Amnesty Forces Prepare for D.C. Rally

Amnesty Forces Prepare for D.C. Rally

From; the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR)

On Sunday, March 21, amnesty supporters from across the country will convene in Washington, D.C. to demand that the U.S. Congress pass legislation granting amnesty to the approximately 11 million illegal aliens currently residing in the United States. Billed the “March for America,” the event is being spearheaded by “Reform Immigration for America,” a coalition of “individuals and grassroots organizations” that support amnesty. (March for America Home Page; About – Reform Immigration for America).

According to the Reform Immigration for America website, the marchers will “demand immigration reform and economic justice for all Americans.” The coalition claims that its “vision of reform includes immigrants and native-born U.S. citizens working shoulder to shoulder to achieve better wages, working conditions, and labor protections, and of an American that’s back to work, with a fair balance between main street and wall street.” (March for America – What March?). Reform Immigration for America lists a number of notorious amnesty proponents as sponsors of the march, including big labor special interest groups, such as the AFL-CIO and the SEIU; liberal think thanks, such as the Center for American Progress; and ethnic interest groups, such as the National Council of La Raza and the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC). (March for America – Whose March?).

The march comes as pro-amnesty organizations are harshly criticizing President Obama for failing to deliver on his campaign promise of signing amnesty legislation into law during his first year in office. On Monday, March 8, the heads of several pro-amnesty coalitions held a press conference to express their frustration. LULAC executive director Brent Wilkes said that the members of his organization feel “angry” and “betrayed.” In addition, amnesty proponents stated that they would rebuke Congressional Democrats at the polls in the 2010 midterm elections if they fail to pass an amnesty bill. As Emma Lozano of Centro Sin Fronteras said: “No legalization. No reelection.” Responding to the criticism, White House spokesman Nicholas Shapiro stated that the president’s “commitment to fixing our broken immigration system remains unwavering.” (The Washington Post, March 9, 2010).

In response to the march, FAIR is encouraging supporters of true immigration reform to make their voices heard by:

Adding your name to a list that will be presented to each Member of Congress with a message that we need to enforce our immigration laws and secure our borders by signing up for FAIR’s Virtual March;

Visiting their elected officials’ local offices on Friday, March 19; and
Calling their elected officials on Monday, March 22.

Stay tuned to FAIR for more on how you can make your voice heard in support of true immigration reform! For more information see FAIR's Action Alert.

The 3 M Candidates Missing Answers

By Bob Haran,

American Conservative Republican

Martin, Mills and Munger should be called the 3 M candidates, all three are Missing an answer to Arizona's financial crisis.

How does Arizona balance its budget without cutting essential services? All the 3 M's can say is cut.

The people of Arizona deserve some specifics, what else would they cut that hasn't been cut already?

Martin, Mills and Munger are just Making promises they can't keep.

Governor Jan Brewer has the answers and has been right from the beginning.

Arizona can't cut its way out of this mess. The 3 M's that Arizona needs are to Make More Money not Martin, Mills or Munger.

God Wins Again

God Wins Again

Atheist Loses Again On Pledge

From Traditional Values Coalition;

March 12, 2010 – God-hater Michael Newdow was dealt a defeat by the 9th Circuit Court in San Francisco today.

In 2002, a 9th Circuit panel ruled in favor of Newdow in his claim that the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance were a violation of the separation of church and state.

Now, in a 2-1 panel ruling, Judge Carlos Bea has determined that the Pledge, with “under God” is constitutional.

The 2002 ruling reached the Supreme Court in 2004. The Court ruled that Newdow had no legal standing to bring the lawsuit in the first place – slapping down the 9th Circuit ruling.

Newdow went back to work and found disgruntled atheist parents who claimed they were offended by the words “under God” in the Pledge.

He convinced a federal judge in 2005 that the Pledge, as written, was unconstitutional and argued his case before the 9th Circuit in 2007.

Newdow is defeated once again. When Newdow learned of the decision, he responded: “Oh, man, what a bummer.”

In addition, the 9th ruled yesterday that the words “In God We Trust” on our coins is constitutional.

