John McCain to delay decision on '08 run until '06
NEW YORK Senator John McCain is considering a
2008 run for president, but he says he's unlikely
to run for the Number Two spot.
He tells the New York Daily News yesterday that he
is seriously considering a 2008 bid. However,
McCain says he'll wait until after the 2006 election
to decide about his political future.
McCain, who ran for president in 2000,
was re-elected to a six-year Senate term in 2004.
see more at kvoa.com
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3958305&nav=HMO6
Monday, October 10, 2005
Senator Jon Kyl formally announces his bid for re-election
Senator Jon Kyl formally announces his bid for re-election
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
In Tucson at 8:00 a.m.
Pima Air and Space Museum
6000 East Valencia
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
In Tucson at 8:00 a.m.
Pima Air and Space Museum
6000 East Valencia
Sunday, October 09, 2005
MCCAIN STATEMENT ON DETAINEE AMENDMENTS
MCCAIN STATEMENT ON DETAINEE AMENDMENTS
For Immediate Release
Wednesday, Oct 05, 2005
Washington D.C. ¬– Senator McCain delivered the following statement today from the Senate floor on the Amendment on (1) the Army Field Manual and (2) Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment, amendment #1977:
Mr. President, I call up amendment #1977, which is filed at the desk.
The Department of Defense Appropriations bill is one of the most important funding measures considered by Congress. Equally important is the Department of Defense Authorization bill, and it is very unfortunate that we are forced to consider this funding measure without having completed our important work on the authorization bill. Despite the efforts of the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee, who have worked to bring up and dispense with the authorization bill in a reasonable manner, they have been unable to reach an agreement with the leadership. As a result, the authorizers have filed the authorization bill and a procedural vote will occur on it this evening.
The Senate has an obligation to address the authorizing legislation, just as it has an obligation to deal with the issue that apparently led to the bill being pulled from the floor – America’s treatment of its detainees. Several weeks ago I received a letter from Captain Ian Fishback, a member of the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, and a veteran of combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. Over 17 months he struggled to get answers from his chain of command to a basic question: what standards apply to the treatment of enemy detainees? But he found no answers. In his remarkable letter, he pleads with Congress, asking us to take action, to establish standards, to clear up the confusion – not for the good of the terrorists, but for the good of our soldiers and our country. The Captain closes his letter by saying, “I strongly urge you to do justice to your men and women in uniform. Give them clear standards of conduct that reflect the ideals they risk their lives for.” I believe that the Congress has a responsibility to answer this call – a call that has come not just from this one brave soldier but from so many of our men and women in uniform.
We owe it to them, Mr. President. We sent them to fight for us in Afghanistan and Iraq. We placed extraordinary pressure on them to extract intelligence from detainees. But then we threw out the rules that our soldiers had trained on, and replaced them with a confusing and constantly changing array of standards. We demanded intelligence without ever clearly telling our troops what was permitted and what was forbidden. And then when things went wrong, we blamed them and we punished them. We have to do better than that.
I can understand why some administration lawyers might want ambiguity, so that every hypothetical option is theoretically open, even those the President has said he does not want to exercise. But war does not occur in theory, and our troops are not served by ambiguity. They are crying out for clarity. The Congress cannot shrink from this duty, we cannot hide our heads, pulling bills from the floor and avoiding votes. We owe it to our soldiers, during this time of war, to take a stand.
And so while I would prefer to offer this amendment to the DOD Authorization bill, I am left with no choice but to offer it to this appropriations measure. I would note that I am offering this amendment in accordance with the options afforded under Rule 16 of the Standing Rules of the Senate. The amendment I will now offer combines the two amendments that I previously filed to the authorizing measure.
This amendment would (1) establish the Army Field Manual as the uniform standard for the interrogation of Department of Defense detainees and (2) prohibit cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of persons in the detention of the U.S. government.
Mr. President, to fight terrorism we need intelligence. That much is obvious. What should also be obvious is that the intelligence we collect must be reliable and acquired humanely, under clear standards understood by all our fighting men and women. To do differently would not only offend our values as Americans, but undermine our war effort, because abuse of prisoners harms – not helps – us in the war on terror. First, subjecting prisoners to abuse leads to bad intelligence, because under torture a detainee will tell his interrogator anything to make the pain stop. Second, mistreatment of our prisoners endangers U.S. troops who might be captured by the enemy – if not in this war, then in the next. And third, prisoner abuses exact on us a terrible toll in the war of ideas, because inevitably these abuses become public. When they do, the cruel actions of a few darken the reputation of our country in the eyes of millions. American values should win against all others in any war of ideas, and we can’t let prisoner abuse tarnish our image.
And yet reports of detainee abuse continue to emerge, in large part, I believe, because of confusion in the field as to what is permitted and what is not. The amendment I am proposing will go a long way toward clearing up this confusion.
Army Field Manual
The first part of this amendment would establish the Army Field Manual as the uniform standard for the interrogation of Department of Defense detainees. The Army Field Manual and its various editions have served America well, through wars against both regular and irregular foes. It embodies the values Americans have embraced for generations, while preserving the ability of our interrogators to extract critical intelligence from ruthless foes. Never has this been more important than today, in the midst of the war on terror.
The Army Field Manual authorizes interrogation techniques that have proven effective in extracting life-saving information from the most hardened enemy prisoners. It is consistent with our laws and, most importantly, our values. Let us not forget that al-Qaeda sought not just to destroy American lives on September 11, but American values – our way of life and all we cherish. We fight not just to preserve our lives and liberties but also American values, and we will never allow the terrorists to take those away. In this war that we must win - that we will win - we must never simply fight evil with evil.
