes as any other candidate
* 57% of voters who had never voted in a primary
* 66% of voters who had never voted before at all
* Every type of community -- urban, suburban, and rural
* 58% of voters between ages 18 and 64
* 67% of voters between ages 18 and 29
The clear lesson from South Carolina is that voters are ready to bring this country together and solve the problems that matter to ordinary Americans.
This election isn't about race or gender, income level or education level.
It's about the past and the future.
The moment to act is now. We're campaigning from Alaska to Georgia, from California to New York.
Your support right now is more important than ever. Sign up to volunteer in Arizona and help Get Out The Vote:
http://my.barackobama.com/AZgotv
Thank you for your support,
David
David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America
P.S. -- If you haven't had a chance to watch Barack's victory speech from Saturday night, watch it here:
http://my.barackobama.com/scvictoryspeech
Donate
Visit: AZ.BarackObama.com | Email: Arizona@BarackObama.com
Jim Ehl begs the Maricopa GOP not to drink Toliet Water
from Jim Ehl
Sometimes the theme of a play, or movie, is lost because of the list of characters. We can also equate that to something our kids said when they were little: "all the kids are doing it!" But does that make it right? Here are two list of characters. The first list is one of 'leaders' in the state. Those that are more able to influence elections than any one else. As you review the list think to yourself which are good, conservative Republicans and which one just wear the Republican name tag, and who has what to gain.
http://www.allamericanpatriots.com:80/48741417_arizona-leaders-join-supporters-john-mccain
The next list is probably available by name if asked for, but for brevity sake just know that his is a list of your peers; those who have evaluated the situation from a grass roots point of view and are honest with nothing personally to gain except good government. Since Maricopa County consist of over 60% of the Republicans in Arizona, hence the most precinct committeemen and state committeemen.
Compare the two groups and see where do you fit.
Jim
Maricopa Republicans Presidential Straw Poll Vote Results
Maricopa County Republicans conducted a Presidential Straw Poll during the Jan. 19 Maricopa County Republican Committee meeting in Tempe . In the first category the delegates were able to vote for only their first choice for president.
Those results were as follows. Presidential Straw Poll with 721 ballots cast:
188...............Mitt Romney..................26%
121...............Fred Thompson..............17%
115...............Ron Paul.........................16%
93.................Duncan Hunter..............13%
80.................John McCain.................11%
33.................Rudy Giuliani................. 9%
32................ Mike Huckabee............. 9%
In the second voting category, the delegates were able to vote for more than one candidate as unacceptable. In the Unacceptable Category 427 out of 721 (59%) of the delegates declared McCain as one of their unacceptable candidates. The tallies were:
Most unacceptable.......427...........McCain
396...........Paul
357...........Giuliani
340...........Huckabee
156...........Hunter
152...........Thompson
121..........Romney
In the third category, the delegates were able to vote for more than one candidate as acceptable. Those results were as follows:
370..........Thompson
358..........Hunter
356..........Romney
235..........Giuliani
207........ Huckabee
135...........McCain
120......... Paul
These issues were rated by the delegates as the most important for the presidential candidates to address:
STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.............643 VOTES
WIN WAR AGAINST TERROR..............552
REDUCE GOV'T SPENDING.................518
LOWER TAXES...................................406
SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENTS....390
PRO-LIFE............................................271
CITIZEN'S GUN RIGHTS........................226
DOMESTIC OIL PRODUCTION..............196
CHOICE OF PRIVATE SS ACCOUNTS..106
The straw poll was distributed and conducted by delegates from Legislative District 11. Contact District 11 Chairman Haney with inquiries.
Rob Haney
Chairman, Republican Party
Legislative District 11
602-996-1004, r_b_haney@yahoo.com
Sometimes the theme of a play, or movie, is lost because of the list of characters. We can also equate that to something our kids said when they were little: "all the kids are doing it!" But does that make it right? Here are two list of characters. The first list is one of 'leaders' in the state. Those that are more able to influence elections than any one else. As you review the list think to yourself which are good, conservative Republicans and which one just wear the Republican name tag, and who has what to gain.
http://www.allamericanpatriots.com:80/48741417_arizona-leaders-join-supporters-john-mccain
The next list is probably available by name if asked for, but for brevity sake just know that his is a list of your peers; those who have evaluated the situation from a grass roots point of view and are honest with nothing personally to gain except good government. Since Maricopa County consist of over 60% of the Republicans in Arizona, hence the most precinct committeemen and state committeemen.
Compare the two groups and see where do you fit.
Jim
Maricopa Republicans Presidential Straw Poll Vote Results
Maricopa County Republicans conducted a Presidential Straw Poll during the Jan. 19 Maricopa County Republican Committee meeting in Tempe . In the first category the delegates were able to vote for only their first choice for president.
Those results were as follows. Presidential Straw Poll with 721 ballots cast:
188...............Mitt Romney..................26%
121...............Fred Thompson..............17%
115...............Ron Paul.........................16%
93.................Duncan Hunter..............13%
80.................John McCain.................11%
33.................Rudy Giuliani................. 9%
32................ Mike Huckabee............. 9%
In the second voting category, the delegates were able to vote for more than one candidate as unacceptable. In the Unacceptable Category 427 out of 721 (59%) of the delegates declared McCain as one of their unacceptable candidates. The tallies were:
Most unacceptable.......427...........McCain
396...........Paul
357...........Giuliani
340...........Huckabee
156...........Hunter
152...........Thompson
121..........Romney
In the third category, the delegates were able to vote for more than one candidate as acceptable. Those results were as follows:
370..........Thompson
358..........Hunter
356..........Romney
235..........Giuliani
207........ Huckabee
135...........McCain
120......... Paul
These issues were rated by the delegates as the most important for the presidential candidates to address:
STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.............643 VOTES
WIN WAR AGAINST TERROR..............552
REDUCE GOV'T SPENDING.................518
LOWER TAXES...................................406
SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENTS....390
PRO-LIFE............................................271
CITIZEN'S GUN RIGHTS........................226
DOMESTIC OIL PRODUCTION..............196
CHOICE OF PRIVATE SS ACCOUNTS..106
The straw poll was distributed and conducted by delegates from Legislative District 11. Contact District 11 Chairman Haney with inquiries.
Rob Haney
Chairman, Republican Party
Legislative District 11
602-996-1004, r_b_haney@yahoo.com
Mega Vote Score Card
January 28, 2008
In this MegaVote for Arizona's 7th Congressional District:
Recent Congressional Votes -
* Senate: National Defense Authorization Act, FY2008
* House: Veto Override on Children’s Health Insurance Program Extension and Improvement
Upcoming Congressional Bills -
* Senate: FISA Amendments Act of 2007
* House: Economic Stimulus Package
Recent Senate Votes
National Defense Authorization Act, FY2008 - Vote Passed (91-3, 6 Not Voting)
The Senate approved a modified version of the defense authorization bill, which addressed concerns that caused President Bush to unexpectedly veto the original bill last month.
Sen. John McCain voted Not Voting......send e-mail or see bio
Sen. Jon Kyl voted YES......send e-mail or see bio
Recent House Votes
Veto Override on Children’s Health Insurance Program Extension and Improvement - Vote Failed (260-152, 19 Not Voting)
The House fell 15 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed to override President Bush’s veto of this bill reauthorizing and expanding the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
Rep. Raul Grijalva voted YES......
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords voted YES.
Upcoming Votes
FISA Amendments Act of 2007 - S.2248
The Senate is scheduled to vote on this intelligence surveillance bill.
Economic Stimulus Package - H.R.____
The House will vote on this economic stimulus bill early in the week.
In this MegaVote for Arizona's 7th Congressional District:
Recent Congressional Votes -
* Senate: National Defense Authorization Act, FY2008
* House: Veto Override on Children’s Health Insurance Program Extension and Improvement
Upcoming Congressional Bills -
* Senate: FISA Amendments Act of 2007
* House: Economic Stimulus Package
Recent Senate Votes
National Defense Authorization Act, FY2008 - Vote Passed (91-3, 6 Not Voting)
The Senate approved a modified version of the defense authorization bill, which addressed concerns that caused President Bush to unexpectedly veto the original bill last month.
Sen. John McCain voted Not Voting......send e-mail or see bio
Sen. Jon Kyl voted YES......send e-mail or see bio
Recent House Votes
Veto Override on Children’s Health Insurance Program Extension and Improvement - Vote Failed (260-152, 19 Not Voting)
The House fell 15 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed to override President Bush’s veto of this bill reauthorizing and expanding the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
Rep. Raul Grijalva voted YES......
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords voted YES.
Upcoming Votes
FISA Amendments Act of 2007 - S.2248
The Senate is scheduled to vote on this intelligence surveillance bill.
Economic Stimulus Package - H.R.____
The House will vote on this economic stimulus bill early in the week.
Bee Fundraising Letter sans Kolbe
Dear James,
We are off and running! Last Saturday at Palo Verde High School, I made my announcement to seek election to the United States House of Representatives in District 8.
During my eight years in office I've stood up for southern Arizona. I have learned that when we put people before politics it is amazing what we can accomplish.
I am committed to winning in November. I appreciate the support I received during the exploratory phase of this race. Please join me in taking back this seat for southern Arizona.
Congress' continued failures are not only dividing our Nation, but placing it in a perilous situation. We can do better.
Washington needs leaders willing to reach beyond partisan politics. Leaders willing to bring people together to build consensus and get things done. That is my record for Arizona.
That is what I will do in Washington.
Our journey has just begun. I will begin to layout my agenda, travel every corner of the district, meet with families, seniors, small businesses, ranchers, and veterans to talk about how we can bring about honest change that puts people before politics and solutions before partisanship.
But I can't do it without you. This must be a team effort. I pledge to work day in and day out to regain this seat. My family and I are committed to this cause and we humbly ask for your support.
As you know, the reality is this: campaigns cost money. This will be a campaign of combined efforts. We need grassroots person to person support and the financial backing for mail, phones and television.
Your contribution of $25, $100, $500 or even the maximum of $2,300 will make a difference today. Please, contribute to the campaign now--let's send a strong, early message that Congressional District 8 is ready for change! Click here to make your contribution online or to print your contribution form and mail your check today!
Then kindly send this email to your friends and family and ask them to join you in committing to ensuring victory in November.
I humbly thank you in advance for your generous support and personal commitment to ensure a brighter future your family and all future generations.
Together we can make a change for southern Arizona and our Country!
Yours,
Tim Bee
Paid for by Tim Bee for Congress
Tim Bee for Congress | P.O. Box 31985 | Tucson | AZ | 85751
We are off and running! Last Saturday at Palo Verde High School, I made my announcement to seek election to the United States House of Representatives in District 8.
During my eight years in office I've stood up for southern Arizona. I have learned that when we put people before politics it is amazing what we can accomplish.
I am committed to winning in November. I appreciate the support I received during the exploratory phase of this race. Please join me in taking back this seat for southern Arizona.
Congress' continued failures are not only dividing our Nation, but placing it in a perilous situation. We can do better.
Washington needs leaders willing to reach beyond partisan politics. Leaders willing to bring people together to build consensus and get things done. That is my record for Arizona.
That is what I will do in Washington.
Our journey has just begun. I will begin to layout my agenda, travel every corner of the district, meet with families, seniors, small businesses, ranchers, and veterans to talk about how we can bring about honest change that puts people before politics and solutions before partisanship.
But I can't do it without you. This must be a team effort. I pledge to work day in and day out to regain this seat. My family and I are committed to this cause and we humbly ask for your support.
As you know, the reality is this: campaigns cost money. This will be a campaign of combined efforts. We need grassroots person to person support and the financial backing for mail, phones and television.
Your contribution of $25, $100, $500 or even the maximum of $2,300 will make a difference today. Please, contribute to the campaign now--let's send a strong, early message that Congressional District 8 is ready for change! Click here to make your contribution online or to print your contribution form and mail your check today!
Then kindly send this email to your friends and family and ask them to join you in committing to ensuring victory in November.
I humbly thank you in advance for your generous support and personal commitment to ensure a brighter future your family and all future generations.
Together we can make a change for southern Arizona and our Country!
Yours,
Tim Bee
Paid for by Tim Bee for Congress
Tim Bee for Congress | P.O. Box 31985 | Tucson | AZ | 85751
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Why did we rescue the kid, if we don't intent to save her?
To The Editor
Regarding the search and rescue of the five year old girl in the Huachuca Mountains .
I thank all of the individuals and departments that in anyway contributed to the rescuing of the five year old girl before any great physical harm befell her. I am sure there will be, hopefully temporary, some trauma for her.
Because of the costs of this incident I believe that the citizenry is owed the proverbial pound of flesh.
There are a lot of questions that arise that I am sure no one will volunteer to stand up and answer. But these answers are owed to the citizenry.
I am more than happy to present these questions.
How did the supposed mother of this child, during the time it took to find the girl, end up in Juarez, MEX? If immediate self deporting was mandatory why not to Naco, Agua Prieta or even Nogales, while awaiting the outcome of the search?
The supposed step-father is in the custody of the Border Patrol. Why not in Cochise County jail charged with child endangerment, child abandonment and child abuse? I believe it is required under state laws. Why aren’t the other people in the group, including the supposed mother, in the Cochise County jail under the same charges?
Was AZ CPS even called? Here is a child found in the desert, in a life threatening situation, without a parent or legal guardian present. It seems CPS territory to me.
How did the Border Patrol know the child was illegally in this country? Why hand the child over to the Mexican Consulate? How were they able to locate the supposed mother so quickly? How do they know the woman from Juarez is the child’s mother? Did they do a DNA test? Maybe she is the victim of child selling.
Was a check made to determine if maybe this was a child kidnapped from somewhere else in the U.S. ? Who is going to pay for the settlement if that was the case?
Just curious.
Tim Richardson
Regarding the search and rescue of the five year old girl in the Huachuca Mountains .
I thank all of the individuals and departments that in anyway contributed to the rescuing of the five year old girl before any great physical harm befell her. I am sure there will be, hopefully temporary, some trauma for her.
Because of the costs of this incident I believe that the citizenry is owed the proverbial pound of flesh.
There are a lot of questions that arise that I am sure no one will volunteer to stand up and answer. But these answers are owed to the citizenry.
I am more than happy to present these questions.
How did the supposed mother of this child, during the time it took to find the girl, end up in Juarez, MEX? If immediate self deporting was mandatory why not to Naco, Agua Prieta or even Nogales, while awaiting the outcome of the search?
The supposed step-father is in the custody of the Border Patrol. Why not in Cochise County jail charged with child endangerment, child abandonment and child abuse? I believe it is required under state laws. Why aren’t the other people in the group, including the supposed mother, in the Cochise County jail under the same charges?
Was AZ CPS even called? Here is a child found in the desert, in a life threatening situation, without a parent or legal guardian present. It seems CPS territory to me.
How did the Border Patrol know the child was illegally in this country? Why hand the child over to the Mexican Consulate? How were they able to locate the supposed mother so quickly? How do they know the woman from Juarez is the child’s mother? Did they do a DNA test? Maybe she is the victim of child selling.
Was a check made to determine if maybe this was a child kidnapped from somewhere else in the U.S. ? Who is going to pay for the settlement if that was the case?
Just curious.
Tim Richardson
"Anonymous Tips Not Allowed!" AZ Legislators Protect Illegals
From Tim Richardson
Rep. Bill Konopnicki, Arizona House of Representatives
Rep. Jack Brown, Arizona House of Representatives
Sen. Carolyn Allen, Arizona Senate
Sen. Jake Flake, Arizona Senate
Sen. Amanda Aguirre, Arizona Senate
I have been reading a lot about suggested changes to the illegal alien employer sanctions law and have a number of concerns.
It appears that businesses want to maintain their anonymity while denying that same status to anyone who might want to direct the attention of those responsible for enforcing the law to possible violations.
My concerns, which have no particular weight, are about the process for offering these changes, voting on the proposed changes, the motives behind these changes and the necessity of any of these changes.
In reading various articles about the proposed changes it seems rather brazen that the people offering these changes may be potentially involved in the application of this law.
It then also seems to me that this represents a very genuine potential for conflict of interest in offering and voting on the changes would potentially exempt these legislators from coverage of this law.
Owning a number of fast food restaurants, McDonalds or Burger King, places these individuals squarely in the target zone of the law as currently written. These individuals should be precluded from offering amendments and voting on any amendments presented.
By eliminating the anonymity for individuals to bring enforcement focus to a given establishment puts, I believe, all anonymous tip processes in jeopardy. Some enterprising attorney will bring up in a criminal trial that his client would not have been arrested but because of evidence located by way of an anonymous tip and clearly the Arizona Legislature has demonstrated that anonymous reporting should not be allowed.
Just recently it was an anonymous tip that caught the Chandler rapist. Don’t put that in jeopardy through unintended consequences.
If I owned a Burger King across the street from a McDonalds I can already make malicious reports about the McDonalds for things such as rodents in the kitchen, sexual harassment of employees, selling drugs from the drive through window, uncontained garbage in the alley and the managers car license plate seen leaving the scene of a robbery, if I were that type of person.
And it really does not make a difference who provides the information since no action is taken directly from that information. All information has to be verified and checked against official records.
These are not tort cases where the person making the complaint, in court, is the complaint and the business is the respondent.
In every one of these cases the County Attorney, for the State of Arizona, will be the complainant and the business will be the defendant. And I assume that the County Attorney will independently obtain the evidence that they need to go forward and it will not hinge on a tipster.
If the tip goes nowhere, no one other than the person receiving the information will ever know. I do not see how that is a threat to a business.
Changing that provision would then inhibit individuals from coming forward and offering such minimal information as having seen, on more than one occasion, employees at a Mexican Food restaurant, say in the area of 35th Ave and McDowell arriving in vehicles with Mexican licenses plates. What difference does it make who I am, all they have to do is go park in the lot and watch.
No business should be exempt. For individuals who own more than one business the evaluation of which license or licenses are in jeopardy is simple. Under which employer ID is the payroll prepared? Are the individuals hired centrally or at the individual locations? Are there separate EIN’s for the separate locations?
The business for which the EIN was assigned and that is contained on the license/application that has hired illegal aliens is the business that is in jeopardy.
Businesses that hire individuals as independent contractors fall under a whole slew of tax laws, a number of which disallow the contracting of individuals who should appropriately be designated as employees.
The independent contractor, who pays the wages to the individual, becomes the business that is subject to the sanctions provisions of the law. Even if that individual is themselves the contractor but is subject to self-employment provisions of the various tax codes. He illegally hired himself. And all of those transactions should be reported through the required use of the 1099-Misc IRS form.
Concerning the knowingly part. Again somewhat easy. If an employer reports wages for an individual to the appropriate government agencies and receives notices of rejection because of a mis-match of the submitted SSN and employee name; and the employer does nothing to correct the transaction; and/or continues to submit the same SSN and name without regard to the notices, the employer has demonstrated that they know the individual who they described in the transactions does not exist and should not be on the payroll.
Additionally then, lack of action of the part of the Attorney General’s office not withstanding, it would seem that the employer who does not correct the mis-match errors has effectively agreed that they have submitted fictitious/false/fraudulent documents to the agencies concerned.
And that I believe might be considered criminal acts within the various tax codes. Further, with substantiating evidence, could possiblly trigger an investigation for seizure under the provisions of RICO laws.
If the burden of proof is to be changed to the standard for criminal acts then the law should be amended to be a criminal act.
The "isolated, sporadic or accidental acts." defense will not cut it for the speeding cameras, running red lights, running stop signs or dumping trash and should not for this law.
Tim Richardson
Rep. Bill Konopnicki, Arizona House of Representatives
Rep. Jack Brown, Arizona House of Representatives
Sen. Carolyn Allen, Arizona Senate
Sen. Jake Flake, Arizona Senate
Sen. Amanda Aguirre, Arizona Senate
I have been reading a lot about suggested changes to the illegal alien employer sanctions law and have a number of concerns.
It appears that businesses want to maintain their anonymity while denying that same status to anyone who might want to direct the attention of those responsible for enforcing the law to possible violations.
My concerns, which have no particular weight, are about the process for offering these changes, voting on the proposed changes, the motives behind these changes and the necessity of any of these changes.
In reading various articles about the proposed changes it seems rather brazen that the people offering these changes may be potentially involved in the application of this law.
It then also seems to me that this represents a very genuine potential for conflict of interest in offering and voting on the changes would potentially exempt these legislators from coverage of this law.
Owning a number of fast food restaurants, McDonalds or Burger King, places these individuals squarely in the target zone of the law as currently written. These individuals should be precluded from offering amendments and voting on any amendments presented.
By eliminating the anonymity for individuals to bring enforcement focus to a given establishment puts, I believe, all anonymous tip processes in jeopardy. Some enterprising attorney will bring up in a criminal trial that his client would not have been arrested but because of evidence located by way of an anonymous tip and clearly the Arizona Legislature has demonstrated that anonymous reporting should not be allowed.
Just recently it was an anonymous tip that caught the Chandler rapist. Don’t put that in jeopardy through unintended consequences.
If I owned a Burger King across the street from a McDonalds I can already make malicious reports about the McDonalds for things such as rodents in the kitchen, sexual harassment of employees, selling drugs from the drive through window, uncontained garbage in the alley and the managers car license plate seen leaving the scene of a robbery, if I were that type of person.
And it really does not make a difference who provides the information since no action is taken directly from that information. All information has to be verified and checked against official records.
These are not tort cases where the person making the complaint, in court, is the complaint and the business is the respondent.
In every one of these cases the County Attorney, for the State of Arizona, will be the complainant and the business will be the defendant. And I assume that the County Attorney will independently obtain the evidence that they need to go forward and it will not hinge on a tipster.
If the tip goes nowhere, no one other than the person receiving the information will ever know. I do not see how that is a threat to a business.
Changing that provision would then inhibit individuals from coming forward and offering such minimal information as having seen, on more than one occasion, employees at a Mexican Food restaurant, say in the area of 35th Ave and McDowell arriving in vehicles with Mexican licenses plates. What difference does it make who I am, all they have to do is go park in the lot and watch.
No business should be exempt. For individuals who own more than one business the evaluation of which license or licenses are in jeopardy is simple. Under which employer ID is the payroll prepared? Are the individuals hired centrally or at the individual locations? Are there separate EIN’s for the separate locations?
The business for which the EIN was assigned and that is contained on the license/application that has hired illegal aliens is the business that is in jeopardy.
Businesses that hire individuals as independent contractors fall under a whole slew of tax laws, a number of which disallow the contracting of individuals who should appropriately be designated as employees.
The independent contractor, who pays the wages to the individual, becomes the business that is subject to the sanctions provisions of the law. Even if that individual is themselves the contractor but is subject to self-employment provisions of the various tax codes. He illegally hired himself. And all of those transactions should be reported through the required use of the 1099-Misc IRS form.
Concerning the knowingly part. Again somewhat easy. If an employer reports wages for an individual to the appropriate government agencies and receives notices of rejection because of a mis-match of the submitted SSN and employee name; and the employer does nothing to correct the transaction; and/or continues to submit the same SSN and name without regard to the notices, the employer has demonstrated that they know the individual who they described in the transactions does not exist and should not be on the payroll.
Additionally then, lack of action of the part of the Attorney General’s office not withstanding, it would seem that the employer who does not correct the mis-match errors has effectively agreed that they have submitted fictitious/false/fraudulent documents to the agencies concerned.
And that I believe might be considered criminal acts within the various tax codes. Further, with substantiating evidence, could possiblly trigger an investigation for seizure under the provisions of RICO laws.
If the burden of proof is to be changed to the standard for criminal acts then the law should be amended to be a criminal act.
The "isolated, sporadic or accidental acts." defense will not cut it for the speeding cameras, running red lights, running stop signs or dumping trash and should not for this law.
Tim Richardson
Border Agent Shots a Fleeing Illegal
from Gene Caferelli
Published 01/24/2008 - 9:03 p.m. EST
(AP)
A U.S. Border Patrol agent questioning the occupants of a pickup truck clung to the passenger door and shot and wounded the truck's driver Thursday as the man attempted to flee, authorities said.
The unidentified agent stopped the truck with five people inside about 9:30 a.m. on U.S. 191, nine miles northwest of Doug las, Cochise County Sheriff's spokesman Carol Capas said. The agent was acting on a tip that a truck matching the description and license plate had been seen loading a group of illegal immigrants near Doug las , Capas said.
As the agent stood on the passenger side of the truck, the driver attempted to drive off, with the agent caught in the vehicle's door, Capas said.
"The agent fired a single shot prior to falling off of the door, which struck the driver one time in the leg," Capas said. The agent was dragged about 20 feet before firing his shot, hitting the driver in the upper left leg, Capas added.
The driver _ identified as Luis Sanchez-Barron, 29, of Hermosillo , Mexico _ stopped a short distance away. He was airlifted to University Medical Center in Tucson , where he was listed in fair condition.
Capas said the other four occupants apparently did not attempt to escape and were taken into custody by the Border Patrol.
Tucson sector Border Patrol spokesman Jesus "Chuy" Rodriguez said he did not know if the five were in the country illegally.
The agent was taken to the Southeastern Arizona Medical Center in Doug las for treatment of cuts and abrasions sustained when he fell from the moving vehicle
--
Bob Price
Nunca Deje Que El Fuego Verde Se Apagare
Minutemen Muster Schedules
from Gener Caferelli
1/20/08
Arizona Chapter
The Arizona Muster Operations Committee is proud to announce the 2008 Arizona Muster schedule. The committee has selected these dates to coincide with the full moon, and with high activity by the illegal aliens. We will also be announcing 6 additional musters in the next few weeks. The 6 additional musters will be split with 3 musters in the Green Valley area and 3 in the Cochise County area.
