Thursday, September 30, 2010

David Schweikert attacks Harry Mitchell back with new TV ad

Real Clear Politics labels David Schweikert-Harry Mitchell race "Leans R;" 35th most likely House seat likely to switch party

The bad news keeps coming in for Harry Mitchell. Real Clear Politics no longer considers the race a toss-up, but now identifies it as "leaning Republican." It also ranks the race as the 35th House seat most likely to switch parties. Considering conservative estimates are that Republicans will take back 40 seats in the House, it's within that margin of seats we take back.

DCCC decides to spend only a piddly $60k helping Harry Mitchell against David Schweikert

Harry Mitchell is putting up a desperate fight trying to save his seat from David Schweikert, running TV ads falsely labeling Schweikert as a "vulture" for investing in foreclosed houses. Unfortunately, with early ballots being sent out in just one week, it's too late for Mitchell. The DCCC has decided to put only $60,000 into his race, which is just a drop in the bucket when it comes to buying TV ads in the pricey Phoenix/Scottsdale market. The AFL-CIO decided not to spend a dime on Arizona Congressional races this cycle. Whereas Schweikert has picked up additional support from independent expenditure committees like the 60 Plus Association, which are saturating the Phoenix/Scottsdale market with TV ads. He is also receiving support from the NRCC and Club for Growth. The NRCC's TV ads for Schweikert are about to start running in the Phoenix/Scottsdale market around the clock.  He recently passed $1 million raised. Internal polling has him leading Mitchell by as much as 12 points. Even Mitchell's own skewed internal polling only has him leading by three points.

Arizona voters are tired of Mitchell voting with Nancy Pelosi and Obama - he voted for Obamacare, billion dollar TARP bailouts, and cardcheck. He is part of the problem. He may end up losing by as much as double digits. 

Press conference tomorrow to denounce fake Taxpayers group opposing the propositions

Beware of fake taxpayer group pushing left-wing agenda

Sign from fake taxpayer groupSign from fake taxpayer groupJoin us for a news conference this Friday, October 1
Dear AZ Taxpayer,
Please let your friends and neighbors know that a fake taxpayer organization, the “Arizona Taxpayers Association,” has been created to defend Big Government policies in the November 2 ballot proposition battles. The group (if it can even be called a group), which has been set up by Democratic political consultant Bob Grossfeld and labor union officer Jim McLaughlin, opposes several propositions that will actually BENEFIT Arizona taxpayers, producers, and consumers, and increase our freedom.
The so-called Arizona Taxpayers Association has no members and no history of ever lobbying on behalf of taxpayers, and appears to have been operating in possible violation of Arizona campaign finance laws (the organization placed campaign signs but apparently did not file with the Secretary of State prior to conducting its political activities, as required by Arizona law). A photo of one of the signs is posted at, under What’s New.
Three of the propositions opposed by Grossfeld and McLaughlin and their fake organization are especially vital to the future well-being of Arizona taxpayers, producers, and consumers:
Prop 106 – The Arizona Health Care Freedom Act
Prop 107 – The Arizona Civil Rights Initiative
Prop 113 – Save Our Secret Ballot
In order to expose this leftist sham perpetrated by Grossfeld and McLaughlin, the Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP Arizona) is holding a news conference this Friday, October 1, at 11:30 am, at the Goldwater Institute, at 500 E. Coronado Road (one block north of McDowell, just west of 7th Street).
AFP Arizona, which has served the taxpayers of Arizona since 2007, grew out of the Arizona Federation of Taxpayers Associations (AFTA), which served from 1980 to 2007, producing an annual “Friend of the Taxpayer” legislative scorecard every year from 1984 to 2006. Representing the “old guard” of AFTA at Friday’s news conference will be former AFTA chairmen Rep. Rick Murphy (R-Peoria) and Mr. Bob Burges. Also present will be spokespersons representing several of the propositions attacked by the fake organization.
Please support your REAL Arizona taxpayer watchdog, Americans for Prosperity. AFP Arizona asks all of its members to invest at least $10 a year in our efforts. You can invest in AFP Arizona by clicking on the Contribute button in the upper righthand corner of our homepage, Or, you can send checks to:
Americans for Prosperity, AZ
One East Camelback Road, Suite 550
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Thank you so much for all you do to fight for the Arizona taxpayer!
For Liberty, Tom
Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity
(602) 478-0146

Read more:

Arizona Republic endorses Prop. 107

Affirmative action no longer useful

Sept. 30, 2010
The Arizona Republic

Affirmative action was a catch-up plan, adding extra opportunity where it had been missing in education and the workplace. The time was going to come when affirmative action was no longer necessary.

