Mapping Device of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC )

Until they became public, and under scrutiny, no one really knew the integral depths ALEC has become at almost every level! Local, state and federal legislatures have been corrupted. From ALEC Exposed.org "These bills and resolutions reach into almost every area of American life: worker and consumer rights, education, the rights of Americans injured or killed by corporations, taxes, health care, immigration, and the quality of the air we breathe and the water we drink. Only by seeing the depth and breadth and language of the bills can one fully understand the power and sweep of corporate influence behind the scenes on bills affecting the rights and future of every American in every single state." I have been working with a friend from Southern Arizona, Lisa Hoffman, and she has compiled an interactive map, it will take your breath away how deep the inner workings have gone. Follow the mapping device, click on the names, see how deep this collusion has been. One masterful Machiavellian scheme by the conservatives is the only way to describe it! Who said there wasn't a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" going on? We know that it was no conspiracy, it was the complete truth!

Exposing ALEC's Corporate Influence On State Government

From yesterday's press conference in Phoenix, AZ at the Capitol.

ALEC in Arizona

Phoenix protesters pepper-sprayed at Westin Kierland Resort "...Some 900 predominantly Republican lawmakers from around the country are taking part in the three-day ALEC conference, which is sponsored by ExxonMobil, AT&T, SRP, Altria, Novartis, Aetna and Freeport-McMoran, among other corporations. Lawmakers were aware of the protests but dismissed the protesters' concerns of undue influence. "They presume that my vote can be bought, and it can't," said Amanda Grosserode, a Republican lawmaker from Lenexa, Kans. Robin Vos, a Wisconsin Republican legislator, said, "there are no examples in Wisconsin of corporations having undue influence." At at much more subdued gathering at the state Capitol on Wednesday morning, a group of about 40 professionals and activist leaders spoke about how legislation that has come out of ALEC affects Arizonans. Former Arizona Democratic legislative leader John Loredo said the groups are focused on "exposing the corporate influence of ALEC." "ALEC is the mechanism companies use to control public policy," Loredo said. "This is policy designed to enrich the richest corporations in the country at the expense of the middle class and the voters." He and other speakers mentioned Arizona's Senate Bill 1070 immigration law, laws supporting the use of private prisons, efforts to curb union activities and laws that privatize education. "Long ago, ALEC's corporate members figured out they could make big bucks by locking people up," said Caroline Isaacs, program director for the Arizona branch of the Quaker-based social justice group American Friends Service Committee. "Immigrant detention is the new growth industry.""

I'm sorry, any rebpuli-con legislator who says their vote cannot be bought by ALEC would not be attending the ALEC conference!

From a friend who was at the protest this morning... "The irony of it all was that here we had this overabundance of police in riot gear poised to pounce on the protesters protesting ALEC. While inside the Westin, ALEC was writing legislation to privatize every function of government. Which legislators throughout the country would bring back to their state legislatures...legislation that would potentially destroy the jobs of these same publicly employed policemen and decimate their pensions!" - Fred B.

