Friday, June 28, 2013

Alan Korwin: How to buy 2,000 guns, out of state, with no paperwork

Someone anonymously provided $200,000, to buy 2,000 guns in Phoenix, in May 2013, using $100 grocery gift cards as the money.
If it was billionaire mayor Michael Bloomberg as the well-founded rumors suggest, he would have had to do it anonymously, and wash the money pretty good, because it’s illegal to buy guns like that across state lines. Buying 2,000 guns that way would be 2,000 federal and state felonies.

Giving money to someone else to buy guns for you — knowing you can’t buy them yourself — would be a “straw purchase,” something mayor Bloomberg knows is strictly illegal, since he has been fighting against straw buyers publicly for a long time. We don’t know who put up the cash and he sure isn’t saying. The crime doesn’t require that the true buyer ultimately receive the guns, just that the money moves through a knowing straw man (or woman).
The broadcast and print “news” media promoted the buyback event, proclaimed it good, spewed hyperbole about taking guns off the street, making us safer, disarming criminals, saving children. At last, something good was being done about all those nasty guns. You couldn’t miss the fanfare, it was even on billboards. There was no mention how that was paid for.
These guns were never “on the street” of course, with its dirty ghetto connotation, they were in closets and drawers in folks’ homes.
Somebody wrote the check that provided the money that was given to the perpetrators that bought the guns in the Phoenix gun buyback. It doesn’t matter who. And it’s really a buy-up, you can’t buy back something you never owned in the first place.
We know how it was done. The anonymous bag man gave the money to Hildy Saizow and her anti-gun-rights group, the deceptively named Arizonans for Gun Safety (AGS), according to Phoenix police. Who has AGS taught gun safety to lately? That’s rhetorical; the answer is no one, ever. They’re in the business of buying guns to melt, and campaigning against gun ownership and gun rights.
They took the lucre and gave it to Basha’s grocers, which includes Food City and AJ’s Fine Foods. The Bashas turned it into 2,000 $100 grocery gift cards. It’s not known if the insiders transacting these dollars for grocery cards for eventual guns cut discounts for each other, announcing big numbers but using smaller figures between themselves. They know of course, but you could have been lied to, there is zero accountability (“the donor wants to be anonymous”), and your Mayor, Greg Stanton, a member of Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Guns (MAG)*, is in cahoots and playing along.
The value in the end though was $200,000 in retail cards to consumers, the event was a sellout. You should also know, as people in the business do, about 30% of gift cards are never returned, and a large percent are either never fully spent, or end up spent well over the card limit, a profit center for the issuer. So they do get big discounts on the publicized amounts. But I digress again.
So that’s how Bloomberg (or MAG, his anti-rights group, or whoever it was, we don’t know and the police and BATFE aren’t telling) washed all the anonymous cash. The $100 cards were given out with the Phoenix police, right at the churches where the buy-ups took place, and the consumers got them right at the point of exchange. Payment for goods received. We can all do that, right?
An exchange of value like that has a name. It’s called a sale. In a voluntary abandonment or relinquishing of property you don’t get anything. Phoenix PD didn’t just get 2,000 guns, as one officer feebly mumbled. Those guns cost somebody two hundred grand.
We also know that a lot, maybe most of the people turned into virtually worthless junk and ripped off the system, so the cash may have bought far less than you think. Police do have plans to keep whatever they consider “historic.”
Gun Buybacks Letter Writer in AzRep500

Arizona Republic May 2013
That’s a good question. Who has title to the property? Why didn’t the media ask? Oh, that’s right, they’re 100% in the tank for this dog-and-pony show — honorable reporters need not apply.
The city washes its hands of all direct financial involvement, with Mayor Stanton quick at the draw with “no tax money used” before you even ask. Scores of city police officers have been involved. Scheduling, cruisers, traffic control, coordination with the churches, advertising, press conferences. No one believes that no tax money was used. But that’s their story and they’re sticking it to you.

Does Phoenix PD own the guns? They’ll tell you no sirree. How about Ms. Saizow and her outfit? If that’s it, how did she get Phoenix PD to store eight tons of property for her, at whose expense, with all the testing, inventorying, labor, rushed time frames, please don’t make me go on. “No tax money here.” All the circumstances seem to imply tax money being used without proper authorization for a partisan anti-rights political agenda.
The Arizona Republic, in an effort at balance, did report, “(Buybacks) make people feel good, but they do nothing to reduce violence on the street,” said Joe Clure, president of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association. “The reality of the matter is gun buybacks are doing zero percent for public safety.”
Where is it written the department has to rush? Just because they can’t meet Bloomberg’s (or whoever’s) public pledge to destroy stuff quick before the law changes and they no longer have their loophole? What happens if they don’t get to burn it all in time? Do they turn into pumpkins?

Az Rep 5-19-13
The only image available of the guns is this one from a newspaper, The Arizona Republic, credited to a TV station, Channel 12 News, the local NBC affiliate. The one relic on the right looks like a replica, most of the guns appear old and cheap, some are incomplete, including one in a baggie in the upper right. Nothing appears labeled or controlled, a good model could simply walk and who would know, maybe that’s why there are none visible. If there is any accountability for the 2,000 anonymously purchased items, it is a mystery. By rough count, at the city’s going purchase price, that’s about $3,300 worth of guns pictured right there. Note the difference between this caption and the one published.

