Friday, March 28, 2014

Shawnna Bolick Receives Endorsements from Arizona Corporation Commission Chairman Bob Stump and Commissioner Brenda Burns

Phoenix, AZ- March 26, 2014- Today, Republican candidate for Arizona House of Representatives in Legislative District 28, received Arizona Corporation Commission Chairman Bob Stump's and Commissioner Brenda Burns' endorsements.shana
"Shawnna's knowledge and expertise in critical policy areas affecting the State of Arizona are hard to come by," stated Chairman Stump. "I know Shawnna has what it takes to be an effective legislator and a strong communicator. She is not only committed to understanding the big picture but is willing to delve into the weeds to craft sound public policy."
"Shawnna is a strong fiscal conservative who will prioritize the needs of Arizona. Watching her raise her two children I know how important education and the future of the state are to her," declared Commissioner Burns. “Shawnna is a quick study and eager to roll up her sleeves to find the right mix of pro-growth ideas benefiting the state. Arizona should be so lucky to have her willing to serve us in such a capacity."
“I am honored to have Chairman Stump's and Commissioner Burns' endorsements. Bob and I are both students of public policy and understand that sound policy often means fine tuning the details. Brenda has always been a role model and someone I would like to emulate in leadership in the Legislature. I have a great deal of admiration for both Bob and Brenda," said Bolick.
Shawnna Bolick has lived in Legislative District 28 for 13 years. Shawnna and her husband, Clint, have two children, Ryne (11 ½) and Kali (9), plus their five year old rescued greyhound, Beary Goldwater, living in the shadows of Squaw Peak.

Thursday, March 27, 2014

Growing Number of Arizona Republican Leadership and Grassroots Support Mark Brnovich for Attorney General

You can support the conservative in the race, Mark Brnovich, who I've known on a personal level since 2000 when we used to have offices next to each other, or you can reelect Tom Horne, the former Democrat who is responsible for helping get Common Core implemented in Arizona and who the national GOP says cannot win in the general election against Democrat Felicia Rotellini.


“We are building a ground game and an army of dedicated supporters and volunteers who are going to ensure we win the Republican primary this August. I can’t thank everyone enough for their support.” - Mark Brnovich
Today, Republican candidate for Attorney General Mark Brnovich announced another list of support by Republican grassroots leaders and party leadership from across Arizona. The second round of supporters includes:
  • Teresa Wright - Legislative District 21 1st Vice Chair
  • Nathan Brown - ASU College Republican Treasurer
  • Shirley Dye - LD 6 Republican Activist
  • Vince Manfredi - City of Maricopa GOP Chair
  • Susan Cohen - Prescott Republican Activist
  • Pam Miller - Prescott Republican Activist
  • Bill Feldmeier - Yavapai County Republican Activist
  • Richard Mihalik - Congressional District 1 Member-at-Large
  • Sean McClusky - LD 10 Republican Precinct Committeeman
  • Lori Oien - LD 10 Republican Precinct Committeeman
  • Anita Christy - Gilbert and Payson Republican Activist
  • Aaron Borders - LD 29 Republican Activist
To date, more than 35 Republican activists, district leaders, county leaders, and state leaders have endorsed Mark Brnovich for Attorney General in the Republican primary. They join former U.S. Senator Jon Kyl, Congressman Trent Franks and Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery in supporting Mark Brnovich over his opponent.
Mark Brnovich is a Republican candidate for Attorney General. He is challenging Tom Horne in the August Republican primary. Raised in Arizona, Mark Brnovich is a graduate of Arizona State University. Mark is an experienced federal and state prosecutor. To follow the campaign, please visit

