Arizona Legislative District 6 Republican Committee

Yesterday, we heard Ann Kirkpatrick’s (D for DEMOCRAT) radio ad in which she intones she’s so serious about the deficit she took a pay cut and is running her staff on a shoestring budget.  This is equivalent to the man who murders his parents, then throws himself on the mercy of the court on the grounds that he’s an orphan.

(D) Ann Kirkpatrick, who likes to keep a ‘polite’ 2,500 mile distance from her Northern Arizona constituents by phoning in her “town halls,” has outdone the media-pimped farce of the little kid who had a bake sale at school and raised $47.59 which the wee tyke naively sent to Washington to “help pay the deficit.” This political posturing has been jacked to stratospheric heights of absurdity with Kirkpatrick (D) being one of the HANDFUL of people in this nation of three hundred million, who VOTED for everything that MADE our current nation-busting deficit what it is today – and thanks to interest, growing like out of control cancer every minute – telling her constituents who beseeched her NOT to vote for ObamaCare or any of the Bailouts – that she’s so moved by our now precarious national plight she’s going without a token few bucks, to show “she cares” about the deficit. The deficit she voted to create, yet now pretends “just happened.” Spontaneous generation was definitively disproved over a century and a half ago. Likewise, deficits and debts don’t just randomly appear out of nowhere.

Boy howdy does she think we’re all stupid.

The Democrats are steadily promoting their narrative of the, “New Normal,” of life in America as belt-tightening; do with less, scale back expectations of success, achievement, enterprise, and to accept a lower standard of living! Maybe this pathetic suggestive conditioning campaign does work on dummies, but why should Americans unquestioningly accept a Democrat Party-produced FAIL? America is the “Land of Opportunity!” Democrats are doubling down to make America the “Land of Debt, Despair and Decrepitude.”

How about THIS “New Normal” – NEVER VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT. This deficit they’ve produced is borne of a colossal national theft, with paying it off stuck to all living Americans today and through the next generation. So, for the next hundred years, let us repay the draining of our banks, our businesses, our savings, our homes, our dreams, our children’s futures, by never voting for a Democrat for any political office of any kind ever, ever.

Ann Kirkpatrick (D) says she’s so concerned about our mounting deficit she says gave herself a symbolic pay cut, literally less significant than a tiny, single drop in an ocean of debt the size of the Pacific. She needs a bigger pay cut to really FEEL what the destructive policies she helped install are doing to her constituents and to Americans across this country. Until she loses her fat salary, that working on a shoestring staff, and all those office perks, and is thrown into the jobless market she helped produce, only then will she have a clue.

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona

Friday, September 3, 2010

Republic gloats over its role defeating Thomas

Proud it contributed to the defeat of a conservative

Doug McEachern Robert Robb

The Arizona Republic ran a post-election editorial yesterday bragging about its role in defeating Andrew Thomas for Attorney General. We’ve reproduced it here:

It is with a sigh of relief that we have defeated Andrew Thomas from becoming Attorney General. We ran countless editorials, columns and “news” articles in the weeks leading up to the election, dredging up the same old accusations over and over again, as if they were new news, in order to fool the voters into thinking Thomas was a bad person. It worked! (of course, Thomas still won Maricopa County despite our best efforts) Two Sundays before the election we ran our most magnificent edition. We had around four articles taking up half the front section and Valley and State section attacking Thomas. Surprisingly, the only non-liberal writers for our paper, our two moderates Bob Robb and Doug McEachern, put in the most work badmouthing Thomas; Robb devoted countless columns to attacking Thomas, and McEachern wrote up many of the editorials. We couldn’t have done it without those guys.

We performed a good service for Arizona. Most people don’t realize how much Thomas has done to reduce illegal immigration in our state and dramatically lower our subscription rates. He’s the one who originally got Sheriff Arpaio on board.  Several years ago when Thomas first took office, Arpaio had to be convinced to support strict measures against illegal immigration. Thomas was one of the principle characters behind sending four initiatives to the ballot in 2006 alone that toughened up laws against illegal immigration. They all passed. Then, when our liberal friends in the judiciary tried to avoid implementing one of them, no bail for illegal immigrants who commit serious crimes, Thomas took them to task and made them enforce it.

Most recently, Thomas has taken on our liberal friends at the Maricopa County Supervisors Office. If those Supervisors get booted out of office, we’re going to end up with right wingers in those positions which is the last thing this state needs. It doesn’t matter that they’ve broken the law, Thomas was wrong to mess with them, because we will support them against him NO MATTER WHAT. Don Stapley has been indicted twice now for separate crimes, but it doesn’t matter, he can do no wrong, we will help him escape punishment and help him put all of the blame on Thomas instead. Yes it’s wrong to spend $70,000 in money raised for an election where you have no opponent on personal luxury items for yourself, but come on, it’s not like he murdered or raped someone. And the hair plugs really do help. He also failed to report significant financial interests on his financial reports when applying for loans and other things, but hey, the cost just gets spread out to the rest of us, no harm no foul. Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, who has a long sordid history of wrongdoing, gave herself loans on favorable terms from Chicanos por la Causa, then turned around and gave them free government grant money. Now, while that may sound bad, again, it’s not like she murdered someone or even forced them to eat at her illegally obtained airport restaurant. They may have abused their positions of power, but hey, they support liberal causes, that trumps everything.

Thomas wasn’t smart to attack the judges for letting these powerful Supervisors off the hook. The judges and Supervisors share the same attorney, former attorney for the Democrat Party, Tom Irvine (a conflict of interest representing both but we’re not going to judge). The Supervisors control the purse strings for the judges. Of COURSE the judges want their brand-new $340 million Taj Mahal court tower the Supervisors have promised them built of travertine, marble, and porcelain, with state-of-the-art technology, private robing rooms and penthouse suites for the judges! Duh.

It was easy to attack Thomas, we just repeated the accusations the Supervisors made up against him over and over again. They’ve complained about him to the State Bar, and they’ve complained about him to the feds, so we just rehashed everything they’ve accused him of repeatedly, and said that the State Bar, FBI, etc. was investigating him.  It sounded a lot more serious than it was. Those investigations won’t go anywhere, since they’re politically motivated, but they sound scary in print when you repeat them over and over again.

Now the Supervisors and their assistants have filed $47 million in claims against the County (taxpayers) over their “emotional distress” from being prosecuted by Thomas and Arpaio. If you read their claims, they’re laughable, but hey, whatever works. They’ve appointed their own mediator to handle the claims, to ensure they win the money. As soon as they are awarded the bailouts -er, money, it will help make it legitimately look like Thomas wrongly prosecuted them.

All’s well that ends well, we can all breathe a sigh of relief, including all the illegal immigrants, and our gang here at the newspaper can take credit for defeating Thomas, since he only lost by a few hundred votes.  Thank goodness no one filed an elections complaint against us since we clearly crossed the line from journalism into electioneering. Democrats rule!