There’s another strange thing about all this. Why bother with all the ballistic tests if you plan to destroy the evidence? Phoenix PD is racing to test fire all the guns someone owns that they’re holding onto, and they’re saving the spent casings and fired rounds. These they’re entering into a new national database of spent ammunition in the hopes, they claim, of finding a match, probably down the road, with a crime gun when more states — even Tucson — joins the national database and makes entries.

Well if they find a match, they’ll have destroyed the evidence that would matter. No fingerprints, no DNA, no fibers, the gun itself can’t be called into evidence, because it no longer exists — it was deliberately destroyed by the people who did all that work to catalog it. They’re really using Saizow to test out and grow their new tool. That was probably part of the draw for them. The crime-fighting capacity appears to be nil or even upside down, if the evidence is vaporized. But hey, it’s not their money, before or after the fact. They’re not volunteers you know.
Come to think of it, this system is the perfect way for a killer to dispose of the murder weapon — have the police do it for you. Even if the police find a match, they have no idea who gave them the gun, it’s a no-questions-asked policy, they just take guns and say have a nice day. The ballistic tests are gear practice with virtually no practical value. How does that help Mayors Against Illegal Guns? Sounds irrational to me, almost hoplophobic.
– Where are they getting all that ammunition, and how is that paid for? How many wacky old calibers do they need, or is that anonymous too? That must be fascinating, it ought to be publicized, a segment on “How It’s Made,” since it’s a public entity doing the simple work. It would make for good public relations.
– Are all those old crapola guns safe to shoot? When we had to shoot a questionable old relic, we tied it to a tree and set it off with a string. Is that how they do it? They must have a jig of some sort. That’s a slow process.
– When BATFE goes after gun irregularities, they follow the money just as you would expect. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to think that the man (or men or women or entities) who actually spent the $200,000 (a lot of money!) to get the 2,000 guns might actually be out-of-state buyers, despite the well-laundered cash and distracting publicity barrage of the process. Take someone’s word, or require depositions?
– Because the money source is hidden from scrutiny Ms. Saizow, her group, the Phoenix police, the City Council and the mayor find themselves in an awfully sticky position. Who actually owns all these guns they bought? If it’s the people, as with any other city asset, destroying public property borders on a criminal act, even if you did pinky swear to a friend. Oh, I’m sorry, is there a contractual arrangement we don’t know about?
– Because the guns are going to be destroyed — with as much public scrutiny as the rest of this sordid affair has received — there is no real assurance that the guns will be reduced to ash. If any of those guns walk, how will you know? Ask the police? Ask, uhh, BATFE?
– If BATFE wants to take some heat off itself, refocus and do some good for a change, they ought to require the source of the $200,000 to be revealed, in case it is indeed from out of state. A crime of such magnitude cannot be allowed to simply coast by. The source of this money, for buying this many guns with city and police cooperation, cannot remain a secret. Where’s the paper trail everyone else would be required to have?
MAIG has a sordid history.
Mayor Bloomberg got into buckets of hot water a short while ago for sending secret “investigators” to Phoenix and elsewhere to buy guns at gun shows to “prove” he could buy guns out of state. He squeaked out of formal charges because people that rich who run cities as big as New York have a lot of pull and a lot of armed guards.
Some members of Michael Bloomberg’s MAYORS AGAINST ILLEGAL GUNS
Mayor Sheila Dixon: Baltimore, Maryland – Convicted of perjury and embezzling funds meant for charity
Mayor Gary Becker: Racine, Wisconsin – Convicted of attempted child molestation and luring a child for illicit purposes
Mayor Larry Langford: Birmingham, Alabama – Convicted on 60 counts of bribery, fraud, money laundering, tax evasion
Mayor Eddie Perez: Hartford, Connecticut – Convicted of bribery and extortion
Mayor David Donna: Guttenberg, New Jersey – Convicted of extortion and tax fraud
Mayor Frank Melton: Jackson, Mississippi – Convicted of violating his own city gun possession ordinance
Mayor Buddy Cianci: Providence, Rhode Island – Convicted of assault and racketeering
Mayor Samuel Rivera: Passaic, New Jersey – Convicted of extortion and accepting bribes
Mayor Jeremiah Healy: Jersey City, New Jersey – Convicted of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest
Mayor Will Wynn: Austin, Texas – Convicted of assault
Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick: Detroit, Michigan – Convicted of assault on a police officer and perjury
Mayor Richard Corkery: Coaldale, Pennsylvania – Convicted of child pornography and bail violations
Mayor Adam Bradley: White Plains, New York – Convicted of domestic violence charges
Mayor Gordon Jenkins: Monticello, New York – Pled guilty on five counts of trademark counterfeiting
Mayor Roosevelt Dorn: Inglewood, California – Pled guilty to public corruption and embezzlement charges
Mayor Pat M. Ahumada Jr.: Brownsville, Texas – Arrested three times for driving while intoxicated
Mayor April Almond: East Haven, Connecticut – Arrested and charged for interfering with a police officer
Mayor Tony Mack: Trenton, New Jersey – Recently charged for accepting $119,000 in bribes
Alan Korwin, is the foremost publisher of books on American gun laws. He can be reached through his website