The Arizona GOP

We Don't Need No Stinkin' Papers! By RON JACOBS The new anti-immigrant law in Arizona (SB 1070) is more than a racist law. It is a device designed to divide and conquer. It's not designed to just divide white-hued folks from brown hued ones; nor is it designed to merely divide citizens from non-citizens. It is also designed to divide Latinos. If one looks to previous such laws, say in Nazi Germany or apartheid South Africa, they will find stories of Jews who turned in their fellow Jews and South African blacks who turned in their fellow Africans. A common motivation for this behavior was the belief that by turning in a supposedly illegal person, the forces of the law would not turn their wrath on those who were doing the turning in. This scenario rests on the very supposition that a person can or can not be illegal. Illegality is a human construct. It can be given and taken away at the whim of those in power. Laws such as Arizona's SB 1070 utilize the suppositions inherent in this construct by labeling a certain type of person as illegal. It then takes this supposition and applies it to everyone, no matter whether they are legal or not in the eyes of the state. In Arizona, it works like this. There are many Latinos in the state of Arizona that do not have the necessary documents that would make it legal for them to live in Arizona. Most of these Latinos are brown-skinned. There are also many Latinos who live in Arizona that are either native-born US citizens or have documents that state they are in Arizona legally. SB 1070 mandates that the police in Arizona check the documents of everyone whom they suspect of being in their state illegally. This means that either the police are to develop a special sense to determine who is living there illegally before they ask for identification or they are to ask for the required documents at their whim. Furthermore, if a citizen thinks someone is without documents stating their legal status and the police fail to investigate this citizen's belief, those police will be in violation of the law. Secondary violations of any part of the law by any party are considered to be felonies and will result in prison time for the offending party. The response to this law from politicians, the media and other self-appointed societal guardians has been mixed at best. Some have come out against it while others have come out strongly in favor. Most, however, seem to be waiting to see which way the political winds blow. We are told by many of the politicians that are against SB 1070 that this law is "un-American." This is categorically untrue. The historical record of the United States is filled with laws whose only intention was to maintain a second class status for certain immigrants. From the laws enforcing the slave status of Africans to the Chinese Exclusion Acts; from laws institutionalizing racial segregation in the US South to the various employment schemes designed to control the flow of Latinos into the fields and other workplaces of corporate America, there is very little that is so profoundly "American" as legalized discrimination against immigrants, especially those labeled non-white. Of course, most politicians speaking out against SB 1070 are unlikely to share this understanding of history. This doesn't render their opposition irrelevant. Instead, it provides the more radical wing of the movement for a humane immigration policy with an opportunity to gain the ears of these politicians and their supporters. The opportunity to challenge the idea that some people can be illegal merely by their presence has never been greater. Indeed, Arizona's attempt to codify that idea has the potential to expose anti-immigrant sentiment for the ultimately racist sentiment that it is. Getting back to the point made earlier in this piece, this law is about creating division. National borders are reinforced to control wages of workers of all nationalities and to create and maintain divisions. Laws like SB 1070 are merely internal extensions of those borders. Just like imperial war, immigration control is a tool of the imperial elites in their pursuit of domination and profit. If the immigrant rights movement wants to be truly successful, it must keep this perception as its basis. While opposing laws like SB 1070 is crucial, the movement's essential demand must be the eradication of borders--especially those borders that restrict humans from crossing them.

I'm against borders of any kind. As animals of this planet, we have the right to go anywhere we please.

Sorry, I just couldn't pass this one up:

Show Everyone Real Freedom of Speech

In Arizona alone: At Democratic congress woman Gabrielle Giffords healthcare meeting a rabid protester dropped a gun out of his pocket. Anne Kirkpatrick couldn't get hers started... The meeting was shut down, republi-cons bragged, calling it "recess roastings". Harry Mitchell's meeting was a farce, with "screamers" everywhere... no respect shown. Threats of violence were issued to Union members if they showed up to voice their opinions.

Last night, republi-con Jeff Flake held his meeting... it was civil and orderly, people outside joked with the media that they were "the angry mob". At Trent Franks meeting they were disappointed there wasn't enough room... again, very subdued and joking about being "the angry mob". John Shadegg's meeting was similar. All three republi-con congress members had one thing in common, respect shown.

Guns, screaming, threats of violence... no respect at the Democratic congress members meetings. Orderly, civil, subdued, and jokes about being "the angry mob" at all the Republican member meetings. That describes Arizona and the rest of the USA currently.

It's evident in Arizona, on FAUX News, right wing radio and through out America, free speech exists for the Republican party. Especially when it resorts to outlandish behavior, inciting violence and preying on people's fear.

Taking August off has once again played into the hands of the party of NO. The Democratic Party is reeling during this recess. The repukes had a strategy... absurd and idiotic as it is... it's effective, and it's taking the voice from the healthcare discussion. Democrats need to be smart about this right now... get organized... this could be a significant political turning point... time to stop fucking around. Democrats won majorities in both Houses, the Presidency... in other words, the vote... time to immediately pass effective healthcare legislation, show everyone real Freedom of Speech!!