This year looks better than ever for our musters. We have upgraded our equipment and believe we have an even greater advantage over the smugglers than ever. Our Eye In The Sky system now has 3 units, which when used together can cover over 2 miles. Our radio system is always a work in progress, and as we expand our coverage area we will have an even larger area of operation. Our new IA Sensor program is also under way and will be in use during 2008 Musters. I would tell you more, but it is so effective, I don’t want to give out too much information, because the other side is always listening.
We have made a few changes this year, which we hope, will help improve our effectiveness. We will have a total of 17 musters this year in AZ. Our April and October Musters which used to be a whole month long will be condensed to 16 days with 3 weekends during the muster. Our Search and Rescue teams will be conducting a special training session during the April Muster for anyone interested in joining the teams.
| AZ Musters | Start Date | End Date | Location |
| February | 2/15/08 | 2/17/08 | Camp Anvil |
| March | 3/14/08 | 3/16/08 | TBA |
| April | 4/4/08 | 4/20/08 | Camp Anvil |
| May | 5/16/08 | 5/18/08 | TBA |
| June | 6/20/08 | 6/22/08 | TBA |
| July | 7/18/08 | 7/20/08 | TBA |
| August | 8/15/08 | 8/17/08 | TBA |
| September | 9/12/08 | 9/14/08 | TBA |
| October | 10/3/08 | 10/19/08 | TBA |
| November | 11/14/08 | 11/16/08 | TBA |
As usual, we always need volunteers to step up and fill the following positions: Line Leader, Administration, and Communications.
We will train you for any of these positions you are interested in.
For more information, please check out our border operations web site at www.borderops.com
Any questions, please contact Lance Altherr at Tucsonmm@mns.com
Does activist Jim Ehl Support Ron Paul?
From Jim Ehl
Remembering Ronald Reagan
(Representative Ron Paul in the congressional record, Wednesday June 9th, 2004)
Mr. Speaker, all Americans mourn the death of President Ronald Reagan, but those of us who had the opportunity to know him are especially saddened. I got to know President Reagan in 1976 when, as a freshman congressman, I was one of only four members of that body to endorse then-Governor Reagan’s primary challenge to President Gerald Ford. I had the privilege of serving as the leader of President Reagan’s Texas delegation at the Republican convention of 1976, where Ronald Reagan almost defeated an incumbent president for his party’s nomination.
I was one of the millions attracted to Ronald Reagan by his strong support for limited government and the free-market. I felt affinity for a politician who based his conservative philosophy on “… a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom…” I wish more of today’s conservative leaders based their philosophy on a desire for less government and more freedom.
Ronald Reagan was one of the most eloquent exponents of the freedom philosophy in modern American politics. One of his greatest achievements was converting millions of Americans to the freedom philosophy; many he inspired became active in the freedom movement. One of the best examples of President Reagan’s rhetorical powers was his first major national political address, “A Time for Choosing.” Delivered in 1964 in support of the Goldwater presidential campaign, this speech launched Ronald Reagan’s career as both a politician and a leader of the conservative movement. The following excerpt from that speech illustrates the power of Ronald Reagan’s words and message. Unfortunately, these words are as relevant to our current situation as they were when he delivered them in 1964:
It's time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, "We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self-government."
This idea - that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power - is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.
You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream - the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism.
Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, "The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits."
The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government set out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing.
One of the most direct expressions of Ronald Reagan’s disdain for big government came during a private conversation I shared with him when flying from the White House to Andrews Air Force Base. As the helicopter passed over the monuments, we looked down and he said, “Isn’t that beautiful? It’s amazing how much terrible stuff comes out of this city when it’s that beautiful.”
While many associate Ronald Reagan with unbridled militarism, he was a lifelong opponent of the draft. It is hardly surprising that many of the most persuasive and powerful arguments against conscription came from President Reagan. One of my favorite Reagan quotes comes from a 1979 article he wrote for the conservative publication Human Events regarding the draft and related “national service” proposals:
“...it [conscription] rests on the assumption that your kids belong to the state. If we buy that assumption then it is for the state- not for parents, the community, the religious institutions or teachers- to decide who shall have what values and who shall do what work, when, where and how in our society. That assumption isn’t a new one. The Nazis thought it was a great idea.”
I extend my deepest sympathies to Ronald Reagan’s family and friends, especially his beloved wife Nancy and his children. I also urge my colleagues and all Americans to honor Ronald Reagan by dedicating themselves to the principles of limited government and individual liberty.
Jim Ehl Whacks McCain
I have a hard-drive full of anti-McCain articles. Remember, the Arizona Town Crier forwarded an article by Sen. Santorum a while back that spelled it out about McCain in D.C. Now, an article by David Limbaugh. If anyone, McCain supporter or not, will send an article by a notable favorable of McCain the Arizona Town Crier will publish it.
Jim
McCain's a 'hero' - so what?
David Limbaugh
Posted: January 25, 2008
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Many conservatives have said Sen. John McCain is not conservative enough to
suit them. Some of McCain's defenders have not only disagreed but have
impugned his critics, hypocritically blaming them for divisiveness.
But intramural bickering isn't the issue. What's important is that
conservatives have an intellectually honest and open discussion about GOP
presidential
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880>
contenders.
It's disappointing to watch good conservatives demean themselves by trying
to present McCain as something he's not. No matter how much they spin, they
can't fool conservatives familiar with McCain's record. McCain's detractors
are not the ones having to stretch and massage the facts in order to turn
McCain - overnight - into a Reagan conservative.
McCain is not only not conservative enough; he has also built a reputation
as a maverick by stabbing his party in the back - not in furtherance of
conservative principles but by betraying them. McCain delights in sticking
it to his colleagues while winning accolades from the mainstream liberal
media.
Former Sen. Rick Santorum, whose conservative credentials are beyond
question, said, "I don't agree with (McCain) on hardly any issues." Santorum
told radio host Mark Levin, "I just have to tell you, as a leader, as
someone who had to put these coalitions together, it was always hard and we
very rarely on domestic policy had any help from the senator from Arizona."
Santorum said McCain has been damaging to conservative causes and would be
no friend to conservatives in the White House.
McCain's defenders - in the McCainian spirit of chilling political speech -
forbid us from criticizing him because he is a war hero. That's
irresponsible nonsense. Voters and analysts have an obligation to assess
McCain's suitability for the presidency. To consider and verbalize the
negatives is not to demean his service or sacrifice.
We can recognize and honor McCain's indescribably grueling POW experiences
without taking the leap of arguing they automatically qualify him as an
ideal commander in chief. His qualifications should be evaluated on the
merits, not on sentimental appeals to his service.
Understandably, I suppose, pundits
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880> often
glibly assert that one of McCain's many advantages is his character - a
character that was molded by the hardships he endured. McCain's captivity
undeniably involved more character building than anything most of us will
ever experience. But to say he is a rugged, battle-tested hero does not mean
he is incapable of prevarication, opportunism, demagoguery or other
mischief. Nor does it immunize him from scrutiny concerning the credible
claim that he lacks the temperament to be president.
I respectfully reject that McCain's honorable and sacrificial
character-building experiences or his self-description as a "straight
talker" place his veracity above question. I remember him sidling up to the
media by falsely claiming President Bush
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880> didn't
level with the American people about how long the Iraq war could take. I
remember him blaming dirty campaign tricks on Bush in South Carolina in
2000, when investigations revealed there was no evidence Bush was behind it.
I remember him joining liberals in slandering the truth-telling Swift Boat
veterans
as "dishonest and dishonorable." I remember his disingenuous derision of the
across-the-board Bush tax cuts as being only for the rich. I witnessed him
changing his position on immigration
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880> to shore
up support in South Carolina, then after that primary arrogantly denying to
Sean Hannity that he'd flip-flopped. People can assess for themselves
whether McCain is always straight, but hopefully they'll base their decision
on the evidence and not his hero status.
I seriously doubt McCain will win the GOP
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880>
nomination, precisely because of his infidelity to conservative principles.
Consider:
He crusades against Guantanamo, favors constitutional rights for terrorists
but opposes tough interrogation techniques, was the ringleader of the Gang
of 14, which legitimized the filibustering of judicial nominees, and is the
godfather of political speech-suppressing and Democrat-favoring
campaign-finance reform legislation.
He has displayed contempt for conservative evangelicals, opposed Bush's
pro-growth tax cuts for reasons other than he says (spending), has engaged
in other class-warfare rhetoric like demonizing oil and drug companies,
co-sponsored the abominable McCain-Kennedy illegal immigrant
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880>
-forgiveness/open-borders/Social Security zapping bill, and even voted for
the Specter amendment, which could have conferred consulting rights on
Mexico concerning the erection of a southern border fence.
He sold out on global warming, opportunistically opposed drilling in ANWR,
favors re-importation of drugs from Canada and promoted the
McCain-Kennedy-Edwards patients bill of rights. Even his pro-life
credentials are not as pristine as we're told: He opposes reversal of Roe v.
Wade and sided with anti-political speech zealots in filing an amicus brief
against Wisconsin Right to Life.
Vote for McCain if you wish, but please don't insult conservatives by
suggesting he's one of us.
****
This is from the "McCain" press and there are probably many more like articles in the McCain press. But, to qualify the statement in the ATC, "If anyone, McCain supporter or not, will send an article by a notable favorable of McCain the Arizona Town Crier will publish it.", the article should be from a third party. Does anyone expect the McCain press to say anything against McCain?
However, since the statement wasn't qualified, here is what McCain's group has to say about McCain.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: Pinalcogop@aol.com
To: strider@theriver.com
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 10:21 AM
Subject: Fwd: In Case You Missed It: The Wall Street Journal: "McCain Gets Edge For El...
From: press@mccainpress.com
To: pinalcogop@aol.com
Sent: 1/25/2008 3:17:55 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time
Subj: In Case You Missed It: The Wall Street Journal: "McCain Gets Edge For Electability"
For Immediate Release
Contact: Press Office
Friday, January 25, 2008
703-650-5550
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
The Wall Street Journal: "McCain Gets Edge For Electability"
"The leading Republican presidential candidates all claim to be the best-suited to overcome the Democratic tide expected in the general election. But opinion polls clearly favor Arizona Sen. John McCain in that regard. ... [McCain] did the best in hypothetical matchups with the two leading Democrats. The [new WSJ/NBC] poll shows him beating New York Sen. Hillary Clinton by 46% to 44% and tying against Illinois Sen. Barack Obama with 42% support. Messrs. Romney, Giuliani and Huckabee all lose handily in polling matchups with Sens. Clinton and Obama." -- The Wall Street Journal
McCain Gets Edge For Electability
As Primary Moves Along, Republican Voters Face Question of Who Can Win
By Alex Frangos And Elizabeth Holmes
The Wall Street Journal
January 25, 2008
The leading Republican presidential candidates all claim to be the best-suited to overcome the Democratic tide expected in the general election. But opinion polls clearly favor Arizona Sen. John McCain in that regard.
In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, 37% of respondents said Mr. McCain has the best chance to win in November against the Democrats. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney was far back in second, with 16%, followed closely by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani at 15% and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee at 12%. Those results are mirrored in other polls.
Mr. McCain also did the best in hypothetical matchups with the two leading Democrats. The poll shows him beating New York Sen. Hillary Clinton by 46% to 44% and tying against Illinois Sen. Barack Obama with 42% support. Messrs. Romney, Giuliani and Huckabee all lose handily in polling matchups with Sens. Clinton and Obama. Statistically, the results are about the same -- a dead heat -- whether Mr. McCain's opponent is Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama because the poll has a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points.
Many Republican primary voters face a quandary this year: Whether to choose the candidate they like best or the one they think has the best shot against a formidable Democratic opponent in November.
"We have got to figure out who's the most electable. That's the hard part," said Ron Dahlstrom, a 67-year-old retiree living in Naples, Fla., who says he hasn't decided on a candidate. The self-described religious conservative likes Mr. Huckabee, but says the Baptist preacher is too religious to get elected. That leaves him undecided between Messrs. Romney and McCain. "Anybody but Hillary," he said Tuesday.
The electabilty quotient is a growing concern for voters as the campaign heats up in Florida. That represents a change for the Republican Party. In recent elections, Republicans have either had an incumbent or an anointed front-runner who gained momentum early, such as George W. Bush in 2000 or Bob Dole in 1996. This year, Republicans are the underdogs, with an unpopular sitting president and facing a possible economic recession.
"A lot of Republicans are looking for who can win," Mr. McCain said yesterday after an event in West Palm Beach, Fla.
Mr. McCain released an Internet advertisement yesterday that will appear on the Web sites of Florida newspapers. It's called "Democrats' Worst Nightmare." The ad says Democrats "fear John McCain most because he's the one candidate who can rally the conservative Reagan Coalition while appealing to independent voters to win in November."
That type of message resonates with McCain supporter Bob Freid of Boynton Beach, Fla. The retired dentist, 67, said yesterday that Mr. McCain is "the candidate that can beat the illustrious Democrats."
"He can work with anybody," Mr. Freid said, explaining Mr. McCain's appeal to independents. ...
Read The Wall Street Journal: "McCain Gets Edge For Electability"
Jim
McCain's a 'hero' - so what?
David Limbaugh
Posted: January 25, 2008
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Many conservatives have said Sen. John McCain is not conservative enough to
suit them. Some of McCain's defenders have not only disagreed but have
impugned his critics, hypocritically blaming them for divisiveness.
But intramural bickering isn't the issue. What's important is that
conservatives have an intellectually honest and open discussion about GOP
presidential
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880>
contenders.
It's disappointing to watch good conservatives demean themselves by trying
to present McCain as something he's not. No matter how much they spin, they
can't fool conservatives familiar with McCain's record. McCain's detractors
are not the ones having to stretch and massage the facts in order to turn
McCain - overnight - into a Reagan conservative.
McCain is not only not conservative enough; he has also built a reputation
as a maverick by stabbing his party in the back - not in furtherance of
conservative principles but by betraying them. McCain delights in sticking
it to his colleagues while winning accolades from the mainstream liberal
media.
Former Sen. Rick Santorum, whose conservative credentials are beyond
question, said, "I don't agree with (McCain) on hardly any issues." Santorum
told radio host Mark Levin, "I just have to tell you, as a leader, as
someone who had to put these coalitions together, it was always hard and we
very rarely on domestic policy had any help from the senator from Arizona."
Santorum said McCain has been damaging to conservative causes and would be
no friend to conservatives in the White House.
McCain's defenders - in the McCainian spirit of chilling political speech -
forbid us from criticizing him because he is a war hero. That's
irresponsible nonsense. Voters and analysts have an obligation to assess
McCain's suitability for the presidency. To consider and verbalize the
negatives is not to demean his service or sacrifice.
We can recognize and honor McCain's indescribably grueling POW experiences
without taking the leap of arguing they automatically qualify him as an
ideal commander in chief. His qualifications should be evaluated on the
merits, not on sentimental appeals to his service.
Understandably, I suppose, pundits
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880> often
glibly assert that one of McCain's many advantages is his character - a
character that was molded by the hardships he endured. McCain's captivity
undeniably involved more character building than anything most of us will
ever experience. But to say he is a rugged, battle-tested hero does not mean
he is incapable of prevarication, opportunism, demagoguery or other
mischief. Nor does it immunize him from scrutiny concerning the credible
claim that he lacks the temperament to be president.
I respectfully reject that McCain's honorable and sacrificial
character-building experiences or his self-description as a "straight
talker" place his veracity above question. I remember him sidling up to the
media by falsely claiming President Bush
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880> didn't
level with the American people about how long the Iraq war could take. I
remember him blaming dirty campaign tricks on Bush in South Carolina in
2000, when investigations revealed there was no evidence Bush was behind it.
I remember him joining liberals in slandering the truth-telling Swift Boat
veterans
as "dishonest and dishonorable." I remember his disingenuous derision of the
across-the-board Bush tax cuts as being only for the rich. I witnessed him
changing his position on immigration
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880> to shore
up support in South Carolina, then after that primary arrogantly denying to
Sean Hannity that he'd flip-flopped. People can assess for themselves
whether McCain is always straight, but hopefully they'll base their decision
on the evidence and not his hero status.
I seriously doubt McCain will win the GOP
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880>
nomination, precisely because of his infidelity to conservative principles.
Consider:
He crusades against Guantanamo, favors constitutional rights for terrorists
but opposes tough interrogation techniques, was the ringleader of the Gang
of 14, which legitimized the filibustering of judicial nominees, and is the
godfather of political speech-suppressing and Democrat-favoring
campaign-finance reform legislation.
He has displayed contempt for conservative evangelicals, opposed Bush's
pro-growth tax cuts for reasons other than he says (spending), has engaged
in other class-warfare rhetoric like demonizing oil and drug companies,
co-sponsored the abominable McCain-Kennedy illegal immigrant
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59880>
-forgiveness/open-borders/Social Security zapping bill, and even voted for
the Specter amendment, which could have conferred consulting rights on
Mexico concerning the erection of a southern border fence.
He sold out on global warming, opportunistically opposed drilling in ANWR,
favors re-importation of drugs from Canada and promoted the
McCain-Kennedy-Edwards patients bill of rights. Even his pro-life
credentials are not as pristine as we're told: He opposes reversal of Roe v.
Wade and sided with anti-political speech zealots in filing an amicus brief
against Wisconsin Right to Life.
Vote for McCain if you wish, but please don't insult conservatives by
suggesting he's one of us.
****
This is from the "McCain" press and there are probably many more like articles in the McCain press. But, to qualify the statement in the ATC, "If anyone, McCain supporter or not, will send an article by a notable favorable of McCain the Arizona Town Crier will publish it.", the article should be from a third party. Does anyone expect the McCain press to say anything against McCain?
However, since the statement wasn't qualified, here is what McCain's group has to say about McCain.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: Pinalcogop@aol.com
To: strider@theriver.com
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 10:21 AM
Subject: Fwd: In Case You Missed It: The Wall Street Journal: "McCain Gets Edge For El...
From: press@mccainpress.com
To: pinalcogop@aol.com
Sent: 1/25/2008 3:17:55 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time
Subj: In Case You Missed It: The Wall Street Journal: "McCain Gets Edge For Electability"
For Immediate Release
Contact: Press Office
Friday, January 25, 2008
703-650-5550
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
The Wall Street Journal: "McCain Gets Edge For Electability"
"The leading Republican presidential candidates all claim to be the best-suited to overcome the Democratic tide expected in the general election. But opinion polls clearly favor Arizona Sen. John McCain in that regard. ... [McCain] did the best in hypothetical matchups with the two leading Democrats. The [new WSJ/NBC] poll shows him beating New York Sen. Hillary Clinton by 46% to 44% and tying against Illinois Sen. Barack Obama with 42% support. Messrs. Romney, Giuliani and Huckabee all lose handily in polling matchups with Sens. Clinton and Obama." -- The Wall Street Journal
McCain Gets Edge For Electability
As Primary Moves Along, Republican Voters Face Question of Who Can Win
By Alex Frangos And Elizabeth Holmes
The Wall Street Journal
January 25, 2008
The leading Republican presidential candidates all claim to be the best-suited to overcome the Democratic tide expected in the general election. But opinion polls clearly favor Arizona Sen. John McCain in that regard.
In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, 37% of respondents said Mr. McCain has the best chance to win in November against the Democrats. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney was far back in second, with 16%, followed closely by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani at 15% and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee at 12%. Those results are mirrored in other polls.
Mr. McCain also did the best in hypothetical matchups with the two leading Democrats. The poll shows him beating New York Sen. Hillary Clinton by 46% to 44% and tying against Illinois Sen. Barack Obama with 42% support. Messrs. Romney, Giuliani and Huckabee all lose handily in polling matchups with Sens. Clinton and Obama. Statistically, the results are about the same -- a dead heat -- whether Mr. McCain's opponent is Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama because the poll has a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points.
Many Republican primary voters face a quandary this year: Whether to choose the candidate they like best or the one they think has the best shot against a formidable Democratic opponent in November.
"We have got to figure out who's the most electable. That's the hard part," said Ron Dahlstrom, a 67-year-old retiree living in Naples, Fla., who says he hasn't decided on a candidate. The self-described religious conservative likes Mr. Huckabee, but says the Baptist preacher is too religious to get elected. That leaves him undecided between Messrs. Romney and McCain. "Anybody but Hillary," he said Tuesday.
The electabilty quotient is a growing concern for voters as the campaign heats up in Florida. That represents a change for the Republican Party. In recent elections, Republicans have either had an incumbent or an anointed front-runner who gained momentum early, such as George W. Bush in 2000 or Bob Dole in 1996. This year, Republicans are the underdogs, with an unpopular sitting president and facing a possible economic recession.
"A lot of Republicans are looking for who can win," Mr. McCain said yesterday after an event in West Palm Beach, Fla.
Mr. McCain released an Internet advertisement yesterday that will appear on the Web sites of Florida newspapers. It's called "Democrats' Worst Nightmare." The ad says Democrats "fear John McCain most because he's the one candidate who can rally the conservative Reagan Coalition while appealing to independent voters to win in November."
That type of message resonates with McCain supporter Bob Freid of Boynton Beach, Fla. The retired dentist, 67, said yesterday that Mr. McCain is "the candidate that can beat the illustrious Democrats."
"He can work with anybody," Mr. Freid said, explaining Mr. McCain's appeal to independents. ...
Read The Wall Street Journal: "McCain Gets Edge For Electability"
Silent Scream
From Joe Peron, the Arizona Right to Life
ABORTION - THE SILENT SCREAM COMPLETE VERSION (with permission from APF). Republished with Permission from Roy Tidwell of American Portrait Films as long as the following credits are shown:
VHS/DVDs Available
American Portrait Films
Call 1-800-736-4567
www.amport.com
This has been performed as asked. This video is perfectly legal.
The Silent Scream Complete Version - Abortion as Infanticide
Dr. Bernard Nathanson's classic video that shocked the world. He explains the procedure of a suction abortion, followed by an actual first trimester abortion as seen through ultrasound. The viewer can see the child's pathetic attempts to escape the suction curette as her heart rate doubles, and a "silent scream" as her body is torn apart. A great tool to help people see why abortion is murder. The most important video on abortion ever made. This video changed opinion on abortion to many people.
Introduction by Dr. Bernard Nathanson, host. Describes the technology of ultrasound and how, for the first time ever, we can actually see inside the womb. Dr. Nathanson further describes the ultrasound technique and shows examples of babies in the womb. Three-dimensional depiction of the developing fetus, from 4 weeks through 28 weeks. Display and usage of the abortionists' tools, plus video of an abortionist performing a suction abortion. Dr. Nathanson discusses the abortionist who agreed to allow this abortion to be filmed with ultrasound. The abortionist was quite skilled, having performed more than 10,000 abortions. We discover that the resulting ultrasound of his abortion so appalled him that he never again performed another abortion. The clip begins with an ultrasound of the fetus (girl) who is about to be aborted. The girl is moving in the womb; displays a heartbeat of 140 per minute; and is at times sucking her thumb. As the abortionist's suction tip begins to invade the womb, the child rears and moves violently in an attempt to avoid the instrument. Her mouth is visibly open in a "silent scream." The child's heart rate speeds up dramatically (to 200 beats per minute) as she senses aggression. She moves violently away in a pathetic attempt to escape the instrument. The abortionist's suction tip begins to rip the baby's limbs from its body, ultimately leaving only her head in the uterus (too large to be pulled from the uterus in one piece). The abortionist attempts to crush her head with his forceps, allowing it to be removed. In an effort to "dehumanize" the procedure, the abortionist and anesthesiologist refer to the baby's head as "number 1." The abortionist crushes "number 1" with the forceps and removes it from the uterus. Abortion statistics are revealed, as well as who benefits from the enormously lucrative industry that has developed. Clinics are now franchised, and there is ample evidence that many are controlled by organized crime. Women are victims, too. They haven't been told about the true nature of the unborn child or the facts about abortion procedures. Their wombs have been perforated, infected, destroyed, and sterilized. All as a result of an operation about which they they have had no true knowledge. Films like this must be made part of "informed consent." NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) and Planned Parenthood are accused of a conspiracy of silence, of keeping women in the dark about the reality of abortion. Finally, Dr. Nathanson discusses his credentials. He is a former abortionist, having been the director of the largest clinic in the Western world. (less)
Added: July 11, 2007
ABORTION - THE SILENT SCREAM COMPLETE VERSION (with permission from APF). Republished with Permission from Roy Tidwell of American Portrait Films as long as the following credits are shown:
VHS/DVDs Available
American Portrait Films
Call 1-800-736-4567
www.amport.com
This has been performed as asked. This video is perfectly legal.
The Silent Scream Complete Version - Abortion as Infanticide
Dr. Bernard Nathanson's classic video that shocked the world. He explains the procedure of a suction abortion, followed by an actual first trimester abortion as seen through ultrasound. The viewer can see the child's pathetic attempts to escape the suction curette as her heart rate doubles, and a "silent scream" as her body is torn apart. A great tool to help people see why abortion is murder. The most important video on abortion ever made. This video changed opinion on abortion to many people.