Sunday, June 23, 2013

Anonymous DHS Employee Reveals Frightening Extent of Obama Administration's Targeting of Conservatives

“This is bigger than you can imagine, bigger than anyone can imagine. This administration is collecting names of sources, whistle blowers and their families, names of media sources and everybody they talk to and have talked to, and they already have a huge list...If you are a website owner with a brisk readership and a conservative bent, you’re on that list. It’s a political dissident list, not an enemy threat list."

 by Doug Hagmann

Something quite unexpected happened just hours ago, in the dark of night, during a two-day layover in Washington, DC. My son and I are scheduled to take part in a seminar outside of Raleigh, North Carolina this weekend, so we combined our travels to include a side-trip to DC for a business meeting we had previously arranged. It was during this layover that something seemingly ripped from the pages of a spy novel took place. 

While I was in the middle of a perfectly good and well needed sleep in the very early hours of this morning, I received a message. I cannot disclose how I received this message, at least not now. The discerning reader will understand why, which, by the way, would make a very interesting story alone. 

The message was extremely clear and precise. I was to meet my high level DHS insider at a very specific location in Washington, DC, at a time when most ‘normal’ people, except third-shift workers are still asleep. And, I was to come alone and make certain that I was not being followed, and I was to leave any cell phone or electronic device behind. Seriously? I thought, as I was still trying to make sense of it all. Is all this really necessary? Is this really happening? I considered waking my son to accompany me, but opted to follow the instructions to the letter. Besides, I thought, he’s not the most affable middle-of-the-night person. I left a hastily written but detailed note in my hotel room before my departure in the event something happened. I looked at the digital clock on my rental car (my personal car would never survive our long distance trip). It was 3:20 a.m. 

Read the rest of the article at Canada Free Press

Saturday, June 22, 2013

Councilman Sal DiCiccio: Ban Gifts to Politicians

Ban Gifts to Politicians
“Transparency is great, but the public demands bans,” Councilman Sal DiCiccio said. “They don’t want to see politicians getting gifts." - Arizona Republic, June 12, 2013
Yesterday the council approved an ethics policy including a ban on gifts to politicians.  Many of us, including Councilmembers Jim Waring, Thelda Williams, Michael Nowakowski and Bill Gates felt strongly this was needed.  Councilman Gates made the motion and I made the second for staff to prepare an ordinance that would set a limit on gifts.
The current policy allows politicians to not report any gift below $500. The motion approved would override that policy and put a ban on gifts. 
No more free trips around the world.  No more payments to give speeches. 
The ethics policy we passed was great, but now it is time to set our sights on something bigger.  If you want to find real abuse, it is with taxpayer paid trips.  This is the next area that really needs transparency and needs accountability. 
Currently politicians bring their staffs on taxpayer paid trips with absolutely no accountability.  Elected officials go on these lavish trips paid by taxpayers and they bring their staff.  They don't provide a single document as to who they met with, what they accomplished and how their time was spent.  If you want to find abuse-this is the area and this is the area I am going to insist we tackle.
On an 8-1 vote the council also approved a recall on Councilmember's who violate the ethics policy.  Many thanks to Councilman Danny Valenzuela for leading the debate saying the public should be given the right to oust the offending elected official.  This position was affirmed by myself, Jim Waring, Bill Gates, Thelda Williams, Michael Nowakowski, Michael Johnson and Tom Simplot. Mayor Greg Stanton was the only no vote.
My best to you and your family,

Sal DiCiccio
City of Phoenix
Councilman, District 6

LD 25 GOP votes to censure Governor Brewer and legislators who voted for Medicaid expansion