Obviously, this is a parody of the real editorial that ran yesterday in the Republic

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Schweikert leading Mitchell with 50% of the vote

Gosar leading Kirkpatrict by 5 points, Giffords and Kelly tied

American Action Network has conducted the first major poll after the primary election of Congressional races in Western states. It found that Democrats are in BIG trouble. A majority of likely voters in these districts prefer a Republican in districts where there is currently a Democrat incumbent, and they oppose Obamacare by a whopping 53 to 39%. All three incumbent Democrat members of Congress in Arizona’s CD1, CD5 and CD8 voted for Obamacare. A majority of likely voters surveyed also view Obama and Pelosi unfavorably. The three incumbents voted lockstep with Pelosi and the Obama administration on almost every vote.

In CD1, Republican challenger Paul Gosar leads incumbent Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick 47% to 41%, despite Kirkpatrick’s 97% name ID.

In CD8, Republican challenger Jesse Kelly and incumbent Democrat Gabrielle Giffords are tied at 46%. This is despite Giffords having 99% name ID.

In CD5, Republican challenger David Schweikert leads incumbent Democrat Harry Mitchell 50% to 44%, despite Mitchell’s 97% name ID. Voters surveyed were upset with Mitchell’s support of Obamacare. With Schweikert taking 50% of the vote, there are few undecideds left for Mitchell to win over.

AAN found that 68% of likely voters believe the country is on the wrong track. That’s nearly a 3-to-1 margin. Controlling government spending and making Washington, D.C. accountable were considered high priorities. Considering the three incumbent Democrats have voted against their constituents again and again, ignoring the Tea Party protests outside their offices against the bailouts and Obamacare and voting with Pelosi and Obama instead, it will be difficult for them to be reelected, especially Mitchell and Kirkpatrick who are too far behind at this point. In an anti-incumbent mood, the polls won’t be moving in their favor as it gets closer to the election.

By Diane Cohen

Goldwater Institute

In an extraordinary move, an expert in President Obama’s administration has challenged the federal health care law’s mandate to arbitrarily reduce funding for Medicare under as “unsustainable,” “unworkable,” and likely to block some people from seeing their doctors.

Richard Foster serves as chief actuary for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the federal agency that administers Medicare coverage, and his job is to predict future health care costs. His office wrote a memo in August 2010 that objects to key estimates in the annual report about the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. Trustees of those two funds are also Obama administration officials, led by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathryn Sebelius.

The trustees’ annual report claims the federal health care bill “improves the financial outlook for Medicare substantially.” But Mr. Foster’s staff strongly disputed that, writing that the report’s projections “do not represent the ‘best estimate’ of actual future Medicare spending.” Even worse, people with Medicare coverage will “almost certainly face increasing severe problems with access to care,” the memo says.

The memo also pointed out the annual report doesn’t consider that required spending cuts for Medicare could stop people who do see their doctors from getting the best possible health care, which could result in more patients falling ill or dying early.

Notably, the chief actuary must predict future growth in Medicare enrollment and spending each year, and give that information to a new federal agency created by health care reform called the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). That board will have virtually unchecked power to adopt laws setting prices and payments for nearly all medical services.

The Goldwater Institute has identified IPAB as a critical reason why the federal health care bill is unconstitutional and must be struck down. Otherwise, as the chief actuary’s office has predicted, the mandated changes to Medicare likely will result in poorer health care for more people.

Diane Cohen is an attorney with the Goldwater Institute Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation.

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona Thursday, September 2, 2010

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:                                                                   MEDIA CONTACT:

September 1, 2010                                                                        Sean McCaffrey (480/366-5975)

 

MEDIA ADVISORY: Pearce, Arpaio, Others

Press Conference  9:00 AM                                                                                            

PHOENIX, AZ¾ Arizona Senator Russell Pearce, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and other elected officials and VIPs will hold a 30-minute press conference in front of Arizona Diamondbacks Chase Field at South 5th Street and East Jefferson Street.

 The press conference will take place at 9:00AM, Thursday, September 2, 2010.  Sheriff Arpaio and Senator Pearce will be joined by other elected officials and VIPs from around Arizona.

“Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Senator Russell Pearce, both national co-chairmen of BanAmnestyNow.com will be announcing the results of B.A.N.’s nationwide petition to keep the 2011 MLB All-Star Game here in Arizona,” said B.A.N. president Sean McCaffrey.

“Arizona is an All-Star State, leading the way in showing our federal government that laws can indeed be upheld,” McCaffrey said.  “Other states are joining us.  Citizens from all fifty states have signed B.A.N.’s petition asking Major League Baseball not to punish the citizens of Arizona because we chose to uphold the law.”

SUMMARY INFORATION:

Who: Sheriff Arpaio, Senator Pearce & Other VIPs

When: Thursday, Sept. 2, 2010 at 9:00AM

Where: Intersection of S. 5th Street and E. Jefferson St., Phoenix

Why: Because Arizona is an All-Star State!

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

 Please contact Sean McCaffrey at B.A.N. at (480) 366-5975

or on his cell-phone at (602) 885-5815

Dear Loyal Supporter,

My staff is closing out the final details of the campaign and has one last plea for help:  Could you please remove JD Hayworth campaign signs along the roadways?

Most Arizona communities require political signs to be removed no later than Friday, September 3rd.  If you see any of my signs along the paths you travel, it would be greatly appreciated if you could please remove and dispose of them.  Most are hung with zip ties and need only a pair of heavy-duty scissors or utility knife to remove.

If you are able to volunteer to remove signs in addition to the ones along your usual path, please email jennifer@jdforsenate.com.

Sincerely,

P.S. Your enduring support for me and my candidacy is truly humbling.  Thank you for everything you have done throughout the past seven months.  I feel blessed to have had the opportunity to meet so many wonderful patriots willing to take a stand to save our country.  I assure you, my work in restoring conservative values and our Constitutional republic is not over.

Paid for by JD HAYWORTH 2010, Inc.

By Matthew Ladner, Ph.D.

Goldwater Institute

Today, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) released a new book that provides a simple, direct way of comparing the effectiveness of public education in every state. I co-authored the Report Card on American Education: Ranking State K-12 Performance, Progress and Reform with Goldwater Institute Senior Fellow Dan Lips and school choice expert Andrew LeFevre. ALEC is distributing the book to state lawmakers across the country.

For the Report Card, we rank all 50 states and the District of Columbia based on student test scores and learning gains on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). We focused in particular on the scores of low-income students who were not in special education programs from 2003 to 2009, the years in which all jurisdictions took the tests used by NAEP

Our rankings give the same weight to overall performance (which states had the highest test scores) and overall gains (which states made the most progress over time). The table below shows the rankings:

 

NAEP Score Rankings on 4th and 8th Grade Math and Reading 

(Performance and Gains) for low-income students Vermont 1 District of Columbia 26 Massachusetts 2 Georgia 27 Florida 3 Wyoming 28 New Hampshire 4 Connecticut 29 New York 5 California 30 Pennsylvania 6 Iowa 31 Kansas 7 Oregon 32 Texas 8 Nebraska 33 Montana 9 Missouri 34 New Jersey 10 Ohio 35 Alaska 11 Tennessee 36 Virginia 12 Kentucky 37 Indiana 13 Illinois 38 Maine 14 South Dakota 39 Hawaii 15 Alabama 40 Washington 16 North Carolina 41 Colorado 17 Utah 42 Nevada 18 Oklahoma 43 Delaware 19 Arkansas 44 Maryland 20 Arizona 45 Wisconsin 21 Mississippi 46 Idaho 22 Louisiana 47 Minnesota 23 New Mexico 48 North Dakota 24 Michigan 49 Rhode Island 25 West Virginia 50     South Carolina 51

Our rankings are not favorable for states with low test scores that didn’t improve over time, like Arizona. States fare well in the rankings if they had relatively high NAEP scores that continued to rise during those six years.