Voter Suppression in Arizona

Yesterday, Mrs. Seven of Six and I voted early here in Arizona.

The Wife likes to get on me about my paranoia over voter suppression. Low and behold, "mi espousa", was almost ruled ineligible for voting because according to registration records, the year she was born didn't match her drivers license. She was born in 1957, somehow, in a week it miraculously changed to 1937. The thing is, last week I made sure to check, as per Anjha's orders, with the county recorders office to verify we were registered, at the time, all was copasetic.

The wife couldn't believe it, she told the fellow Hispanic female poll worker, "I've been voting in Arizona for 5 years now, all of a sudden there is a discrepancy with my date of birth?" I mumbled under my breath, loud enough for everyone in the room to hear, "Voter Suppression!" The young poll worker made a call, then commented, "It must have been a typo." Right... we believe that.

Mrs. Seven was a little bit more pissed than usual. She ranted on, "What if I waited until election day to vote? Would they have been so kind as to make that phone call while hundreds waited in line?" Now my wife is convinced our Republi-con Secretary of State, Jan Brewer and Republi-con Maricopa County Recorder, Helen Purcell, are purging Hispanic Democratic voters from the rolls.

Then I pulled one of my high pitched Jon Stewart imitations, "Told you so!" She smacked me in the arm!

Cross posted at Low and Left Part Duex

Lurch

Mr. Bush explains what we've been doing in Iraq for the last five years.
h/t Jeff Huber, Pen and Sword

It's not often you can say of blogging friends, "I've met that person, we had beers, we talked about blogging and blogsites, politics, music interests, they came inside my house and met my family." I was fortunate enough to meet D.J. Moonbat 2 years back. A few weeks later, Lurch, of Main and Central stopped by. Unfortunately, Valentines Day of this year I learned that he had passed away.

I find myself going back and remembering where I first encountered Lurch. I know we first talked at Jo Fish's place, Democratic Veteran. Upon stopping by Jeff Huber's place today, I remember reading his comments there as well. I was just getting my blogging legs then, coming out from being a lurker. With the help of Jo Fish, he started Main and Central with some other Veterans. I was always amazed at how prolific he was. Story after story... sometimes, 6 in one day. I have a tough time putting out one or two pieces a week. It wasn't only how productive he was, his articles had substance. I think Lurch was the best at reporting on the lack of equipment (such as Body Armor) the troops had in Iraq. His commentary on the War of the Bridges in Iraq was simply outstanding!

I'm glad he took the time to visit. I was able to go all out because it was a weekend when he stopped by. We had a large Mexican feast in his honor. That's what we do in AZ in early summer, Bar-B-Que some marinated chicken and beef for tacos, all the trimmings, some Corona or Dos Equis all poolside, laughing and talking. He loved it. Easy going, smiling the whole time. He spoke lovingly of his late wife. That's how I'll remember him...

In short, I miss my friend Lurch... RIP. He, like Steve Gilliard, leaves a "blogging void" of which few can replace. I find myself visiting Veteran websites for a glimpse of Lurch. He would have laughed at that picure and comment of bu$h...

Crossposted at Low and Left Part Deux

Racism: Alive and Well in Arizona

It's the same old hate here in Phoenix: Racist whites and the nauseatingly humorous, few, long-time resident, wait until it happens to them, misguided Hispanics: Against realistic-thinking Whites, Hispanics and the impoverished, persecuted illegal immigrants who will do any job for minimum wage yet are accused of every crime known to man.

No one understands how much this will cripple the local economy here if the scumbag, sheriff Joe, and (new stance on immigration because he was on Lou Dobbs for 10 minutes) Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon get their way on enforcing this new, racial profiling, immigration law. Basically what the new law means is they can hold anyone who looks Hispanic for an unspecified period of time until they can prove they are a citizen or here legally! Welcome to the police state of Arizona.

