The citizens of Arizona and across the country are reacting strongly to the recall campaign against Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Maricopa County, Arizona.  As previously posted in SGP Action, an organized and calculated recall effort was launched just weeks after Sheriff Joe was re-elected this past November.   

Today, The Conservative Business League, which is supporting the will of the voters by fighting off this unwarranted attack, released a statement and update today:

Conservative Business League Updates Progress On Save Sheriff Joe Campaign

Strong results in fundraising, social media and email signups all indicate significant support for their attempt to block the recall of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio

Phoenix, AZ, May 6, 2013: The Conservative Business League (CBL) announced today that they are encouraged by the massive amount of grassroots support shown thus far for their campaign to block the recall attempt of Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County. CBL states that the momentum is clearly against the recall and is steadily building.

Between Facebook, Twitter, email signups and donations, the campaign reports that it has generated almost 4,000 supporters in the past month. Further, this support has translated into almost $10,000 in donations. CBL states that these donations will go directly into paying for campaign workers on the ground. In fact, CBL has already put significant private resources into this effort.

 The campaign also noted that Arpaio has received multiple bomb threats in recent weeks – a clear indication that the campaign is turning ugly. The campaign remains undeterred in the face of such bullying and fear tactics.

Bob Thomas, member of the Board of Directors, said that the campaign is off to a great start, and the CBL is well on its way to reaching its goal of stopping the recall. “We recognize that this recall effort is about more than just Sheriff Joe, and we are making aggressive moves to stop it. The recall was filed mere weeks after Sheriff Joe was reelected – meaning that it had nothing to do with his performance and that it was politically motivated. We’re very encouraged by the grassroots support we’ve received over the past several weeks. This is an issue that clearly resonates with the voters who don’t want to see their vote overturned by bullies and community organizers.”

Ron Ludders, also a member of CBL’s Board, commented on the recall itself: “This is the same thing the professional Left tried to do with Scott Walker in Wisconsin. We firmly believe that this campaign is of interest on a national level. This recall is the next step in the attempt to spread the Colorado Modeli across the nation and turn reliably conservative states more liberal, as they did in Colorado in 2006ii.” The outpouring of grassroots support from across the nation shows that folks know how important it is to stop the recall.”

CBL cautions that this fight is not over. The recall campaign has recently announced that it has reached benchmarks of signatures gathered, and they have marshaled support in the liberal blogosphere. Huffington Post and Phoenix Weekly are doing everything they can to keep this recall alive. Those behind the recall have until May 30 to gather the minimum number of signatures required to get the recall on the November ballot, and they are more than halfway there.

The Save Sheriff Joe campaign urges all those interested in stopping the recall to visit www.savesheriffjoe.org and www.facebook.com/RallyToSaveSheriffJoe for more info and to get involved.

Find out more about the CBL at www.conservativebusinessleague.com.

i The Colorado Model, explained at RedState.com: http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2011/12/28/the-colorado-model-the-lefts-stratagem-for-turning-red-states-to-blue/

ii http://www.amazon.com/Blueprint-Democrats-Colorado-Republicans-Everywhere/dp/1936218003  

Our US Senate is expected to pass a bill today to make it easier for states to collect taxes for online purchases from sites such as Amazon and ebay. Hence, businesses (customers) in states that currently do not have to pay sales tax will pay taxes for all online sales (purchases).  For example, if one lives in New Hampshire where there is NO sales tax, but ordered from Ohio where there is an 8% sales tax, , the New Hampshire business (Customer) would consequently have to pay sales tax on their sale (purchase).  Why would anyone from New Hampshire order anything from Ohio, or any other state?  Is this a war on business? Is it a war on hard working families who will ultimately be the ones paying even more?

Your huddled masses, yearning to destroy me.”

ALOHA, ALL!!!  Don’t recognize the statement in the title?  We might as well change the inscription on the Statue of Liberty to those words. Yes, something needs to be done about immigration – we badly need reform and a policy that that makes sense.  But should we not secure the borders first?  Should we not realize that there are millions here currently who are breaking the law?  The current immigration reform bill being discussed has tons of flaws, not the least of which it does nothing to make our borders safer and that it will truly bankrupt the country. 

Attention Texans! 

Texas House Bill (HB) 149, the Texas Liberty Preservation Act, was voted out of the Federalism and Fiscal Responsibility Committee on April 24, 2013, and was forwarded on to the Calendars Committee. As such, it is now at the mercy of a Committee whose responsibility it is to bring HB 149 to the House floor for debate and passage.  If the Calendars Committee does not schedule HB 149 for debate soon, the legislative session will expire (May 27, 2013) without House members having a chance to debate and vote on this key sovereignty centered legislation and the Texas Liberty Preservation Act will die in Calendars Committee!

Why is this important?  "This bill (HB 149) is designed to stop “indefinite detention” (an undefined term)by nullifying two sections of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012. Under NDAA of 2012, the federal government claims the right to detain anyone identified as a "covered person" (another term yet to be defined)that it suspects of being involved in “terrorist activities” (yet another term undefined). Sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA offer only vague definitions for nearly all of its most important provisions.”