Obama handcuffs police

May 20, 2015

On February 28, 1997, Los Angeles police officers engaged in one of the most violent gun battles in modern law enforcement history. A foiled bank robbery and the lengthy exchange of gun fire that followed came to be known as the North Hollywood Shootout. Twelve officers and eight civilians were wounded. The two heavily armed bank robbers eventually were taken down. What makes this shootout involving nearly 2,000 rounds of ammunition memorable is the fact that the police were outgunned by the criminals who were wearing the latest in body armor and carrying military-level armaments. The battle gave police agencies a compelling reason to better equip patrol officers, arming them with semi-automatic rifles, rather than pistols and 12-gauge shotguns.

That was then and this is now.

Barack Obama has announced a ban on federal transfers of various types of military-style gear to local police departments.

“We’ve seen how militarized gear can sometimes give people a feeling like they’re an occupying force, as opposed to a force that’s part of the community that’s protecting them and serving them,” Obama said in a speech in Camden, New Jersey earlier this week. He said such equipment can “alienate and intimidate local residents and may send the wrong message.”

He announced the formation of a volunteer, “Elite Tech Team,” described as “data scientists, software engineers, and tech leaders, to assist law enforcement.” Obama absurdly says, “They’re going to work with the police department to troubleshoot some of the technical challenges so it’s even easier for police departments to do the things they already want to do in helping to track what’s going on in communities, and then also helping to make sure that data is used effectively to identify where there are trouble spots, where there are problems, are there particular officers that may need additional help, additional training.  All that can be obtained in a really effective, efficient way,” he claimed. 

Since when is it up to the President of the United States to decide how individual city police departments function and which officers may “need help or additional training?” Exactly how do volunteers fit into that scenario?

Through an executive order, Obama instructed federal departments to consult with police and civil rights groups to come up with restrictions on police use of military equipment. 

Obama also declared that he is launching what he calls “Promise Zones,” to combat “a sense of unfairness and powerlessness, to change the odds for communities because we’re providing job training, and helping to reduce violence, and expanding affordable housing.” 

Instilling the importance of education, respect, and working to lower the astronomical out-of-wedlock births in black communities —- which carry a near certain guarantee of poverty and accompanying high crime rates —- would be a great starting point. 

But don’t expect that to happen. The national media remains fixated on supporting Obama’s agenda of racial divisiveness, dutifully reporting on his betrayal of our dedicated law enforcement personnel —- blaming them for unrest and now severely restricting their abilities to serve and protect.


GOP establishment conspires with Obama on trade deal

May 18, 2015

Mitch_and_Barack

McConnell: Obama ‘has done an excellent job’

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) appeared on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday morning, telling host George Stephanopoulos that he supports Hillary Clinton’s Obamatrade deal. (Transcript here)

McConnell has come under fire from both Republicans and Democrats this past week for pushing the slippery Trade Promotion Authority that would fast-track the Trans Pacific Partnership trade liberalization deal Barack Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton negotiated with eleven Pacific Rim nations.

Conservative Rick Manning, president of Americans for Limited Government, contends McConnell is jeopardizing Republican control of the U.S. Senate in the next election by pushing this tremendously unpopular trade deal through Congress.

But McConnell is not to be dissuaded. He previously described his coordination with Obama on trade as “an out-of-body experience.” 

Fast-track authority faces a significantly more difficult path in the House. Nearly all Democrats are opposed to the scheme, along with strong a contingent of Republicans.

U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, expressed confidence that the measure will pass in the House. “We will have the votes,” Ryan declared on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “We’re doing very well. We’re gaining a lot of steam and momentum.”

Arizona Rep. Matt Salmon (R-CD-5) exhibiting eel-like slipperiness, was quoted as saying, 

“The president I don’t think has any political capital at all with this place, and it’s coming to bear right now because the president needs a real heavy lift, and nobody feels any real connection with him or like they owe him anything.”

Still, Salmon plans to vote for Obama’s trade agenda when it hits the House floor, though unlike Ryan, he claims doesn’t think House GOP leadership has the votes.

