Fox News Accidentally Airs Arizona Suicide?

This week was another banner week for the national media, and my former home state of Arizona.
Recently, there was a mainstream media story regarding the "accidental" airing of a high speed chase in Arizona which was carried on the Fox's "fair and balanced" news media that eventually resulted in a live broadcast suicide.

Just what has our media become?

Or better yet, just where is the quest for sensationalized journalism and ad revenues and profits going to end?

Shepard Smith, the Fox tool, has apparently apologized profusely for thie media faux pas. Several times, in fact.

The tape was "supposed" to afford a 10 second delay while the Fox national media was broadcasting this chase on an Arizona interstate.

Although, after the bucks which were made over the OJ chase, seems to me Fox is merely cashing in on continuing the sensationalized journalism for corporate profits.

Shepard's apologies sounded hollow, to say the least.

I'm even beginning to wonder if this event truly was a "true" story, or merely one in which actors were used in order to create news, at this point, and thus ratings.

Who's to know?

Caplitalizing on crime is also a modus operandi at this point with our national media.

With all the competition for those ad dollars, with pay cable you get the news you pay for, America.
So tune in, within a very short time, there will be another "accidental" or innuendo based widespread media story.

I guarantee it.

And if, as I suspect, this man did commit suicide after this high speed chase, in which there were no police at the scene when the suicide occurred, merely a Fox News helicopter, just what would drive a man to do such a thing?

He had several misdemeanor offenses, from all reports.

But misdemeanors are now held as capital crimes in many states, also for state budget and economic purposes. Plea bargained or given mere bench trials in order for most states to raise capital, as it were.
Even non-moving traffic offenses, or any crime for which the punishment is a fine.

With the amounts of those fines also escalating to the point which has created "payment plans" (at additional cost) for many citizens who don't have much of a paycheck (or any paycheck at this point) left at the end ofthe month.

Which may have been why they committed the "crime" in the first place - as minor offenses increase during this recession/depression.

Crimes such as shoplifting, or non-moving license, registration or insurance violations.
 
People are having to move from state to state, many times, in order to seek or obtain work and may not have the amounts statutory set for some of those costs in the case of those non-moving registration, licensing and other offenses.

This is how most local governments run.

Through provision by the state general funds (and federal) governments provision which has decreased the local governments share of the pie progressively due to all the extra-Constitutional budgetary items the state and federal government continue funding.

While local governments then are additionally charging the citizens and taxpayers higher and higher fees and fines for petty offenses for using the court or in the statutory levying those fines, which are now set by state law without any citizen input or oversight.

Sometimes, citizens are placed in the position of either payihg the fine (by mail, preferably) or sitting through plea bargaining sessions with the city or county prosecutors before even seeing a judge - yet if you request to see a judge, the amount levied then for "court costs" is equal to or greater than even the expensive fine.

Now most of the punishments are extra-Constitutional "cruel and unusual punishment" under it for low to middle class Americans, without having any real recourse than simply arranging for a payment plan and paying the "fine" other then petitioning the very entity that will profit off these fees and fines.

Taking more work time, or time to find work to go through the process. So lost work time and pay also is part of any traffic ticket, which ups the actual cost tremendously if you must lose a day's pay or more to argue a traffic citation.

If you do and lose, you have lost a day's wages, the fine and court costs on top of that. For most petty offenses, figure the amount it would take to fee a family of four for two to three weeks.

But that scenario is exactly what "the State" and local governments capitalize on, right?

Or the sums provided for the head counts in the privatized or public jails, while feeding the citizen detainees moldy bologna sandwiches.

With detainees now incarcerated until that time comes to enter their pleas. Or you pay hundreds or thousands of dollars in bail money which amounts have also increased progressively to stimulate the economies of the bail bondsmen.

No wonder our jails are so very full (with many held without entering their pleas, at this point)
Or a man takes his life in the Arizona desert...

Ponder that.

Arizonans Losers Again

This is a banner week for the U.S. Supreme Court.

First up, the recent political decision on the Arizona immigration case and the provisions of SB 1070, Arizona's tough "anti-illegal immigrant" bill which challenged the federal government's authority with respect to the ramifications to my former home state over its failure to secure our southern borders.

With the number of foreigners escalating particularly after the first Reagan amnesty back in the 80's to the point where it is estimated there are literally millions of foreign Mexican and South Americans making it a "national" concern.

Except for those in the upper 48 apparently, including D.C.

Even after passage of the Secure Fence Act back in 2006, and the much ballyhooed passage of the bill which provided for a centralized database for employers to check the immigration status of potential employees.

The flow hasn't stopped significantly, but unless something isn't done soon, those numbers will eventually simply increase...a bad or good economy makes no real difference, although a bad economy makes the hiring of illegals and the drug trafficking and auto thefts in most border states skyrocket.

Problem is the government, state and federal,through their own governmental contractors, are probably the largest employer of illegal immigrant labor.

And, so very many are making a killing keeping those southern borders unsecured for the cheap foreign labor our open borders provide - not to mention how much the courts and lawyers make throughout the country on all those criminal and "civil rights" cases which are heard in our local and federal courts.

Illegal immigration, while being a jobs killer, is definitely an economic stimulus for the politicians, lawyers, and large and small businesses that profit off their labors.

As a former long term Arizonan, what was interesting to me is just how ludicrous this entire Supreme Court case actually was to begin with.

I mean, even the one provision the Court upheld was politically motivated.

The provision that enabled local law enforcement officials to require proof of citizenship be provided in the event any individual is stopped and suspected of being in the country illegally.

Since there is a U.S. District Court case pending until the Supremes decision was rendered which is directly challenging that provision on "civil rights" grounds, that was hardly a "win" for Arizona - although Arizona's Governor sure seemed to publicly whitewash and call the Supremes' decision a win for Arizona due to their upholding that provision (at least until one of their fellow brethren on the bench in the U.S. District Court strikes that one down).

It was really a win for Mexicans throughout the land, and the government of Mexico, truth be told.

The Supremes' upheld the rights of foreigners over those of Americans.

SB 1070 in and of itself was a rather political move by the Arizona legislature to begin with.
During President Bush's final days in office, he used one of those Executive Orders to grant "free pass" visa waivers with only 48 hour security checks to foreigners from over 35 different countries.

Visas for Mexican visitors haven't been required for literally decades.

So upon those "stops" just how would any officer prove in a court of law that an undocumented Mexican was in the country illegally, if there are no visa requirements anymore?

What seems more than clear was that this case was politically motivated, and was the biggest winner for the lawyers who also get their legal fees paid gratis for any deemed "civil rights" action they might bring.

And if the U.S. District Court doesn't overturn the "show me your papers" provisions of that law, I just wonder how many Arizona lawyers will be licking their chops over all the potential cases they will now have for decades to come?

What a travesty...and the passion plays go on...and on...while the Americans and Arizona citizens aren't even an after thought.

I mean, people are commerce, are they not?

Foreign or domestic.

And isn't it clear that crime certainly does pay?

As far as the Constitutional questions...

I have read and reread the U.S. Constitution numerous times, and the only power I actually see granted to the federal government in this respect is that they are to provide a "process for naturalization," and to provide the federal courts for any crime committed by a foreigner in this country before they finalize the naturalization process.

So just where is it written that it is the federal government's sole job to dictate immigration policies, or their enforcement?

Since, after all, it is the state's that petition the federal government for all those green cards each and every year by Resolution?

This just keeps getting worse and worse...just whose rights was that Constitution written in order to protect?

Americans...or foreigners?

Since, of course, being Mexican or South American, or Latino is not a race at all.

Simply a nationality

Capitalizing on Gabby: Giffords Interview Poses Questions

As a former long term Arizonan of 45 years, I just could not bring myself to watch the entire much publicized interview with Gabrielle Giffords, the Congresswoman from Tucson who was shot ten long months ago by a gunman in a Tucson grocery store parking lot along with six others who perished in the incident.

Why?

It was far too personal, and painful for me personally...

Ms. Giffords was not my representative, but from a state that I hold dear to my heart and in which I grew up in long ago when times were different, and things were much simpler.

She, too, is a native and long term Arizonan from the second largest city in Arizona, in the still wild and wooly west (if you speak to any Easterner, that is, who has never been there for any length of time other than possibly for rehab).

I had seen snippets of the interview, which Diane Sawyer seemed to publicize on every ABC affiliated program and station in the nation the past several weeks.

