Jeff Flake morphs into full blown lunatic

March 21, 2018

Trump hatred has rendered limited, egotist Flake incapable of rational thought as he now dangles threat of presidential impeachment

It’s no secret Jeff Flake is not the brightest bulb in the chandelier. He’s obviously been aware of his own limitations, masking them with a perpetual, and often inappropriate smirk, in an effort to appear affable. His advisers thoughtfully provided him with an issue to run on: cutting earmarks.  He took to it as though nothing else mattered, though it turned out, it didn’t.

First elected in 2001 to the U.S. House out of a religiously friendly East Valley district he held a safe seat, but gave his word that he would only serve for three two-year terms. When the headiness of D.C. became irresistible, he abandoned his pledge with a glib, “I lied,” accompanied by that now infamous smirk.

With major assists from Jon Kyl and John McCain, Flake squeaked into replacing retiring Kyl by a slim 3 percentage points in 2012. By 2018, with an 18% approval rating in his home state, it was clear, even to him, that reelection was beyond his grasp. In a state that overwhelmingly supported Donald Trump for president, Flake’s constant derision of President Trump won him no conservative friends, but made him the darling of the left. He even passed off an anti-Trump slim 140-page diatribe, posing as a book, with a title stolen directly from Barry Goldwater’s iconic, “Conscience of a Conservative.” Since conservatism is a term unfamiliar to Flake, the title is not just a blatant heist, it is a lie.

After making the rounds of leftwing media outlets denouncing Trump, he has become increasingly full of himself, even dangling the possibility of mounting a presidential challenge — preposterous on its face from a man with bottom dragging approval ratings among Arizona voters.

Now Flake has crossed the line from deceitful anti-Trumper to manic psychotic, tweeting impeachment is in order if President Trump fires Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

We are begging the president not to fire the special counsel. Don’t create a constitutional crisis. Congress cannot preempt such a firing. Our only constitutional remedy is after the fact, through impeachment. No one wants that outcome. Mr. President, please don’t go there.

3:04 PM – 20 Mar 2018

Mueller is conducting a politically biased investigation of President Trump relating to a discredited report given the intriguing name of “dossier.” It was authored by Christopher Steele, a former British spy,  financed by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. FBI agents abruptly stopped using Steele as an informant later that same year after concluding that he had lied to them. Read more by Paul Sperry, in RealClear Investigations.

The salacious but phony report was hand carried to then-FBI Director James Comey, by none other than John McCain, who called Hillary Clinton “a rock star” he could support for president.

McCain is now seriously ill and despite glowing reports from his family, is unlikely to return to the senate, which unfortunately keeps him from being subpoenaed for his integral role in this fraud. If anyone should be investigated, it should be Arizona’s two traitorous senators, who have worked diligently to undermine our president, and never represented the citizens of Arizona as much as they do the illegal aliens to whom they want to give the gift of amnesty and eventual voting rights — rendering the Republican Party, under whose banner each of them has opportunistically run, to historical irrelevance.


Jeff Flake OK as a “globalist,” but WH takes heat

March 18, 2018

Double standard exists for liberals and Republicrats while Trump staff irrationally smeared as anti-Semites

The link received in an email was too compelling to resist. AOL News, flexing its decidedly anti-Trump muscle, contemptibly refers to an “anti-Semitic term” used during a White House staff meeting. Pulled in by what appears to be a vulgarity, imagine the surprise to read the word that so offends the delicate sensibilities of the left-wing media. Simple sleuthing found the charge originated at the HuffPost with this headline: “This Anti-Semitic Term Was Casually Used At The White House 3 Times This Week.”

The pejorative word, worthy of such hyperventilation by AOL and HuffPost?

Sit down before you fall down.  The offensive word is ….“globalist.”

It’s a term Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake, a dedicated ‘Never Trumper,’ says he embraces.