Introduction by Dr. Bernard Nathanson, host. Describes the technology of ultrasound and how, for the first time ever, we can actually see inside the womb. Dr. Nathanson further describes the ultrasound technique and shows examples of babies in the womb. Three-dimensional depiction of the developing fetus, from 4 weeks through 28 weeks. Display and usage of the abortionists' tools, plus video of an abortionist performing a suction abortion. Dr. Nathanson discusses the abortionist who agreed to allow this abortion to be filmed with ultrasound. The abortionist was quite skilled, having performed more than 10,000 abortions. We discover that the resulting ultrasound of his abortion so appalled him that he never again performed another abortion. The clip begins with an ultrasound of the fetus (girl) who is about to be aborted. The girl is moving in the womb; displays a heartbeat of 140 per minute; and is at times sucking her thumb. As the abortionist's suction tip begins to invade the womb, the child rears and moves violently in an attempt to avoid the instrument. Her mouth is visibly open in a "silent scream." The child's heart rate speeds up dramatically (to 200 beats per minute) as she senses aggression. She moves violently away in a pathetic attempt to escape the instrument. The abortionist's suction tip begins to rip the baby's limbs from its body, ultimately leaving only her head in the uterus (too large to be pulled from the uterus in one piece). The abortionist attempts to crush her head with his forceps, allowing it to be removed. In an effort to "dehumanize" the procedure, the abortionist and anesthesiologist refer to the baby's head as "number 1." The abortionist crushes "number 1" with the forceps and removes it from the uterus. Abortion statistics are revealed, as well as who benefits from the enormously lucrative industry that has developed. Clinics are now franchised, and there is ample evidence that many are controlled by organized crime. Women are victims, too. They haven't been told about the true nature of the unborn child or the facts about abortion procedures. Their wombs have been perforated, infected, destroyed, and sterilized. All as a result of an operation about which they they have had no true knowledge. Films like this must be made part of "informed consent." NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) and Planned Parenthood are accused of a conspiracy of silence, of keeping women in the dark about the reality of abortion. Finally, Dr. Nathanson discusses his credentials. He is a former abortionist, having been the director of the largest clinic in the Western world. (less)
Added: July 11, 2007
Thermal drug mule video
from Gene Caferelli
Screen grab from video taken by a private citizen northeast of Douglas, Arizona, last Friday evening, November 2. Image shows four drug "mules" carrying illicit cargo. Six people were in the group. Four were apprehended by the Border Patrol, after being guided in by the private citizen. 139 pounds of marijuana was confiscated. Two got away.
Screen grab from video taken by a private citizen northeast of Douglas, Arizona, last Friday evening, November 2. Image shows four drug "mules" carrying illicit cargo. Six people were in the group. Four were apprehended by the Border Patrol, after being guided in by the private citizen. 139 pounds of marijuana was confiscated. Two got away.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Paton on Election 08: Stakes Are High
"We are 3 seats short of losing the majority," declared State Representative Jonathan Paton today in a short telephone conversation. The Budget weighed foremost on the legislator's mind and he criticized Governor Napolitano's proposed budget, "She wants to use a lot of bonding and gimmicks and photo radar to solve the budgets woes."
Paton opposes photo radar but conceded the Governor's constitutional power, "The money collected from the photo radar would go into the general fund and wouldn't go to roads." Mindful of rising insurance rates in the onslaught of photo radar revenues, "I wrote a bill that would keep any points from being awarded by photo radar."
The budget reflects the housing slump that has affected the Arizona economy acutely. "In Tucson there are 40,000 houses on the market right now."
Some of Paton's peers mentioned budget cuts. Paton responded, "Sixty percent of the budget is education. Ten percent is prisons."
On the budget, "There will be a compromise. There will be some budget cuts and there will be some bonding but not as much as she [Napolitano] wants."
Paton attended Tim Bee's announcement rally at Palo Verde High School in Tucson. "I grew up with Tim and Gabby. We all went to the same junior high. Tim was valedictorian. Gabby was salutatorian. I just wanted to pass auto shop."
Paton cited the Iraq War as the key issue for 08. "If we pull out of Iraq like the democrats want, then Iraq will be a stain on this country's honor forever. Our country will fall apart with unrest we have not seen and with us goes the rest of the world."
Paton leaned on his war time record, "I had a mission where we had to maintain two man accountability of some equipment we escorted. Being a lieutenant, the only way I could get from place to place reliably was to take the Al Queda birds transporting the men in the yellow jumpsuits. I was standing in Baghdad International Airport where I met a man - a Jordanian who spoke perfect English. He was an engineer who studied in America. I asked him what his objectives are. He told me that he wanted 'to kill as many Americans as he could until' we 'left Iraq.' I then asked him. What if that happens then what. He asked me where I am from. I said Arizona. Then he said 'we want to kill as many Americans as we can in California, New York and Arizona.'"
We should be proud we have an Iraq War veteran representing us.
Paton opposes photo radar but conceded the Governor's constitutional power, "The money collected from the photo radar would go into the general fund and wouldn't go to roads." Mindful of rising insurance rates in the onslaught of photo radar revenues, "I wrote a bill that would keep any points from being awarded by photo radar."
The budget reflects the housing slump that has affected the Arizona economy acutely. "In Tucson there are 40,000 houses on the market right now."
Some of Paton's peers mentioned budget cuts. Paton responded, "Sixty percent of the budget is education. Ten percent is prisons."
On the budget, "There will be a compromise. There will be some budget cuts and there will be some bonding but not as much as she [Napolitano] wants."
Paton attended Tim Bee's announcement rally at Palo Verde High School in Tucson. "I grew up with Tim and Gabby. We all went to the same junior high. Tim was valedictorian. Gabby was salutatorian. I just wanted to pass auto shop."
Paton cited the Iraq War as the key issue for 08. "If we pull out of Iraq like the democrats want, then Iraq will be a stain on this country's honor forever. Our country will fall apart with unrest we have not seen and with us goes the rest of the world."
Paton leaned on his war time record, "I had a mission where we had to maintain two man accountability of some equipment we escorted. Being a lieutenant, the only way I could get from place to place reliably was to take the Al Queda birds transporting the men in the yellow jumpsuits. I was standing in Baghdad International Airport where I met a man - a Jordanian who spoke perfect English. He was an engineer who studied in America. I asked him what his objectives are. He told me that he wanted 'to kill as many Americans as he could until' we 'left Iraq.' I then asked him. What if that happens then what. He asked me where I am from. I said Arizona. Then he said 'we want to kill as many Americans as we can in California, New York and Arizona.'"
We should be proud we have an Iraq War veteran representing us.
Helter Skelter: The Race War in the Democratic Party
From Rush Limbaugh
The Democrat Party's Uncivil War rages on with Bill Clinton's whispering campaign that Obama is only going to win South Carolina because of all the black folks there. Obama says Hillary's pulling out all the stops to win the state. Bill Clinton berates CNN's Jessica Yellin for daring to question him over the use of race in the campaign.
The Media is watching.
Hillary and Bill Use Alinsky Tactics To Bring Down Obama
Bill Clinton says race, gender to decide S.C. vote
Slick Willie Rides Again
Obama Criticizes Clinton's Candor
from a fundraising email:
Michelle Obama wrote:
Friend --
This Campaign Relies on You In the past week or two, another candidate's spouse has been getting an awful lot of attention.
We knew getting into this race that Barack would be competing with Senator Clinton and President Clinton at the same time.
We expected that Bill Clinton would tout his record from the nineties and talk about Hillary's role in his past success. That's a fair approach and a challenge we are prepared to face.
What we didn't expect, at least not from our fellow Democrats, are the win-at-all-costs tactics we've seen recently. We didn't expect misleading accusations that willfully distort Barack's record.
Barack Obama isn't relying on a former President of the United States to campaign for him.
He's relying on us -- you, me, and hundreds of thousands of people like us who are giving whatever they can afford to support this movement.
Please stand up in the face of these new attacks. Make your first online donation of $50 today and own a piece of this campaign:
https://donate.barackobama.com/reliesonyou
Barack's unwavering opposition to the war in Iraq, his outspoken support of women's rights, and his call for leadership that will transform our party and our country have all been mischaracterized in the past two weeks.
We've seen disingenuous attacks and smear tactics turn people off from the political process for too long, and enough is enough.
It's time for a change. It's time for a new kind of leadership and a new kind of politics in our party and in our country.
And while Senator Clinton has a former president in her corner, I'll put my faith in a movement of a whole lot of people who are ready for change.
South Carolina votes in 48 hours, and more than 20 states will make their voices heard in less than two weeks on February 5th. Now is the time for all of us to step up and take personal responsibility for making change happen.
Please make your first online donation of $50 now:
https://donate.barackobama.com/reliesonyou
Thank you,
Michelle
Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: biz_account_only@yahoo.com
To unsubscribe, go to: http://my.barackobama.com/unsubscribe
The Democrat Party's Uncivil War rages on with Bill Clinton's whispering campaign that Obama is only going to win South Carolina because of all the black folks there. Obama says Hillary's pulling out all the stops to win the state. Bill Clinton berates CNN's Jessica Yellin for daring to question him over the use of race in the campaign.
The Media is watching.
Hillary and Bill Use Alinsky Tactics To Bring Down Obama
Bill Clinton says race, gender to decide S.C. vote
Slick Willie Rides Again
Obama Criticizes Clinton's Candor
from a fundraising email:
Michelle Obama
Friend --
This Campaign Relies on You In the past week or two, another candidate's spouse has been getting an awful lot of attention.
We knew getting into this race that Barack would be competing with Senator Clinton and President Clinton at the same time.
We expected that Bill Clinton would tout his record from the nineties and talk about Hillary's role in his past success. That's a fair approach and a challenge we are prepared to face.
What we didn't expect, at least not from our fellow Democrats, are the win-at-all-costs tactics we've seen recently. We didn't expect misleading accusations that willfully distort Barack's record.
Barack Obama isn't relying on a former President of the United States to campaign for him.
He's relying on us -- you, me, and hundreds of thousands of people like us who are giving whatever they can afford to support this movement.
Please stand up in the face of these new attacks. Make your first online donation of $50 today and own a piece of this campaign:
https://donate.barackobama.com/reliesonyou
Barack's unwavering opposition to the war in Iraq, his outspoken support of women's rights, and his call for leadership that will transform our party and our country have all been mischaracterized in the past two weeks.
We've seen disingenuous attacks and smear tactics turn people off from the political process for too long, and enough is enough.
It's time for a change. It's time for a new kind of leadership and a new kind of politics in our party and in our country.
And while Senator Clinton has a former president in her corner, I'll put my faith in a movement of a whole lot of people who are ready for change.
South Carolina votes in 48 hours, and more than 20 states will make their voices heard in less than two weeks on February 5th. Now is the time for all of us to step up and take personal responsibility for making change happen.
Please make your first online donation of $50 now:
https://donate.barackobama.com/reliesonyou
Thank you,
Michelle
Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: biz_account_only@yahoo.com
To unsubscribe, go to: http://my.barackobama.com/unsubscribe
Illegal Immigrant Stats
Gene Cafarelli
The following information continues my effort to disseminate data re illegal immigration. I hope you will find this useful in discussions with friends, and writing to our elected officials and the media.
Center for Immigration Studies
Based on figures from March, 2007
* The immigrant population - both legal & illegal - hit a record 37.9 million in 2007.
* Immigrants account for 1 in 8 U.S. Residents, the highest in 80 years.
* Nearly 33% of immigrants are illegal - 50% are Mexican & Central American and 33% are South Americans.
* Since 2000, 10.3 million immigrants have arrived - the highest 7-year period in U.S. History. More than 50% of those (5.6 M) are illegal.
* Of adult immigrants, 31% have no High School Diploma.
* 33% of immigrant heads of household use at least one welfare program – among Mexican immigrants, the largest group, 51% use at least one welfare program.
* The poverty rate for immigrants & their U.S. born children under 18 is 17%; nearly 50% higher than the rate for natives & their children.
* 34% of immigrants lack health insurance, compared to 13% of natives. Immigrants and their U.S. born children account for 71% of the increase of the uninsured since 1989.
* Immigration accounts for virtually all of the national increase in public school enrollment over the past 20 years. In 2007, there were 10.8 million school-age children from immigrant families in the United States.
My Analysis
12.63 million Illegals
6.31 million illegals from Mexico
3 million uninsured illegals
3 million heads of household receiving welfare
2 million according to Secy Chertoff must be deported for criminality
The following information continues my effort to disseminate data re illegal immigration. I hope you will find this useful in discussions with friends, and writing to our elected officials and the media.
Center for Immigration Studies
Based on figures from March, 2007
* The immigrant population - both legal & illegal - hit a record 37.9 million in 2007.
* Immigrants account for 1 in 8 U.S. Residents, the highest in 80 years.
* Nearly 33% of immigrants are illegal - 50% are Mexican & Central American and 33% are South Americans.
* Since 2000, 10.3 million immigrants have arrived - the highest 7-year period in U.S. History. More than 50% of those (5.6 M) are illegal.
* Of adult immigrants, 31% have no High School Diploma.
* 33% of immigrant heads of household use at least one welfare program – among Mexican immigrants, the largest group, 51% use at least one welfare program.
* The poverty rate for immigrants & their U.S. born children under 18 is 17%; nearly 50% higher than the rate for natives & their children.
* 34% of immigrants lack health insurance, compared to 13% of natives. Immigrants and their U.S. born children account for 71% of the increase of the uninsured since 1989.
* Immigration accounts for virtually all of the national increase in public school enrollment over the past 20 years. In 2007, there were 10.8 million school-age children from immigrant families in the United States.
My Analysis
12.63 million Illegals
6.31 million illegals from Mexico
3 million uninsured illegals
3 million heads of household receiving welfare
2 million according to Secy Chertoff must be deported for criminality
Mexico Cooperates in Border Patrol Agent's Killing
Gene Cafarelli wrote:
Let’s see where this goes.
Article published Jan 24, 2008
Mexico arrests suspect in U.S. agent's death
January 24, 2008
By Jerry Seper - Mexican law-enforcement authorities arrested a man in the killing of a U.S. Border Patrol agent who died Saturday when drug- and alien-smuggling suspects ran him down as he tried to lay spike strips on a road about a mile north of the Mexico border.
Mexican federal and state police said Jesus Navarro Montes, 22, was taken into custody in the northern state of Sonora in the killing of Agent Luis Aguilar Jr., 32, who was struck and killed at about 9:30 a.m. Saturday.
According to a joint statement yesterday by Mexico's federal Attorney General's Office and Public Safety Department, Mr. Navarro left Mexicali in Baja California on Saturday, headed for the U.S. in a Hummer carrying drugs, and that after running down the agent, he drove to Mexicali and gave the Hummer to accomplices for safekeeping.
It said Mr. Navarro had previously been detained and jailed for smuggling 10 illegal aliens into the U.S., adding that there also was a warrant for his arrest in Mexicali on alien-trafficking counts.
Last night, Mexican federal authorities in Baja California told reporters that information from the Navarro arrest had led them to three Mexicali homes where they found materials for making fake U.S. immigration papers — blank documents, border-crossing cards, temporary visas, and stamping machines to produce U.S. government seals.
Agent Aguilar, a six-year Border Patrol veteran assigned at the agency's Yuma, Ariz., sector office, was killed when struck by the driver of a Hummer fleeing other Border Patrol agents near the Imperial Sand Dunes in California, about 20 miles west of the state's border with Arizona. More arrests are expected in the case, because two trucks were involved in the deadly chase.
In a statement to Border Patrol agents issued before Mexico announced the arrest, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner W. Ralph Basham and Border Patrol Chief David Aguilar called the breaking investigation "encouraging news" and said they "are optimistic that progress is being made toward the eventual prosecution and conviction of those individuals connected to this heinous act."
"In the face of increasing acts of violence against our officers and agents, CBP's resolve in securing America's borders is unwavering," they said. "We continue to mourn the loss of Agent Aguilar and will not rest until all those responsible are brought to justice."
Mr. Basham and Chief Aguilar said they appreciated the "dedication shown" by local, state, federal and international law-enforcement partners in bringing those responsible to justice, and particularly commended the "rapid response" of the Mexican government, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Justice Department.
Border Patrol officials said Agent Aguilar was struck as other agents were trying to stop the fleeing Hummer and a Ford F-250 pickup that crossed from Mexico into the U.S. He was declared dead at the scene.
Mexican authorities in Baja California recovered the burned remains of a Hummer and Ford pickup Sunday afternoon. Identification numbers showed both trucks had been stolen in California.
Agent Aguilar's death, the first for the Border Patrol in 2008, comes at a time when assaults on border agents continue to rise — from 384 in 2005 to 987 in 2007. In the first quarter of fiscal 2008, which began Oct. 1, there were about 300 assaults on Border Patrol agents, on a pace to reach 1,200 by the end of the year.
The rise is attributed by CBP to a greater law-enforcement presence, criminal resistance to tightening operational control along the Southwest border and turf battles between rival drug- and alien-smuggling gangs.
"Dangerous criminal groups have chosen to respond to our tougher security posture at the border with increased violence," said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. "They mistakenly believe we will give way in the face of violence. We will continue to show them how wrong they are."
Let’s see where this goes.
Article published Jan 24, 2008
Mexico arrests suspect in U.S. agent's death
January 24, 2008
By Jerry Seper - Mexican law-enforcement authorities arrested a man in the killing of a U.S. Border Patrol agent who died Saturday when drug- and alien-smuggling suspects ran him down as he tried to lay spike strips on a road about a mile north of the Mexico border.
Mexican federal and state police said Jesus Navarro Montes, 22, was taken into custody in the northern state of Sonora in the killing of Agent Luis Aguilar Jr., 32, who was struck and killed at about 9:30 a.m. Saturday.
According to a joint statement yesterday by Mexico's federal Attorney General's Office and Public Safety Department, Mr. Navarro left Mexicali in Baja California on Saturday, headed for the U.S. in a Hummer carrying drugs, and that after running down the agent, he drove to Mexicali and gave the Hummer to accomplices for safekeeping.
It said Mr. Navarro had previously been detained and jailed for smuggling 10 illegal aliens into the U.S., adding that there also was a warrant for his arrest in Mexicali on alien-trafficking counts.
Last night, Mexican federal authorities in Baja California told reporters that information from the Navarro arrest had led them to three Mexicali homes where they found materials for making fake U.S. immigration papers — blank documents, border-crossing cards, temporary visas, and stamping machines to produce U.S. government seals.
Agent Aguilar, a six-year Border Patrol veteran assigned at the agency's Yuma, Ariz., sector office, was killed when struck by the driver of a Hummer fleeing other Border Patrol agents near the Imperial Sand Dunes in California, about 20 miles west of the state's border with Arizona. More arrests are expected in the case, because two trucks were involved in the deadly chase.
In a statement to Border Patrol agents issued before Mexico announced the arrest, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner W. Ralph Basham and Border Patrol Chief David Aguilar called the breaking investigation "encouraging news" and said they "are optimistic that progress is being made toward the eventual prosecution and conviction of those individuals connected to this heinous act."
"In the face of increasing acts of violence against our officers and agents, CBP's resolve in securing America's borders is unwavering," they said. "We continue to mourn the loss of Agent Aguilar and will not rest until all those responsible are brought to justice."
Mr. Basham and Chief Aguilar said they appreciated the "dedication shown" by local, state, federal and international law-enforcement partners in bringing those responsible to justice, and particularly commended the "rapid response" of the Mexican government, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Justice Department.
Border Patrol officials said Agent Aguilar was struck as other agents were trying to stop the fleeing Hummer and a Ford F-250 pickup that crossed from Mexico into the U.S. He was declared dead at the scene.
Mexican authorities in Baja California recovered the burned remains of a Hummer and Ford pickup Sunday afternoon. Identification numbers showed both trucks had been stolen in California.
Agent Aguilar's death, the first for the Border Patrol in 2008, comes at a time when assaults on border agents continue to rise — from 384 in 2005 to 987 in 2007. In the first quarter of fiscal 2008, which began Oct. 1, there were about 300 assaults on Border Patrol agents, on a pace to reach 1,200 by the end of the year.
The rise is attributed by CBP to a greater law-enforcement presence, criminal resistance to tightening operational control along the Southwest border and turf battles between rival drug- and alien-smuggling gangs.
"Dangerous criminal groups have chosen to respond to our tougher security posture at the border with increased violence," said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. "They mistakenly believe we will give way in the face of violence. We will continue to show them how wrong they are."
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Safford Legislator wants to pull the plug on the Employer Sanctions Law
Gene Cafarelli wrote:
From: Don Goldwater [mailto:don@dongoldwater.com]
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 7:13 PM
To:
Subject: Hate to say I told you so - but
Employer sanctions law challenged by Legislators
HOWARD FISCHER has a good article in the East Valley Tribune on January 18, 2008 on the bills that have been drafted by Arizona legislators for action this year. A recap of the main provisions follows:
Rep. Bill Konopnicki, R-Safford bills exempt a company from losing its license to do business for having an undocumented worker on the payroll if that person was already on the payroll before Jan. 1. But that's not all.
His bills require prosecutors to prove "regular, repeated and intentional " illegal hiring before a license could be suspended or revoked. Companies would not be penalized for "isolated, sporadic or accidental acts."
Konopnicki's bills would also limit the types of licenses a judge could take away, a move that would exempt more than half of Arizona businesses from any type of punishment.
Even in the remaining cases, a company would be subject to license suspension or revocation only if guilt were proved "beyond a reasonable doubt," a standard that never applies for civil cases.
Konopnicki's bills would not allow prosecutors to investigate anonymous complaints.
His bills give a clear exemption from punishment for hiring independent contractors who are here illegally.
This creates a loophole allowing businesses to simply fire their employees and, instead, contract with them.
Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa said Konopnicki has an ulterior motive. Owner of several McDonald's franchises, Konopnicki profits from the low wages caused by illegals in the workforce.
Other lawmakers who voted for last year's legislation and are now working with Konopnicki include Sens. Jake Flake, R-Snowflake, Carolyn Allen and Amanda Aguirre, D-Yuma, and Rep. Jack Brown, D-St. Johns
ARIZONA NEEDS YOUR HELP!
It is important that you phone, Fax or E-mail the supporters of these bills and tell them how you feel about their actions and their bills.
(R) Rep. Bill Konopnicki Phone (602) 926 5409 Fax (602) 417 3105 E-mail bkonopnicki@azleg.gov
(D) Rep. Jack Brown Phone (602) 926 4129 Fax (602) 417 3010 E-mail jbrown@azleg.gov
(R) Sen. Carolyn Allen Phone (602) 926 4480 Fax (602) 417 3155 E-mail callen@azleg.gov
(R) Sen. Jake Flake Phone (602) 926 5219 Fax (602) 417 3224 E-mail jflake@azleg.gov
(D) Sen. Amanda Aguirre Phone (602) 926 4139 Fax (602) 417 3024 E-mail aaguirre@azleg.gov
In addition please contact Speaker Weiers and Senate President Tim Bee and ask them not to assign these bills to committee or support these bill in any way.
Speaker Weiers Phone (602) 926 4173 Fax (602) 417 3153 E-mail jweiers@azleg.gov
Senate President Tim Bee Phone (602) 926 5683 Fax (602) 417 3247 E-mail tbee@azleg.gov
The actions of these and other legislators make it clear why in is imperative to put the Legal Arizona Workers (L.A.W.) initiative on the ballot in 2008. For more information on the L.A.W. initiative please goto www.azgrassroots.com.
Don Goldwater | 1928 E. Highland F-104 #616 | Phoenix | AZ | 85016
From: Don Goldwater [mailto:don@dongoldwater.com]
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 7:13 PM
To:
Subject: Hate to say I told you so - but
Employer sanctions law challenged by Legislators
HOWARD FISCHER has a good article in the East Valley Tribune on January 18, 2008 on the bills that have been drafted by Arizona legislators for action this year. A recap of the main provisions follows:
Rep. Bill Konopnicki, R-Safford bills exempt a company from losing its license to do business for having an undocumented worker on the payroll if that person was already on the payroll before Jan. 1. But that's not all.
His bills require prosecutors to prove "regular, repeated and intentional " illegal hiring before a license could be suspended or revoked. Companies would not be penalized for "isolated, sporadic or accidental acts."
Konopnicki's bills would also limit the types of licenses a judge could take away, a move that would exempt more than half of Arizona businesses from any type of punishment.
Even in the remaining cases, a company would be subject to license suspension or revocation only if guilt were proved "beyond a reasonable doubt," a standard that never applies for civil cases.
Konopnicki's bills would not allow prosecutors to investigate anonymous complaints.
His bills give a clear exemption from punishment for hiring independent contractors who are here illegally.
This creates a loophole allowing businesses to simply fire their employees and, instead, contract with them.
Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa said Konopnicki has an ulterior motive. Owner of several McDonald's franchises, Konopnicki profits from the low wages caused by illegals in the workforce.
Other lawmakers who voted for last year's legislation and are now working with Konopnicki include Sens. Jake Flake, R-Snowflake, Carolyn Allen and Amanda Aguirre, D-Yuma, and Rep. Jack Brown, D-St. Johns
ARIZONA NEEDS YOUR HELP!
It is important that you phone, Fax or E-mail the supporters of these bills and tell them how you feel about their actions and their bills.
(R) Rep. Bill Konopnicki Phone (602) 926 5409 Fax (602) 417 3105 E-mail bkonopnicki@azleg.gov
(D) Rep. Jack Brown Phone (602) 926 4129 Fax (602) 417 3010 E-mail jbrown@azleg.gov
(R) Sen. Carolyn Allen Phone (602) 926 4480 Fax (602) 417 3155 E-mail callen@azleg.gov
(R) Sen. Jake Flake Phone (602) 926 5219 Fax (602) 417 3224 E-mail jflake@azleg.gov
(D) Sen. Amanda Aguirre Phone (602) 926 4139 Fax (602) 417 3024 E-mail aaguirre@azleg.gov
In addition please contact Speaker Weiers and Senate President Tim Bee and ask them not to assign these bills to committee or support these bill in any way.
Speaker Weiers Phone (602) 926 4173 Fax (602) 417 3153 E-mail jweiers@azleg.gov
Senate President Tim Bee Phone (602) 926 5683 Fax (602) 417 3247 E-mail tbee@azleg.gov
The actions of these and other legislators make it clear why in is imperative to put the Legal Arizona Workers (L.A.W.) initiative on the ballot in 2008. For more information on the L.A.W. initiative please goto www.azgrassroots.com.
Don Goldwater | 1928 E. Highland F-104 #616 | Phoenix | AZ | 85016
Is Kolbe Pulling the Strings in Cochise County?
Bloggers Tim Richardson and R.W. Masterson debate strategy and the influence of erstwhile Kolbe.
Tim Richardson wrote:
Mr. Masterson
I could not agree with you less.