Saturday, March 22, 2014

Arizona Lawman Calls Obama Deportation Statistics Bogus

Arizona Lawman Calls Obama Deportation Statistics Bogus

shrfarpDuring an interview with Fox News Channel’s Neil Cavuto on Friday, the man known by many as “America’s Toughest Sheriff” said he believes that the Obama administration’s claim that more people in the U.S. illegally have been deported than ever before since President Barack Obama took office is a deceptive claim.
More than 30 percent of the suspects detained in his jails on criminal charges were arrested before and his office turned them over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for deportation, according to Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio. In fact, ICE agents have been up-in-arms over the Obama White House’s handling of criminal aliens, according to an Examiner news report.
The Arizona lawman also told Cavuto that the Obama administration isn’t being completely honest with American citizens on the illegal immigration, criminal aliens, and how they are being being handled by the federal government.
“One of two things is happening: either the federal government is quietly ushering illegal aliens out its back doors and back onto our streets, or our border is still so wide open that deportees continue to re-enter the country illegally with remarkable ease,” Sheriff Arpaio said in a news release.
According to Obama’s Homeland Security Department officials, who are responsible for border security and enforcing immigration laws, DHS is approaching 2-million people deported since Obama took office in 2009. But national security and counterterrorism experts claim those numbers are inflated.
For example, according to a former police lieutenant, Stephen Hodges, “The Obama bean-counters are using numbers that shouldn’t be used in their ‘deportations column.’ If a Border Patrol agent apprehends someone attempting to enter the U.S. from Mexico, and the agent sends the intruder back from where he came, the bean-counters categorize that apprehension as a deportation. It’s a lie.”
During his appearance on Cavuto’s show, Arpaio told the Fox News host that he wants to know why one of three illegal aliens arrested by his deputies and turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for deportation proceedings are discovered back on the streets of Maricopa County, which includes the city of Phoenix.

Thursday, March 20, 2014

Western Shooting Journal interviews Sheriff Paul Babeu about the status of illegal immigration and crime in Pinal County

Our March issue of Western Shooting Journal features an in-depth interview with Sheriff Paul on the sad state of illegal immigration, drugs and crime in Arizona today. Pinal County is the number one pass-through county in all of America for drug and human smuggling. Unlike the federal government, Babeu is proactively trying to fix the problem, not ignore it. He's received death threats from the drug cartels and busted one of them, the Sinaloa cartel, the largest drug bust in the history of Arizona. He revealed how the federal government released 2,228 illegal immigrants from prison facilities which included violent criminals, and did not tell law enforcement where they let them go, then lied multiple times about it! I asked him what the best approach should be for dealing with the broken border, arming school teachers, and working with new Pinal County Attorney Lando Voyles, who's been great for cleaning up that office. 

You can pick up this issue on news stands in gas stations, Kroger-affiliated stores and Walmart. Or contact us at to order it for $5 plus shipping. Or, just come back to IC Arizona in a few weeks and I will post it.

Compete in Arizona's first 2-Gun SWAT Rodeo!

Forward to Friend

2-Gun SWAT Rodeo comes to Arizona

May 5-10, 2014—SWAT Personnel Competition May 8-9, 2014—Pro-Am Competition May 10, 2014—Public (CCW) Competition

Get ready for stucco-scaling, desert-stomping, and mud-running training for active-duty SWAT personnel in a competitive format, fully immersing shooting competitors into unpredictable, chaotic, and physically stressful situations.USTACRA & Day One Arms™ are bringing back the Two-Gun SWAT Rodeo and this time, the high-speed pistol and carbine action will explode at CowTown, a Special Operations range located in the blistering desert of Peoria, Arizona.Your mind, body, and gear will be tested and validated in 11 stages culminating in tense hostage situations built to challenge tactical combat shooters.

Lay of the land

CowTown Range offers raw desert terrain for realistic competition.

Watch the Intro Video

Perfect score round count: 777 11 Sponsored Stages. Major prizes include guns & gear.

Copyright © 2014 USTACRA & Day One Arms, All rights reserved. We are bringing back the SWAT Rodeo!

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Support Common Core? Then re-elect Tom Horne for AG

Embattled Attorney General Tom Horne, who was permanently banned from trading by the SEC, is in the fight of his life to retain his seat, but he has little chance of making it past the primary now that conservative Mark Brnovich is challenging him. It is no secret that Horne used to be a Democrat, and switched to Republican to run for the legislature, no doubt because he realized a Democrat could not win in that district. His record at the legislature was pretty dismal, one of the more liberal Republicans.

Since becoming Attorney General in 2010, he has been trying to run to the right on illegal immigration in order to appease the base, but he’s not fooling conservatives. As Superintendent of Public Instruction, he went to Washington, D.C., in 2009-2010 with Governor Brewer to apply for a No Child Left Behind Grant – which meant Arizona would be required to adopt the Common Core standards verbatim. Thanks to their efforts, Common Core was adopted in Arizona’s public schools in 2010, rather surprising considering how conservative Arizona is. Either Horne knew what he was signing onto, or he did not do the research and due diligence the voters of Arizona expected of him when they sent him to that office.