I pity the racist idiots who don't relize how much the underground Hispanics pump into the local economy. Who do these 'uppity white folk' think washes their cars, cleans their offices, serves them fast food, mows their lawns, buys their products and helps to pay the taxes of this state? Seems like it's back to the late 1800's and Chinese immigrant labor and laws all over again.

As far as local crime goes, we had a policeman killed by an illegal immigrant this year. So now, every crime that happens, it's illegals.

Two other local officers were killed by white men. The Baseline Serial Rapist and Murderer was a black man. The Phoenix Serial Shooter: two white guys.

In the last 3 years there has been an upswing in the theft of copper from new home construction and installed construction sites. News media outlets claimed illegals were suspect. Turns out, a man was found to be electrocuted with his hands still on a live line; yep, (toasted) white guy. Two more theives got caught when they took their copper to a recycle center; yep, two (dumb) white guys. I guess those illegals are so smart, they don't get caught with copper.

Why don't these racists admit: Crime crosses all ethnic barriers. We don't even need to talk about who commits corporate white collar crime: The most profitable and least prosecuted of all crimes.

In my honest opinion, I think U.S. Customs and Border Protection should be investigating more human smuggling operations (coyotes) and big businesses who profit from cheap labor.

Please people, start treating all human beings with respect for one another and follow "The Golden Rule". And if you're the religous sort, the ever popular saying, "What would Jesus do?", applies most wholeheartedly.

"We will cross Mountains, Deserts, and yes... even Borders to feed our families! Wouldn't you?"

"Remember Manuel Cordova"

Not exactly what I was expecting in an Op-Ed representing the Arizona Republic. However, it is outstanding when a major media outlet will recognize that illegal immigrants are human beings.

I am proud of the fact that my Congressman, Democratic Rep. Raul Grijalva, (District 7 - AZ), feels that this man should at least be allowed a work visa.

What do you think?

Illegal immigrant. Fighting words. Unwelcome people. But people, nonetheless. The act of one of those people on Thanksgiving Day saved a little boy's life. You've heard the story. Manuel Jesus Cordova, 26, was walking across the desert when he came across 9-year-old Christopher Buchleitner, whose mother died in a car crash. The child was alone. The man had been walking for two days, on his way to find work. Illegally. He stopped. Gave the child his sweater, built a fire and stayed with the little boy through the night. They didn't speak the same language, but he made the child comfortable. He watched him as he slept. Authorities said if it hadn't been for this illegal immigrant, the child might have died. Help came. The child was rescued and Cordova was returned to Mexico. He came to the border Tuesday to pick up a certificate of appreciation for what he did. He talked of the night he became a hero. He said he'd been afraid that nobody would come to help the boy. Before he met the child, his fears had been precisely the opposite. He didn't want to be found then. His goal then had been to evade detection and get to a job. Funny, isn't it, how human beings change their plans to help each other? Funny, too, how the current debate over illegal immigration focuses on the negative and forgets the human. Remembering that illegal immigrants can be decent human beings doesn't change the need to reform a broken immigration system. But it could change the tone of the diatribes about the problem. It should do that. Rep. Raul Grijalva plans to introduce legislation that would allow Cordova to get a special visa and come here to work. That probably won't happen. But Grijalva deserves credit for trying. As Arizona works through the challenges of being a border state at a time when the federal government's failure to deal with illegal immigration has resulted in crisis, Cordova - this illegal immigrant - has already done important work here. He saved a child. He reminded Arizona that undocumented immigrants are people with the same range of good and bad attributes as any other group of people.