Gabby is courageous, that much is evident.

And still very much healing...

What I found totally unbelieveable is that this interview comes on the heals of a book that she supposedly "wrote" with her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly.

Ms. Giffords has come a long way, but is still having a great deal of trouble with her speech, although is remarkably improved from where she has been to where she is now. But capable of even corroborating on a book, while continuing her intensive therapy?

I highly doubt it.

Not to mention the fact that most of the entire segment seemed geared also toward extolling the virtues of the medical profession and her somewhat unusual therapy for her traumatic brain injuries at TIRR Medical Center in Houston, Texas (which also just so happens to be the home of her husband, a non-Arizonan).

In Ms. Giffords present condition, though again remarkable, I just wonder how much she understood and consented to this interview, given her still healing brain function, and seemed she was once again being used clearly for a political agenda.

It is, after all, less than a year until the next major election, and the Supreme Court today "advised" the public that it would be hearing the lawsuits which have occurred in light of the passage of ObamaCare, and that dreaded and unconstitutional "mandatory" provision contained within it.

Gaining public support and sympathy prior to the hearing of that case, seems to be also a focus of both the medical profession (who will benefit ultimately) and also the politicians who sold out the American people with the passage of that provision and those founding fathers.

Gabby Giffords did vote for that bill, although is receiving care that will and is far exceeding that which would be given to any "regular" American citizen under some of those "low cost" health care plans marketed through those "co-ops" Mr. Obama envisions.

And in states such as Arizona, most of the "native" citizens have been paying for many of those hospital research grants, and also operating costs through their state property taxes, in addition to the monies they contribute to their state through the income tax, and also at the federal levels.

Here's to Ms. Giffords full and complete recovery, whenever that may be...

But let's hope that Diane Sawyer, and those media types leave her alone until then...and the politicians, lawyers and the Supreme Court start arguing their case for ObamaCare on Constitutional grounds.

On which, there really aren't any...

Obama and Calderon Plan Meet and Greet While More Americans Die

It was announced by the White House press corps that Barack Obama plans to meet with Mexico's President Felipe Calderon in the near future with respect to the border situation. A meeting announced and purportedly planned prior to the recent events in both Arizona and Mexico which have once again cost several Arizonans and Americans their lives due to the escalating tensions over the border situation, and another recent death of a U.S. border patrol agent in Mexico this past week.

A death that then also was attributed to guns smuggled into Mexico from the U.S., which firearms just so happened to trace back to the State of Texas?

I mean, as a long term Arizona resident it doesn't appear that drug cartel members are "buying" guns from the U.S. but from those smuggled in from South America which are unregistered and thus for the most part untraceable as has been historically the case. Or those they appropriate from the many law enforcement personnel whose lives have also been taken during the escalating violence at the border.

I wonder, at this point in America's history with the decades long and increasing violence, and the number of American lives and property losses which have also increased ten to twenty fold since the mid 1950's in the border area, would the founding fathers still be holding discussions with the government of Mexico over the loss of American lives and property, rather than actually securing our porous southern borders and providing for the common defense of the citizenry as is their primary Constitutional duty and function?

The "discussions" are continuing, and one of the topics is "immigration reform" of those poorer citizens from Mexico who also have had to flee that country due to its poorer economy and also the violence which continues to occur there so that those cartels, and the auto thieves that operate cross borders can continue to market their products on both sides of the border.

A situation which has also fundamentally increased since the Reagan years, when the interstate also from Mexico through the State of Arizona was widened and also the first amnesty was passed thus affording those wealthy profiteers to then apply for American citizenship and thus facilitate also their "commerce" cross borders.

Just what WILL it take for the federal government to actually even begin to do their fundamental job and begin practicing true "human rights" and protecting the lives of the American people, their property, and also the lives of those Mexican nationals who are dying in the desert at the hands of their former countrymen from Mexico who are for the most part those Coyotes charging them thousands of dollars to only leave them in the desert to perish.

Recession Increasing Crimes

By most reliable statistics post the 1960's even, it does appear that the violent property and personal crime rates throughout most of the U.S. metro cities is on the rise, and ten fold what they were back in the day from this boomer's point of view and personal experiences. Especially in the last five years post my exile from the State of Arizona after the National Guard was called out due to public demand back in 2006 when the housing crisis and mortgage mess was in full swing.

Recently, I had another experience with our out of control rates of criminal activity by the younger generation especially, it appears.

A generation raised on computer and video games, and also expensive calculators and computers for their research and learning in our "New Age" schools which are predominately focused on teaching children how to use these machines, rather than to think, reason or even read. Vocabulary lessons are pretty much gone in favor of the btw and lol shorthand of the computer generation.

I left Arizona, of course, almost five years ago after having experienced the criminal activity in the banking and foreclosure industry there, an industry highly supported by most of the legislature in one manner or another in order to, of course, fund their campaign war chests for their next election runs.

The banking and real estate market is a very lucrative one, and also one in which has progressively taken some rather unethical and immoral turns in the past thirty years since the 1970's in that tourism and retirement state after having foresaken long ago most of its historical industries in cotton, cattle, copper, climate (for the health impaired) and citrus.

I moved to the Midwest first but unfortunately the spring and summer crop seasons and crop dusting and humidity did not agree with this asthmatic.

I then moved to the South where I had family members living to somewhat assist my parents with their increasing difficulties due to their aging and health declines, and was there for one of the hurricanes and then progressively contracted a lung infection which got worse the longer I stayed.

During that time while staying at a nearby hotel after one of my mother's surgeries, I had the first of several automobile thefts, in which they appropriated some of my luggage, a quarter collection, and even a soup bowl I used for my Cup o' Noodles. Louisiana truly is hurting post all the devastation of the past five years in that particular state.

This taken in light of the break-in I had just prior to leaving Arizona when my car was broken into at one of the truck rental establishments near the freeway when I had to rent a truck overnight to move what I had left of my personal property and effects after having sold most of them in order to pay off debts which were "due" concerning my house and what occurred which led to the loss.

In that instance, the perpetrators tried to get a small cheap CD player I had in the car, and broke the panel attempting to remove it, and stole of course most of the few CDs I had in the car along with damaging it, although it is a 16 year old automobile at this point.

Then several weeks ago, another property crime once again.

After having been cited for a traffic violation in another area of the country in which I have attempted to live in order to get as well as can be expected considering my health issues as an asthmatic, I decided one snowy day to walk to a nearby store in order to purchase some cream for my coffee. I have also been politically targeted due to the positions I have taken on many issues facing this country in the border situation, health care and housing mess from a Constitutional perspective, which of course has created enemies in those who hold with their "illegal" views for the benefit of the few, at the cost of the many.

As I was walking past one of those portable lunch wagons along a major city street, a young man of about 25-28 blocked my route, grabbed my purse, and took off across an open field with it. A blur of a dark haired youth in a blue jacket is all I really can remember, it happened so fast.

With it, he got about $10.00 in cash, and all my personal identification for the most part. My social security card, my birth certificate, and even pictures of my children when they were mere babes. Of what I had left, most of what I held dear.

Of course, there are fees and charges involved with replacing even those documents which were stolen. And inside it also was about three years worth of work I had done as a graphic artist and designer on some of the photographs I had begun to edit during the time my health was up and down and during my parents health crisis and hospitalizations these past several years.

I was, of course, outraged and angry.

It wasn't the fact that there are not programs for those that need them in order to eat, as at least those programs have not been cut in food stamps and the civic organizations that provide food for the hungry.

In fact, I have had to avail myself of the services of some of those civic organizations after having lost most everything I owned and unable to work other than at my small art endeavor this past several years, and mostly living in weekly rentals due to the fact that I really do not have all those deposits nor a credit rating that will afford me to "permanently" relocate anywhere - and meet the legal definitions and guidelines for refugee status, although there are no benefits provided for American refugees of the border wars even after the Guard had been called out as my former home state truly and continues to be under invasion from those open and porous southern borders and the crime that has occurred there and increased in leaps and bounds post-Reagan and the widening of that interstate from Nogales to Flagstaff.

I just wonder, if those police had been instead of harassing Americans post the Patriot Act for their own self-serving ends, or facilitating and assisting in the rising costs of insurance in this country which now few can afford at all in most metro areas throughout the country, and instead patrolling neighborhoods as they did in the olden days, would the property and personal crime figures be as high as they are today?

