Due to low readership and the constant complaints. Please visit Seeing Red AZ, Sonoran Alliance, and Liberty's Apothecary for similar commentary.

The candidates in CD-5 are desperately trying to recreate themselves as conservatives in order to look better against David Schweikert, who is leading the race on the Republican side with rock solid conservative credentials. First Jim Ogsbury put conservative in large writing on the top of his campaign website, then Susan Bitter Smith did. Ogsbury is no conservative, and Bitter Smith has a history of being one of the most liberal Republicans in the state.

Now a supporter of the Knaperek campaign has started a blog claiming she is conservative.
Knaperek is no conservative. Her 2005 score from the AZ Federation of Taxpayers was a 73.
For perspective, contrast that with Pamela Gorman's score that year, 87%, or Bob Stump, 83%. In 2006, Knaperek barely missed being categorized in the "Needs Improvement" category, scoring barely over 60%.

Knaperek received a C from the Goldwater Institute in 2006. No Republican scored lower than her except the obvious RINOs. Even Ted Carpenter scored higher. And her score the year before was in the same place relative to other legislators that it was in 2006.

We do have to give the blog some credit however. Their praise for Guttersmith was hysterical it was so transparent. digg_url ='POST_URL';

While we're glad to see that the Capitol Times now has a new feature "Best of the Blogs," we disagree with its response to our post on the State Bar's ridiculous emphasis on diversity.

Here is what they wrote -

So we came up with some questions to ask before posting such an emotion-filled rant: What is the purpose of the ad? Do I know what the bar is trying to represent with their ad? Is the picture intended to be representative of the state’s population or the membership of the bar? Should I chastise the bar for trying to promote diversity, even if it is a bit over the top?

Maybe the bar is trying to show/promote its other members, besides “the white guys,” who everyone knows already are there anyway. Are people really confused about which demographic controls the legal system?

Here is our response, to rather silly questions that everyone already knows the answer to:

1) The purpose is to promote minorities and women - at the expense of white males.
2) The bar is trying to represent minorities and women=good ideal. White males=bad.
3) Obviously the picture is not supposed to be representative of the state's population or membership of the bar. It's not even representative of a utopian future, since it's so completely skewed.
4) The bar should be chastised since it is using its members' mandatory dues to train skewed leadership classes like this. Promoting such obvious discrimination breeds resentment and divides people.
5) Which demographic controls the legal system? Excuse me? Justice Ruth McGregor is the Chief Justice of the AZ Supreme Court. Barbara Rodriguez-Mundell is the Presiding judge of the Maricopa County Superior Court. It's certainly not white males who control the legal system.

digg_url ='POST_URL';

BAMN, which stands for "By Any Means Necessary," an extremist group based in Michigan that literally follows its name in order to achieve extra special rights for minorities, has flown in its members to fight the Arizona Civil Rights Initiative. According to Max McPhail, who is managing AZCRI in Arizona, BAMN tried to block petition signature collectors at the South Mountain Department of Motor Vehicles a few days ago. Fortunately, the DMV kicked them off the property, since AZ state law prohibits that kind of interference and a permit is required to be on DMV property. If BAMN has to resort to prohibiting one of our most basic rights, the right to collect signatures for an election, they are treading on the very essence of our Constitution.

BAMN is a very scary group, and their motto is essentially the same as the communist motto, "The ends justify the means." So much for democracy. It's not democratic if a few BAMN supporters are forcing their will on the majority. BAMN refers to supporters of the Civil Rights Initiative as "segregationists." Since easily over 80% of Arizonans are signing the AZCRI petitions, BAMN is labeling 80% of Arizonans as "segregationists." Shame on them, they're not welcome in our state. digg_url ='POST_URL';

The AZ Republic's transparent attempt to run frequent articles about the Valley's traffic congestion in order to gin up support for a costly $42.6 billion transportation ballot measure which will go to mass transit, not just roads, is slimy. The Valley no longer needs a drastic tax increase to fix its traffic problem, since illegal immigrants are leaving the state and reducing the traffic on the road. Both my spouse's commute and my commute to work in the mornings on the freeways became much better a couple of months ago, and I rarely see the formerly prevalent number of landscaping trucks anymore on the freeways.