"A Lambasted Landscaper's Lament"

From E.J. Montini's blog at the Arizona Repulic:

He's been a Valley landscape contractor for years; he pays decent wages and provides health benefits; he considers himself a loyal, patriotic American. But he asks that I keep his name out of the paper because some of his employees are illegal immigrants and because, he says, “People are nuts. They don't want to talk about this. They just want to yell at you and string you up.” Arizona's employer sanctions law will not kick in until next month, assuming it doesn't get tied up in court. The landscaper says that he'll comply with the new rules. For now, however, he wonders if he could make a few points without getting shouted down. Only if there were no one around to hear you, I say. He begins by discussing the notion that illegal immigrants fill jobs that Americans don't want. “When I put ads in the paper that we have openings, there is not one white guy busting down my door asking to push a lawnmower,” he says. “It does not happen. Same with the guys I know who do roofs. Same with other contractors. Why does Arizona have to be a cowboy and go after the businessmen here?” Some would say that it's because the federal government isn't doing anything, I tell him, and that someone has to take the lead. “That's a joke,” he says. “This is going to hurt Arizona. I have painting contractor friends. Framers. Roofers. When this law takes effect and they have to fire people – like I will – do you think those employees will go away? No. They'll start working for themselves and everything we put into them, all of the training, will be used against us. Only they'll be working for cash and paying no taxes.” He pauses and then adds, “And what happens then to Social Security?” The landscaper says that his average employee makes about $400 a week. From that, each pays the federal government over $30 in taxes. He matches that amount. “When the government gets the money and finds that it can't match an employee's name with a Social Security number, does it send me back a check saying, ‘Sorry, we don't know what to do with this money?' No,” he says. “They keep it. Why? Because they need it.” The Social Security system has received billions from illegal immigrants who will never collect benefits. Some suggest that without that money, the system would collapse. “We need a program where people can be identified and can work here,” the landscaper says. “Maybe a system that says if you don't have a job you have to leave. But as it is, I might have to fire a guy who has worked for me for 10 years. He is married to a U.S. citizen. He has never been in trouble. Owns a house. A truck. Has two kids who are citizens. He's been paying a lawyer 10 years to get citizenship and still hasn't got it. Now I'm supposed to fire him because (Gov.) Janet (Napolitano) and some others got on a bandwagon and are mad at Mexicans? That's not right. Why not punish everybody else who deals with illegals or makes money from them?” He includes those who might sell supplies to such people. And groceries. And clothes. As well as individuals who use their services. And everyone who benefits, directly or indirectly, from illegal immigrants. Every business with a “se habla español” signs in its window, for instance. Or those who own Spanish language newspapers, TV stations and radio stations. “What would happen if we punished everyone who has benefited from illegals?” he asks. “What would it be like then?” For one thing, I say, there'd be no one left to shout down a frustrated landscaper.

You really should read some of the vitrolic comments in this thread. Everyone will understand how touchy a subject illegal immigration is in Arizona.

But... but... what would Jesus do?

UDATE: Phoenix Officials Feel Heat Over Migration as Protests Continue

As protests and arrests of undocumented workers continued near a Phoenix furniture store over the weekend, a Washington-based think tank is researching whether to sue Phoenix over its immigration policies. Judicial Watch, a 13-year-old conservative think tank best known for its lawsuits against the Clinton administration, sent its chief investigator to Phoenix on Friday to review public documents related to immigration...

A Victory for Sanity

Well it seems that a little sanity has returned to Maricopa County.

I wrote about it in Bits and Pieces: A police state in the county I live in! "The leaders of an alternative newspaper chain were arrested after running a story about grand jury subpoenas they received seeking reporters' notes and information on who visits their Phoenix weekly's Web site." More at DKos by artmartin, Breathtaking Abuse of the Constitution in Arizona. Lucky for me my next door neighbor is a Deputy who works for Sheriff Joe... or maybe not?

What a sordid tale of local politics that made national headlines, had everyone in Maricopa County livid and was blasted all over the blogs. Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and their friend, special prosecutor Dennis Wilenchik will think twice now when it comes to violating people's rights.
Everyone knows about "Sheriff Joe" and his claim of being the toughest Sheriff in America. But what they don't know is that he rules with an iron fist, bullies investigating reporters, intimidates everyone who stands in his way and thinks he is above the law.
What does "Sheriff Joe" say about all this, "I'm the victim".
If it sounds familiar, it is, he's a Republi-con.