Instead of incarcerating or citing low level DUIs without injury or property damage, seat belt violators, or those who have not at all committed any true measurable crime under the common law in which our Constitution is based?

Some of the laws which are clearly used by those public servants are merely exercises in harassment, rather than addressing the symptoms (such as with the border situation) rather than the problems themselves and curing those.

So for all those "personal responsibility" Republicans, and all those "bleeding heart" Democrats believing in "human" rights rather than the inalienable rights of native born or naturalized Americans, it isn't the victims who are responsible for their circumstances, or their increasing poverty, especially those in the boomer generation.

A country without a conscience, as has occurred progressively post 9-11, is mostly to blame.

And that, once again, is fact.

Liberal Lunacy: Colt Isn't The Tommy Gun

Contrary to the progressively lunatic "liberal" fringe element, the Arizona State legislature has proposed a bill that will make the single action Colt which harkens back to Arizona's territorial days the "official" state firearm.

To me, the world "liberal" with respect to the second amendment, and also so very many other provisions of the first ten amendments makes that label for the clearly socialist and communist bent a conundrum in terms.

I mean the socialist/communistic media is now even scrutinizing and stalking the house and parents of the man-child accused in the January shooting deaths of six Arizonans and wounding many others who have reportedly taken to isolating themselves in their home also in response to the curiosity seeking press camped on their doorstep, and neighbors who obviously also wish their 15 minutes of fame regardless of the reason.

As a former long term Arizonan, I truly believe the legislature has better things to do in light of also Arizona's progressive decline under the two political party system, and I really had to ALMOST laugh at the outrage over this one.

I mean the Colt is hardly an assault weapon, nor is it akin to Chicago's brutal history and love affair with the Tommy Gun.

What worries me, however, is that this move just might spread and Illinois may move to make the Tommy Gun its official state firearm.

Utah is also on the move to favor the Browning semi-automatic weapon as their gun of choice. One upmanship maybe?

I mean, doesn't the state have much better things to do and needed legislation in so very many areas with respect to the border situation and that open desert in which progressively more people have died there than in all Arizona's history at the hands of a cowboy bearing a Colt?

Another border agent was killed recently from all reports, just another of so very many on both sides of that expanse of desert.

Will wonders never cease?

Sedona and Tucson: Who Decides?

This week other than the Egyptian crisis, there have been two stories which were carried in the mainstream media which also demonstrates how regional news and stories get buried by the big box media in the second or third pages of most American newspapers, even less than a month or year after the events.

One was the pending trial of the Jim Jones of Sedona, James Arthur Ray, who was the leader of a for profit organization of "Spiritual Warriors" and Californian who was conducting a lucrative retreat in Sedona, Arizona in which two women and a man perished after being mentally browbeaten from leaving a plastic tent filled with other devotees a little over a year ago and died of suffocation and heat related illness.

The other, of course, was the accused from the Tucson massacre, Jared Loughner, and his trial in which it was recently also reported that due to the fact that he is charged with both federal and state crimes in the incident in which Mr. Loughner used a 9mm Glock (an automatic police weapon) in order to gun down six people, including a federal judge and U.S. Congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords, it may take "years" for his case to wind through the criminal justice system.

So much for speedy trials, in which the true evidence may be still fresh.

What is interesting about both these cases is the politics which are occurring with respect to the prosecution of them, and just who has jurisdiction and who will be responsible for determining these two individual's fate.

The Sedona incident occurred in Yavapai County, Arizona in a California style "new age" community, and was allegedly committed by an out state resident in which most of the attendees of this paid event were also not Arizona residents, but from the East Coast, Midwest or California. Apparently, due to the media coverage the defense wishes to move this case out of Yavapai County and into Maricopa County (Phoenix) so that the accused can be assured of a "fair trial," in the hopes that Phoenix or Phoenicians would be more likely to be unbiased with respect to the facts and evidence in the case.

Although would state as a former Arizonan, that the media coverage of what occurred shortly thereafter and the interviews with the victims' families were carried far more in the metro Phoenix papers than those in Yavapai County, and those in Yavapai County most likely would not know personally any of the victims.

Witness costs also would not be impacted, since most of the witnesses also were out state residents from all reports.

Mr. Ray's actions brought shame to the State of Arizona, a state in which such an unregulated commercial enterprise could even occur by one who had no medical training or had any true knowledge of even the spiritual practices behind his highly publicized and profitable venture.

Two women were killed, and one older man. Women have far fewer sweat glands than men and thus do not biologically have the means to cool down their bodies, which is why such practices by the American Indian community were restricted to males as a "rite of male passage" into adulthood, and in which a tribal healer was always present.

Our Constitution does specially provide that in any capital offense, the trial must be held in the jurisdiction in which the crime occurred, if the accused is a U.S. citizen and the victims also U.S. citizens.

Mr. Loughner's crime, of course, was witnessed by a great many, all Arizonans.

Mr. Loughner himself was an Arizonan from Tucson and so were all of his victims, whether governmental or civilian, a life is a life.

And the loss of that life at the hands of another is a matter of state, not the federal government.

Between the border situation, and now Mr. Loughner's crimes, it appears the federal government is perhaps failing to carry out its true functions under our Constitution (such as securing our porous and exposed southern borders), while then prosecuting a case which ocurred within state borders that just may have been the result of the political arena and climate in the community in which it occurred.

After all, it did occur at a political event, and purportedly a politician was one of the targets along with other Arizonans. All of the witnesses are Arizonans from Tucson.

If this crime was in no way political, as so many in the media have stated, but merely committed by a "disturbed" loner, and man-child as has been written and widely publicized, then why is the trial now becoming so very, very political?

Rather than Constitutional?

Free Speech and Right of Petition Merely An Illusion

With all the political fallout post the recent tragedy in Arizona, an event which precipitated all the dialogue between the political analysts on television with respect to free speech and civility, the fact remains that in the land of the free and home of the brave free speech and the right of petition is merely an illusion, no matter how civil.

How would I know? My personal story post my exile from my former home of 45 years is proof positive.

I am a 57 year old white female and mother of three grown adult children. Hardly a threat to anyone, and in fact have been the victim of numerous property crimes within the past ten years, including the loss of a home I had lived in for over 12 years, my last home in Arizona as a single mom raising my children.

In my younger years, I worked in law and also the travel industry after my divorce, making not a whole lot of money but with hours that afforded me to continue to be a present parent during the tumultuous teen years. My kids all had their rebellious years, and my birth family was spread out throughout the country due to jobs and marriages. I and one of my children were asthmatics so Arizona remained home throughout their growing up years.

My youth was also somewhat rebellious, but mild in comparison in looking back. I excelled in academics, and also was involved in civic and extra-curricular activities and eventually married my high school sweetheart, although it did not last.

After the mortgage boom and bust, and due to other corporate friendly laws and statutes in Arizona, I eventually lost my home or at least any enjoyment in it my last child's final year in high school.

Graduation plans were intermingled with listing my home and attempting to find a buyer while the market was tanking. I had had to refinance during the boom due to increasing property taxes and insurance, and got caught up in a loan underwritten by Indy Mac bank which also then factored into the eventual loss. But the lawyers, realtors, title companies and bank made out as I was able to eventually find a buyer and got off much better than some, although also lost a small business I had during this time in which I worked from home in order to be around until the last graduated.

I sold most of what I owned to pay off the debts, and also borrowed from relatives in order to pay off more. From parents who were living off a small pension from my father's former employment, and their social security and whose health was failing - and who were also residents of Louisiana and had been evacuated for Katrina. Both had undiagnosed heart disease for literally decades.

I moved to the Midwest first, but unfortunately the climate did not agree with me, and subsequently got involved in the housing and mortgage situation writing articles on a small blog and letters to my former representatives in Arizona about how and what occurred that resulted in the loss of my home. Moving at 20 is hard. At 50 it is much, much harder.

After several months there, I was stalked in my apartment complex parking lot.

A lawsuit had been filed against me over a matter which had occurred over four and half years prior over an insurance claim, and in which it wasn't even filed until four months after I had left the State of Arizona, and after I had returned most of the monies sought to the insurance company for settlement with the contractor. The amount sought with interest was over three times the claimed debt in addition after four and a half years.

