canfield cartoon

Vote fraud is a civil rights issue

If I prevent a person from voting by violence, the threat of violence or trickery, I have violated that person’s civil rights. But what if I vote illegally? Haven’t I canceled the ballot of a legitimate voter just as effectively as if I’d driven that same voter away from the polls with a baseball bat?

The Arizona Republic editorial, “Court Was Right to Toss Provision” (Oct. 28, 2010) approved of the decision of a three judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturning a provision of the Arizona law requiring citizens to prove their right to vote when registering. The editorial never discussed the fact that an individual, who isn’t entitled to vote, but who registers anyway, and then votes, is violating the civil rights of someone who voted the other way, by negating that other person’s vote.

What’s wrong with taking proactive measures to protect the civil rights of all who vote legally, by taking reasonable steps to make sure that people registering to vote are legally entitled to do so?

William O. Sumner | Scottsdale


If you doubt

The election results are a “restraining order” and reflect America’s re-assessment, if not rejection, of President Obama’s vision of transformation and “change.” His proposals to redistribute wealth, impose higher taxes and increase government control of our lives and economy are incompatible with the spirit of the Declaration of Independence and the tenets of the Constitution.

Recent events in Europe dramatically illustrate what happens when governments can no longer afford entitlements to the self-declared “entitled.” Citizens in France and Greece are “riotously” demanding more government spending while Americans are peacefully demanding less. Former UK’s Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher forewarned that the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.

If you doubt our liberties and prosperity are in danger, consider President Obama’s ominous warning when, in a recent TV appearance, he likened his health care legislation to “every piece of progressive legislation” like Social Security as a “structure” for the changes to come. His imperious world view and obstinate adherence to discredited and failed economic theories are a matter of record. What is remarkable and dangerous is that in spite of the Constitution, we will be coerced to fund unsolicited unwanted mandatory government beneficence against our will.

Ayn Rand, author of “Atlas Shrugged” observed “We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.”

Ed Konecnik | Flushing, New York



Has Mr. Smith returned?

The 2010 Republican tidal wave has risen and swept some 60 "D's" from the U.S. House of Representatives roster, passing the baton to the largest freshman class in half a century. It was a brutal campaign, lies were told, mud was slung and philosophies clashed. The TEA Party defined the moment demanding a return to constitutionally based government. But, the campaign was about rhetoric, it is now time for action. Who do we look to to unwaveringly lead the charge. Ben Quayle seems to fit the role after his "...worst president in history" comment, or Rand Paul the TEA Party's poster boy, the list is long. Whoever now wears Mr. Smith's shoes must be prepared to face a firestorm of opposition from the media, the Dems, the President and an entrenched Republican hierarchy. And who do we cast in the Claude Rains role of Senator Joseph Paine? A bruised and bloodied, but returning, Harry Reid or our own John McCain?
Good Luck Mr. Smith, whoever you are.

Randy Edwards | Cave Creek


A new sport emerges

You could see it coming if you watched much television or spent much time ear to radio. After the thrill of football season and baseball season, what was left? Politics, of course.

National Public Radio hired a “political junkie” to bring us news from places most of us never heard of. National races – get the sports note? – could take up only so many paragraphs or syllables. So the game spread to the local races, the governors’ games, the minutiae usually reserved for champion pitchers and hitters.

The news media outlets loved it. Here was a burgeoning new major source of revenue, except for the Public Broadcasting System, which apparently has a policy of no political advertising. It was sort of like noticing, if you were a newspaper publisher, that your automotive classified section was growing beyond anyone’s expectations. You’d feel you had to add some kind of car coverage to sweeten up the readers.

The mid-term elections of 2010 are history. The ad schedules are over. What will the news media do to fill the holes of revenue and real news? For one, they could spend more time muckraking, exposing corruption and sweetheart deals. For another, they could stretch all of that political ad revenue over the next two years – and hire and retain underworked reporters to do the real work of covering real news, not sports.

Jack Grenard | Cave Creek


Sonoran News should sound like liberal newspapers

I find it incredibly disconcerting that the Sonoran News is so conspicuously and unapologetically biased. It’s clear that Cave Creek and Carefree are conservative towns, but the one-dimensional viewpoint that is projected in every single issue of your newspaper merely detracts from your credibility and propriety. I grew up in this community and I am proud to be an active member; however, I find it disturbing how this publication seeks to promote a right-wing political agenda rather than unite and inspire the people of this beautiful city. The staff appears quick to jump at any story that would bring someone to public mockery or humiliation rather than seek out newsworthy events, occurrences, and citizens that demonstrate the overly-discounted acts of benevolence and altruism that are occurring every single day.

Just a couple weeks ago, Linda Bentley wrote an article that castigated the Cactus Shadows IB Education Forum in what seemed like an effort to disparage the CSHS IB students and push her own political views on her readers. The week before, she wrote another article criticizing the IB program, somehow finding it necessary to claim that it promotes “European English and spelling over American English.” Somehow she found this untrue and invalid point more important than explaining the numerous opportunities this program has provided to Cactus Shadows students as well as the countless hours of community service these students commit themselves to each year. What about the fact that this program helped several of last year’s seniors to now attend prestigious universities such as NYU, Georgetown, Bentley, Occidental, Brown, and Princeton? Don’t you find this information far more useful and valuable than misaimed punches and verbal battery? Shouldn’t this be the type of image we are promoting in order to strengthen and encourage this community?

Molly Gum | Cave Creek

Editor note: Some readers who, despite our efforts to provide the other side of what is published everywhere else, demand it appear here as well. We don’t offer Kool Aid and we don’t apologize for being true to our mission as a watch dog. Due to Linda Bentley’s efforts CCUSD is on probation for violating election statutes. Her recent reporting was on a re-occurrence of the same violations that for which they were put on probation. We’re proud of that.


Letter to Attorney General Horne

RE: Carefree, Arizona and Open Meeting Law

First let me congratulate you on your election victory. I am sure you will be an outstanding Attorney General for Arizona.

The Arizona Agency Handbook at 7.5.2 contains the following:

7.5.2 Circumvention of the Open Meeting Law. Discussions and deliberations between less than a majority of the members of a governing body, or other devices, when used to circumvent the purposes of the Open Meeting Law violate that law. See Ariz. Att'y Gen. Op. 75-8; Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974). Public officials may not circumvent public discussion by splintering the quorum and having separate or serial discussions with a majority of the public body members. Splintering the quorum can be done by meeting in person, by telephone, electronically, or through other means to discuss a topic that is or may be presented to the public body for a decision. Public officials should refrain from any activities that may undermine public confidence in the public decision making process established in the Open Meeting Law, including actions that may appear to remove discussions and decisions from public view.

I am enclosing a copy of the Sept. 29 – Oct. 5, 2010 issue of Sonoran News. There is a photograph on the front page of the principal members of the Carefree Shadow Government leaving a private meeting together. The group includes Mayor David Schwan, Vice Mayor Glenn Miller, Councilman Bob Gemmill, former Mayor Wayne Fulcher, former Vice Mayor Lloyd Meyer, and former Councilman Greg Gardner.

None of the six persons who attended the meeting held in the office of the town-owned water business would talk about what was discussed.

Good luck in your new position!

Jim Peirce | Carefree


Heads-Up: Your IRA's & 401K's are about to be confiscated!

All Socialistic-Indebted Governments have one thing in common ... Raise taxes and steal wealth! Both the Labor and Treasury Department, along with the Obama Administration will confiscate IRA's and 401K's and use them as equity, in an attempt to balance the Trillion Dollar U.S. deficit. This will be done in an effort to once again make the United States credit worthy to China and other buyers of our debt. The meeting held on Sept.14 and 15, between the Labor and Treasury Departments outlined the Course of Action. The agenda is called "Lifetime Income Options for Retirement Plans."

The Federal Government will manage and control an estimated $3.613 Trillion Dollars in IRA's and $2.350 Trillion Dollars in 401Ks.

The equity will be placed in U.S. Treasury Bonds that will pay out an estimated 3%. One major clause is that upon retirement, the value of the individual's account will be placed into Annuities. Once the individual dies, the value of the Account will automatically become property of the government.

The only way government would get away with what will be "The Largest Heist Known To Man" is by allowing or creating a major financial market meltdown!

An ageing person who sees his or her retirement account drop 50%-60% in a matter of days ... is more willing to take a conservative approach ... even if it means "government-guaranteed income."

The move toward nationalization of IRA's & 401Ks will initially be offered as an option. Those who are unwilling to accept government run retirement accounts, will be stripped of their current account tax benefits.

You'll be forced to pay taxes on your holdings, automatically wiping out 35-45% of your money!

This will take place after the Stock Market drops an estimated 40-60%!

If the following indicators are right ... A Stock Market crash is eminent!
• Unsustainable U.S. debt
• Real un-employment continues to rise
• Housing market continues to drop
• Failing banking system (2-7 banks fail weekly)
• Lower quality of life (1 in 8 Americans are now on food stamps)

A massive crisis is brewing!

Remember the government phrase: "Never waste a good crisis."

Please visit links below be prepared:

Roman Stockton | Katy, Texas


What did the new financial regulation law miss?

Expert describes loopholes that may reduce new law’s effectiveness

After the Civil War, war veterans and their families who wished to look at their military records were made to come to Washington, D.C. to examine them in person. The wait time was intolerable, and in many cases, it took months to locate an individual’s files. They were poorly organized, many being wrapped in giant bundles stacked like a mountain in the government’s warehouse.

And they were bound together with red tape.

The new law, despite its many benefits, has plenty of red tape.

“The bill’s laudable ambition is marred by significant omissions and complexity,” said Karl Rubinstein, a retired business litigator who specialized in troubled banks and insurance companies (www.karl “Every line of a statute carries weight, and it’s easy to forget for every action there can be an equal and opposite reaction. The financial industry doesn’t consider the fight over just because the law passed. Moreover, the messy litigation we face won’t compare to the mess that the law’s new bureaucracy will generate. I worry it’ll be like the Marx Brothers all trying to go through a door at the same time.”

Rubinstein believes there are trouble spots for the new legislation, including:
Fannie and Freddie – It totally omits reworking of Fannie and Freddie Mae which hold 40 percent of subprime mortgages. These mortgages were part of the root cause of the financial crisis, so this door was still left wide open by the law. Since the law’s passage Treasury Secretary Geitner has held a closed-door meeting to “discuss” Fannie and Freddie, but nothing concrete has come from it.

New Agency – The law creates a new consumer protection agency tasked with protecting you and me from financial institution abuses, which is a great idea in concept. The problem is that executing this mission will require a huge new bureaucracy, smacking of Big Brother style government, creating potential conflicts with state law and state administrations. After its passage, SEC Chair Mary Schapiro announced the new legislation requires “dozens of studies,” prior to writing implementing regulations.

Litigation – Many of the law’s features require the creation of other multiple studies and more complex regulations, a situation that will consume time for those affected in the financial industry to understand. Since the industry is none too happy about the law to begin with, we can expect them to file lawsuits early and often.

Overreaching – The law probably bites off more than can be chewed, particularly where it seeks to replace state government activities, such as in the insurance industry. The states have always regulated insurance, and they’re not going to like Washington regulators telling them how to run things. And don’t forget the insurance industry is still reeling from hurricanes, floods and the BP oil spill. The approach is like trying to eat a hamburger in a single bite, but cutting your fries up into tiny pieces so they can be better digested.

Red Tape, Red Tape, Red Tape – Passing a law is one thing. Holding the feet of those who are being regulated to the fire can be a daunting task. Expect any kind of enforcement or real protection to be hobbled by red tape.

“There is no doubt that the U.S. and global financial crisis was the result of a combination of governmental failure to adequately regulate the industry and the irresponsible investment practices of individuals, industry, and government,” Rubinstein added. “I’ve heard they say in Washington D.C. that there are two things you never want actually to witness: How they make sausage, and how they make laws. What started out as a noble and necessary legislative mission has resulted in a law that may or may not actually work, depending on how these issues are addressed. Knowing many, if not most, of our financial regulators come from industry, we have to wonder if they have the will to regulate.”

Karl L. Rubinstein, Retired | Rubinstein & Perry



"The Federal Government did not create the States; the States created the Federal Government." ~ Ronald Reagan

This is yet another fact about the history and creation of the United States that eludes Obama, "his" cronies and all liberals.

Tom Carbone | Phoenix