Today the Republic ran a huge front page article claiming that relief from traffic congestion won't be inexpensive, in order to convince the public that another 1-cent sales tax is necessary. They have yet to run a single article noting how traffic has decreased since illegal immigrants started leaving Arizona due to tougher illegal immigration laws.

The Goldwater Institute, which looks out for the fiscal interests of taxpayers, had this to say about the costly initiative:

The proposal is flawed because it steers much of the revenue from the proposed sales tax increase to non-highway projects, said institute Chairman Tom Patterson.

"The sales tax should be a last resort for road building," Patterson said. "It's regressive, it taxes people who never use roads, and it stifles the economy. The right mix for transportation funding includes privatized projects."

The initiative itself is rife with corruption. Governor Napolitano was recently outed for making a deal with the homebuilder industry giving them exemptions from significant tax hikes in the initiative in exchange for them refraining from opposing a land initiative of hers. In other words, Napolitano is indirectly paying the developers using our taxpayer money to get both her transportation initiative and her land initiative passed. The taxpayers get stiffed twice thanks to Napolitano's backroom deal.

This is a bad initiative and if it involves corruption in order to pass, it should not be passed. digg_url ='POST_URL';

Judicial Watch just issued a news release on unethical behavior by the Arizona Bar Association (our least favorite organization in case you don't read this blog regularly), regarding its attempts to stop the enforcement of illegal immigration laws, namely Prop. 100 which was passed by 78% of voters in Arizona. Judicial Watch is an organization that sues on behalf of the rule of law, with much success. We can probably expect a lawsuit by them against the Arizona Bar Association if the bar doesn't stop interfering with illegal immigration enforcement mandated by the public. Sonoran Alliance and Red State Arizona both have excellent articles covering the scandal. The bar has been politically correct for too long. Now they've gone over the permissible legal line with their made-up investigation of Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas in order to stop him from enforcing the law. Whether you agree with illegal immigration enforcement or not, it's unlawful to ignore the law. Those who disagree with laws against illegal immigration need to change them at the ballot and in the legislature - not by breaking the law and other unethical means. It's time for change and new leadership at the bar. digg_url ='POST_URL';

The timing of this is classic bureaucratic waste. An article on the front page of the Arizona Republic today says that Phoenix ranks 21 out of 100 U.S. cities for the least carbon emissions, better than 75% of the largest 100 U.S. cities. In other words, we're doing very well in terms of air quality.

Also today, Maricopa County sent out an email from RunningOutOfAir.com declaring an ozone watch for tomorrow. Considering the budget problems the county is in, with county agencies forced to cut 5-15% of their spending, including the Sheriff's Office, why is the county continuing to spend money on this campaign? Shouldn't law enforcement be a higher priority in a budget crisis than warning people about pollution? The funding for this ad campaign comes from polluters, below. This money could be put to better use than a public awareness campaign instructing people not to pollute. Public safety should be a higher priority than politically correct global warming related propaganda.

digg_url ='POST_URL';

We were pleased to see that Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas has asked the Supreme Court to investigate the State Bar Association - no not for using member's mandatory dues to promote diversity, something else that needs to be looked into - but for its retaliation against him for upholding Prop. 100. The article in the left wing Arizona Republic doesn't indicate this, but according to Sonoran Alliance, of the 6 bar complaints against Thomas, legal experts unanimously agree they have no merit. The experts are (and at least a couple of these are diehard liberals): Thomas Zlaket, former Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court; Jack La Sota, former Attorney General of Arizona; Ernest Calderon, former State Bar President; Geoffrey Hazard, former Yale Law School professor and perhaps the nation’s leading expert on legal ethics; and Michael Alan Schwartz, former chief counsel at the State Bar of Michigan.

The article also indicates that there may have been misconduct by the state bar. We heard that Sheriff Arpaio has said he intends to launch an investigation of the state bar if there is any criminal misconduct. digg_url ='POST_URL';

This is out of control.....
"Operative group 'The Zetas' wants you, soldier or ex-soldier. We offer a good salary, food and benefits for your family. Don't suffer anymore mistreatment and don't go hungry."


DRUG LORDS GO AFTER MEXICAN POLICE OFFICERS

By MARK STEVENSON – 4 days ago

CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico (AP) — Drug cartels are sending a brutal message to police and soldiers in cities across Mexico: Join us or die.

The threat appears in recruiting banners hung across roadsides and in publicly posted death lists. Cops get warnings over their two-way radios. At least four high-ranking police officials were gunned down this month, including Mexico's acting federal police chief.
...

Police who take on the cartels feel isolated and vulnerable when they become targets, as did 22 commanders in Ciudad Juarez when drug traffickers named them on a handwritten death list left at a monument to fallen police this year. Of the 22, seven have been killed and three wounded in assassination attempts. Of the others, all but one have quit, and city officials said he didn't want to be interviewed.
...

"Juarez Needs You! Join up and become part of the city police," say enormous city billboards. The jobs offer salaries about three times higher than those offered by the foreign-owned "maquiladora" factories that are the city's biggest industrial employer. But police and soldiers keep deserting to the cartels, giving traffickers inside knowledge about tactics and surveillance.

Read more

digg_url ='POST_URL';

(click to enlarge)
The Arizona State Bar has become really offensive in its relentless promotion of diversity, using mandatory bar dues from all attorneys in Arizona in order to promote excessive programs and articles that do nothing other than divide people by race and sex and stir up resentment. Every month there are more and more articles in its monthly magazine preaching about the value of diversity. This month's issue features a full page ad for the Bar Leadership Institute program, with a picture of its most recent class. There are 12 attorneys pictured, and only one of the 12 is a white male, some guy named Nathan Fidel, who obviously got to be the token male because his father is Court of Appeals liberal judge Noel Fidel. The AZ State Bar is looking more like the National Lawyers Guild than a fair representation of the lawyers in Arizona. White males do not make up 1/12 of the population of lawyers, or 1/12 of the general population. This is politically correct nonsense and mandatory bar dues should not be funding this kind of propaganda. digg_url ='POST_URL';

ABC-15 has done an investigaton to find out if libraries are permitting 10-year olds like the one to the left and other children check out R-rated movies. Phoenix and Chandler libraries permitted them to, including renting the movie "Naked States," which features all nude actors. Glendale libraries did not prohibit the children to rent R-rated movies. Kudos to them, and shame on the Phoenix and Chandler libraries. They're breaking the law. digg_url ='POST_URL';

"Governor pushes for bigger effort to crack down on felons."

should more honestly be -

"Governor finally discovers way to stop local law enforcement from arresting illegal immigrants - de-fund the Sheriff"

Check out the AZ Republic's overtly biased headline...and the lack of mention of the fact that the warrants are NOT the responsibility of the Sheriff's office, the article makes it look like they are. The vast majority of the outstanding warrants did not originate from the Sheriff's Office. Many of them originated from Phoenix and Mesa police - who can't blame their large number of outstanding warrants on lack of resources due to arresting illegal immigrants, because both of those police departments have had sanctuary city polices. And no mention of how the Pima County Sheriff received the same amount of money under the same grant and did not get their money taken away. Nor the fact that many of the illegal immigrants who are arrested have outstanding warrants, so arresting them solves a lot of the warrant problem. The Governor has overstepped her power by taking away this money from the Sheriff's office. It's time for her to go. digg_url ='POST_URL';

Wouldn't want to have this group going after me, they're pretty zealous. I don't agree with the "neocon" criticism, but the rest of the criticism of McLain, who is somewhat of a RINO, sounds fairly legit. digg_url ='POST_URL';

This is ridiculous. Every day we read in the newspapers about the ongoing struggle between the legislature and our big-spending governor to work out a budget to resolve our $2 billion dollar deficit crisis, and she has the nerve to put on a Women's Health Expo? There was a massive Women's Expo just a few weeks ago in the Glendale stadium, put on by private businesses. There is no need for a government-sponsored a couple of weeks later when we're in a budget crisis.

The Expo features the organization Susan G. Komen for the Cure. This partisan organization contributes your donations to Planned Parenthood - it has awarded 72 grants to Planned Parenthood so far. That money is then used to perform abortions. Goes to show where Napolitano's agenda is.

Special Invitation for Women

Join the Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families in celebration of Women’s Health week at a free
Women’s Health Expo

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

10 a.m.-3 p.m. —Drop-in anytime

State Capitol Executive Tower

1700 W. Washington, Phoenix, AZ 85007

v “Fit & Fast Living” Luncheon at 12:30 p.m. with lunch provided by Albertsons
(Luncheon space is limited, tickets available beginning at 10 a.m.)

v 15 minutes could save your life!
Mobile On-site Mammography will be at the Expo 9a.m.-5 p.m.
Call (480) 967-3767 for an appointment

v Raffles every hour and a Grand Prize Raffle at 2:30 p.m. Prizes include:

Gift Certificates for Restaurants, Spas, and Salons, Jewelry, Gift baskets

This event is funded in part by the Bureau of Women’s and Children’s Health as made available through the Arizona Department of Health Services

Organizations Confirmed to attend on May 14, 2008 10:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m.

• 1230 AM KOY - Clear Channel Radio Broadcasting, Inc.- Broadcasting Live!
• Albertsons Osco Pharmacy - Blood Pressure and Blood Sugar Screening
• American Cancer Society
• American Heart Association
• Arizona Osteoporosis Coalition
• Bureau of USDA Nutrition/ Breastfeeding Program-ADHS
• Dept of Administration-Benefit Options- Wellness
• Chronic Disease-ADHS
• Bureau of Health Systems Development and Oral Health-ADHS
• Bureau of Tobacco Education and Prevention-ADHS
• Bureau of USDA Nutrition Programs-ADHS
• Bureau of Women & Children's Health-ADHS
• EmpowHer.com
• Health Disparities-ADHS
• Healthwaves - Cholesterol and Glucose Screening
• Maricopa Integrate Health Systems - Body Fat Analysis
• Mental Health Association of America – Mini depression screening
• Mobile Onsite Mammography (Stationed outside Tower) - Mammography by appointment 480-967-3767
• Office of Children & Environmental Health-ADHS
• Office of Environmental Health-ADHS
• Oral Health Office-ADHS
• Ovarian Cancer Alliance of Arizona
• Sister To Sister Foundation
• Sunwise-ADHS
• Susan G. Komen for the Cure
• The Wellness Community

For more information about Women’s Health Week, visit http://www.4woman.gov/whw/

Please share this information with your organization, download an Expo poster.

We’ll see you at the Expo!

Gina Flores

Director of Community and Family Health

Office of Governor Napolitano

1700 W. Washington St, SE 101

Phoenix, AZ 85007

Direct: 602.542.2391
Email: gflores@az.gov

Web: www.gocyf.az.gov/fch

digg_url ='POST_URL';

The Morrison Institute wants YOU to be a future victim.

The Morrison Institute had an article in the Arizona Republic's Saturday Phoenix section advocating for early release of prison inmates (can't find it online). The authors are from the liberal think tank Morrison Institute for Public Policy which is funded in part by taxpayers since it is located at ASU (can you imagine a conservative think tank being funded by taxpayers at a university? never in a million years). They argue that we should release 18,000 prison inmates simply because we have a lot of people in prison now. Astonishingly - but to their credit for being honest - the authors admit that crime has gone down as a result of putting more criminals behind bars. And they admit that two out of three of the 18,000 inmates will commit another crime within three years of being released (and those are just the crimes we know about that they're caught for).

The article complains about the high cost of incarcerating these criminals. But it neglects to point out the high cost of prosecuting, defending, and incarcerating them the next time they're caught. Or the cost to their future victims, whether it's property loss, emotional loss, or physical harm. If a study were done, I predict it would find that the cost of dealing with their future crimes is higher than the costs of incarcerating them, which can be kept minimal if the inmates are required to work to pay for their food and housing while in prison.

What most criminal sympathizers don't tell you is that most prison inmates aren't there just for doing drugs. For every crime a criminal commits and gets caught for, there are 12 more he's not caught for. And when he's caught, he rarely gets the recommended sentence, most criminals accept the plea offer which permits them to plead guilty to a lesser sentence (although the current county attorney has implemented a policy prohibiting this for felonies). That burglary charge? It's just overlooked - he gets to say he's in jail for doing meth, adding to another erroneous statistic that criminal sympathizers can bandy about. This explains why releasing these inmates results in such a high recidivism rates - the 18,000 weren't solely drug users. How many of your friends who have done drugs have ended up in jail? Probably none, and probably most of you can name some friends who have done drugs. The myth of drug users being put behind bars is just that - a myth unless they commit other crimes. The cops don't have enough resources to bust drug users who aren't committing other crimes. Try calling the cops on your next door neighbor smoking pot and see what happens.

The article criticizes Arizona for ranking 10th in the country in its rate of incarceration. Considering Scottsdale, Phoenix, and Tempe recently announced their crime rates are decreasing, this correlation makes sense and I'm proud of our law enforcement for keeping us safer than other cities. digg_url ='POST_URL';

Kyrsten Sinema, the most left wing legislator in Arizona's House, has started an initiative that would force businesses to hire gays, transsexuals, and transgendered people, and prohibit businesses from firing them. The exact language is "gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation." She's named it "Free to Work Arizona," which is dishonest. This name is deceptively similar to "Right to Work," which is a conservative principle she doesn't agree with that allows businesses to prohibit unions from forming. Her initiative should more accurately be called "Free to Work Arizona - Businesses Must Hire Gays." (note - Sinema is bisexual)

Her petition signature collectors are telling people that this initiative would stop racial and sex discrimination in hiring - confusing people with the AZ Civil Rights Initiative, which would prohibit racial & gender preferences in government, something close to 80% of Arizona voters are in favor of. The summary Sinema wrote describing the measure deceptively never mentions the words "gay" or "transgender:"

MAKES IT UNLAWFUL FOR ARIZONA EMPLOYERS TO REFUSE TO HIRE, DISCHARGE OR PROMOTE A PERSON SOLELY BECAUSE OF THE PERSON'S RELIGION, AGE, RACE, DISABILITY, OR SEX. EXEMPTS EMPLOYMENT DECISIONS BASED ON SEX FOR CHURCHES AND CHURCH SCHOOLS FOR JOBS THAT ARE DIRECTLY RELATED TO RELIGIOUS FUNCTIONS OR THAT ARE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN EDUCATING STUDENTS.

The exception she claims for "religious organizations" is very vague, which was obviously done on purpose in expectation of the litigation that will commence over it. Since the judiciary is controlled by the left, it will end up being interpreted very narrowly. Many religious organizations will find themselves forced to hire people who disagree with the core tenets of their faith.

The Supreme Court has definitively established that race deserves the highest protection against discrimination, followed by gender. Sexual orientation has not been afforded these higher levels of protection, no doubt because there is considerable debate over whether it is a choice, and the fact that it conflicts with a majority in society who profess Christian and other religious beliefs. Sinema's initiative would force this higher level of protection of gays and transgendered on society, something even our courts aren't willing to do.

This isn't the first time Sinema has pulled this kind of doubletalk - because she knows the voters won't support her agenda, she fools them by masking the words. In opposing the AZ Civil Rights Initiative, she formed an opposition group called "Protect Arizona's Freedom." The opposition group had nothing to do with freedom, which is something Sinema isn't concerned about unless it's freedom for a far left cause. Her group wants to keep racial preferences based on skin color and gender in place. It has been more accurately renamed by Red State Arizona as "Protect Arizona's Freedom to Discriminate in Government." digg_url ='POST_URL';

We received a copy of the Capitol Times' Yellow Sheet from Wednesday which covered the State Democrat Party's attempts to taint Tim Bee by linking him with Grover Norquist, who they they link with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. The smear job was even worse than the Yellow Sheet revealed. The Yellow Sheet failed to mention that Norquist was never indicted nor implicated in the Jack Abramoff scandal. And they neglected to mention that describing Norquist as an aide to Newt Gingrich was part of the smear, because although they were friends, Norquist never worked for Gingrich. The AZ Dems aren't very good at creating fake scandals. digg_url ='POST_URL';

Medical Choice for Arizona CAMPAIGN UPDATE Join Our List Featured Article Go to www.medicalchoiceforaz.com to read pertinent information on this important initiative to preserve patient rights. Dear Friend,

I am pleased to inform you that due to your support and financial assistance, we are nearing the end of our signature gathering for "The Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act." We will be able to file our 300,000 signatures in June before the July deadline. We only have 90,000 signaures left to collect and are seeking our last contribution to reach the $25,000 we need to complete our goal. For those of you that so generously contributed to our campaign we wish to thank you and hope that those of you who haven't yet contributed will chose to help us at this time. You can contribute online at www.medicalchoiceforaz.com for your convenience. "The Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act" is a historic endeavor to make choice in health care a constitutionally guaranteed right for all individuals in the state of Arizona. Other states are carefully monitoring the reaction and support of our initiative which will be on the November 2008 ballot. Ensuring medical freeom in Arizona could not happen without your help and we are grateful for your support. Please send your friends to our website and encourage them to get involved. Again, we are so close to our goal and hope that you can invest today. Sincerely, Dr. Eric Novack Chairman Medical Choice for Arizona 3655 W. Anthem Way Ste. A-109 -- PMB 212 Anthem, AZ 85086 (623) 271-9576 digg_url ='POST_URL';

Hats off to PolitickerAZ for questioning CD-5 Congressional candidate Jim Ogsbury on his claim to being "The Real Conservative" in the race. This blog contended a couple of days ago that Ogsbury is not really that conservative. Ogsbury dismissed the post by saying this blog is "pro-Schweikert." None of us are working on the Schweikert campaign, but if being "pro-Schweikert" means we've concluded he's the best candidate in the race, then yeah, we are "pro-Schweikert."

Judge for yourself Ogsbury's conservative credentials - here are some excerpts from the interview:

BORDER ENFORCEMENT
He omitted any mention of local enforcement, saying, "I'm not a big government conservative, but this is one of the federal government's responsibilities." Does this mean he opposes Sheriff Joe's crime suppression sweeps and arresting illegal immigrants for smuggling themselves over the border? Sounds like it.

2ND AMENDMENT
He said that "while some restrictions may be necessary, 'I draw the line very, very liberally - small 'l' - toward the right of individuals to own and bear arms.'" Some restrictions may be necessary? This sounds like a copout answer that could authorize any restrictions. I would be very nervous as a gun owner if a candidate characterized their position in that vague manner.

GAY MARRIAGE
"He does not believe it is proper for the federal government to assert that definition, and that, rather, it is a matter for the states." Doesn't sound terribly conservative.

What do you think, is Ogsbury "The Real Conservative" in the race? digg_url ='POST_URL';

The effect of this patriotic rally was lost considering there was no illegal immigrant march this year, having been scared off by Sheriff Arpaio's crime suppression sweeps and Arizona's new employer sanctions law.

Find more videos like this on www.truveo.com. digg_url ='POST_URL';