The Russell Pearce show, Arizona’s most reliable conservative radio talk show, hosts Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne.
If you’re not watching “America’s Forum,” you’re not fully informed
Be sure to log on to “America’s Forum” on newsmaxtv.com and watch the streaming video as Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio joins J.D. Hayworth.
Tuesday, April 1, at 9:00 am (AZ Time).
Other states seek repeal as anti-Fed Ed movement takes hold
Less than four years after Indiana became an early adopter of the national Common Core education standards, Gov. Mike Pence signed legislation Monday making Indiana the first state to opt out of the controversial school guidelines, according to this report in the Indianapolis Star.
Republican Sen. Scott Schneider, the bill’s author said, “This voids Common Core, and we are starting the process of writing new standards. Eternal vigilance of parents is still needed, and I encourage you to do so.”
“SB 91 is a strong statement that we are moving forward, moving away from Common Core, protecting Indiana sovereignty and student data,” said Schneider.
Even liberal New York has lost confidence in the scheme.
Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Kentucky —- the first state to adopt Common Core before the “standards” were even publicly released —- all have measures moving through their state legislators to at least halt, if not completely abolish the so-called standards.
But in Arizona the deception continues, as John Huppenthal, Arizona’s Superintendent of Public Instruction has changed the highly charged name of his Obama-influenced vision for Arizona classrooms from “Common Core” to “Arizona College and Career Ready Standards” —- in the mistaken belief we won’t notice.
Fortunately, we have a choice. Diane Douglas is the undisputed conservative running for state Superintendent of Public Instruction. Check out the key words across the top of her website. They’re sure to brighten your day.
Step up to assist the next generation and “Life of the Party”
We take great pleasure in sharing the news of an outstanding dinner event being hosted by the Teenage Republicans of Arizona (TARS). These terrific conservative teens can use our help.
The group’s mission statement says it all: “The purpose of this organization is to encourage young people to discuss, analyze and participate in the political process while fostering and encouraging the ideals of the Republican Party.”
The banquet will be held at the Scottsdale Plaza Resort, 7200 N. Scottsdale Rd., Scottsdale 85253. (Map)
Date: Saturday, April 5, 2014
Time: 6:15 pm
Early bird registration: $55 per person, $100 per couple or $550 per table.
Regular pricing: $65 per person, $115 per couple and $650 per table.
Speakers include AZ GOP Chairman Robert Graham, Constitutional expert Shane Krauser, and nationally syndicated columnist Katie Pavlich.
RSVP: Chairman Lilia Dashevsky: 602-918-3411.
Republican elected officials, Precinct Committeemen, District Chairs, GOP officers and those who care about the future of the Republican Party should all step up and ensure the success of this event.
Media cover-up of serious voter fraud
Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne has announced that Arizona has won a significant victory in the legal battle to require voters to provide evidence of U.S. citizenship as mandated by Arizona law.
Arizona joined Kansas in a federal lawsuit against the Federal Election Assistance Commission, which had denied requests by both states to vary the federal election registration form to include proof of citizenship. The court ruled Wednesday that the Election Assistance Commission exceeded its authority in denying those requests, and ordered the Commission to help Arizona and Kansas enforce their voter identification laws.
Attorney General Tom Horne personally argued this case before the United States Supreme Court (Transcript here). The language of that Supreme Court case dictated Wednesday’s result in the District Court.
“There’s been a media cover-up of the seriousness of voter fraud in Arizona. In an earlier trial, a Federal District Judge in Arizona found that voter fraud is a serious problem in Arizona. This decision is an important victory for the people of Arizona against the Obama Administration, assuring that only Arizona residents and not illegals, vote in Arizona elections,” Attorney General Horne said.
U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren in Wichita ruled that the commission has no legal authority to deny requests from Kansas and Arizona to add state-specific instructions to a national voter registration form. Melgren ordered the commission to immediately modify a national voter registration form to add special instructions for Arizona and Kansas residents about their states’ proof-of-citizenship requirements.