County Attorney Andrew Thomas announced that all charges against the 'New Times' were to be dropped and that the case had been seriously mishandled.

A criminal case against Phoenix New Times fell apart Friday amid a crush of public outrage and admissions that a special county prosecutor made serious mistakes. Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas dismissed all charges against the free weekly newspaper less than 24 hours after two New Times owners were arrested for publishing details of a grand-jury subpoena that demanded the Internet records of any person who had visited the newspaper's Web site since 2004. Thomas' announcement came just hours after the State Bar Association confirmed that it had received multiple complaints and had launched an internal investigation into Thomas and special prosecutor Dennis Wilenchik for their actions in the New Times case and an unrelated one. Thomas, who looked contrite and atypically uncomfortable as he faced cameras in a news conference, said he had no prior knowledge of the arrests or the demands set forth in the subpoena that his office sought. "It has become clear to me that this investigation has gone in a direction that I would not have authorized," Thomas said, adding that he holds the First Amendment in great esteem and that it needs to be upheld. "There have been serious missteps in this matter," he said. "I am announcing that Mr. Wilenchik will no longer serve as special prosecutor." The mea culpa was a gigantic victory for New Times, which for three years has battled the County Attorney's Office over charges that reporters and editors broke the law when they published online the home address of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. "This really is a win for the Constitution," said Michael Lacey, executive editor of Village Voice Media, which owns Phoenix New Times and several other papers across the country. He also said it was a victory for readers, who won "the right to read whatever they want without government interference." On Thursday night, Lacey and New Times owner Jim Larkin were arrested on charges that they broke the law by publishing details of the subpoena in Thursday's paper. Lacey and Larkin acknowledged in their cover story that they risked prosecution but said the issues were too important to keep from the public. The two said the subpoena was part of an investigation orchestrated to get back at reporters and the critical stories they wrote about Arpaio, Thomas' political ally. Public backlash over the arrests and the subpoena was immediate and overwhelming Friday, with conservatives and liberals saying Thomas had made an assault on free speech. "There is only one place for friends of freedom to stand at this moment: shoulder to shoulder with the New Times," the conservative Goldwater Institute wrote in defense of the alternative newspaper. The case, which has cost taxpayers undisclosed thousands of dollars, dragged on for years. It started when New Times launched an investigation of Arpaio's real-estate holdings in 2004. The story alleged the sheriff abused a law that allows peace officers to keep their addresses from being made public. It said Arpaio used the law to hide nearly $1 million in cash real-estate transactions while leaving his actual home address on public rolls. Thomas said Friday that he still believes New Times committed a crime by publishing Arpaio's home address. "It was inappropriate. It was wrong. It was arguably illegal," Thomas said. After Thomas dropped the case, Arpaio simply said, "I'm the victim." He declined further comment. Sheriff's spokesman Capt. Paul Chagolla said, "From the beginning, the behavior and activity that the New Times engaged in victimized the sheriff and his spouse. To this day, they're still victims and still being victimized." Because of Thomas' contentious relationship with New Times, which has repeatedly criticized his office, Thomas turned the case over to the Pinal County Attorney's Office for prosecution in 2004. The case was returned after two years of inaction. To avoid a conflict of interest, Thomas selected Wilenchik to act as a special prosecutor and continue the investigation. Wilenchik is a private Phoenix attorney for whom Thomas worked before taking office in 2004. Since then, Thomas has often hired Wilenchik as a contract attorney for the county and appointed him as Arpaio's exclusive attorney. Maricopa County has paid Wilenchik's firm $1.9 million since May 2005, county records show. Thomas said Friday that because of Wilenchik's "missteps" in the New Times case, he will no longer be used for criminal prosecutions. Those missteps include the decision to make arrests and the subpoena, which demanded years of reporter and editor notes on several stories and records involving the Internet habits of every visitor to the New Times Web site in three years. Thomas, however, defended Wilenchik as a good attorney. He said Wilenchik could still be used in civil cases and his firm will remain on a list of outside attorneys used by the county. But Wilenchik and Thomas are now the subjects of legal and ethical complaints with the State Bar of Arizona. The Bar, which has oversight of Arizona attorneys, can revoke a lawyer's license to practice law if it finds evidence of wrongdoing. Arizona State Bar President Daniel McAuliffe confirmed Friday that his office has received multiple complaints against the two. The Bar has also launched its own internal investigation into a campaign that Thomas and Wilenchik launched against Maricopa Superior Court judges, which led to an unprecedented request that all 93 judges in Maricopa County be replaced by judges from other counties. Wilenchik and Thomas contend judges are mishandling cases involving illegal immigrants and accused the court's assistant presiding criminal judge, Timothy Ryan, of bias. Thomas' motions to dismiss Ryan and other judges were denied. Bar complaints have also been filed against Wilenchik in the New Times case, alleging that he violated ethical rules by enlisting a political operative to broker a private and inappropriate meeting with Superior Court presiding Judge Anna Baca, who has oversight of the grand jury. At his news conference Friday, Thomas denied any ethical violations and accused the state Bar of engaging in rumor-mill behavior that he called disgraceful. "What they have done is they have attempted to smear me and this office for speaking out and criticizing judges who have been issuing rulings that, in my honest opinion as a prosecutor, endanger public safety," Thomas said. But Thomas hasn't been scoring a lot of points with the public. Newspaper Web sites experienced a crush of e-mails, message board postings and blogs ranting against his office's actions in the New Times case. The Attorney's Office was also vilified by civil-rights and journalism organizations, which described the arrests and the subpoena as an abuse of power. "This is the type of action that should bring everyone, Democrats, Republicans, conservatives and liberals together," Arizona Republic reader and Thomas supporter Bob Haran wrote on the The Republic Web site. "This attack on freedom of the press must end immediately, if not every freedom- loving American in Maricopa County must help fight to preserve a free press by organizing a recall of Thomas and Arpaio for abuse of power and malicious prosecution."