The flip side of “Let's get over the petty attachment to the past” is the consideration that those that do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.
I for one do not believe that the good old boys, incumbents, in Washington should be able to attempt to influence a primary election. As has been done in the last three elections.
I do not believe that the self described elite at the party headquarters in Phoenix should meddle in the primary elections.
And I believe that the people in the leadership positions at the State level should be making honest efforts to ensure that those influences do not occur.
Many of those staunch Republicans did not vote because Jim Kolbe influenced them not to. They had a greater loyalty to Jim Kolbe than they did to the Republican Party. When it came to the general election Kolbe dumped the party.
So much for Republican Party loyalties. And your philosophy that any Republican is better than none.
I followed the comments in the AZ Star for the articles for both Bee’s and Gifford’s announcements of opening campaigns over the weekend. The comments on either article indicated that not many are happy with Gabby, even those within her party. But there were a number of, appearing Democrats, who welcomed the participation of Mr. Kolbe as a positive for their side. Many of the comments concerning Tim Bee were cautionary supportive with the caution being the inclusion of Jim Kolbe.
Jim Kolbe may be some sort of hero in Pima County and at the State Party Headquarters but he certainly does not garner that admiration in Cochise County and especially in Eastern Cochise County.
I do not need to shoot myself in the foot to know that it hurts.
Do you want someone in the seat that is a Republican or that merely calls themselves a Republican?
The point being with things as they are, Tim Bee will have a more difficult time demonstrating that he is, in fact, a Republican to a significant number of individuals who have been loyal Republicans for a great number of years and are tired of the shenanigans that make their votes seem empty and of no value.
From: Masterson
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 2:49 PM
To: T
Cc: Pete Davis; Meg Econ; PIMAGOP
Subject: Re: Randy Graf and the 1200 Club
This is the kind of attitude that elected Gabby. There were staunch Republicans who would not vote for Randy under any circumstances so we lost those votes.
Graff and Kolbe have been mortal enemies since the 2000 election.
Kolbe is the "honorary Chair". If that makes you want to keep Giffords in office then we are in trouble and might as well just pack it in.
Do you want a Republican representing you in CD8? If you do then get behind Tim Bee. If you don't care one way or the other you could just stay home or you could work for Giffords.
As for me, I want a Republican in this seat and I believe strongly that Tim Bee is our best bet. Let's get over the petty attachment to the past and get something done for the people of southern Arizona.
----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Richardson
To: James Bretney
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 10:37 AM
Subject: RE: Randy Graf and the 1200 Club
-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 1:54 PM
tim
Subject: Randy Graf and the 1200 Club
My response:
Randy Graf is a more gracious person than myself.
Gail Griffith needs to expand the “no fly zone” to include all of eastern Cochise County.
“You are known by the company that you keep.”
My neighbors and I have some serious reservations concerning any support for Tim Bee because of his affiliation with Jim Kolbe. Kolbe may still have political clout but that is only valid once elected. In the mean time if the affiliation causes a loss of votes, of what value is the clout?
The antics and tactics of Mr. Kolbe during the last election cycle has put off a number of people who are considering joining the ranks of the Independents. Mr. Kolbe’s clout is apparently sufficient to have the State Republican leadership turn a blind eye as to what was happening in CD8.
His bringing in big national dollars to influence the primary elections, with the apparent indifference of the state party leaders, was a slap in the face to the local voters. He blatantly campaigned for Gabby. I do not know, but would like to, if any of the national Republican dollars brought in were spent on Gabby. Now he wants us to believe that he wants to unseat her?
He was working for the Democrats, and may well still be. He was paid for his efforts by Governor Janet appointing him to chair a commission. That position is a political plumb and I doubt that the Governor appointed him because of his winning smile. There are not many political plumbs that a Arizona Governor has and are sparingly dealt out to people to whom the Governor’s party owes favors.
Tim Richardson wrote:
Mr. Masterson
I could not agree with you less.
The flip side of “Let's get over the petty attachment to the past” is the consideration that those that do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.
I for one do not believe that the good old boys, incumbents, in Washington should be able to attempt to influence a primary election. As has been done in the last three elections.
I do not believe that the self described elite at the party headquarters in Phoenix should meddle in the primary elections.
And I believe that the people in the leadership positions at the State level should be making honest efforts to ensure that those influences do not occur.
Many of those staunch Republicans did not vote because Jim Kolbe influenced them not to. They had a greater loyalty to Jim Kolbe than they did to the Republican Party. When it came to the general election Kolbe dumped the party.
So much for Republican Party loyalties. And your philosophy that any Republican is better than none.
I followed the comments in the AZ Star for the articles for both Bee’s and Gifford’s announcements of opening campaigns over the weekend. The comments on either article indicated that not many are happy with Gabby, even those within her party. But there were a number of, appearing Democrats, who welcomed the participation of Mr. Kolbe as a positive for their side. Many of the comments concerning Tim Bee were cautionary supportive with the caution being the inclusion of Jim Kolbe.
Jim Kolbe may be some sort of hero in Pima County and at the State Party Headquarters but he certainly does not garner that admiration in Cochise County and especially in Eastern Cochise County.
I do not need to shoot myself in the foot to know that it hurts.
Do you want someone in the seat that is a Republican or that merely calls themselves a Republican?
The point being with things as they are, Tim Bee will have a more difficult time demonstrating that he is, in fact, a Republican to a significant number of individuals who have been loyal Republicans for a great number of years and are tired of the shenanigans that make their votes seem empty and of no value.
From: Masterson
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 2:49 PM
To: T
Cc: Pete Davis; Meg Econ; PIMAGOP
Subject: Re: Randy Graf and the 1200 Club
This is the kind of attitude that elected Gabby. There were staunch Republicans who would not vote for Randy under any circumstances so we lost those votes.
Graff and Kolbe have been mortal enemies since the 2000 election.
Kolbe is the "honorary Chair". If that makes you want to keep Giffords in office then we are in trouble and might as well just pack it in.
Do you want a Republican representing you in CD8? If you do then get behind Tim Bee. If you don't care one way or the other you could just stay home or you could work for Giffords.
As for me, I want a Republican in this seat and I believe strongly that Tim Bee is our best bet. Let's get over the petty attachment to the past and get something done for the people of southern Arizona.
----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Richardson
To: James Bretney
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 10:37 AM
Subject: RE: Randy Graf and the 1200 Club
-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 1:54 PM
tim
Subject: Randy Graf and the 1200 Club
My response:
Randy Graf is a more gracious person than myself.
Gail Griffith needs to expand the “no fly zone” to include all of eastern Cochise County.
“You are known by the company that you keep.”
My neighbors and I have some serious reservations concerning any support for Tim Bee because of his affiliation with Jim Kolbe. Kolbe may still have political clout but that is only valid once elected. In the mean time if the affiliation causes a loss of votes, of what value is the clout?
The antics and tactics of Mr. Kolbe during the last election cycle has put off a number of people who are considering joining the ranks of the Independents. Mr. Kolbe’s clout is apparently sufficient to have the State Republican leadership turn a blind eye as to what was happening in CD8.
His bringing in big national dollars to influence the primary elections, with the apparent indifference of the state party leaders, was a slap in the face to the local voters. He blatantly campaigned for Gabby. I do not know, but would like to, if any of the national Republican dollars brought in were spent on Gabby. Now he wants us to believe that he wants to unseat her?
He was working for the Democrats, and may well still be. He was paid for his efforts by Governor Janet appointing him to chair a commission. That position is a political plumb and I doubt that the Governor appointed him because of his winning smile. There are not many political plumbs that a Arizona Governor has and are sparingly dealt out to people to whom the Governor’s party owes favors.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
A Return for the Shah?
Iran may be changing its government:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080122/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_president_s_peril
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080121/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_ahmadinejad_s_woes;_ylt=AteYuMjk_x4Uasgzy16osPkLewgF
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/07/africa/tehran.php
Iran supplies training and material support to insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. AZ has troops in both theaters. 1,000 Arizona National Guard soldiers were deployed to Afghanistan last January. Arizona National Guard’s 996th Area Support Medical Company is in Iraq. A change of government that I predicted early in the year maybe in the offing.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080122/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_president_s_peril
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080121/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_ahmadinejad_s_woes;_ylt=AteYuMjk_x4Uasgzy16osPkLewgF
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/07/africa/tehran.php
Iran supplies training and material support to insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. AZ has troops in both theaters. 1,000 Arizona National Guard soldiers were deployed to Afghanistan last January. Arizona National Guard’s 996th Area Support Medical Company is in Iraq. A change of government that I predicted early in the year maybe in the offing.
Illegal Aliens Incur Massive Costs
Gene Cafarelli wrote:
This is being circulated by responsible citizens. I’m passing it on because I believe the implications should be discussed, and used when we contact our elected officials.
Tomorrow I will have more data for you.
Illegal Aliens Incur Massive Costs
>>
>> December 4, 2007
>>
>> http://rense.com/general79/seniors.htm
>>
>> I hope the following 14 reasons are forwarded over
>> and over again until they are read so many times that the
>> reader gets sick of reading them. I have included the URL's
>> for verification of the following facts:
>>
>> 1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to
>> illegal aliens each year. http://tinyurl.com/zob77
>>
>> 2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food
>> assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free
>> school lunches for illegal aliens.
>> http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
>>
>> 3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid
>> for illegal aliens.
>> http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
>>
>> 4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary
>> and secondary school education for children here illegally
>> and they cannot speak a word of English!
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.0.html
>>
>> 5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education
>> for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as
>> anchor babies.
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate
>> illegal aliens.
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are
>> illegal aliens.
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal
>> aliens for Welfare and Social Services by the American
>> taxpayers.
>> http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed
>> American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a
>> crime rate that's two-and-a-half times that of white
>> non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going
>> to make a huge additional crime problem in the US .
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10
>> MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border
>> also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist
>> Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth,
>> heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the
>> Southern border. Homeland Security Report.
>> http://tinyurl.com/t9sht
>>
>> 12. The National Policy Institute, "estimated that
>> the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and
>> $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46
>> billion annually over a five year period."
>> http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/pdf/deportation.pdf
>>
>> 13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in
>> remittances back to their countries of origin.
>> http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm
>>
>> 14. "The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly
>> One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In
>> The United States ". http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml
>>
>> Total cost is a whooping... $338.3 BILLION A YEAR!!!
>>
>>
>> Snopes is provided for doubters:
>>
>>
>> http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/bankofamerica.asp
This is being circulated by responsible citizens. I’m passing it on because I believe the implications should be discussed, and used when we contact our elected officials.
Tomorrow I will have more data for you.
Illegal Aliens Incur Massive Costs
>>
>> December 4, 2007
>>
>> http://rense.com/general79/seniors.htm
>>
>> I hope the following 14 reasons are forwarded over
>> and over again until they are read so many times that the
>> reader gets sick of reading them. I have included the URL's
>> for verification of the following facts:
>>
>> 1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to
>> illegal aliens each year. http://tinyurl.com/zob77
>>
>> 2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food
>> assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free
>> school lunches for illegal aliens.
>> http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
>>
>> 3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid
>> for illegal aliens.
>> http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
>>
>> 4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary
>> and secondary school education for children here illegally
>> and they cannot speak a word of English!
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.0.html
>>
>> 5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education
>> for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as
>> anchor babies.
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate
>> illegal aliens.
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are
>> illegal aliens.
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal
>> aliens for Welfare and Social Services by the American
>> taxpayers.
>> http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed
>> American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a
>> crime rate that's two-and-a-half times that of white
>> non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going
>> to make a huge additional crime problem in the US .
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html
>>
>> 11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10
>> MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border
>> also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist
>> Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth,
>> heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the
>> Southern border. Homeland Security Report.
>> http://tinyurl.com/t9sht
>>
>> 12. The National Policy Institute, "estimated that
>> the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and
>> $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46
>> billion annually over a five year period."
>> http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/pdf/deportation.pdf
>>
>> 13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in
>> remittances back to their countries of origin.
>> http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm
>>
>> 14. "The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly
>> One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In
>> The United States ". http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml
>>
>> Total cost is a whooping... $338.3 BILLION A YEAR!!!
>>
>>
>> Snopes is provided for doubters:
>>
>>
>> http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/bankofamerica.asp
Saturday, January 19, 2008
the 1200 Club and Randy Graf
Last night, I attended the 1200 Club of Greater Sierra Vista at Pueblo Del Sol Country Club on St Andrews Street. For $ 12, I became a member in good standing of the 1200 Club. Judy Gignac presides over the 1200 Club - epicenter of the Cochise County establishment Republicans. Attendees included County Attorney, Judge Tim Dickerson, and Mayor Bob Strain. Term limited State Legislators Bob Robson, Marion McClure and Bob Stump circulated their petitions for Arizona Corporate Commission as well as Sonita Custom Home builder Doug Sposito running for Legislative District 30.
The CEO of Arizona Opinions and former Kolbe and Kyl pollster Dr. Margaret Kenski
addressed the packed room over the current state of affairs of the Republican Party. She rehashed some of the same data that media outlets have been reporting over the dealignment of the Reagan coalition. When asked about the possibility of a brokered convention, Kenski reported that the last time a brokered convention occurred in 1952 between Taft and Eisenhower. She said that the candidates with the better organizations prevailed. On a personal note her parents were Taft supporters and that they were very disheartened.
Kenski reported that the fastest growing group of voters was Independents with both parties losing members though the GOP held a slight edge. She also clarified that Independents were not a monolithic voting bloc. When asked if the growth of Independents could be linked to rise of cynicism, the failure and instability of out social institutions, Kenski said that our social institutions have definitely failed as has personal responsibility. She cited the failure of families, schools and churches. “We have a problem distinguishing wants from needs. When people are taking out home equity to pay off credit cards to pay for items like Whataburger, we have a problem.”
When canvassed about the development of Jim Kolbe chairing Tim Bee’s campaign in an apparent snub to Randy Graf, 1200 Club members generally defended Jim Kolbe and reiterated their confidence in Tim Bee. One energetic 1200 club member even announced Tim Bee’s announcement rally at a local car dealership.
I made calls to Bee Chairwoman Meg Econ, County GOP Chair Gail Griffin and former legislator Randy Graf, Meg Econ said she would work for a reconciliation between Kolbe and Graf. Meg Econ pleaded for unity. Randy said that he supported Tim as a “good Republican” and Gail Griffin warned that Kolbe better not show his face in Sierra Vista.
The CEO of Arizona Opinions and former Kolbe and Kyl pollster Dr. Margaret Kenski
addressed the packed room over the current state of affairs of the Republican Party. She rehashed some of the same data that media outlets have been reporting over the dealignment of the Reagan coalition. When asked about the possibility of a brokered convention, Kenski reported that the last time a brokered convention occurred in 1952 between Taft and Eisenhower. She said that the candidates with the better organizations prevailed. On a personal note her parents were Taft supporters and that they were very disheartened.
Kenski reported that the fastest growing group of voters was Independents with both parties losing members though the GOP held a slight edge. She also clarified that Independents were not a monolithic voting bloc. When asked if the growth of Independents could be linked to rise of cynicism, the failure and instability of out social institutions, Kenski said that our social institutions have definitely failed as has personal responsibility. She cited the failure of families, schools and churches. “We have a problem distinguishing wants from needs. When people are taking out home equity to pay off credit cards to pay for items like Whataburger, we have a problem.”
When canvassed about the development of Jim Kolbe chairing Tim Bee’s campaign in an apparent snub to Randy Graf, 1200 Club members generally defended Jim Kolbe and reiterated their confidence in Tim Bee. One energetic 1200 club member even announced Tim Bee’s announcement rally at a local car dealership.
I made calls to Bee Chairwoman Meg Econ, County GOP Chair Gail Griffin and former legislator Randy Graf, Meg Econ said she would work for a reconciliation between Kolbe and Graf. Meg Econ pleaded for unity. Randy said that he supported Tim as a “good Republican” and Gail Griffin warned that Kolbe better not show his face in Sierra Vista.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Pinal County Tax Rebellion
From Jim Ehl
I guess that where ever we live we have our problems with some local government. We have read about problems in Phoenix and yet the same bunch are reelected into office. And so it goes. Looks like Pinal has a little soul searching to do. But, in the election year remember, people deserve the government that they elect.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 11:33 AM
Subject: Ten Million $$ & San Tan Flats
Ron "Low-Tax" Reinagel for
Pinal County Assessor
Pinal County embarrassed (at least, they should be) featured on the WALL STREET JOURNAL WEBSITE in a Reason TV video hosted by Drew Carey. Watch the video. Note at the end that Pinal County officials have refused to comment on the case or the video. A link to the video is below.
One of the items that I mention in talking with Pinal County Taxpayers, when addressing why spending is so high, is the “sad-case” being spearheaded by Pinal County Supervisor of District # 2 Sandie Smith to stop outside dancing at San Tan Flats in Pinal County. It is estimated that, to date, Pinal County has spent well in excess of $200,000 on outside legal fees to pursue this miscarriage of justice. Mr. Bell is represented by the National Institute of Justice Legal Organization (famous in AZ for the Randy Bailey Brake Shop case in Mesa).
The primary question; Why spend money on a "non-Issue" item? Pinal County has already announced a TEN MILLION DOLLAR BUDGET SHORTFALL and extreme 2008 property valuation increase by Mr. Paul Larkin’s Office (Larkin is the Pinal County Assessor). Regardless of your political party preference, the buffoons that operate Pinal County must be stopped. For additional information on many of their ridiculous decisions, visit our website. www.ronforassessor.com.
As of matter of full disclosure I (with my wife) have met with Dale Bell, proprietor of San Tan Flats. We thoroughly enjoyed the pleasant atmosphere and food. When you are standing directly outside the door of San Tan Flats it is virtually impossible to hear the music performed by Lee Alexander. There is a high double wall surrounding the establishment. The only environmental item making it “outside” is there is a portion of the facility that does not have a roof.
CLICK THIS Wall Street Journal Link to view the video; http://online.wsj.com/public/page/8_0006.html?bcpid=86195573&bclid=212338097&bctid=1378313918
From The Institute Of Justice - The Institute for Justice Arizona Chapter is starting 2008 strong with an excellent video commentary on our San Tan Flat case released today by Reason.TV and the Drew Carey Project. Pinal County, Arizona, is abusing its power and harassing local entrepreneur Dale Bell who opened a steakhouse and saloon in Pinal County in 2005. Little did he know doing so would earn him the County's ire: the county has taken the absurd position that allowing his customers to dance outdoors transforms the restaurant into a dance hall in violation of zoning ordinances.
Thank You for your ongoing interest in and support for the Institute's work on behalf of individual rights, and Happy 2008!
Jennifer M. Perkins, Staff Attorney - Institute for Justice Arizona Chapter - Tempe, Arizona 85281
A vote for Ron is a vote for lower taxes made possible with a correctly functioning “User-Friendly” assessment system.
PLEASE - Forward this E-Mail to every Pinal County Taxpayer in your address book.
"We must no longer allow our future
to be held hostage by our past."
Thank You;
Ron Reinagel for Assessor - CLICK HERE FOR WEBSITE
Larkin’s Law & Larkin Must Go!
Elect Ron “Low-Tax” Reinagel
Pinal County Assessor in 2008
Paid for by Ron for Assessor Committee
If you are no longer interested in information on why Pinal County Property Taxes are so high, click unsubscribe.
I guess that where ever we live we have our problems with some local government. We have read about problems in Phoenix and yet the same bunch are reelected into office. And so it goes. Looks like Pinal has a little soul searching to do. But, in the election year remember, people deserve the government that they elect.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 11:33 AM
Subject: Ten Million $$ & San Tan Flats
Ron "Low-Tax" Reinagel for
Pinal County Assessor
Pinal County embarrassed (at least, they should be) featured on the WALL STREET JOURNAL WEBSITE in a Reason TV video hosted by Drew Carey. Watch the video. Note at the end that Pinal County officials have refused to comment on the case or the video. A link to the video is below.
One of the items that I mention in talking with Pinal County Taxpayers, when addressing why spending is so high, is the “sad-case” being spearheaded by Pinal County Supervisor of District # 2 Sandie Smith to stop outside dancing at San Tan Flats in Pinal County. It is estimated that, to date, Pinal County has spent well in excess of $200,000 on outside legal fees to pursue this miscarriage of justice. Mr. Bell is represented by the National Institute of Justice Legal Organization (famous in AZ for the Randy Bailey Brake Shop case in Mesa).
The primary question; Why spend money on a "non-Issue" item? Pinal County has already announced a TEN MILLION DOLLAR BUDGET SHORTFALL and extreme 2008 property valuation increase by Mr. Paul Larkin’s Office (Larkin is the Pinal County Assessor). Regardless of your political party preference, the buffoons that operate Pinal County must be stopped. For additional information on many of their ridiculous decisions, visit our website. www.ronforassessor.com.
As of matter of full disclosure I (with my wife) have met with Dale Bell, proprietor of San Tan Flats. We thoroughly enjoyed the pleasant atmosphere and food. When you are standing directly outside the door of San Tan Flats it is virtually impossible to hear the music performed by Lee Alexander. There is a high double wall surrounding the establishment. The only environmental item making it “outside” is there is a portion of the facility that does not have a roof.
CLICK THIS Wall Street Journal Link to view the video; http://online.wsj.com/public/page/8_0006.html?bcpid=86195573&bclid=212338097&bctid=1378313918
From The Institute Of Justice - The Institute for Justice Arizona Chapter is starting 2008 strong with an excellent video commentary on our San Tan Flat case released today by Reason.TV and the Drew Carey Project. Pinal County, Arizona, is abusing its power and harassing local entrepreneur Dale Bell who opened a steakhouse and saloon in Pinal County in 2005. Little did he know doing so would earn him the County's ire: the county has taken the absurd position that allowing his customers to dance outdoors transforms the restaurant into a dance hall in violation of zoning ordinances.
Thank You for your ongoing interest in and support for the Institute's work on behalf of individual rights, and Happy 2008!
Jennifer M. Perkins, Staff Attorney - Institute for Justice Arizona Chapter - Tempe, Arizona 85281
A vote for Ron is a vote for lower taxes made possible with a correctly functioning “User-Friendly” assessment system.
PLEASE - Forward this E-Mail to every Pinal County Taxpayer in your address book.
"We must no longer allow our future
to be held hostage by our past."
Thank You;
Ron Reinagel for Assessor - CLICK HERE FOR WEBSITE
Larkin’s Law & Larkin Must Go!
Elect Ron “Low-Tax” Reinagel
Pinal County Assessor in 2008
Paid for by Ron for Assessor Committee
If you are no longer interested in information on why Pinal County Property Taxes are so high, click unsubscribe.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Jack Kaltenhauser v. Gabby Giffords: Iraq
From Jim Ehl
Seems that some time back Jack Kaltenhauser (in Iraq) received a letter from Rep. Giffords. Below is his answer. I found it interesting and forward it because it contained not so much his opinion, but because it gave a lot of facts.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Kaltenhauser
To: 'Representative Gabrielle Giffords'
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 12:17 AM
Subject: RE: From the Office of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords
Representative Giffords,
You continue to demonstrate that from you years of experience in military and foreign affairs that you do not have a clue what is happening in the real world outside of Washington DC. Your state you have visited Iraq on two separate occasions, how long were those trips? One or two days? Did you talk to the soldiers and the many American contractors who are actually doing the work in Iraq? No you spent your time hobnobbing with the elite Washington insiders stationed in the International Zone and herd of military O5 & O6’s who are stationed at Camp Victory, most of who are also Washington insider here to get their “tickets” punched for advancement. Did you go out to the FOB’s where the “real” soldiers are actually going out on the patrols into the neighborhoods of Baghdad, Al Anbar, Mosul, Kirkuk and Mahmudiyah? Did you talk to the Corporals, Sergeants, and Specialist who are on the front lines of this campaign? Again your answer is, “No”. The how do you to profess to know what is happening on the ground in Iraq.
You claim that this is “The President’s four and half years of military action in Iraq …” This is not the President’s military action, it is military action which was authorized by United States Congress in October 2002 under Public Law 107-243, with a 296 to 133 vote in the House and 77 to 23 vote in the Senate. That represents 68 ½% of the Congressmen and 77% of the Senator voted to authorize the use of the United States Military in Iraq. So the military actions taken in Iraq are those of the People of the United States of America as authorized by United States Congress. Your claim there is “no a clear plan as to how long or to what extent will be engaged there.” Maybe you do not understand the plan but has been clear to me since my original deployment into Turkey in February 2003. We are at war with terrorist, our involvement with continue until they are destroyed and can inflict further attacks on American interests around the world. We will leave Iraq when the situation on the ground is stable and the Iraqi security forces are strong enough to keep their country from falling back into the control of the terrorists and they supports.
If as you claim you are so concerned the extreme costs of the battles of the WAR on TERROR then you need to take the funding for the WAR off budget and introduce a bill in Congress to pay for the military operations with War Bonds like we did during the First and Second World Wars. I am sure you would be totally surprised at the willingness of the American People to support the costs of the WAR if they knew that is where the funding is actually going and they could have a tangible return on their investments.