In his book with the stolen title, Conscience of a Conservative, soon- to-be-out-the-door Flake writes,

“Seemingly overnight, the word globalist became a grave insult among people in my party who also call themselves ‘conservative.”  He continues, “In this country, we are less than 5 percent of the world’s population. We are 20 percent of the world’s economic output. And if we don’t trade, we don’t grow. Given the alternatives, I’ll take the globalist moniker, thank you.”

But the well-named HuffPost hyperventilates, huffing “the term ‘globalist’ has been used at the White House at least three times this week in reference to an outgoing Jewish Trump administration official, raising some eyebrows because the word is increasingly used in xenophobic and anti-Semitic contexts.”

Says who?

And  if that’s the case — which we dispute — why did these liberals give Jeff Flake a pass?

The answer is liberals and Republicrats function under a different set of standards than conservatives, who are always blameworthy. Remember that the next time you open your mouth. And don’t make the mistake of a D.C. mayor’s employee fired (and ultimately rehired when the word was researched) for using the word ‘niggardly,’ rooted in the Old Norse verb ‘nigla,’ which means “to fuss about small matters.” If you’re a guy don’t compliment a female co-worker about anything or the #MeToo police will be bringing you a box to put your desk contents into as they accompany you doing the perp walk out the door.

It’s a new world, folks.  One in which you’re apt to be found guilty for nothing, especially if you’re a conservative.

School ‘walkouts’ issue threats, demand gun control

March 15, 2018

America’s under-educated students used as pawns in forwarding liberal agenda

One month after the Parkland, Florida high school massacre killing 17 students and teachers, perpetrated by a known mentally ill teen who should have been on the FBI’s radar, thousands of  students nationally participated in walkouts — demanding, not better vigilance, but gun control.

It makes sense if you realize our rights have taken a back seat to political correctness, gender and minority studies, global warming now known as climate change, celebrations of diversity rather than unity, recycling and the #Me Too movement.

The national walkout was organized by Women’s March Youth Empower, an arm of the radical leftist group that plans worldwide protests. Their Mission Statement includes these words: “Women’s March is committed to dismantling systems of oppression through nonviolent resistance….” To understand the full impact of its intentions, check out the group’s Unity Principles.

These are the people who are influencing American youth and using them to advance a left-wing, anti-Second Amendment agenda. Teachers and administrators who cancelled classes are far from blameless, using taxpayer dollars to advance a similar political scheme. This video shows propagandized students chanting, “Hey, Hey, NRA, how many kids did you kill today?”

These students have no understanding of what the NRA stands for or the important work it has done since its 1871 founding in protecting our freedoms.

We’ve heard the name Marjory Stoneman Douglas frequently since the Florida shooting at a high school named in her honor. She’s been blandly described as a journalist and environmentalist.  Few are aware the early advocate for illegals and hard-drinking liberal was instrumental in founding the first ACLU chapter in the south in the 1950s and was so godless she left advance instructions forbidding any religious references at her own funeral. She was no fan of Ronald Reagan but was posthumously honored by Barack Obama who designated her home a national historic landmark.

The Center for Responsive Politics shows the millions in campaign donations made by the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). They donate almost exclusively to Democrat candidates. Remember that these people spend more time influencing your children and grandchildren than you do.

Rather than leaving class to threaten legislators with their imminent ability to vote them out, these students need to be in class learning — something this Pew Research Center study shows is in serious decline. American students lag behind developed and developing countries in science, math and reading scores, ranking 30th in math and 19th in science. The U.S. Constitution — including the all-important Amendments and our Bill of Rights — wouldn’t be on that international list, but there is little doubt that it isn’t a high priority in our nation’s public schools.

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.

McCain ‘dossier’ collusion: The story you won’t read in the AZ Republic

February 27, 2018

Today is a day to pay special attention to the news, both local with the special CD 8 primary election and national — though the national news has a local component up to his gnarly neck in anti-Trump deceit.