That time is now.

Voters should approve Proposition 107, which would amend the Arizona Constitution to ban affirmative-action programs in public employment, public education or public contracting.

Affirmative action has reached the point where its drawbacks outweigh its advantages. We need to stop putting a well-intended thumb on the scale.

Setting exact quotas for minorities and women in every category of job - as has been done at some universities - is just ludicrous.

Minorities and women can find that their achievements are shadowed by the assumption that they got an extra leg up through affirmative action.

Our changing world means that the group benefiting from affirmative action can suddenly change. While public universities used to make an effort to include women, the enrollment ratios have reversed so much that some are now discriminating in favor of men.

The last presidential election showed that being an African-American is no barrier to reaching the pinnacle of power in the United States.

The best way to make sure every Arizonan has access to a level playing field is to get rid of affirmative action with a "yes" vote on Proposition 107.

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Harry Mitchell pulls off his mask

Her Politics video show discusses real estate and the housing slump

Did you know that the laws recently changed, and a short-sale will hurt your credit? Listen as Nancy Huzar, real estate expert Suzanne Sharer and I discuss the the current state of the housing market and what to do about it.

Yes on 107 Campaign Challenges U of A President to Sacrifice his Position for “Diversity”

University of Arizona President Robert Shelton stated in a recent interview with the Arizona Daily Star that he opposes Proposition 107, which would ban race and gender preferences in government, including in higher education. Mr. Shelton further stated that, if 107 is adopted by voters, he “will not back off one bit” from the university’s efforts to promote “diversity” and recruit more women and minorities.

The university’s diversity goals, which are posted on their website, include hiring specified percentages of women and minorities. These hiring quotas include goals for women to comprise 63% of new Assistant Director Administrators, 73% of Animal Technicians, and 56% of the Faculty in Fine Arts. Goals for minority hires include 53% of General Maintenance positions and 59% of Supervisors in Service/Maintenance.

“President Shelton appears concerned that if Prop. 107 passes, the university won’t be able to put ‘diversity goals’ ahead of ‘most qualified’,” said Proposition 107 campaign chair, Rachel Alexander.  I bet there’s a woman or a ‘minority’ that meets the minimum
qualifications to be president of the University. I challenge President Shelton to walk his own talk and step down for the sake of ‘diversity’. His $549,400 position could be given to an affirmative action applicant. Or perhaps he believes that discriminating quotas should only apply to other people, but not to him?”

Monday, September 27, 2010

Ann Kirkpatrick Campaign Caught Telling Lies about the “No New Taxes” Pledge

WASHINGTON, DCThe Ann Kirkpatrick Campaign recently launched a new line of attack on Paul Gosar by attempting to mislead voters about the actual meaning of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. The goal of the Pledge is to protect taxpayers and businesses from tax increases. The Kirkpatrick campaign’s charges follow the patently false claims made by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) earlier in the year – claims that the non-partisan agrees are “blatantly false.”

The “No New Taxes” Pledge commits a signer to “oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses and oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.” By making this promise, Gosar has taken tax hikes off the table for all taxpayers in Arizona- something Ann Kirkpatrick has not done.

Read more from Americans for Tax Reform:

This just in - NRCC to launch TV ads against Harry Mitchell in a couple of days

Stay tuned.....will post the ads when they are live. This is more bad news for the Harry Mitchell campaign, which has seen national money dry up, as the DCCC and national unions give up on saving Mitchell's seat and spend it elsewhere in other states. Ongoing polls show Mitchell losing the race by as much as double digits to Republican challenger David Schweikert.

Former AZ Democrat Party chair & union boss behind fake taxpayers association to try and steal election!

