BHO to brassy pro-amnesty heckler: “If I could bypass congress, I would”

Obama has already made bypassing congress via executive orders on voting rights, health care, the economy, climate change and illegal immigration a hallmark of his administration

He also says “I respect the passion of these young people….”

But Obama is stony silent on the issue of respecting the Rule of Law and our national sovereignty as he works to expand the Democrat base by legalizing upward of 30 million of those who have invaded the United States. The issue of illegal immigration doesn’t need more laws, studies or debates, it cries out for leadership and enforcement. America doesn’t need immigration reform, it needs leadership reform — a necessity glaringly missing on both sides of the aisle, as we read in Breitbart.

Adding to the problems, the government of Canada has begun rolling up its welcome mat, stepping up efforts to track down and deport thousands of those claiming asylum status, whose applications have been denied. The crackdown is likely to have devastating repercussions in the United States. Analysts warn we could become a new destination for thousands of asylum/refugee applicants soon to be pushed out of the pipeline in Canada.

Arsonist Harry Burkhart is a case in point. The 24-year-old German national traveled to the U.S. from Vancouver after losing his nearly three-year bid for refugee status. During a reign of terror in the Los Angeles area, he set a series of nearly 50 blazes, costing $ millions in property damage. When captured, he told authorities, “I hate America.”

Monday as Obama was making his liberal immigration pitch in the sanctuary city of San Francisco, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) stated, “America is not an oligarchy. Congressional leaders must forcefully reject the notion, evidently accepted by the President, that a small cadre of CEOs can tailor the nation’s entire immigration policy to suit their narrow interests. A Republic must answer to the people.”

Sessions focused on the devastating impact immigration reform legislation will have on working class Americans of all backgrounds — a Congressional Budget Office determination that Sessions has continually emphasized while advocating on behalf of the interests of American workers. He said Obama “must be asked — by media and lawmakers alike — how he can possibly justify a plan that will double the flow of immigrant workers at a time when 91.5 million Americans are outside the labor force?”

Good question, Senator.

About these ads

43 Responses to BHO to brassy pro-amnesty heckler: “If I could bypass congress, I would”

  1. Kent says:

    Thanks SRAZ for calling out Obama’s hypocrisy again. Also, Sen. Jeff Sessions insightful statement makes me even more aware how ill served we are by McCain and Flake here in Arizona. Our senators have been primary movers and shakers in the amnesty high-jinks of the so-called “bipartisan” Gang of Eight. Have you noticed that when Republicans cave in to the demands of liberals, its configured as “bipartisan.” Somehow it never works the other way.

  2. Harris Shirley says:

    Kent, there is no “other way” for Libtards, everything is their way. And once again BHO proves his tendencies towards becoming Il Duce. After all, he has a penchant for combining corporate interests with those of the state.

  3. ZOO says:

    Perhaps the most devastating fact is that someone like Jeff Sessions could never be elected POTUS. At some point during the GWB administration we reached a milestone of an impasse dictating the rule of law preventing a foreign invasion will never see the light of day again. Sessions remark that “America is not an oligarchy” is admirable and quite apropos, but the fact remains the country is and has been an oligarchy for many years.

    Obama’s remark that he ‘lacks authority’ to stop deportations is said with tongue-in-cheek and equates to a game of playing ‘possum.’ In that only Congress has the power to change immigration status for anyone, Obama’s strategically planned June 2012 “Deferred Action For Childhood Arrivals” (DACA) was clearly unconstitutional but we have yet to hear a single elected voice of opposition nor congressional action to stop it.

    The GOP, coming off a 2012 plank of “self-deportation” and presidential defeat, now cowers and would not dare to rise up against “the children.” Obama’s DACA parallels to a vacuum cleaner salesman’s foot-in-the-door. The “oligarchy” now revels in the ‘perfect storm’ of distracted debate over amnesty while inland enforcement and border security enters it’s 13th consecutive year of suspended animation. Don’t change that flat tire now, wait until all four are flat.

    • eubykdisop says:

      ROFL! Still trying to pass yourself off as a “conservative” I see, LOL! The only problem with that is your support for Obamacare Medicaid expansion in Arizona which was backed by the Liberal Democrat caucus of the Arizona legislature!

      But I should let your own words speak for you! You tell us that Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion will SAVE Arizona money!

      “The reality here is that the Federal government has expanded the Medicaid program to 138% of FPL (above and separate from Obamacare), and the expansion of AHCCCS addresses that issue – to reduce the bottom line expense to the state under the Federal expansion.” – ZOO

      And while 36 Republican state legislators continue the battle against Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion through a lawsuit against Brewer, you tell us just how unimportant the entire issue is!

      “Some conservative pundits are touting 2014 and 2016 will have to be the time to “get 60% of what you want.” I hate that forecast, but in this particular race I’ll accept it. In my situation, Obrewercare expansion is not the end of the world. There are burning issues that usurp it.” – ZOO

      “I don’t recall ever coming here to rant about the Medicaid expansion because as I honestly said, I just don’t see it as an earthshaking issue when then are much more crushing/destructive issues at hand.” – ZOO

      I’m SURE that a Liberal like you doesn’t see “the encroachment of socialism”, as SRAZ has put it, as “the end of the world” or as “an earthshaking issue”. You have told us so explicitly in your above quoted comments!

    • Vince says:

      Congratulations for ignoring the rants, ZOO. I would have to bite nails to retain my the composure, but I commend you for your steady focus on the posts. I parted company with Brewer on the Medicaid Expansion, but the state Treasure’s race is a different ball game. I’m strongly pro-life, but that is not a defining issue for me if the office has no involvement in life issues. I have a friend who uses that as a measure for each and every office, regardless of the scope of the office. If someone is running for Corporation Commissioner with duties that include overseeing utility rates, that is still THE issue. We need to view the whole picture or our small vision will render us irrelevant.

    • eubykdisop says:

      Oh, you ain’t seen nothing yet, Vince! Try this! Here’s how ZOO has pitched Obamacare Medicaid expansion to us:

      “The reality here is that the Federal government has expanded the Medicaid program to 138% of FPL (above and separate from Obamacare), and the expansion of AHCCCS addresses that issue – to reduce the bottom line expense to the state under the Federal expansion.” – ZOO

      First, let’s be clear on what it is ZOO is pitching us on. SRAZ has called it “the encroachment of socialism” and the Heritage Foundation says:

      “The Medicaid expansion is a crucial part of Obamacare that is supposed reduce the number of uninsured.”