 “I’m voting for it,” Salmon stated, “not because of him but in spite of him. I don’t think he could pick me out of a crowd, which is so different from when I was here when Bill Clinton was president because President Clinton was really engaged with everybody.” 

Sunday’s Arizona Republic weighs in with an mega-editorial urging Democrats Kyrsten Sinema (CD-9) and Ann Kirkpatrick (CD-1) not to side “with extremists” and to ignore pressure from labor unions which oppose the trade pact and, coincidently, fund their campaigns. 

Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images


Stephanopoulos acted disreputably…but “for the best reasons”

May 16, 2015

The unbridled arrogance of the left exposed once again

George Stephanopoulos, chief political correspondent and anchor for ABC News, as well as the co-anchor of ABC’s “Good Morning America” and host of the Sunday show, “This Week,” has been exposed as a high dollar donor to the increasingly questionable Clinton Foundation. 

Among the myriad revelations to emerge regarding the donor list is the relationship between the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One, a former Canadian mining company that was taken over by Russia in 2013 with U.S. government approval. From 2009 through 2013, Uranium One’s chairman donated a whopping $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. Hillary Clinton claims that there is “not an inherent conflict of interest” between the foundation donations and her decisions at the State Department. Foreign governments with much to gain also contributed. 

Stephanopoulos, who had not previously disclosed his own donations, has now admitted he has given a total of $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation. That figure represents contributions of $25,000 each in three consecutive years. ABC News initially said that Stephanopoulos had given a total of $50,000 to the foundation —- which has raised nearly $2 billion since it was founded in 2001

Clinton Cash” author Peter Schweizer rightly refers to Stephanopoulos’ donations as a “massive ethical breach.” After Sens. Rand Paul and Mike Lee joined the chorus for him recuse himself from all 2016 coverage, he has finally acquiesced and will step aside.

This man is not a political novice. Prior to joining the network, Stephanopoulos was communications director and senior adviser for policy and strategy to President Clinton. He was also communications director on Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign. 

This video montage shows Stephanopoulos shamelessly acting as Clinton Defender-In Chief.

Stephanopoulos apologized for not making the contributions public knowledge. The left-of-center network issued a statement saying he was wrong not to disclose the contribution though calling it “an honest mistake.’ 

In an interview Stephanopoulos acknowledged that while he made the donations “for the best reasons,” he now realizes he “probably shouldn’t have” done so, even as he nobly characterized his “substantial donations” as given to “stop the spread of AIDS, help children and protect the environment in poor counties.” 

Would this newly selfless and benevolent, longtime Clinton political strategist, have come to that conclusion had he not gotten caught?


AZ Republic wants to mute your voice, muzzle your vote

May 11, 2015

It wasn’t that long ago, the daily newspaper was rife with editorials, columns, contrivances and a variety of other machinations passing themselves off as reports, pushing what it termed the “non-partisan,” or “Top Two” Primary. In a nutshell, the scheme does away with party aligned voters selecting their own candidates to run in the General Election. The ideal scenario of the leftists at the newspaper would have the “Top Two” both Democrats, restricting voter’s choices to liberal or liberal. Swell for the leftists at the newspaper, bad for the rest of us.  

There have been other such schemes over the years. The warm and fuzzy sounding “Home Rule,” included provisions to appoint all county “line officers” as they were dismissively called, including the County Attorney, Sheriff, Treasurer and School Superintendent. Though its intent was to eliminate citizen’s ability to vote for these and other county officials —-  turning the immense appointment power over to the Board of Supervisors —- it was promoted as merely a “housekeeping” budgetary provision. Arizona voters caught on quickly as did the elected office holders, both successfully pushing back against this ruse.

Now the slippery tricksters at the Fish Wrap have taken the editorial route again to advocate for appointing the five members of the Arizona Corporation Commission, charged among numerous other tasks, with regulating utility rates. Ambiguous language is its tool in trade and denials of hazy allegations are flippantly dismissed. Regardless of the specious reasons the newspaper puts forward for taking away the vote of the people —- this time —- the actual reason is purely political. Commissioners Tom Forese, Doug Little, Bob Stump, Bob Burns and Chairman Susan Bitter Smith have one thing in common that rankles the folks at the Arizona Republic: They are all Republican.  So are the Maricopa County elected officeholders with the exception of a single County Supervisor.