Florida scored No. 3 on the list because that state had high scores (ranked 11th overall) and made big gains (ranked first overall), even though a majority of Florida’s students come from disadvantaged backgrounds.

This year the Arizona Legislature adopted a number of Florida’s previous education reforms that led to that state’s top ranking. Now, policymakers should use this new report card as a rallying cry to make sure those reforms are carried out in every Arizona public school.

The ALEC Report Card demonstrates once again why when it comes to K-12 reform: I’ll have what Florida is having!

Dr. Matthew Ladner is vice president of research for the Goldwater Institute.

Hosts James Allen, Rachel Alexander and I discuss the primary election results with a conservative perspective.

Link to Monday, August 30 Roundtable Politics episode*

*this episode was NOT filmed with Horst Kraus’ camera nor was it filmed with the approval of the “Republican” Party or the self-aggrandizing McCainiac “Mafia” “leader” Jabba the Vath. No liberals, moderates, RINOs, or DIDs were harmed during the filming of this video…they were ritually sacrificed AFTER the program.

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Schweikert campaign puts up signs next to Mitchell’s signs exposing his record

Mitchell campaign in meltdown; moves signs — drawing more attention to his record

We had to chuckle when we got an email from the David Schweikert for Congress campaign about campaign signs. The Schweikert campaign put up signs next to Mitchell’s campaign signs saying things like “Union Owned,” “Hides from Voters,” and “Supports Obamacare.” Mitchell reacted by complaining to the media and taking his signs down and putting them up elsewhere. This is the sign of campaign in disarray. The last thing in the world Mitchell wants is more attention drawn to his voting record, which includes voting for Obamacare and union-backed card check. Mitchell is running from his record but moving his signs and complaining to the media makes his record even more obvious!

by Nick Dranias

Goldwater Institute

Many local governments in Arizona want us to believe they have gone to extreme lengths to tighten their budget belts. But when you hear that Tucson is using its sign laws to squelch artistic murals on the historic Rialto Theater because the murals aren’t purely for artistic purposes—they also promote shows at the theater—your realize budgets can’t be that bare. Then there are the pool cops of Maricopa County, who are aiming to shut down weekend pool parties used by Phoenix-area resorts to boost their business during this recession.

Any government that can waste resources on such measures has too many idle hands on the payroll. The fact that local governments can’t recognize this shows that streamlining budgets requires more than a commitment to saving money. It requires a guiding philosophy of limited government.

In many cases, cities and counties cannot focus limited resources on core functions because they cannot identify what functions are core. Laws against genuine public nuisances have no higher standing than crack downs on wall murals and bans on resort pool parties where guests might eat or drink too close to the water. Resources are stretched because government officials are using them to perform needless and often abusive tasks.

Fortunately, local governments can look right at the Arizona Constitution for guidance on identifying core functions: “All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.”

Officials who accept this basic principle of limited government are unlikely to prosecute  businesses for such offenses as painting wall murals on their own property that also advertise their business and planning some outdoor fun to attract more customers. No function of government is a core function if it has nothing to do with protecting and maintaining individual rights.

Nick Dranias holds the Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan Chair for Constitutional Government and is Director of the Joseph and Dorothy Donnelly Moller Center for Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute.

Note to : Senator McCain (R) and Senator Kyl (R) and ALL AZ Congressional Representatives (R) and (D) to Congress:

“Arizona Governor Jan Brewer angrily demanded yesterday that the White House withdraw their report to the UN Human Rights Council that singled out Arizona’s law as a cause for concern about the American track record on human rights. Calling such a reference “downright offensive” in her letter to Hillary Clinton, Brewer also called the entire report “internationalism run amuck.”

 (Ed Morrissey: http://hotair.com/archives/2010/08/28/brewer-blasts-obama-over-submission-to-un-specifying-az-immigration-law/)

Every single citizen of Arizona has been smeared as racist, human rights abusers to the United Nations HRC by our current President, Barack Obama (D), through his appointee, Hillary Clinton (D) as Secretary of State. One cannot recall a single instance when a sovereign government has EVER issued a condemnation of its OWN people to the United Nations. The Obama Administration initiated the international smear by instructing the State Department through Hillary Clinton and her deputy to introduce Arizona as a human rights abuser to the Chinese a few months ago, “Brought it up early and often.” Not a peep from our elected representatives then, now Obama jacks this cynical campaign against Arizona to the United Nations.

This also follows a recent obnoxious scene when Nancy Pelosi (D) as Speaker of the House provided Congress as the venue for a pulpit and a tacit stamp of approval for Mexico’s President to spew falsehoods and outrageous complaints against lawful Arizona state governing , and Arizona’s people. Before the entire nation, the Democratic Party literally applauded the whines of a foreigner against American citizens. Before the entire nation, Arizona’s elected representatives have been mute.

Arizona apparently has no representation in the Senate or in the House of Representatives. The silence is inexcusable. Our elected representatives should be in 100% in unison regardless of political party in public, and in unrelenting condemnation, and in demanding accountability on the Senate and House floors to protest the complete abuse of our national governance against the state of Arizona and the American citizens of Arizona they were elected to represent.

It goes far beyond Republican or Democrat, to the national integrity of our country, yet the elected officials Arizona has sent to represent this state in Congress are silent. There is no Congressional mobilization of the Constitutional checks and balances to control this executive branch abuse, thanks to the abandonment by our legislators of their sworn duties to the PEOPLE.

Governor Jan Brewer is a Republican. Where are her fellow Republican elected officials standing with her as she rightly objects to this unheard of act of the government in Washington DC going to an international body to pressure a U.S. State to accept a radical, corrosive and extra-legal domestic political agenda? Senator McCain, where are you? Senator Kyl where are you? Are you (R) busy defending the PEOPLE or (R)INO busy enabling the Democrats by co-drafting amnesty for favored status of foreigners who’ve broken our laws, over lawful citizens?

This is not only a national disgrace, a complete travesty, but a terrible abrogation of national sovereignty. We sure don’t hear any murmurs of concern about this coordinated Democratic Party disgusting action against a fellow Republican elected official who currently represents this state.

The United Nations Human Rights Committee has been considered a travesty of its own, usually stocked with the world’s worst human rights offenders on the planet: Cuba, with journalists starving to death in squalid Cuban jails, China which harvests organs from prisoners, Saudi Arabia which beheads religious apostates, amputates people’s hands for crimes like theft, and shelters slavery within its kingdom’s borders, all of which have prisoners who would literally give their right arms to be taken care of by Sheriff Joe Arpaio instead.   