Go here for more, local TV interviews.

Amid all the Sheriff Joe intimidation and his cozy relationship with Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas, there exists the relationship between Thomas and Special Prosecutor Dennis Wilenchik.
Thomas couldn't pursue the case against the 'New Times' editors without there being "a conflict of interest". So he appoints a Special Prosecutor in the case, Dennis Wilenchik, his former boss. Then he fires him?

Thomas went from trying his best not to make this look political in appearance to doing the exact opposite.

And I only thought the bu$h administration could screw something like this up.
This is the trickle down effect when the leaders of our country act in a lawless manner.

Judi Villa of The Arizona Republic does a great job in her article.

Thomas said he brought in Dennis Wilenchik as a special prosecutor to head up the New Times investigation given that the alternative weekly paper has "not been, let's say, a fan of mine." He also said he thought "there could be an appearance of conflict of interest" for his office to prosecute the paper. The New Times and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio have a contentious relationship that worsened after the paper published the sheriff's home address in 2004. The criminal investigation initially was handed off to the Pinal County Attorney's Office. Thomas said Pinal County prosecutors did not act on the case for two years, so he took it back and turned it over to Wilenchik. Wilenchik is Thomas' former boss, and his firm has reaped $1.9 million since May 2005 for work done on behalf of the County Attorney's Office... ...Rick Romley, who served as Maricopa County Attorney before Thomas, said that "arguably, he (Thomas) shouldn't know" about details of the special prosecutor's work. "If it's a conflict of interest, that's how it should work," Romley said. "He should not know." Still, Romley said, it doesn't make sense that Thomas could fire Wilenchik if he was an independent prosecutor. "This was either one of the worst handled matters in years that I've seen, or there was something purposeful about it. I don't know which one," Romley said. "Nothing makes sense to me in this matter. "If Andrew Thomas said he had a conflict of interest, he should not have been able to fire him. If it was not a conflict of interest, shame on him for not keeping a better handle on things."