 In July 2012 columnist Robert Robb candidly exposed the Republic’s angst regarding the Top Two. His words apply to the latest crusade to remove our vote:

“A little honesty and sobriety is in order about the top-two primary system initiative that apparently will be on the November ballot. The purpose of the initiative should be stated plainly and bluntly: It is to reduce the influence of conservative Republicans in Arizona. The rhetoric used to sell it will be more lofty. There will be a pretense of deploring extremism on both sides of the political divide. But what’s driving the initiative isn’t a concern that the Democrats who get elected in Arizona are too liberal. It’s a call-to-arms reaction to a bone-deep belief that the Republicans who run Arizona are too conservative.”

No wonder the liberals get testy.


AZ Ed Dept web weirdness: It’s déjà vu all over again

May 4, 2015

The body snatchers seem to have their flashing neon lasers focused on the inhabitants of the executive offices of the Arizona Department of Education.

It’s not as though State Superintendent of Public Instruction Diane Douglas, who disdains the media spotlight, doesn’t’ have enough to keep her hopping. A foolish recall against her by her liberal opponents was announced within nanoseconds of her election based in large part on her campaign opposition to Common Core. By law they have to wait six months to collect 367,000 signatures, making a daunting task even more difficult in the blazing Arizona summer.

But we digress. The daily recently reported that the online activity of Douglas’ chief of staff Michael Bradley is raising more than a few eyebrows. 

In his off hours, according to the newspaper report, Bradley “runs a website featuring items of general interest, including pictures of dogs and quirky news items, as well as thousands of photos of scantily clad women in costumes, and sexually suggestive images and humor.”

Since the news of his blog surfaced, he has removed some of the most vulgar content. On his website, scroll down past the unfortunate costumed dogs and futuristic ships for Bradley’s sarcastic response to the news coverage regarding his peculiar hobby known as “cosplay,” or costume role-playing —- where adult participants oddly dress as characters (examples not from his site) inspired by comic books, video games or movies.

Bradley provides contact information for his followers to respond to the media and education community which find his posting content inappropriate for someone in his position. The state agency is responsible for educating over a million Arizona K-12 students.

It seems just a blink ago that Douglas’ immediate predecessor John Huppenthal was ousted due to his inappropriate blog postings. The two term Huppenthal posted anonymously and at all hours, including during the day when he was on the taxpayer’s dime at the Superintendent’s office. Bradley is engaging in his pursuits on his own time.

Over the weekend, Diane Douglas asserted that she was “absolutely not” going to replace him. “He serves as the chief of staff during the day, and after that it’s his personal life,” she said.

Like too many others, Douglas has disappointingly fallen short of her campaign promises. This instance provides her a much-needed opportunity to prove she can be trusted to lead.  She ought to do so without the costly entanglement of Michael Bradley —- pulling down a $150,000 salary —- besides causing her needless grief.


Robert Robbed of memory on closed primary

May 1, 2015

The rest of us still have our wits about us. The symbol of the Republican Party is the elephant, noted for its long memory

Those of you who still read the daily fishwrap might have felt your jaw unhinge over what passed for a column by Robert Robb.

Robb claims that having a closed primary in 2010 wouldn’t have made a difference in the U.S. Senate race in which conservative former Congressman J. D. Hayworth challenged the self-identified “maverick” and amnesty proponent John McCain.  

And if you don’t buy that load of baloney, Robb throws another curve, opining that even though the Republican Party would be on sound legal ground to close the primary, to do so would be nothing short of a “PR blunder.”

Want more? He adds that a “non-partisan” or Top Two Primary which does away with parties selecting their own candidates to run in the General Election, would provide an actual solution. He blasts Republicans who desire a return to the closed primary system where registered Independents don’t have a hand in selecting our candidates, as “hard-bitten” and “hardliners.”