In your letter you made the assertion that the Iraqi government needs to be more productive. At the same time as you are slamming the Iraqi government for their lack of action, the congress of which you are currently a member made not forward progress in the requirements of the office. In the House the Defense Authorization Billed was introduced by Rep. Skelton (D-Mo) on 20 March 2007 it had 579 amendments attached most having nothing to do with the Operations of the Defense department or the War on Terror, it was passed by the House 17 May 2007 or 58 days to process through the House. The bill was then sent to Senate where Senator Reid kept if off calendar until a vote on 1 October 2007 (the day the bill was suppose to into effect by law) the beginning of fiscal year 2008. The is took from 1 October until 12 December 2007 for the Senate/House Conference Committees to work out the differences in the bill and get it passed and sent to the President. That bill still has not been authorized because when was sent to the President it has language which the Executive Branch had warned that if it remained in the bill the President would Veto, the President held true on the Veto on 28 December. So at this time the Defense Authorizations for FY 2008 remain unfunded. It is now 107 days after the date this bill needed to be completed. The lack of the ability of the US Congress to do their job is deeply apparent. This is a body of representatives who on the average make $169,300 dollars a year not including the numerous benefits which they do not have to pay, transportation on military aircraft, medical care at military facilities, free official mail, staff paid for by the taxpayers, who live in the safety of Beltway around Washington DC, who are guarded by the Capital police, and other federal agencies, yet you can’t complete your work on time. Meanwhile your counterparts in the Iraqi government face threats to the lives on a nearly daily basis, they are attacked by the very insurgents you would allow to take of their country with mortars and rockets while they sit in session. Their average salary $120,000 they have to travel through their country under guard of special security team of highly trained guard in highly armored vehicles. They have worked to set up a government of which has only been in existence for less than 3 years. You are part of a government with over 200 years experience and the body to which you work has not done anymore that the Iraqi government. You and the other members of the US Congress has no record to stand on when you call for more action from the Iraqi government.
Finally the United States Congress does not have the authority under the US Constitution to dictate to the Pentagon or Commander in Chief on how to conduct military operations. Your role in the military is to fund the them through the Defense Authorization bill which I have shown above you have failed to do. If you feel that the War on Terror is wrong then exercise your rights as a member of Congress and do not fund the Department of Defense. Do not try to control the Department of Defense with hundreds of amendments and delays in their funding so that you Grandstand with the other members of your party (socialists). I talk about how much you have done when the truth is you have not done a DAMN thing but go to parties and take campaign contributions from Washington area lobbyists.
You and your ilk sicken me, and you can believe I am working to see that your Congressional term does not exceed your current two years.
J. Kaltenhauser
Taxpayer
Tucson, AZ
J.(Jack)L. Kaltenhauser
Auditor
From: Representative Gabrielle Giffords [mailto:az08ima@mail.house.gov]
Sent: 14 January, 2008 21:41
To: jkaltenhauser
Subject: From the Office of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords
January 14, 2008
Dear Friend,
Thank you for contacting me about the war in Iraq . As a member of the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committees, I have engaged in many hours of hearings with Administration officials and policy experts. I have traveled to Iraq twice to see first-hand how our operations are working and how they can be improved. These experiences have made me confident that the situation in Iraq and the global war against terrorism is more complicated than President Bush seems to recognize.
The President's four and half years of military action in Iraq have come at a staggering cost. We have lost nearly 4,000 American lives, with seven times as many wounded. So far, we have spent more than $500 billion in Iraq , which is more than $10 billion per month, and we still have no clear plan as to how long or to what extent we will be engaged there.
The long-term costs of this war are escalating. Our involvement in Iraq has subjected our military to extraordinary stress, requiring repeated deployments and allowing insufficient recovery and training time for our troops. The war has also had dire consequences for the readiness of our military. I have serious concerns that the war in Iraq has pushed our Army -- especially the Guard and Reserve components -- to the breaking point. In late September, the Chief of Staff of the Army, General George Casey, testified that the repeated deployment of our Armed Forces over the past few years has seriously weakened the Army's ability to respond to emerging threats.
Additionally, I am deeply concerned that the war in Iraq has diverted precious resources from our fight against Al Qaeda and international terrorism. In early December 2007, Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the Armed Services Committee that "in Afghanistan, we do what we can; in Iraq, we do what we must." This statement is indicative of the fact that our efforts in Afghanistan have suffered from a lack of focus. Our commitments in Iraq have prevented us from dedicating the forces necessary to fight and defeat Islamic extremism in the central front of the war on terror: Afghanistan .
In light of these facts, I believe that we must immediately begin a responsible withdrawal of all of our combat forces from Iraq while initiating a diplomatic offensive in the region. This approach would demand accountability from the Iraqi government and limit our military presence to special operations and rapid reaction forces for the purposes of striking Al Qaeda and training the Iraqi Security Forces.
In early September, I heard testimony from Ambassador Ryan Crocker and General David Petraeus on the status of the surge. Although they indicated limited success in securing some areas of Iraq , it is clear that no significant progress has been made toward political reconciliation. Furthermore, while violence is down in some parts of the country, Iraq is still far from being safe and secure. This is unacceptable. Unless the Iraqis can resolve their differences and compromise on issues such as de-Ba'athification, the equitable distribution of oil revenues, and the disarmament of sectarian militias, any improvements in the country's security will be temporary, at best.
Since my term in Congress began, I have consistently voted for measures that challenge the president's Iraq policies. I am a cosponsor of the Responsible Redeployment from Iraq Act, H.R. 2956, which would require redeployment of our forces to begin within 120 days. I am also a cosponsor of H.R. 3159, which would guarantee U.S. soldiers at least one year at home for every year they are deployed. Both bills passed the House earlier this year with my support and are now awaiting Senate consideration.
In addition, I have supported the following measures on the House floor:
oHouse Concurrent Resolution 63: Disapproving of the President's military surge (February 16, 2007);
oH.R. 1591: Supplemental appropriations legislation imposing strict withdrawal timelines for American troops from Iraq (April 25, 2007);
oOverride of President Bush's veto of withdrawal timelines (H.R. 1591) (May 2, 2007);
oH.R. 2929: A bill that prohibits the establishment of permanent bases in Iraq (July 25, 2007);
oH.R. 3087: A bill that requires the Department of Defense to plan for the redeployment of troops in Iraq and report to Congress on their progress (October 2, 2007); and
oH.R. 4156: The Orderly and Responsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations Act, a supplemental appropriations bill imposing a strict withdrawal timeline that would aim to redeploy most American forces by the end of 2008. It requires a shift in mission from combat to training, targeted counterterrorism missions, and protection of U.S. personnel in Iraq . (November 14, 2007).
As long as our servicemen and women put their lives on the line every day in Iraq , I will continue to fight in Congress for a more effective strategy-one that supports our troops, bolsters our military readiness, focuses our efforts on fighting international terrorism. I strongly support our men and women in uniform who risk their lives to protect and defend our nation. Our armed forces must have the tools, training, and support they need to be successful in any mission.
I always appreciate hearing from constituents, like you, who are informed and interested in issues of important to Arizona and the nation. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if you require assistance. My job as your representative is to help you connect with federal agencies, access services and get your policy questions answered thoroughly. Feel free to sign-up for e-news updates on my website at www.giffords.house.gov.
Sincerely,
Gabrielle Giffords
Member of Congress
Seems that some time back Jack Kaltenhauser (in Iraq) received a letter from Rep. Giffords. Below is his answer. I found it interesting and forward it because it contained not so much his opinion, but because it gave a lot of facts.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Kaltenhauser
To: 'Representative Gabrielle Giffords'
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 12:17 AM
Subject: RE: From the Office of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords
Representative Giffords,
You continue to demonstrate that from you years of experience in military and foreign affairs that you do not have a clue what is happening in the real world outside of Washington DC. Your state you have visited Iraq on two separate occasions, how long were those trips? One or two days? Did you talk to the soldiers and the many American contractors who are actually doing the work in Iraq? No you spent your time hobnobbing with the elite Washington insiders stationed in the International Zone and herd of military O5 & O6’s who are stationed at Camp Victory, most of who are also Washington insider here to get their “tickets” punched for advancement. Did you go out to the FOB’s where the “real” soldiers are actually going out on the patrols into the neighborhoods of Baghdad, Al Anbar, Mosul, Kirkuk and Mahmudiyah? Did you talk to the Corporals, Sergeants, and Specialist who are on the front lines of this campaign? Again your answer is, “No”. The how do you to profess to know what is happening on the ground in Iraq.
You claim that this is “The President’s four and half years of military action in Iraq …” This is not the President’s military action, it is military action which was authorized by United States Congress in October 2002 under Public Law 107-243, with a 296 to 133 vote in the House and 77 to 23 vote in the Senate. That represents 68 ½% of the Congressmen and 77% of the Senator voted to authorize the use of the United States Military in Iraq. So the military actions taken in Iraq are those of the People of the United States of America as authorized by United States Congress. Your claim there is “no a clear plan as to how long or to what extent will be engaged there.” Maybe you do not understand the plan but has been clear to me since my original deployment into Turkey in February 2003. We are at war with terrorist, our involvement with continue until they are destroyed and can inflict further attacks on American interests around the world. We will leave Iraq when the situation on the ground is stable and the Iraqi security forces are strong enough to keep their country from falling back into the control of the terrorists and they supports.
If as you claim you are so concerned the extreme costs of the battles of the WAR on TERROR then you need to take the funding for the WAR off budget and introduce a bill in Congress to pay for the military operations with War Bonds like we did during the First and Second World Wars. I am sure you would be totally surprised at the willingness of the American People to support the costs of the WAR if they knew that is where the funding is actually going and they could have a tangible return on their investments.
In your letter you made the assertion that the Iraqi government needs to be more productive. At the same time as you are slamming the Iraqi government for their lack of action, the congress of which you are currently a member made not forward progress in the requirements of the office. In the House the Defense Authorization Billed was introduced by Rep. Skelton (D-Mo) on 20 March 2007 it had 579 amendments attached most having nothing to do with the Operations of the Defense department or the War on Terror, it was passed by the House 17 May 2007 or 58 days to process through the House. The bill was then sent to Senate where Senator Reid kept if off calendar until a vote on 1 October 2007 (the day the bill was suppose to into effect by law) the beginning of fiscal year 2008. The is took from 1 October until 12 December 2007 for the Senate/House Conference Committees to work out the differences in the bill and get it passed and sent to the President. That bill still has not been authorized because when was sent to the President it has language which the Executive Branch had warned that if it remained in the bill the President would Veto, the President held true on the Veto on 28 December. So at this time the Defense Authorizations for FY 2008 remain unfunded. It is now 107 days after the date this bill needed to be completed. The lack of the ability of the US Congress to do their job is deeply apparent. This is a body of representatives who on the average make $169,300 dollars a year not including the numerous benefits which they do not have to pay, transportation on military aircraft, medical care at military facilities, free official mail, staff paid for by the taxpayers, who live in the safety of Beltway around Washington DC, who are guarded by the Capital police, and other federal agencies, yet you can’t complete your work on time. Meanwhile your counterparts in the Iraqi government face threats to the lives on a nearly daily basis, they are attacked by the very insurgents you would allow to take of their country with mortars and rockets while they sit in session. Their average salary $120,000 they have to travel through their country under guard of special security team of highly trained guard in highly armored vehicles. They have worked to set up a government of which has only been in existence for less than 3 years. You are part of a government with over 200 years experience and the body to which you work has not done anymore that the Iraqi government. You and the other members of the US Congress has no record to stand on when you call for more action from the Iraqi government.
Finally the United States Congress does not have the authority under the US Constitution to dictate to the Pentagon or Commander in Chief on how to conduct military operations. Your role in the military is to fund the them through the Defense Authorization bill which I have shown above you have failed to do. If you feel that the War on Terror is wrong then exercise your rights as a member of Congress and do not fund the Department of Defense. Do not try to control the Department of Defense with hundreds of amendments and delays in their funding so that you Grandstand with the other members of your party (socialists). I talk about how much you have done when the truth is you have not done a DAMN thing but go to parties and take campaign contributions from Washington area lobbyists.
You and your ilk sicken me, and you can believe I am working to see that your Congressional term does not exceed your current two years.
J. Kaltenhauser
Taxpayer
Tucson, AZ
J.(Jack)L. Kaltenhauser
Auditor
From: Representative Gabrielle Giffords [mailto:az08ima@mail.house.gov]
Sent: 14 January, 2008 21:41
To: jkaltenhauser
Subject: From the Office of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords
January 14, 2008
Dear Friend,
Thank you for contacting me about the war in Iraq . As a member of the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committees, I have engaged in many hours of hearings with Administration officials and policy experts. I have traveled to Iraq twice to see first-hand how our operations are working and how they can be improved. These experiences have made me confident that the situation in Iraq and the global war against terrorism is more complicated than President Bush seems to recognize.
The President's four and half years of military action in Iraq have come at a staggering cost. We have lost nearly 4,000 American lives, with seven times as many wounded. So far, we have spent more than $500 billion in Iraq , which is more than $10 billion per month, and we still have no clear plan as to how long or to what extent we will be engaged there.
The long-term costs of this war are escalating. Our involvement in Iraq has subjected our military to extraordinary stress, requiring repeated deployments and allowing insufficient recovery and training time for our troops. The war has also had dire consequences for the readiness of our military. I have serious concerns that the war in Iraq has pushed our Army -- especially the Guard and Reserve components -- to the breaking point. In late September, the Chief of Staff of the Army, General George Casey, testified that the repeated deployment of our Armed Forces over the past few years has seriously weakened the Army's ability to respond to emerging threats.
Additionally, I am deeply concerned that the war in Iraq has diverted precious resources from our fight against Al Qaeda and international terrorism. In early December 2007, Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the Armed Services Committee that "in Afghanistan, we do what we can; in Iraq, we do what we must." This statement is indicative of the fact that our efforts in Afghanistan have suffered from a lack of focus. Our commitments in Iraq have prevented us from dedicating the forces necessary to fight and defeat Islamic extremism in the central front of the war on terror: Afghanistan .
In light of these facts, I believe that we must immediately begin a responsible withdrawal of all of our combat forces from Iraq while initiating a diplomatic offensive in the region. This approach would demand accountability from the Iraqi government and limit our military presence to special operations and rapid reaction forces for the purposes of striking Al Qaeda and training the Iraqi Security Forces.
In early September, I heard testimony from Ambassador Ryan Crocker and General David Petraeus on the status of the surge. Although they indicated limited success in securing some areas of Iraq , it is clear that no significant progress has been made toward political reconciliation. Furthermore, while violence is down in some parts of the country, Iraq is still far from being safe and secure. This is unacceptable. Unless the Iraqis can resolve their differences and compromise on issues such as de-Ba'athification, the equitable distribution of oil revenues, and the disarmament of sectarian militias, any improvements in the country's security will be temporary, at best.
Since my term in Congress began, I have consistently voted for measures that challenge the president's Iraq policies. I am a cosponsor of the Responsible Redeployment from Iraq Act, H.R. 2956, which would require redeployment of our forces to begin within 120 days. I am also a cosponsor of H.R. 3159, which would guarantee U.S. soldiers at least one year at home for every year they are deployed. Both bills passed the House earlier this year with my support and are now awaiting Senate consideration.
In addition, I have supported the following measures on the House floor:
oHouse Concurrent Resolution 63: Disapproving of the President's military surge (February 16, 2007);
oH.R. 1591: Supplemental appropriations legislation imposing strict withdrawal timelines for American troops from Iraq (April 25, 2007);
oOverride of President Bush's veto of withdrawal timelines (H.R. 1591) (May 2, 2007);
oH.R. 2929: A bill that prohibits the establishment of permanent bases in Iraq (July 25, 2007);
oH.R. 3087: A bill that requires the Department of Defense to plan for the redeployment of troops in Iraq and report to Congress on their progress (October 2, 2007); and
oH.R. 4156: The Orderly and Responsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations Act, a supplemental appropriations bill imposing a strict withdrawal timeline that would aim to redeploy most American forces by the end of 2008. It requires a shift in mission from combat to training, targeted counterterrorism missions, and protection of U.S. personnel in Iraq . (November 14, 2007).
As long as our servicemen and women put their lives on the line every day in Iraq , I will continue to fight in Congress for a more effective strategy-one that supports our troops, bolsters our military readiness, focuses our efforts on fighting international terrorism. I strongly support our men and women in uniform who risk their lives to protect and defend our nation. Our armed forces must have the tools, training, and support they need to be successful in any mission.
I always appreciate hearing from constituents, like you, who are informed and interested in issues of important to Arizona and the nation. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if you require assistance. My job as your representative is to help you connect with federal agencies, access services and get your policy questions answered thoroughly. Feel free to sign-up for e-news updates on my website at www.giffords.house.gov.
Sincerely,
Gabrielle Giffords
Member of Congress
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Anti-McCainiac Strike back after Michigan Defeat
from Jim Ehl
In the Arizona Town Crier of 1-14, Would Arizona Support McCain if he were not from Arizona, there have been some interesting relies. The range all the way from:
"Personally, I am going around to various areas being a surrogate speaker on behalf of John McCain and very proud to be able to do so." to:
"I found this stuff on McCain last night. I will NOT support or vote for McCain. My lovely spouse owns a nice home in Panama. I know where to go if that *%$&#@#^&*$ wins." And he listed numberous links to information on McCain.
If you get the GOP USA Eagle, you will see below that here is what Chuck Muth had to say.
Jim
Posted by Chuck Muth
January 14, 2008 at 1:44 pm
>> Printer-Friendly Version
Many conservatives thought - hoped - that John McCain’s presidential campaign was dead beyond revival last summer as, indeed, it appeared. Alas, his win in New Hampshire last week has resurrected his campaign corpse, so it’s time to remind everyone why nominating McCain, for conservatives anyway, would be the next worst thing to nominating Mike Huckabee.
In a Washington Post column yesterday, McCain adviser John Weaver had this to say about opposition to McCain’s candidacy by various conservative leaders such as our good friend and best friend of the American taxpayer, Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform:
“Here's who John McCain has angered: self-described conservative lobbyists who basically represent special interests. They're angry at him because he has put the national interest in front of their special interests.”
No, John McCain has put John McCain’s interests before the national interests of freedom and a strictly-limited federal government.
McCain’s sole interest is in washing away the historical memory of his role in the Keating Five scandal by replacing it with a presidential term or two.
The “special interests” which “conservative lobbyists” who oppose McCain advocate for include those who value free speech, which was muzzled by the abominable McCain-Feingold law, those who value gun rights and the constitutional right of self-defense, those who don’t think terrorists planning to kill millions of Americans should enjoy American constitutional rights, those who don’t buy into the hooey of Al Gore’s global warming hysteria, those who supported the Bush tax cuts which McCain voted against, those who don’t think it’s the federal government’s role to regulate professional boxing, and those who object to extending amnesty to illegal aliens.
In other words: conservatives.
Another McCain adviser, Charlie Black, told the Post that “In three or four weeks, everybody will be for McCain.”
I can’t speak for the rest of you, but I won’t be. No way. No how.
If you really want to blow up the Republican Party, nominate McCain for president and have him tap Huckabee for Veep. Then turn out the lights, because the party will be over.
In the Arizona Town Crier of 1-14, Would Arizona Support McCain if he were not from Arizona, there have been some interesting relies. The range all the way from:
"Personally, I am going around to various areas being a surrogate speaker on behalf of John McCain and very proud to be able to do so." to:
"I found this stuff on McCain last night. I will NOT support or vote for McCain. My lovely spouse owns a nice home in Panama. I know where to go if that *%$&#@#^&*$ wins." And he listed numberous links to information on McCain.
If you get the GOP USA Eagle, you will see below that here is what Chuck Muth had to say.
Jim
Posted by Chuck Muth
January 14, 2008 at 1:44 pm
>> Printer-Friendly Version
Many conservatives thought - hoped - that John McCain’s presidential campaign was dead beyond revival last summer as, indeed, it appeared. Alas, his win in New Hampshire last week has resurrected his campaign corpse, so it’s time to remind everyone why nominating McCain, for conservatives anyway, would be the next worst thing to nominating Mike Huckabee.
In a Washington Post column yesterday, McCain adviser John Weaver had this to say about opposition to McCain’s candidacy by various conservative leaders such as our good friend and best friend of the American taxpayer, Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform:
“Here's who John McCain has angered: self-described conservative lobbyists who basically represent special interests. They're angry at him because he has put the national interest in front of their special interests.”
No, John McCain has put John McCain’s interests before the national interests of freedom and a strictly-limited federal government.
McCain’s sole interest is in washing away the historical memory of his role in the Keating Five scandal by replacing it with a presidential term or two.
The “special interests” which “conservative lobbyists” who oppose McCain advocate for include those who value free speech, which was muzzled by the abominable McCain-Feingold law, those who value gun rights and the constitutional right of self-defense, those who don’t think terrorists planning to kill millions of Americans should enjoy American constitutional rights, those who don’t buy into the hooey of Al Gore’s global warming hysteria, those who supported the Bush tax cuts which McCain voted against, those who don’t think it’s the federal government’s role to regulate professional boxing, and those who object to extending amnesty to illegal aliens.
In other words: conservatives.
Another McCain adviser, Charlie Black, told the Post that “In three or four weeks, everybody will be for McCain.”
I can’t speak for the rest of you, but I won’t be. No way. No how.
If you really want to blow up the Republican Party, nominate McCain for president and have him tap Huckabee for Veep. Then turn out the lights, because the party will be over.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Against McCain
From Jim Ehl
In most any political race it never ceases to be amazing how some becomes a 'front runner'. Perhaps it's the circle of people with whom I associate but I don't hear from many that have any use for Senator McCain. And, that goes for his side kick,Senator Kyl who is in Florida stumping for him. They both flopped so badly on the immigration thing that it's hard to decided where they stand. It was over a year ago that the Arizona Republican Assembly voted 100% at their state convention to censure Senator McCain and sent the resolution to Matt Salmon, AZGOP chair at that time, who did exactly nothing. In the Arizona Town Crier, 'Ruled by flower children' it was noted, "Of those Republicans running for president we read and hear about an equal amount of positive and negative information on each. So far, we have seen that the Republicans in Iowa sure don't see the Republicans candidates the same way as in New Hampshire." Now, tune in Michigan. What do the voters know about John McCain except what they see on TV? Here is a look behind the curtain.
Jim
To be removed from the list click here.
Monday, January 14, 2008 4:48 PM
By: Newmax Staff Article Font Size
Former Senator and leading conservative Rick Santorum says a John McCain presidency would be “very, very dangerous for Republicans.”
Santorum — who was defeated in 2006 after two terms as a U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania — was sharply critical of fellow Republican McCain in an interview that aired last week on syndicated talk radio host Mark Levin’s show.
Responding to Levin’s observation that McCain is trying to recast himself as more conservative now that he is seeking the GOP presidential nomination, Santorum said:
“It’s amazing to hear what John McCain is trying to convince the voters he is all about. The bottom line is, I served 12 years with him, six years in the Senate as one of the leaders of the Senate, trying to put together the conservative agenda, and almost at every turn, on domestic policy, John McCain was not only against us, but leading the charge on the other side.”
Santorum cited the campaign finance reform bill sponsored by McCain, the McCain-Feingold Act, which limits campaign contributions and has been called by some an “incumbent protection act.”
Santorum called the act “an affront to personal freedom and liberty in this country, and what we’ve seen as a result of this misguided attempt to placate the New York Times and to help his stature within that community … is that special interests have absolutely taken over the political process, and individual candidates, unless you’re a billionaire, and parties have very little voice in the process.
“It’s a shame, but he was obviously out front on that.”
The former Senator also criticized McCain for voting against the Bush Tax cuts — he was one of only two Republicans to do so.
“The reduction in [tax] rates and lowering the rates on capital gains and dividends … did so much to get this economy up and going. [But] we would have had a much bigger tax cut if it were not for John McCain.”
Santorum pointed to McCain’s opposition to conservative positions on drug re-importation, federally funded embryonic stem cell research, immigration, the questioning of terror detainees and other issues, and said he has a “big fear” of a McCain presidency.
He asserted it would create a “huge rift” in the Republican Party, and told Levin’s listeners:
“I think he’s been solid in the war on terror … but on domestic policy, he’s very, very dangerous for Republicans.
“There’s nothing worse than having a Democratic Congress and a Republican president who would act like a Democrat in matters that are important to conservatives.”
Santorum also claimed that McCain was a leader of Senate moderates that often stopped Republicans from pushing strong pro-life legislation.
Santorum said he had not decided which candidate he will vote for in the upcoming GOP primary, but ruled out voting for McCain.
Santorum expressed the same sentiment back in March, saying he would support whoever wins the Republican nomination for president in 2008, with the exception of John McCain.
As Newsmax reported at the time, Santorum said in an interview: "I don’t agree with him on hardly any issues. I don’t think he has the temperament and leadership ability to move the country in the right direction.”
In most any political race it never ceases to be amazing how some becomes a 'front runner'. Perhaps it's the circle of people with whom I associate but I don't hear from many that have any use for Senator McCain. And, that goes for his side kick,Senator Kyl who is in Florida stumping for him. They both flopped so badly on the immigration thing that it's hard to decided where they stand. It was over a year ago that the Arizona Republican Assembly voted 100% at their state convention to censure Senator McCain and sent the resolution to Matt Salmon, AZGOP chair at that time, who did exactly nothing. In the Arizona Town Crier, 'Ruled by flower children' it was noted, "Of those Republicans running for president we read and hear about an equal amount of positive and negative information on each. So far, we have seen that the Republicans in Iowa sure don't see the Republicans candidates the same way as in New Hampshire." Now, tune in Michigan. What do the voters know about John McCain except what they see on TV? Here is a look behind the curtain.
Jim
To be removed from the list click here.
Monday, January 14, 2008 4:48 PM
By: Newmax Staff Article Font Size
Former Senator and leading conservative Rick Santorum says a John McCain presidency would be “very, very dangerous for Republicans.”
Santorum — who was defeated in 2006 after two terms as a U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania — was sharply critical of fellow Republican McCain in an interview that aired last week on syndicated talk radio host Mark Levin’s show.
Responding to Levin’s observation that McCain is trying to recast himself as more conservative now that he is seeking the GOP presidential nomination, Santorum said:
“It’s amazing to hear what John McCain is trying to convince the voters he is all about. The bottom line is, I served 12 years with him, six years in the Senate as one of the leaders of the Senate, trying to put together the conservative agenda, and almost at every turn, on domestic policy, John McCain was not only against us, but leading the charge on the other side.”