Both states require new voters to provide a birth certificate, passport or other documentation to prove their U.S. citizenship to election officials. The federal registration form requires only that prospective voters sign a statement declaring they are citizens.
This ruing has paved the way for all states to enact much needed proof-of-citizenship requirements, which protect ballot integrity.
Prop. 200, the “Arizona Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act,” passed in 2004 by a vote of 1,041,741 – 830,467.
Seeing Red AZ has addressed this serious problem previously:
Illegals voting in AZ? Never happens. Move along Nov. 20, 2013
AZ AG Horne argues Voting Rights Act to SCOTUS March 18. 2013
U.S. Supreme Court to hear AZ Voter ID case Oct. 23, 2012
Voter fraud exposé? Don’t look to AZ República Aug. 25, 2012
AZ AG Tom Horne: Protecting ballot integrity June 8, 2011
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.”
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.
Does “trustworthiness” actually exist in DC?
There’s no denying the brilliant columnist Thomas Sowell has a way with words. He proves it once again with this cogent commentary, “Republicans to the Rescue?”
His take on the issue of children here “through no fault of their own,” those “living in the shadows,” and “comprehensive immigration reform,” in the most politically incorrect but completely honest terms, is potent.
Do yourself a favor and read the unvarnished truth as only Dr. Sowell can deliver it.
In light of Speaker John Boehner’s recent abrupt switch on pushing amnesty legislation, suddenly declaring he now has reservations regarding Obama’s trustworthiness, it’s refreshing to realize that conservatives also have reservations — about Boehner and his band of GOP amnesty-devotees — who are poised to increase the ranks of the Democrat Party as they gut and neuter the Republican Party, the very brand they ran under. The only difference now is that Boehner and his cohorts are hearing from skittish Republican House members who will be standing for midterm elections this year. Watch for this amnesty disaster to return within short order after the ballots are counted
On the heels of the overwhelming 1,150 – 351 vote to censure John McCain passed at the annual mandatory Maricopa County Republican meeting recently, and the similar rebuke of Lindsey Graham in South Carolina — comes this attention-piquing article on the need to change the “incentive structure” in Washington.
Matthew Boyle covers the South Carolina Tea Party Convention, zeroing in on remarks by U.S. Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-OK) who said foundational changes to D.C. politics will be needed to achieve a conservative agenda.
“We must change the incentive structure in Washington,” he told roughly 500 attendees.
“You’ve got collusion between Republicans and Democrats in Washington, D.C. They’re coming together and they’re making deals. You guys have probably heard of the Ryan-Murray budget deal? It does nothing to stop the $6.4 trillion that will be added to the debt over the next 10 years. Nothing. But everybody wants you to come in and vote for it,” he told the enthusiastic crowd.
Take time to read the rest of this post, which addresses the aggressive use of “outside group” vote scorecards to punish wayward Republicans. He mentions Heritage Action, which scores Jeff Flake a low 58% (just a bit above his McMentor, faltering at 43%) the Club for Growth, and the Senate Conservatives Fund.
“There’s nothing that politicians like less than these scorecards,” Bridenstine said. “Why? Because they’re being exposed.”
Although we agree with Rep. Bridenstine’s conclusions, we part company on the issue of Club for Growth, which brutalized principled conservative Arizona businessman Wil Cardon as he challenged establishment fav, then-Rep. Jeff Flake in a 2012 senate match-up. NumbersUSA also has an Immigration Report Card, rating each state’s delegation on this critical issue. We’ve got Arizona’s scores up for you. Not a single Arizona Republican congressman rates an “A.”
The Senate Conservatives Fund, a former 2012 Flake high dollar supporter, did an about-face, as it ran ads criticizing GOP lawmakers who opposed using the appropriations process to cut funding for Obamacare. Flake was hammered in the worst possible way — by being compared to McCain. (Watch the linked ad.)