Sham nonexistent "Arizona Taxpayers Association" group exposed! Former Arizona Democrat Party chairman Sam Coppersmith and union boss Jim McLaughlin have been caught trying to steal the election! This nonexistent group has put up red signs around Arizona saying vote no on the propositions. In reality, most taxpayer advocacy groups would FAVOR most of the propositions. Click here for the website exposing this fraud.

Schweikert signs vandalized - is Harry Mitchell moving from stealing signs to vandalizing them?

It has been well-documented by the local media in Arizona that incumbent Democrat Congressman Harry Mitchell was caught stealing his opponent's signs, and admitted it. David Schweikert has noticed over 100 of his signs disappearing in this race. Now they're being vandalized and being made unusable. How crooked will Mitchell go to win this race? 

National Research poll in AZ CD5 shows David Schweikert's lead over Harry Mitchell increasing

In this internal poll released by National Research, Inc., the generic ballot in AZ CD 5 favors Republicans by 16 points, 50%-34%. Among voters who are the most motivated to vote this year, the Republican leads 52%-35%.

In the head to head ballot, David Schweikert leads Harry Mitchell 46%-38%. Among men, David leads 46%-39%. Among women, David leads 45%-38%. Among those most likely to vote, David leads 50%-39%.

Sunday, September 26, 2010

Franks Says President Obama Ignoring China's One-Child Policy

September 24, 2010 – Congressman Trent Franks (AZ-02) today released the following statement in response to President Obama's meeting yesterday with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and in light of tomorrow's significance as the 30th anniversary of China's notorious one-child policy:

"As tomorrow marks the 30th anniversary of China's brutal, oppressive, inhumane 'one-child' policy, one would hope that President Obama would have taken advantage of his face-to-face meeting yesterday with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao to express absolute opposition to a policy that results in millions of coerced abortions ever year. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the conversation bore no mention of China's unspeakable human rights violations.

"For someone who says he cares about 'women's rights,' as President Obama so often claims when promoting abortion-on-demand, Mr. Obama seems disturbingly unperturbed by the fact that, even today, pregnant Chinese women were dragged off the streets and forced to endure the murder of their child, either because the Chinese government determined they shouldn't have more than one, or because they had the 'nerve' to conceive without a government license to do so.

"Moreover, it would seem that ignoring China's overwhelming record of human rights violations is an Administration-wide policy. Just last February, while addressing China's appalling human rights record during a trip to China, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton shockingly said, '... our pressing on those issues can't interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis, and the security crisis.' I can hardly sum up the Administration's deplorably skewed priorities better than Mrs. Clinton herself.

"Because of the traditional preference for boys in China, as many as 40 million Chinese baby girls have been murdered since the one-child policy’s institution, not to mention the millions who are simply abandoned. This ghastly trend has led to huge demographic disparities, with ratios of 160 men for every 100 women in some areas. And by creating a black market for little boys, this policy almost singlehandedly accounts for the abduction of 190 Chinese boys every single day. The incredible strain such an oppressive atmosphere places on mothers has caused the suicide rate amongst Chinese women to reach epidemic proportions, with 500 Chinese women killing themselves every day, a number unheard of in other parts of the world.

"If Barack Obama cannot find his tongue to condemn an inhumanity of this magnitude, he has lost his way as a human being."

Service Employees International Union funding anti-Prop. 107 efforts

This comes as no surprise, the unions make money off of unfair racial and gender preferences. The AP article at ABC-15 is below. Also, to clarify something brought up in the article: "Good" affirmative action would not be eliminated, the kind of affirmative action originally envisioned by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That referred to action taken to make sure minorities or women aren't discriminated against, for example, disciplining an employee who was observed overtly discriminating against a woman or minority. It is the bad kind of affirmative action which started showing up after this Act was passed that would be eliminated - race and gender preferences.

PHOENIX - Arizona voters will decide in November whether to ban state and local governments from discrimination or preferential treatment based on race, ethnicity and sex.

The state constitutional amendment doesn't use the term "affirmative action," but there is no disputing that is what Proposition 107 is aimed at eliminating. Such programs generally give preferences to minorities.