Santorum cited the campaign finance reform bill sponsored by McCain, the McCain-Feingold Act, which limits campaign contributions and has been called by some an “incumbent protection act.”
Santorum called the act “an affront to personal freedom and liberty in this country, and what we’ve seen as a result of this misguided attempt to placate the New York Times and to help his stature within that community … is that special interests have absolutely taken over the political process, and individual candidates, unless you’re a billionaire, and parties have very little voice in the process.
“It’s a shame, but he was obviously out front on that.”
The former Senator also criticized McCain for voting against the Bush Tax cuts — he was one of only two Republicans to do so.
“The reduction in [tax] rates and lowering the rates on capital gains and dividends … did so much to get this economy up and going. [But] we would have had a much bigger tax cut if it were not for John McCain.”
Santorum pointed to McCain’s opposition to conservative positions on drug re-importation, federally funded embryonic stem cell research, immigration, the questioning of terror detainees and other issues, and said he has a “big fear” of a McCain presidency.
He asserted it would create a “huge rift” in the Republican Party, and told Levin’s listeners:
“I think he’s been solid in the war on terror … but on domestic policy, he’s very, very dangerous for Republicans.
“There’s nothing worse than having a Democratic Congress and a Republican president who would act like a Democrat in matters that are important to conservatives.”
Santorum also claimed that McCain was a leader of Senate moderates that often stopped Republicans from pushing strong pro-life legislation.
Santorum said he had not decided which candidate he will vote for in the upcoming GOP primary, but ruled out voting for McCain.
Santorum expressed the same sentiment back in March, saying he would support whoever wins the Republican nomination for president in 2008, with the exception of John McCain.
As Newsmax reported at the time, Santorum said in an interview: "I don’t agree with him on hardly any issues. I don’t think he has the temperament and leadership ability to move the country in the right direction.”
Abortionist Republican Witches
Recall that infanticide is the first step toward service to Satan
From Joe Peron
Friends, please check this out. AZ WISH is a chapter of the National Republican group that exists only to encourage, train, and financially support pro-abortion women for the Senate and the House. Please send this out to friends and family in your address book, especially to anyone who hasn't seen "The Silent Scream" video, a link in the last paragraph. (Please warn them how graphic it will be, but they still need to view it) Thanks, Marne
Whatever happened to the Arizona WISH chapter? « Seeing Red AZ
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Fort Protestors Allege Torture in the War on Terror
Torture on Trial.org held a protest at Fort Huachuca.
Jack Cohen-Joppa
Tucson, AZ
Walking Mary
Bisbee, AZ
Jack Cohen-Joppa
Tucson, AZ
Walking Mary
Bisbee, AZ
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Don't Call It a Comeback: the Flower Children of the 08 Race
From Jim Ehl
In the early 40's a terrible thing happened; there was a world war. Many men and women went away to fight the war and died. When, the war was over and the men and women came home. As nature would have it, we had a 'baby boom'.
Time rocked on and with everyone home and jobs becoming plentiful, the country became very affluent, and probably because of the struggles of the war, many people became very forgiving, and 'spoiled' their kids.
In the Bible. it was said to teach the young the right way and they won't stray, or words to that effect. A couple hundred years or so ago a political reformist named Karl Marx made the statement to give me your children. It's axiomatic that to teach a child anything is what the child is going to believe. And, as the child grows older the tendency is to keep that belief.
Now, put three together, the affluent society, forgiving adults, and children believing what they want to and setting their own standards, we arrive at Woodstock. A wonderful world of no responsibility, do whatever feels good, and let the government take care of everything. Robin Hood, take from the rich and give it to the poor.
The Flower Children didn't go away. They continue to thrive. And, they still have their belief. They are now professional educators, politicians, and leaders in other fields of endeavor and are now teaching children their ways. It's foolish to think that they are all Democrats. Statistics and surveys (by both parties) have shown that there are more folks who believe in conservatism than believe in liberalism. Since that's were the majority of the votes are,some flower children masquerade as conservative Republicans to get the votes for the power of the office. Although some don't agree with Hillary Clinton, many have more respect her more that many Republicans. She is liberal, doesn't hid it, and we know from where she is coming. How about Republicans that tell us one thing and then vote liberal? This nation is floating on a sea of red ink, the dollars is falling manufacturing jobs are lost in favor of service type jobs, and where will it end? When there are no longer enough producers to carry the non-producers, what will the flower children do?
Of those Republicans running for president we read and hear about an equal amount of positive and negative information on each. So far, we have seen that the Republicans in Iowa sure don't see the Republicans candidates the same way as in New Hampshire. And, it's going to play out about the same for other 48 states. So, what are we going to believe? For example, there has been a pretty good discussion on the internet between a couple of good Republicans about Ron Paul. So, cut Ron in half and vote yea for this half and nay for the other.
As long as we am operating without any information, except what we hear from the candidates, and most of us don't have the time, knowledge, means, or whatever to do research on all of them, perhaps we should just vote for George Wallace as a write it, or maybe McGovern.
The point being, where can we turn for reliable information?
The Republican National Committee probably has more information on those Republican presidential candidates than we do on our kids. Support means things like money, campaigning, and such. However, of all those candidates just who, one or all, would the RNC ENDORSE? (Same with state). But, if they don't care, why should we? Even the Arizona state governor is going to announce her endorsing before the election. Does she have more gumption that the party?
A Judge Bork put it, we're still slouching towards Gomorrah. (Or Woodstock.)
In the early 40's a terrible thing happened; there was a world war. Many men and women went away to fight the war and died. When, the war was over and the men and women came home. As nature would have it, we had a 'baby boom'.
Time rocked on and with everyone home and jobs becoming plentiful, the country became very affluent, and probably because of the struggles of the war, many people became very forgiving, and 'spoiled' their kids.
In the Bible. it was said to teach the young the right way and they won't stray, or words to that effect. A couple hundred years or so ago a political reformist named Karl Marx made the statement to give me your children. It's axiomatic that to teach a child anything is what the child is going to believe. And, as the child grows older the tendency is to keep that belief.
Now, put three together, the affluent society, forgiving adults, and children believing what they want to and setting their own standards, we arrive at Woodstock. A wonderful world of no responsibility, do whatever feels good, and let the government take care of everything. Robin Hood, take from the rich and give it to the poor.
The Flower Children didn't go away. They continue to thrive. And, they still have their belief. They are now professional educators, politicians, and leaders in other fields of endeavor and are now teaching children their ways. It's foolish to think that they are all Democrats. Statistics and surveys (by both parties) have shown that there are more folks who believe in conservatism than believe in liberalism. Since that's were the majority of the votes are,some flower children masquerade as conservative Republicans to get the votes for the power of the office. Although some don't agree with Hillary Clinton, many have more respect her more that many Republicans. She is liberal, doesn't hid it, and we know from where she is coming. How about Republicans that tell us one thing and then vote liberal? This nation is floating on a sea of red ink, the dollars is falling manufacturing jobs are lost in favor of service type jobs, and where will it end? When there are no longer enough producers to carry the non-producers, what will the flower children do?
Of those Republicans running for president we read and hear about an equal amount of positive and negative information on each. So far, we have seen that the Republicans in Iowa sure don't see the Republicans candidates the same way as in New Hampshire. And, it's going to play out about the same for other 48 states. So, what are we going to believe? For example, there has been a pretty good discussion on the internet between a couple of good Republicans about Ron Paul. So, cut Ron in half and vote yea for this half and nay for the other.
As long as we am operating without any information, except what we hear from the candidates, and most of us don't have the time, knowledge, means, or whatever to do research on all of them, perhaps we should just vote for George Wallace as a write it, or maybe McGovern.
The point being, where can we turn for reliable information?
The Republican National Committee probably has more information on those Republican presidential candidates than we do on our kids. Support means things like money, campaigning, and such. However, of all those candidates just who, one or all, would the RNC ENDORSE? (Same with state). But, if they don't care, why should we? Even the Arizona state governor is going to announce her endorsing before the election. Does she have more gumption that the party?
A Judge Bork put it, we're still slouching towards Gomorrah. (Or Woodstock.)
Monday, January 07, 2008
Obama Email
from John Doe
wrote:
--
_____________________________________________________________
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
From: Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 14:50:54 EST
Subj
Hi !
I received this from a Kiwanis buddy and wondered what you thought of this info...Let me know!
Cynthia
See AOL's top rated recipes and easy ways to stay in shape for winter.
From: "jack jaffe"
To:
Subject: Fw: Just Who Is Barrack Obama----Please Read----------
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 13:51:29 -0500
Subject: Fw: Just Who Is Barrack Obama----Please Read----------
>
>
> Subject: Just Who Is Barrack Obama
>
>
> This is sooooooooooooooooo scary - honestly and he is also
>
> gaining so much attention what with the "OPRAH" thing and all. Regardless of how
> you feel about Oprah - she is certainly helping the muslim/athiest try and get to this country..
> Prayer and telling others about this is our greatest hope for this nation.,
>
>
>
> Who is Barack Obama?
> Very interesting and something that should be considered in your
> choice.
>
> If you do not ever forward anything else, please forward this to all
> your contacts...this is very scary to think of what lies ahead of us
> here in our own United States...better heed this and pray about it and share it.
>
> We checked this out on "snopes.com". It is factual. Check for yourself.
>
> Who is Barack Obama?
>
> Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHIEST from Wichita, Kansas.
>
>
> Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia.
>
> When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocate to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school.
>
> Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school."
>
> Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that he is not a radical.
>
>
> Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education.
>
> Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta.
>
> Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. ALSO, keep in mind that when he was sworn into office he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran.
>
> Barack Hussein Obama will NOT recite the Pledge of Allegience nor will he show any reverence for our flag. While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama turns his back to the flag and slouches.
>
> Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy.
>
> The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!!
>
> Please forward to everyone you know. Would you want this man leading our country?...... NOT ME!!!
>
wrote:
--
_____________________________________________________________
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
From: Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 14:50:54 EST
Subj
Hi !
I received this from a Kiwanis buddy and wondered what you thought of this info...Let me know!
Cynthia
See AOL's top rated recipes and easy ways to stay in shape for winter.
From: "jack jaffe"
To:
Subject: Fw: Just Who Is Barrack Obama----Please Read----------
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 13:51:29 -0500
Subject: Fw: Just Who Is Barrack Obama----Please Read----------
>
>
> Subject: Just Who Is Barrack Obama
>
>
> This is sooooooooooooooooo scary - honestly and he is also
>
> gaining so much attention what with the "OPRAH" thing and all. Regardless of how
> you feel about Oprah - she is certainly helping the muslim/athiest try and get to this country..
> Prayer and telling others about this is our greatest hope for this nation.,
>
>
>
> Who is Barack Obama?
> Very interesting and something that should be considered in your
> choice.
>
> If you do not ever forward anything else, please forward this to all
> your contacts...this is very scary to think of what lies ahead of us
> here in our own United States...better heed this and pray about it and share it.
>
> We checked this out on "snopes.com". It is factual. Check for yourself.
>
> Who is Barack Obama?
>
> Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHIEST from Wichita, Kansas.
>
>
> Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia.
>
> When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocate to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school.
>
> Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school."
>
> Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that he is not a radical.
>
>
> Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education.
>
> Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta.
>
> Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. ALSO, keep in mind that when he was sworn into office he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran.
>
> Barack Hussein Obama will NOT recite the Pledge of Allegience nor will he show any reverence for our flag. While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama turns his back to the flag and slouches.
>
> Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy.
>
> The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!!
>
> Please forward to everyone you know. Would you want this man leading our country?...... NOT ME!!!
>
Tourists Not Vacationing in Mexi-Beaches, Por que? La Crima
From Gene Caferelli
Tourists shun crime-hit Mexico beaches
By ELLIOT SPAGAT, Associated Press WriterSat Jan 5, 1:24 PM ET
Assaults on American tourists have brought hard times to hotels and restaurants that dot Mexican beaches just south of the border from San Diego .
Surfers and kayakers are frightened to hit the waters of the northern stretch of Mexico 's Baja California peninsula, long popular as a weekend destination for U.S. tourists. Weddings have been canceled. Lobster joints a few steps from the Pacific were almost empty on the usually busy New Year's weekend.
Americans have long tolerated shakedowns by police who boost salaries by pulling over motorists for alleged traffic violations, and tourists know parts of Baja are a hotbed of drug-related violence. But a handful of attacks since summer by masked, armed bandits — some of whom used flashing lights to appear like police — marks a new extreme that has spooked even longtime visitors.
Lori Hoffman, a San Diego-area emergency room nurse, said she was sexually assaulted Oct. 23 by two masked men in front of her boyfriend, San Diego Surfing Academy owner Pat Weber, who was forced to kneel at gunpoint for 45 minutes. They were at a campground with about 30 tents, some 200 miles south of the border.
The men shot out windows of the couple's trailer and forced their way inside, ransacked the cupboards and left with about $7,000 worth of gear, including computers, video equipment and a guitar.
Weber, who has taught dozens of students in Mexico over the last 10 years, plans to surf in Costa Rica or New Zealand . "No more Mexico ," said Hoffman, who reported the attack to Mexican police. No arrests have been made.
The Baja California peninsula is known worldwide for clean and sparsely populated beaches, lobster and margaritas and blue waters visited by whales and dolphins. Surfers love the waves; fishermen catch tuna, yellowtail and marlin. Food and hotels are cheap.
News of harrowing assaults on American tourists has begun to overshadow that appeal in the northern part of the peninsula, home to drug gangs and the seedy border city of Tijuana . The comparatively isolated southern tip, with its tony Los Cabos resort, remains safer and is still popular with Hollywood celebrities, anglers and other foreign tourists.
Local media and surfing Web sites that trumpeted Baja in the past have reported several frightening crimes that U.S. and Mexican officials consider credible. Longtime visitors are particularly wary of a toll road near the border that runs through Playas de Rosarito — Rosarito Beach .
In late November, as they returned from the Baja 1000 off-road race, a San Diego-area family was pulled over on the toll road by a car with flashing lights. Heavily armed men held the family hostage for two hours. They eventually released them but stole the family's truck.
Before dawn on Aug. 31, three surfers were carjacked on the same stretch of highway. Gunmen pulled them over in a car with flashing lights, forced them out of their vehicles and ordered one to kneel. They took the trucks and left the surfers.
Aqua Adventures of San Diego scrapped its annual three-day kayak trip to scout for whales in January, ending a run of about 10 years. Customers had already been complaining about longer waits to return to the U.S. ; crime gave them another reason to stay away.
"People are just saying, 'No way.' They don't want to deal with the risk," said owner Jen Kleck, who has sponsored trips to Baja about five times a year but hasn't been since July.
Charles Smith, spokesman for the U.S. consulate in Tijuana , said the U.S. government has not found a widespread increase in attacks against Americans, but he acknowledged many crimes go unreported. The State Department has long warned motorists on Mexico 's border to watch for people following them, though no new warnings have been issued.
Mexican officials acknowledge crime has threatened a lifeblood of Baja's economy. In Playas de Rosarito, a city of 130,000, police were forced to surrender their weapons last month for testing to determine links to any crimes. Heavily armed men have patrolled City Hall since a failed assassination attempt on the new police chief left one officer dead. On Thursday the bullet-riddled bodies of a Tijuana police official and another man were found dumped near the beach.
"We cannot minimize what's happening to public safety," said Oscar Escobedo Carignan, Baja's new secretary of tourism. "We're going to impose order ... We're indignant about what's happening."
Tourist visits to Baja totaled about 18 million in 2007, down from 21 million the previous year, Escobedo said. Hotel occupancy dropped about 5 percentage points to 53 percent.
Hugo Torres, owner of the storied Rosarito Beach Hotel and the city's new mayor, estimates the number of visitors to Rosarito Beach since summer is down 30 percent.
In the city's Puerto Nuevo tourist enclave, which offers $20 lobster dinners and $1 margaritas, restaurant managers said sales were down as much as 80 percent from last year. One Saturday afternoon in October, masked bandits wielding pistols walked the streets and kidnapped two men — an American and a Spanish citizen — who were later released unharmed. Two people who were with them were shot and wounded.
Omar Armendariz, who manages a Puerto Nuevo lobster restaurant, is counting on the new state and city governments to make tourists feel safer. He has never seen fewer visitors in his nine years on the job.
"It's dead," he said.
Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press.
Tourists shun crime-hit Mexico beaches
By ELLIOT SPAGAT, Associated Press WriterSat Jan 5, 1:24 PM ET
Assaults on American tourists have brought hard times to hotels and restaurants that dot Mexican beaches just south of the border from San Diego .
Surfers and kayakers are frightened to hit the waters of the northern stretch of Mexico 's Baja California peninsula, long popular as a weekend destination for U.S. tourists. Weddings have been canceled. Lobster joints a few steps from the Pacific were almost empty on the usually busy New Year's weekend.
Americans have long tolerated shakedowns by police who boost salaries by pulling over motorists for alleged traffic violations, and tourists know parts of Baja are a hotbed of drug-related violence. But a handful of attacks since summer by masked, armed bandits — some of whom used flashing lights to appear like police — marks a new extreme that has spooked even longtime visitors.
Lori Hoffman, a San Diego-area emergency room nurse, said she was sexually assaulted Oct. 23 by two masked men in front of her boyfriend, San Diego Surfing Academy owner Pat Weber, who was forced to kneel at gunpoint for 45 minutes. They were at a campground with about 30 tents, some 200 miles south of the border.
The men shot out windows of the couple's trailer and forced their way inside, ransacked the cupboards and left with about $7,000 worth of gear, including computers, video equipment and a guitar.
Weber, who has taught dozens of students in Mexico over the last 10 years, plans to surf in Costa Rica or New Zealand . "No more Mexico ," said Hoffman, who reported the attack to Mexican police. No arrests have been made.
The Baja California peninsula is known worldwide for clean and sparsely populated beaches, lobster and margaritas and blue waters visited by whales and dolphins. Surfers love the waves; fishermen catch tuna, yellowtail and marlin. Food and hotels are cheap.
News of harrowing assaults on American tourists has begun to overshadow that appeal in the northern part of the peninsula, home to drug gangs and the seedy border city of Tijuana . The comparatively isolated southern tip, with its tony Los Cabos resort, remains safer and is still popular with Hollywood celebrities, anglers and other foreign tourists.
Local media and surfing Web sites that trumpeted Baja in the past have reported several frightening crimes that U.S. and Mexican officials consider credible. Longtime visitors are particularly wary of a toll road near the border that runs through Playas de Rosarito — Rosarito Beach .
In late November, as they returned from the Baja 1000 off-road race, a San Diego-area family was pulled over on the toll road by a car with flashing lights. Heavily armed men held the family hostage for two hours. They eventually released them but stole the family's truck.
Before dawn on Aug. 31, three surfers were carjacked on the same stretch of highway. Gunmen pulled them over in a car with flashing lights, forced them out of their vehicles and ordered one to kneel. They took the trucks and left the surfers.
Aqua Adventures of San Diego scrapped its annual three-day kayak trip to scout for whales in January, ending a run of about 10 years. Customers had already been complaining about longer waits to return to the U.S. ; crime gave them another reason to stay away.
"People are just saying, 'No way.' They don't want to deal with the risk," said owner Jen Kleck, who has sponsored trips to Baja about five times a year but hasn't been since July.
Charles Smith, spokesman for the U.S. consulate in Tijuana , said the U.S. government has not found a widespread increase in attacks against Americans, but he acknowledged many crimes go unreported. The State Department has long warned motorists on Mexico 's border to watch for people following them, though no new warnings have been issued.
Mexican officials acknowledge crime has threatened a lifeblood of Baja's economy. In Playas de Rosarito, a city of 130,000, police were forced to surrender their weapons last month for testing to determine links to any crimes. Heavily armed men have patrolled City Hall since a failed assassination attempt on the new police chief left one officer dead. On Thursday the bullet-riddled bodies of a Tijuana police official and another man were found dumped near the beach.
"We cannot minimize what's happening to public safety," said Oscar Escobedo Carignan, Baja's new secretary of tourism. "We're going to impose order ... We're indignant about what's happening."
Tourist visits to Baja totaled about 18 million in 2007, down from 21 million the previous year, Escobedo said. Hotel occupancy dropped about 5 percentage points to 53 percent.
Hugo Torres, owner of the storied Rosarito Beach Hotel and the city's new mayor, estimates the number of visitors to Rosarito Beach since summer is down 30 percent.
In the city's Puerto Nuevo tourist enclave, which offers $20 lobster dinners and $1 margaritas, restaurant managers said sales were down as much as 80 percent from last year. One Saturday afternoon in October, masked bandits wielding pistols walked the streets and kidnapped two men — an American and a Spanish citizen — who were later released unharmed. Two people who were with them were shot and wounded.
Omar Armendariz, who manages a Puerto Nuevo lobster restaurant, is counting on the new state and city governments to make tourists feel safer. He has never seen fewer visitors in his nine years on the job.
"It's dead," he said.
Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press.
Court will hide ID of illegal immigrant employer
From Gene Caferelli
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/105888
January 4, 2008 - 11:22PM
Howard Fischer, Capitol Media Services
A federal court will keep secret the identity of an Arizona business owner who admits in a sworn statement to hiring illegal immigrants.
The business owner, who remains anonymous, has filed an affidavit in federal court saying he was employing people not in this country legally last year when the lawsuit was filed, and he intends to continue to do so even with the new state law that took effect Jan. 1.
That law allows a judge to suspend or revoke any state licenses of firms that knowingly hire undocumented workers.
Attorney David Selden, who represents businesses challenging the law, said the purpose of the affidavit was to prove to U.S. District Court Judge Neil Wake that the law will harm at least one company.
The judge had previously indicated he might not be able to rule on the validity of the law without some proof someone could get in legal trouble for disobeying it.
Selden said the move is justified because the business owner faces both the threat of prosecution if his identity becomes known, as well as the possibility of actual physical harm.
But the move drew objections from state Solicitor Gene ral Mary O’Grady, who said it is improper to let an unidentified person challenge state law. She asked Wake to quash the effort.
On Friday, though, the judge suggested he would simply sidestep the issue.
Wake pointed out that the state essentially has now agreed that the business groups challenging the law do, in fact, have legal standing to ask him to overturn it. That, he said, may make it unnecessary for him to rule on Selden ’s effort to introduce the affidavit.
O’Grady said she is studying Wake’s latest ruling.
Two other business owners also filed “John Doe” affidavits in the case. Selden said neither business owner has admitted to hiring illegal immigrants, but both assume there may be some on their payroll.
The lawsuit contends the state law is unconstitutional because only the federal government is empowered to punish companies for employing workers not legally entitled to work in this country.
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/105888
January 4, 2008 - 11:22PM
Howard Fischer, Capitol Media Services
A federal court will keep secret the identity of an Arizona business owner who admits in a sworn statement to hiring illegal immigrants.
The business owner, who remains anonymous, has filed an affidavit in federal court saying he was employing people not in this country legally last year when the lawsuit was filed, and he intends to continue to do so even with the new state law that took effect Jan. 1.
That law allows a judge to suspend or revoke any state licenses of firms that knowingly hire undocumented workers.
Attorney David Selden, who represents businesses challenging the law, said the purpose of the affidavit was to prove to U.S. District Court Judge Neil Wake that the law will harm at least one company.
The judge had previously indicated he might not be able to rule on the validity of the law without some proof someone could get in legal trouble for disobeying it.
Selden said the move is justified because the business owner faces both the threat of prosecution if his identity becomes known, as well as the possibility of actual physical harm.
But the move drew objections from state Solicitor Gene ral Mary O’Grady, who said it is improper to let an unidentified person challenge state law. She asked Wake to quash the effort.
On Friday, though, the judge suggested he would simply sidestep the issue.
Wake pointed out that the state essentially has now agreed that the business groups challenging the law do, in fact, have legal standing to ask him to overturn it. That, he said, may make it unnecessary for him to rule on Selden ’s effort to introduce the affidavit.
O’Grady said she is studying Wake’s latest ruling.
Two other business owners also filed “John Doe” affidavits in the case. Selden said neither business owner has admitted to hiring illegal immigrants, but both assume there may be some on their payroll.
The lawsuit contends the state law is unconstitutional because only the federal government is empowered to punish companies for employing workers not legally entitled to work in this country.
Drama from the Catholic Left
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 17:57:13 -0800 (PST)
From: "James Bretney" View Contact Details View Contact Details
Subject: Re: Fw: Torture
To: "Joel Fago" , "St. Gianna, Teri Gauger" , "Shih Tzus, Chris Jones" , "Sherry Zimmerman" , "Sam Sohrab" "Rick (son of Cim)" , "Margnariz" , "Lora" , "Long Beach Prolifer", "Kelly Copeland Knights, Pro-Life Chairman" , "Joe and Terri" , "Joan JoAnn Jacobson" , "Jay Mawhinney" , "Jane Kosco" , "Gil Cadena" , "Frank and Marie Burke" , "Fr. Robert Rankin" , Send an Instant Message "Fr. Robert Mugisa" , "Fr. John Shetler" , Send an Instant Message "Fr. Fidelis Igwenwane" , "Fr. Dennis Dolter" , "Ferndinand, Department of Insurance" , "Esther and Gloria" , "Dorothy Hansen" , "Don Collier" , "Don and Lucy" , "David Gowan, politician" , "Cottonwood Parishioner" , "Cheryl Sonick" , "Charly" , "Big Ed Mure" , "Barbara Kuntz" , "Art and Marian Travis" , "Ardell Jorde" , "Ann Downey" , "!Sunny" , "!Ed Kahn(prolife attorney)" , Send an Instant Message "!Cim Sankey" , "!!Joel" , "Wally Pacholka"
I am US Army defense contractor and reservist. I am very familiar with the course offerings here on Fort Huachua. We don't torture. If you have evidence that we do teach torture, please produce it. Thank you.