Practiced liar Jeff Flake is definitely losing popularity, dragging bottom with a 30% approval rating as he emulates John McCain. In a front page assessment of Jeff Flake’s first year in the U.S. Senate, the Arizona Republic was forced to acknowledge that Arizona’s junior senator’s “moderate path over the past 12 months, has enraged his supporters and surprised his critics but also left him in the middle of an uncomfortable crossfire between the right and the left.”
Mark this as a rare occasion we can’t take issue with the daily newspaper.
Oafish O’Connor orders obedience or ouster
Disputes over the propriety of God being removed from Invocations at Legislative District 28 meetings was first reported in this post in early December. The matter has now escalated, with a petty letter sent by Chairman Scott O’Connor to Precinct Committeeman Rob Haney. A popular former two-term Maricopa County Republican Chairman, Haney also previously served as the district’s chairman.
Scott O’Connor’s January 8, 2014 threatening letter to Haney:
I appreciate your right to disagree, and I gave you plenty of opportunities to do so last night.
However, your tendency to interrupt and play games with the chair and the agenda is a pattern that must end. If you do it again, you will be removed.
Adding vocal God Bless and Amens during a moment of silence clearly vocalized your opposition to the suspension of formal prayer at the meeting, but not in a respectful way or time. Do it again and you will be removed.
Personally, I don’t really care if we have the prayers or not, but the executive committee and I are respecting the wishes of those who are offended by the practice.
I will respect you when you start showing some respect. If you want to change a policy, request it formally and it will be considered, but do not disrupt the meeting again with your antics. Maybe you should attend the classes at the Center for Self Governance on how to be more effective in your engagement with political officials.
Scott H. O’Connor
Rob Haney’s January 9, 2014 response to O‘Connor:
I am taking the liberty of publishing our exchange of emails in an open forum because I view removal of the Invocation from our LD 28 meetings at the sole discretion of the executive board as a continuance of the attack on religion in our country. Other districts need to be made aware of how easily they can lose the rights they took for granted through the actions of a few anonymous complaints brought to a receptive executive board. To have a universally accepted, decades long practice within the Republican Party ended by fiat of the executive board without even debate or a vote of the body, is the height of arrogance and is reminiscent of Obama’s executive orders.
I would suggest to other LDs that they take preventative action, possibly through a bylaw addition which states that the Invocation and Pledge cannot be remove from the opening proceedings of a district meeting without a vote of the LD precinct committeemen.
And, although it should not be necessary to tell you in advance of a motion to be offered in the next meeting to rescind the executive board’s edict to do away with the invocation, please add that motion to your agenda.
Now to your other points:
1) I find it disingenuous that after the meeting you took the time to compliment me on adding to the debate, but now you are critical of my doing so.
2) You state that I have a tendency to interrupt and play games with the chair and the agenda and if I do so again, I will be removed. Responsible citizenship requires objections to unilateral dictates. Also, when you began the meeting with an uncalled for ad hominem attack on Russell Pearce, I felt it necessary to call you on it since you had called this unscheduled meeting to discuss the resolutions, not to attack the sponsors of the resolutions. This action was uncalled for and unprofessional. In your call letter you stated that we were going to discuss “no less than 11 resolutions put forth by Russell Pearce.” That statement alone was denigrating and you proceeded to expound upon it at the meeting. To those of us who admire and respect Russell Pearce for his long record of unselfish service to our state and country, the attack was a “red flag,” warranting immediate rebuttal.
3) You state that you do not care if we have the prayer or not but you and the executive committee were respecting the wishes of those who were offended by the practice. You appear to have been biased in favor of removal to begin with or you would have brought the matter before the body of PCs for open discussion and a vote. My guess is that you have offended far more by removing the Invocation without a discussion than were offended by its inclusion.
