George Will exposes his visceral hatred of Republicans

May 12, 2018

Calls VP Mike Pence,“horrifying”

George F. Will, a longtime baseball aficionado, was once also regarded as a sound political thinker. He’s a prolific author, counting,“The Woven Figure: Conservatism and America’s Fabric,” among his many titles. The Phoenix-based Libertarian Goldwater Institute, has featured him as a fundraising headliner. That doesn’t rank him as a conservative, but for many of his fans he did a credible job of impersonating one.

Then, preceding the 2016 presidential election, Will veered off as a Never-Trumper.  A registered Republican since 1964, his revulsion of Donald Trump caused him to re-register as an Independent prior to the election.

The fact that he’s been a Washington Post columnist since 1974, should have given us pause even before Donald Trump emerged victorious over 16 other Republican Primary contenders, but many of Will’s readers were charmed by his laconic delivery and sharp wit — frequently interspersed with historical baseball minutiae.

No more. And never again.

Will has revealed himself as more than a Never-Trumper.  He is now a Republican reviler. A conservative basher. A Vice President Mike Pence mugger. Though he has a degree in Religion from Trinity College, and attended Anglican Magdalen College at Oxford, (among a host of other colleges) he self-identifies as an “amiable, low voltage atheist.”

It’s time to ditch the “amiable” label and replace it with “hateful”and update “low voltage” to “incendiary.”

Will’s latest effort, replete with words such as “feral cunning,” “oleaginous, “toadyism“ and “obsequiousness,” all packed into the opening two sentences, sets the tone of what the WaPo headlines,Trump is no longer the worst person in government.

Not content to trash the President and Vice President of the United States, George Will also scathingly takes on former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in the vicious hit piece.

You’ve been forewarned.

Advertisements

Goldwater Institute sets teachers straight on pay complaints

April 15, 2018

Frequently mistaken for a conservative organization, the Goldwater Institute (GI) is deeply rooted in fiscal Libertarianism, which has no social component, ie: it is not pro-life. At one time, it rated state legislators with its highly anticipated Legislative Report Card, which has been replaced by a “Donate Now” tab. Goldwater also  took positions on ballot issues, but those days are long gone.  Taking positions means offending some donors, which is not a smart business model.

The person answering the phone was new enough not to have been aware that GI gained its political creds and respect within the state for its list of top legislators and promotion of ballot  issues it deemed worthy.

During the 2016 election cycle, GI took no official position on ‘Legalize Marijuana,’ launched as Prop. 205. The ballot measure advocated recreational use, but was sold to voters as a medical necessity, allowing for the proliferation of dispensaries featuring ‘doctors’ who never saw a youthful patient who was not experiencing chronic pain. 

Voters rejected Proposition 205 in Arizona by a vote 0f 51.32% t0  48.68%. The proposition called for legalizing possession and recreational consumption of marijuana by those 21 and older. Medical marijuana was legalized in Arizona in 1996.

Neither did GI take a position on the disastrous minimum wage hike that actually caused many low wage workers to lose their jobs when their small business employers were forced to reduce staff as salaries were artificially and incrementally hiked. 

Proposition 206 increased the Arizona hourly minimum wage from $8.05 to $12 by 2020, forcing employers to provide additional benefits and exceed the federal minimum wage of $7.25 jumping pay to $10 soon after the election. In numerous instances, this overreach actually defeated the intent of the proponents of the new law. It passed by a vote of 58.33% – 41.67%.

Goldwater Institute is a behind-the-scenes proponent of illegal immigration, which its Chamber of Commerce donors — many illegal labor profiteers — support. The group even hammered Sheriff Joe Arpaio in two separate reports in which they castigated him for enforcing the law.

But veering into the realm of education, attorney Victor Riches, President and CEO of the Goldwater Institute, gets it right with his column, “The Truth About Teacher Pay.

As the father of nine children, he knows a thing two about his subject and who is responsible for setting teachers’ salaries — a pertinent fact which even the striking teachers abysmally lack knowledge, though they can teach climate alarmist/pseudo scientist Al Gore‘s science of global warming …er… climate change and recycling while omitting cursive as they short shrift American history, Constitutional studies and classic literature.

