AZ Republic’s hit pieces: Have you noticed a pattern?

March 4, 2014

Fishy_Arizona_Republic

Conservatives repeatedly slammed, mischaracterized

It’s no secret the Arizona Republic is a leftward-lurching, agendized newspaper.  Most often the struggling daily concentrates its energies on promoting legalization of America’s illegal invaders and normalizing homosexuality. But superseding all else is its cause célèbre — advancing the Democrat party and its candidates.  It is via that method, after all, that the other issues move forward.

A couple of weeks ago a multi-page, fabricated exposé of Republican political consultant Sean Noble was Page One material. If disinterested readers skipped past it, they saw all that was needed to get the daily’s nefarious point across.  Accompanying his mega-size photo was the sinister title, “The Dark Money Man: Sean Noble, Koch cash and Politics.” 

Suddenly Noble transmogrified into evil personified. Despite the Republic’s usage of a ProPublica cut and paste smear passing as a “report”— actually containing nothing of substance, Noble didn’t  appear less than his name implies. What was missing was such disclosure from the Republic and the omission that ProPublica is a recipient of a massive funding stream from billionaire leftist George Soros with tentacles to radical Media Matters. Yet ProPublica innocently calls itself “an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest.”

Hogwash.

On Sunday it was Cathi Herrod’s turn to be eviscerated. Herrod is the president of the conservative Center for Arizona Policy which promotes and defends the foundational values of life, marriage, family, and religious liberty. She is also an effective lobbyist for those issues. That makes her ripe for a barrage of attacks by the daily. Her above the fold, Page One portrayal was titled, “A Political Force Behind the Scenes; Activist wields influence on Ariz. Laws.”

Let’s hope so.

The newspaper is now shining its high beam distortion campaign on state Rep. John Kavanagh, (LD-8).The conservative lawmaker has been the subject of articles, columns and even an editorial which actually employed the word “Yuck” throughout — regarding his participation in a roast of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Kavanagh’s participation — he was one of several “roasters” —  at the  private dinner wrapping up the Western Conservative Conference in Phoenix, is obviously the lynchpin.  The newspaper despises Arpaio. A banquet room full of his friends and admirers poking fun at him, would bring on teeth gnashing at the Republic. So now the well respected John Kavanagh is being savaged.

The leftist newspaper became emboldened after contributing to the bogus upheaval playing out in tandem with suspect redistricting that resulted in Russell Pearce’s loss of his district seat and the senate presidency. He was defeated by a one-termer, but that was of no consequence to the Republic.  They simply wanted Pearce, the architect of SB 1070, out.

Attorney General Tom Horne is now in the daily’s sights. While Superintendent of Public Instruction, he successfully fought the racist and anti-American MAS program in Tucson Unified School District. As Attorney General he has been a standout, but not one of their choosing. Conservative Horne urged the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse a Ninth Circuit ruling, arguing that Arizona has a right to deny Medicaid funding to abortion providers. Planned Parenthood is scheduled to receive more than $1.5 billion in Medicaid subsidies

What do Noble, Herrod, Arpaio, Kavanagh, Pearce and Horne all have in common? They are independent thinking, conservative Republicans, who don’t take their marching orders from the editorial board of the dying newspaper or the squishy party establishment elites, earning them attacks from the daily — which wants to see all of the top offices led by Democrats. When they endorse a Republican it will be a RINO or the weakest candidate, positioning the Democrat to win the general.

This isn’t rocket science.


SB 1062 Veto: Brewer’s finger to the wind leadership

February 26, 2014

Caving to pressure exerted by loud special interest groups and mass demonstrations, Gov. Jan Brewer has exhibited her cowardly leadership skills by vetoing SB 1062, the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act.”

Brewer’s letter to Senate President Andy Biggs justifying her veto can be read here.

Though nearly a dozen prominent law professors from prestigious schools across the United States have urged Brewer to take a deeper look at a bill that has been “egregiously misrepresented by many of its critics,” she has bowed to threats from  a more vocal minority — homosexual activists and the leftwing media who have relentlessly pressed for a veto.

Read the letter signed by eleven legal scholars — Democrats and Republicanshere.

“As these legal scholars rightly point out, the misrepresentations about the bill have been egregious,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Douglas Napier. (Listen to his sound bite.) “It has nothing to do with refusing someone a sandwich. It has everything to do with making Arizona a safe place for people to freely live out their faith. The falsehoods need to be exposed for what they are.”