Mark Brnovich opposes Common Core and would do anything he could as Attorney General to remove the federal abuse of power. Brnovich is also equally as conservative as Horne on illegal immigration, possibly more so.

If you’re pleased with Common Core, then stick with Horne for Attorney General. But if you would like to see it rescinded, Brnovich is the conservative choice.

For more on Tom Horne’s scandals, including the investigation into him over campaign finance violations, the hit and run accident, office affair and AG’s office whistleblower, check out the wikipedia page.

Monday, March 17, 2014

Arizona's Rep. Matt Salmon Hosts Town Hall in Mesa TOMORROW

Details about Rep. Matt Salmon's town hall are below:

TOMORROW: Town Hall in Mesa 

I'm hosting my next town hall tomorrow in Mesa. I will be there to discuss ongoing issues with ObamaCare and our national health care delivery system.

WHAT: Town Hall Meeting: ObamaCare and our national health care delivery system
WHEN: Tuesday, March 18th, 3:00 P.M. to 4:00 P.M.
WHERE: Broadway Christian Church, 7335 East Broadway Road, Mesa, AZ 85208
RSVP: (480) 699-8239 or by clicking here.

Saturday, March 15, 2014

Andrew Thomas will be the headliner guest at the Red Mountain Tea Party meeting April 7

Arizona Patriot Newsletter
Sign up for our Newsletter today!
If you didn't receive this e-mail newsletter directly from us, we would like to add you to our mailing list and keep you informed about important issues facing this country. You can receive these updates directly each week by writing to us at the address below and leave your email address with a request to be added to the list. 

Join us Monday nights at 7:00pm for 
our Weekly Patriotic Meeting! 
Faith Christian School
7464 E. Main St., Mesa  85207
(Our meetings include a Prayer, Pledge, National Anthem, Honor Veterans, Inspirational Speakers, Constitutional Instruction and much more.
 This meeting begins at 7:00pm.   Doors open to the public at 6:00pm!
Seats are just $2.50 each and Children are free)
  Refreshments will be Served!
Dont Miss this Monday, 
March 17:
Ken Bennett
Candidate for Governor of Arizona

Monday, March 24:
Joel Skousen
National Author and Speaker

Monday, March 31:
Peter Hammond
International Pastor, Missionary, Author

Monday, April 7:
Andrew Thomas
Candidate for Governor Arizona
Kevin Hansen is the most trusted man in Auto Repair!

Hatch Tire & Auto
Get FREE quote on any Auto Repair or New Tires!
(Get an Oil Change and receive a FREE car checkup!) 

Call Kevin today at 480-985-5528!
Call Conservative Property Casualty Insurance Agent, Talmage Pearce 
Home, Auto, Boat, Trailers, Mobile Home, Motorcycle, Quads, Sheds etc...
Call for a Free Quote at 480-421-8381!
"Talmage Pearce saved me over $750 a year on my property insurance and I received my unused premiums back from my old companies."
Order DVD copies of our meetings  
on Monday nights! 
ATF Agent John Dodson,Trevor Loudon, John Huppenthal, Michael Farris, Russell Pearce, Sheriff Joe, Matt Salmon, Doug Ducey, John Huppenthal and more!
(Just $10 + Shipping.  Be sure to let me know which speaker you want!)
Please order your DVD here through secure Pay Pal!
Click on this button: 
Putin vs Obama! 
Who do you think is winning?    
Obama's real line in the Sand! 

Article by Bill Tatro

In the middle of an International crisis, the President (U.S. that is) drew the line in the sand and finally, finally, decided to back up his words with actions.  

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates in January said "if you cock the pistol, you've got to be willing to fire it." Apparently Barrack Obama is exhibiting to the world his metal. Don't mess with me, his words and actions are saying, loud and clear. No matter what turmoil is engulfing the world our President will not be deterred from a couple of rounds of golf in Florida. When the going gets tough, the tough get going-to the links.  