I then heard through the family grapevine that my parents health was not at all good, and decided to travel to Louisiana to be nearer to them at least. Another mistake, as that climate definitely did nothing for my also up and down health after the move, although with the multiple hospitalizations of my parents ended up staying there almost two years. I was there for Gustav, and then got even sicker as mold is one of my asthma triggers. I couldn't even lift my arms for an extended period of time, and was eventually recommended by a doctor that I leave and seek a drier climate just prior to my father's massive heart attack in January, 2010. He, of course, had all the symptoms of heart disease for literally a decade, but was only given blood thinners until the inevitable occurred as a Medicare patient, with a 95% blockage in a major artery.

I continued to write on my small blog (with about 200 views), and also my letters to my former representatives in Arizona. I also began writing on a globally focused website (which also had minimal circulation) my political take after my experiences on the housing and mortgage crisis, border issue, and the health care debate as an "expert" due to my experiences and longevity living in Arizona, and my personal experiences and having gone through the health care system with my parents progressive disease. I also had a mother-in-law that died at 54 of undiagnosed heart disease, so it is a disease that goes undiagnosed in women and men many times until it is far too late.

Most of my petitions were civil, although held much truth due to my experiences. But my free speech rights nor my rights of petition have been respected, and have not at all been unaffected by my continued involvement. Even though it is also those politicians lives and that of their children that are also my concern. Even those who wish me ill.

Presently, I get Golf Digest magazine although never subscribed to it. I have been followed and chased from state to state as I seek a climate in which I can actually breathe by those who obviously are threatened by what I have to say.

Imagine that. A mere 57 year old woman, with a readership of less than 300, if that.

My voice is simply one of many, but there is no civility when you challenge the powers that be. There is simply stalking.

I have less than $4.00 in my bank account, and the contents of what I have left of my possessions now fill less than a 5x10 foot area from a 1,900 square foot house in North Phoenix. Most of them are merely Christmas decorations, dishes, towels and personal records.

This is America, and I am living proof that there is no free speech no matter how civil.

Or how true.

MYOB Mayor Bloomberg: Arizona Isn't New York, Thank Goodness

It appears the greenhorns and Eastern dandies are hell bent on using the tragedy which recently occurred in Arizona for their own nefarious ends once again.

Case in point: Mayor Michael Bloomberg's sting operation in Arizona at a Tucson gun show wherein he took his New York thugs to Arizona in order to expose the ease with which someone can buy a gun in the Grand Canyon State.

As one who believes there should be at least some laws governing the sales of assault or automatic weapons throughout the country, which did not exist at the time our Constitution was ratified, I found the Mayor's grandstanding rather revolting, as also a former long term Arizonan.

Arizona is, after all, the epitomy of the west, and just so happens to border a foreign country and government.

One in which there has been historically a great deal of cross borders crime and trafficking ever since Arizona entered into the union. And in which a great deal of the war refugees from these increasingly aggressive wars are also now being resettled, unlike greater Manhattan.

Mr. Bloomberg, your pure ignorance of the differences between Arizona and New York are telling. And so are your methods in order to gain political power at the cost of the recent occurrences in Arizona, and of course the rest of the nation also who have not at all stood behind Arizonans calling for a physical solution to our country's greatest threat: securing and fencing our open and exposed desert expanse and southern borders.

A great deal of the crime which occurs in Arizona is actually facilitated by foreigners, whether domestic or international. Or our youth who have been polluted by the political betrayals of many of our political leaders the past half century, clearly a scenario which is increasing.

Not native Arizonans or longer term residents. But by those from New York and Los Angeles who are primarily responsible for the road rage and gang violence, for example.

MYOB, Mayor Bloomberg.

Arizona isn't New York (and thank goodness).

And it is mainly true collectors that attend such venues as the one in which you staged your political propaganda.

The events which occurred in Tucson were not the result of an attack with a Colt .45.

Wisconsin Politico Unaware Arizona Borders Mexico?

As an example of the horrendous state of America's educational system, below is a link to a Wisconsin Board of Supervisor's meeting wherein one of the members of the Board (a Democrat) alleges that the Arizona border situation and concerns are unwarranted, given that Arizona is not Texas and a state that is far away from the Mexican border.

Really makes you wonder, doesn't it?

This also reminded me of a response I received from a New Mexico legislator (an attorney, at that) who represented in a response to one of my petitions regarding the border situation as one who lived in Arizona for over 45 years that the definition of "America" encompassed all the land and territory extending from the tip of South America to Alaska.

Enjoy.

http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2010/06/25/wisc-dem-unaware-that-arizona-borders-with-mexico-plus-youtube-pulls-video/

Senate Approves 600 Million For Border: But Where's The Fence?

It was announced with great fanfare by the mainstream media that the Senate has approved on voice vote an additional 600 million dollars in order to reportedly secure the U.S. Mexico border.

Just in time for the upcoming November elections.

The funds provided are to be utilized in the hiring of an additional 1,500 government employees (whose salaries and benefits will escalate over time, and is once again expanding the costs of government rather than reducing it, and who also will be disempowered in effectively doing their jobs through internal regulatory backbiting) and more toys for the monitoring of the border with unmanned aircraft and the like for the defense contractors and Silicon Valley.

But where are the sums for the fence, the true security which is needed at least along the Arizona border which encompasses over 300 miles of open desert?

It would literally take agents arm in arm to secure that desert adequately against those new and improved all terrain vehicles those large scale hard drug dealers and auto theft rings have been able to purchase with their massive profits PROGRESSIVELY.

The pickup trucks crossing with the loads of Mexico Gold are a mere drop in the bucket, and don't have the speed or familiarity with those stretches of desert that those repeat large scale drug operations do, or homie domestic distributors and suppliers they have signed up on the U.S. side of the border after the last amnesty under Reagan who are now plying their wares to middle school students.

I'll bet the cost for four to five foot titanium spikes would be far less than the costs of this newest "solution" to the open border situation will actually be.

And far less likely to potentially add billions more to the bottom line deficit for those fees and costs for that other group of government contractors, the illegal immigrant "civil rights" lawyers and PAC organizations at the U.S. taxpayers expense who are now forced to literally pay for their own abuse in many of these illegal, in more ways than one, civil rights cases with the illegals getting free lawyers gratis the U.S. taxpayers including those U.S. citizens, municipal and state governments who are getting hit in double and triple whammies for those illegal cases since the Mexican government surely isn't providing the legal fees for these migrant workers and drug dealers through the American courts.

Mr. Obama heralded the bill and is expected to sign it on Friday, again using this ineffective and costly "solution," which has been tried numerous times before throughout the decades to push his "comprehensive immigration reform" agenda ala George Bush and that of the globalists serving on the Hill from both the mainstream political parties who dominate our elective and appointed offices across the board both at the federal and state levels.

A "high tech" physical fence is what is needed here, not a virtual fence that can be turned off and on at will at the flip of a few switches and monitored once again by government contractors (in the name of "jobs and the economy" in these ever increasing public/private partnerships for mostly Wall Street's eventual gains) that just might be tempted to look the other way for a cut of this profitable Mexican commerce in this underground trade agreement.

The sums for this Silicon Valley and defense contractor stimulus it was announced is going to be funded by an increase in the taxes levied on personnel agencies that provide foreign labor.

Say, what? The majority of those that legally wish entry into this country to my knowledge do not go through "personnel agencies" at all, but through immigration lawyers who solicit their clients overseas and who arrange for those green cards at huge fees for the average Eastern European or South American.

Which, of course, simply means that the profits for the mostly naturalized Mexican coyotes will increase, since those taxes for those foreign workers will be passed on to them as part of their "application fees", making it more than likely that the U.S. will be seeing an increase in Western European immigrants whose countries have higher currency rates for the legal Visas and green cards, than those from poorer countries who will simply again take their chances on the coyotes leading the across that desert.

Which just goes to show that the Democrats are not the party of the "common" people they claim to be, but also identical to that other branch of the Globalist Party, the NeoCon Republican wing, since this solution is really no solution at all and has been used numerous times in the past - even under Ms. Napolitano when she was Governor of Arizona but did not at all reduce the numbers in any significant manner of "new" crossers.

Or this will simply give some of those new internet "homeland security" graduates those 1,500 jobs along partisan lines according to which party is in power for their party members, the ones most likely that will flip the switches on those virtual fences, and then create eventually another agency or panel to investigate and monitor the monitoring of the virtual fencing after the next high profile rancher's death occurs.

