LIGHTHOUSE BLOG

J.D. Hayworth The Only True Choice for Pro-Lifers

  

   Of the two viable candidates running for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in Arizona, only one is worthy of a vote from true pro-life voters.  That candidate is J.D Hayworth.  The other candidate, John McCain, has a spotty pro-life record and has not been an advocate for pro-life causes.  For instance, McCain supports experimenting on baby embryos, which of course kills them.  McCain also supports using federal tax dollars for embryonic stem cell research.  J.D. Hayworth opposes both.

   As far as ratings from pro-life groups, JD Hayworth has a 100% rating from ProLife Arizona, and a 100% rating from National Right to Life.   Even Arizona Right to Life said, "AZRTL PAC acknowledges that J.D. Hayworth had a perfect pro-life voting record during his service in the U.S. House of Representatives."  It does NOT say the same about McCain.

   John McCain, on the other hand, received a 0% rating from ProLife Arizona for not completing its survey.  He has only a 75% rating from National Right to Life.  Though controversially endorsed by Arizona Right to Life this year, he was passed over in 2008 for his support of embryonic stem cell research, a position he still holds.  

   Arizona Right to Life has taken a public relations thrashing for its endorsement of McCain.

   National Right to Life endorsed Fred Thompson in 2008 over John McCain because of McCain's support for testing embryos, in addition to McCain's support of McCain-Feingold, legislation which heavily restricted the 1st Amendment rights of pro-life groups.

   As recently as 1999, John McCain is quoted as saying about abortion, "I'd love to see a point where it is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations."  San Francisco Chronicle & CNN, August 1999

   Arizona pro-lifer voters have a clear choice on Tuesday to protect and advance the sanctity of life, and that choice is J.D. Hayworth.

Duplicity at Arizona Right to Life Is Bizarre

Arizona Right to Life seems to want things both ways quite often of late.   First, they endorse the much lesser of two candidates running for the United States Senate for Arizona, John McCain, while sending out emails about how important it is to protect life at all stages.  McCain supports embryonic stem cell research, and has been nearly silent in terms of proposing pro-life legislation.  J.D. Hayworth, McCain's opponent, on the other hand, not only agrees with AZRTL's positions, but unlike McCain, would be an advocate for them. 

If that weren't strange enough, AZRTL is now working against the HB 5175, a bill that would suppress the free speech of grassroots groups such as AZRTL.  While they are correct to fight the bill, it seems odd that they favor returning John McCain to the Senate, the very same guy who, along with Russ Feingold, created the McCain Feingold Campaign Reform Bill, which did nearly the very same thing as HB 5175.

AZRTL wants to protect life, but didn't chose the guy who will do it.  They also want to fight for free speech, but instead endorsed a candidate who opposes it. Something's in the water over there.

Arizona Right to Life Endorses....McCain? Huh?

Despite my prediction days ago that Arizona Right to Life PAC would endorse the far more pro-life JD Hayworth over John McCain, sadly AZRTL PAC did not. 

As a former Chairman of the PAC, I can only wonder if some untoward influences came into play that lead to this misguided endorsement.  For instance, one of the members of the PAC is a member of a law firm that represented McCain in legal matters. And at least one member of the PAC has personal ties to the McCain campaign.  Further, the Senator has also been a long time financial contributor to AZRTL, generosity that's always appreciated, but was appropriately discounted in 2008 when I was Chairman and the PAC endorsed Mike Huckabee.  

In its press release, AZRTL PAC states, "Under the AZRTL PAC criteria for endorsing candidates, if the incumbent candidate and the challenger both have a pro-life voting record, AzRTL PAC will endorse the incumbent over the challenger."  That language never existed in any document I ever saw as Chairman, and is ridiculous on its face as any incumbent could be found to be pro-life on some issue.  Would AZRTL PAC endorse an incumbent with a 2% NLRC rating?  I hope not. It's the level of their commitment, and the consistency of the candidate's positions that count, not their mere incumbency. After all, we're working to save lives here, and each one should matter. Moreover in 2008, like now, John McCain had an inferior pro-life record to a more committed opponent. The PAC did the right thing then in endorsing the stronger pro-life candidate, why not now?