June 20, 2013
·       Tonight “A Resolution Of The Arizona LD25 Republican Precinct Committeeman To Censure The Governor And 15 Arizona State Legislators”  passed with two dissenting votes.  An Amendment to add the Governor to the Resolution passed unanimously. 
·       LD25 Resolution to Censure Gov. Jan Brewer and 15 legislators: Whereas, Governor Brewer and 15 Republican state legislators formed an alliance with Democratic elected officials for the express purpose of thwarting the will of the Republican majority in the legislature and violating Republican Party principles and the Republican Party Platform, including but not limited to the following:
o   They implemented the passage of Medicaid expansion.
o   They implemented government healthcare.
o   They approved taxpayer funding for abortion and increased funding for abortion services.
o   They expanded eligibility for welfare benefits, and invited 300,000+ new people into the welfare system.
o   They raised taxes.
o   They voted against tax relief & kept Arizona as the state with the 2nd highest tax rate in the nation.
o   They voted against auditing the hospital bed tax.
o   They increased property taxes.
o   The only tax relief they offered was for special-interest industries who could afford to hire lobbyists
o   They rejected a balanced budget and voted for one with a structural debt of $400 million.
o   They removed government oversight for special interests.
o   They voted against verifying citizenship as a requirement for Medicaid benefits.
o   They removed funding for English immersion for non-English-speaking students, thus ensuring the continuation of the failed, Democratic-Party-supported, bilingual programs.
ü  Whereas, they corrupted the legislative process by suspending the rules and depriving the public of the opportunity to scrutinize and comment on the proposed legislation.
ü  Whereas, they stymied the legislative process, dishonored American legislative traditions, stifled democratic notions of fairness and openness, and violated decorum by refusing to debate.
ü  Whereas, they violated the wishes of the vast majority of Republican precinct committeemen in the state of Arizona who had overwhelmingly opposed the passage of Medicaid Expansion, making their wishes known in formal resolutions.
ü  Whereas, they voted in favor of national health care, disregarding the will of the voters of Arizona who amended the Arizona Constitution via Proposition 106 in 2010 to oppose national health care.
ü  Whereas, they violated the separation of powers defined in the Arizona Constitution by voting for a budget amendment originated by the executive branch of government.
ü  Whereas, they violated the Arizona Constitution by surrendering the legislative authority to tax to an unelected bureaucrat in an Executive branch agency, and made such taxes subject to approval of the federal government.
ü  Whereas, they forced passage of a tax increase by a mere majority vote instead of the  constitutionally required 2/3 vote.
ü  Therefore be it Resolved, that we, the precinct committeemen of Legislative District 25, do censure the following Arizona State legislators:
Governor Jan Brewer
LD1 Senator Steve Pierce         
LD16 Senator Rich Crandall
LD18 Senator John McComish
LD23 Senator Michele Reagan
LD 25 Senator Robert Worsley
LD28 Senator Adam Driggs
LD5 Rep.  Doris Goodale
LD6 Rep.  Thomas “T.J.” Shope
LD8 Rep.  Frank Pratt
LD9 Rep.  Ethan Orr
LD15 Rep.  Heather Carter              
LD16 Rep.  Doug Coleman         
LD18 Rep.  Jeff Dial       
LD18 Rep.  Bob Robson
LD28 Rep.  Kate Brophy McGee

Wednesday, June 19, 2013

Shawnna L.M. Bolick opens up exploratory committee for LD 28 House

“We need conservative, free market leaders willing to step up and put their constituents first over politics. As a policy person that would come easy to me.”

Phoenix, AZ- June 18, 2013- Last night, Shawnna L.M. Bolick opened an exploratory committee “Elect Bolick for Arizona” for Arizona House Legislative District 28 (LD 28).
There has been a drumbeat of support for me to step up from members across all factions of the Arizona Republican Party since the beginning of this calendar year after key failed votes, from reforming paycheck protection to expanding Education Savings Accounts. Bolick’s “fire in the belly” was ignited last week when her fellow Republican state legislators did not allow public input or civil discourse among their colleagues and closed off debate over the Medicaid-expansion budget bill that was crafted in closed door meetings.
“As a proponent of a full transparent, limited government this rubbed me the wrong way. My knees wouldn’t bend at the will of the powers-that-be while bypassing an important part of any public policy budget process through civil discourse.”
“Both elected Republican legislators representing LD28 voted with the Democrat also serving in the Arizona House failed to give reasons why they supported Governor Jan Brewer’s Medicaid-expansion bill during Brewer’s special session. I believe the voters in LD 28 deserve not only a voice from a common sense citizen legislator but one who sides with full transparency and I want to give our voters that choice.”
In the weeks ahead, the Elect Bolick for Arizona exploratory committee will launch its website www.BolickforArizona as well as focus on its social media strategy.
Shawnna and Clint, her husband, have two children, Ryne (11) and Kali (8 ½), plus their five year old rescued greyhound, Beary Goldwater. Bolick has worked on behalf of school choice for more than 17 years and continues to help in elevating key education reform ideas both at the state and national level. As an undergraduate at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School she worked in an inner city magnet high school where her true passion for education reform caught fire. During graduate school, she worked at The Heritage Foundation on its “No Excuses” campaign which focused on elevating high-performing principals whose practices allowed children to excel regardless of income level. She also spent time working for conservative leaders as U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) and now Governor Rick Perry. As a school choice supporter she organized the BASIS Phoenix’s Boosters program during its inaugural year raising more than $30,000 to help support teachers and classroom activities and presently serves on the BASIS Scottsdale School Board.

Shawnna L.M. Bolick can be reached via email at

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Liberal State Bar Spends Three Years Going After Lawyer For Being Conservative Blogger