So again I and literally tens of thousands of other present and former border state residents and victims, and others throughout the nation now feeling annually more and more the impact of this PROGRESSIVE negligence, ask this Congress and this Administration - WHERE'S THE FENCE?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/08/12/pol.senate.border.funding/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_politics

UPDATE: Obama, as reported, signed the bill with much mainstream media ballyhoo as was expected. Another political move, and not Constitutional one.

In former Goldwater Arizona, I can unequivocally state that given the level of victimization of the American people, and the fact that we are STILL engaged in a foreign war primarily due to an attack that was carried out from within the country by illegal immigrants who overstayed their visas and were not screened adequately prior to allowing entry, and the amount of homeless and jobless in a state which he truly loved as a native, that he would have had the marines, army and coast guard patrolling those borders - and during this war would have had any and all "visitors" expelled before one boot set on Afghan soil....

So, again, WHERE'S THE FENCE?

Anchor Babies: Are They Constitutionally U.S. Citizens?

This week during the continuing debate on the validity of the steps the State of Arizona has undertaken in order to address the illegal immigrant problems in that state by mostly outside agitators from various special interest groups and media types, there was a report that an additional law addressing the "anchor" baby problem also is being formulated to further restrict any and all citizenship rights by extension to the parents of children who are born in the United States of illegals.

Of course, Arizona once again is setting up the civil rights lawyers for a clear challenge to any such law, rather than taking the steps that would be clearly called for here by our Constitution.

And that would be to place this before the citizenry after using the Constitutional solution through the federal courts in order to get our borders truly physically secured, especially those southern borders nine long years after 9-11, so that this problem is not a problem in any manner whatsoever of those that cross the border to give birth to their children.

Due to separate federal legislation providing for emergency medical care for foreigners - many of whom use the border hospitals also for their needs but do return to Mexico, such legislation is sure to spark additional politicizing by the Mexican government also who use the United States and U.S. citizens wallets, whether visiting that country or not, for their economic stimulus and benefit in more ways than one.

These steps fly in the face of existing federal legislation in this respect, and many others, and does seem that most of these measures that are being facilitated by the state "misrepresentatives" in Arizona are being done for political purposes, of course, without taking any legal steps under Constitutional provision whatsoever to get those borders secured under both the "common defense" provisions of the Constitution, and also the 2006 Secure Fence Act.

That is, after all, why we have a federal government (and is also the primary purpose also of the state government) to begin with - to protect the populace from the adverse impact of foreigners, whether militarily or criminally.

I, of course, have a special interest also in this legislation - as both a former Arizonan and victim of multiple illegal immigrant crimes over the course of 45 years, and also as the granddaughter of immigrants, one of whom never went through the naturalization process and was a "registered resident alien" from Scotland until her death - my grandmother.

My grandfather was a citizen, but although she entered this country legally back in early part of the 20th century, she was busy raising children thereafter, and then feared she did not have the education in order to pass the test at that time, which was fairly stringent, and also had family living in Scotland and was concerned due to wars and such she would be denied the opportunity to visit them, although for financial reasons merely went back three or four times during her lifetime for family visits and celebrations.

The 14th Amendment is being brought to the forefront as the barrier to such legislation at the state level, although I would argue that the legality of all those amendments after the 10th is questionable to begin with, since the 9th Amendment was meant to clarify that any and all future amendments to the Constitution, as a government "of the people, by the people, for the people," were to be first put before the people before the states had any authority to ratify any future amendments to it.

This is a fundamental principle of the Constitutional Republican form of government the founders envisioned and created, as below the people and accountable to them.

And it would clearly be different if we had a true representative government on any level at this point - which we have not since that bogus Supreme Court decision granting "corporate personhood" status to property facilitated by the corporate lawyers in this country, and also due to the fact that the Supreme Court has progressively also then given even Bill of Rights protections even to corporate entities. Including affording them just recently unlimited campaign contributions to candidates for federal office - and in which many of these corporations now are not even U.S. home domiciled, or even home domiciled in the states and thus outside district funding and influence negates even the shred of a representative government at state, federal and local levels across the board.

BP is and was a British domiciled oil company that was formerly owned by the British roayl family, it has been reported, but made massive campaign donations to federal and state legislative campaigns, and appears to me quite obviously why this Administration has basically taken a hands off approach other than the public tongue lashings which have gone on now for over a month after the Deepwater Horizon disaster which cost another eleven Americans their lives at the hands of foreigners operating outside even a minimum of federal or state oversight and drilling into America's coastline and given access to American oil reserves.

While we are fighting a war in Iraq and Afghanistan, Washington is selling off American assets and industries to foreigners right and left.

Patrick Henry fought tooth and nail for those first ten Bill of Rights in order to protect the citizenry from the overstep of this new government as they had experienced in Britain, and his speech during the Virginia ratification process proves what was intended to be secured for the citizenry by those first ten amendments.

It is clear throughout the Constitution that it was also the intent of the founders to write the Constitution addressing this matter clearly through many of its other provisions, such as:

The presidential office holder had to be a certain age, born in this country, and also lived in this country consistently for a proscribed number of years (which coincided with the birth of future Americans through the British custom of making their European tours and schooling after reaching the age of 13, since there were no schools of higher learning in this country at that time and many went abroad for their higher learning).

As are there such age required and residency provisions for all the federal senators and congressmen.

The provisions also addressing the hiring and outsourcing of foreign labor involving placing a tax on such labor after the first generation of "immigrant" Americans died out who were in this country at the signing also shows their intentions in this respect, as does the duty for the new federal government to provide a naturalization process for foreigners (and at the beginning, it took five full years, which was extended to seven at one point, and no inherent "rights" were afforded to foreigners at all prior to formal naturalization and those that entered were documented upon entry and stowaways not included on ship's manifests were criminals and were shipped back to their home countries immediately in chains).

It is clear that the "intent" of those founders after the first generation of Americans died out, that the definition of a "natural born American" was one who was born of at least one either natural born or naturalized parent, and that full citizenship actually is not afforded until that child reached the age of majority.

Children born of generational Americans do not have citizenship rights while minors, and full adulthood in their day was not recognized until the age of 25 through many of the provisions in that Constitution, since at that age most had left home, were either finished their higher educations, or had families or property of their own.

I, as an Arizonan paying taxes for the schools in that state throughout my adulthood there, always wondered how the children of illegals were afforded to attend the public schools as more and more illegals flooded into Arizona after the Reagan amnesty.

It would appear to me that this measure is again treating the symptoms once again and not doing anything fundamentally within the Arizona legislature's power to address the problem at all.

And that is the open borders.

The true legal solution is in passing the required Resolution directing the Governor to file, through the Attorney General's office, the federal lawsuit of "breach of contract" in order to get those borders truly secured from both the criminal element, and the property theft and impact on the legal citizenry this negligence has progressively caused in the homelessness and joblessness especially in that state, and resulting drain on the social service welfare rolls which have placed more and more legal Americans on them progressively in that state.

We have party politicians, and not true statesmen or duly elected representatives at all levels of government - that is abundantly clear.

Or else none of them truly have any understanding of or have read the document upon which they all swear their oath of office.

Cops, Cops Everywhere: Cinco De Mayo Profiling

While the mainstream news media and politicians continue to "politicize" the recent old "new" law in Arizona written mostly by the civil rights lawyers in that state clearly for their own "stimulus" with respect to the rather broad and open-ended language contained in it and using the race card inappropriately to racket up the temperatures of the citizenry for both of the mainstream political parties benefit, as a former long term Arizonan I had an interesting experience this past month upon returning to that state for a brief 48 hour turnaround trip for a family member's graduation.

I, of course, left the state fairly quickly as one of those affected by the border situation, and costs of ownership of my home which necessitated relinquishing my ownership "nonrights," when a plea went out to those attending to support an added sales tax increase in order to purportedly fund the universities and schools, when Arizona's schools are funded through property taxes, and as a divorced single mother, both my ex-spouse and I had paid those taxes through the nose while our children were growing up there while watching property and insurance rates also skyrocket.

But while traveling through the State of New Mexico along the interstate highway to Arizona it seems the State of New Mexico has its own version of "profiling," both racially and otherwise.

There were at least a dozen of those expensive electronic highway safety signs that were flashing the message, "Cops, Cops Everywhere...May Cinco de Mayo DUI Blitz," or words similar to that effect.