It’s been a bad joke and just got worse. The committee members know very well Arizona is paradise compared to what they and scores of other countries routinely dish out to their citizens. Not a single other country would tolerate for a nanosecond ANY illegals entering their own nations, but many are happy to play along with the Obama Administration’s little political maneuvering stunt and condemn Arizona anyway, so this takes bad theatre down to a lower level of basement decrepitude.

What happens next?  Will Arizonans be  subject to arrest while innocently traveling abroad?  Not likely?  How preposterous is the fact that the “”problem of Arizona” is now on the UNHRC’s agenda?  It’s ridiculous, but there it is, thanks to Obama. By forcing this issue into the United Nations, all sorts of consequences are now possible.  Will the ultimate cynical ploy be realized by a gloating and gleeful White House?  Governor Jan Brewer indicted as Sudan’s Bashir was for “crimes against humanity”?  President  Bashir presided over Darfur atrocities, Brewer presides over …  SB1070, which the Obama Administration evidently is arguing is on some sort of bizarro par with Bashir’s Darfur policies.  Our POTUS is destroying the protections ALL American citizens are entitled to as stated in the Constitution.  Yet, our representatives are AWOL.  Instead of standing up for us all, they are hiding from us.

If the US Senate race was held today, who would you vote for?online survey

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona

Friday, August 27, 2010

Judicial Watch Client Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce Asks Appellate Court to Reverse SB 1070 Injunction

Judicial Watch Files Brief on Behalf of SB 1070 Author in

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Washington, DC – Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has filed a new brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit relating to the Obama administration’s legal challenge to Arizona’s new immigration law, SB 1070.  The court filing, on behalf of Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce (the author of SB 1070), asks the appellate court to reverse the preliminary injunction granted in part by the lower court on July 28, 2010 and allow all of the provisions of the law to be enforced immediately.

According to the new brief:  “Even though the Arizona Legislature has done nothing more than enact a series of law enforcement provisions under its well-recognized police powers to protect its citizens from serious public safety concerns, the district court has denied Arizona law enforcement officers the opportunity to reasonably interpret and apply the provisions in a constitutionally valid manner.”

On July 28, 2010, pursuant to a lawsuit filed by the Obama administration, a federal court put a hold on four of SB 1070′s key provisions until such time as the court determines that they are constitutionally sound.  Judicial Watch addressed the legality of all four provisions in its appellant brief:

·         Section 2(B) [reasonable attempt to determine a person's immigration status] “imposes no ‘new’ burden on lawfully present aliens because Arizona law enforcement officials have the discretion to inquire about a person’s immigration status regardless of Section 2(B).  Section 2(B) also does not place any undue burden on federal resources because Congress has mandated that the federal government respond to requests from state and local law enforcement officers about persons’ immigration status.”

·         Section 3 [willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document] “does not regulate the conditions under which a lawfully present alien may remain in the country.  Instead, Section 3 utilizes ordinary state police powers to create criminal penalties for the failure to comply with a federal registration scheme.”

·         Invoking Arizona’s broad authority to regulate employment under its police powers, Section 5 [unlawful employment of illegal aliens] “seeks to strengthen Arizona’s economy by protecting the state’s fiscal interests and lawfully resident labor force from the harmful effects resulting from the employment of unlawfully present aliens.”

·         Section 6 [warrantless arrest] “does not grant Arizona law enforcement officers the authority to determine whether an individual has committed a public offense that makes him removable.  Section 6 only authorizes Arizona law enforcement officers to make a warrantless arrest of an individual who has already been determined to have committed a public offense that makes him removable.”

State Senator Pearce issued the following statement on his new brief to defend SB 1070:

This ought to be a no-brainer for the courts.  I hope the appeals court allows our state to enforce the rule of law because the Obama administration doesn’t seem to care one whit for the safety of the citizens of Arizona.  SB 1070 simply reflects federal immigration law.  This Obama team doesn’t want immigration laws enforced – but that doesn’t mean that Arizona can’t take common sense steps to protect its own citizens.  This is the first time in the history of this Republic, that a sitting President has sided with a foreign government against our citizens and in fact sued them to prevent them from enforcing the laws of the land.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton issued the following statement today on the new push to defend SB 1070:

State Senator Pearce specifically crafted SB 1070 to be entirely consistent with federal law.  The district court jumped the gun by invalidating components of the law on a purely speculative basis.  It is shameful that the Obama administration has chosen to mount a legal assault against the State of Arizona for simply trying to protect its citizens.  It is little wonder that the situation at the border continues to deteriorate given the Obama administration’s unwillingness to secure the border and enforce the law.  We hope the appellate court respects the rule of law and allows SB 1070 to be put into full force.

On July 14, 2010, Judicial Watch filed a motion to intervene on behalf of State Senator Pearce in the Obama administration’s lawsuit challenging SB 1070.  On July 20, 2010, Judicial Watch filed a memorandum with the district court on behalf of State Senator Pearce opposing the Obama administration’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

Visit www.JudicialWatch.org to review Judicial Watch’s appeals brief filed on behalf of ArizonaState Senator Russell Pearce.

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Conservatives planning to vote for any candidate but McCain

Disgusted over $25 million “win at all costs” scorched earth campaign against JD Hayworth
Repulsed by the dirty tricks and massive amounts of money McCain used from his prior presidential run with Palin for smear attacks against JD Hayworth, conservatives are looking for an alternative candidate to vote for in the general election. Some are looking at the Libertarian candidate, David Nolan. Others are flocking to Ian Gilyeat, a conservative Independent candidate. Unlike McCain, he supports repealing automatic birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants. He is opposed to gay marriage, which McCain flip-flops on. He is in favor of tax breaks, unlike McCain who opposed them twice as “tax cuts for the rich.” He would follow the Cato Institute’s model to cut government regulations, unlike McCain. He is opposed to Cap and Trade, which McCain co-sponsored with Joe Lieberman. Will be interesting to see how much support he picks up from Republicans and Independents as his campaign picks up speed.

Conservatives made some good gains in the Congressional races. I think conservatives had wins in the Congressional races because they’re sexier than state races. This is perhaps where we shined the brightest since we lost wholesale in the state-wide races and, as you’ll see in my next article, the legislative races were a real mixed bag. I’d argue that since the federal government is a government of limited powers and the states are governments of general powers, we need to be focusing a lot more on state races than we currently do. Same with city, county, school board and other elections. Again, there’s LOTS of work for the TEA Partiers to do if they’ll just apply themselves.

CD 1
I’ve got to admit, CD 1 isn’t my strong suit and I don’t know a ton about Gosar. Paul Gosar won in CD 1 with about 38% of the vote. Looking at the FEC reports, he had the money. He also had a Palin endorsement. In Arizona, that shouldn’t mean much to conservatives since she endorsed McCain too, but apparently it meant something to the district. It looks like from his webpage he had the support of Sheriffs Arpaio and Babeu as well.