      So ZOO is pitching us on the financial benefit to Arizona of something which Heritage says is a “crucial part” of the ongoing disaster which is Obama’s “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”!

      But is what ZOO claims in pitching Obamacare to the Conservatives as SRAZ true? The Heritage Foundation has this to say:

      “Medicaid Expansion in Arizona: Impact and Cost to Taxpayers”

      “March 5, 2013″

      “Medicaid expansion in Arizona would result in a rapid increase in spending beginning in 2017, quickly surpassing any modest savings from reductions in state payments to providers for uncompensated care. On net, the expansion would cost Arizona taxpayers $417 million through 2022.”

      http://www.heritage.org/multimedia/infographic/2013/03/medicaid-expansion/arizona

      So let’s review ZOO’s “conservative” credentials!

      1 – He makes a case for “the encroachment of socialism”, as SRAZ has termed Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

      2 – He makes a case for what the Heritage Foundation states is a “crucial part” of Obamacare.

      3 – He claims that Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion will “reduce the bottom line expense to the state” but the Heritage Foundation says that the net cost to Arizona taxpayers will be $417 million through 2022!

      If that makes ZOO a “conservative” then B. Hussein Obama must be a “conservative” too because they are both promoting the same agenda!

      • Vince says:

        Your continually regurgitation of the same ideological differences with another commenter here is more than tedious. We get your perspective. Why are you trying to remake this site into your own? We’re all visitors here and entitled to our own opinions. After you make your point, let it go. There was a time you were quite complimentary to this commenter. Unlike you, I haven’t catalogued the past comments of everyone, but I remember your previous views. Were you wrong then?

      • eubykdisop says:

        Since you inserted another comment, pushing my reply to you distantly down the thread and deliberately creating a disconnect, I’ll repost my reply here:

        Vince:

        ROFL! And YOU regurgitate the same old Liberal tripe that we have heard countless times from leftist sympathizers like you when a Liberal Obama troll is confronted with the truth!

        The MOST significant thing about your comment is that, unlike my comments, it doesn’t address a single political issue, let alone one of importance to Arizonans and Conservatives, nor does it present a single objective fact of use to Conservatives in making voting choices. Instead of addressing a significant and current political issue, like Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion and ZOO’s position on that, you want to manage this blog. Hey, Sunshine, this ain’t your blog! Get over it! I assure you that SRAZ is fully capable of managing this blog without your unsolicited assistance!

        Why is there not a single political issue or objective political fact mentioned in your comment? Because the entire purpose of your comment is to take the heat off of ZOO regarding his positions and statements on Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion! That is NOT the purpose of this blog. The purpose of this blog is to “inform from a Conservative point of view” and your comment is neither Conservative nor does it inform about anything related to local or national politics.

        Next, I’ll address the comments which you DID make in this thread which DO speak to current political issues in Arizona. Those need to be run through the shredder to “inform from a Conservative point of view”.

    • Vince says:

      What’s right is right, ZOO. Happy to stand against bullying tactics. Obviously, they don’t just occur in school yards.

      • eubykdisop says:

        And there we have it, Folks! Vince flies his true colors with the proprietary Liberal “bullying” meme, LOL! Thanks, Vince, for exposing where you really are on the political spectrum! :-)

        Who makes “bullying” accusations, Liberals or Conservatives? Let’s find out!

        “Conservatives: Giant Bullies Who Abuse the Weak”

        “Mitt Romney is a bully. And he’s just right for the GOP”.

        http://1980.www.alternet.org/story/155420/conservatives%3A_giant_bullies_who_abuse_the_weak

        “Republicans are Bullies with Very Thin Skins”

        “by Jonathan David Tankel on October 19, 2011″

        “Conservative media: The new bullies of Transgender people”

        “by Sabrina Samone, 02/27/2013″

        “Conservatives oppose anti-bullying legislation, because those who are bullied, are gay”

        “By Jerome McCollom, Mar 11, 2011″

        “Conservative Bullying Has Made America Into a Broken, Dysfunctional Family: But There Are Ways to Regain Our Well-Being”

        Well what do you know! ALL of the above articles trashing Republicans and Conservatives for “bullying” and for being “bullies” come from the radical left and from the homosexual activist lobby!

        Yeah, Vince, we know that from the Liberal perspective that all Conservatives, and even all Republicans, are considered to be “bullies” who engage in “bullying”. That is the Liberal way, and your way, of trying to steer things away from the hard, objective political facts because the hard, objective political facts destroy all Liberal arguments and positions. Truth and the facts are on the side of Conservatives!

        Now why don’t you see if you can get the Obama DOJ to prosecute me for “bullying”. I’m sure that Eric Holder would be more than happy to look into that for you!

    • eubykdisop says:

      Vince:

      ROFL! And YOU regurgitate the same old Liberal tripe that we have heard countless times from leftist sympathizers like you when a Liberal Obama troll is confronted with the truth!

      The MOST significant thing about your comment is that, unlike my comments, it doesn’t address a single political issue, let alone one of importance to Arizonans and Conservatives, nor does it present a single objective fact of use to Conservatives in making voting choices. Instead of addressing a significant and current political issue, like Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion and ZOO’s position on that, you want to manage this blog. Hey, Sunshine, this ain’t your blog! Get over it! I assure you that SRAZ is fully capable of managing this blog without your unsolicited assistance!

      Why is there not a single political issue or objective political fact mentioned in your comment? Because the entire purpose of your comment is to take the heat off of ZOO regarding his positions and statements on Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion! That is NOT the purpose of this blog. The purpose of this blog is to “inform from a Conservative point of view” and your comment is neither Conservative nor does it inform about anything related to local or national politics.

      Next, I’ll address the comments which you DID make in this thread which DO speak to current political issues in Arizona. Those need to be run through the shredder to “inform from a Conservative point of view”.

      • Vince says:

        If you think I’m a liberal, you’re showing yourself to be delusional. Since I first registered to vote, I have been not only a Republican, but a staunchly conservative one. I was instrumental in initiating a Republican club on my college campus. I would gladly put my longtime party involvement up against yours any day of the week. I’ve been and remain active as a precinct committeeman, state committeeman and district officer. My credentials are not confined to using acronyms such as ROFL to deride others. I have been a solid Reagan conservative who puts my time and energy as well as $$ into my commitment. What have you done for the AZ and County GOP?

        When you decide to take issue with someone, you attempt to overpower all other views by multiple comments saying the same exact thing. YOU appear to be the liberal troll you accuse others of being, since you have exerted such effort to commandeer this conservative site. Most of us come here for the content or to comment on what we read. We have as much right to our opinions as you do. No one else resorts to name calling as you do.

        Back at the end of October when you indicated you had been hospitalized there was a sincere outpouring of good wishes for your recovery. Among them was ZOO, who received a warm response from you. Now you call him a psychopath for disagreeing with you? You have a very short memory.

        How about going back to Square One and begin to conduct yourself rationally again. There is a lot to be gained when we interact rather than bludgeon those with opposing viewpoints. I looked forward to reading your comments when they were instructional instead of angry outbursts.

      • ZOO says:

        Vince, I appreciate your comments and willingness to object (at your own peril) to erratic and troll-like stalking behavior, but in full disclosure it was I that used the term ‘psychopath.’ I realize that some believe that is going too far, but a lesser related term would still point to the same thing.

        The CC’s decision on net metering by five Republican commissioners did not stop the attack on me for that issue, and that was where I felt the usage of the mental illness term was appropriate – good or bad. I used the term in reaction to behavior, not on the issue(s).

      • ZOO says:

        P.S. I also used the term after a two-day lull in the attacks were re-started. I don’t believe anyone realizes that these attacks will continue indefinitely. Five members have now tried to diffuse this onslaught, and each has been attacked. One was attacked simply because he responded to my post on Kyrsten Sinema. The ‘troll goal’ is for me to abandon the site (as some have) under a daily barrage of mucilage-born off-topic strikes. That isn’t going to happen.

      • eubykdisop says:

        Bwa, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Oh, too rich! :-)

        Hey, boys, let’s cut the crap and get down to political brass tacks instead of your endless psychovomit, shall we? Here is what ZOO is guilty of doing in this blog:

        1 – Minimizing the importance of Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

        “Some conservative pundits are touting 2014 and 2016 will have to be the time to “get 60% of what you want.” I hate that forecast, but in this particular race I’ll accept it. In my situation, Obrewercare expansion is not the end of the world. There are burning issues that usurp it.” – ZOO

        “I don’t recall ever coming here to rant about the Medicaid expansion because as I honestly said, I just don’t see it as an earthshaking issue when then are much more crushing/destructive issues at hand.” – ZOO

        2 – Summarizing ALL of the points made in FAVOR of Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion from an article by Randy Pullen.

        “ZOO says:
        November 7, 2013 at 9:19 pm”

        “RECAP OF PULLEN EXPANSION ASSESMENT”

        “1) In 2000, voter-passed Prop 204 mandates AHCCCS–cover all adults up to 100% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL)”

        “2) Court allowed reduction during recession, state now has surplus”

        “3) Trigger PROP 204 lawsuit if 100% FPL not restored”

        “4) Loss of Federal matching funds if 100% FPL not restored”

        “5) Prop 200 funding as passed – a)tobacco tax b)tobacco companies settlement c)state general fund”

        “6) Provider assessment (hospitals) covers cost to 100% FPL, expansion to 138% FPL, and state general fund contribution mandated by Prop 204″

        “7) Assessment cannot be passed back to patients, or non-AHCCCS privately-insured policyholders”

        “8) Federal subsidy for under 100% FPL restricted to legal aliens, not citizens”

        “9) If not restored to 100% FPL, cost of uncompensated care to childless adult citizens responsibility of hospitals”

        “10) Hospitals report 81% increase in these costs over the last 6-months”

        “11) Without restoration 60,000 will be dropped from AHCCCS next year-increasing uncompensated care to hospitals–rural hospitals worse–financial distress–result in closings”

        “12) Without restoration, Arizona employers will be subject to $45 Million to $60 million in increased taxes under Obamacare “shared responsibility”–expansion stops tax increase”

        “13) AHCCCS/Medicaid will remain, even if Obamacare repealed”

        “14) Higher taxes to AZ taxpayers whether Medicaid expanded or not–due to government expansion to 138% FPL”

        “15) Government expansion to 138% FPL–participation will lower cost to state”

        “16) If government pulls funding–reset provision takes expansion back to 100% FPL”

        3 – Claiming that Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion will SAVE Arizona money.

        “The reality here is that the Federal government has expanded the Medicaid program to 138% of FPL (above and separate from Obamacare), and the expansion of AHCCCS addresses that issue – to reduce the bottom line expense to the state under the Federal expansion.” – ZOO

        4 – Claiming that arguments against Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion are based on “what if” scenarios.

        ”The arguments of others you have dropped here appear to be based on “what if?” scenarios, instead of addressing the reality (Federal Medicaid expansion) at hand.” – ZOO

        That, of course, completely ignores these hard, dollars and cents facts:

        “For the first three years, the federal government has promised to cover 100% of the medical costs for the newly eligible Medicaid enrollees, and yet the cost to Arizona’s General Fund for the first year alone would be $154 million. The costs to the state are a result of the fact that the federal reimbursement rate of 100% applies only to the direct medical expenses of the newly eligible enrollees, not the additional administrative costs. Additionally, the 100% reimbursement rate does not apply to those new enrollees who were previously eligible but either did not know it or otherwise failed to enroll.”

        5 – Finding that the ONLY fault with Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion is that it’s a tax rather than objecting to it on the principle that it is “the encroachment of socialism”, as SRAZ so astutely put it.

        6 – Still being willing to support Randy Pullen despite his propaganda piece backing Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

        Now, ZOO, explain to SRAZ readers how your actions and positions, as accurately and factually presented above, constitute Conservatism rather than Liberalism. Let’s discuss and debate your actions, statements and positions in terms of a Liberal versus Conservative paradigm.

      • eubykdisop says:

        As for you, Vince, here’s a political issue for you to deal with instead of a psychological/emotional one. This is, after all, a Conservative political blog and not the Dr. Phil show!

        Vince:

        Now, as promised, I will shred the political comments which you did actually make in this thread as you attempted to slip in pure Liberal propaganda.

        Vince wrote: “I parted company with Brewer on the Medicaid Expansion, but the state Treasure’s race is a different ball game. I’m strongly pro-life, but that is not a defining issue for me if the office has no involvement in life issues.”

        Vince’s comment is a classic example of the Liberal tactic of “false argument”. What’s false about it? What’s false about is that Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion is NOT about health care at all! It’s about $$$ money! It’s about state money. Your money and my money. Taxpayer money! As state treasurer, Randy Pullen would be in charge of our money, managing the state budget and investments. So Pullen’s position on Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion could not be more relevant to his desire to serve as treasurer!

        What, precisely, did Pullen say?

        “Former GOP Chair Randy Pullen: Follow the Governor’s Lead”

        “We now are presented with a similar situation with AHCCCS. Republican leadership needs to step forward and make another smart choice – follow the Governor’s lead. She’s been proven right before!”

        “Sincerely,
        Randy Pullen”

        http://www.restoringarizona.com/article/a-letter-from-randy-pullen

        What was “the Governor’s lead” which Pullen urged the Republican leadership to follow?

        1 – Brewer levied a TAX on Arizonans to pay for the implementation of her Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

        2 – Under the provisions of Prop 108, which passed with 71.87% of the vote, a 2/3 majority in both chambers of the legislature is required to levy a tax. Brewer couldn’t get enough Republicans to reach 2/3 so she called her tax an “assessment”, trying to exploit what appears to her to be a “loophole” in the provisions of Prop 108. Sound familiar? This is right out of the Obama play book but SCOTUS found the provisions of Obamacare to, in fact, be a TAX!

        3 – By exploiting the theoretical “assessment” loophole, the Governor’s plan allows the Director of AHCCCS unchecked authority to set the tax hospitals will pay in order to receive federal matching funds. In other words – authority that constitutionally is in the hands of elected, accountable legislators will be given to a political appointee who would set the tax rate on hospitals going forward.

        THIS is “the Governor’s lead” which Randy Pullen urged the Republican leadership to follow AND it is ALL about… $$$ MONEY!

        So Pullen supported Brewer’s tax, her implementation of that tax by calling it an “assessment” and Pullen supported removing taxing authority from the legislature and putting it into the hands of a political appointee in the executive branch of state government.

        So don’t try to tell us, Vince, that Pullen’s support for Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion was about health care issues and NOT about fiscal issues! It is all about $$$ money and I don’t want someone who is willing to back Brewer’s tax ripoff sitting in the treasurer’s office!

      • ZOO says:

        I posted Pullen’s 16 points without comment. I later requested that you address each (in true or false fashion), after a flurry of cut & paste responses. You refused. As to my specific questions to you on solar net metering, you refused to answer – blowing them off with “irrelevant”. You have been asked several times who you will support for state treasurer in 2014, and refused to answer the question. When pressed twice by a poster, you responded “idiotic and irrelevant question.”

        I posted on this site that I opposed the method used for the Medicaid expansion after relating to Obamacare and the flip-flop terms of “assessment” and “tax” on November 8th, and repeated my position on November 16th. You insist that not only must everyone agree with you, but for the same reason(s).

        Your egocentrism, trolling, and stalking are more than obvious to everyone except yourself. On top of these ‘traits’, you have some issues that fuel it, which you have advertised here for almost 30 days.

        As for Randy Pullen, I have known “of him” for over 10 years and he is a conservative and his is no fool. He has the education and background to look at the state’s numbers much more intelligently than you or I can. I fully intend to vote for him and nothing you can say will change my mind. This is the last time I will address the expansion, net metering, or Pullen. Get over it.

      • eubykdisop says:

        ROFL! I challenge you AGAIN, ZOO, to defend what you did in this blog. Which is:

        1 – Minimizing the importance of Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

        “Some conservative pundits are touting 2014 and 2016 will have to be the time to “get 60% of what you want.” I hate that forecast, but in this particular race I’ll accept it. In my situation, Obrewercare expansion is not the end of the world. There are burning issues that usurp it.” – ZOO

        “I don’t recall ever coming here to rant about the Medicaid expansion because as I honestly said, I just don’t see it as an earthshaking issue when then are much more crushing/destructive issues at hand.” – ZOO

        2 – Summarizing ALL of the points made in FAVOR of Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion from an article by Randy Pullen.

        “ZOO says:
        November 7, 2013 at 9:19 pm”

        “RECAP OF PULLEN EXPANSION ASSESMENT”

        “1) In 2000, voter-passed Prop 204 mandates AHCCCS–cover all adults up to 100% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL)”

        “2) Court allowed reduction during recession, state now has surplus”

        “3) Trigger PROP 204 lawsuit if 100% FPL not restored”

        “4) Loss of Federal matching funds if 100% FPL not restored”

        “5) Prop 200 funding as passed – a)tobacco tax b)tobacco companies settlement c)state general fund”

        “6) Provider assessment (hospitals) covers cost to 100% FPL, expansion to 138% FPL, and state general fund contribution mandated by Prop 204″

        “7) Assessment cannot be passed back to patients, or non-AHCCCS privately-insured policyholders”

        “8) Federal subsidy for under 100% FPL restricted to legal aliens, not citizens”

        “9) If not restored to 100% FPL, cost of uncompensated care to childless adult citizens responsibility of hospitals”

        “10) Hospitals report 81% increase in these costs over the last 6-months”

        “11) Without restoration 60,000 will be dropped from AHCCCS next year-increasing uncompensated care to hospitals–rural hospitals worse–financial distress–result in closings”

        “12) Without restoration, Arizona employers will be subject to $45 Million to $60 million in increased taxes under Obamacare “shared responsibility”–expansion stops tax increase”

        “13) AHCCCS/Medicaid will remain, even if Obamacare repealed”

        “14) Higher taxes to AZ taxpayers whether Medicaid expanded or not–due to government expansion to 138% FPL”

        “15) Government expansion to 138% FPL–participation will lower cost to state”

        “16) If government pulls funding–reset provision takes expansion back to 100% FPL”

        3 – Claiming that Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion will SAVE Arizona money.

        “The reality here is that the Federal government has expanded the Medicaid program to 138% of FPL (above and separate from Obamacare), and the expansion of AHCCCS addresses that issue – to reduce the bottom line expense to the state under the Federal expansion.” – ZOO

        4 – Claiming that arguments against Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion are based on “what if” scenarios.

        ”The arguments of others you have dropped here appear to be based on “what if?” scenarios, instead of addressing the reality (Federal Medicaid expansion) at hand.” – ZOO

        That, of course, completely ignores these hard, dollars and cents facts:

        “For the first three years, the federal government has promised to cover 100% of the medical costs for the newly eligible Medicaid enrollees, and yet the cost to Arizona’s General Fund for the first year alone would be $154 million. The costs to the state are a result of the fact that the federal reimbursement rate of 100% applies only to the direct medical expenses of the newly eligible enrollees, not the additional administrative costs. Additionally, the 100% reimbursement rate does not apply to those new enrollees who were previously eligible but either did not know it or otherwise failed to enroll.”