While the Obama Administration has also been using Arizona's new law for its agendas in pursuing another Reagan era amnesty for the estimated over 12 million illegal immigrants in this country at the present time - once again, without any real permanent fencing or border security per the 2006 Fence Act - his National Highway Safety Council apparently is doing its own "racial" profiling regarding the timing of these DUI stings and in some states even, road blocks.

At these road blocks citizens at random are presumed to be possibly under the influence during select holiday weekends, since most of these sting operations are occurring during the spring breaks or other holidays.

Conveniently, May happens to be the month when both Cinco De Mayo is celebrated throughout the country at this point (a Mexican holiday, not U.S.) and graduation celebrations are in full swing.

These "saturation patrols" are compromised mostly of off-duty police officers for added pay under federal grant monies given to the states for such purposes so that they will tow the line in federal mandates in this respect under threat of removal of federal (and state) highway funding - one of their true Constitutional duties, of course rather than handing out monies for the next Woodstock Museum, or bridge to nowhere - mainly at the behest of that now temperance organization, MADD, and the global and national bankers, once again, and insurance industry.

The cities and states, of course, love those laws since the fees and fines now are so high they can also receive double revenue for those minor offenses (civil matters if not involving property loss or injury to another).

Many of the states have quietly sold some of their jail facilities to private entities, of course, leasing them back at higher costs to the public or turned to such facilities as "tent city" in Arizona in order to gain even more revenue, since those states then also receive added revenue by the head for those who are arrested and cannot now make their bonds due to the amount of those fines and fees even for first time offenses, many of whom are then serving jail time before they are even arraigned or have entered their pleas.

I wonder if this, too, could be classified as "racial" profiling?

Or simply governmentally facilitated "terrorism," on the public.

It seems Granddaddy does seem to speak out of both sides of its mouth when push comes to shove, and wonder whether such barricades and "checkpoints" that are used now for insurance and DUI "searches and seizures," will also become the norm?

"Let me see your papers," also includes those mandatory insurance barricades and checkpoints in some of those states that are also now conducted "in the interest of public safety" outside Arizona after Big Daddy spoke back in the 1970's using the same tactics for those nationwide laws for mandated citizen control also at the behest of mainly the insurance industry using again removal of highway funding, didn't they?

How come Saturday Night Live hasn't done a skit on THAT?

As a former Arizonan who has seen it all and watched this situation progress for the past forty years, I am opposed to the law in its present form for many reasons, but primarily because without the needed border fencing and security, it simply is addressing the symptoms and not the cause at all.

We are looking at serial amnesties here for political purposes at the cost, once again, of the natural and naturalized Americans progressively since any such attempt by Congress would be the second in two decades. Generational amnesties.

If it is the federal government's intent to simply turn the West and Southwest back over to Mexico and Canada, too, since so many Canadian snowbirds also live in those Sunbelt states more than six months out of the year or own second homes there, maybe there is a great deal in that NAFTA free trade agreement with those two countries that those Americans living in the West and Southwest and Sunbelt states simply haven't been told.

Especially since foreigners now are progressively gaining Bill of Rights protections under a Constitution that is now more protective of foreigner's rights, than Americans.

Like hasta la vista, baby.

They now have been given squatters rights as the new international states of Canifornico, Mexicanzona, Nuevo Mexico, and Texico.

Obama Sends Out The Guard: Far Too Little, Way Too Late

In the wake of the brouhaha over the recent legislation passed by the State of Arizona after the murder of a rancher and decades of increased crime in that state due primarily to the open U.S. southern borders, it was announced by the Obama Administration that an additional 1,200 National Guardsmen will be sent to assist the Border Patrol in securing the U.S. Mexico border.

But is this simply another political ploy in order to quiet the masses and gain some public support from those recent transplants or non-border state residents for another Reagan era amnesty in the interests of commerce rather than national security, or another fine example of the federal government's response of too little, too late after literally thousands upon thousands of border state residents have been adversely impacted by this governmental negligence nine long years post 9-11?

I mean, if those U.S. borders HAD been secured, would an American rancher today still be alive, or those in Arizona particularly losing their homes by the score due to increases in property insurance and added taxation due to this situation, in addition to the federal negligence which resulted in those bogus British LIBOR based loans which were sold by California lenders to so many unsuspecting homeowners during the short housing boom?

Which bears the question: How can banks in this country be loaning out sums based on a foreign currency almost twice that of the U.S., and backed also by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac without Congress's knowledge, which negligence also has not been addressed in any meaningful way after that bogus bank "bailout."

The U.S. Mexico border encompasses over 1,900 miles of expanse, a great deal of which is desert terrain and passable only by all terrain vehicles - of which the drug cartel members have in abundance due to their progressive profits at the American public's expense, including our youth. The War on Drugs is as much a commercial venture and falacy, it appears as the War on "Terrorism."

"Terrorism" that never occurred prior to the "Go Globalists" gaining an ever increasing foothold in public offices in this country through the two mainstream political parties, and basically selling off vital U.S. industries and infrastructure to foreigners over the "global" exchange.

The economy they are truly concerned with - global industry and "foreigners" profit once again.

This additional troop surge amounts to a drop in the bucket, from this writer's perspective, since it would literally take agents linked arm in arm to secure those southern borders, and the costs in salaries and benefitis of those additional border agents which this Administration is hiring far exceeds that which would be necessary to construct the border fencing.

I mean esthetically pleasing titanium vehicle spikes about six feet high would definitely preclude those drug cartels from entering in their SUVs, and reduce significantly the hard core drugs and auto theft criminal activity tremendously.

And certainly could be made to look esthetically pleasing for those environmental wackos that believe in protecting nature as a priority, rather than the lives and property of their fellow Americans who have been victimized.

Sending out the Guard, in this writer's opinion, appears again to be another political tool and ploy, since Ms. Napolitano also was sent additional troops during the Bush years and yet the crime continued almost unabated.

I hope this time, at least, they will be able to use their guns - with buckshot if not bullets - to deter the criminal element and secure this nation's borders which should have been done after the Mexican American war, but at the very least immediately after 9-11 while this country remains "at war" due to a foreign massive attack - whether it could be classified at this point military or civilian.

Since those Guard members, due to those U.S. Mexico free trade agreements, were pretty much disempowered from actually securing the border in any meaningful way.

That was also while Ramos and Compean were being prosecuted for shooting a drug peddler in the rear, for which they received jail time while the foreigner got the American lawyers.

The timing of this announcement is suspect, while this Administration and Congress have also delayed funding for that fence under the Secure Fence Act, while providing instead billions to the local and state governments for upgrades for their computers, and spent massive amounts also on extra-Constitutional functions instead.

When providing for the common defense actually is the primary reason that the United States even has a federal government at all. I mean that WAS the reason that the Constitution even came to be, in order to protect and provide for the common defense of the states, and the state citizenry from foreign attack or invasion.

Be it militarily, or through attrition which is actually what is occuring in the lower 48.

Particularly those border states, which are being "assumed" by Mexico progressively in sending their citizens to this country to find work, and hopefully strengthen the Mexican economy at the cost of America's own if not eventually bring it economy down to that of Mexico's in its two class system.

What's to say that as soon as another amnesty style bill passes, as appears is the agenda here, that those troops then are once again removed in the interests of "budgetary reasons," while, again, sums are spent for political reasons most of all rather than Constitutional ones?

This Administration, as the last, has shown its true colors in continuing to play the "race card" on this issue inappropriately by and large.

After the Patriot Act, which is still for the most part on the books and the continued marginalization of the American public who are outraged at this point with their federal and state governments over its progressively unconstitutional focuses, does it not seem hypocritical for the Obama Administration and this Congress to attack Arizona's "new" law "national origin" profiling which also is one of its primary duties and functions, the protection of its lawful and legal citizens from foreign attacks or invasion?

Apparently that connection and out and out hypocricy has been lost by those on the Hill and our mainstream media in the interest of politics and ratings.

I'm sure to most Americans this little ditty will ring true, especially those Americans living in a border state who have lived there since the first Reagan amnesty under "Reaganomics," which primarily created this situation to begin with, along with continued federal and state negligence in carrying out their Constitutional functions regarding this issue:

Fool me once, shame on you.

Fool me twice, shame on me.

The Obama Limbo: Or How Low Can You Go?

That globally affiliated news organization, ABC, carried a story this morning that seemed to sink to a level that seems to be becoming the modus operandi with those in Washington over controversial and unpopular (and unconstitutional) legislation.