The referendum was sent to the Nov. 2 ballot by a vote of the Legislature in 2009 after supporters failed to gather enough signatures to get the measure on the ballot in 2008.

This year's proposed amendment contains exemptions for "bona fide" qualifications based on sex and for a preference or program whose elimination would violate a court order or lead to the loss of federal funds.

That can be a broad exemption, because federal money often comes with requirements that its recipient have some sort of affirmative action plan in place.

The affirmative action ban has for years been pushed nationally by Ward Connerly, a businessman and former California education official. A group he heads, the Sacramento-based American Civil Rights Institute, backed the failed 2008 signature-gathering effort in Arizona and had donated $50,000 so far this month to the Yes on 107! campaign. That's virtually all the funding the group has received.

The Service Employees International Union has given $10,000 to the No on 107 campaign, the majority of its funding so far.

California, Washington, Nebraska and Michigan voters have approved affirmative action bans backed by Connerly. Voters in Colorado rejected one in 2008.

Connerly, who is black, argues that race- and sex-based preferences are no longer needed in America and points to the election of Barack Obama as proof.

Opponents of the measure argue that Arizona eliminated "affirmative action" programs years ago and that the Connerly-backed referendum goes much farther by banning the "equal opportunity" programs that remain. They say those programs generally help people, often women or minorities, who have already qualified but need extra help overcoming disadvantages.

"You shouldn't get into school unless you're qualified to get into college -- everyone agrees," said state Rep. Kyrsten Sinema. "But once you get into college, we have a number of programs at our public universities ... that help people who are already qualified, already admitted to the university, simply succeed in their chosen field."

Connerly disputed Sinema's contention that affirmative action has been outlawed in the state, and said if that was the case her group shouldn't be opposing Proposition 107.

"The reality is that our initiative does not mention affirmative action ... it talks about preferential treatment," Connerly said. "And when the city of Tucson gives a 7 percent bid preference (on contracts) to minorities, that's a preference. And that is against our initiative and it would be outlawed."

Sinema pointed to a program that supports women who are studying science, technology, engineering and math as one that would be cut off from state funding if Proposition 107 became law. Only a quarter of students in those fields are women, and she says it is clear that it is important to provide them extra support to encourage them to complete studies in those fields.

Connerly says that program would still be legal if Proposition 107 passes -- if it admitted men as well as women.

Saturday, September 25, 2010

Harry Mitchell spreads lies about David Schweikert; calls him a "vulture" preying on home foreclosures

Harry Mitchell doesn't think investors should be able to buy homes like this from banks and fix them up!
Democrat House incumbent Harry Mitchell is so desperate to save his seat in Congress he is spreading a smear campaign about Republican challenger David Schweikert. In video ads, he claims that Schweikert preyed upon victims losing their homes to foreclosure. He claims that Schweikert even bought a home that an owner was in the process of saving. All of these accusations are FALSE. Schweikert has NEVER bought a property from a homeowner in foreclosure. He has never even owned someone's mortgage or deed of trust. He has never loaned money to anyone. He buys property from BANKS and trustees. The banks have already foreclosed on the homes he buys. After Schweikert purchases these properties, he fixes them up and rents them. This is standard practice for any typical real estate investor.

Mitchell can't get his facts straight on business because he doesn't understand it. Apparently he would rather prohibit investors from buying foreclosed homes from banks? Just let the properties sit with weeds growing as the banks own them? It makes no sense. We NEED investors to purchase these properties. Especially investors who will fix them up instead of just letting them sit deteriorating. Schweikert actually fixes them up and puts them back out on the market for people to rent, he doesn't just sit on them and wait to sell.

We hear Mitchell is the one with real estate problems. Apparently something is about to come out regarding his rental property. Maybe the Democrats should have checked Mitchell's properties first before they launched this bogus attack on Schweikert.

Sarah Palin targets Schweikert, Gosar & Kelly Congressional races in Arizona

Sarah Palin's "Take Back the 20" project has announced it will be targeting three Congressional races in Arizona - David Schweikert taking on incumbent Democrat Harry Mitchell in CD5, Paul Gosar taking on incumbent Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick in CD1, and Jesse Kelly taking on incumbent Democrat Gabrielle Giffords in CD8. We're hoping she expands that to include Janet Contreras taking on incumbent Democrat Ed Pastor in CD4, Ruth McClung taking on incumbent Democrat Raul Grijalva in CD7, and Ben Quayle running for an open seat in CD3.