 We encourage you to read Victor Riches’ article. 


Lacey, Larkin homes raided by FBI. Sex site shut down

April 7, 2018

Although the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Arizona has nothing on its website as yet, other sources are replete with information concerning an FBI raid on the Sedona home of former New Times publisher, Michael Lacey, and the Paradise Valley home of Jim Larkin. The duo co-founded Backpage.com.

Sedona Red Rock News carries the report by Christopher Fox Graham detailing that Backpage.com, ranks second behind craigslist for online classified advertising. But its main products aren’t lawnmowers or toaster ovens. Their stock in trade is prostitution and sex trafficking, often involving underage girls. This 2017 report released by a U.S. Senate subcommittee reveals that 73 percent of the child-trafficking reports are knowingly facilitated by Backpage.com.

This is the indictment.  (Click link to open.)

The website has been removed. It has been replaced with a screenshot overlayed with law enforcement insignias and a notice stating: “Backpage.com and affiliated websites have been seized as part of an enforcement action by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, and the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Division, with analytical assistance from the Joint Regional Intelligence Center.”

Although the Department of Justice said it will issue a press release after the charges are unsealed, CBS News reports that an indictment had been unsealed against seven people allegedly involved in running Backpage, containing 93 criminal counts including money laundering and running a website to facilitate prostitution. The indictment, which was filed in Arizona where Backpage is maintained, reportedly names 17 victims who were trafficked, both adults and children. The site is alleged to have earned more than $500 million in revenue since it was founded in 2004. Law enforcement officials have called it “the world’s top online brothel.”

A year ago, before he departed to work for the hate-mongering Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Stephen Lemons, still writing his “Feathered Bastard” column for the free-of-charge, far left Phoenix New Times, opined that Lacey and Larkin — his former bosses —  were being treated unfairly for “donating to powerless Democrats.” Even a man of Lemons’ low caliber knew there was far more going on, but chose to try imitating Houdini and misdirect our attention.  It didn’t work then. It clearly doesn’t work now.

Focusing on Mike Lacey, co-founder and former owner of Phoenix New Times, Lemons characterized him as “still battling for freedom of speech despite being slimed by Backpage’s foes.”

With this critical thinking, Lemons couldn’t have found a more accommodating place to land than the equally dishonest SPLC.


Latin American democracy crumbles under corruption

March 30, 2018

The Hill posts an enlightening commentary,Latin American democracy is crumbling under corruption,” by Edward Lynch. Ph.D. The chair of political science at Hollins University, and former Special Assistant to President Reagan for Defense and Foreign Policy, Lynch details the high levels of governmental corruption in Mexico and other Latin American counties.

When people come to the United States, they bring with them the concepts they were familiar with in their countries of origin.  In the case of Latin America, they are often incompatible with our system of government.

How’s Socialism Doing in Venezuela?  This instructional video on PragerU has received over a million hits.

Knowledge is power. Get yours today with these two links.


Weekend reading guaranteed to make you smarter

March 11, 2018

Deborah C. Tyler, writing for American Thinker, makes us all think with her outstanding column carrying the provocative title, “Everyone Knows.”

SRAZ urges you to read it. It’ll be among the best 3 1/2 minutes you’ve spent all weekend. Guaranteed. 


AZ Republic celebrates repression of First Amendment

March 3, 2018

Liberals determine what constitutes free speech

The First Amendment to the Constitution separates America from repressive regimes and anarchies. In their wisdom, our Founders enshrined free speech as sacrosanct. It does not specify speech they approved of, but all speech. Among the rights detailed is that of people to peaceably assemble. The First Amendment, along with the entire Bill of Rights, was submitted to the states for ratification on September 25, 1789, and was adopted on December 15, 1791.

In recent years there have been efforts, especially in the halls of academia — the last place to imagine such constraints to exist — to shut down dissenting voices. What was held as above reproach for nearly 230 years is now unworthy.  Even newspapers, exemplified by the left-wing, Hillary Clinton endorsing,  Arizona Republic, demean those with views opposing their own skewed vantage point. Letters to the editor are selected to substantiate the skew.

Conservative speakers who have been invited to universities by campus groups are now either “uninvited” or banned from the campus and denied the ability to speak. Supposed scholars, putting their ignorance on display as they oppress opposing opinions, have overseen instances where protests have become violent. Bodily injuries, extensive property damage and intentionally set fires have been the instruments of intimidation.

 In 2004, conservative commentator, author and lawyer. Ann Coulter, invited to give an address to the U of A by the College Republicans, was the recipient of a cream pie attack. Ben Shapiro has been booed, as has FrontPage magazine’s editor David Horowitz. Students from ASU’s Cronkite School of Journalism — who should revere the First Amendment — invited then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio to participate in a forum, only to shamefully chant ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ over him, denying him the right to speak. (video).

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, invited to give the commencement address at Rutgers University in 2014 was forced to withdraw after students and faculty staged a sit-in protest over her selection due to her involvement in the Iraq war during the G.W. Bush administration. When Rice gave the commencement address at Boston College in 2006, dozens of students and professors turned their backs to her and held up signs protesting the Iraq war.

In this National Review article, conservative author and CRTV host Michelle Malkin, details the absurdity of university students being too offended to hear speakers with whom they disagree — even Vice President Mike Pence, invited as a commencement speaker by the University of Notre Dame. Activist Imanne Mondane told the campus newspaper that she and her peers felt “unsafe” and threatened by “someone who openly is offensive but also demeaning of their humanity and of their life and of their identity.” Pence was formerly the governor of Indiana, where the school is located and was elected to represent the residents in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Here in Arizona the local leftist Arizona Republic newspaper uses this incendiary headline to herald another repression of free speech: Far-right provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos has another Phoenix-area event canceled.

Yiannopoulos, who reportedly received death threats, is unworthy to be heard because he previously worked for conservative Breitbart News. Being openly homosexual would have otherwise placed him on the newspaper’s preferred list.


Elvia Diaz: Sets poor example for Lenten conduct

February 25, 2018

Those who observe the 40 days of Lent leading up to Easter focus on introspection. Some give up a specific behavior as an exercise in sacrificial self-denial.

 The Arizona Republic’s Elvia Diaz has written a column on her desire to find common ground with people she normally disagrees with as part of her series spanning Lent.

She chooses as her antagonist, Republican Phoenix City Councilman Sal DiCiccio. How nice, it seemed, that committed leftie Elvia Diaz wants to make amends with him. Yet despite her stated desire to treat the fiscal conservative decently for the holiday, she describes DiCiccio in less than glowing terms, referring to “his methods of challenging his liberal colleagues as boorish, bordering exaggerations, or truth twisting, and bullying political rivals and journalists when they disagree with him.”

If this negative spew is indicative of her self-reflection, she’s missed the mark by a mile, showing herself incapable of examining her own thoughts and motives.  Diaz also displays her animus toward the word “liberal,” preferring to hide behind the term “progressive,” favored by liberals who want to deny who they actually are. Could she be a “self-loather?”

She does admit that she and DiCiccio have no common ground, defining him as appealing to “tea partiers” — a term rarely used by most conservatives these days. She also disingenuously describes him as “a diehard Trump supporter and buddy of former Sheriff Joe Arpaio.” Is she exhibiting early onset memory loss or simply choosing not to recall that DiCiccio ripped Arpaio in the Ahwatukee Foothills News, telling the newspaper in 2016 that neither he, nor anyone in his family, would be voting for Arpaio.

Her use of the phrase “pro-immigrant rights activists” is duplicitous at best, since she’s discussing illegal aliens, who should have no supporters. This was used in the context of a Trump rally in Phoenix when police employed tear gas to disperse the crowd after the rally ended. The “activists  refused to let the issue go,” she writes, demanding, “among other things, that Phoenix ban President Trump from using city-owned buildings and police officers.”  

Admitting that she “doesn’t throw a blanket endorsement of the work of our men and women in blue” as DiCiccio does, Diaz says, “DiCiccio isn’t wavering and neither am I.”

In summation, after giving him a scathing review, she schizophrenically concedes, “I find DiCiccio respectful, attentive and willing to talk, though we often disagree.”

What happened to the lying boor she described at the beginning of her peculiar article? This must be Diaz’ concession to Lent with which she began her rant.