James A. Bretney
biz_account_only@yahoo.com
520 255 4137
Joel Fago
To: "Larry Fagot" ; "!Don" ;
"JoAnn" ; "Lynne"
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 6:58 AM
Subject: Re: Torture
> Dear Larry,
>
> Thanks for the email. I am familiar with Dorthy Day's Catholic Workers--
> much humanitarian work has been done by its members.
>
> Today, Sierra Vista Herald printed my letter "defending" Obama:
> Take a look at the facts on Obama, other candidates
>
> Published on Monday, January 07, 2008
>
> To the Editor:
>
> Re: "Take a deep look at the candidates," Dec. 23.
>
> Anyone who says that Sen. Barack Obama refuses to say the Pledge of
> Allegiance or place his hand over his heart during the Pledge of
> Allegiance is not taking a deep look at the facts. All one looking for the
> truth has to do is go to www.youtube.com or www.snopes.com.
>
> I am against Sen. Barack Obama because he is for abortion, the killing of
> unborn babies.
>
> Joel Fago
>
> Sierra Vista
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Fagot"
> To: "Joel Fago" ; "!Don" ; "JoAnn"
> ; "Lynne"
> Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 12:24 PM
> Subject: Re: Torture
>
>
>> Joel & Shelia,
>>
>> I read an account of your protest in "Peacemakers
>> Spend Weekend Protesting Torture in the Desert"
>> see
>> http://www.catholicworkersd.org/newspapers/2007/SDCWPaper_Christmas_2007.pdf
>>
>> @ http://www.catholicworkersd.org/aboutus.htm
>>
>> Are you familiar with Dorthy Day's Catholic Workers?
>>
>> LARRY
>> --- Joel Fago wrote:
>>
>>> Sheila and I just returned from the torture protest
>>> at Fort Huachuca. When we arrived, someone handed
>>> Sheila a sign, "Support Our Troops." I wandered off
>>> and picked up a great sign: it had a drawing of
>>> Jesus on the cross and the words, "All Torture Is
>>> Evil." After holding it for a while, a fellow came
>>> over and thanked me for holding his sign and gave me
>>> a sign, "NO TO TORTURE." I took the sign to where
>>> Sheila was standing. Some people near Sheila told
>>> me to go back to the other side. I said that I do
>>> support our troops by saying no to torture. They
>>> screamed at me to get out of there. I tried to
>>> reason with them until a police officer told me to
>>> go over to the other side. I tried to reason with
>>> him until he started pushing me to the other side.
>>>
>>> A lady on the other side asked me to step up to the
>>> microphone and tell what happened. I did and asked
>>> for a discussion of the issues not to be separated
>>> into sides. I ended by saying, "Unless truth
>>> prevails, our country will fail."
>>
>
From: "James Bretney"
Subject: Re: Fw: Torture
To: "Joel Fago" , "St. Gianna, Teri Gauger" , "Shih Tzus, Chris Jones" , "Sherry Zimmerman" , "Sam Sohrab" "Rick (son of Cim)" , "Margnariz" , "Lora" , "Long Beach Prolifer", "Kelly Copeland Knights, Pro-Life Chairman" , "Joe and Terri" , "Joan JoAnn Jacobson" , "Jay Mawhinney" , "Jane Kosco" , "Gil Cadena" , "Frank and Marie Burke" , "Fr. Robert Rankin" , Send an Instant Message "Fr. Robert Mugisa" , "Fr. John Shetler" , Send an Instant Message "Fr. Fidelis Igwenwane" , "Fr. Dennis Dolter" , "Ferndinand, Department of Insurance" , "Esther and Gloria" , "Dorothy Hansen" , "Don Collier" , "Don and Lucy" , "David Gowan, politician" , "Cottonwood Parishioner" , "Cheryl Sonick" , "Charly" , "Big Ed Mure" , "Barbara Kuntz" , "Art and Marian Travis" , "Ardell Jorde" , "Ann Downey" , "!Sunny" , "!Ed Kahn(prolife attorney)" , Send an Instant Message "!Cim Sankey" , "!!Joel" , "Wally Pacholka"
I am US Army defense contractor and reservist. I am very familiar with the course offerings here on Fort Huachua. We don't torture. If you have evidence that we do teach torture, please produce it. Thank you.
James A. Bretney
biz_account_only@yahoo.com
520 255 4137
Joel Fago
To: "Larry Fagot" ; "!Don" ;
"JoAnn" ; "Lynne"
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 6:58 AM
Subject: Re: Torture
> Dear Larry,
>
> Thanks for the email. I am familiar with Dorthy Day's Catholic Workers--
> much humanitarian work has been done by its members.
>
> Today, Sierra Vista Herald printed my letter "defending" Obama:
> Take a look at the facts on Obama, other candidates
>
> Published on Monday, January 07, 2008
>
> To the Editor:
>
> Re: "Take a deep look at the candidates," Dec. 23.
>
> Anyone who says that Sen. Barack Obama refuses to say the Pledge of
> Allegiance or place his hand over his heart during the Pledge of
> Allegiance is not taking a deep look at the facts. All one looking for the
> truth has to do is go to www.youtube.com or www.snopes.com.
>
> I am against Sen. Barack Obama because he is for abortion, the killing of
> unborn babies.
>
> Joel Fago
>
> Sierra Vista
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Fagot"
> To: "Joel Fago" ; "!Don" ; "JoAnn"
> ; "Lynne"
> Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 12:24 PM
> Subject: Re: Torture
>
>
>> Joel & Shelia,
>>
>> I read an account of your protest in "Peacemakers
>> Spend Weekend Protesting Torture in the Desert"
>> see
>> http://www.catholicworkersd.org/newspapers/2007/SDCWPaper_Christmas_2007.pdf
>>
>> @ http://www.catholicworkersd.org/aboutus.htm
>>
>> Are you familiar with Dorthy Day's Catholic Workers?
>>
>> LARRY
>> --- Joel Fago wrote:
>>
>>> Sheila and I just returned from the torture protest
>>> at Fort Huachuca. When we arrived, someone handed
>>> Sheila a sign, "Support Our Troops." I wandered off
>>> and picked up a great sign: it had a drawing of
>>> Jesus on the cross and the words, "All Torture Is
>>> Evil." After holding it for a while, a fellow came
>>> over and thanked me for holding his sign and gave me
>>> a sign, "NO TO TORTURE." I took the sign to where
>>> Sheila was standing. Some people near Sheila told
>>> me to go back to the other side. I said that I do
>>> support our troops by saying no to torture. They
>>> screamed at me to get out of there. I tried to
>>> reason with them until a police officer told me to
>>> go over to the other side. I tried to reason with
>>> him until he started pushing me to the other side.
>>>
>>> A lady on the other side asked me to step up to the
>>> microphone and tell what happened. I did and asked
>>> for a discussion of the issues not to be separated
>>> into sides. I ended by saying, "Unless truth
>>> prevails, our country will fail."
>>
>
Sunday, January 06, 2008
Thomas Dunn accuses Gabby of Franking Fraud
From Jim Ehl
Remember, a couple of times we discussed on the Arizona Town Crier how Rep. Giffords was using franked mail to campaign? Now, someone with initiative has done something about it. Thomas Dunn has filed an official complaint. See below. The amount of money spend is really secondary to the character of the person spending it. For a representative to take advantage of those whom they represent is not worthy of that office.
Jim
To be removed from the list click here.
Remember, pass to 10.
Thursday, January 03, 2008
Citizen Complaint filed against Giffords on Franked Mail Abuse
For Immediate Release: January 3, 2008
CITIZEN COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST GIFFORDS ON FRANKED MAIL ABUSE
Dunn: Gabby Giffords violates franking standards…demands reimbursement of the peoples' money.
Tucson, AZ – Local political activist Thomas Dunn filed an official complaint that Congresswoman Gabby Giffords violated Section 3215; Section 3210 (a) (2); Section 3210 (a) (3) (B); and Section 3210 (a) (5) (A) of the standards set forth by the Committee on House Administration with Congressman Michael Capuano. The complaint was sent on December 14, received and forwarded to the Majority Office of the Committee on House Administration.
In his written complaint, Dunn refers to Pelosi's branding of Republicans as "the culture of corruption" as demogoging. Pelosi clearly had no principled intent on enforcing the same standards upon her own party.
Dunn demands that Ms. Giffords reimburse any funds spent inappropriately from her official reelection campaign accounts and vow to not abuse the privilege in the future.
Dunn also pleaded for an impartial analysis from the Majority Office.
Actual complaint
Here is the link to the Cmtee on House Admin franking guidelines.
Her violations are on
pg 2, #5;
pg 14, #12;
pg 16 # 16.
Remember, a couple of times we discussed on the Arizona Town Crier how Rep. Giffords was using franked mail to campaign? Now, someone with initiative has done something about it. Thomas Dunn has filed an official complaint. See below. The amount of money spend is really secondary to the character of the person spending it. For a representative to take advantage of those whom they represent is not worthy of that office.
Jim
To be removed from the list click here.
Remember, pass to 10.
Thursday, January 03, 2008
Citizen Complaint filed against Giffords on Franked Mail Abuse
For Immediate Release: January 3, 2008
CITIZEN COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST GIFFORDS ON FRANKED MAIL ABUSE
Dunn: Gabby Giffords violates franking standards…demands reimbursement of the peoples' money.
Tucson, AZ – Local political activist Thomas Dunn filed an official complaint that Congresswoman Gabby Giffords violated Section 3215; Section 3210 (a) (2); Section 3210 (a) (3) (B); and Section 3210 (a) (5) (A) of the standards set forth by the Committee on House Administration with Congressman Michael Capuano. The complaint was sent on December 14, received and forwarded to the Majority Office of the Committee on House Administration.
In his written complaint, Dunn refers to Pelosi's branding of Republicans as "the culture of corruption" as demogoging. Pelosi clearly had no principled intent on enforcing the same standards upon her own party.
Dunn demands that Ms. Giffords reimburse any funds spent inappropriately from her official reelection campaign accounts and vow to not abuse the privilege in the future.
Dunn also pleaded for an impartial analysis from the Majority Office.
Actual complaint
Here is the link to the Cmtee on House Admin franking guidelines.
Her violations are on
pg 2, #5;
pg 14, #12;
pg 16 # 16.
Back Room Brawls?
From Jim Ehl
News about Maricopa County
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 08:54:30 -0700
One of the things that this information brings to mind is a lack of an Arizona Republican TEAM. And, it's no better here in this corner of the state. We, too, changed chairs except like the info from Rob to the MCRC, the CCRC was not told about it. Some learned about second hand and the membership as a whole found out about it at the mandatory meeting where the 'in crowd' were all acting as business as usual. It was known earlier down here about Lyle's resignation when 'Frosty' forwarded a copy of Dan Nichols resignation. But, with no state team one wonders just how many of the other counties are doing what. Do the have the same chairs as they elected in 2006? Have any changed in significant way? Ah, it doesn't seem to matter. It's been noted that the counties can do whatever they like and we don't work together, anyway.
Does the state party hierarchy know what is going on with the county parties? Sometimes back the chair of Cochise County resigned and the party blog, nor the Tusk bit said anything. Now, Lyle Tuttle is resigning as the chair of Maricopa and the state had said nothing that I have seen. No fond farewell, kiss my bazooka, or anything. Is there anything going on with the rest of the county parties that is of interest?
Anyway, good luck to Tom. There are those of us outside Maricopa County who have appreciated Lyle.
Jim
To be removed from the list click here.
P.S. There is some interesting information in the wind. The budget, property taxes, and a number of other items. If you go to ALIS (Arizona Legislative Information System) you will note that all of the state representatives and state senators have their email address listed. I have added the Republicans to my list. There are no plans to send every Arizona Town Crier to them, but there will be some that should be of interest to our elected.
----- Original Message -----
From: Rob Haney
To: ROB HANEY
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 1:23 PM
Subject: Good News For Maricopa County Republicans
Click on link below at SEEINGRED for the story.
Rob
Tom Husband, District 11 officer, to run for Maricopa County Chairman « Seeing Red AZ
News about Maricopa County
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 08:54:30 -0700
One of the things that this information brings to mind is a lack of an Arizona Republican TEAM. And, it's no better here in this corner of the state. We, too, changed chairs except like the info from Rob to the MCRC, the CCRC was not told about it. Some learned about second hand and the membership as a whole found out about it at the mandatory meeting where the 'in crowd' were all acting as business as usual. It was known earlier down here about Lyle's resignation when 'Frosty' forwarded a copy of Dan Nichols resignation. But, with no state team one wonders just how many of the other counties are doing what. Do the have the same chairs as they elected in 2006? Have any changed in significant way? Ah, it doesn't seem to matter. It's been noted that the counties can do whatever they like and we don't work together, anyway.
Does the state party hierarchy know what is going on with the county parties? Sometimes back the chair of Cochise County resigned and the party blog, nor the Tusk bit said anything. Now, Lyle Tuttle is resigning as the chair of Maricopa and the state had said nothing that I have seen. No fond farewell, kiss my bazooka, or anything. Is there anything going on with the rest of the county parties that is of interest?
Anyway, good luck to Tom. There are those of us outside Maricopa County who have appreciated Lyle.
Jim
To be removed from the list click here.
P.S. There is some interesting information in the wind. The budget, property taxes, and a number of other items. If you go to ALIS (Arizona Legislative Information System) you will note that all of the state representatives and state senators have their email address listed. I have added the Republicans to my list. There are no plans to send every Arizona Town Crier to them, but there will be some that should be of interest to our elected.
----- Original Message -----
From: Rob Haney
To: ROB HANEY
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 1:23 PM
Subject: Good News For Maricopa County Republicans
Click on link below at SEEINGRED for the story.
Rob
Tom Husband, District 11 officer, to run for Maricopa County Chairman « Seeing Red AZ
Jim Ehl takes a page from Pat Buchanan
By Jim Ehl
For those of you who have read my stuff know that one of my "soapboxes" is noting how the Republican Party's inability, or unwillingness, to 'clean house' has lead, or is leading, to the destruction of the party. I just received a fund raising letter (like many more) from the NRCC, that would have me believe that ALL the problems and excessive spending in the government is the fault of the DEMOCRATS. When is the party going to 'get real'?
We are now in the election year, and daily more folks register as Independents. Any idea why? And, you may have read how Independents flocked to the Democrats polls in Iowa. Why? Anyone ever consider faith in the party? Even Jessie Ventura writes "Ventura writes in the book, due in stores in April. "The government is supposed to be us, and it's not us anymore. It's been hijacked. Just when is somebody going to do something?" Now, just who is "somebody"? Me? You? Yeah, lets make a sign, get a box and head for the nearest busy street corner. That should make for some success? Or, the party?
Pat Buchanan (and many of you are not Buchanan fans as you have told me) said, and I copied it below, "The Party of Reagan is losing the country because it is no longer the party of the principles, policies and persona of Reagan, as applied to the problems of our time." If anyone wants to dispute what I noted below, I'll be more than happy to follow up with your response on the Arizona Town Crier. It is incumbent on all party members to demand that the party return to it's principles. Probably, most of you received, or receives, mail from the NRCC. That's a good place to start.
Jim
To be removed from the list click here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On issue after issue, the Republican Party, if it stood true to its beliefs and purged the twin heresies of neoconservatism in foreign policy and Wall Street Journal ideology in trade and immigration policy, would still stand well with Middle America.
Most Americans are traditionalist on right to life, homosexual marriage, a polluted culture and Hollywood values. Most Americans believe in a defense second to none, while staying out of wars that are not our quarrels.
Conservatives never believed in the United States going into nation-building abroad because they never believed in government nation-building at home. Nations grow organically. They rise from the soil of their own history, culture, faith, traditions.
Republicans believe in conservative judges and strict-constructionists justices like Antonin Scalia, who do not write the laws, but interpret the laws we have written through our elected representatives.
Democrats know this. Thus, they are not promising us any new Ruth Bader Ginsburgs.
What has alienated America is the Bush bellicosity, the my-way-or-the-highway free-trade ideology, the refusal to defend the border with the implication that anyone who wants to preserve the country he grew up in is some kind of bigot. The Party of Reagan is losing the country because it is no longer the party of the principles, policies and persona of Reagan, as applied to the problems of our time.
To find out more about Patrick Buchanan, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
For those of you who have read my stuff know that one of my "soapboxes" is noting how the Republican Party's inability, or unwillingness, to 'clean house' has lead, or is leading, to the destruction of the party. I just received a fund raising letter (like many more) from the NRCC, that would have me believe that ALL the problems and excessive spending in the government is the fault of the DEMOCRATS. When is the party going to 'get real'?
We are now in the election year, and daily more folks register as Independents. Any idea why? And, you may have read how Independents flocked to the Democrats polls in Iowa. Why? Anyone ever consider faith in the party? Even Jessie Ventura writes "Ventura writes in the book, due in stores in April. "The government is supposed to be us, and it's not us anymore. It's been hijacked. Just when is somebody going to do something?" Now, just who is "somebody"? Me? You? Yeah, lets make a sign, get a box and head for the nearest busy street corner. That should make for some success? Or, the party?
Pat Buchanan (and many of you are not Buchanan fans as you have told me) said, and I copied it below, "The Party of Reagan is losing the country because it is no longer the party of the principles, policies and persona of Reagan, as applied to the problems of our time." If anyone wants to dispute what I noted below, I'll be more than happy to follow up with your response on the Arizona Town Crier. It is incumbent on all party members to demand that the party return to it's principles. Probably, most of you received, or receives, mail from the NRCC. That's a good place to start.
Jim
To be removed from the list click here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On issue after issue, the Republican Party, if it stood true to its beliefs and purged the twin heresies of neoconservatism in foreign policy and Wall Street Journal ideology in trade and immigration policy, would still stand well with Middle America.
Most Americans are traditionalist on right to life, homosexual marriage, a polluted culture and Hollywood values. Most Americans believe in a defense second to none, while staying out of wars that are not our quarrels.
Conservatives never believed in the United States going into nation-building abroad because they never believed in government nation-building at home. Nations grow organically. They rise from the soil of their own history, culture, faith, traditions.
Republicans believe in conservative judges and strict-constructionists justices like Antonin Scalia, who do not write the laws, but interpret the laws we have written through our elected representatives.
Democrats know this. Thus, they are not promising us any new Ruth Bader Ginsburgs.
What has alienated America is the Bush bellicosity, the my-way-or-the-highway free-trade ideology, the refusal to defend the border with the implication that anyone who wants to preserve the country he grew up in is some kind of bigot. The Party of Reagan is losing the country because it is no longer the party of the principles, policies and persona of Reagan, as applied to the problems of our time.
To find out more about Patrick Buchanan, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
Mexico continues to interfere in the internal affairs of the USA .
From Gene Caferelli
January 4, 2008 - 1:21PM
Mexico blasts Arizona employer sanctions law
Associated Press
The Mexican government promised Friday to defend any Mexicans affected by an Arizona law that punishes employers who hire undocumented migrants.
The Arizona law, which went into effect Tuesday, prohibits businesses from knowingly employing illegal immigrants. Violators face business license suspensions for up to 10 days; a second offense triggers permanent revocation.
“Measures like the one approved in Arizona do not contribute to solving the issue of migration by workers between the two countries, and ignore the contributions that migrants make to the U.S. economy and society,” Mexico ’s Foreign Relations Department said.
The department said it will “intervene, through its consulates, in any situation in which the rights of Mexican workers are affected, regardless of their immigration status.”
In the past, Mexican consulates have helped with the legal defense of Mexican citizens in similar cases. In Arizona , Mexico has consulates in Phoenix , Tucson , Nogales , Douglas and Yuma .
The Mexican government considers migration an unavoidable phenomenon given the higher wages in the United States . It strongly opposes tightened U.S. controls such as border fences, and instead wants temporary work-visa programs and legalization of workers in the United States .
January 4, 2008 - 1:21PM
Mexico blasts Arizona employer sanctions law
Associated Press
The Mexican government promised Friday to defend any Mexicans affected by an Arizona law that punishes employers who hire undocumented migrants.
The Arizona law, which went into effect Tuesday, prohibits businesses from knowingly employing illegal immigrants. Violators face business license suspensions for up to 10 days; a second offense triggers permanent revocation.
“Measures like the one approved in Arizona do not contribute to solving the issue of migration by workers between the two countries, and ignore the contributions that migrants make to the U.S. economy and society,” Mexico ’s Foreign Relations Department said.
The department said it will “intervene, through its consulates, in any situation in which the rights of Mexican workers are affected, regardless of their immigration status.”
In the past, Mexican consulates have helped with the legal defense of Mexican citizens in similar cases. In Arizona , Mexico has consulates in Phoenix , Tucson , Nogales , Douglas and Yuma .
The Mexican government considers migration an unavoidable phenomenon given the higher wages in the United States . It strongly opposes tightened U.S. controls such as border fences, and instead wants temporary work-visa programs and legalization of workers in the United States .
Saturday, January 05, 2008
Good shepherds: K-9s help nab stab suspect
from Gene Caferelli
Two heroic police dogs and their handlers helped capture a Rockland man suspected of stabbing his roommate five times at a New Year’s Eve party before nearly choking one of the pooches to death.
Julian Teixeira Demoura, 42, was collared early Tuesday on multiple charges, including attempted murder, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, mistreating a police dog and cruelty to an animal, Rockland police said.
Shortly before 2:30 a.m., Officer Steven Somers arrived at 808 Market St. in response to a report of a disturbance. There, he said, he found people screaming that someone had been stabbed and saw Demoura brandishing a 10-inch kitchen knife.
Somers drew his .40-caliber gun, he said, and Demoura ran out a back door, touching off a nearly four-hour chase that led about a dozen police officers and their dogs through two miles of woods, swamp and snow.
Somers suddenly fell into an ice-covered marsh. Up to his chest in freezing water, he ordered his three-year-old partner, a German Shepherd named Boyar, to attack the suspect. The dog gave chase and, a few seconds later, the officer heard a scream, followed by eerie silence.
Somers eventually made his way out of the icy marsh in the dark, repeatedly calling the dog’s name. Boyar, meanwhile, was wrestling with the suspect, trying to drag him back to his partner, even as Demoura used his shirt and a piece of metal as a winch to try to strangle the courageous canine, Somers said.
After struggling 20 minutes, Boyar lost hold of his prey when Demoura and the dog fell down a steep ravine, the officer said. Covered in the suspect’s blood, Demoura’s shirt still wrapped around his neck, Boyar finally made his way out and obeyed Somers’ order to return to him while other officers and their dogs picked up the chase.
Zar, a Duxbury police pooch, eventually tracked Demoura back to the basement of the house, where the suspect hit him in the head with the handle of a lawnmower before being arrested.
Both dogs escaped serious injury. The suspect was not so lucky.
After being treated at South Shore Hospital for multiple dog bites, Demoura was taken to the Plymouth County House of Correction, pending a dangerousness hearing Monday, police said, and could be deported because he is an illegal alien from Brazil .
The roommate, Sergio Lana, 34, is recovering at Brockton Hospital .
Two heroic police dogs and their handlers helped capture a Rockland man suspected of stabbing his roommate five times at a New Year’s Eve party before nearly choking one of the pooches to death.
Julian Teixeira Demoura, 42, was collared early Tuesday on multiple charges, including attempted murder, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, mistreating a police dog and cruelty to an animal, Rockland police said.
Shortly before 2:30 a.m., Officer Steven Somers arrived at 808 Market St. in response to a report of a disturbance. There, he said, he found people screaming that someone had been stabbed and saw Demoura brandishing a 10-inch kitchen knife.
Somers drew his .40-caliber gun, he said, and Demoura ran out a back door, touching off a nearly four-hour chase that led about a dozen police officers and their dogs through two miles of woods, swamp and snow.
Somers suddenly fell into an ice-covered marsh. Up to his chest in freezing water, he ordered his three-year-old partner, a German Shepherd named Boyar, to attack the suspect. The dog gave chase and, a few seconds later, the officer heard a scream, followed by eerie silence.
Somers eventually made his way out of the icy marsh in the dark, repeatedly calling the dog’s name. Boyar, meanwhile, was wrestling with the suspect, trying to drag him back to his partner, even as Demoura used his shirt and a piece of metal as a winch to try to strangle the courageous canine, Somers said.
After struggling 20 minutes, Boyar lost hold of his prey when Demoura and the dog fell down a steep ravine, the officer said. Covered in the suspect’s blood, Demoura’s shirt still wrapped around his neck, Boyar finally made his way out and obeyed Somers’ order to return to him while other officers and their dogs picked up the chase.
Zar, a Duxbury police pooch, eventually tracked Demoura back to the basement of the house, where the suspect hit him in the head with the handle of a lawnmower before being arrested.
Both dogs escaped serious injury. The suspect was not so lucky.
After being treated at South Shore Hospital for multiple dog bites, Demoura was taken to the Plymouth County House of Correction, pending a dangerousness hearing Monday, police said, and could be deported because he is an illegal alien from Brazil .
The roommate, Sergio Lana, 34, is recovering at Brockton Hospital .
Jim Ehl criticizes Shadegg
by the Arizona Town Crier
A very interesting and enlightening article from Congressman Shadegg. However, it kind of like Pontious Pilate who washed his hands in a pail of water and noted wherein the wrongs against Jesus were concerned that his hands were clean. No where in the article is there an official objection or noted plan by the Honorable Congressman to rectify the situation.
Sooooooo, just what is the party, state and national, going to do about it? Obviously, the elected elite are only going to talk about it as they have for years. Stevens has been hung out to dry a couple to times, so what?
The answer us for the national party and the state parties to report on a regular basis the transgressions of our dearly beloved Republican elected and those who are more for power than the people to be exposed and for the party to clean their own house. I have noted in red my thoughts on the matter. It time to stop protecting and supporting, so called Republicans. (Are any from Arizona?)
Spending is the kind of thing the Republicans carry on about when talking about Democrats. For the same thing by a Republican is hypocrital, isn't it? And, who wants to vote for a hypocrite?
Jim
To be removed from the list click here.