The Democrats are currently politically exploiting the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords by attacking Sarah Palin for this map. They conveniently forget that defeated Democrat Congressman Harry Mitchell did the same thing to JD Hayworth a few years ago right here in Arizona, running a campaign ad featuring JD Hayworth in the crosshairs of a rifle.

East Valley Tribune article on Prop. 107

Some excerpts from the article -

Voters will decide at the ballot this year if they want to outlaw affirmative action programs and any special programs or preferences for women and minorities.

Proposition 107 would prohibit preferential treatment or discrimination by government on the basis of race, sex or ethnic origin. It would specifically apply to employment, education and contracting.

Proponents say that the language simply reflects the goals of a color-blind society. In fact, Rep. Steve Montenegro, R-Litchfield Park, who sponsored the measure to amend the Arizona Constitution, has invoked the verbiage the 1963 "I Have a Dream" speech of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., who said he looked forward to when "little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

That exception is at the heart of a provision of Tucson City Code which provides eligible firms of minorities which have not received their fair share of contracts an "adjustment" allowing them to bid up to 7 percent more on product or service contracts and still win. And there are procedures to give bonus points to certain firms bidding on professional services.

Montenegro said the affirmative action programs which started out to outlaw discrimination now actually promote it. He said the measure, if approved, would truly create a level playing field, at least in government programs.

Others, however, defend the system of preference points.

In a statement of opposition to Proposition 107, Lea Peterson, president of the Tucson Hispanic Chamber, said studies have shown that firms owned by women and minorities "may lack key procurement business relationships and consequently be left off of preferred vendor lists without such a system."

But five southern Arizona Republican legislators, in their own statement of support, said the aim of the measure is to ensure equal treatment.

"All these government preferences are saying is women, minorities, people of color aren't good enough to create a natural, genuine diversity on the merits," said Sens. Frank Antenori and Al Melvin and Reps. David Gowan, Ted Vogt and David Stevens. "No person should be entitled to ‘special' programs solely based on their race or sex."

The measure contains an exception for any action necessary to maintain eligibility for any federal program if doing otherwise would result in a loss of federal dollars to the state. It also would not apply to any court orders or consent decrees in force if and when the measure is enacted.

Goldwater Institute: New health care law forces affirmative action on medical schools

President Barack Obama’s new health care law doesn’t just radically transform our nation’s medical system; it contains provisions that require discrimination on the basis of race.
It starts at page 516 of the more than 2,000 page law, in a section that allows the Obama administration to give grants and contracts to training hospitals and medical schools. In awarding this federal money, the law requires the administration to give preferences to hospitals and schools based on the racial makeup of their student body. Moreover, hospitals and schools who receive these federal funds must engage in race-based student recruitment as well.

In several letters to Congress, the U.S. Civil Rights Commission called on Congress to reject these discriminatory provisions and consider “proven methods of improving health care outcomes.” But the Civil Rights Commission said forcing medical schools to use race-based admissions policies assumes differences in the health of people from different races are caused by a shortage of doctors from those races. This misdiagnoses the problem, the Commission said, pointing to studies that show health care disparities do not result from a lack of medical professionals of particular races.

Further, the Commission stressed that congressionally-mandated affirmative action is likely to be thrown out as unconstitutional.

Certainly, attracting talented people to medicine is a worthy goal. But individuals should not be singled out and given special benefits based on their race to reach that goal. Likewise, the Obama administration should not force hospitals and schools to recruit students based on race to obtain federal money.

There is something we can do right here in Arizona to ensure equal treatment under the law. The Goldwater Institute is working in federal court to strike down the entire health care bill. Also, Arizona voters will consider Proposition 107 during the Nov. 2 general election. Called the Arizona Civil Rights Initiative, Prop. 107 offers an amendment to the state constitution that forbids race-based policies for any taxpayer-funded agency or program. The citizens of Arizona have the power to say “yes” to equal opportunity for all Arizonans, and “no” to unfair and unlawful policies that focus on anyone’s race or ethnic background.