John McCain, staying out of D.C. since July when his practiced theatrics in voting down the “skinny repeal” of Obamacare made Democrats rejoice, is suffering from what his doctors describe as an aggressive form of  brain cancer, We suspect even if was as healthy as a horse, he’d invoke any excuse to remain as far away as possible from the exploding contrivances against President Trump, who McCain worked hand-in-glove to defame as he attempted to remove his former rival from the Oval Office — something McCain long coveted but never attained.

David J. Kramer, a former State Department official and close associate of Sen. John McCain, who was the director of the McCain Institute, has invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to testify in connection with questions from the House Intelligence Committee about the discredited anti-Trump dossier’s Russian sources. The Fox News article is headlined,McCain associate takes Fifth on Trump dossier questions.”

The Daily Caller reports that in a Dec. 19 interview with the committee, Kramer said that he had information about some of the sources of information in the dossier, which was written by former British spy Christopher Steele and financed by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

Kramer gathered the information in November 2016, after traveling to London to meet with Steele. Kramer and McCain first learned of the dossier earlier that month after meeting with an associate of Steele’s.

After the London meeting, Steele provided a copy of the dossier to Kramer with instructions to share it with McCain. The no doubt gleeful senator then hand carried a copy of the document to then-FBI Director James Comey during a Dec. 9, 2016, meeting.

McCain, doing the Democrat Party’s bidding on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, is likely relieved his serious illness has occurred in time to save him from being deposed, charged and found guilty of treacherous collusion on this massive level, leaving what he regards as his “legacy” on the trash heap of Arizona history. This story, which the McCain worshipping Arizona Republic newspaper ignores, is not going away. In fact, it is intensifying.

But you’d never know that here in Arizona where the liberal newspaper routinely derides President Trump and joins ambitious Democrat Mayor Greg Stanton heralding the foolish renaming of the newly renovated Terminal 3 at Sky Harbor International Airport after McCain, who crashed three jets while a navy pilot,

Gun owners, NRA remain resolute in face of misaimed backlash

February 26, 2018

Amid all of the negativity illogically lodged against the NRA in the wake of the horrific Florida school shooting, another Crossroads of the West gun show took place at the Arizona State Fairgrounds in Phoenix Saturday and Sunday. The vast area was packed with dealers and overflowing with purchasers, including many families, with children in tow, who understand the importance of our Second Amendment rights enshrined in the U.S. Constitution by our nation’s Founders.

The shooting, perpetrated by a mentally deranged former student, highlights the need for follow-up on obvious concerns since deputies had been called to the family home of Nikolas Cruz 23 times. The FBI was alerted to him months earlier. His Internet postings showing him posing with an AR-15-style semi-automatic rifle and boasting about plans to shoot up a school, should have raised red flags about the threat he posed. The recently expelled 19-year-old, who began introducing himself as a “school shooter,” has been charged with 17 counts of murder perpetrated against classmates on Valentine’s Day. Despite repeated warnings, authorities took no decisive action. When the volley of gunshots sounded from within the school, the armed resource officer chose not  to enter the building.

Though years of warnings were ignored, backlash has irrationally focused against the National Rifle Association. The NRA is a pro-Second Amendment organization that protects the rights of Americans to defend themselves.

Under political pressure from the hard left, some corporations that have long offered discounts and benefits to NRA members have begun peeling away, though many remain in effect. This is the complete statement on corporate partnerships offered by the organization, which includes these words:

“……some corporations have decided to punish NRA membership in a shameful display of political and civic cowardice.  In time, these brands will be replaced by others who recognize that patriotism and determined commitment to Constitutional freedoms are characteristics of a marketplace they very much want to serve.

Let it be absolutely clear. The loss of a discount will neither scare nor distract one single NRA member from our mission to stand and defend the individual freedoms that have always made America the greatest nation in the world.”

Seeing Red AZ encourages readers to show their support for the NRA. Join today.

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.