SB 1062 Discrimination? The left has a way with words

February 25, 2014

These past few days we in Arizona have been hearing a lot about discriminationfrom a single perspective. Just as SB 1070 spitefully transmogrified into the “show me your papers” lawSB 1062 is now gaining traction among liberals as the “OK-to-discriminate” bill. The fact that neither designation is factual means little to those spewing the falsehoods.

The issue to ponder as this bill has taken on a life of its own — fed by a frenzied media and fervent homosexual rights proponents — is who is actually oppressed? There is no question religion in under attack in America.

It’s important to understand that SB 1062 simply strengthens protections in Arizona law to defend against religious discrimination toward people of faith. Our country was founded upon the First Amendment and our right to freely exercise our religious beliefs. 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. — The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

The Free Exercise clause prohibits the government from interfering with a person’s practice of their religion. The significance of the Free Exercise of Religion Clause is its affirmation of the value of religion in American culture.

Organized pressure is mounting against the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which is now on Gov. Jan Brewer’s desk. Clamoring demonstrators, armed with signs and loud voices, have parked themselves at the state capitol, playing for the willing media, while conservative supporters of the bill are at work.

Absurdities rule the day. Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake have, of course, weighed in, imploring a veto. Bowing to pressure, state legislators who voted for the bill are peeling away and opportunistic gubernatorial candidates are preening to the cameras. Threats of relocating the 2015 Super Bowl are stirred into the bawdy brew by a previously unheard of Democrat governor from Delaware. The Drudge Report headlines with a photo of Arizona Gov. Brewer topping SHOWDOWN IN AZ.

Read The Christian Post’s in-depth analysis of the issue. Then sit back and wait for Brewer’s veto pen to scratch across SB 1062 — exactly  as she’s been advised to do by her left-leaning McAdvisors. 


SB 1062: Misinformation campaign in full swing

February 24, 2014

Here we go again

It’s no surprise that the Arizona Republic has embraced its usual technique of bold headlines, multi-page contrivances posing as news reports, and zealously oversized photos on the issue of SB 1062  — employing the irresponsible tactics the liberal newspaper blatantly uses to promote its myopic dual agenda. Columnists and editorialists have donned their jackboots to facilitate marching in lockstep with the attack strategy — irrespective of the facts

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act modifies the definition of exercise of religion and allows a person to assert a free exercise claim or defense in a judicial proceeding regardless of whether the government is a party to the proceeding. Read the legislative fact sheet here.

After reading the bill, it becomes clear that the effort to demonize people of faith is what the left is hard at work to accomplish.

The Center for Arizona Policy has done a masterful job of explaining all that is entailed in this legislation that strengthens protections in Arizona law to defend against religious discrimination. Included is a fact sheet, summary, background and talking points.

The bill is on Gov. Jan Brewer’s desk and action is expected early this week. Call her office today and let your voice be heard in support of religious liberty. This administrative staff list omits the names of her behind-the-scenes key advisors such as liberal extremist Grant Woods (formerly John McCain’s congressional chief of staff) and political strategist Chuck Coughlin (another McCain crony who also lobbied for Woods during his 1990′s stint as Attorney General) — both of whom have her ear. In this USA Today video, Brewer gives a clue to the advice she is receiving as she calls the billvery controversial.”

Faith-based conservatives see this bill not in the framework of “controversy,” but as an issue of religious liberty. Opponents have hijacked this discussion via deceit and reckless reporting. 

Grant Woods was quoted as saying, “Hopefully, from my perspective, she’ll see this will put Arizona in a national negative light, and it shows Arizona is really going in the opposite direction on important issues at a time when the country seems to be moving forward.” Woods, who frequently talks with Brewer about legislation and other matters, will urge her to not sign SB 1062.

Legal experts Joseph La Rue and Kerri Kupec with the Scottsdale-based Alliance Defending Freedom wrote this fact-based ‘Our Turn’ column demonstrating the need for this legislation by citing a disturbing case in New Mexico that, under current law, could be replicated in Arizona. Take time to read it.


Maricopa County GOP ordered out of Dodge

February 16, 2014

Have the censures had repercussions?

MCRC_forced_out_of_headquarters

Click letter to enlarge.


New poll: McCain’s 2016 reelection prospects dim

February 14, 2014

Poll shows dismal outlook for McCain’s reelection in 2016

It’s no secret many Arizona Republicans hold John McCain in disdain. He has been formally censured by elected GOP precinct committeemen at district meetings across the state, in Maricopa, Apache, Cochise, Gila, Mohave and Santa Cruz counties

McCain was further humiliated in the national press as elected state committeemen assembled at the annual Statutory Meeting of the State Committee of the Arizona Republican Party and overwhelmingly voted to censure him. Two weeks earlier, Maricopa County Republican elected precinct committeemen also voted to censure John McCainThat resolution, expressing deep dissatisfaction with Arizona’s senior senator, passed overwhelmingly — by a vote of 1,150 to 351.