Ironically, the press release from AZRTL PAC states, " Those who serve in public office have a duty to use their office to protect and defend innocent human life and ensure that laws are passed to protect the defenseless in our society."  Yet John McCain has made many questionable statements about Roe v. Wade, and supports embryonic stem cell research.  McCain has a 75% approval ranking for National Right to Life Committee.  JD Hayworth, on the other hand, has a 100% ranking, and by any objective standard, deserved the endorsement from Arizona's oldest and largest pro-life organization.   

Arizona Right to Life has had troubles over the last few months with several key people resigning.  It is my understanding as well that a member of the PAC resigned after being unable to convince other PAC members to endorse Hayworth. (In the interest of full disclosure, she does work for the Hayworth campaign, but has for many years questioned McCain's pro-life commitment, and was instrumental in endorsing Huckabee over McCain in 2008.)  In addition, I'm being told that other key supporters of the organization, including former Board members, are distancing themselves from the organization as a result.

I'm a fan of AZRTL, and I hope the organization gets its act together, but this endorsement is a black mark on the 30 plus year legacy of pro-life leadership. The pro-life citizens of Arizona might just be better served by a new organization, unadulterated by political ties and financial donations from the people it may endorse.

Brewer's Indentity Crisis

Who is Jan Brewer today? 

In past elections she has run as a right-of-center Republican, who was fiscally responsible, and pro-life.   She had a distinguished career as a public servant, and is credited with signing some long overdue pro-life bills into law soon after taking over from General Napolitano.

In November, however, she hired as her campaign's co-chairman, Grant Woods, an Arizona fixture, like an old decaying engine in the weeds in the front yard, who vacillates on both sides of the political fence.  Was this to appease the left?

She has proposed tax increases, which most Arizonans oppose, and has had difficulty making budget decisions that are necessary for the state - hardly a characteristic of a fiscal Republican.

More recently she has seemingly aligned herself with some leaders of Planned Parenthood, allowing them to throw her a fund-raiser.

It seems our Governor has gone through some sort of ideological shift to the left.  That may gain her some new acquaintances, but at the expense of her longtime friends.

A Contrast In Leadership - Phil Gordan v. Maricopa Supervisors

The Arizona Republic today ran a story about Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon putting one of his top aides on administrative leave until he can resolve charges of domestic violence.  The charge would be a misdemeanor, but Gordon, with whom I rarely agree, did the right thing by moving the issue away from the work of the people until it is resolved.

Contrast that with the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, who unanimously voted to elect beleaguered politician Don Stapley as Chairman of the Board.  Stapley, in case you've been under a rock, "was indicted in December on 22 felony counts of fraud, perjury, theft and forgery in the misuse of campaign funds," according to the Arizona Republic.  Stapley had at one time faced over 100 felony and misdemeanor counts.  Yet, the Board of Supervisors felt he was fit to run their Board and do the people's work.

This is the same group of Supervisors, mind you, that decided to fire the elected County Attorney, and replace him with a crony, rather than have Mr. Stapley answer to the charges.  It begs the question of why, if someone is innocent, do they need to take such drastic steps to avoid answering to criminal charges?  I hope if I ever get indicted, I can just fire the County Attorney in order to avoid defending myself.  

Mayor Gordon showed leadership in his placing his misdemeanor-facing aide on administrative leave.  How shameful of the Maricopa County Supervisors that they promoted their felony-facing peer to the highest position on the Board.  It's nothing short of a slap in the face to the people who elected them.  A contrast in leadership indeed.

Grant Woods' Selection Is Bizarre Choice For Brewer

Perennial politician and current Governor, Jan Brewer, announced her intention today to seek a full term as governor in next year's election.

Brewer has had difficulty appealing to the fiscal hawks of her party, and, with the selection of Grant Woods as her campaign's co-chairman, probably sealed her fate as Arizona's first female Republican governor never elected to her own term.

Grant Woods garners little respect in the Republican Party, a party he has almost left on several occasions.  About being a Republican, Woods stated, "I'm trying to remember why I became a Republican in the first place."

Woods was also instrumental in making sure Matt Salmon was not elected governor, thus installing Janet Napolitano, which resulted in the major economic catastrophe Arizona finds itself in today.

Brewer made a major misstep here if she was trying to heal her party.  Instead she apparently is trying to ride the coattails of New York 23 congressional candidate Dede Scuzzafava.