Use the children.

Yesterday apparently there was an "uncomfortable" moment during a visit by Ms. Obama and the wife of the current president of Mexico, Mr. Calderon.

During this highly publicized visit of the Mexican first family which conveniently co-incided with the passage of the Arizona legislature of a law merely codifying the federal laws with respect to illegal immigration meant to be used during lawful stops by local law enforcement authorities in requiring ID or green cards from immigrants (as U.S. citizens are required to provide driver's licenses) during those stops, there was a question posed by a "shy" second grader to Ms. Obama with respect to this requirement.

The second grader related how "Barack Obama was taking everyone away that didn't have papers" and that her mother "didn't have any."

It seems that this Administration, as with the last, will use any method imaginable to further polarize and politicized this issue, when it has been due to federal negligence and a prior Administration's "amnesty" in the interest of commerce before national security pre-9-11 which has led to the fact that there even are over 12 million reported illegal and undocumented foreigners in this country at all.

Of course, the article went on to publicize how fearful this child's mother was, and would not then give her name for fear apparently of deportation.

Which moment appeared more aimed also at slamming those in Arizona once again who have been victimized repeatedly by this situation, and also the fact that this child was in a public school afforded such an opportunity to get politically used as a tool seems utterly contemptible to this writer.

And just goes to show how low those in Washington that are on the illegal immigrant gravy train from both sides of the political aisle will go, again, at the cost of their fellow natural or naturalized American.

In defending and protecting foreigners and foreign interests, rather than abiding by those lawful and legal duties of their office, offices which they wouldn't even hold if not for that "antiquated" document both parties apparently disdain.

Since, of course, it was meant to limit their powers over the American citizenry and masses, and yet protect them from foreign invasion such as what is occurring in Arizona and elsewhere due to the open border situation that continues now nine years after 9-11.

And prevent such occurrences as happened yesterday, and just wonder where those highly paid state and federal social service workers are in using a child in such a manner for political gain.

Since this little incident was simply too scripted to believe.

First after the 2006 attempt with the Pope getting involved during a visit in 2007 to facilitate this "globalism" agenda of the Global Socialists even though the Pope actually has a fortress surrounding his country from his own church members, and now a child.

Just how much further can those on the Hill, and in the Halls of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and those global mostly European bankers sink for their agendas?

At the ultimate cost in their collusion with those whose lust for power knows no end nor recognition of the fight and sacrifices and personal cost those founders made to establish a free and independent America of their fellow Americans?

Who will also wave the flag also to facilitate their ends, but apparently haven't even a shred of knowledge in just what it truly stands for.

Since Arizona is one of those stars on the stars and stripes, after all.

Or is this something the Global Socialists conveniently forget in order to continue their massive march into world socialism and government?

Or that the "common defense" provisions of the Constitution was the entire reason the states united to begin with, and supercedes any "free trade" agreements with our southern neighbors at the cost of the American people?

I wonder just how many poor South Americans or their criminal element Mexico has taken in in the past ten years?

Wait, maybe America is also getting a great many of those South Americans too through those porous southern borders.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/michelle-obama-caught-immigration-debate/story?id=10694734

Proposition 100: Arizonans Victimized And Misled Once Again

As if the garbage over the "new" illegal immigrant law codifying the federal laws with respect to illegal foreigners in this country wasn't enough with all the outside agitators and backlash that has resulted, the clueless Arizonans just victimized themselves once again due to the special interest lobbying groups operating without any check or balance within that state.

Including those state employees who were behind the push to increase the sales taxes in Arizona at a time of both increasing homeless and joblessness due to the progressively regressive global agendas of both political parties at the present time.

Early returns show that the Arizona citizenry has passed an added transaction privilege tax in order to purportedly fund the deficits in the state budgets with respect to education and public services.

The only problem is that the clueless Arizona public, consisting of mostly transplanted Easterners and Californians at this point in Arizona's history, have no idea that a hike in the transaction privilege tax which is levied against the corporate interests in that state will be passed on to the Arizona citizenry, and as a general "sales" tax will simply go into the general fund for the legislature to spend at will and not for those purpose for which this added tax was promoted.

And will, of course, continue to increase the bankruptcies in that state which have increased in leaps and bounds due to just such measures as these.

Not to mention that if any of those sums do go into education, will simply stay at the top increasing the ASU president's salary from the current $700,000 to maybe $750,000 and not trickle down to those teachers in any manner whatsoever.

Or to the local law enforcement for the bogus "new" illegal immigrant law, since most of those law enforcement officials also get civic contributions from those businesses that are hiring those illegals that supplement their pay in added benefits, so the Arizona legislature will simply deny any added budgetary requests from the city and state law enforcement officials as has progressively also occurred.

So that they can continue to feed their special interest lawyer, real estate and financial sector groups for their next run for office.

Arizona is a transient state, which markets to retirees most of all in order to fleece them of their wealth in one form or another, or progressively bankrupt the longer term residents until they also eventual move in order to feed their real estate and land fraud backers.

Proposition 100 was promoted as a "temporary" increase in the sales and/or transaction privilege tax in Arizona, but if history serves, this tax will be permanent.

And the homeless and jobless in the Arizona washes will simply increase.

Since the monster must be fed, and until the Arizona residents are truly bled dry, the monster apparently is insatiable.

Beware America.

Those now "cheap" homes have a price that is far above the listed price for those foreclosed homes.

Your eventual ruin.

O'Reilly & Company Continue The Spins On Arizona's "New" Illegal Immigrant Laws

Bill O'Reilly really, really needs a reality check regarding he and his "political commentators" remarks regarding Arizona's "new" illegal immigrant laws.

Tonight I briefly watched a segment where O'Reilly, the "no spin, spinner" again was addressing Arizona's "new" illegal immigrant law signed into law by Arizona's interim governor, Jan Brewer, this last legislative session.

On the program he had, of course, two different "political commentators" supposedly taking both sides of this issue, of course neither one of which was taking the Constitutional positions, nor Bill O'Reilly for that matter.

One of which pointed out that he had lived in Arizona "from 1997 to 1999" or thereabouts, so felt he was qualified to comment on the history of just what has occurred in that state to bring this matter to national attention.

The other, of course, was an illegal immigrant sympathizer again pushing for amnesty "since we have over 12 million illegals in this country," without, of course, pointing out that this would not be the case at all if the Reagan amnesty way back when had not created this situation to begin with, nor that the federal government through the U.S. Marshall's office has abdicated its responsibilities progressively in their duties in busing the illegals back which were picked up by the local Arizona law enforcement on stops as was done for decades, which kept those numbers down and those border hoppers at bay who are victimizing the Arizonans.

Nor was there then federal funding given to most of these lawyer led "immigrant rights" groups that have progressively also defended the rights of illegals, over those of the natural or naturalized citizenry due to an unconstitutional statute which was passed that granted these lawyer led groups their legal fees for civil rights matters, whether they were in defense or prosecution of American civil rights, or those of foreigners.

Bill, of course, reiterated that in the event this law is used by local law enforcement in any manner "racially profiling" those individuals picked up under this law, then they always have the recourse of suing.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 actually had to do with American Civil Rights, not foreigners, although this has been left out of the liberals posturing - whether O'Reilly's, or CNN's.

Since, of course, the Bill of Rights was originally meant to protect the American citizenry from both the government, corporate entities such as these groups, and foreigners.

Oh, the spins continue on both sides of the poltiical spectrum.

By both the American liberals, and those British Conservatives that are posturing ad nauseum on Fox.

I mean, as a 45 year former Arizona resident, I can tell you that there was always "national origin" profiling in Arizona pre-Reagan since Arizona does, after all, border a foreign country.

But political correctness and lawyer profit is the aim here, not the Constitution.

Since this segment appeared clearly aimed at a spin for the legal community that would make a jester proud.

I mean, just who does Bill think will pay for all those bogus lawsuits for the civil rights special interest "non-American" groups if not the Arizona citizenry, and really the American public since those sums for that "civil rights" statutes comes out of the federal coffers?

And if Bill is an example of our educators, America and Americans should be very, very worried since apparently he has no concept of just truly what has occurred, and just whose economy this "new" law was meant to insure.

This is a public/public partnership between the feds and the state at the cost of the Arizona citizenry, bottom line, since the solution is clear.

Fund the fence, and if the feds won't cough up the dough, they are in "breach of contract" and should be held accountable under both the Constitution, and the 2006 Secure Fence Act.