        5 – Finding that the ONLY fault with Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion is that it’s a tax rather than objecting to it on the principle that it is “the encroachment of socialism”, as SRAZ so astutely put it.

        6 – Still being willing to support Randy Pullen despite his propaganda piece backing Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

        Don’t try to get off the hook by hoping to baffle SRAZ readers with your avoidant BS. You actively defended Brewer’s Medicaid expansion, using Pullen’s article to help make your case, AND you sought to dismiss arguments against Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion as simply being “what if” scenarios. Face the music, ZOO!

        As regards your boy Pullen, he not only backed Brewer but urged the Republican leadership to “follow the Governor’s lead”. That “lead” included levying a tax on Arizonans to pay for Obamacare Medicaid expansion, supporting Brewer’s trick of calling the tax an “assessment” and giving taxing authority to an executive branch appointee! Even now, 36 Republican state legislators are fighting Brewer’s, and Pullen’s, Liberal deception in court with an active lawsuit. Your boy Pullen is entirely unfit to hold public office.

        How can this be the last time you will “address” this issue when you have yet to address it? I won’t fail to address it with you. THAT you can count on!

      • Seeing Red AZ says:

        Euby,
        Posting a comment once is welcomed. That’s what the comment forum is all about. Repeated postings of the same comment will be taken down. A point made does not have to be remade. If commenters choose not to reply that is their prerogative. No commenters have the right to insist that others respond to them. That borders on harassment and is not acceptable.

        Take a deep breath and have a happy Thanksgiving.

      • eubykdisop says:

        Take a deep breath yourself, SRAZ! If you want to remove my comments, repeated or otherwise, do it! You don’t have to explain it to me as I already know that this is your blog to do with as you wish. You may remove anything at any time for any reason without explanation. That is and always has been understood.

        SRAZ wrote: “A point made does not have to be remade.” Really? Then how is it that you have written so many articles about John McCain and The Arizona Republic? Did you think that we didn’t get the point the first ten times?

        SRAZ wrote: “If commenters choose not to reply that is their prerogative.” Yes it is. I also consider it my prerogative to make it clear that they are not responding when they have staked out Liberal positions, while presenting themselves as Conservative, but refuse to speak to those Liberal positions. That permits those promoting Liberal positions in this allegedly Conservative blog to have their way. That’s not a Conservative approach to the situation!

        SRAZ wrote: “No commenters have the right to insist that others respond to them.” That is disingenuous of you and a gross misrepresentation, SRAZ. Conservatives do and should have a right to demand ACCOUNTABILITY of those who stake out Liberal positions. Neither I nor anyone else can “force” them to respond but we can make it clear to SRAZ readers that they are avoiding a fact based, evidence based defense of those Liberal positions. That is how Liberal ideas are debunked!

        SRAZ wrote: “That borders on harassment and is not acceptable.” I most definitely do harass those who take up Liberal positions in this allegedly Conservative blog. I intend to continue to do so. If you find that “unacceptable” then I would suggest that you ban me from SRAZ permanently.

        What is your idea of how those who promote Liberal positions in a Conservative blog should be treated? Should we be genteel? Follow the Geneva Convention? Cookies and milk perhaps? Sorry, if those are your ideas of how those who take up Liberal positions in an allegedly Conservative blog should be treated, then we have “irreconcilable differences”. The implementation of a Liberal agenda, promoted through venues like blogs, will result in the death of America and the death of Americans. If you think that is an exaggeration then might I suggest you review the “Fast and Furious” body count.

        May you have the Thanksgiving which you have earned.

      • Seeing Red AZ says:

        euby,
        There is no intention of banning you from this comment forum. We ask only that you observe basic civility when interacting with others on this site. In addition, let us remind you that this is not an “allegedly conservative blog.” It is, in fact, Constitutionally-based and strongly conservative. The topics we choose might bore you, but they resonate with us and usually the other readers. Posting each and every day means sometimes we hit the mark for some and not for others.

        When you wrote ”May you have the Thanksgiving which you have earned,“ it sounded suspiciously like you were hoping we’d choke on a turkey bone. It was not that long ago you told us of your hospitalization. Many of us wished you well and sent words of encouragement along with heartfelt prayers. Remember that there is more we have in common than that which divides us. As we approach a new year, let’s do so with a spirit of conservative unity. 2014 will be an important election cycle both statewide and nationally. We need to concentrate on electing conservatives.

      • eubykdisop says:

        SRAZ:

        SRAZ wrote: “We ask only that you observe basic civility when interacting with others on this site.” Really?

        “ZOO says:
        November 25, 2013 at 2:24 pm”

        “@ eubykdisop”

        “Haven’t you been ‘keeping up’, psychopath?”

        “ZOO says:
        November 25, 2013 at 4:21 pm”

        “You’re a liar.”

        “Get bent!”

        “ZOO says:
        November 25, 2013 at 3:57 pm”

        “@ eubykdisop”

        “Unfortunately, these come up considerably short in addressing your deep-seated obsessive and paranoiac psychosis.”

        Since you don’t have any problem with all of those things which ZOO said to me then it must constitute basic civility when interacting with others on this site to call them a psychopath, a liar, obsessive, a paranoid psychotic and telling them to get bent. If those things didn’t constitute basic civility when interacting with others on this site then surely you would have spoken with ZOO just as you are now speaking with me… but you haven’t, have you!

        SRAZ wrote: “In addition, let us remind you that this is not an “allegedly conservative blog.” It is, in fact, Constitutionally-based and strongly conservative.” Oh really! Is that right? Enlighten me how it is “strongly conservative” to demand “civility” of a Conservative calling out someone who supports and who made a case for “the encroachment of socialism”, as you yourself phrased it, while remaining completely silent when that Conservative is called a psychopath and a liar. If this were, in fact, a consistently “strongly conservative” blog wouldn’t you be chastising the person making the case for “the encroachment of socialism”, as you yourself put it, and being supportive of the Conservative opposing “the encroachment of socialism”, or isn’t “the encroachment of socialism” really that important to this “strongly conservative” blog?

        SRAZ wrote: “The topics we choose might bore you, but they resonate with us and usually the other readers. Posting each and every day means sometimes we hit the mark for some and not for others.”

        That isn’t what I was addressing and you are certainly smart enough to know that isn’t what I was addressing. I was addressing this comment by you:

        SRAZ wrote: “A point made does not have to be remade.”

        How many times have you made and remade the point, through the articles that you write and post, that McCain is a piece of garbage and that The Arizona Republic is a reliably Liberal rag? You have made and remade those points countless times and you continue to make and remake those points. If a commenter does the same thing you do, however, it’s a bad thing!

        SRAZ wrote: “When you wrote ”May you have the Thanksgiving which you have earned,“ it sounded suspiciously like you were hoping we’d choke on a turkey bone.”

        With your perception that I lack “basic civility” do you think that if I hoped you would choke on a turkey bone that I would hesitate to say so?

        SRAZ wrote: “It was not that long ago you told us of your hospitalization. Many of us wished you well and sent words of encouragement along with heartfelt prayers.”

        Yes, and I thanked each and every person who did so. However, that doesn’t give you or anyone else a permanent free pass to support those promoting “the encroachment of socialism” while selectively chastising a Conservative opposing that “encroachment of socialism”. That ain’t “conservative” and it doesn’t cut it!

        SRAZ wrote: “Remember that there is more we have in common than that which divides us. As we approach a new year, let’s do so with a spirit of conservative unity.”

        THAT just ain’t so, SRAZ! I don’t have ANYTHING in common with someone presenting themselves as “conservative” who minimizes the extreme importance of Governor Brewer’s Medicaid expansion which is a “crucial part” of Obamacare!

        I don’t have ANYTHING in common with someone presenting themselves as “conservative” who would support for state treasurer an individual who backed Brewer and who urged the Republican leadership to follow her lead! Her “lead” was imposing a tax, masquerading a tax as an “assessment” and giving taxing authority to a political appointee in the executive branch of state government! It just doesn’t get any worse, any more unconstitutional or any more dictatorial and socialistic than that! I don’t want “unity” with that kind of “conservative”!

        You and I apparently have very different ideas about what qualifies as being “conservative”!

        Liberals are exceedingly aggressive in their efforts to end America and there is nothing that they will not do to succeed. Unless there are Conservatives who are such fierce warriors that they are willing the tear the hearts out of the chests of the Commies with their bare hands and eat them, we’re already finished!

        This is, quite literally, a battle to the death and there will be the victor and the vanquished. There is no place on the field of battle for those who are “sort of”, “mostly”, “generally” conservative.

        “We herd sheep, we drive cattle, we lead people. Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way.” – General George S. Patton

      • Jackson says:

        Others can collect comments, too, although I hesitate emulating this tacky technique. Just want to show that no one is “pure,” not even you, euby. Here YOU use what you later call the “liberal” term “bullying“:

        eubykdisop says:May 20, 2013 at 12:19 am  
        “There is a comment section on this blog that you seem to enjoy monopolizing. I have a question myself. Why are you always so eager to verbally assault and bully others? How about taking a break from the constant jabs? There was nothing in my intial comment worthy of your attack.”

        Here you say what others have been saying about you…stick to the subject:
        eubykdisop says:May 20, 2013 at 12:39 am
        “Hey, I have a great idea, No Name Please! Let’s see how long we can keep this thread going with comments which have nothing whatsoever to do with the SRAZ article! Now there’s a challenge! You’re doing great with it so far. Hang in there and keep up the good work. This is important stuff to “inform from a conservative point of view”! Extremely valuable!”

        I agree we need to put this to rest and move on. That does not make me a liberal as you are sure to declare, but one who gets your repeatedly stated points and merely asks that you stop overpowering this site and stay on topic. From your actions, it appears you are intent on overtaking and destroying this fine conservative site.

        BY the way, I’ve used a new handle for today. That will delay this going up, but you won’t be able to collect my previous comments.

      • eubykdisop says:

        Bwa, ha, ha, ha, ha! :-)

        Too bad I didn’t write that first comment, LOL! Care to post the title of the article where I supposedly posted that comment so we can look it up? I didn’t think so!

        Hey, I can do the same thing, LOL!

        Jackson says: April 14, 2012 at 1:37 pm
        “Hey, dirtball, so what if I’m a Liberal Democrat homosexual activist, I have the same right to post here as you wingers!”

        Now try again when you’re ready for prime time, LOL! ;-)

      • Jackson says:

        You’re obviously an intelligent guy, euby. Since your comments were time stamped and dated, you could locate them as easily as I have. The post was titled: “Reagan, O’Connor: Liberal elites masquerade as Republicans.” Read your own comments:

        http://seeingredaz.wordpress.com/2013/05/18/reagan-oconnor-liberal-elites-masquerade-as-republicans/

        I also see you are not above lying to make your point. The following quote you attribute to me is patently false: “Hey, dirtball, so what if I’m a Liberal Democrat homosexual activist, I have the same right to post here as you wingers!”

        As I stated earlier, I have never previously used the name Jackson. I will not be using it again. Neither will I waste my time with you.

        Why do you lie and continually needle others? From some of your more lucid comments, it’s clear you have far more to offer than that. You routinely abuse the anonymity we are afforded here to act in an irrational manner.

    • eubykdisop says:

      Vince:

      Now, as promised, I will shred the political comments which you did actually make in this thread as you attempted to slip in pure Liberal propaganda.

      Vince wrote: “I parted company with Brewer on the Medicaid Expansion, but the state Treasure’s race is a different ball game. I’m strongly pro-life, but that is not a defining issue for me if the office has no involvement in life issues.”

      Vince’s comment is a classic example of the Liberal tactic of “false argument”. What’s false about it? What’s false about is that Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion is NOT about health care at all! It’s about $$$ money! It’s about state money. Your money and my money. Taxpayer money! As state treasurer, Randy Pullen would be in charge of our money, managing the state budget and investments. So Pullen’s position on Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion could not be more relevant to his desire to serve as treasurer!

      What, precisely, did Pullen say?

      “Former GOP Chair Randy Pullen: Follow the Governor’s Lead”

      “We now are presented with a similar situation with AHCCCS. Republican leadership needs to step forward and make another smart choice – follow the Governor’s lead. She’s been proven right before!”

      “Sincerely,
      Randy Pullen”

      http://www.restoringarizona.com/article/a-letter-from-randy-pullen

      What was “the Governor’s lead” which Pullen urged the Republican leadership to follow?