Sydney Hay came in second with about 23% of the vote. Not too shabby since she’s run in the district a couple of times before. She had name ID and money that rivaled Gosar’s. However, Sydney threw her hat in the ring late in the game. Sydney has been a movement conservative for a long time. To my mind, the fact that she was Alan Keyes’ campaign manager is all I need to know about her. Keyes is a consummate conservative, but in recent years, he’s acted on the crazy side.

The surprise in the race is that newcomer Bradley Beauchamp beat Rusty Bowers. Bradley was nice enough to come on Grassroots Interviews. He styles himself a constitutionalist and is passionate about his beliefs. As a constructive criticism, his passion often comes across as anger and that can be off-putting. I’d like to see Beauchamp run for office again.

Rusty Bowers of course is a lobbyist and former state legislator. The lobbyist Mike Williams once told me that being a lobbyist pretty much precludes you from winning office. He was right in Matt Salmon’s case and in Rusty’s case, but I remain skeptical about his adage.

The others might be good guys, but this was a crowded field and they failed to broach even 10% and to be frank aren’t worth mentioning.

Simply by looking at Gosar’s webpage, he seems like a relatively conservative guy. I hope that he truly is. It would be a ray of hope for conservatives and one of the too few wins in our column. The next test will be for Gosar to beat Ann Kirpatrick, but then comes the REAL test: will he have the spine to be a conservative icon like Mike Pence, Jeb Hensarling and to a lesser extent Paul Ryan or will he be subverted by the RINO McCainiacs like Flake and Shadegg. I pray he has backbone.

CD 2
No surprises that Trent Franks annihilated Black by an 80-20 margin. Since Shadegg and Flake abandoned conservatives, Trent Franks has been our lone conservative in Congress. He has made some missteps, like endorsing the RINO Sen. Nelson in LD 12and endorsing McCain before JD Hayworth got in the race, but again, right now, he’s the best we conservatives have in Congress and he’s a darned good Congressman. We’re lucky to have him.

CD 3
I’ll be the first to admit that I called this race incorrectly. With Niecegate, dirty.com, the hint of nepotism and inexperience and all the old Bush-Quayle establishment money flowing into Ben Quayle’s coffers from out of state, I thought he was going to be beat. I was wrong. I think the Quayle win was the most impressive of election night.

Many commenters have said money and name ID were the most key in this election cycle. The Quayle win would seem to prove that assertion correct. Apparently, he was able to paper the district with mailers. Again, since I haven’t been back in the state long enough to be considered a high-propensity voter, I wasn’t targeted by many campaigns, so I didn’t see all the campaigning many candidates in my area did. By many accounts, the Quayle effort could be compared to a deluge.

Luckily, Quayle can fundraise. Hulburd, the Democrat nominee has around three quarters of a million dollars. While the Democrats may THINK they’re going to have a field day smearing Quayle, this will NOT be a repeat of Harry Mitchell vs. J.D. Hayworth. This is a Republican year and CD 3 has a strong Republican registration advantage.

To my mind, Moak coming in second was also a surprise. His fundraising was second only to Quayle’s. Moak seemed to be a relatively conservative guy when he came on Grassroots Interviews. I’ll also assert, as many have, that immigration was also a key issue this cycle. I believe his opponents were successfully able to label him as a supporter of the DREAM Act, a measure that upset the anti-illegal immigration crowd. After my interview of Mr. Moak, his answers about the DREAM Act seemed to be less than a direct and emphatic, “No, I don’t support the DREAM Act.” If he had not been successfully characterized to the voter’s mind as a supporter of the DREAM Act, he might have edged out Quayle. There was only about a 3,000 vote difference between Moak and Quayle.

Waring coming in third was also a surprise. I had picked him to win this contest because I know he was knocking on doors every day. While I may have picked him to win, I did not want him to win. He was a McCain staffer and while some have said he’s shown some independence, I would never have trusted him not to carry McCain’s water in the House. If McCain subverted our Arizona delegation, he wouldn’t have even had to try with Waring. I am happy with Waring’s loss simply because I worry about his politics. To my mind, he’s not conservative enough. Mark my words, Jim will be back. I believe he’s ambitious. He’ll run for something else soon and trust me, he’ll win because he knows how to campaign and he campaigns hard.

I never understood the hype around Vernon Parker. Vernon was a Bush appointee. Bush was a liberal Republican so it might stand to reason that Vernon is a moderate or liberal too because he was tapped by Bush to serve in the Administration. One bit about Parker that even he did not publicize, to his detriment, that would have helped him shake off the mantle of moderate or liberal, is that he worked on the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court. I also felt like Vernon got Arpaio’s endorsement simply because both are Jason Rose clients. It didn’t seem like a sincere endorsement to me. I mean, really, when you think of stopping illegal immigration, is Vernon Parker’s name the first that pops into your head? Don’t get me wrong, I have come to like the Sheriff and I honestly do appreciate the fact that he endorsed so many candidates. I’ve thanked Arpaio in person for that. I think three other things killed Vernon’s chances. First, he seemed wishy-washy or inconsistent when he dropped out of the governor’s race and ran for Congress instead. I was thankful he dropped out of the governor’s race because I supported Dean and I thought Vernon was a distraction. Since CD 3 includes Paradise Valley, I sorta felt like his switch in races was cynical in that he decided to abandon the Governor’s race for a seat that had his constituency as a larger percentage of the electorate. Second, I’m skeptical of anyone who’s in city government. City government is not a bastion of conservatism, of belief in de minimis government. Unless someone in city government is really making waves slashing and burning unnecessary city services and being a total junkyard dog attacking wasteful city spending, they’re likely moderate or liberal. Third, the playing of the race card in was desperate and perfidious. Calling someone a “poster boy,” isn’t racist in the slightest. Calling a black man, “boy” is. The term was used to assert white dominance over blacks in the South. I’m a Southerner by birth and the grace of God. Vernon wasn’t called, “boy” by anyone…except maybe me. Before the “poster boy” flap, at the Sheriff’s birthday party in Cave Creek, I asked Vernon when he was coming on Grassroots Interviews. Without thinking, I addressed him as “boy.” I truly meant it in a jocular and familiar sense. I realized later that the term had racist overtones and I sought Vernon out to look him in the eye and sincerely apologize about any unintended connotations. Vernon said he hadn’t heard me call him that and said he wouldn’t have taken offense. That told me that Vernon’s “outrage” at the “poster boy” comments was manufactured. We’re in a time where the leftists have shrilly cried “racist” at every turn. We’re in a time where the term has been so overused, we’ve started to turn a deaf ear to it and dismiss the claims. We’re not letting the leftists shut down the debate anymore with that now meaningless and overused brand.