When the normal tourist plays a round of golf it may cost a few hundred dollars. (Senior discount not included) When the President of the United States takes to the fairways it cost you and me several hundred thousand dollars, perhaps even millions. Stoking up the family station wagon (Air Force One), piling in all the family (staff and secret service) and providing room, board and souvenirs for everyone becomes a very impressive tactical and expensive operation. Especially, when it is a last minute decision to hit the little white ball.

But the President will not be dissuaded no matter the cost or inconvenience, the line in the sand has been drawn.  

I am so glad that Barrack Hussein Obama has allowed nothing, such as perhaps the most serious crisis since Cuba and the missiles, to interfere with his "36." This kind of guts and determination and consistent attention to detail should make those in North Korea, Beijing, Iran and even Moscow sit up and take notice.  

Many will point to Bush 1's fishing trips, Reagan's chopping wood, and even Bill's Monica distraction as justification for time off from the rigors of the job.  

However I am not sure that when the missiles moved into Cuba that JFK drew his line in the sand nor any of the other President's mentioned did the same with as much vigor as Barrack Obama did this past weekend.
I will play! He proclaimed to the world.  

Yes, Gates said "don't cock it unless you intend to use it" and most assuredly the United States President has proven he will not back down in the face of adversity. 18 on Saturday, 18 on Sunday and with a little luck 9 before the sun set after the family wagon pulled into town.  

Now that is drawing the line in the sand and sticking to it.
Vladamir Putin be forewarned!  

Remember the Alamo?   

Article by Pastor Chuck Baldwin

Today, March 6, marks the anniversary of the fall of the Alamo outside of San Antonio, Texas, back in 1836. For more than 13 days, 186 brave and determined patriots withstood Santa Anna's seasoned army of over 4,000 troops. To a man, the defenders of that mission fort knew they would never leave those ramparts alive. They had several opportunities to leave and live. Yet, they chose to fight and die. How foolish they must look to this generation of spoiled Americans.

It is difficult to recall that stouthearted men such as Davy Crockett (a nationally-known frontiersman and former congressman), Will Travis (only 26 years old with a little baby at home), and Jim Bowie (a wealthy landowner with properties on both sides of the Rio Grande) really existed. These were real men with real dreams and real desires. Real blood flowed through their veins. They loved their families and enjoyed life as much as any of us do. However, there was something different about them. They possessed a commitment to liberty that transcended personal safety and comfort.

Liberty is an easy word to say, but it is a hard word to live up to. Freedom involves much more than financial gain or personal pleasure. Accompanying Freedom is her constant and unattractive companion, Responsibility. Neither is she an only child. Patriotism and Morality are her sisters. They are inseparable: destroy one and all will die.

Early in the siege, Travis wrote these words to the people of Texas: "Fellow Citizens & Compatriots: I am besieged by a thousand or more of the Mexicans under Santa Anna...The enemy has demanded a surrender at discretion, otherwise the garrison are to be put to the sword... I have answered the demand with a cannon shot & our flag still waves proudly from the walls. I shall never surrender or retreat... VICTORY OR DEATH! P.S. The Lord is on our side..."

As you read those words, remember that Travis and the others did not have the National Education Association (NEA) telling them how intolerant and narrow-minded their notions of honor and patriotism were. They didn't have the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) telling them they were a hate group. A hostile media did not constantly castigate them as a bunch of wild-eyed extremists. As schoolchildren, they were not taught that their forefathers were nothing more than racist jerks. The TSA didn't have them on a terrorist watch list. Neither did they have pastors constantly filling their hearts and minds with this imbecilic "Obey-the-government-no-matter-what" misinterpretation of Romans chapter 13. (Please be sure to read my P.S. below.)

The brave men at the Alamo labored under the belief that America (and Texas) really was "the land of the free and the home of the brave." They believed God was on their side and the freedom of future generations depended on their courage and resolve. They further believed their posterity would remember their sacrifice as an act of love and devotion. It all looks pale now.

By today's standards, the gallant men of the Alamo appear rather foolish. After all, they had no chance of winning--none. Yet, the call for pragmatism and compromise was never sounded. Instead, they answered the clarion call, "Victory or death!"

Please try to remember the heroes of the Alamo as you watch our gutless political, corporate, and religious leaders surrender to globalism, corporatism, socialism, and political correctness. Try to recall the time in this country when ordinary men and women had the courage of their convictions and were willing to sacrifice their lives for freedom and independence.