by John Hawkins
Reprinted from Right Wing News

Everyone has now heard stories about conservatives who’ve been punished by “non-political” agencies like the IRS for their beliefs, but it happens at the state level, too. Back in 2011, I wrote about Rachel Alexander, who was targeted by the liberal State Bar of Arizona for having the audacity to work with other conservative lawyers to fight corruption in the state.
Rachel Alexander was collateral damage in a liberal fight to ruin her former boss, then-Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas. Thomas attempted in 2009 and 2010, with the help of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, to stop corruption by some judges and county supervisors in Arizona by filing criminal charges and a racketeering lawsuit against them. Alexander, a Deputy County Attorney, performed some research and writing on the racketeering lawsuit after it had been filed. However, since she was one of the best known conservative bloggers in Arizona, running Intellectual Conservative and IC Arizona, she was dragged into the court even though she was a minor player in the case.
The supervisors filed bar complaints against Thomas, Alexander, and another prosecutor. The left-wing Bar ran with the charges, demanding to know everything Alexander had ever blogged, anonymously or not, within the past five years and the corrupt liberal judiciary rubber-stamped the charges. That’s not surprising considering the judiciary is under the Bar and can be disciplined by the Bar; so there is no way the judiciary would not do the Bar’s bidding.
Thomas and his other deputy prosecutor were disbarred and Alexander was suspended for six months plus one day, requiring her to retake the Bar exam again and reapply to the Bar. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice, which the Left had asked to investigate Thomas and Arpaio over abuse of power for going after the judges and supervisors, dropped the case, stating it had found no evidence. This completely refuted the Bar’s case against the three, exonerating them, but the Bar would not budge. Thomas remains disbarred and his other deputy is appealing.
The supervisors refused to pay for Alexander’s appeal, which was unprecedented for a merit-protected Maricopa County employee. Alexander wrote up her appeal herself (A lawyer would have charged $60,000, to give you an idea of how much work this was). The Arizona State Supreme Court sat on her appeal for eight months; then just one week after Thomas announced he was running for governor, it issued the opinion which essentially upheld most of the suspension.
The Arizona Supreme Court based most of its ruling upon statements of a former supervisor of Alexander’s who was her supervisor in name only. He said he’d heard complaints about Alexander’s performance in the office, but provided no evidence of these supposed complaints. The Supreme Court said this was evidence she wasn’t competent enough to work on the racketeering complaint. The court ignored the fact that Alexander had never received a poor review in her entire five years at the County Attorney’s Office and Thomas testified during the trial that he’d never received a complaint about her. At the same time, the Court stated several times in its opinion that it found no evidence of political bias by Alexander against the judges or supervisors. So essentially, Alexander is being suspended because liberals want to stick it to a conservative blogger.
At this point, Rachel Alexander is being left with little recourse other than to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The problem is the Supreme Court only accepts about 80 of the 10,000 petitions it receives every year. Alexander has no attorney and cannot afford one, having been forced out of the legal profession into journalism, where she doesn’t even make enough money to make payments on her law school loans. Alexander also has a federal claim against the Bar for selective prosecution. Several attorneys familiar with her case have told her she has a slam-dunk case, considering the Bar reached down through several layers of supervisors to single her out for discipline without even targeting her immediate supervisor, who was in charge of the racketeering case and who performed the bulk of the work on it. Worse yet, the Bar is trying to force her to pay $128,203 for the cost of its prosecuting just her.
The Left targeted her because she may have been well known on the Arizona political scene, but she didn’t have the connections or money to fight back. She is a weekly columnist for TownhallThe Christian Post, and Right Wing News, but not someone with enough star power to make this a huge story. This story of corruption at the state government level is no different than the corruption that is now coming out about the Obama Administration, but because it is on a smaller scale, it is more difficult to get people interested in it.
Meanwhile, Alexander’s reputation has been dragged through the mud and the abuse that she has had to endure is appalling. She has been smeared non-stop by liberal websites in Arizona. Her main website was hacked by an IP address associated with the county supervisors, but no law enforcement agency would investigate it even though it destroyed her traffic, got her website banned from Google –and she finally had to rebuild her website from scratch using a different platform in order to get back into Google. Her traffic has never recovered because she lost thousands of articles; she went from 5,000 unique visitors per day down to less than 1,000. Her bankruptcy business fell apart because potential clients would not hire her once they’d googled her. She lost her home to foreclosure last summer and moved in with her parents.
This is even worse than the IRS’s targeting of Tea Party groups because she’s one person, without the resources to fight, without the national attention, without lawyers coming out of the woodwork to help her out.
If anyone can help Alexander find legal counsel or provide more exposure for her plight, please contact her at This case needs all the sunlight it can get. The liberals have been doing this to many bloggers and if we don’t stand up to them and stop this, they’ll be coming for us next. Michelle Malkin has covered it here.

Monday, June 17, 2013

Governor Brewer Betrays Conservatives, Forces Through Huge Obamacare Medicaid Expansion

Brewer is wagging her finger at Arizonans now
Once considered a conservative governor due to signing SB 1070, which toughened up illegal immigration laws, Arizona’s Governor Jan Brewer has now destroyed that reputation. Last week, she called a surprise special session of the legislature, and allying with Democrats, bullied through Obamacare's massive expansion of Medicaid, known as AHCCCS in Arizona. The bullying tactics she used to coerce Republican legislators into voting for it were so appalling, they made national news and have prominent Republicans all over the state speaking out in outrage.

Brewer called legislators into the State Capitol at 5 p.m. last Tuesday, and kept them there until they passed the bill at 3:40 a.m. According to Arizona State Rep. Kelly Townsend (R-Mesa), a Tea Party leader, the 600-page bill was presented at the last minute to legislators, who were told they would be voting on it within a few hours – not enough time to thoroughly examine it. Legislators were instructed not to answer any questions, nor vote yes on any amendments. One of the amendments they were forced to turn down would have created a Pat Tillman license plate to benefit veterans and their families (fortunately it was added to another bill a couple of days later and passed).