To: Shadegg Friends
From: Congressman John Shadegg
________________________________
Washington Politicians Mortgage Our Future for Their Benefit
by Congressman John Shadegg
As they left town for Christmas, Congress (includes Republicans and Democrats) passed an unprecedented
end-of-the-year appropriations bill with billions in wasteful spending
designed principally to benefit incumbent Members of Congress.(includes Republicans and Democrats) This bill
includes thousands of self-serving Member-directed spending projects and
displays total disregard for both legislative process and the Constitution.
Though civics teaches that both Houses of Congress (includes Republicans and Democrats) must pass a bill before
it can be presented to the President for his signature to become law, this
did not happen. Instead the House, (includes Republicans and Democrats) fearful of political fallout, used
trickery (so, what was the trickery that could not be overcome?) so Members (includes Republicans and Democrats) could avoid voting on the actual bill as it passed the
Senate. A dangerous precedent.
The 3,417 page bill (34 pounds) was dropped (How? By whom?) barely 20 hours before final
consideration by the House. It included 9,170 Member-directed (includes Republicans and Democrats) spending
projects. Over 300 of these had never been made public, seen by
rank-and-file Members, or passed by either House. Combined with the 2,161
passed earlier, Members (What members? Who were the Republicans?) gave themselves a total of 11,331 self-serving
projects, costing Americans over $20 billion this year. During this
season of goodwill, this bill, and those who crammed it through Congress, (includes Republicans and Democrats)
showed none toward American taxpayers, their children, or grandchildren.
This legislation continues an embarrassing trend in government pork-barrel
spending, funneling untold billions into pet projects designed to re-elect
incumbents. (includes Republicans and Democrats) Most such projects are not requested, or even supported, by the
Departments obligated to deliver them. Many are outright corrupt -
directing funds to Members' (includes Republicans and Democrats) contributors, former staffers, and even family
members. The Democrat leadership promised to "make this the most honest,
ethical, and open Congress in history," yet under their guidance Members of
both parties continue brazenly using tax dollars to benefit themselves. ( How many tax dollars to beneift Republicans?)
Senator Ted Stevens (A Republican) matched his "Bridge to Nowhere" with $20 million for a
"Ferry to Nowhere" that appears to benefit his brother-in-law, and former
staffers Congressman Jim Clyburn, the Democrat Whip, obtained $229,000 for
the Drew Wellness Center, a physical fitness center where his daughter
works. In 2003, Clyburn obtained the $900,000 to construct the center.
Clyburn also obtained $3 million for a private charity associated with the
"James Clyburn Golf Center" he established at taxpayer expense in 2002. (Let's see, the $4,129,000 by Clyburn, a Democrat is still $15,872,000 short of the earmark by Stevens, a Republican.)
Charles Rangel, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee obtained
$1.95 million for a center bearing his name and bragged on the House Floor
that he deserved it. (Compared to the 20M by Stevens, the Republican?) The bill even restored the now infamous Hillary
Clinton-Chuck Schumer Woodstock museum.
Members (What Republican members) devote huge amounts of time to these projects and openly acknowledge
the funds are being used - not for the larger public good - but to ensure
incumbents' reelection. In a letter to Speaker Pelosi, the leader of a
prominent Congressional Member caucus complained that caucus Members weren't
receiving enough projects to ensure the reelection of its incumbents in
"highly contested races." At this rate, Members (includes Republicans and Democrats) will soon complain they
aren't receiving sufficient bribes to maintain their lifestyle.
While the short-term ramifications of Washington's corruption and fiscal
promiscuity are disturbing, the long-term consequences for our children and
grandchildren should give every American cause for serious concern. Because
Congress (Renenber, congress encompasses both party's, not just Nancy's.) chooses to spend far more than is collected in current taxes, the
government must borrow money to fund our largess.
And borrow we have, to the point where our current national debt is a
whopping $9.2 trillion dollars - or more accurately $9,193,315,468, 899.43
as of December 21, 2007. That translates to $30,323.94 of debt for every
man, woman, and child in America.
Who, exactly, is lending us all this money? Well, Japan has lent us $586
billion. We owe communist China $400 billion. Our "friends" in Saudi
Arabia and other oil producing nations have lent us $123 billion. And here
is the really bad news: they expect us to pay them back - with interest. In
fact, we paid $430 billion in interest on our debt last year alone.
Of course, current taxpayers are not going to pay anywhere close to all of
that debt - we can't possibly. So who will be stuck paying for our wasteful
and irresponsible spending? Today's wasteful and corrupt spending will be
tomorrow's obligation. Our children and grandchildren will be forced to
repay today's wasteful spending. Anyone who truly cares about the future of
their children and grandchildren must demand that Washington put an end to
this corrupt and economically disastrous practice. (How? That's why we elected Republicans!)
One recent survey put Congress's approval rating at eleven percent. (That includes elected Republicans.) Given the self-serving, wasteful conduct Congress continues to engage in, it is shocking the number is not lower.
There will be much celebration and back slapping in Washington this
Christmas as Members (includes Republicans and Democrats) congratulate themselves for a job well done. But I
suspect, as Americans learn once again that Members of Congress (includes Republicans and Democrats) devote more
energy to looking out for themselves than the nation's and our children's
well-being, Congressional approval ratings will sink ever further, and
deservedly so.
For more on Member-directed spending projects, see Congress Daily article
at:
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=weeklyreport-000002596442
PAID FOR BY JOHN SHADEGG'S FRIENDS
A very interesting and enlightening article from Congressman Shadegg. However, it kind of like Pontious Pilate who washed his hands in a pail of water and noted wherein the wrongs against Jesus were concerned that his hands were clean. No where in the article is there an official objection or noted plan by the Honorable Congressman to rectify the situation.
Sooooooo, just what is the party, state and national, going to do about it? Obviously, the elected elite are only going to talk about it as they have for years. Stevens has been hung out to dry a couple to times, so what?
The answer us for the national party and the state parties to report on a regular basis the transgressions of our dearly beloved Republican elected and those who are more for power than the people to be exposed and for the party to clean their own house. I have noted in red my thoughts on the matter. It time to stop protecting and supporting, so called Republicans. (Are any from Arizona?)
Spending is the kind of thing the Republicans carry on about when talking about Democrats. For the same thing by a Republican is hypocrital, isn't it? And, who wants to vote for a hypocrite?
Jim
To be removed from the list click here.
To: Shadegg Friends
From: Congressman John Shadegg
________________________________
Washington Politicians Mortgage Our Future for Their Benefit
by Congressman John Shadegg
As they left town for Christmas, Congress (includes Republicans and Democrats) passed an unprecedented
end-of-the-year appropriations bill with billions in wasteful spending
designed principally to benefit incumbent Members of Congress.(includes Republicans and Democrats) This bill
includes thousands of self-serving Member-directed spending projects and
displays total disregard for both legislative process and the Constitution.
Though civics teaches that both Houses of Congress (includes Republicans and Democrats) must pass a bill before
it can be presented to the President for his signature to become law, this
did not happen. Instead the House, (includes Republicans and Democrats) fearful of political fallout, used
trickery (so, what was the trickery that could not be overcome?) so Members (includes Republicans and Democrats) could avoid voting on the actual bill as it passed the
Senate. A dangerous precedent.
The 3,417 page bill (34 pounds) was dropped (How? By whom?) barely 20 hours before final
consideration by the House. It included 9,170 Member-directed (includes Republicans and Democrats) spending
projects. Over 300 of these had never been made public, seen by
rank-and-file Members, or passed by either House. Combined with the 2,161
passed earlier, Members (What members? Who were the Republicans?) gave themselves a total of 11,331 self-serving
projects, costing Americans over $20 billion this year. During this
season of goodwill, this bill, and those who crammed it through Congress, (includes Republicans and Democrats)
showed none toward American taxpayers, their children, or grandchildren.
This legislation continues an embarrassing trend in government pork-barrel
spending, funneling untold billions into pet projects designed to re-elect
incumbents. (includes Republicans and Democrats) Most such projects are not requested, or even supported, by the
Departments obligated to deliver them. Many are outright corrupt -
directing funds to Members' (includes Republicans and Democrats) contributors, former staffers, and even family
members. The Democrat leadership promised to "make this the most honest,
ethical, and open Congress in history," yet under their guidance Members of
both parties continue brazenly using tax dollars to benefit themselves. ( How many tax dollars to beneift Republicans?)
Senator Ted Stevens (A Republican) matched his "Bridge to Nowhere" with $20 million for a
"Ferry to Nowhere" that appears to benefit his brother-in-law, and former
staffers Congressman Jim Clyburn, the Democrat Whip, obtained $229,000 for
the Drew Wellness Center, a physical fitness center where his daughter
works. In 2003, Clyburn obtained the $900,000 to construct the center.
Clyburn also obtained $3 million for a private charity associated with the
"James Clyburn Golf Center" he established at taxpayer expense in 2002. (Let's see, the $4,129,000 by Clyburn, a Democrat is still $15,872,000 short of the earmark by Stevens, a Republican.)
Charles Rangel, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee obtained
$1.95 million for a center bearing his name and bragged on the House Floor
that he deserved it. (Compared to the 20M by Stevens, the Republican?) The bill even restored the now infamous Hillary
Clinton-Chuck Schumer Woodstock museum.
Members (What Republican members) devote huge amounts of time to these projects and openly acknowledge
the funds are being used - not for the larger public good - but to ensure
incumbents' reelection. In a letter to Speaker Pelosi, the leader of a
prominent Congressional Member caucus complained that caucus Members weren't
receiving enough projects to ensure the reelection of its incumbents in
"highly contested races." At this rate, Members (includes Republicans and Democrats) will soon complain they
aren't receiving sufficient bribes to maintain their lifestyle.
While the short-term ramifications of Washington's corruption and fiscal
promiscuity are disturbing, the long-term consequences for our children and
grandchildren should give every American cause for serious concern. Because
Congress (Renenber, congress encompasses both party's, not just Nancy's.) chooses to spend far more than is collected in current taxes, the
government must borrow money to fund our largess.
And borrow we have, to the point where our current national debt is a
whopping $9.2 trillion dollars - or more accurately $9,193,315,468, 899.43
as of December 21, 2007. That translates to $30,323.94 of debt for every
man, woman, and child in America.
Who, exactly, is lending us all this money? Well, Japan has lent us $586
billion. We owe communist China $400 billion. Our "friends" in Saudi
Arabia and other oil producing nations have lent us $123 billion. And here
is the really bad news: they expect us to pay them back - with interest. In
fact, we paid $430 billion in interest on our debt last year alone.
Of course, current taxpayers are not going to pay anywhere close to all of
that debt - we can't possibly. So who will be stuck paying for our wasteful
and irresponsible spending? Today's wasteful and corrupt spending will be
tomorrow's obligation. Our children and grandchildren will be forced to
repay today's wasteful spending. Anyone who truly cares about the future of
their children and grandchildren must demand that Washington put an end to
this corrupt and economically disastrous practice. (How? That's why we elected Republicans!)
One recent survey put Congress's approval rating at eleven percent. (That includes elected Republicans.) Given the self-serving, wasteful conduct Congress continues to engage in, it is shocking the number is not lower.
There will be much celebration and back slapping in Washington this
Christmas as Members (includes Republicans and Democrats) congratulate themselves for a job well done. But I
suspect, as Americans learn once again that Members of Congress (includes Republicans and Democrats) devote more
energy to looking out for themselves than the nation's and our children's
well-being, Congressional approval ratings will sink ever further, and
deservedly so.
For more on Member-directed spending projects, see Congress Daily article
at:
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=weeklyreport-000002596442
PAID FOR BY JOHN SHADEGG'S FRIENDS
Dallas Newspaper Selects the Illegal Immigrant as Texan of the Year
From Gene Caferelli
Friday , January 04, 2008
DALLAS —
When editorial writers at The Dallas Morning News chose the illegal immigrant as the newspaper's Texan of the Year, they expected some criticism. But not this: 800 blog postings and more than 150 letters to the editor blasting the decision.
Some of the critics threatened to cancel subscriptions or pressure advertisers to stop doing business with the paper.
"What an asinine article!!!" exclaimed one reader.
"What part of stupid are you guys that support illegal aliens? This puts us ALL in danger," another wrote.
Editorial writer Rodger Jones said he was "surprised at the nastiness" of the backlash, some of which came from readers who had only seen the editorial's headline.
The Texan of the Year designation, announced in Sunday's paper, has been an annual year-end editorial page feature since 2003.
It recognizes — without passing judgment — someone who has had a major impact or effected change in Texas during the past year. Previous recipients included the city of Houston for its response to Hurricane Katrina and a former police officer whose two sons died in Iraq and Afghanistan , as well as George W. Bush and Karl Rove.
None provoked a reaction on the scale of this year's choice, Jones said.
"All of those readers, it seems to me, who objected, conceded that it is a huge story," Jones said. "They just don't like the label applied. They construed that as some kind of honor that we bestow."
In its editorial, the News noted that illegal immigration directly affects Texas because of its proximity to the border and reviewed how policies aimed at curbing it have played out across the state.
For example, it cited efforts by Irving police to identify suspected illegal immigrants arrested for minor infractions, even traffic offenses, and turn them over to immigration agents.
The newspaper also mentioned Farmers Branch, another Dallas suburb, where residents and leaders marched into the immigration debate by requiring landlords to make sure renters are U.S. citizens or legal residents before leasing to them. And, the Morning News noted, a planned border fence has riled officials throughout the Rio Grande Valley .
The newspaper would not say how many readers actually canceled their subscriptions as a result of the editorial.
"Against our customer base, it's just not a material number," said Keven Ann Willey, vice president and editorial page editor. The Morning News has an average daily circulation of about 373,500 and a Sunday circulation of about 523,000, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations.
Willey and Jones say they hope the editorial makes readers reflect on the issue.
"No one disagrees that illegal immigration is a huge deal, and no one disagrees that the system is broken and needs to be fixed," Jones said.
Dallas activist Elizabeth Villafranca praised the News for its courage in giving the immigration debate such importance.
"The animosity is already at the highest level that it can be," she said. "I don't think it can hurt. Maybe it is going to make people think."
Friday , January 04, 2008
DALLAS —
When editorial writers at The Dallas Morning News chose the illegal immigrant as the newspaper's Texan of the Year, they expected some criticism. But not this: 800 blog postings and more than 150 letters to the editor blasting the decision.
Some of the critics threatened to cancel subscriptions or pressure advertisers to stop doing business with the paper.
"What an asinine article!!!" exclaimed one reader.
"What part of stupid are you guys that support illegal aliens? This puts us ALL in danger," another wrote.
Editorial writer Rodger Jones said he was "surprised at the nastiness" of the backlash, some of which came from readers who had only seen the editorial's headline.
The Texan of the Year designation, announced in Sunday's paper, has been an annual year-end editorial page feature since 2003.
It recognizes — without passing judgment — someone who has had a major impact or effected change in Texas during the past year. Previous recipients included the city of Houston for its response to Hurricane Katrina and a former police officer whose two sons died in Iraq and Afghanistan , as well as George W. Bush and Karl Rove.
None provoked a reaction on the scale of this year's choice, Jones said.
"All of those readers, it seems to me, who objected, conceded that it is a huge story," Jones said. "They just don't like the label applied. They construed that as some kind of honor that we bestow."
In its editorial, the News noted that illegal immigration directly affects Texas because of its proximity to the border and reviewed how policies aimed at curbing it have played out across the state.
For example, it cited efforts by Irving police to identify suspected illegal immigrants arrested for minor infractions, even traffic offenses, and turn them over to immigration agents.
The newspaper also mentioned Farmers Branch, another Dallas suburb, where residents and leaders marched into the immigration debate by requiring landlords to make sure renters are U.S. citizens or legal residents before leasing to them. And, the Morning News noted, a planned border fence has riled officials throughout the Rio Grande Valley .
The newspaper would not say how many readers actually canceled their subscriptions as a result of the editorial.
"Against our customer base, it's just not a material number," said Keven Ann Willey, vice president and editorial page editor. The Morning News has an average daily circulation of about 373,500 and a Sunday circulation of about 523,000, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations.
Willey and Jones say they hope the editorial makes readers reflect on the issue.
"No one disagrees that illegal immigration is a huge deal, and no one disagrees that the system is broken and needs to be fixed," Jones said.
Dallas activist Elizabeth Villafranca praised the News for its courage in giving the immigration debate such importance.
"The animosity is already at the highest level that it can be," she said. "I don't think it can hurt. Maybe it is going to make people think."
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Arizona economy bracing for immigration crackdown
There are several economic issues raised in the following article. Let’s take one----the effect of labor cost on the (market) price of a product. For our example, we’ll select landscaping services, presumably a product in which labor costs are a large part of the total costs faced by the landscaping firm.
In this analysis we’ll start by dividing the landscaping firm universe into two groups; those who hire illegals and therefore undoubtedly have lower labor costs, and those who hire only legal workers.* Both types face the same demand curve for landscaping services.
But the illegal firm has an advantage over the legal firm, actually two advantages. On one hand, they can price their product at market but make a greater profit because of their lower labor cost (Unfair Advantage #1). Or they can price their services lower than their legal competitors (Unfair Advantage #2). Who wants to talk about fairness?
*I am assuming equal output per hour for both illegal and legal workers.
Gene Cafarelli
Full disclosure: I am willing to pay more for my lettuce if it means that it is produced by my fellow (legal) Americans.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071230/ts_alt_afp/usimmigrationeconomyarizona
Arizona economy bracing for immigration crackdown
by Scott SeckelSun Dec 30, 6:03 PM ET
New laws targeting employers who hire illegal immigrants take effect here on January 1, with experts predicting the move may cost the state's economy billions of dollars in lost income and taxes.
The new laws are described as the toughest local anti-illegal immigration legislation in the United States , and will sanction businesses who knowingly hire undocumented workers.
Any employer who falls foul of the law will see their business license suspended for 10 days for a first offense; a second infraction will see the license permanently revoked.
Judith Gans, a University of Arizona immigration policy expert who has studied the economic impact of illegal immigrants, said the new law will have a dramatic effect on the local economy.
"Industries will shrink and prices will go up," Gans told AFP.
The price of a hamburger, a head of lettuce, and a week's worth of gardening services will all increase as workforces shrink, Gans said.
Illegal immigrants "are filling gaps in the labor force, and as those gaps widen, prices will go up," she said. "That theory is not contested."
According to an October study released by Gans , Arizona 's foreign-born population has tripled in less than two decades, from about 269,000 in 1990 to 831,000 in 2004.
Experts peg the state's illegal immigrant population at about half a million. Workers, mainly from Mexico , flock to pick lettuce in Yuma , make sushi in Phoenix , and clean hotel rooms in Flagstaff .
According to Gans' study, they make up 59 percent of the workforce in farming; 27 percent in construction; 51 percent in landscaping; 26 percent in hotel work; 23 percent in restaurants; 33 percent in private homes; and 46 percent in textile manufacturing.
Out of every six non-citizens in Arizona , five are illegal, according to Gans. Her study indicates the net 2004 fiscal impact of Arizona illegals was positive by about 940 million dollars, when balanced against costs of 1.4 billion dollars for education, health care, and law enforcement.
A public outcry and inaction by lawmakers in Washington to pass immigration reform laws, led state officials to pass the employer sanctions law.
Local businesses are bracing for the effect of the crackdown.
"Oh yeah, it'll affect us," said Jeremiah, the owner of Around Town Landscaping in Phoenix who estimated that the cost of having a garden mowed will go up 15 to 20 percent in 2008 as a result.
"We're going to lose some qualified guys, for sure. I'll keep my product the same, but it'll affect efficiency. It's a lack of foresight to think it wouldn't affect those things," added Jeremiah, who would not give his last name.
"It's not the right way to go. I don't think people did their homework on it, and no one consulted small companies on how they feel about it," he added.
Construction costs won't noticeably rise, said Julie Fenner, office manager of Hidden Valley Roofing in Phoenix . The company has always screened for proof of citizenship.
"To spread that over the cost of a roof, it's not going to happen," she said. "I can't see costs going up based on that."
Agriculture is expected to be among the industries hardest hit by the new law. Yuma needs about 50,000 pickers during lettuce harvest. Only half that number lives on the American side of the border. Pickers now earn 12 to 14 dollars per hour, said Dawn McLaren, an Arizona State University research economist.
Their wages could rise to 20 dollars per hour.
As more and more farms move south of the border to avoid high production costs, food may have to be imported on a weak dollar, making groceries more expensive.
"If we can't find labor here at a reasonable cost to business, businesses can simply move their business elsewhere," McLaren said. "We may see the cost of having to import stuff."
One Arizona grower recently decided to buy a farm in Iowa instead of investing in his Arizona operations, said Joe Sigg, director of government relations for the Arizona Farm Bureau.
"Banks will start looking at credit risks," Sigg said. "It's going to be more of an economic cloud on Arizona than the cost of a head of lettuce will be. Any prospectus for investors will have to have a flashing sign around it saying, This business may lose its LLC.' I think the investment community will chill on Arizona as well."
Uncertainty about what will happen is as big an issue as anything, Gans said. "We'll see," she said. " Arizona has certainly put itself on the line."
Copyright © 2008 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
In this analysis we’ll start by dividing the landscaping firm universe into two groups; those who hire illegals and therefore undoubtedly have lower labor costs, and those who hire only legal workers.* Both types face the same demand curve for landscaping services.
But the illegal firm has an advantage over the legal firm, actually two advantages. On one hand, they can price their product at market but make a greater profit because of their lower labor cost (Unfair Advantage #1). Or they can price their services lower than their legal competitors (Unfair Advantage #2). Who wants to talk about fairness?
*I am assuming equal output per hour for both illegal and legal workers.
Gene Cafarelli
Full disclosure: I am willing to pay more for my lettuce if it means that it is produced by my fellow (legal) Americans.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071230/ts_alt_afp/usimmigrationeconomyarizona
Arizona economy bracing for immigration crackdown
by Scott SeckelSun Dec 30, 6:03 PM ET
New laws targeting employers who hire illegal immigrants take effect here on January 1, with experts predicting the move may cost the state's economy billions of dollars in lost income and taxes.
The new laws are described as the toughest local anti-illegal immigration legislation in the United States , and will sanction businesses who knowingly hire undocumented workers.
Any employer who falls foul of the law will see their business license suspended for 10 days for a first offense; a second infraction will see the license permanently revoked.
Judith Gans, a University of Arizona immigration policy expert who has studied the economic impact of illegal immigrants, said the new law will have a dramatic effect on the local economy.
"Industries will shrink and prices will go up," Gans told AFP.
The price of a hamburger, a head of lettuce, and a week's worth of gardening services will all increase as workforces shrink, Gans said.
Illegal immigrants "are filling gaps in the labor force, and as those gaps widen, prices will go up," she said. "That theory is not contested."
According to an October study released by Gans , Arizona 's foreign-born population has tripled in less than two decades, from about 269,000 in 1990 to 831,000 in 2004.
Experts peg the state's illegal immigrant population at about half a million. Workers, mainly from Mexico , flock to pick lettuce in Yuma , make sushi in Phoenix , and clean hotel rooms in Flagstaff .
According to Gans' study, they make up 59 percent of the workforce in farming; 27 percent in construction; 51 percent in landscaping; 26 percent in hotel work; 23 percent in restaurants; 33 percent in private homes; and 46 percent in textile manufacturing.
Out of every six non-citizens in Arizona , five are illegal, according to Gans. Her study indicates the net 2004 fiscal impact of Arizona illegals was positive by about 940 million dollars, when balanced against costs of 1.4 billion dollars for education, health care, and law enforcement.
A public outcry and inaction by lawmakers in Washington to pass immigration reform laws, led state officials to pass the employer sanctions law.
Local businesses are bracing for the effect of the crackdown.
"Oh yeah, it'll affect us," said Jeremiah, the owner of Around Town Landscaping in Phoenix who estimated that the cost of having a garden mowed will go up 15 to 20 percent in 2008 as a result.
"We're going to lose some qualified guys, for sure. I'll keep my product the same, but it'll affect efficiency. It's a lack of foresight to think it wouldn't affect those things," added Jeremiah, who would not give his last name.
"It's not the right way to go. I don't think people did their homework on it, and no one consulted small companies on how they feel about it," he added.
Construction costs won't noticeably rise, said Julie Fenner, office manager of Hidden Valley Roofing in Phoenix . The company has always screened for proof of citizenship.
"To spread that over the cost of a roof, it's not going to happen," she said. "I can't see costs going up based on that."
Agriculture is expected to be among the industries hardest hit by the new law. Yuma needs about 50,000 pickers during lettuce harvest. Only half that number lives on the American side of the border. Pickers now earn 12 to 14 dollars per hour, said Dawn McLaren, an Arizona State University research economist.
Their wages could rise to 20 dollars per hour.
As more and more farms move south of the border to avoid high production costs, food may have to be imported on a weak dollar, making groceries more expensive.
"If we can't find labor here at a reasonable cost to business, businesses can simply move their business elsewhere," McLaren said. "We may see the cost of having to import stuff."
One Arizona grower recently decided to buy a farm in Iowa instead of investing in his Arizona operations, said Joe Sigg, director of government relations for the Arizona Farm Bureau.
"Banks will start looking at credit risks," Sigg said. "It's going to be more of an economic cloud on Arizona than the cost of a head of lettuce will be. Any prospectus for investors will have to have a flashing sign around it saying, This business may lose its LLC.' I think the investment community will chill on Arizona as well."
Uncertainty about what will happen is as big an issue as anything, Gans said. "We'll see," she said. " Arizona has certainly put itself on the line."
Copyright © 2008 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
From the Arizona Town Crier
The question comes to mind, has the state legislature, or either of the state's political parties addressed this?
http://www.phxnews.com/fullstory.php?article=55538
Jim
http://www.phxnews.com/fullstory.php?article=55538
Jim
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