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

Learn More:
Goldwater Institute: Coons v. Geithner
Proposition 107: The Arizona Civil Rights Initiative
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: pp. 516-21; 538-551
U.S. Civil Rights Commission: Letters to Congress

AZ Capitol Times coverage of Prop. 107

Some excerpts from the article -

Ward Connerly has carved a career, and a reputation, out of striking down affirmative action, starting with university programs in his home state of California. Now Connerly and his American Civil Rights Institute are bringing the fight to Arizona.

Proposition 107 seeks to amend the Arizona Constitution to ban state government and municipalities from giving preferential treatment on the basis of sex, race, color, ethnicity or national origin. This includes everything from state-funded programs that help women and minorities in areas where there is a disparity, such as science education, to hiring quotas in the state university system.

The programs are designed to correct inequities in gender or race, but Connerly thinks they’re just another form of discrimination.

“Why should anybody’s tax money be used to discriminate?” he said. “I wouldn’t want anyone discriminating against me.”

During his tenure as a University of California regent, Connerly took aim at race-based admission preferences and was the public face of a 1996 ballot initiative in which California banned race and gender preferences in state-funded programs and institutions.

Since then, he has led successful efforts in Washington, Michigan and Nebraska to make the practice illegal in state and city hiring and university admissions.

Connerly’s message is underscored by a notion that equal treatment is the essence of civil rights. His Sacramento, Calif.-based American Civil Rights Institute contends that government policies shouldn’t advocate group rights over individual rights.

Connerly said there is a simple solution for these programs the opposition claims would be eliminated. “All they have to do is admit anybody,” he said.

The language of Propositon 107 does exempt “reasonably necessary qualifications based on sex, existing court orders and actions that would result in the loss of federal funds.”

The issue hasn’t attracted much funding to date.

The Yes on 107 committee hasn’t filed any financial reports with the Secretary of State’s Office. Two groups opposing the proposition, Protect Arizona’s Freedom and the Equality and Opportunity Committee, have registered $100 and $1,1111 in income, respectively.

Leon Drolet, campaign manager for Yes On 107, said the proposition will also affect city programs, such as the Minority and Woman-Owned Business Program in Tucson, which provides incentives to certified firms within the county to conduct business with the city.

According to Drolet, those meeting the city’s favored ethnic status in certain categories receive bid preferences of up to 7 percent on contracts.

Bob Barton, project manager for the Office of Equal Opportunity in Tucson, said the city provides preferences when it has identified disparities in three sectors: construction, professional services and goods and services.

The city of Tucson last paid $500,000 in November 2008 a for study that is valid for five years to pinpoint where disparities exist.

Barton added the city has a race- and gender-neutral small business program. He sees Proposition 107 as having very little impact on local Tucson firms because 95 percent qualify for the race- and gender-neutral program.

Drolet also said hiring quotas, or goals, for state jobs would be illegal under the measure. The University of Arizona’s Office of Institutional Equity posts its placement goals for job-specific hiring, with a percentage of hires allocated to be female and a separate percentage to be minorities.

“Many know these policies are unpopular with the public, so they don’t make them easy to find,” Drolet said.

Johnny Cruz, the university’s assistant vice president for communications, said UA isn’t taking an official stance on the proposition but will study the potential “intended and unintended consequences” closely.

Connerly said he’s optimistic Proposition 107 will pass because everyone deserves a fair chance.

“If you believe in the American creed of all people are created equal, how can you oppose this?” he said.

States that have approved ballot measures banning affirmative action programs:

• California
• Washington
• Michigan
• Nebraska

Yes on 107! launches Billboard Blitz!

Arizona motorists are being greeted by a blitz of billboard advertising urging a ‘Yes’ vote on Proposition 107, which would end affirmative action programs that give preferences based on race.

“This highway billboard campaign is designed to make clear to voters what Proposition 107 is, in language that everyday Arizonans understand,” said Rachel Alexander, Chair of the Yes on 107 campaign. “A ‘yes’ vote on Prop. 107 will end affirmative action policies that people know as quotas, race preferences, reverse discrimination and ‘diversity goals’.”