Now, substantiating the votes against him by intra-Republican Party elected activists, is this latest Rocky Mountain Poll, of over 700 interviewees, which indicate McCain would likely face a tough race if he were to run for reelection in 2016.

McCain’s numbers in the Behavior Research Center’s Rocky Mountain poll showed his job approval at a dismal 37% rating of ‘Excellent/Good.’  His ‘Fair/Poor/Very Poor’ rating was a stunning 56%.

Junior Sen. Jeff Flake, McCain’s obedient underling, fares not much better among those surveyed. His inability to connect with more knowledgeable voters  — those over 35 — poses a hefty problem. Fifty-six (56) percent of male voters in that category cast Flake’s performance as “fair to very poor.’

About 20 percent of those surveyed rated Flake’s performance “good,” up from a bottom-dragging 17 percent last summer. In fact, last April Flake was found to be the nation’s most unpopular senator by a Public Policy Poll —  grabbing the unenviable label from Mitch McConnell. (Watch Senate Conservatives Fund video under link.)

 


Sex trumps sports: Napolitano’s pride in gay athletes

February 9, 2014

As outstanding Americans athletes compete with others from around the globe in the Winter Olympics, Janet Napolitano turns her focus to homosexuality.

What a surprise!

Obama appointed uber-liberal Napolitano, his one-time Homeland INsecurity chieftain, to lead the U.S. Olympic delegation to Sochi, Russia.

The inclusion of three openly gay previous Olympic medalists in the U.S. delegation is regarded as a symbolic protest against Russia’s recent law banning recruitment “propaganda” aimed at minors. For the first time since 2000, the U.S. delegation to an Olympics competition will not include a president, vice president or first lady.

In a hard-hitting speech prior to the opening ceremonies, International Olympic Committee President Thomas Bach accused “world leaders” of using the Sochi Olympics as a political platform “on the backs of the athletes,” and making an “ostentatious gesture” serving their own agendas. “Have the courage to address your disagreements in a peaceful direct political dialogue and not on the backs of the athletes,” Bach challenged.

Napolitano, Arizona’s former governor, now president of the University of California system, received glowing coverage for her recent endorsement of same sex marriage in On Top, a “gay” publication — a position on which she claims to have “evolved,” sayingthe arc of history has clearly arrived.”

If you’re interested in the competition instead of the agenda, the sporting events are live streamed here.


Democrat AZ Rep wants felons to get automatic vote

February 7, 2014

State Rep. Martin J. Quezada, has a nifty new scheme for increasing the number of Democrat voters. The Avondale Democrat has sponsored HB 2132, which would automatically restore the right to vote to released prisoners who have been convicted of two or more felonies.

Quezada has more than a passing interest in the controversial topic. He’s an immigration and criminal defense lawyer whose practice also includes election law.  Like Barack Obama, he refers to himself as a “community activist.”

Current law (Title 13, Chapter 9) allows restoration of voting rights for first-time felons after completing probation and paying fines and restitution. Quezada’s bill intends to eliminate those pesky provisions, since he says the fines are an impediment to exercising good citizenship by voting.

Most Arizonans would likely agree that “good citizenship” is a commodity in short supply with those who have been convicted of numerous felonies — but that doesn‘t deter supporters of increasing the Democrat voter base.

Cronkite News, the left-leaning ASU Journalism School student team that fills in where the Arizona Republic’s dwindling number of actual reporters once  toiled, quotes the left-agendized Sentencing Project, a Washington, D.C.-based group that advocates for prison and sentencing reform. According to its estimates 200,000 felons in Arizona remain ineligible to voteThat’s enough to make any Democrat salivate.

The article featured obligatory interviews with the ACLU executive director who agrees voting rights should be automatically restored, and Donna Leone Hamm, founder of Middle Ground Prison Reform, who also sees voting as a “bridge for felons to rejoin society.”

She should know. Her husband, James Hamm, then a drug dealer, shot two men in the back of the head at point-blank range during a robbery in 1974. After his early release, he had his rights restored in 2001 and registered to vote the same day. He also took up a seat at the ASU Law School where he was admitted as a law student but not allowed to practice based on grounds of moral turpitude.

Arizona’s law-abiding citizens have every reason to regard the restoration of voting rights as a privilege — to be earned by fulfilling obligations outlined in state law.  HB 2132 should find its place in the round file.