      1 – Brewer levied a TAX on Arizonans to pay for the implementation of her Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

      2 – Under the provisions of Prop 108, which passed with 71.87% of the vote, a 2/3 majority in both chambers of the legislature is required to levy a tax. Brewer couldn’t get enough Republicans to reach 2/3 so she called her tax an “assessment”, trying to exploit what appears to her to be a “loophole” in the provisions of Prop 108. Sound familiar? This is right out of the Obama play book but SCOTUS found the provisions of Obamacare to, in fact, be a TAX!

      3 – By exploiting the theoretical “assessment” loophole, the Governor’s plan allows the Director of AHCCCS unchecked authority to set the tax hospitals will pay in order to receive federal matching funds. In other words – authority that constitutionally is in the hands of elected, accountable legislators will be given to a political appointee who would set the tax rate on hospitals going forward.

      THIS is “the Governor’s lead” which Randy Pullen urged the Republican leadership to follow AND it is ALL about… $$$ MONEY!

      So Pullen supported Brewer’s tax, her implementation of that tax by calling it an “assessment” and Pullen supported removing taxing authority from the legislature and putting it into the hands of a political appointee in the executive branch of state government.

      So don’t try to tell us, Vince, that Pullen’s support for Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion was about health care issues and NOT about fiscal issues! It is all about $$$ money and I don’t want someone who is willing to back Brewer’s tax ripoff sitting in the treasurer’s office!

    • Vince says:

      Thanks for the clarification, ZOO. My mistake.

      Yes, it does appear that the intent to dominate drove “Westnash” and at least one other from the comment section. It becomes a unpalatable chore to deal with personal attacks rather than engage in dialogue on the issues. Glad to know you’re not easily cowed into submission!! I suspected as much.

      Euby often has a lot to offer, but you can’t part company an iota or the insults and wild rants take over. Reminds me of Robert Louis Stevenson’s Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

      Happy Thanksgiving!

      • ZOO says:

        Happy Thanksgiving Vince!

      • eubykdisop says:

        Bwa, ha, ha, ha, ha! In classic Liberal form, hide out behind pseudo psychoanalysis rather than attempt to defend your Liberal political positions! I challenge you AGAIN ZOO to defend and debate your political positions. Here’s what you have to defend!

        1 – Minimizing the importance of Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

        “Some conservative pundits are touting 2014 and 2016 will have to be the time to “get 60% of what you want.” I hate that forecast, but in this particular race I’ll accept it. In my situation, Obrewercare expansion is not the end of the world. There are burning issues that usurp it.” – ZOO

        “I don’t recall ever coming here to rant about the Medicaid expansion because as I honestly said, I just don’t see it as an earthshaking issue when then are much more crushing/destructive issues at hand.” – ZOO

        2 – Summarizing ALL of the points made in FAVOR of Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion from an article by Randy Pullen.

        “ZOO says:
        November 7, 2013 at 9:19 pm”

        “RECAP OF PULLEN EXPANSION ASSESMENT”

        “1) In 2000, voter-passed Prop 204 mandates AHCCCS–cover all adults up to 100% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL)”

        “2) Court allowed reduction during recession, state now has surplus”

        “3) Trigger PROP 204 lawsuit if 100% FPL not restored”

        “4) Loss of Federal matching funds if 100% FPL not restored”

        “5) Prop 200 funding as passed – a)tobacco tax b)tobacco companies settlement c)state general fund”

        “6) Provider assessment (hospitals) covers cost to 100% FPL, expansion to 138% FPL, and state general fund contribution mandated by Prop 204″

        “7) Assessment cannot be passed back to patients, or non-AHCCCS privately-insured policyholders”

        “8) Federal subsidy for under 100% FPL restricted to legal aliens, not citizens”

        “9) If not restored to 100% FPL, cost of uncompensated care to childless adult citizens responsibility of hospitals”

        “10) Hospitals report 81% increase in these costs over the last 6-months”

        “11) Without restoration 60,000 will be dropped from AHCCCS next year-increasing uncompensated care to hospitals–rural hospitals worse–financial distress–result in closings”

        “12) Without restoration, Arizona employers will be subject to $45 Million to $60 million in increased taxes under Obamacare “shared responsibility”–expansion stops tax increase”

        “13) AHCCCS/Medicaid will remain, even if Obamacare repealed”

        “14) Higher taxes to AZ taxpayers whether Medicaid expanded or not–due to government expansion to 138% FPL”

        “15) Government expansion to 138% FPL–participation will lower cost to state”

        “16) If government pulls funding–reset provision takes expansion back to 100% FPL”

        3 – Claiming that Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion will SAVE Arizona money.

        “The reality here is that the Federal government has expanded the Medicaid program to 138% of FPL (above and separate from Obamacare), and the expansion of AHCCCS addresses that issue – to reduce the bottom line expense to the state under the Federal expansion.” – ZOO

        4 – Claiming that arguments against Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion are based on “what if” scenarios.

        ”The arguments of others you have dropped here appear to be based on “what if?” scenarios, instead of addressing the reality (Federal Medicaid expansion) at hand.” – ZOO

        That, of course, completely ignores these hard, dollars and cents facts:

        “For the first three years, the federal government has promised to cover 100% of the medical costs for the newly eligible Medicaid enrollees, and yet the cost to Arizona’s General Fund for the first year alone would be $154 million. The costs to the state are a result of the fact that the federal reimbursement rate of 100% applies only to the direct medical expenses of the newly eligible enrollees, not the additional administrative costs. Additionally, the 100% reimbursement rate does not apply to those new enrollees who were previously eligible but either did not know it or otherwise failed to enroll.”

        5 – Finding that the ONLY fault with Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion is that it’s a tax rather than objecting to it on the principle that it is “the encroachment of socialism”, as SRAZ so astutely put it.

        6 – Still being willing to support Randy Pullen despite his propaganda piece backing Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

        Now, ZOO, explain to SRAZ readers how your actions and positions, as accurately and factually presented above, constitute Conservatism rather than Liberalism. Let’s discuss and debate your actions, statements and positions in terms of a Liberal versus Conservative paradigm.

        Come on, step up to the plate, ZOO and defend your political positions! This is, after all, a political blog and not your therapist’s couch, LOL!

      • eubykdisop says:

        As for you, Vince, you seem to have missed my challenge to your political position, even though I posted it twice, so I’ll post it for you again. Maybe you’ll see it this time… or maybe you are trying to avoid defending a political position which can’t be defended!