Robb writes the “GOP brass, however, have decided not to pursue such a court case,” completely ignoring  the fact that the “brass” are McCain operatives, aware that he benefits from having outsiders choose our candidates. The divide in the Arizona Republican Party over this major issue separates grassroots conservatives and the party elites as few issues have.

Robert Robb must think we’ve forgotten his prior stance on this critical election component.

 In July 2012 Robb had an entirely different mindset, in a column opening with these words:

A little honesty and sobriety is in order about the top-two primary system initiative that apparently will be on the November ballot. The purpose of the initiative should be stated plainly and bluntly: It is to reduce the influence of conservative Republicans in Arizona. The rhetoric used to sell it will be more lofty. There will be a pretense of deploring extremism on both sides of the political divide. But what’s driving the initiative isn’t a concern that the Democrats who get elected in Arizona are too liberal. It’s a call-to-arms reaction to a bone-deep belief that the Republicans who run Arizona are too conservative.”

Could job security be responsible for Robert Robb’s double-talking turnaround? His newfound opinion coincides with yesterday’s announcement of a shakeup of the honchos at the Arizona Republic as it undergoes a major “corporate transition.”

For a genuine insight into the compelling need to close Republican primaries refresh your memory with our April 13 post A. J. LaFaro dispels Robert Graham’s myth on closing Primary. It includes a letter to the members of the AZ GOP executive committee sent by immediate past Maricopa County Republican Chairman A.J. LaFaro, in which he lays out the case in detail. 

Closed primary resolutions were overwhelmingly passed by elected state delegates at the January 2014 and 2015 AZ GOP Statutory Meetings. Yet instead of being voted on at the April 18, 2015 executive committee meeting, state chairman Robert Graham, carrying McCain’s water, shut out Precinct Committeemen and scrapped the issue opposed by…..John McCain.

Get it?


McCain hosts Sedona shindig: Your invitation is in the mail

April 23, 2015

Well, not actually.

Although John McCain wants your money and your vote, he doesn’t want YOU. According to the website, “registration for this invitation-only, closed-press event is full.”

These are the high-profile folks you could have mingled with at the third annual weekend conference, if only you had made the cut. As you nose around the site, be sure to take a gander at the high dollar donor list, with categories ranging from “$100,000 and above” down to a paltry “$24,999 and under.” The McCain Presidential Campaign and Bloomberg Philanthropies are among the eye catchers, but San Francisco-based Democrat donors Lisa and Greg Wendt, should ring a bell or two. As FrontPage magazine reports, under the guise of the benign sounding “Arizona Grassroots Action PAC,” the longtime McCain contributors helped raise nearly $300,000 to oust elected conservative committeemen —- the backbone activists of the AZ GOP —- who voted in a stinging rebuke to censure McCain in 2014. Colorado businessman Gregory Maffei and the Wendt’s wrote the PAC’s largest checks.

 Leftist Democrats are integral to McCain’s programs. Last year, Hillary Clinton, who McCain has referred to as a “rock star,” was featured.  Past speakers besides Clinton, have included “Vice President Joe Biden, Actor/Director Ben Affleck, CEO’s from major corporations and Presidents, Prime Ministers, Foreign Ministers, experts and civil society leaders from around the world.” This year even Actress/Cougar Demi Moore who co-founded a group fighting sexual exploitation of children, will be in attendance.

While National Security is prominently featured on McCain’s Sedona Forum agenda, not a word is mentioned about border security or the fact that besides not having a clue who is entering our country, we are losing our national identity as reported Wednesday by the Washington Examiner. The newspaper points to recent U.S. Census figures that indicate a record 51 million immigrants in 8 years will account for 82% of U.S. growth. The Center for Immigration Studies analyzed the statistics and concluded that by 2023, one in seven U.S. residents will be an immigrant, rising to one in five by 2060 when the legal and illegal immigrant population is expected to total 78 million and minorities will be the majority.

Staring 80 in the eye, the egotistical and mean-spirited McCain is running for yet another six-year-term. We have a choice. Get onboard.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 365 other followers