Gorman and Crump were two LD 6 conservatives that likely split the votes of their constituencies. Pam Gorman certainly campaigned harder than Sam Crump. Crump certainly had a hard time raising money. Not only did I vote for Sam Crump, but I had hoped he would have remained in the Attorney General’s race. Had he stayed in that race, with Thomas and Horne destroying each other, he might have been the victor…but more than likely, he would have split the conservative vote with Thomas and assured Horne’s victory. My trouble with Gorman is her support of moderate or liberal candidates. She supported Tony Bouie over Carl Seel and Sam Crump for the LD 6 House. Tony is a nice guy, I appreciated the fact that he came on Grassroots Interviews, I’m just hesitant to believe he’s a hard-core conservative and I hope he doesn’t hold my comments against me because I’d like to remain friends with him. Gorman also supported Peggy Neely. To my mind, conservatives should NEVER, EVER, EVER support moderate or liberal candidates. To me, it’s unforgiveable. Gorman did it not once, but twice. I think both Gorman and Crump are ambitious and we’ll see them run for office again. I can honestly say I wish them both the best of luck.

I’m SO happy that the Jan Brewer-loving and pro-death Paulina Morris finished near the bottom. She had an organized and ardent pro-death constituency. I can only hope she and Hull, the two pro-death candidates, split the pro-death vote. But more than the Life issue, Paulina Morris’ ads were atrocious. Find out who did her commercials and avoid them like the plague. The impression I was left with after her first TV ad was that she was an angry woman marching around behind a desk stabbing her finger at me. That’s not a way to PERSUADE me to vote for you. Her “frank” assessment of the other candidates was also a colossal disaster. There’s a certain decorum that’s expected of Congressmen. It’s why Joe Wilson got reprimanded for correctly stating that Obama is a liar during the State of the Union address. Saying she “damned well approved this message,” violated that decorum. So did Quayle’s ad stating that he’d “knock the Hell out of Washington.” However, sexist or not, I think we generally still expect ladies to act like ladies and Morris’ ad was not lady-like. I truly hope this is Morris’ political obituary, at least in terms of running for office. We Republicans don’t need her for much more than voting for our nominees. Otherwise, she needs to register as a Democrat.

Ed Winkler had an amazingly tin ear. He committed suicide in front of the Arizona Republican Assembly by stating that he thought Jeff Flake was on the mark on illegal immigration. He had neither the district-wide name ID or the money or the position on illegal immigration necessary to win. I knew he’d be an also-ran and he finished just about where I privately suspected he would.

Bob Branch came in second to last. Sad. He’s a good guy and my impression is that he’s genuinely conservative. The only black mark I know about on him is that he apparently dislikes Prop. 13. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, I hope Bob Branch stays involved in politics and I hope he runs for something else soon, like perhaps the state legislature. If he does, I’d be happy to support him. Ultimately, he didn’t have a lot of cash, he didn’t have a lot of name ID, and he didn’t have an Arpaio endorsement. Though negatives to overcome.

LeAnn Hull never had a chance. She came in dead last and had I publicly made predictions before the primaries, I would have stated that she would come in last. She’s a passionate woman, but comes across as crazy. Her ad done in the toilet where she says we’re flushing money in Washington just looks thoroughly insane. She’s pro-death and when I asked her about amnesty, she at first said that she didn’t believe in it, then explained in a round about way that she thought there should be a path to citizenship. She should have started her political career running for the state legislature, but I would not counsel her to run for anything at all ever again. Her positions on the Life issue and amnesty and her inability to raise money should be clear indicators that she’ll never go anywhere in politics. LeAnn said she didn’t want to raise money. That’s a cop out. While having the most money is not a guarantor of a win, have NO money guarantees defeat. Her position on fundraising is more proof of her lack of a grasp on reality.

Is the Quayle win a win for conservatives? I’m undecided. He has at least one conservatarian on his staff that truly believes Ben is conservative. I hope he’s right. If the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, we need to remember that Bush picked Dan Quayle as his VP running mate to appeal to the conservatives. I truly hope Ben Quayle makes his dad look like a sissy liberal. I’ll be voting for Ben in the general election over Hulburd and I’m confident that Ben WILL win a seat to Congress. Get used to saying, “Congressman Quayle.”

CD 4
Janet Contreras smoked admitted progressive candidate Jose Penalosa by almost 19 points. Yes, Janet is my client, but I can truly say CD 4 made a VERY wise choice by nominating Janet. I’m sure Janet will want me to be nice to Jose because that’s just the type of classy woman she is, but I’m going to take a moment to talk about Jose Penalosa’s campaign strategy. That I can tell, Jose’s strategy was to show up on just about every Spanish speaking media outlet and put campaign signs in downtown Phoenix which has a very transitory population of workers that come from a multitude of districts. He wasn’t targeting constituents at all by doing that. His signs should have been in the residential areas of CD 4. As for targeting the Spanish-speaking, I don’t see the logic in that either. Even Hispanics will admit that Hispanics aren’t high efficacy voters as they should be. Now, there’s been speculation that Penalosa might be a Pastor plant or even a McCain plant, but there’s also speculation that Penalosa ran for Congress just to advertise his law firm which defends illegals. His campaign strategy sure seemed to target those same illegals who listen to Spanish radio.

This is a win for conservatives. Now we need to really help Janet get the 9K or 10K more votes she needs to topple Ed Pastor. As Janet says, we need to stop spreading the lie that pastor is not vulnerable. In this Republican year and with a stellar candidate like Janet, he IS vulnerable.

CD 5
Conservative David Schwiekert beat moderate Jim Ward by slightly more than 12 points. Schweikert had name ID, money, and a strong stance on immigration. It was a recipe for a win.

Ward’s ads were pure perfidy. Attacking Schweikert as a career politician? It’s been a while since he’s held office. Attacking Schweikert for losing to Mitchell in a year when Republicans lost across the board? I guess in bad years for Republicans no one should challenge the Democrats? I think the voters saw through Ward’s thin logic.

Now, it’s time for some frank talk with Susan Bitter Smith. How many times have you run for office and lost? You’re now officially a perennial candidate and perennial loser. Arizonans have you figured out as a moderate or RINO and you’ve been outed as such on this blog innumerable times. Please, stop running for office. You can’t win. We want you in the party to vote for our nominees, but your ambition has been soundly rejected time and again. I’d suggest taking the hint.

Some TEA Partiers supported Chris Salvino. He came in fourth and garnered less than 10%. I have friends that worked for his campaign and were supporters, but I have to think that Dr. Salvino might have fared better if he had run for a legislative seat out of the gate.

The other also rans aren’t worth mentioning their results were so poor.

This is a total win for conservatives. Almost 59K people turned out to vote in the Republican primary. Only 24K, less than half of the Republican votes, turned out to vote for Mitchell. That’s a heartening statistic in a Republican year. I’m sure the Leftists will argue that Mitchell hasn’t bothered to run a campaign yet since he wasn’t facing a primary.

CD 6
That Jeff Flake beat Jeff Smith by a 2-1 margin is no surprise. I believe I predicted Flake’s win, not like that was too difficult to predict. Despite all the black marks against Jeff Flake, he is a leviathan in the district. He certainly had the name ID and money to command the field. Even Russell Pearce had the wisdom not to challenge Flake. Flake started out his Congressional career as a staunch conservative, but he has been subverted by McCain and the open borders crowd. He has voted for ENDA, he sponsored the STRIVE Act, he has proposed Cap & Trade legislation and he broke his term limit pledge. Flake has become a disaster.