Kelly sent a mass email to Republicans around the state after the debacle, blowing the lid off Brewer's underhanded tactics, which included this appalling story, “One Republican legislator whom I won't name told me that when they were in the Governor's office, they were offered help on their next reelection campaign and an assurance that they would win if they voted for the expansion.”

Read the rest of the article at Townhall

Saturday, June 15, 2013

Statements by Arizona's brave legislators who stood up on the House floor to oppose Brewer's Medicaid expansion

Arizona legislators who voted for Medicaid expansion betrayal

Rep. Kelly Townsend exposes betrayal at the legislature over forced Medicaid expansion

My experience this week at the Legislature
One of the most offensive things about this week wasn't the fact that some R's are really D's and want more socialism, (we already knew that) it was that they voted to use the rules in a way that has never been done before. 

The suspend rules applies to emergency legislation that we couldn't have foreseen earlier in the session. If you need to submit a bill after the deadline, then vote to suspend the rules with the blessing of the leadership. However, this caucus voted to suspend as many rules as possible in spite of the leadership. In fact, they threatened to vote out the leadership and replace them with theirs if they didn't cooperate. Although Doris Goodale claimed it was a crazy rumor put out by the far right and an example of what they had to put up with on a daily basis from us, the Arizona Capitol Times verified this on their website. Apologies are generally accepted, Doris.

The Governor thought that by threatening leadership and suspending the rules, she would get her expansion Tuesday night by making us work into the wee hours. She later found out that there are AZ Constitutional rules she must follow and all we could do was the first read Tuesday and she had to wait three days by law for the entire process. 

And so began a drama of errors. When normally a bill is introduced and goes through the process of debate, public comment/scrutiny, and rules committee to see if it is Constitutional, a set of brand new bills with a brand new budget and medicaid expansion was set on our desks after a long wait for a repaired printer. I was told it was more than 600 pages and we would be voting on it in a matter of hours.

No committees, no public scrutiny, no rules committee, no ability to truly see what went into this new budget and whether it was structurally sound or not. Well, we figured we could at least ask the new coalition to tell us about it on the floor. Brace yourselves. These Representatives were told to not answer any questions. Not vote yes on any amendments. Even amendments they had supported in the pass. No matter the merit, vote no.

We were accused by the Governor of not getting to the "people's business." As if it were we who were trying to screw over the people of Arizona. I asked one of them why they didn't answer a question on the floor about it. He shrugged his shoulders. I asked if he knew HOW to answer a question about it. Did he know what was in the bill? He said no. They were told, "Here is a bill, now go vote yes for me and don't answer any questions." Sounds like the Mafia. 

Why were they so obedient? Why were these people whom I once held in high regard even though I disagreed with them, why would they yield to mafia-like tactics? Who had THAT much power over the human beings I thought were honorable? One person whom I won't name told me that when they were in the Governor's office was offered help on the campaign and an assurance that they would win. They regrettably didn't have a recording of it and so didn't want to go on the record because it was their word against hers. I asked if it was okay if I told about this if I didn't mention the name and was given permission.

This, folks, is the only logical answer I can wrap my head around as to why the "Honorable Representatives" would sit silent and not answer one question, nor vote yes on amendments like the Pat Tillman plates that would benefit veterans and their families. Oh, they voted yes on that bill to pass it Friday morning when it was amended onto another bill unrelated to the budget or Medicaid expansion. But not during the special session. Because they were instructed not to do so, they were willing to take orders from a puppet master.

I cannot imagine myself being in a position to take someone else's orders on how to cast a vote. I was asked by a certain person the other day to PLEASE, PLEASE vote yes on a bill as a personal favor to them. They will not ask me to do that again, I promise. What is it in the moral fiber that causes someone to think it is okay to vote in a certain way that is contrary to the good of the people? Is it "We the People," or We, the Politicians?"

I was behind a Dem staffer Friday morning after Sine Die, and she not knowing I was there told her colleague that although she didn't understand the rule process, it didn't matter because they got the job done, right? I said to her surely I must have just heard her wrong. Surely she didn't just say forget any rules, let's just get what we want however we can.

This, however, is the new culture of American, and now Arizonan politics. Get it done, or else. By the way, when did that cancer infect our State? Seems Governor Brewer was opposed to Obamacare at one point. Was it after she went back to DC to see Obama? Seems like it to me, but I cannot be for sure. I will have to go back and look at the dates. After witnessing what this Governor is capable of when she wants something, I will not be surprised if her support of Medicaid expansion came soon after her trip back east. Doesn't matter at this point...

I have been largely silent about Governor Brewer. As a matter of fact, I was told by her that she didn't mind if we disagreed, just don't do it before the media. I watched her veto bills of those who went public before I did and was very thankful that my bill got through before this all came up. I don't expect to get anything else signed by my Governor next year, but I will submit bills just the same. Like one that says you must have X amount of time to read a bill for every 50 pages. I would like that in the AZ Constitution, because apparently it isn't safe or matter much if it isn't there. Will she sign that one? I bet you she does not.

It wasn't so much the fact that these folks wanted Medicaid expansion. It was the lengths they went to to get it. It was the fact that we have a House majority willing to sit silent, ignore the rules, and vote no on good legislation that they previously supported because someone TOLD them to. 

