New Book Exposes Left-Stream Media’s Folly over HB1062

Less than two years ago, extremists on the far Left fringe and their media lemmings in Arizona and around the nation successfully waged a campaign of fear, deceit and distortion against a state religious freedom bill, HB 1062. They stampeded Gov. Jan Brewer into fearfully vetoing this harmless, but helpful, bill. Virtually every television station in Arizona bought the lies of homosexual activists … hook, line and sinker, and engaged in yellow journalism. Even a Phoenix sportscaster, Mike Jurecki, foolishly shot off his mouth about what the bill would not do, further spreading the Big Lie, the Big Narrative of the Left. We saw again how gullible, how ignorant and misinformed and how horribly misguided the left-stream media really is. And just how easily the left-stream media could be led by extreme leftists, without pretending to be fair or factual.

Outside of The Arizona Conservative, there were few in this state who really stood up to speak the truth to this manufactured “crisis.”

Now Ryan Anderson of The Heritage Foundation has addressed what happened here — in his book “Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom.” He writes the following in Chapter 5: Religious Freedom: A Basic Human Right. We think this is well worth your read:

In February 2014, the State of Arizona considered a minor legislative clarification to its state RFRA, attracting incendiary media coverage. The New York Times editorialized that the Arizona legislation had passed “noxious measures to give businesses and individuals the broad right to deny services to same-sex couples in the name of protecting religious liberty.”

The Times got it wrong. The Arizona bill, an amendment to the stat’s 1999 RFRA protections, never even mentioned same-sex couples. In provided that the RFRA protections would extend to any “state action” and would apply to “any individual, association, partnership, corporation, church, religious assembly or institution or other business organization. In other words, the bill would have protected all citizens and the associations they form from undue burdens by the government on their religious liberty and from private lawsuits that would have the same effect.

Kirsten Powers jumped into the fray with a USA Today column misleadingly titled “Arizona Latest to Attack Gay Rights.” She warned that the law “would result in nothing less than chaos,” even though the federal government has operated under the same rules for twenty years and Arizona had had similar protections since 1999. A bipartisan group of law professors set the record straight in a letter to Governor Jan Brewer:

The bill has been egregiously misrepresented by many of its critics …

We should not punish people for practicing their religion unless we have a very good reason. Arizona has had a RFRA for nearly fifteen years now; the federal government has had one since 1993; and RFRA’s standard was the constitutional standard for the entire country from 1963 to 1990 …

[The proposed law] would amend the Arizona RFRA to address two ambiguities that have been the subject of litigation under other RFRA’s. It would provide that people are covered when state or local government requires them to violate their religion in the conduct of their businesses, and it would provide that people are covered when sued by a private citizen invoking state or local law to demand that they violate their religion.

The rhetoric about giving bigots a license not to serve gays and lesbians was simply nonsensical. Indeed, religious liberty claims in connection with same-sex marriage have never been about turning away certain persons or groups, but about not endorsing certain actions or ceremonies.

But the lies worked, and Governor Brewer, a Republican, vetoed the bill. Among those applying pressure were Arizona’s two Republican senators, John McCain and Jeff Flake, as well as Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney [and State Senator Bob Worsley], showing that both political parties are susceptible to abandoning principle once the media dial up the heat. Or big business. National Football League officials expressed concern about holding the Super Bowl in Arizona, as scheduled, should the religious liberty bill be enacted.

The scholar’s letter flew right over the head of the frightened governor, who vetoed the bill and got the rabid radicals off her back.

Advertisements

New Poll on McCain’s Comment about Trump

POLITICIANS FAVOR POLITICAL CORRECTNESS OVER CITIZEN SAFETY IN ARIZONA

This fire over the border invasion just keeps growing in intensity. Now Governor Doug Ducey, far Left extremist Phoenix mayor Greg Stanton and border appeaser Senator Jeff Flake are all distancing themselves from Trump — and from you. Stanton needs to take a chill pill and a huge cup of Sanka after stating:

“Phoenix is an incredibly diverse and welcoming city — and I’m proud of that,” Stanton said in a statement. “Donald Trump’s ignorant, deplorable and racist rhetoric does not represent our values, and I could not disagree with him more.”

So, Mayor Stanton, you cling to your city’s outrageous sanctuary status and put all who pass through the state’s largest city at risk of crime from illegal aliens. That is what’s deplorable. PC over citizen safety. Truly sad, but that’s what you expect from the far Left. By the way, is Phoenix welcoming to conservatives and Christians?

We’ve had concerns about Gov. Ducey, and this isn’t a good day for him either.

Sen. Flake is just confirming his long-held position among establishment Republicans of compromise and an open border.

We, the people, deserve better from these elected officials.

FORMER ARIZONA GOVERNOR JAN BREWER

I believe Mr. Trump is kinda telling it like it really truly is.  Being the governor of the gateway of illegal immigration for six years, we’ve had to deal with a lot of things. And I think the people of Arizona realize that we pick up the tab of the majority of the violence that comes across our border in regards to the drug cartels, the smugglers, the drop-houses.  It has been horrendous.  Of course, they come through Arizona and therefore end up in other states  so they go throughout the country, and it is — no, I think everybody knows that he’s right.

JULY 10 UPDATE!

McCain’s supporters/attack dogs at High Ground, Inc., a polling outfit in Phoenix, are urging people to tell Donald, you’re fired. But these McCain sycophants are wildly out of touch with Arizonans who disagree with the senator!

McCain Posturing for 2016 While His Cronies Flake and Graham Vote for Lynch for AG?

“I think it’s kind of funny—as we know, it only takes four of us [Republicans] to get her confirmed,” Ward said in an interview. “You would think as the senior senator he might have some influence over the guy he’s supporting for president and his colleague in the Senate from the state of Arizona. I hope he does, because I would like to see this nomination stopped—I would have liked to see it stopped in the committee process.”