“We can expect Newdow to start over again,” said Traditional Values Coalition Executive Director Andrea Lafferty. “He’s not going to go away. But, today is a good day for religious liberty in America. His hatred of God has been rebuffed by the very court that ruled in his favor in 20

Judge Allows God Back in Public School

From the Thomas More Law Center;

Roger T. Benitez, a Federal District Court Judge in California ruled recently that the Poway Unified School District in San Diego, violated math teacher Bradley Johnson’s constitutional rights when it ordered him to remove two patriotic banners from the walls of his classroom because they “over-emphasized” God. [Decision attached]

The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a federal lawsuit on Johnson’s behalf, after the school district ordered him to take down his banners in January 2007.

The two banners are approximately seven feet wide and two feet tall and contain phrases that highlight our Nation’s history and religious heritage. One banner with red, white, and blue stripes hung on the wall for twenty-five years and displayed the famous patriotic phrases: “In God We Trust,” “One Nation Under God,” “God Bless America,” and “God Shed His Grace on Thee.”

The second banner, which had been displayed for seventeen years, contained an excerpt from the Declaration of Independence: “All Men Are Created Equal, They Are Endowed By Their Creator.”

One school official justified the ban by claiming a Muslim student might be offended by the slogans.

That school officials banned Johnson’s patriotic displays while permitting other teachers to display personal posters and banners promoting partisan political issues such as gay rights and environmental causes, including global warming, played a crucial role in the Judge’s decision.

These displays included: a 35 to 40 foot string of Tibetan prayer flags with images of Buddha; a poster with the lyrics from John Lennon’s song “Imagine,” which starts off, Imagine there’s no Heaven; a poster with Hindu leader Mahatma Gandhi’s “7 Social Sins;” a poster of Muslim leader Malcolm X, and a poster of Buddhist leader Dali Lama.

Judge Benitez’s 32-page opinion was strongly worded and critical of the Poway school districts aversion to mentioning God: “[The school district officials] apparently fear their students are incapable of dealing with diverse viewpoints that include God’s place in American history and culture. . . . That God places prominently in our Nation’s history does not create an Establishment Clause violation requiring curettage and disinfectant for Johnson’s public high school classroom walls. It is a matter of historical fact that our institutions and government actors have in past and present times given place to a supreme God.”

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel for the Law Center, commented, “Many school officials exhibit hostility towards our nation’s Christian heritage. Yet, these same officials see no problem in actively promoting atheism or other religions under the guise of cultural diversity and tolerance. Hopefully, Judge Benitez’s decision will help put an end to this double standard.

It is the responsibility of our public schools to educate students on the crucial role Christianity played in our Nation’s founding.”

In his ruling, Judge Benitez acknowledged that public schools provide students with a healthy exposure to diverse ideas and opinions. He then went on to rule, “Fostering diversity, however, does not mean bleaching out historical religious expression or mainstream morality. By squelching only Johnson’s patriotic and religious classroom banners, while permitting other diverse religious and anti-religious classroom displays, the school district does a disservice to the students of Westview High School and the federal and state constitutions do not permit this one-sided censorship.”

In response to the school district’s claim that Johnson’s patriotic banners might make a Muslim student uncomfortable, Judge Benitez stated, “An imaginary Islamic student is not entitled to a heckler’s veto on a teacher’s passive, popular or unpopular expression about God’s place in the history of the United States.” And the judge flatly rejected the school district’s argument that Tibetan prayer flags were permissible because they were decorative, describing the argument as “a transparent pretext.”Judge Benitez concluded that Johnson was entitled to a declaration that the school district violated his individual rights protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and the California Constitution. He ordered the school district to pay nominal damages and Johnson’s attorney’s fees and costs. And he ordered the school district “to permit Johnson to immediately re-display, in his assigned classroom, the two banners at issue in this case.” Johnson returned the displays to his classroom that same day.

Robert Muise, the Thomas More Law Center Senior Trial Counsel handling the case, commented, “Judge Benitez’s strong opinion sends a clear message to school districts across the country that hostility toward our Nation’s religious heritage is contrary to our constitution. Indeed, it was refreshing to read an opinion that does justice to our Nation’s history, rather than rewrite it.”