One thing is certain: those courageous champions at the Alamo did not fight and die for a political party or for some lesser of two evils mantra. They fought and died for a principle--and that principle was liberty and independence.

On this day in 1836, those 186 defenders of the Alamo joined the ranks of the world's greatest freedom fighters. Patriots such as the 70 Christian men from the Church of Lexington who stood against 800 British troops on April 19, 1775, at Lexington Green and the hundreds more who joined them at the Concord Bridge; men such as the great Scottish freedom fighter, William Wallace, and his band of 2,000 men who stood against an English force of over 13,000 men at the Battle of Stirling Bridge on September 11, 1297, and again on July 22, 1298, when Wallace and 5,000 Scots went up against an English force of over 15,000 men at the Battle of Falkirk; and let's not forget the single greatest example of men who chose to fight for liberty against the greatest of odds: the 300 Spartans who squared off against more than 100,000 Persians at the Battle of Thermopylae in August or September of 480 B.C. These stories--and hundreds like them--are the heritage of free men everywhere. And the willingness to stand against overwhelming odds for the cause of liberty is certainly America's heritage.

Today, however, our national leaders are in the process of turning the greatest free nation to ever exist, the United States of America, over to the very forces that the Alamo defenders--and America's Founding Fathers--gave their lives resisting. And, for the most part, the vast majority of Americans seem completely apathetic to the fetters being fastened around their necks.
On second thought, do Travis, Bowie, and Crockett look foolish, or do we?

The very Origin of America!    

Article by Earl Taylor Jr.

"The Very Origin of Existence of the United States"

Even though the Framers of the Constitution were very careful to give only a few delegated powers to each of the three branches of government, that is, about twenty powers to congress, six areas of power to the president, and only eleven kinds of cases assigned to the federal courts, still there were some who were not satisfied that enough protection had been provided to the people and the states in the Constitution. They therefore let it be known that a Bill of Rights had to be included in order to receive their endorsement. This was the reason the Bill of Rights was nearly the first item of business taken up by the new government.

When a Bill of Rights was suggested at the last minute in the convention, some of the Framers said they did not think it was necessary because they had not given the national government enough power to trample on the rights of the people. Some of the wiser observers of history, like George Mason, however, knew human nature and he would not be satisfied until the protection of a Bill of Rights was added.

It is interesting that the Bill of Rights includes a Preamble, which most Americans have never read because it is not included in most printings. It reflects the importance the Founders placed on the protection of some very special rights mentioned in the Bill of Rights:

"The Conventions of a number of states, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses be added; and as extending the ground of public confidence in the government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution, [be it] resolved...."

Freedom of Religion:
The Most Important of the Rights Listed

The freedoms of speech and press are guaranteed in the very first amendment to the Constitution and thereby prevent the federal government from any action dealing with these two sacred rights of citizens. If any laws were needed in these areas they were to be left to the states' jurisdiction. It would seem then that that was all that was needed to keep the national government in check, since the freedom to say and write whatever one wishes would give one complete freedom of conscience to also believe whatever one wishes. But the Founders knew something more was needed. Constitutional scholar Dallin H. Oakes explains that the freedom to practice one's religious beliefs should receive an even greater position than the freedom of speech and press in the First Amendment. Said he:

"Religious belief and preaching must be protected against government action.... But unless the guarantee of free exercise of religion gives a religious actor greater protection against government prohibitions than are already guaranteed to all actors by other provisions of the Constitution (like freedom of speech), what is the special value of religious freedom? Surely the First Amendment guarantee of free exercise of religion was intended to grant more freedom to religious preaching and action than to other kinds of speech and action. Treating actions based on religious belief the same as actions based on other systems of belief should not be enough to satisfy the special place of religion in the United States Constitution." (Dallin H. Oakes, "Fundamentals of Our Constitutions," Utah's Constitution Day Celebration, September 17, 2010, emphasis in original)

It should also be remember that Thomas Jefferson placed religious freedom on the highest pedestal when he wrote his own tombstone inscription. He did not even mention the fact that he had been twice elected to the presidency of the United States. Instead, he included as one of his accomplishments, by which he wished to be remembered, that he was the author of the "Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom." Jefferson's philosophy that the number one protection that government can give individuals, is also reflected in the inscription which encircles the inside of the rotunda of the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, D. C.:
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