        Vince:

        Now, as promised, I will shred the political comments which you did actually make in this thread as you attempted to slip in pure Liberal propaganda.

        Vince wrote: “I parted company with Brewer on the Medicaid Expansion, but the state Treasure’s race is a different ball game. I’m strongly pro-life, but that is not a defining issue for me if the office has no involvement in life issues.”

        Vince’s comment is a classic example of the Liberal tactic of “false argument”. What’s false about it? What’s false about is that Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion is NOT about health care at all! It’s about $$$ money! It’s about state money. Your money and my money. Taxpayer money! As state treasurer, Randy Pullen would be in charge of our money, managing the state budget and investments. So Pullen’s position on Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion could not be more relevant to his desire to serve as treasurer!

        What, precisely, did Pullen say?

        “Former GOP Chair Randy Pullen: Follow the Governor’s Lead”

        “We now are presented with a similar situation with AHCCCS. Republican leadership needs to step forward and make another smart choice – follow the Governor’s lead. She’s been proven right before!”

        “Sincerely,
        Randy Pullen”

        http://www.restoringarizona.com/article/a-letter-from-randy-pullen

        What was “the Governor’s lead” which Pullen urged the Republican leadership to follow?

        1 – Brewer levied a TAX on Arizonans to pay for the implementation of her Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

        2 – Under the provisions of Prop 108, which passed with 71.87% of the vote, a 2/3 majority in both chambers of the legislature is required to levy a tax. Brewer couldn’t get enough Republicans to reach 2/3 so she called her tax an “assessment”, trying to exploit what appears to her to be a “loophole” in the provisions of Prop 108. Sound familiar? This is right out of the Obama play book but SCOTUS found the provisions of Obamacare to, in fact, be a TAX!

        3 – By exploiting the theoretical “assessment” loophole, the Governor’s plan allows the Director of AHCCCS unchecked authority to set the tax hospitals will pay in order to receive federal matching funds. In other words – authority that constitutionally is in the hands of elected, accountable legislators will be given to a political appointee who would set the tax rate on hospitals going forward.

        THIS is “the Governor’s lead” which Randy Pullen urged the Republican leadership to follow AND it is ALL about… $$$ MONEY!

        So Pullen supported Brewer’s tax, her implementation of that tax by calling it an “assessment” and Pullen supported removing taxing authority from the legislature and putting it into the hands of a political appointee in the executive branch of state government.

        So don’t try to tell us, Vince, that Pullen’s support for Brewer’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion was about health care issues and NOT about fiscal issues! It is all about $$$ money and I don’t want someone who is willing to back Brewer’s tax ripoff sitting in the treasurer’s office!

        May both of you have the Thanksgiving which you deserve.

  4. Rambling Rose says:

    What does Obama find to “respect” in boorish behavior and outrageous demands from those who have entered the US in violation of the law? I am certainly no fan of this president, but it would never occur to me to disrupt his speech. I respect the office of the presidency and besides that, I have been raised with manners. These people have no decency and by their actions show they have no respect for our country and its heritage. They want all we the taxpayers have to offer and Obama wants to increase the Democrat base and render the Republican party impotent. That ANY Republicans go along with this plan of self destruction is beyond any rational thinking. I will not vote for any pro-amnesty Republican. Our US citizenship is a glorious gift that is available to those who legally apply, not demand.

  5. Kathy says:

    Pro-Amnesty heckler – NOT, a plant by the Obama team. Everything this man does is planned, orchestrated, for effect and propaganda. Obama has and will continue to break the law, shred the Constitution and no one in the Govt is doing anything to stop him. Holder violates the law as well – thanks for the confirmation Kyl and McCain, a couple who a responsible for the destruction of this Country!

    • Kimball says:

      It didn’t occur to me until I read your comment, Kathy, but of course you’re right in your assessment of this scenario. The “heckler” was very well positioned for maximum impact. Thanks for making me rethink this. It’s very much like the fake fainting woman standing beside Obama during one of his Obamacare speeches recently.

      • Kathy says:

        Exactly! Just like in the Wizard of OZ – don’t look at the man behind the curtain. Sadly the Republican so-called leadership, don’t get and continue to facilitate this regime.

  6. Kathy says:

    Update per National Review – heckler was White House guest Ju Hong, graduate from Berkley. Yep an Obama plant, Obama cronies lie again.

  7. Seeing Red AZ says:

    UPDATE:

    On Wednesday, Nov. 27, after a series of repetitive and haranguing comments from “eubykdisop” and in our subsequent appeal for civility, we responded “there is no intention of banning you from this comment forum.”

    Unfortunately the tirades continued, most recently culminating with blatant falsehoods and attacks. For the first time since the inception of Seeing Red AZ in June 2007, we have indeed blocked a commenter. The comment section is a place for dialogue and sometimes spirited interaction, not muggings.

    We left the lengthy and repeated comments up on this post, (http://seeingredaz.wordpress.com/2013/11/26/bho-to-brassy-pro-amnesty-heckler-if-i-could-bypass-congress-i-would/)
    although removing the personal attacks which appeared on a follow-up post, to illustrate the ongoing problem that brought about this decision.

    On this one post alone, there were more than a dozen, often repetitive, comments from this single person.

    • PV PC says:

      Great news! This character was bent on destroying this blog. I hope we’ve seen the last of these repetitive rants. I also noticed the comments were posted into the early morning hours, indicating someone who couldn’t sleep, was on meds, or obsessed. Maybe all three?

      • Arizona Conservative Guy says:

        Ditto! Eradicating this angry and obsessive eubykdisop is the best news SRAZ could impart. Bravo for finally growing a spine, SR!! The hateful spew coming from this guy was cringe worthy.

    • Vince says:

      Just found this UPDATE and commend Seeing Red for taking this correct position. It was also wise to leave all of the comment reposts up on this thread, showing how out of control this eubykdisop character actually is. He/she was damaging to this site and removing the uncontrolled commenter will benefit us all. We have a right to disagree without continually being hammered for stating a perspective that this person opposes.

  8. Observer says:

    It was long past time for “euby” to be shown the door. Whoever that character is, it’s clear the objective was take over this site. When that was impossible, the aim was to take it down. It will be a pleasure to once again read posts without the manic and raging egocentric hyperbole. Everyone who disagrees with eubykdisop is a liberal “troll.” What an engaging persona. NOT.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 338 other followers