I HAVE to chalk this up as a win for moderates and a loss for conservatives. CD 6 was presented with a conservative alternative to Flake and they rejected him. Flake will continue to move left. He’s lost his way. We’d love to have Flake back in the conservative fold, but I’m not holding out hope.

CD 7
Myers may have had some money, but that didn’t help him beat Ruth McClung. Ruth campaigned hard. I saw her everywhere. I saw Myers once. Granted, I don’t live in CD 7. Let me ask, if we should have voted for Myers because he’s a millionaire and he had the cash to beat Grijalva, then why didn’t he spend the cash to defeat Ruth? Myers ran a poor campaign. I’ve also got to ask if Myers is dedicated to defeating Grijalva, is he going to max out to McClung now?

The shocker here was that Robert Wilson, who made an attempt at campaigning, lost to perennial candidate and nut job Joe Sweeney.

This has to be counted as a conservative win. The real test is for Ruth to run hard against Mr. “Boycott Arizona” Grijalva. He’s utter leftist scum and hates America and his own state. Democrats should be ashamed for electing this guy and returning him to office.

CD 8
Jesse Kelly, a newcomer, beat a former state legislator with more money. This is proof that money isn’t everything, but it’s helpful. Jesse campaigned hard. For a while at the beginning, I thought he was the only guy in the race. Something else that may have hurt Paton was his late entry into the race. Paton has never been a conservative legislator in the mold of Harper or Gould or Seel or Burgess. I bet we see Paton run for something else in the future.

If Jesse makes it to Congress, and I hope he does, I hope he is unwaveringly conservative. I hope he resists McCain’s attempts to subvert him. We need him to stand strong.

I have to chalk this up to a win for conservatives due to Paton’s middle of the road record. Since Giffords is considered vulnerable, I expect Jesse to get a flood of cash from the RNC.

WRAP-UP
Conservatives and TEA Partiers, you did OK. I give you a B+…but that’s not an A+. There’s work to be done. You need to STAY involved and be involved in ALL races and elections. Don’t give up!

Here’s a great ad from Americans for Prosperity featuring a number of conservative activists!

Click here to view the embedded video.

by Byron Schlomach, Ph.D.

Goldwater Institute

The nation’s high unemployment rate has barely fallen this year, in part because many businesses are waiting for the other shoe to drop from federal health care reform.

At this point, business people can only guess at what new employees will cost in the near future. Already, health care benefits constitute almost 8 percent of the total cost of an employee. Though these costs were rising before, they did so predictably.

Now, the Arizona Department of Administration has warned of a previously unexpected 37 percent increase in state employee health care costs due to federal reform. That follows announcements by John Deere and AT&T of unexpected expenses of $150 million and $1 billion, respectively, also due to the federal health care bill.

Michael Fleisher, president of Bogen Communications in New Jersey, recently wrote of an unexpected and extraordinary 28 percent increase in his company’s health insurance premiums. “As much as I might want to hire new salespeople, engineers and marketing staff in an effort to grow, I would be increasing my company’s vulnerability to government decisions to raise taxes, to policies that make health insurance more expensive, and to the difficulties of this economic environment,” he wrote in the Wall Street Journal.

Similarly, Steve Wynn, the hotel-casino magnate, while discussing new ventures in China, told CNBC, “No one in the (U.S.) business community from one coast to another has any idea what’s next…The uncertainty of the business climate in America is frightening, frightening to everybody, and it is delaying a recovery.”

Add the many thousands of regulations yet to be written to the current almost-3,000 pages of health reform legislation. It’s no wonder that entrepreneurs are skittish. The certainty needed to inspire widespread job growth will only return when this “reform” is stopped.

Dr. Byron Schlomach is an economist and the director of the Center for Economic Prosperity at the Goldwater Institute.

As I predicted, Arizona TEA Partiers and conservatives did not produce stellar results. While conservatives utterly failed to cut the head off the RINO snake in Arizona, they did undercut McCain by defeating some of his allies in some more local races and I’ll be writing post-mortems on the Congressional and legislative races soon. The net result for conservatives for the state as a whole may be a wash.

Conservatives and TEA Partiers should not give up hope. We need to now start looking forward to the 2011 local elections. We need to recruit and vette candidates. We need to work tirelessly to get the candidates we favor elected by knocking on doors, carrying petitions, distributing literature, making phone calls, and asking voters to donate money. Staying involved in the party to drag it to the right is the answer. Abandoning ship is not.

U.S. Senate

I’ve got to admit, I never thought that the utter RINO McCain would beat J.D. Hayworth by such a wide margin. Yet again, he was able to hoodwink Arizona’s voters by falsely claiming the mantle of conservatism. He was one of a multitude of liberal candidates this cycle that lied to voters about being conservative while their voting records clearly demonstrated otherwise. Let me ask, if conservatives are so horrible, why campaign as one every time you’re up for election? If being conservative is so great for winning elections, why did McCain give ObaMao a pass? Clearly, the conventional wisdom is flawed and being conservative in BOTH the primary AND general AND in deed as well as word is the recipe for winning elections and maintaining majority status.

Another correct prediction I made was that Deakin was not even a factor. He is demonstrably insane and he and his wife were alienating rather than persuasive, that is what rendered him a non-issue in all but the closest of races. Even adding Deakin’s votes to Hayworth’s, Hayworth would not have won due to McCain’s wide margin of victory. I truly do like all of Hayworth’s campaign staff, I am friends with and know many of them, but I’ve got to say that Hayworth’s commercials (at least the ones I saw), and therefore his messaging, were lackluster. McCain was able to land more telling blows, regardless of their veracity, like labeling Hayworth a “huckster.” Hayworth’s camp was convinced that once J.D. began his media buys, Deakin’s paltry support might actually make a difference in a tight race. I remained skeptical.

This race was a win in the moderate column. Moderates do not excite conservatives because moderates have no principles. Expect conservatives to concentrate their attentions and efforts to other races. They could sit out the 2010 Senate race as conservative voters did nationwide in 2006 & 2008 because Republicans had abandoned their core principles. Conservatives could even vote for Libertarians or other candidates in an effort to show their utter displeasure with the election of McCain.

Arizona Governor

As many have said, Jan Brewer owes her victory entirely to Russell Pearce. Without him delivering S.B. 1070 to her desk, the tax and spend Brewer would have been slaughtered by the likes of conservative Dean Martin as the earliest polls showed. 1070 was the game changer. I had hoped that Arizona voters would have been astute enough to see through her cynical support of 1070 since the woman has NO record on illegal immigration before 1070 and supports amnesty.

Another win in the moderate column. Again, the tax and spend Brewer and her special interest cronies will not ignite the conservative base. Expect conservatives to focus on other races and consider Libertarians as an alternative. The Dems will have a field day excoriating Brewer as unintelligent. Just dig up some of the videos about her on YouTube to see what I’m talking about. Luckily, Goddard’s campaign has proven that it has no clue what the voters are interested in. His commercials are on topics that no one cares about.