It wasn’t stopped in committee because McCain’s ally Graham and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT)—another who has stated he’ll back Lynch on the floor, along with Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME)—voted for her there. Together, Graham, Flake, Hatch and Collins—along with all the Democrats—could be enough to get to 50 votes, and Vice President Joe Biden could come in and cast the tiebreaker, confirming Lynch as the next Attorney General. No other Republican has said they’ll back her at this time, and it’s increasingly unlikely any more will. While at this time the four Republicans who say they will vote for her haven’t shown any signs of budging, with McCain’s public opposition to Lynch, the pressure is heating up on Graham and Flake especially to reconsider their previous positions and oppose her nomination.

When asked if McCain would be personally responsible for Graham’s and Flake’s votes for Lynch, if they do vote for her, due to McCain’s demonstrable influence over those members, Ward said that “I would have to agree with that.”

“If Sen. McCain votes to allow it to go to the floor for a vote, it’s basically the same as allowing her nomination to go through, because we don’t have a filibuster-proof majority,” Ward said. “They can get around that for a little bit by allowing that to come to a vote but then voting no when it comes up for a vote.”

McCain would be responsible for the actions Lynch takes as Attorney General—including the upholding of Obama’s executive amnesty—if he isn’t willing or able to flip Flake’s or Graham’s planned votes for Lynch. Ward said:

I think he [McCain] will have had a hand in it [whatever Lynch does if she does get confirmed with a Flake or Graham vote]. You see him on the Sunday shows defending the president, defending the president’s views and telling us that we just need to move on, move on, move away from executive amnesty, move on from immigration. Well, the people of Arizona don’t want to move on from immigration. They want us to uphold our immigration laws. They want us to secure our border. It’s bad when our senior senator thinks we should just move on to some other issue but it’s important to Arizonans and important to Americans.

McCain spokesman Brian Rogers wouldn’t answer any questions about the senator’s thoughts about Graham’s or Flake’s planned votes for Lynch. He wouldn’t answer whether McCain plans to withdraw his planned endorsement of Graham’s potential presidential campaign or if he would continue to work closely with either member if they vote for Lynch—or if there are planned consequences or repercussions from McCain against those two if they do end up voting for Lynch.

“Senator McCain has said for weeks that he will vote against Loretta Lynch because of her stated approval of President Obama’s executive actions on immigration, which Senator McCain believes are clearly unconstitutional,” Rogers said in an email on Friday when asked to respond to Ward’s latest interview with Breitbart News about McCain’s responsibility for the votes of Graham and Flake.

Rogers also noted that McCain has been vocal about his opposition to Lynch.

“In an interview on 550 KFYI Phoenix this morning, Senator McCain said that voting for Lynch would be ‘a very serious mistake,’” Rogers said.

Graham’s office refused to comment further than providing yet again his statement in committee that he plans to vote for Lynch, and Graham spokesman Kevin Bishop wouldn’t answer questions about why Graham would vote for Lynch when it could endanger McCain’s political future. Flake’s office didn’t even respond to any questions.

Ward said the reason that all Republicans should oppose Lynch is primarily because of Lynch’s support for Obama’s executive amnesty. Ward said:

She testified that she would support that executive amnesty and I don’t think that would uphold our Constitution or our rule of law. The attorney general should not be operating from a political point of view, she shouldn’t be operating from a political perspective or a philosophical perspective. Basically, she should be operating from the perspective of someone who upholds the law and this executive amnesty does not exist in the Constitution and it’s really offensive to a majority of Arizonans and the majority of Americans.

Ward wonders, too, if McCain’s newfound public opposition to Lynch is similar to his build “the danged fence” ad from his 2010 primary, where he spent more than $20 million winning back the GOP nomination against challenger former Rep. J.D. Hayworth. McCain made the infamous ad to make himself appear to be a conservative when the chips were down, and he may have been about to lose. It worked last time, but it may not work again in 2016. Ward said:

We see some conservatism coming from him about six months every six years. It is something that people need to think about because you want somebody who is conservative all the time, not just during election time. Did it take this long for him to decide? That kind of seems strange why it would take him this long. I think he is feeling some pressure not just from me but from other people who are considering running and throwing their hats in the ring. It seems to me that that’s how this is coming about. Some of his advisers are out there people out there who are seriously considering a run and he wants to have that ‘build the danged fence’ moment so people will start to believe his conservatism is back.

Ward ended the interview on Friday by noting that “things are moving right along” in her decision-making process as to whether she’s going to launch a bid to oust McCain in a 2016 primary.

“We’re still getting lots and lots of support from all over the place, from inside Arizona and out,” Ward said. “I think support is actually growing since the last time [we talked].”

She also laughed at McCain ally Sean Noble—the former chief of staff to former Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ), who now runs political consulting firm DC London—who said in a previous interview with Breitbart News while touting McCain that Ward was not ready for primetime. Specifically, Noble said that Ward is “not a viable candidate.”

“She won’t be able to raise the money, and you just can’t go from being a rural state senator and go up against a very popular United States Senator who chairs the Armed Services Committee and leading the charge against the administration on national security issues on a daily basis,” Noble said. “This is going from little league to the big leagues without any stop at triple A on the way or even single A or high school ball on the way.”

Ward said she welcomes the fight that lay on the road ahead should she decide to run.

“I was interested in your last article [where a McCain ally said] I’m in the little league,” she said. “The thing that came to mind to me is I hope to be the Lebron James of politics. He went straight from high school to superstardom. I think that attack and attempt to belittle my viability as a candidate shows that there might be some fear on the other side.”