President Jefferson was insistent that the right of conscience of individuals was completely outside the purview of government:

"No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority. It has not left the religion of its citizens under the power of its public functionaries." (Bergh 16:332, 1809. Quoted in The Real Thomas Jefferson, p. 605 )

President George Washington was equally emphatic that one only need answer to God and not to government for his religious opinions and mode of worship:

"I have often expressed my sentiments that every man, conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience." (To the General Committee of the United Baptist Churches in Virginia. Fitzpatrick 30:321n, (1789. Quoted in The Real George Washington, p. 764 )

Congress itself, in its code of laws, has consistently held that:
  1. "The right to freedom of religion undergirds the very origin and existence of the United States." And that:
  2. "Freedom of religious belief and practice is a universal human right and fundamental freedom..." (22 U.S. Code § 6401)

"Congress shall make no law... prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

The Founders knew that beliefs drive actions. History is full of such examples. Without the ability to act on ones' beliefs, the beliefs are really not fully protected as sacred. For this reason, the Founders included not only the prohibition on the federal government from telling people what they must believe (establishing a religion), but also a prohibition against the federal government from preventing citizens to freely exercise their religious beliefs (prohibiting the free exercise thereof). In America, citizens were free to show by their actions what they believed in their hearts. The Bible is filled with examples, parables, and doctrines to the effect that unless a person's actions reflect a person's belief, he is a hypocrite, a whited sepulchre, or as sounding brass or tinkling cymbal. Actions must follow beliefs if humanity is to rise above the natural man. It would seem then that any government which prevents its citizens from acting on their beliefs is reflecting the tool of tyrants and is using an age-old technique to gain master over its citizenry.

Should there be any limits on the exercise of one's religion?

Does freedom of religion, then, mean one can do anything he wants to do in the name of religion? The Founders said not exactly. Like any other freedom, it must be held within the restraints of morality and reason. But freedom of religion, as well as speech and press, are such sensitive issues, the Founders felt that any limits on these must be established by state and local governments, where abuses can be more easily detected and corrected and where differences can be allowed from one place to another. Hence, the prohibitions in the First Amendment are directed toward the federal government and are absolute. Not even the federal courts were to take on such cases. The states were left free to establish any regulations in these matters.
Thomas Jefferson explains that even the freedom to exercise one's religion has its limitation when it comes violating another's unalienable rights. One cannot commit a crime and justify it on the basis of religion:

"Whatsoever is lawful in the commonwealth or permitted to the subject in the ordinary way cannot be forbidden to him for religious uses; and whatsoever is prejudicial to the commonwealth in their ordinary uses, and therefore prohibited by the laws, ought not to be permitted to churches in their sacred rites. For instance, it is unlawful in the ordinary course of things, or in a private house, to murder a child. It should not be permitted any sect, then, to sacrifice children. It is ordinarily lawful (or temporarily lawful) to kill calves and lambs. They may, therefore, be religiously sacrificed. But if the good of the state required a temporary suspension of killing lambs, as during a siege, sacrifices of them may then be rightfully suspended also. This is the true extent of toleration." (Ford 2:102. Quoted in The Real Thomas Jefferson, p.603)

In other words, government has a legitimate role in protecting the life, liberty, and property of its citizens from those who would infringe on them, even for so-called religious reasons.

But what happens when government officials begin to think they can and should regulate the way people operate their businesses and begin to demand that they do things that violate the people's conscience and their religious beliefs in areas that have nothing to do with protecting unalienable rights?

The encroachment of government on the exercise of religion today

In a recent interview, Hannah Smith, senior counsel for The Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty, gave this summary of the intrusion of the federal government on the exercise of religious freedom:

"I think we're currently seeing increased threats to religious autonomy, which is eroding our right to religious freedom. Certainly, in the context of colleges and universities, we're seeing more and more policies that are being set that would require religious student organizations to have leaders that are nonbelievers and these policies are forcing these religious student groups off campus. There are also threats to religious individuals in their professions and not being coerced to acting in a way that's contrary to their religious beliefs. So, for example, Christian pharmacists who object to dispensing abortion-inducing drugs and state regulations that would force them to dispense these drugs even when the state can very easily permit them to refer these customers elsewhere, yet they are forcing them to do so against their religious convictions. Another example is photographers or innkeepers who would be forced by regulations to provide commercial services to those whose behavior is censured by their religious teachings.