Investigation of Dean Martin called for

According to gubernatorial candidate Steven Slaton, at the February 27th 2010, Cobre Valley Republican Club's Lincoln Day Dinner in Globe, Arizona Treasurer Dean Martin, who is a candidate for governor, said he saved the State of Arizona millions upon millions of dollars by not reported the revenue collected to then Governor Janet Napolitano back in 2007. Slaton claims that Martin said that he informed his staff to withhold deposit so that the governor would not know how much money came into the treasury, thus stopping her from spending it!

Andrei Cherny, a former Arizona criminal prosecutor and candidate for state treasurer said, "This is a very serious accusation that should rise above political sparring." Cherny explained that if Martin did "cook the state's books," it would not only be an illegal act of fraud, but also a violation of his constitutional oath of office.

"Only a timely investigation can show what Treasurer Martin said and did. The billions of dollars managed by the State Treasurer are the people's money and they have the right to know what is going on," Cherny said.

Cherny has called on the Fraud and Public Corruption Unit of the Criminal Division of the Attorney General's Office to open an investigation into whether Martin did indeed make that statement and did indeed fail to report state revenue.

Employer Sanctions Opponent Holds Fund Raiser for McCain

Employer Sanctions Opponent Holds Fund Raiser for McCain

By Bob Haran,
American Conservative Republican

If you think Sen. John McCain has finally gotten the message that the people of Arizona want illegal immigration controlled, you might be mistaken.

I came across a invitation to a fundraiser, paid for by "Friends of John McCain," the Arizona senator's campaign committee.

The flyer for the fundraiser says, "Jim Click and Donald Diamond cordially invite you to a Reception with U.S. Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts In support of the reelection of U.S. Senator John McCain."

Now if you don't know who Jim Click is you haven't followed the employer sanctions against hiring undocumented workers issue in Arizona. Jim Click is a Tucson auto dealer and big time campaign contributor who along with; Mac Magruder, James LeVecke, Mary Rose Wilcox and others formed the group, Wake Up Arizona coalition, back in 2007 to oppose any sanctions by the state of Arizona against employers who illegally hire undocumented workers and they vowed to defeat any legislator or candidate that supported employer sanctions.

Russell Pearce was the architect behind Arizona's successful employer sanctions law which has resulted in thousands of illegal aliens leaving Arizona. Pearce was also the target of a very nasty campaign in 2008 to oppose his state senate bid orchestrated by political consultant Nathen Sproul and financed by members of the Wake Up Arizona coalition.

Donald Diamond is a Arizona real estate developer and long time major campaign contributor to McCain with a history of shady real estate deals, see
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/us/politics/22diamond.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

If you want to help John McCain and illegal immigration, the fund raiser will be on Saturday, March 6, 2010 at the Arizona Inn at 2200 East Elm in Tucson, VIP Roundtable is only $2,400 per person and the Reception is only $1,000 per person.

I don't think I will attend, hope you don't either.

Schweikert Gets Important Endorsement.

The Political Action Committee of Concerned Women for America (CWA) has announced its endorsement of David Schweikert for Congress in Arizona's 5th Congressional District.

CWA is the nation's largest public policy women's organization with more then 500,000 members.

The incumbent Member of Congress from CD 5 is Harry Mitchell. The CWA Legislative Action Committee says that Mitchell's rating with them is poor, having voted against their position on 25 out of 36 votes in congress.

Penny Nance, the CEO of CWA's Political Action Committee said, "David Schweikert is a stark contrast to liberal Congressman Harry Mitchell."

She pointed out that Harry Mitchell, whose voting she said matched House Speaker Nancy Pelosi 80 percent of the time, "suggest that he would prefer to listen to her than to his much more conservative district which voted for John McCain in 2008."

"My hunch is that David's personal story of adoption as a child and his strong pro-life legislative credentials will make him an irresistible choice over a partisan politician like Harry Mitchell," Nance said.

Concerned Women Political Action Committee's mission is to elect solid pro-family, pro-life conservatives to Congress. Concerned Women PAC sends out a monthly letter to members encouraging them to financially support candidates like David Schweikert.

This is an important endorsement for Schweikert which you probably wont read about in the mainstream press.