Elections? Indecisive Vernon Parker re-emerges

February 6, 2014

Perennial candidate Vernon Parker is engaged in his cyclical political vacillation once again. As a 2014 candidate for Congress he filed for the U.S. House in CD 9 with the Federal Election Commission. Now the 54-year-old Parker, a former appointed mayor of Paradise Valley, has abruptly decided to ditch the congressional race and cast his lot as a candidate for the Arizona Corporation Commission.

As baseball icon Yogi Berra is reputed to have said, “It’s déjà vu all over again.”

McCain supporter Parker’s been all over the political map before — minus any election feathers in his cap to show for his troubles. In 2010 after a strenuous weeklong campaign for governor, he had a change of heart and decided to mount a congressional race in what was then CD 3, finishing fourth. The easily distracted Parker even gave brief consideration to running for chairman of the Arizona Republican Party, another gig that never came to fruition. In Nov. 2012 Parker lost the CD 9 race to radical liberal Kyrsten Sinema.

If there is a next time, Parker should pick a race and stay with it to the bitter end. The qualities of stick-to-itiveness and tenacity play better with voters than habitual slipperiness and indecision.


Brnovich’s campaign ads violate code of conduct

February 5, 2014

Mark Brnovich is a candidate for Attorney General, recruited by McCain allies to challenge a conservative incumbent. Brnovich’s wife, Susan, is a Maricopa County Superior Court judge, appointed by Gov. Janet Napolitano in 2009.  Although liberal Napolitano reserved her appointments for kindred spirits, Judge Brnovich’s problem has to do with ethical violations rather than her associations. Susan M. Skibba Brnovich has appeared in her husband’s political commercials (one such video is linked here), in which she is identified as a former prosecutor. That’s true. However as a judge, she is prohibited from such activities. She’s been on the bench long enough to have at least a passing knowledge of the Canons of Ethics. Her husband Mark, a candidate for the state’s top law enforcement post, who purports himself to be a devoted family man, should not have encouraged his wife to engage in such a violation.

The Arizona Code of Judicial Conduct is very clear in citing which political activities judges are permitted to engage in (Page 35).

CANON 4

A  JUDGE OR CANDIDATE FOR JUDICIAL OFFICE SHALL NOT ENGAGE IN POLITICAL OR CAMPAIGN ACTIVITY THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY, OR IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDICIARY.

RULE 4.1. Political and Campaign Activities of Judges and Judicial Candidates in General

(A) A judge or a judicial candidate shall not do any of the following:

(1) act as a leader in, or hold an office in, a political organization;

(2) make speeches on behalf of a political organization or another candidate for public office;

(3) publicly endorse or oppose another candidate for any public office;

(4) solicit funds for or pay an assessment to a political organization or candidate, make contributions to any candidate or political organization in excess of the amounts permitted by law, or make total contributions in excess of fifty percent of the cumulative total permitted by law. See, e.g., A.R.S. § 16-905.

(5) actively take part in any political campaign other than his or her own campaign for election, reelection or retention in office;

(6) personally solicit or accept campaign contributions other than through a campaign committee authorized by Rule 4.4;

(7) use or permit the use of campaign contributions for the private benefit of the judge, the candidate, or others, except as provided by law;

(8) use court staff, facilities, or other court resources in a campaign for judicial office;

(9) make any statement that would reasonably be expected to affect the outcome or impair the fairness of a matter pending or impending in any court; or

(10) in connection with cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the court, make pledges, promises, or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial performance of the adjudicative duties of judicial office.

Comment 7 (page 36) is specific regarding a family member’s political activity or campaign for public office.

7. Although members of the families of judges and judicial candidates are free to engage in their own political activity, including running for public office, there is no “family exception” to the prohibition in paragraph (A)(3) against a judge or candidate publicly endorsing candidates for public office. A judge or judicial candidate must not become involved in, or publicly associated with, a family member’s political activity or campaign for public office. To avoid public misunderstanding, judges and judicial candidates should take and should urge members of their families to take reasonable steps to avoid any implication that the judge or judicial candidate endorses any family member’s candidacy or other political activity.

It hasn’t escaped the notice of political watchers that Brnovich’s first quarter filings show his donations far below what would be expected from one recruited by establishment elites. It was filed in the late hours of the Jan. 31, deadline, no doubt hoping it might escape notice. He dropped $2,000 of the weak total into his own campaign coffers, and nearly $10,000 was donated by his in-laws, the Skibba family. In actual donations from supporters, many state legislative district candidates have far exceeded Brnovich’s statewide fundraising.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 288 other followers