Attorney General

Dean Martin beat Tome Horne back in 2000 by successfully casting himself as a hard-line conservative and exposing Tom Horne for the RINO he is. While I have disliked Andy Thomas in the past, my support has grown for Andy over time and I voted for him. That Thomas might actually be losing to the RINO Horne, someone who has a reputation for being a lech at the Legislature, someone who lost his SEC license and had to admit wrong-doing, is unfathomable. Granted, Horne is one of those candidates that lied to the public and claimed a mantle of conservatism when he’s anything but a conservative.

This is a win for the RINOs. Horne couldn’t be a less inspiring candidate. On the stump, he looks and sounds like a doddering old man. We’ve had Democrat Attorney Generals for how long now? Just like the other RINO candidates who won statewide nomination, Horne will fail to ignite the passions of the conservatives and he may lose.

Treasurer

Last night, I told Doug Ducey that he thoroughly surprised me. He’s a likeable guy and I thank him for showing up on RoundtablePolitics.com with James Allen, Rachel Alexander and me, but I never would have predicted that he’d be our nominee. I expected him to come in third behind Verschoor and Leff because he was a newcomer.

I voted for Thayer. Verschoor had the most conservative record. Leff sponsored the tax increase, had a more moderate voting record and I’m glad she ended up being held accountable for it. As for Ted Carpenter, he used to be my Senator and is a nice guy. I had several conversations with him during the primary, but he really did seem to run a nigh non-existent campaign.

I had serious concerns about Ducey when many blog commenters began to indicate that Ducey has strong ties to McCain. He bundled campaign contributions for McCain back in 2008. He was also apparently involved with the pro-big government and command economy group Greater Phoenix Leadership (this group is in turn supported by former McCain Chief of Staff and former RINO legislator Deb Gullet). GPL supported RINO Republicans and Democrats in state legislative races via the Twelve in `10 fundraiser. GPL also supported Expect More Arizona, a group dedicated to protecting the failed status quo in education. One can only ascribe the same philosophies to Ducey. Why else would he be associated with the group?

If one might be concerned that Ducey supports McCain and favors government tailoring an economy and picking winners and losers via special breaks, then one should also be concerned that a McCain supporter would have a position fourth in line from being Governor. Will we be seeing a Governor Ducey down the road?

While I like Thayer and voted for him, I heard many express concern about his competency to do the Treasurer’s job (clearly I was not swayed). Dean Martin, our current state Treasurer, endorsed Ducey, ostensibly because he felt Ducey was the most competent to do the job. Leff’s camp loved to reiterate the fact that Ducey had to take Coldstone through bankruptcy and I’m sure the Democrats will fling this at Ducey in the general election.

In the end, we have to chalk this race up as a moderate win as well. If that’s the case, then moderates made a clean sweep of the statewide races. Even though I may have concerns about Ducey, I’ve already invited him to come on Grassroots Interviews and I hope to help him draw bright-line distinctions between himself and the Democrat nominee. I’d be pleased to have him on the show.

**edit**
Corporation Commission

Of course, the Corporation Commission race is the only ray of hope for conservatives in the elections results for statewide races. Gary Pierce and Bredna Burns were our two most conservative choices in the race. Pierce and Burns won. I don’t think anyone would disagree that Barry Wong killed his own chances. His voting record is demonstrably to the left of Burns’ and Pierce’s records. He tried, like many moderate candidates, to run as a conservative. I think everyone knows that in an effort to pander to the anti-illegal immigration crowd, he disingenuously stated that utilities should shut off electricity and water to illegals in Arizona. This statement turned many off to Barry. Why anyone would consider Verry Wrong in the first place is beyond me.

This might be conservatives one win, but it’s not very exciting. The corporation is a cesspool of government regulation of the economy. We can’t expect Pierce and Burns to reverse ages of command economy regulation and install a free market. The best we can hope for is for them to hold the line. However, these are elective positions, so, Pierce and Burns, to hold power, will have to pander to consumers. That being the case, I don’t expect them to hold the line without fail. Still, better these two than Mr. Wrong.
**edit**

Final Analysis of Statewide Races

This does not bode well for igniting the passions of the conservative base. Again, individual conservative voters will likely focus on the smaller races where some conservative candidates won while the Party pushes establishment moderate candidates in the general election. Some have said that money and message matter. That’s certainly true in the Senate and Treasurer’s race, but not the case in the Governor’s race. Money is definitely helpful, but it’s not everything. If it was, Buz Mills would be our nominee.

Seemingly, as the races go upticket and more voters actually pay attention to the races, the more purple or blue the voters get. That analysis would certainly hold true for our statewide races since it was a clean sweep for the moderates and RINOs.

It is of paramount importance that the TEA Partiers stay engaged. They need to continue to infiltrate the Republican Party and drag it to the right. The TEA Partiers need to become Republican PCs and dictate to the party who its leaders will be. Granted, all movements die, but there’s plenty of room for them to be relevant for years to come if they choose to remain relevant. One might question that desire considering the statewide results.

Phoenix, AZ – August 25, 2010 – “The time for debating and tough words in the Republican Primary is over.  The time for vote counting is upon us. I appreciated Tom Horne’s words earlier in the campaign and just last night when things were not looking his way that he would support me were I to be the nominee.  Likewise, if Tom prevails I don’t want there to be any doubt that I will support him against the Democrat. Let’s see where the vote counting takes us knowing that in the end the Republican Party will offer a nominee that is vastly better than a Democrat counterpart who opposes Senate Bill 1070 and who refuses to challenge ObamaCare by joining other Attorneys General across the U.S.”

by Nick Dranias
Goldwater Institute

Last week, the Goldwater Institute filed a formal appeal to the Supreme Court to strike down matching funds once and for all. The appeal follows the Court’s decision on June 8, 2010, to suspend temporarily the distribution of matching funds to taxpayer-funded “Clean Elections” candidates.

Matching funds seek to “level the playing field” between taxpayer-funded and privately-funded candidates by showering taxpayer-funded candidates with matching subsidies for every dollar that an opposing privately-funded opponent raises or spends above a specific spending limit.

Imagine if this concept were applied to the media in general, news websites that get “too many” visitors could trigger subsidies to bail out failing newspapers. To provide “balance,” talk shows with ratings that spike “too high” could spawn access to tax dollars for their struggling competition.

Sounds pretty far-fetched, right. The Federal Trade Commission recently published a report urging more funds to public broadcasting, creation of a government program to pay reporters and fund local news, and taxes on electronic devices and online news aggregators. Columbia University President Lee Bollinger wrote this summer in the Wall Street Journal that there is nothing to fear from government subsidizing the media – highlighting China’s CCTV and Xinhua news as examples of unbiased journalism.

If these ideas gain momentum, the government could easily shape the marketplace of ideas through triggered subsidies. Stopping the government from silencing candidates with the threat of massive subsidies to their political opponents is a necessary step to preventing the government’s wider expansion of fiscally-engineered censorship.

Nick Dranias holds the Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan Chair for Constitutional Government and is Director of the Joseph and Dorothy Donnelly Moller Center for Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute.