This blog is not affiliated in any way with, nor endorsed by, any political candidate

Sunday, September 30, 2012

Iran: Woman beats up cleric for telling her to cover up

This from Globalpost.com.  My question is why it was under "News You Wish You Didn't Know".

Iran: Woman beats up cleric for telling her to cover up

An Iranian woman got so mad at being told to dress "modestly" by a cleric that she put him in hospital.
Iran women bad hijab
Some Iranian women are getting really fed of up of being told what to wear. (ATTA KENARE/AFP/Getty Images)
Uninvited wardrobe advice is never a good idea. Unfortunately for Iranians, though, it's pretty much a given, since the Islamic Republic has strict dress codes on everything from jeans to high heels and necklaces to haircuts.
Women have it worst: they are obliged by law to cover their body and hair in public, and risk a public reprimanding by morality police if they're judged to be immodestly dressed.
Recently, one Iranian woman got fed up of being told what to wear. Really, really fed up.
According to a report by the semi-official Mehr News Agency, the unnamed woman beat a cleric so badly that he needed hospital treatment after he told her to cover up.
CNN's translation says that the cleric, Hojatoleslam Ali Beheshti, encountered her and another woman in the northern town of Shahmirzad, on his way to pray at the mosque. Per CNN:
"He told one of the girls to cover up, the report said.
'She responded by telling me to cover my eyes, which was very insulting to me,' Beheshti said. So he asked her a second time to cover up and also to put a lid on what he felt was verbal abuse.
She hit the man of the cloth, and he hit the ground."
The woman reportedly continued kicking and insulting Behesti after he fell. The cleric says he was in hospital for three days, but has not pressed charges.

Tags: Islam, women, media bias Please mention / link to the Conservative Observer AZ. Thanks!

Saturday, September 29, 2012

Tolerance, Civility, Inclusion and Hate Speech: Liberals are Hypocrites!

Civility.  Tolerance.  Inclusion.  No hate speech.  These nice, even lofty sounding words are simply packed with righteousness and truth, aren't they?  As a conservative, I can say that these ARE good things to strive for, and they should apply equally to all.  Conservatives, however, are NOT the ones running around screaming these words.  Only liberals.  Why?  Because they don't want them equally for all.  Liberals only want it their way, only for some people (that they get to choose), and they're determined to make civility and hate speech an issue for everyone!

You'll hear them among the different liberal pet peeves:  LGBTQRST (oh, did T already) demanding that society endorse a lifestyle that many oppose on moral and/or legal grounds; illegal aliens (oops, immigrants), who ought to just say the word to get citizenship, work, the right to vote, and more; and we ought to have more sensitivity to Muslims so that they can oppress women and behead infidels with Sharia law... and the list goes on.

Hate speech shows racism, intolerance, and incivility, right?  It seems we can all agree on that, right?  Well, let's see.

After a blog post I put up that called out the President and the media for what I believe was a racially motivated overfocus on the Trayvon Martin case, I naturally got comments back.  Credit where credit is due: some, while disagreeing strongly with me, were reasonable.  I can be called an idiot and it's ok.  That's not hate speech, at least to me.  But here's a sampling of what 90% of the comments were like [my commentary in brackets], then I'll make 2 final points.
  • You bunch of hillbilly racist f***tards! You think this **** is funny? [nothing in the post implied this].  Yeah, it's real f***ing funny when kids die! [don't know where you got this idea].  Give me a f***ing break! You pieces of **** think that your white privilege is so f***ing undeniable that the President should bow down to you at every turn [uh, no, didn't say that either. and what if I'm brown?]. Just because he doesn't address every f***ing crime in the nation you want to try to convince people that he is the racist and not you [nope on this too]? Go f*** yourselves. You are the embodiement of everything that is wrong in this f***ing country and the world! Your hate will carry you straight to hell where you belong! [my hate?]  And if I forgot to mention it F*** YOU!!!
  • And you're among the most morally reprehensible, repulsive bigots on the Internet. [hateful personal attack]
  • It must be sad to exist with such small minded hate dictating your every thought. It is even sadder that you feel the need to share your small mind with the world.  [sounds hateful to me]
  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator because he is a typical intolerant, Teabagging moron. Or as his colleges spell it, MORAN.  [hate speech though it is, it's amusing too]
  • F***ing a**hole you keep removing comments because you are too f***ing stupid to defend your racist a** bull****! You go****n piece of ****! Delete this one to! So I can write another one! F*** you!
  • Oh now it has to be approved huh? You f***ing loser just f***ing kill yourself you f***ing slimy little pr*ck!
  • If Family-Friendly commenting is encouraged, wouldn't it be consistent to post family-friendly content. Your cartoon is offensive, racist, and shameful. You should apologize to the candidate you appear to be supporting [what?]. But then perhaps she [oh, you are attacking whom I endorsed] is actually affiliated with this site and agrees with you [did you read the line just below the blog name?]. If you don't like Obama, run a candidate at the national level that can compete [we are].
Point 1:  Did I mention that the post that brought all of this hoo-ha on was put up in March 2012?  Did I also mention that all of the anti-post comments were posted on September 29, 2012 within a 12 hour period?   So the hate spewing liberals attacking this site launched a coordinated blitz, 6 months after the fact.  Hate comes in many forms, doesn't it?
Point 2:  The last comment above is trying to link this blogpost's supposed racism to Arizona's 3rd Congessional District's conservative candidate Gabriela Saucedo Mercer, who is trying to unseat ultra-leftist progressive Democrat Raul "Boycott Arizona" Grijalva.  Saucedo Mercer endured a similar targeted cyber attack back in the summer, to which was added a Grijalva-led racism smear campaign using doctored video 2 days before the primary election in August.  Oh, and... yes.  My comment box does request family-friendly commenting. 
Beware liberals spouting civility, inclusion, and tolerance euphemisms.  Don't get caught up in their HATE.

Tags: Hate speech, liberals, tolerance, racism, cyber attacks, Gabriela Saucedo Mercer, Raul Grijalva Please mention / link to the Conservative Observer AZ. Thanks!

Monday, September 24, 2012

This Week's Steaming Pile: Voting Laws May Disenfranchise 10 Million Hispanic U.S. Citizens

I wrote last week about how Raul "Boycott Arizona" Grijalva and liberals in general keep condescending to the Hispanic population as poor, oppressed people so that they (liberals) can continue to be the heroes, fighting injustice, etc. etc.  It really ticks me off to see people treated that way because it disrespects Hispanics and everyone else.

So here's the latest chain to be thrown over Hispanics, not that anything here is new, because it's not.  I first saw the Reuters article, "Voting Laws May Disenfranchise 10 Million Hispanic U.S. Citizens", by Patricia Zengerle.  Writing from Washington, D.C.  Not exactly the hub of Hispanic activity.  This article cites a "study" from Advancement Project, a "next generation" social justice organization.  You can check out the full 24-page report titled, "Segregating American Citizenship: Latino Voter Disenfranchisement in 2012".  (As a teaser on their web site, they headline the article as "Voter Suppression Laws Could Disenfranchise 10 Million Latinos".  A little spin?  I think so).

The objections boil down to these, taken from the report's executive summary (Underline is mine, italic is in the original):
"The types of voter suppression laws and policies analyzed in this report are:
(1)Alleged noncitizen voter purges of registered voters (in 16 states), which target naturalized citizens and may violate equal protection guarantees. Communities of color, specifically Black, Latino and Asian Americans, form a large percentage of naturalized citizens in states pursuing these purges, with Latinos comprising the largest percentage in most. (See Table 2 in Section II.A.)
(2) Proof of citizenship requirements for voter registration (in effect in Georgia, and pending in Alabama and Arizona), which impose onerous and sometimes expensive documentation requirements on prospective voter registrants. These laws target naturalized citizens, many of whom are Latino. (See Section II.B)
(3) Restrictive photo ID laws in 9 states, which similarly impose costs in time and money for millions of Latino citizens who do not have the required documents. (See Table 4 in Section III)."

My response.

First off, having conducted the "study" themselves, they have violated a fundamental ethics in research principle, which is simply that they have a conflict of interest here

Second, they assume that the purging of voter rolls is fraudulent.  No evidence substantiates this and they cite no source.  Biased reporting.

Third, they state that these actions target naturalized citizens, of course with communities of color hardest hit.  This is also unfounded, because there may be lots of dead white people still on the voter rolls that need to be purged.  Again, assumption with bias towards their claim, with no evidence to back it up.

Fourth, the allegation is laughable that proof of citizenship requirements impose onerous and expensive documentation requirements.  I will address this sorry statement below.  A foreign born, naturalized citizen will prize and cherish the documents that they worked so hard to get.  And again with the targeted naturalized citizens.

Fifth, "restrictive" photo ID laws... these are the same laws all citizens must abide by, not just Latinos!

Do you see how patronizing these people are?  Do you see how sickeningly condescending these liberals are?  The poor hapless muddle-headed Latino CITIZENS can't navigate the big bad state laws that everyone else has to navigate to get themselves a photo ID!

Finally, just how bad is the cost?  Here it is, straight from the horrible State of Arizona MVD web site:For an Arizona Driver's license, the MAXIMUM cost is $25.
  • For an Arizona ID card, the cost is $12
  • There are 2 identification requirements to get either one:
  • Primary (must include date of birth): 22 possible documents
  • Secondary: 26 possible documents
  • If an applicant has nothing with a photo ID, he only needs a 3rd document:
  • Anything from the primary or secondary lists.
 Who's really suppressing Latinos?
Crossposted at Blogs For Borders

Tags: Voter suppression, Latinos, Advancement Project, Grijalva, photo ID, Arizona driver's license, Reuters, Patricia Zengerle Please mention / link to the Conservative Observer AZ. Thanks!

Thursday, September 20, 2012

The End of an Era

Like many you who read this, my life span is about the same as manned space flight.  The 1950s and 1960s were the heady days of Mercury, Gemini and Apollo, and the X-15.  I was a giddy, wide-eyed nerd who took it all in (still am, I guess).  But those days gave way to the letdown of Skylab and the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project.  Not great, but we were there.

Then came the space shuttle, first Enterprise's test flight off the back of a 747 in 1978, then the first real flight of Columbia on April 12, 1981.  Now, today, the final flight of the last shuttle, Endeavor, as it passed over Tucson on its way to become a museum piece in California.

As I watched the flyby along with hundreds of others on top of buildings and parking garages at the University of Arizona where I work, memories from the last 55 years flashed through my mind.  I am tempted to list out names, dates, times, other little odds and ends and trivia from my memory spanning those years.

But I won't.  I'm just sad.  Between the recent death of astronaut Neil Armstrong and today's Endeavor flight, it's the end of an era.  The future is a big question mark.  Sure there's the International Space Station - ho hum - and now the United States isn't even ferrying our own astronauts there and back.  The strong national pride that was generated by our accomplishments in space is gone.  This must be what "leading from behind" feels like.

I'm sad for another reason also.  To be sure, NASA and the space program were born during the economic high-water mark of the 1950s and 1960s, in very stark contrast to today's economy.  But what really drove our exploration of space was a challenge.  The challenge of the Soviet Union, and then the focused challenge, pointedly verbalized by President Kennedy. 

Spurred by that challenge, America's investment in space flight triggered a technological boom that hasn't yet stopped.  The economic boost from that boom, however, seems to have fizzled out.  Skylab, the Shuttle, and the International Space Station have not brought technological and economic advances that the early space program did.  Maybe we've reached some kind of limits on that, but America does not now have a technology-producing, economy-infusing, pride-creating challenge anymore.

Such a challenge would pull us together, energize business and innovation, drive technological advances and create jobs, and restore pride in what we as a nation can do.  I know, duplicating the space program somehow wouldn't really work; that was the response to another challenge of another time, another era.

But if ever there was need for such a challenge for America, it's time is now.

Tags: Space Shuttle, Endeavor, Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, X-15, NASA, Neil Armstrong, Challenge for America Please mention / link to the Conservative Observer AZ. Thanks!

Saturday, September 15, 2012

Why Raul Grijalva Disrespects Latino Voters

I hate it when politicians claim to be a champion "for" a certain group of people when in fact they denigrate those people and use them for their own political gain.

Take Raul "Boycott Arizona" Grijalva for example.  He recently made the following statements.
"...we can say the Latino vote is here for good, and it is here for big stakes. There have been plenty of announcements, plenty of arrivals and plenty of breaking-out parties. That process is over. The curtain has fallen. If anyone doubts that Latinos will be a big part of our political future, this election is going to be a very big wake-up call."
At first glance, Grijalva sounds quite the cheerleader for Latinos.  But if you reflect a minute, you begin to see that he is actually affirming the myth that Latino voters have not been important in the past, that they've been nobodies.  He pats them condescendingly on the head like a proud tata and tells them how big they have grown.

The difference lies between valuing Latino voters and valuing the Latino vote.

He is disrespecting Latino voters because what is important in his mind is the utilitarian nature of the Latino vote.  He judges the value of the Latino vote from a political end, whether politicians or other people think they are useful or important, instead of respecting and valuing them for the votes they have always cast as Americans for generations.

If Grijalva can keep their attention focused on the label that he is a champion for, then they will identify with that label and vote the way people with the label are supposed to vote - his way.  After all, he's their champion.  He "fights" to lift them from the second-class-citizen myth that comes with the label, and because they could not do it without him, he becomes the hero who deserves their support.

That's the story he feeds them, rather than telling the truth.  Because the truth is, that Latino voters, American citizens, who are Latino, have always had and will always have a vote that is equal in power to the vote of Americans who are Black, White, Red, Yellow, or whatever color the government has labelled them with (to use a great phrase that Gabriela Saucedo Mercer coined).

Latino voters do not have to be chained to a label that keeps Raul Grijalva as their hero.  They do not have to vote the way they are supposed to vote, to keep Grijalva in office.

It is time to retire the self-proclaimed champion, Raul Grijalva.

Tags: Raul Grijalva, Gabriela Saucedo Mercer, Latino voters, Grijalva disrespects Latino voters, Az CD-3.  Please mention / link to the Conservative Observer AZ. Thanks!

Friday, September 14, 2012

CA Dem Rep Sherman Want Illegals to Unionize?

What planet is he from? 

It's idiots like this who are killing out country.

Via Daily Caller:

"WASHINGTON — California Democratic Rep. Brad Sherman said at a press conference on immigration outside the Capitol Friday afternoon that America needs immigration reform to help those here illegally while also allowing them unionize for better wages. “We need a regular process by which the 12 million people who are part of our society can be fully part of our society, and they need documents,” the congressman said. “It’s important for the labor market of this country because as long as there are 12 million people without documents, there are 12 million people who can’t stand up for their rights as workers, and that means there are 12 million people who can be used by unscrupulous employers to keep down wages and to prevent unions from organizing.”

Crossposted at Blogs for Borders

Tags: Brad Sherman, Illegal, workers, unionizing, amnesty, Dream Act To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Conservative Observer AZ. Thanks!

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Video "Words Matter": Four Years of Promises, Lies and Contradictions

H/T Patterico's Pontifications:

A great summary of the history of the Obama administration, as told by Barak Obama. It's 13-1/2 minutes long, but worth it.


Tags: Words Matter, Barak Obama, Obama lies, Obama failures, Patterico's Pontifications Please mention / link to the Conservative Observer AZ. Thanks!

Monday, September 10, 2012

Grijalva Must Go: It's America's Issue Too

Voted NO on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance. Reference: Bill sponsored by Rep Todd Akin [R, MO-2]; Bill H.R.2028 ; vote number 2004-467 on Sep 23, 2004
Voted NO on allowing Courts to decide on "God" in Pledge of Allegiance.
Reference: Watt amendment to Pledge Protection Act; Bill H R 2389 ; vote number 2006-384 on Jul 19, 2006
Voted NO on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration. Reference: Resolution sponsored by Thomas, R-CA; Bill HJRes.4 ; vote number 2003-234 on Jun 3, 2003
Voted YES on $15B bailout for GM and Chrysler.  Reference: Auto Industry Financing and Restructuring Act; Bill HR.7321 ; vote number 2008-H690 on Dec 10, 2008
Voted YES on additional $825 billion for economic recovery package. Reference: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act; Bill H.R.1 ; vote number 2009-H046 on Jan 28, 2009
Voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman.  Reference: Marriage Protection Amendment; Bill H J RES 88 ; vote number 2006-378 on Jul 18, 2006
Voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage.  Reference: Constitutional Amendment sponsored by Rep Musgrave [R, CO-4]; Bill H.J.RES.106 ; vote number 2004-484 on Sep 30, 2004
Rated 20% by the US COC, (Chamber of Commerce) indicating an anti-business voting record.
Voted NO on building a fence along the Mexican border.
Voted NO on preventing tipping off Mexicans about Minuteman Project.
Voted NO on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment.
Rated 0% by FAIR, indicating a voting record loosening immigration.
Rated 0% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance.
Voted YES on the American Dream Act
Voted YES on Veto override: Congressional oversight of CIA interrogations.
Voted NO on adopting the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Rep Denny Hastert [R, IL-14]; Bill H.R.10 ; vote number 2004-523 on Oct 8, 2004
Establish a Department of Peace and Nonviolence.  source: Department of Peace and Nonviolence Act (H.R.808) 07-HR808 on Feb 5, 2007
Form unions by card-check instead of secret ballot.
No ANWR drilling, permanently
Source: 2002 House campaign website, www.Grijalva2002.com, “Issues” , Oct 26, 2002
Voted NO on opening Outer Continental Shelf to oil drilling.
Voted NO on barring EPA from regulating greenhouse gases.
Voted YES on enforcing limits on CO2 global warming pollution.
Voted YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies.
Voted YES on keeping moratorium on drilling for oil offshore.
Voted NO on scheduling permitting for new oil refinieries.
Voted NO on authorizing construction of new oil refineries.
Regulate wholesale electricity & gas prices.
Voted YES on $40B for green public schools.
Reference: 21st Century Green Schools Act; Bill H.R.2187 ; vote number 2009-H259 on May 14, 2009
Voted YES on additional $10.2B (over budget) for federal education & HHS projects.
Reference: American Competitiveness Scholarship Act; Bill Veto override on H.R. 3043 ; vote number 2007-1122 on Nov 15, 2007
Voted YES on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges.
Reference: Reverse the Raid on Student Aid Act; Bill HR 609 Amendment 772 ; vote number 2006-080 on Mar 30, 2006

Tags: Grijalva, boycott Arizona, voting record, AZ CD-3, Congressional Progressive Caucus Please mention / link to the Conservative Observer AZ. Thanks!

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Tucson Jobs Data: Net +800 Since Aug. 2010

I heard a little snippet about this on 104.1 The Truth this morning and had to look it up for myself.  I was shocked at first, and then when my brain caught up it unfortunately made a lot of sense. 

Net jobs created since August 2010:
  • Arizona  75,000
  • Phoenix  69,400
  • Tucson  800

It made a lot of sense to me because I know Tucson, Pima County, and its politics.  While others have contributed to this, Raul "Boycott Arizona" Grijalva is chief offender.  Electing Gabriela Saucedo Mercer would be a leap in the right direction in November.  WE NEED ROSEMONT COPPER!  WE NEED THE YUMA REFINERY!  Both of which Grijalva is against.

These numbers come from the economic experts at the University of Arizona.  The Eller College of Management, one of the top business schools in the nation, houses the Economic and Business Research Center (EBR), which tracks all kinds of economic data internationally, nationally, statewide, and locally.  The data above was given at the EBR's Mid-Year Economic Update on June 5, 2012.

Tags: Tucson Jobs Data, Gabriela Saucedo Mercer, Grijalva, University of Arizona, Eller College of Management, Economic and Business Research, 104.1 The Truth Please mention / link to the Conservative Observer AZ. Thanks!

Saturday, September 1, 2012

Border Patrol Union Calls Grijalva on His Smear Campaign

Most of you who read this know that I'm a supporter of Border Patrol Local 2544, and often re-post articles from their web site www.local2544.org to give a view of the issues from the "non-Washington" side.  They're not fooled by an Old Fool.  Presented in its entirety.

"Raul Grijalva's Race-Baiting Tactics Take a New Twist

Raul Grijalva
08-30-12 What do you do when your usual race-baiting tactics aren't logical because you are facing a LEGAL immigrant from Mexico who became a naturalized Unites States citizen? You find a way to take a bunch of quotes out of context and make a slick compilation of them to make your opponent appear, well.....racist. But this time she must be a racist against Middle Easterners because she doesn't want terrorists entering this country "legally or illegally". This is all Grijalva knows. His entire world and his entire philosophy have always been based on one thing - race. When you can't run on your record, sling mud and call others who disagree with you "racists" and accuse them of "hate speech" for opposing illegal immigration and terrorists.
Get a clue Raul. Americans are growing tired of all the race-baiting. Stop with the whining and the excuses and try to solve some real problems for a change."

Tags: Border Patrol, Local 2544, Grijalva, Racist, race-baiting, Gabriela Saucedo Mercer, middle easterners, smear, Please mention / link to the Conservative Observer AZ. Thanks!