Nine Phoenix-area billboards are carrying a Yes on 107 message. The billboards encourage voters to vote ‘yes’ on ending affirmative action quotas, ending race preferences, and ending reverse discrimination.

“More highway billboards will be lit up with the ‘Yes on 107’ message in the next few weeks,” stated Yes on 107 campaign manager Leon Drolet. “Given the large number of candidates and issues on the ballot, voters need a clear and simple explanation of Proposition 107. That it what this billboard campaign is about.”

Proposition 107 is a proposed state constitutional amendment placed on the November ballot by the Arizona State Legislature that will prohibit the state and local governments from granting preferential treatment to, or discriminating against, any person or group based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in public employment, education or contracting.

Schweikert for Congress: Rogue What?

The Obama administration’s idea of a rogue state is Arizona.
Today we learn that the UFCW union has come to its senses and renounced the economic boycott of our state it has led while financially backing Congressman Mitchell’s campaign efforts. They have done harm to our community, and it defies good judgment… but that’s just it, Congressman Mitchell’s voting record has been a treasure trove of bad judgment!
Congressman Harry Mitchell has been bought and paid for by unions like UFCW to the tune of over half a million dollars.
Washington liberals like Congressman Mitchell have betrayed workers, seniors, taxpayers, and they’ve abandoned the Constitution. The liberal rank-and-file have picked a fight with Arizona.
Now that’s exactly what we’re going to give it to them!
Replacing Congressman Mitchell is crucial to turning this economy around and that won’t happen until union-owned Congressmen like Mitchell are defeated.
Congressman Mitchell’s allegiance to liberal labor unions has no limits. He sponsored card check legislation putting union bosses before an individual’s right to a secret ballot.
He handed the car companies over to the unions.
His record in Congress, carrying the water of unions like UFCW, has hurt our economy and cost us jobs.
Congressman Mitchell hasn’t wasted a single chance to sell our government to big labor.
Join David Schweikert TODAY and stand up for Arizona, stand up for America, and let’s defend the Constitution and fight for our economic freedom.
Your incredible support has meant that our campaign has the resources to stay competitive. But we need to keep up the pressure to be able to fund the ads that help keep us on the path to victory.
The American people want jobs, they want a real economic recovery, and they want federal policies that remove barriers to economic prosperity.
Our ad goes dark in just a few hours.
I need your help to make sure we can keep it running strong.
Congressman Harry Mitchell has been a huge part of the problem in Washington.
He voted for ObamaCare (twice!), voted for the Wall Street bailouts, and voted for the Obama-Pelosi stimulus that has lost more jobs than it has produced.
With your support, I am confident that we can have still have a strong economic recovery.
If WE THE PEOPLE are going to save our country, and turn our economy around, we need to replace politicians like Congressman Mitchell who have squandered trillions of dollars and done nothing to strengthen our economy and bring about real jobs creation.
Let’s put the Democrats' job killing record behind us and unleash the entrepreneurial genius of the American people and elect true fiscal leaders to Washington who will fight for our economic freedom.
Please join us...

Friday, October 1 - 5:30pm to 7:30pm
Keri Christian and
Ernie and Jennifer Gammons

cordially invite you to Keri's home for an
evening in support of David Schweikert for Congress

4922 E Monte Way, Phoenix
Please consider a minimum contribution of $50

Friday, October 8 - 6:30pm to 8:30pm
Cathy Horrell, Karen Garrett and Jan Sammons
invite you to join
Jan D'Atri in the kitchen for Food and Politics

8712 E Clubhouse Way, Scottsdale
Please consider a minimum contribution of $50

Friday, October 15 - 6:30pm to 8:30pm
Tom and Monique Sinyard
cordially invite you to their home for an
evening in support of David Schweikert for Congress

10235 N 99th Street, Scottsdale
Please consider a minimum contribution of $100

Friday, October 22 - 6:30pm to 8:30pm
Jerry & Marilyn Hayden
cordially invite you to their home for an
evening in support of David Schweikert for Congress