4) The Preamble to the Republican Platform ends with the sentence, “May God continue to shed his grace on the United States of America.” Do you and the executive committee of LD 28 now place yourselves above the Republican Platform?
5) Your last attack paragraph is too immature to warrant a response.
More from O’Connor:
I chastise you in private, for a legitimate reason, and you go off on a crusade with a list of secret trolls. And you want me to favor your requests? Seriously? You represent everything that is wrong with the Arizona GOP.
So how about sending me your list so that I can defend myself and the LD?
The letter I sent you was shared only with the executive committee, who was involved in the policy discussion. I decided not to call you out during the meeting, as that would have veered off the agenda and caused too much of a distraction. Your other input during the meeting, when you were called on, was as welcome as anyone else’s. It was that input I referred to at the end of the meeting.
Scott H. O’Connor
You want my email roster? Lots of luck.
It has been sent to hundreds of email addresses but I would not post email addresses to be picked up by a junk mail gatherer.
From: Precinct Committeeman Florence Smith
To: Rob Haney
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2014 8:29 PM
Subject: Re: Disruption of LD 28 meetings
This is Florence here.
Thank you for your stand and your letter to Scott. I wrote him also. I am attaching the letters below in case any of it can add to your case.
Part of my first email said:
Both this meeting and the last one were started without prayer. (I wasn’t at the June meeting, since my husband was in the hospital; so I am not sure about that meeting.) I know some people just see it as a formality, but as a Christian I feel we presently need more prayer not less. I have always seen it as a good way to open the meetings asking for God’s guidance. If we make efforts to do things in a way pleasing to God, the results should be better than promoting our own agendas. I sincerely hope that we can have the prayer back in future meetings.
Scott O’Connor replied:
Thanks, Florence. We have several pc’s who have requested we do not offer prayers at the LD meetings since we are doing government work and not religious work, separating the two as per the Constitution. I respect their requests. Several other pc’s have asked, and been upset with my answer. My suggestion is that those who wish to pray do so in silence or before coming to the meeting. This issue has been discussed with our executive committee and we are in agreement on the matter.
On Nov 4, 2013, Florence Smith wrote the following to Scott O‘Connor:
Actually if you read the Constitution there is nothing stating the separation of church and state. That was a quote taken from a letter of Thomas Jefferson’s to the Danbury Baptist association. His letter used the term the separation of church and state to show that it protected the church from the state (not the other way around).
During the Constitutional Convention of 1787 when delegates had failed to reach an agreement, Ben Franklin stated, “I therefore beg leave to move that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business.”
Both the Senate and the House are opened each day with prayer. Both bodies have chaplains. The Founding Fathers prayed publicly while drafting our Constitution and its Bill of Rights. Prayer is included as part of the presidential inauguration. Each session of the Supreme Court opens with “God save the United Sates and this honorable court.”
As a Judeo-Christian country we have offered a lot of tolerance in our country. There is no one in our country that will be put in jail or be told they can’t have a job because they are Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, etc. Yet in atheistic, Muslim, and socialist countries as a Christian you can be jailed, banned from working, or even killed. We need to see the value of what the faith of our founders has made this country into. Noah Webster said, “No truth is more evident than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.”
Ronald Reagan said, “…prayer is one of the few things in this world that hurts no one and sustains the spirit of millions.”
George Washington stated, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness.”
He also stated, “It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor.”
The Supreme Court ruling of 1983 clearly affirmed the right of legislative bodies to open sessions with prayer. The justices said that such prayer was in keeping with the history and tradition of this country.
I would hope that you would take these facts into consideration.
Scott O’Connor replied:
Florence, the issue is in the federal and state courts again, and is not settled. I will forward an article on the subject. For me, religion is intensely personal, and I do not appreciate those who must demonstrate theirs while I am attending and event for another purpose. Sorry I do not agree with you on this.
Florence Smith responded:
Pat and I plan to attend the next meeting, and if there is a motion to keep prayer in the meetings we will vote for it.