For example, a Christian wedding photographer was fined because she refused to photograph a ceremony that violated her religious teachings on the family. Freedom of conscience is the right to not be forced to do something that violates the truth that God has spoken to your heart. And so it's that freedom of conscience that undergirds the freedom of religion."

This intrusion of government into the exercise of religious is fueled by a misapplication of the word "discrimination." Americans have been fed such a steady diet of anti-discrimination propaganda that many now think that any kind of discrimination is wrong even in our own affairs. But all of us discriminate all the time and every day in what we wear, what we eat, our daily activities, what we chose for leisure, with whom we associate, where we live, and in a hundred other ways. Truly free people are a discriminating people, but, of course, there should be no discrimination in the application of law (all laws should be made for all the people), before the bar of justice (protecting equal rights), or in the use of the public funds for public purposes (equal benefit of legitimate tax-payer dollars).

When governments begin to mandate that a person must perform an act which directly contradicts the way a person choses to exercise his religious beliefs, it is an affront to the Founders, to the American way of life, and to the Constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion. This is especially egregious when the federal government does so because, under the Founders' formula for freedom, it is strictly prohibited from involving itself in such matters, as before noted. It is opening the door wide to tyranny over the most precious American freedoms and, hence, to all our freedoms. Restricting our exercise of religious beliefs is, in effect, denying us religious freedom, the most precious of all our rights.

Hopefully, the time is coming when enough Americans will awaken to a sense of our awful situation.

Earl Taylor, Jr.

Read the article here:      
Speaker John Boehner and other Rino's are trying to wear
us down on Amnesty
for Illegal Aliens?

Article by J. Robert Smith

Tony Lee at Breitbart's Big Government reported a few days ago that John Boehner still craves immigration reform this year.  Boehner also wants to be speaker again in 2015, goes a Washington Times report.  No, he doesn't.  The speaker's immigration drum-banging has him acting more like a man who's already signed his own political death warrant.  Boehner's insistence on pushing immigration reform this year only harms his party's candidates - up and down the ballot - this November.      

Why raise Boehner's doggedness for amnesty again?  Isn't it old news?  Because of the way politics are played today, that's why.  The Democrats do it ceaselessly, and RINOs are learning.  The tactic is "wear them down and wear them out."  That's what the speaker's doing.  In the face of strong public opposition to immigration reform that amounts to a grant of amnesty (the only sort that President Obama will accept), Boehner keeps hoofing for "reform." 

Yes, we know: Boehner's doing the old soft shoe, politically.  He has important caveats attached to his notion of immigration reform.  The midterm elections are coming, so don't tee off Hispanics, goes the conventional wisdom.  Boehner and his establishment Republicans are merely attempting to reassure Hispanics that their passion for amnesty hasn't been forsaken by the GOP. 

Add that the speaker's desire is to care for and feed big business interests, since big business strokes lots of checks for Republicans.  Big business wants amnesty, however it's sugarcoated.

From a Rasmussen survey conducted last October, via the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), we learn that Hispanics aren't wild about blank-check amnesty.  In this critical election year, here's the big takeaway: "Hispanic voters ranked immigration reform last (31%) among a list of four priority issues, behind the economy (62%), healthcare (57%), and education (45%)."
Republicans aren't going to fetch many Hispanic votes in the midterms anyway.  In all likelihood, the 2014 midterms will mirror the 2010 elections.  That means mobilizing core constituencies and picking off enough independents to tip the balance in competitive races.     

Per the 2010 pattern, there'll be a significant drop off in Hispanic, black, and younger voter participation.  White liberals?  Most are confined to safe Democrat U.S. House districts.  Their impact on U.S. Senate contests?  Varies by state, yet white liberal votes matter only in states where there are closely contested races.  Otherwise, white liberals might be a dispirited lot.  ObamaCare is a bust.  The economy isn't revving.  Putin's putting the lie to the president's Kumbaya foreign policy. 

Via the Daily Caller, which cites a recent Washington Post poll on voter attitudes toward amnesty, this about Hispanics:  

Thirty-six percent of Latinos say a vote against amnesty would be welcome or would make no difference.

In 2012, GOP candidate Mitt Romney won 26 percent of the Latino vote. That's the same proportion of Latinos who trust GOP legislators to do a better job on immigration than Democrats, the poll reported.

Appears that in 2014, Republicans are going to top out at about a quarter of the Hispanic vote - however how many turn out, that is - as they've done before.  Or Republicans actually may do worse among the GOP's Hispanic voters if Boehner continues to agitate for immigration reform.  Many Hispanic Republican voters hold similar attitudes toward amnesty as their Anglo conservative counterparts.

Here's a bigger, more glaring point from the Post poll:

The poll showed legislators' support for amnesty inflicted a 12-point penalty from registered voters, 28 points from white people who did not go to college. 14 points from middle-class people who earn between $50,000 and $100,000, and even a few points from college grads, people who earn over $100,000 and people who earn less than $50,000[.]

What did we learn from the 2012 presidential elections?  Turnout was noticeably down from 2008.  Many of those absent voters were white working- and middle-class folk who hold generally conservative worldviews.  Their absence cost Mitt Romney the presidency.  Shouldn't the speaker be concerned about how to attract, not turn off, hard-pressed white blue-collar and middle-class voters - those who view amnesty as a jobs-buster, primarily, but also as a threat to their communities, schools, and services?  As fundamentally unfair?

Nevertheless, Boehner prattles on about 2014 being the year for immigration reform.  If the midterm congressional elections go Republicans' way, the House will be at least as Republican (perhaps marginally more so), and the Senate will be controlled by the GOP for the first time in eight years.  The House Republican caucus will be more, not less, conservative.  The Senate will have a bit more conservative cast, too.

In fact, Boehner, despite his predictable bravado about now being better anchored politically among House Republicans, might find that, post-November 4, he lacks the votes to win renomination as speaker.  Between a more conservative 2015 House Republican caucus and Boehner's problematic speakership fortunes, he might be correct that his best bet is to reach agreement with the president (meaning cave in) on amnesty this year, cobble together his die-hard RINOs with Democrats, and push legislation across the goal line.  Boehner's been passing unpopular major legislation recently with his "coalition of the willing" (the farm bill, debt, and spending measures are striking). 

A continued push for amnesty by Boehner - even if he starts to low-key it - serves only to rile and alienate grassroots conservatives who are indispensible to GOP election prospects.  And then there are the AWOL white conservative voters who need to be wooed back into polling places.    

ObamaCare's unpopularity and economic uncertainty are powerful drivers in the November elections.  Boehner and his election whizzes may assume that those issues will push conservatives to the polls regardless of a resolution on immigration reform.  This is a miscalculation of giant proportions.  The amnesty issue cuts deeply with GOP base voters.  Boehner may not, but other Republicans will rue having pimped amnesty and deflating turnout when Election Day is finished. 

Of course, Boehner might decide to cool his jets until after the elections, wagering that in tandem with the president and Nancy Pelosi, he could pass immigration reform during a lame duck session.  Would a new Republican-controlled Congress move to repeal Boehner's and McConnell's handiwork?  It would depend on the mettle of the men and women leading Republicans.  McConnell most certainly wouldn't double back, assuming he still leads Senate Republicans. 

With each passing day, John Boehner acts more like a dead speaker walking than a leader with a future.  If Boehner finagles his way on immigration, he bequeaths nothing to the GOP but division, strife, and electoral woe.  Far more critically, on many different levels, the speaker's immigration ploy could set back an energizing conservative movement that means to right wrongs caused by a increasingly disastrous five-year-plus liberal binge.

RINOs like John Boehner prefer big-government management and left-leaning accommodation, not conservative-driven movements encompassing reforms aimed at greater liberty, that uphold the law and seek to protect national integrity.

The stakes are too great to let Boehner wear us down.  

Read the article here:      
General Policies for the Arizona Patriots
 April to January
Meetings are held at:
 East Valley High School
7420 E. Main St., Mesa, Az.  85207

January to April
Meetings are held at:
Faith Christian School
7464 E. Main St., Mesa, Az.  85207
(Doors open to the public at 6:00pm.  Meeting starts officially at 7:00pm.)
(Guest Speakers usually begin speaking at about 7:30pm.  $2.50 per seat)