10306 E. Calle de las Brisas, Scottsdale
Please consider a minimum contribution of $250

If you wish to contact us, please do not reply to this email but instead go to To manage your subscription, or to be removed from our list, please click the link at the bottom of this email.
Paid for by David Schweikert for Congress...  Contribute  Contact Us Privacy Policy 

Schweikert Campaign Reaches $1 Million in Contributions for the Election

Today, the Schweikert for Congress campaign announces that it has reached the $1 million benchmark in campaign contributions for the 2010 cycle.
“The support we’ve received from across Arizona, and the country, has been outstanding,” said David Schweikert.
“The American people want jobs, they want a real economic recovery, and they want federal policies that remove barriers to economic prosperity. I am confident that we can win this race because our liberal opponent has been a huge part of the problem in Washington.”
“The American people want a change from the failed, wasteful, big government policies that Congressman Mitchell has voted for. I am confident about the future, provided we elect true fiscal leaders in November. The House Republican Pledge to America, unveiled this week, is a commitment to let loose the entrepreneurial genius of the American people and stop punishing the free enterprise system with a government that crowds out growth.”
Two studies out this summer refute the Obama-Keynesian notion that increased government spending grows the economy. In fact, higher government spending only serves to limit prosperity and crowd out private sector growth.
The Harvard Business Review concluded that bigger government over the past 40 years in America caused decreased private sector employment levels, lower volumes of sales and general revenues, and a drop in critical research and development.
George Mason University’s Mercatus Center concluded that higher government, in a sample of 76 countries worldwide, showed the same negative relationship between a larger central government and economic growth. On a broad scale, higher government spending levels increased tax burdens and reduced private sector spending, savings, and investment.
Both The New York Times and leading think tanks like The Heritage Foundation agree that the Obama-Pelosi stimulus has lost more jobs than it has produced.
“Arizonans and Americans understand where this government is taking us, and they have watched Obama, Pelosi, and Congressman Mitchell squander what could have been a very strong recovery. If we’re going to save our country and turn our economy around, we need to replace politicians like Congressman Mitchell and his lockstep support of the failed Obama-Pelosi policies that have squandered trillions of dollars and done nothing to strengthen our economy and bring about real job creation," concluded David Schweikert.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

The Return of the Liberal Arizona Sign Thief

For Immediate Release – September 23, 2010
Contact: Oliver Schwab, Campaign Manager • 480.302.4872
The Return of the Sign Bandit???
“I did it…” Mitchell admitted to stealing his opponent’s signs. (Arizona Republic, 02/05/01)
Over the past few weeks, upwards of 100 of Republican David Schweikert’s campaign signs have disappeared, been vandalized, or destroyed.
“This is, of course, not terribly surprising considering who our opponent is. In anticipation of this possibility, we printed more than enough to cover the expected losses,” said Oliver Schwab, Schweikert for Congress campaign manager.
“We started to see our signs disappear after the primary," continued Schwab. "As we have tried to get to the bottom of this mystery, we initially thought the obvious place to look for our missing signs was Congressman Mitchell’s own back yard, given his history of storing his opponent's purloined signs there."
"But at the end of the day, we decided that if Congressman Mitchell is inclined to return to his old sign bandit ways, then we will just put up more. After all, while he did make the mistake of voting for ObamaCare twice, we cannot imagine that if he has in fact returned to his old ways, he would make the mistake of again storing his opponent's signs in his backyard."
While running for office in 2000, Congressman Mitchell was accused by his opponent of stealing signs and breaking the law. Mitchell finally admitted guilt to the Arizona Republic in 2001 saying, “I did it.” (Arizona Republic, 02/05/01)
Paid for by David Schweikert for Congresson the web...  Contribute  Contact Us Privacy Policy 

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Her Politics video interview with Anthony Miller about Get Out the Vote, social media, and his big surprise announcement

On Her Politics this morning, co-host Sophia E. Johnson and I talked with LD20 Chairman Anthony Miller about the Arizona Victory 2010 effort - what is the RNC doing in Arizona and what candidates are they helping. Sophia discusses the Women With Women campaign. I also reveal some of my best political social media secrets. You'll have to wait until the very end of the hour long show to hear Anthony's surprise announcement! Kudos to Nancy Huzar for producing.