County Attorney's Office Responds to Bizarre Request from County Manager Smith

From the Maricopa County Attorney's Office:

Good afternoon

County Manager David Smith is demanding disclosure of any communication between several employees at the County Attorney’s Office and a number of media outlets including , The Arizona Republic, the East Valley Tribune, The New Times, several conservative web sites “or any other internet site or address.” A letter sent to a number of County Attorney employees also demands details of communications that happened during non work hours using personal computers. A copy of the letter is attached.  Download Smith letter

 

The move comes days after the Board of Supervisors stalled a criminal probe of county government by refusing to hire outside prosecutors while at the same time demanding that the County Attorney ’s Office not prosecute potential cases.

 

Among those receiving the letter is the Public Information Officer for the County Attorney ’s Office, whose job it is to communicate with the media.

Mike Scerbo and Barnett Lotstein are available for comment   

Also available for comment are two conservative bloggers targeted by county management.  Shane Wikfors, SonoranAlliance.com 480.332.3440   David Roney, CactusAlliance.com 480.443.8500 x101

Michael Anthony Scerbo

MCAO PIO

Office 602-506-3170

Cell    602-489-6913

Fry's Food Stores Fund Planned Parenthood Through Komen Foundation's Race For The Cure

Fry's Food Stores continues its 5 year partnership with the Susan G. Komen Foundation's Race for the Cure this year, hoping to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for the dual purpose cancer "research" and Planned Parenthood fund-raising organization.

It has long been known that the Susan G. Komen Foundation has a strong partnership with Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider, which was founded in an effort to eradicate minority children, among other things (see below).  Despite pleas from cancer patients and donors year after year to direct all cancer research money to find a cure, as Komen advertises, Komen continues to donate a portion of the "research" money to Planned Parenthood.  Planned Parenthood does no cancer research.

While Komen and Planned Parenthood claim none of the money goes directly toward abortions, but instead toward post-its, pencils, and other things, none of the money Komen gives to Planned Parenthood goes toward cancer research.  Essentially, Komen is lying to its donors, many of whom are victims of cancer struggling with their diseases while hoping for a cure.

Further, anyone who's ever run a budget knows that Komen's and Planned Parenthood's claims are a bogus shell game.  By funding office supplies, Planned Parenthood is free to allocate more funds for abortions.  Think of Saddam Hussein's Oil for Food Program.

Susan Komen's Foundation is tragically but legally free to raise money for Planned Parenthood if it so pleases, however, misleading donors that their money goes to cancer research is unconscionable, immoral, and should be illegal.

Fry's Food Stores is also free to raise funds for the Komen Foundation, but we are free to not shop there.  

___________________________

Quotes from Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood:

On blacks, immigrants and indigents:
“…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ’spawning… human beings who never should have been born.”  Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people

On sterilization & racial purification:
Sanger believed that, for the purpose of racial “purification,” couples should be rewarded who chose sterilization. Birth Control in America, The Career of Margaret Sanger, by David Kennedy, p. 117, quoting a 1923 Sanger speech.

On the right of married couples to bear children:
Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child, she wrote in her “Plan for Peace.” Birth Control Review, April 1932

On the purpose of birth control:
The purpose in promoting birth control was “to create a race of thoroughbreds,” she wrote in the Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921 (p. 2)

On the rights of the handicapped and mentally ill, and racial minorities:
“More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief aim of birth control.” Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12

On the extermination of blacks:
“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,” she said, “if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon

On respecting the rights of the mentally ill:
In her “Plan for Peace,” Sanger outlined her strategy for eradication of those she deemed “feebleminded.” Among the steps included in her evil scheme were immigration restrictions; compulsory sterilization; segregation to a lifetime of farm work; etc. Birth Control Review, April 1932, p. 107

And finally:

“The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)  (*Quote collection compiled and available at dianedew.com)

Most of us will never forget...

 

Republic Comments on Senator Gorman Idiotic

The Arizona Republic chastised Arizona State Senator Pamela Gorman yesterday for failed leadership when she was Senate Majority Whip.  Yet not two sentences later, they chastise her for not "being a team player."  Huh?

A person who is a leader is by definition not a team player.  Leaders lead, followers are team players.  That the Republic doesn't get this is not surprising, but to be so obviously inept is embarrassing. 

The Republic, always in favor of liberal "ideals," more likely just wanted to throw a few arrows at Gorman because its writers don't understand principled leadership. 

Lighthouse Blog applauds the leadership or Senators Gorman, Gould & Crump for leading the charge against tax increases in the face of intense pressure from political lemmings.