The Governor stated that some of her coalition had their political careers threatened, as if that was something subversive. It is not, and as a matter of fact, she can consider this a PROMISE that I will do all in my power to make sure these people who sold out to Mafia tactics are replaced, for the good of "We, the People!"

I encourage you to do the same.
Rep. Kelly Townsend
Visit Greater Phoenix Tea Party Patriots at:

Statement from Senate President Andy Biggs and House Speaker Andy Tobin on the Governor’s call for a Special Session

“This evening, Governor Brewer summoned legislators to convene a special session to address the FY14 budget and Medicaid expansion. The special session was called without any consultation with Senate or House leadership, and was designed to commence at the precise moment it was conveyed. We are disappointed and stunned that the Governor and her staff would resort to such an unnecessary, impulsive and unprecedented tactic.

Since the beginning of the session, Senate and House leadership have made the budgetary process a top priority. Additionally, the debate regarding the full implementation of Obamacare in Arizona was already fully under way. In fact, these two specific items have not only consistently been a top legislative focus, but the other essential bills of the legislature have also been moving through our respective chambers. Instead of allowing the process to proceed in an orderly manner, the Governor made the impetuous decision to intercede and collude with the democrat minority in order to force an expedited vote on her sole legislative priority of Obamacare.

We are frustrated and bewildered by her overt hostility and disregard for the budgetary process which was already well under way. The blatant disrespect and reckless practices exhibited by this Executive are less than what was expected of her and more than should be tolerated.”

Thursday, June 13, 2013

I will be on the Austin Hill Show tomorrow morning to explain to women everything they need to know for concealed carry of firearms

If you're a gal and interested in the concealed carry of firearms, tune in Friday morning at 6:30 a.m. PST (9:35 a.m. EST) to Austin Hill's Idaho show where I will discuss as the editor of Western Shooting Journal everything women need to know about getting a concealed weapons permit and shooting. If I can do it, anyone can :-) Click here to listen to NewsRadio KINF 99.1 FM live. Click here to check out Western Shooting Journal and subscribe (only $1.89/mth online, $29.95/yr print subscription).

Tuesday, June 11, 2013


By Alan Korwin

First of two parts.
[The Arizona Republic has decided against running this story.]

To provide balance to the constant promotional drumbeat the media has supplied for the inaccurately named Phoenix gun buyback (you can't buy back something you never owned), this two-part series will examine what's really occurring in the mysteriously funded city-supported gun buy ups in Phoenix.

A handful of close associates saw an early version of this piece while the Arizona Republic was deciding against publishing it; now it goes out statewide. Next, it goes out with Part II nationally soon, with the criminal questions at the forefront -- who actually owns the collected guns (no one is saying); did the money come from out of state (a federal crime); was it in essence a straw purchase with funds laundered through a grocery chain (very possible); will any of this be investigated (by trustworthy BATFE); is there any assurance these guns won't "walk" and is there any other accountability (we're working on it); and the two really big questions... stay tuned.

by Alan Korwin
The Uninvited Ombudsman

A publicity stunt has given the impression that mayor Greg Stanton and other Phoenix officials are "doing something" about psychopathic murderers. It claims to have spent $200,000 -- with no audit trail -- buying up rusted, inoperable, obsolete and other firearms from residents for $100 grocery cards last month.

The only reason these gun buy ups took place was because a madman slaughtered innocent kindergarten children 2,400 miles away. If it weren't for that insanely criminal act, this buying program would not have run. The motivation was essentially irrational -- even the sponsors admitted this had virtually no chance of preventing a similar atrocity which, after all, should be our goal. New "goals" materialized as justification.

When similar programs first appeared after tragedies years ago, organizers believed if they offered bags of groceries criminals would respond by turning in their guns. That was so absurd it was abandoned because it made the promoters look like abject idiots (and gangbangers stayed home, furthering that impression). Because tax money was used the legislature banned this for the future.

Untethered officials now figure they can use donated funds instead, and using a "loophole" (which they usually detest), destroy guns they collect, despite the law. If you still have doubts about what gun haters want to do with your guns, fuggetaboutit -- they've announced they'll abandon even this program if they can't destroy the guns.

And even that's a lie. Earlier reports said police will selectively destroy the guns. Guns they can use, or with historic value will be saved, which is only common sense. Only trash will be destroyed (including inexpensive guns only poor people can afford). With no audit trail.

So what's really happening, is police are buying guns from the public (or somebody is buying them) at a deep discount. For quality guns, you get way below market value and no destruction. You would have done far better selling your property at a store. In the next article, we will reveal the inventories, if the police and the mayor come clean (they are stalling on this).

As plain observation showed, this guns-for-groceries scam worked two ways. A letter published by the Arizona Republic confirmed what observers there all saw -- but reporters and columnists deliberately omitted:

"I spent an hour going from car to car as people waited excitedly to turn in their firearms... most people were actual gun owners taking advantage of the opportunity to get something for their garbage. Almost every gun I saw or learned about was either old, damaged or obsolete or worth far less than even $100. The beauty of these events is you have anti-gunners donating money that benefits gun owners... I'm sure the police will boast about what a success it was..." (5/6/13, C. Johnson)

One savvy entrepreneur reportedly turned in ten pieces of junk and walked away with a cool thousand dollars. Another one I personally know (whose name you know) turned in six. Promoters called this a success. One widow turned in a $700 new-in-the-box stainless-steel sidearm that some cop will end up with. She lost $600 in value, won't get the promised destruction, won't know it, and the media bragged about more success.


Caption: Ambitious Arizonans did what they could to buy valuable firearms, give folks fair value, and save precious guns from the controversial plan of people who hate guns seeking to destroy perfectly good constitutionally protected private property. Hoplophobes and others running this scheme, backed by the media, held out a vain hope that destruction would "do good," or take guns off a street they were never on. The guns came from peoples' homes in closets and drawers, not from streets, a complete fabrication incessantly repeated by the mindless "news" media.

Entrepreneurs on the street meanwhile were buying everything they could for cash and cleaning up. You're hearing this here for the first time. The media calls this fair and balanced. They are not doing their job. In fact, they are becoming one of the greatest enemies of an informed public we face. They have a chance to correct this, by running this story, or following up on their own. Hundreds of them are getting this article.

Officials act as if the Second Amendment authorizes them to destroy firearms. Ed Montini's column mentioned Tucson councilman Kozachik spouting deceptive silliness about a right to dispose of firearms. In fact, firearms are the only private property specifically protected by the U.S. Constitution. Honor has fled our system. Oaths have been abandoned.

When firearms police accumulate are sold (through background checks to legitimate buyers), this public asset provides critical funding for law enforcement. Destroying guns only makes hoplophobes (people with morbid fears of weapons) feel good. In essence, lunatics are running the asylum. These same people are the ones who screamed about blood in the streets when life-saving carry-permits were issued nationwide. Nothing happened then because that... was... a... paranoid... delusion. No corrections were ever issued. Guns save lives.

People who need treatment are getting legislation. The "news" media is aiding and abetting this destruction of the American system by promoting (not reporting) one side of a story only, thus deceiving you. It's as if reporters and editors are as deluded and hoplophobic as the people they are promoting. This must stop.

You are encouraged to send this article to your local reporters. If you don't keep a list of them, you could be doing more to protect your freedoms. Even if they toss it out, they need to look at it to do so.


Scottsdale resident Alan Korwin's 14th book is Your First Gun: Should you buy one and join 60 million safely armed American homes? The author of The Arizona Gun Owner's Guide, his website is

Support my work -- and save your bacon
all at the same time:

It doesn't make sense to own a gun and not know the rules.
The Arizona Gun Owner's Guide

In Part Two, with the Phoenix Police and Mayor's office cooperation, we will examine exactly what police collected during the buy-ups. How much was valuable and how much was pure junk? What is the net value planned for destruction and how does that help who exactly? Can any be returned to rightful owners as recovered stolen property as promised? What about the ballistic tests being conducted -- for guns that will be destroyed? Rational examination of this expensive public program demands more scrutiny than the media has provided.

Don't end up in more trouble than the crook:

After You Shoot: Your gun's hot. The perp's not. Now what?

For your gunless friends:

Your First Gun --
Should you buy one and join
60 million safely armed American homes?
(Use the Amazon link there to read some for free!)

Every gun owner should have at least one of these around.
It will convince someone you know, who needs it.

Get trained

Monday, June 10, 2013

Suspicions Confirmed: Academia Shutting Out Conservative Professors

Conservatives have long suspected there is discrimination against conservative professors in academia, and now there is evidence to prove it. Sociology professor Neil Gross, a self-described liberal, reveals the results of surveys showing this bias in his new book, Why Professors are Liberal and Why do Conservatives Care?  
Sociologist George Yancy asked professors if they would be more or less likely to hire someone if they were a Republican, evangelical or fundamentalist. Three-quarters said political affiliation would not affect their hiring decision. But the one-quarter that did say it would influence their decision virtually all said they would favor a Democrat over a Republican. Almost half of the sociology professors surveyed said they would look unfavorably upon evangelicals and fundamentalists trying to get a job in their department!

In a 2005 survey, researcher Gary Tobin asked professors how favorably or unfavorably they felt about various religious groups. Fifty-three percent of academics responded that they regard evangelicals unfavorably. The next highest unfavorable rating was 33 percent regarding Mormons. 

Professor Gross performed his own “audit study,” sending in fake applications to upper academia at universities around the country. One set of applicants, the control group, had nothing political listed on their resumes. The other two sets of applicants indicated they had either worked on the McCain or Obama 2008 presidential campaigns. He found, “On average, the DGSs (directors of graduate studies) responded less frequently, more slowly, and less enthusiastically to the conservative applicant.” 

The average professor is three times as liberal as the average American, and academia is even more liberal now than it was in the 1960s. Gross provides evidence indicating that feminism greatly increased the drift of college faculty to the left, in every field except engineering. Today, 63 percent of female academics describe themselves as feminists. Seventy-three percent of academics describe themselves as moderates, liberals or radical leftists. Gross admits, “…it would be foolish for anyone with truly antifeminist sensibilities to become a sociologist,” due to how liberal that field has become. The Sex and Gender Section is the second largest section in the American Sociological Association. New departments have emerged like Women’s Studies where conservatives would not even bother applying.