And then simplify the paperwork so that it isn't necessary to hire an immigration lawyer in this country to complete, and make the application fees not for profit so that those Mexicans that wish to immigrate can do so for less than it costs for those Coyotes to bring them across the border, and then abandon them to the desert.

And that's no spin from this former long term resident and victim.

Although what CAN you expect from a mainstream media organization that hires non-practicing lawyer/political commentators that haven't the slightest clue what they are talking about?

Other than continue the spins for their Bar affiliated brothers and sisters.

Or their American taxpayer funded special interest group - which in actuality means that the Arizona and American taxpayers are actually paying for their own abuse in a great many of these foreigner "civil rights" actions under an unlawful and illegal U.S. statute to begin with meant purely for lawyer, politician and special interest profit at the American public's ultimate expense.

Renewable Energy Is Homeland Security

While out and about driving this late afternoon, I pulled behind a car that had a bumper sticker that read "Renewable Energy Is Homeland Security," and couldn't help but laugh.

I am a former 45 year resident of Phoenix, Arizona, a state which receives most of its energy resources from Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station about 50 miles outside Phoenix.

I was living there when the idea of nuclear power was being brought to the state, and those at our local power company, Arizona Public Service, were in the forefront of getting an initiative passed in Arizona that called for a bond election to assist with its building, and a Corporation Commission then also expanded after it was built in order to supposedly act as a check on rate increases.

Although most in Arizona still believe that Arizona Public Service Company is a public utility company that is accountable to the Arizona Corporation Commission for its rate increases and also its regulation with respect to Palo Verde, such is not the case.

Why?

Well, after Palo Verde was finished being built, which also supplies some power to California - the state which has stolen Arizona's water for literally decades, and now boycotting it due to the citizenry and state government actually attempting to stop Phoenix and Tucson and those border towns from truly becoming another L.A. - the federal and state government afforded Arizona Public Service Company to be assumed by a holding company that also is engaged in commercial building construction by the name of Pinnacle West.

And shares of Pinnacle West are currently sold over the global stock exchange, in essence affording foreigners or foreign governments to now own shares in even America's nuclear reactors and generators progressively (don't you love that word, those progressives have sold out this country right and left to foreigners in the name of "progress").

So just how secure is Palo Verde (and America itself, for that matter) if it is entirely possible that foreigners, and not even Americans, own controlling interests in the largest nuclear generating station and reactor in the country?

Another American asleep at the wheel, and couldn't stop laughing at the naiveté that is still present in a good many Americans who are under 40.

Or possibly missed the 60's, 70's and 80's.

Los Angeles Boycotts Arizona: Hooray!

With much ceremony and political rhetoric, it appears the City of Los Angeles has boycotted doing business with Arizona businesses in response to the "new" illegal immigration measures signed into law by Arizona's Governor, Jan Brewer.

As a former 45 year Arizonan and victim of illegal loans sold to thousands of Arizonans through California domiciled banking institutions that were not even based on the U.S. currency, but the British LIBOR rates, all I can say is hooray!

It doesn't appear to me that the City of Los Angeles knows anything at all about how corrupt some of their own politicians and businesses are, so since it is more expensive to bring litigation in the California courts due to all those outrageous hotel and bed taxes levied there, this boycott appears it will work in favor of the Arizona businesses whose contracts will be illegally broken due to the Council's actions.

It seems California's budgetary problems will become even more extreme after this latest scene right out of Hollywood.

Interesting also that during all those illegal immigrant rallies held in Los Angeles in years past, during the one in which the rubber bullets were used, the Mayor of Los Angeles just happened to be out of the country in Mexico at the time.

It would appear that since most of those Arizonan businesses also hire local day laborers in Los Angelese to assist with some of those contracts, the Council has just taken a stand that may cost a few illegal immigrants their jobs.

Way to go, Mayor and Council, you made your constituents proud.

At least those that are waiting in front of the Home Depots now, but you might want to schedule a few more trips out of the country when those jobs dry up.

Just a suggestion from one who has waited a long, long time for California to show their true colors in just how far afield they have gone from even giving the slightest credence to the U.S. Constitutuion.

Or California's.

And I wouldn't be looking for many of those Zonies on the beaches, so the Governor might need to up the budgets on those "See California" ads for the rest of the country, at least in those which have state citizens that can still afford those bed and tourism taxes.

Hey, if Arizona can't get its water back that you've stolen, just give them the cash.

They will need it for all those deportation hearings, including over half California's former residents who fled to Arizona within the last fifteen years due to its "progressively" regressive policies such as these.

Maybe even some of them will too finally leave, since it is a great many of those former Californians who may have left California, but brought their same excesses and expectations with them.

Which has progressively also impacted the long term and native Arizonans along with the illegal immigrant situation, many of whom are now living in those desert washes.

Do you think you can get San Francisco and San Diego, and the rest of the state to join you?

Please?

The first that need to go are all those California New Agers that have taken over Sedona - including those that even recently baked a few women in a plastic tent after charging them over $10,000 each for the privilege.

Three-Card Monte Arizona Style

If the political gamesmanship over the illegal immigration situation isn't enough, there is more rotten in the State of Arizona than simply the continued negligence of the State officials over this issue.

Enter the three card monte style of western government and extortion.

Although this state has been one of the hardest hit due to the California banks and mortgage scams and the fallout from the open borders since the Reagan amnesty with continued negligence at both the state and federal levels which has lead to thousands upon thousands losing their homes and jobs, the Arizona legislature and state government isn't finished yet, it appears.

This week the citizens of Arizona are being asked to fork over another "temporary" increase in the sales taxes in order to supposedly cover budgetary gaps in education, health care and public safety.

Recently I attended the graduation of a family member at one of the public institutions of higher learning in Arizona.

During the speechifying for the masses by the faculty, there was a plea to the public for the passage of Proposition 100, in order to bulk up the universities budgets in that increased "temporary" sales tax.

An institution that was granted within the last year, along with the other two public universities, one of the highest tuition rate increases ever - and during a recession where there lies vacant thousands of Arizona homes.

And in a state which the state Constitution provides that funding for education IS a Constitutional function of the Arizona state government, one of their primary functions, although more and more revenue is earmarked for discretionary expenditures in annual budgets, with threats then instead directed to reducing public services and education funding in order to close the gap due to a balanced budget initiative that was passed by the Arizona citizens way back when in order to rein in the cost of government.

Most of these universities receive their funding by the Arizona residents through their property taxes primarily, and Arizona has had a "growth at all costs" agendas for at least the past three decades which has expanded the tax base tremendously in the process - although its now reliance on tourism, and as a retirement state for those from colder climes and then progressively forsaking its sustainable industries (cotton, cattle, copper, climate for those with respiratory diseases, and citrus) has cost this state dearly.

Foreclosures and empty homes mean that the amount of revenue has shunk within the past four years, however, little nod has been given that prior to that time the state was raking in added revenue during the boom since property taxes are tied into home valuations in the State of Arizona - and had doubled its number of citizens in less than ten years.

Also what was missing in this plea to the public during a graduation ceremony was the fact that those faculty members and administrators at the present time, including their taxpayer paid benefits, make more than most of those unemployed and homeless Arizonans - and can retire with full benefits after a mere 20 years service, and are also afforded the freedom to then work in another district or even community college while collecting their retirement benefits, thus double dipping.

As one who was affected by the increasing costs of ownership of my home due to state negligence, special interest "give mes" and rising taxation that bore no relevance to either the cost of living, or the Constitution parameters under which those state legislators were duty bound, I found using a graduation exercise in order for those university staff members to up their budgets, and increase their salaries once again at the public's expense both ill timed, and outrageous.

Interesting also is that this special election is scheduled a mere week after all three major universities have had their graduations, using the public and those graduates in order to raise their salaries, and budgets through this "special interest" proposition - since this measure did not pass the legislature when it was proposed in the last session.

The three card monty lives and breathes in Arizona, and I would not hesitate to guess, in the majority of other states across the nation.

Which sums ultimately would not be earmarked for education, health or public safety at all, since as a sales tax would merely go into the general fund for general budgetary purposes with no accountability whatsoever.

The desert isn't the only thing that is dry in Arizona.

Since it appears that unless and until the Arizona citizens' wallets are bled dry, the greedy state and local government appears insatiable.

Sort of like their Big Brother.