Grand Slam for Corruption, Strikeout for Justice

The American Post-Gazette reports …

Emboldened by the verdict against Andrew Thomas disbarring him, the Maricopa County Supervisors are going on a spending spree of our taxpayer dollars awarding themselves and their cronies millions of dollars. Arpaio and Thomas had tried to prosecute county supervisors and judges, but the defendants cleverly turned the prosecution around on Thomas by filing bar complaints against him, knowing the liberal State Bar would punish him.

Now the Supervisors are handing out millions of dollars to themselves and their cronies like it’s candy. Even county employees who were not prosecuted by Arpaio and Thomas are getting in on the gravy train.  Don Stapley’s secretary, who was not prosecuted, filed a lawsuit against the county demanding $1.5 million. The Supervisors’ hatchet man David Smith said she will be awarded $500,000. You have to wonder if this was a payoff to her for keeping her mouth shut about Stapley’s wrongdoing? Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox will receive $975,000 and retired judge Barbara Mundell will receive $500,000. The Supervisors have already awarded millions of dollars to other cronies for similar claims.

Wilcox, a Democrat, has a long sordid history of breaking the law and using her powerful political position to avoid punishment, some of which was reported by reporter Linda Bentley last year. A Grand Jury indicted Wilcox on 36 criminal counts over some of her recent misdoings. Gila County Attorney Daisy Flores thought Thomas’s prosecution of Wilcox had enough merit to initiate a review. Although she eventually dismissed the charges, no doubt due to political pressure, she did not initially express any problem taking over the prosecutions from Thomas, and spent 10 months going over 10,000 documents in the case. Flores concluded that Wilcox had indeed failed to properly report financial information.

Smith says that he would rather settle the lawsuits now instead of fully litigate them in order to save the county money. The truth is that these people have no valid claims, so Smith is helping them skate around the judicial process. This is not right, these claims need to be properly litigated so it can be determined whether they have any merit or not.

Have the county coffers become a revolving door now? Anyone that threatens to sue the county we just give them money? Who is next? Quick, file a claim against the county claiming that Arpaio and Thomas stressed you out, and you too can get in on the county gravy train. Hurry though, Smith is resigning this month, and Supervisors Stapley and Brock will not be running for reelection. The free taxpayer handouts will probably end come election time.

The Tea Parties have championed cleaning up the County Supervisors office, and they will continue standing up to this kind of abuse. This is outrageous that not only did defendants like Wilcox get away with crimes, but now they are profiting off the taxpayers and calling themselves victims. Get involved with your local Tea Party and let’s stop this now.

It’s truly a dark day and time for Maricopa County taxpayers.

Governor Signs Bill Strengthening Maternal Health, Protecting Unborn

Governor Jan Brewer signed into law HB 2036 – the Mother’s Health and Safety Act – which strengthens current state laws to safeguard maternal health and protect Arizona’s unborn. Among its provisions, the bill prohibits an abortion if the gestational age of the unborn child is determined to be at least 20 weeks, except in cases when the life or health of the mother is at risk.

“This legislation is consistent with my strong track record of supporting common sense measures to protect the health of women and safeguard our most vulnerable population – the unborn,” said Governor Brewer. “Knowing that abortions become riskier the later they are performed in pregnancy, it only makes sense to prohibit these procedures past twenty weeks.”

Arizona now joins seven states with similar regulations prohibiting abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Among its provisions, HB 2036:

·Bars abortions after 20 weeks due to safety risks to the mother and the likelihood that the unborn child will endure pain;

·Strengthens existing parental consent and informed consent regulations, including requiring that women seeking an abortion receive an ultrasound at least 24 hours in advance, and establishing the development of a website with facts about fetal development and abortion risks.

·Requires that any physician on-site for a surgical abortion have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the abortion clinic, in case of abortion-caused complications.

State Rep. Kimberly Yee, (R-LD10), said, “I want to thank Governor Brewer for signing the Women’s Health and Safety Act. This important bill strengthens Arizona’s laws protecting the health and safety of women, and recognizes the precious life of the preborn baby.”

This is the latest legislation signed into law by Governor Brewer to safeguard the health and safety of women and protect the unborn. Among these measures, the governor has barred non-physicians from performing abortions, and required written, notarized parental consent for any minor seeking an abortion.

 

Pearce Responds to Worsley’s Harsh Attack

By Russell Pearce, Mesa Candidate for Arizona Legislature

On Tuesday, Bob Worsley’s campaign attacked me and like-minded Arizonans for our efforts to draw attention to–and business away from–the Phoenix New Times and its corporate owner, The Village Voice.  While hypocritically attacking me for some imagined ³divisive rhetoric,² Worsley’s campaign offered a strangely disconnected defense of the Phoenix New Times while asking voters to draw a connection between Congressman Raul Grijalva and me.

Worsley’s rhetoric was obviously meant to be divisive, but he could not pick a more ill fitting pair than Grijalva and me.

“What do Russell Pearce and Raul Grijalva have in common?” asked his press release.  The answer is nothing.  I’m a proven conservative, Raul is a committed liberal.  I have a 100% pro-life, pro-family, pro-Second Amendment voting record; Raul’s is the opposite.  I helped to write and pass Arizona’s Jobs Bill and led the passage of the first truly balanced state budget in years, while Grijalva passed ObamaCare and voted for trillion dollar budget deficits.  My actions led to job creation and economic growth, while Grijalva’s led to recession and depression.  I wrote and passed SB1070 to enforce our nation¹s immigration laws, while Grijalva opposed our efforts and wrote that the bill was bad for Arizona.

Come to think of it, so did Bob Worsley.  You wouldn’t know that he wrote about it because he deleted part of his writings just after he announced for office, but the same Bob Worsley who wants to attack me for non-existent commonalities with Raul Grijalva wants voters to ignore (or better still never find out) that he shares his illegal immigration ideology with Raul.

In his desperate attempt to try to connect me to Grijalva, Worsley jumped the shark and decided that attempts to change the business practices associated with the New Times and its owner were morally equivalent to Raul Grijalva calling for a boycott of the entire State of Arizona because he disagreed with SB1070 and enforcing the law.

It is worth revisiting the Phoenix New Times and The Village Voice to learn more about the people that Bob Worsley is defending.

According to media reports, The Village Voice and its family of newspapers account for 70% of all prostitution advertising in the United States.  48 State Attorney Generals and 19 U.S. Senators–Republicans and Democrats alike–have called on them to stop running sex ads which have been tied to child sex trafficking, and which collectively finance a national operation of hate campaigns against conservative individuals and organizations, elected officials and public servants, law enforcement and others.

Investigations into these crimes have led to more than 50 arrests in 22 states.  Millions of tainted dollars flow into the coffers of these

publications and those paying the price are too often themselves victims of the most horrible crimes imaginable.  Human trafficking and child and adult prostitution are horrific, and it is right and justifiable that decent people here in Arizona and across the country draw attention to these crimes and act to hold businesses that profit from them responsible.

While our effort to let advertisers know the truth about these publications is brand new, we have already been rewarded because the great people at Harkins Theaters and Buddy Stubbs Harley Davidson have pulled their advertising.  Bob Worsley accused me of threatening Harkins Theaters, but his accusations were wildly off the mark.  The good folks at Harkins run a decent, family-oriented business, and they are much better off today knowing the truth about where their advertising dollars were going.  And the people of Arizona will reward Harkins with even more business for being a responsible and family-friendly corporate citizen.

SB1070 was about enforcing laws to keep people safe.  Liberals like Raul Grijalva and Bob Worsley opposed SB1070 and Grijalva went so far as to call for a boycott of his own state because he was mad that it was going to enforce the law.

Exposing the New Times and its corporate model is about exposing human exploitation, indecency, and alleged illegality.  Bob Worsley, Sean Noble, and the rest of his political team oppose our efforts because they are desperate to attack me with a ludicrous comparison to Raul Grijalva.  In so doing they take the side of an entity that profits off of some of the worst crimes imaginable.

I am disappointed in Bob and his campaign, both for the position they are taking, the negativity with which they are beginning this campaign, and the very same divisive rhetoric they would accuse me of.

I hope that Bob will change his mind and join those of us who are working to expose these practices.  Decent Arizonans from all over this great state are rallying to the effort and we certainly have room for Bob, Sean and the rest of his team.  We can and ought to be able to agree on the need to end the exploitation of children, and I hope that political ambition does not prevent Team Worsley from getting on the right side of this very important issue.

The citizens of our district deserve an honest and decent debate on the issues facing our state.  I hope Mr. Worsley will drop his attacks and join me in that effort.

FBI: American Universities Infected by Foreign Spies

Growing signs of spying on U.S. universities are alarming national security officials. As schools become more global in their locations and student populations, their culture of openness and international collaboration makes them increasingly vulnerable to theft of research conducted for the government and industry.

“We have intelligence and cases indicating that U.S. universities are indeed a target of foreign intelligence services,” Frank Figliuzzi, Federal Bureau of Investigation assistant director for counterintelligence, said in a February interview in the bureau’s Washington headquarters.

Bringing this into focus locally, the University of Arizona and Arizona State University are large research universities attracting many, many foreign students in graduate and undergraduate studies.

ASU President Michael Crow is a member of the National Security Higher Education Advisory Board, established by the FBI and CIA in 2005. “It’s all a little perplexing and overwhelming,” he said. “We’re in the business of trying to recruit more students from China. We’re operating at a total openness mode, while we recognize there are people working beyond the rules to acquire information.”

Read more

Legislature Moves to Protect Preborn Children

Early this afternoon, the Arizona House of Representatives passed a bill banning abortions after 20 weeks gestation. Not only are babies at that stage of development fully capable of feeling pain all over their bodies, but abortions done at that stage exponentially increase the mother’s risk of death.

The Legislature wisely passed HB 2036, and it is now headed to Gov. Jan Brewer’s desk for her signature; she has until Monday to sign it.

According to the Center for Arizona Policy, the governor is already receiving tremendous pressure from out-of-state activists not to sign the bill. Encouragement from her own constituents would go a long way toward helping this vital piece of legislation over its final hurdle.

–CitizenLink

President Claims Court Ruling Against Health Care Law Would Be Unprecedented

By John Semmens: Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News

In an effort to try to nudge the Supreme Court toward a favorable decision on his signature legislative accomplishment, President Obama argued that overturning the Affordable Care Act would be “unprecedented.”

“Both Congress and the Executive have already assessed the constitutionality of this law,” Obama asserted. “We wouldn’t have approved it if it were unconstitutional.”

The president said that “the fact that two branches of the government have already come down on the side of the law’s constitutionality should be enough. Frankly, I’m surprised that the Court is even bothering to take up the issue. In a best-out-of-three play-off they don’t play the third game if one side has won the first two. In fact, to have a situation where one branch can overrule the other two would be unprecedented.”

Obama discounted the Republicans’ citation of 150 previous instances in which the Court had overruled Acts of Congress. “Those were all before the Roosevelt era when the Court finally realized that its attempts to limit the power of the government to act for the general welfare were mistaken,” he said. “Since that time the practice has been for the Court to defer to the other branches except in cases like Roe vs. Wade where the other branches have failed to enact the appropriate laws.”

In related news, Attorney General Eric Holder acknowledged that “We’ve become accustomed to letting the Court have the last word on the Constitutionality of our laws. However, there is no language in the Constitution that expressly grants the Court the authority to negate an Act of Congress. Neither is there any language requiring the Executive to abide by what the Court says. So, an unfavorable ruling doesn’t mean ‘game over.’”

President Illuminates Philosophies of Government

Gearing up for what promises to be a difficult campaign, President Obama laid into his critics saying “they want you to be on your own.” He contrasted this “social darwinism” approach to his “on us” philosophy.

“The idea that Americans want to be left alone to pursue happiness on their own is clearly out-of-step with the way most Americans think,” Obama maintained. “People only go to work because they have to, not because they want to. When they’re on the job they’re watching the clock waiting for the workday to end. They look forward to the weekend, not the workweek. So my opponents’ promise of more opportunity to earn a good life through hard work misses the boat.”

The president pointed to statistics indicating that the percentage of adults in the US workforce is the lowest it has been in decades as evidence that “the difficult transition to a leisure-based society is making headway. Under my leadership millions have been able to drop out of the workforce. These people now have more time to spend with their families, enjoy hobbies, watch TV, or do the many things they previously had to forgo because they had to get to a job and punch a time clock. ” “The choice for voters this Fall will be whether they want to continue on the path I’ve laid out over the last three years or whether they want to turn back toward the dismal life of toil that my opponents offer,” Obama said. “The GOP says ‘you’re on your own.’ The Democratic Party says why struggle to pursue happiness. Let it be ‘on us.’ I’m confident that only a fool would choose to pay his own way when he could vote to live off another.”

Treasury Says Deficits Mustn’t Be Allowed to Slow Spending

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner argued against letting fears of ballooning federal government deficits interfere with increased government spending.

“The federal government’s debt and deficit are no big deal,” Geithner insisted. “It’s not like personal or corporate debt or fiscal shortfalls. It can be canceled at any time. Look, the government makes the laws. It can easily make a law absolving itself from the responsibility to repay borrowed money if it has to.”

Geithner hastened to clarify that he was “not advocating such a law at this time, but the power is there if we need it. I don’t think we will need it because the Federal Reserve has the authority to create as much money as it wants to. We owe $16 trillion. The Fed can create $16 trillion—problem solved.”

A bigger worry as Geithner sees it is that “government won’t have sufficient funds to invest if we don’t provide more stimulus spending. A key to sustaining support for the Administration is a generous supply of cash to distribute ahead of the November balloting. As Franklin Roosevelt demonstrated in winning three reelection campaigns, getting money into the right hands helps secure the votes the incumbent needs to retain his office.”

Left-wing economist Paul Krugman backed Geithner’s stance saying that “maintaining the flow of cash from the government is crucial. Congress should appropriate the funds and not worry about where the money will come from. In turn, the Fed should create as much new money as is needed to fund these outlays and not concern itself with the inflationary consequences. In fact, inflation works to the government’s benefit by allowing it to repay debt with cheaper dollars.”

Obama Critiques Media Bias

President Obama told journalists that their effort to give both sides of a story conveys unwarranted credibility to his opponents.

“Reporters may think it’s fair or balanced to juxtapose contending views on controversial issues,” the President lectured. “This creates an impression that there might be merit on both sides. But must wrong be given a platform to contend with right? Must sin be given a voice to counterbalance virtue?”

The president urged media representatives to “not shy away from your duty to report the truth nor dilute it with a dollop of lies just to attain an appearance of unbiased treatment. Truth should be allowed to stand on its own.”

“The fact of the matter is, if they were alive today both Roosevelt and Reagan would be supporting my reelection,” Obama contended. “I am the perfect blend of FDR’s compassion for the forgotten man and Reagan’s optimism for the future. This is what journalists should be writing in their coverage of the campaign.”

New Jobless Claims Understated 56 of Last 57 Weeks

Given the difficulty of estimating economic data it is common practice for government agencies to announce a preliminary number subject to later revision. Under the law of averages, estimates should balance out between being higher or lower than later revisions. Amazingly, though, the Obama Department of Labor’s preliminary estimates of new jobless claims have been lower than later revisions in 56 of the last 57 weeks. The odds of this happening by chance are infinitesimal.

This oddity was explained by Labor Secretary Hilda Solis. “We feel it is better to err on the side of optimism,” she said. “The preliminary estimate is widely reported. The subsequent revisions are rarely noticed. By adding a bit of sheen to the preliminary estimate we feel we are helping to boost morale. We believe that good morale is an important building block for positive change.”

“Making the economy look better will make people feel better,” Solis went on. “If people feel better they are more likely to support the policies of the Administration, which we feel is crucial if we are to be given the opportunity to continue on the path laid out by the President for another four years.”

Democrats Deride Ryan Budget

Wisconsin’s Republican Representative Paul Ryan’s efforts to put the federal government budget on a track to balance in the next decade was widely criticized by Democrats.

“This budget is not a statement of our national values,” said Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif). “It represents a bleak future for America,” said Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md). “It is antithetical to our entire history,” said President Obama.

Statistical analysis reveals that Ryan’s budget spends 46% more in inflation-adjusted dollars than Democratic President Bill Clinton’s last budget. It also would put federal spending at 22.2% of gross domestic output vs. the Clinton budget’s 18.2%.

Unfazed, Pelosi pointed out that “Ryan’s budget still would deny the federal government access to nearly 78% of the nation’s wealth. Too much of our resources would be left in private hands. It’s just another cynical ploy  aimed at blocking the President’s program of hope and change.”

Hoyer seconded Pelosi’s lament alleging that “It would starve the government of the funds it needs to transform our society. In many European countries the government’s share of the output is well over 50%. Under Ryan’s plan we wouldn’t even reach half that amount.”

“America has been on a march from selfish individualism toward collective solidarity for over 200 years,” Obama contended. “I have set steps in motion that would serve to accelerate the pace of this march. In this regard, Ryan’s proposal that we slow down would needlessly condemn yet another generation to alienating individualism. I say the suffering has already gone on way too long.”

A Satirical Look at Recent News

John Semmens Archives

Additional Reading:

Grijalva, Pastor Vote for ‘Death Panel’

Planned Parenthood Sued for Cheating Taxpayers, Defrauding Government

Congressional Poll: Schweikert vs. Quayle

Arizona Congressional Poll

Democrats Tell of Obama Fraud, Strong-Arming Tactics, Rule Breaking

 

Bruce Ash: Obama’s Careless Comments about Supreme Court

By Bruce Ash, Arizona’ National Committeeman to the Republican National Committee

In recent history there has not been a more unthinking judicial comment made by a sitting president about a pending case being considered by the Supreme Court than President Obama’s Rose Garden remarks warning the justices against judicial advocacy that would be “an un precedented , extraordinary step” to overturn “the STRONG majority of Congress” who passed ObamaCare. The bill was passed by one party and the law is even more unpopular today.

Did Barack Obama , a former editor of the Harvard Law Review and a constitutional professor, forget Marbury v Madison? Certainly he taught Marbury to his students. Would the president also be opposed to the judicial activism of the high court in Brown v Board of Education or Roe v Wade? Of course not, but he warns the justices against such action by this court. I’ll bet this earns at least one swing vote against him he can’t afford.

Obama admonished the justices to consider the “human element” in this case. Perhaps in addition to not being much of a constitutional scholar he also forgets his Old Testament. Exodus says we are not to favor a poor man in judgement. When you take the human into account then you lose justice and promote social justice. That is the judicial view of the left and the essence of ObamaCare.

When Barack Obama warned there would be a political price by overturning “The Affordable Healthcare and Patient Protection Act” was he warning the justices on the high court or American voters? The case against ObamaCare highlights the reality that our next president will nominate from one to three new Justices. The decision on ObamaCare will demonstrate the most compelling argument against a second term for Barack Obama is all about judges.