This amendment would establish the Army Field Manual as the standard for interrogation of all detainees held in DOD custody. The Manual has been developed by the Executive Branch for its own uses, and a new edition, written to take into account the needs of the war on terror and with a new classified annex, is due to be issued soon. My amendment would not set the Field Manual in stone – it could be changed at any time.
The advantage of setting a standard for interrogation based on the Field Manual is to cut down on the significant level of confusion that still exists with respect to which interrogation techniques are allowed. The Armed Services Committee has held hearings with a slew of high-level Defense Department officials, from regional commanders, to judge advocate generals, to the Department’s deputy general counsel. A chief topic of discussion in these hearings was what specific interrogation techniques are permitted in what environments, with which DOD detainees, by whom, and when. And the answers have included a whole lot of confusion. If the Pentagon’s top minds can’t sort these matters out after exhaustive debate and preparation, how in the world do we expect our enlisted men and women to do so?
Confusion about the rules results in abuses in the field. We need a clear, simple, and consistent standard, and we have it in the Army Field Manual on Interrogation. That’s not just my opinion, but that of many more distinguished military minds than mine. I would refer you to a letter expressing strong support for this amendment, signed by 28 former high-ranking military officers, including General Joseph Hoar, who commanded Centcom; General John Shalikashvili, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs; RADM John Hutson and RADM Don Guter, who each served as the Navy’s top JAG; and LTGEN Claudia Kennedy, who served as Deputy Chief of Staff for Army Intelligence. These and other distinguished officers believe that the abuses at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and elsewhere took place in part because our soldiers received ambiguous instructions, which in some cases authorized treatment that went beyond what the Field Manual allows, and that, had the Manual been followed across the board, we could have avoided the prisoner abuse scandal. Mr. President, wouldn’t any of us do whatever we could to have prevented that? By passing this amendment, our service members can follow the Manual consistently from now on. Our troops deserve no less.
Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment
The second part of this amendment really shouldn’t be objectionable to anyone since I’m actually not proposing anything new. The prohibition against cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment has been a longstanding principle in both law and policy in the United States. Before I get into why this amendment is necessary, let me first review the history.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, states simply that “No one shall be subject to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the U.S. is a signatory, states the same. The binding Convention Against Torture, negotiated by the Reagan administration and ratified by the Senate, prohibits cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. On last year’s DOD Authorization bill, the Senate passed a bipartisan amendment reaffirming that no detainee in U.S. custody can be subject to torture or cruel treatment, as the U.S. has long defined those terms. All of this seems to be common sense, in accordance with longstanding American values.
But since last year’s DOD bill, a strange legal determination was made that the prohibition in the Convention Against Torture against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment does not legally apply to foreigners held outside the U.S. They can, apparently, be treated inhumanely. This is the administration’s position, even though Judge Abe Soafer, who negotiated the Convention Against Torture for President Reagan, said in a recent letter that the Reagan administration never intended the prohibition against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment to apply only on U.S. soil.
What all this means is that America is the only country in the world that asserts a legal right to engage in cruel and inhuman treatment. But the crazy thing is that it is not even necessary, because the Administration has said that it will not engage in cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as a matter of policy. What this also means is that confusion about the rules becomes rampant again. We have so many differing legal standards and loopholes that our lawyers and generals are confused – just imagine our troops serving in prisons and the field.
So the amendment I am offering simply codifies what is current policy and reaffirms what was assumed to be existing law for years. In light of the administration’s stated commitment, it should require no change in our current interrogation and detention practices. What it would do is restore clarity on a simple and fundamental question: Does America treat people inhumanely? My answer is no, and from all I’ve seen, America’s answer has always been no.
Mr. President, let me just close by noting that I hold no brief for the prisoners. I do hold a brief for the reputation of the United States of America. We are Americans, and we hold ourselves to humane standards of treatment of people no matter how evil or terrible they may be. To do otherwise undermines our security, but it also undermines our greatness as a nation. We are not simply any other country. We stand for something more in the world – a moral mission, one of freedom and democracy and human rights at home and abroad. We are better than these terrorists, and we will we win. The enemy we fight has no respect for human life or human rights. They don’t deserve our sympathy. But this isn’t about who they are. This is about who we are. These are the values that distinguish us from our enemies.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
For Immediate Release
Wednesday, Oct 05, 2005
Washington D.C. ¬– Senator McCain delivered the following statement today from the Senate floor on the Amendment on (1) the Army Field Manual and (2) Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment, amendment #1977:
Mr. President, I call up amendment #1977, which is filed at the desk.
The Department of Defense Appropriations bill is one of the most important funding measures considered by Congress. Equally important is the Department of Defense Authorization bill, and it is very unfortunate that we are forced to consider this funding measure without having completed our important work on the authorization bill. Despite the efforts of the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee, who have worked to bring up and dispense with the authorization bill in a reasonable manner, they have been unable to reach an agreement with the leadership. As a result, the authorizers have filed the authorization bill and a procedural vote will occur on it this evening.
The Senate has an obligation to address the authorizing legislation, just as it has an obligation to deal with the issue that apparently led to the bill being pulled from the floor – America’s treatment of its detainees. Several weeks ago I received a letter from Captain Ian Fishback, a member of the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, and a veteran of combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. Over 17 months he struggled to get answers from his chain of command to a basic question: what standards apply to the treatment of enemy detainees? But he found no answers. In his remarkable letter, he pleads with Congress, asking us to take action, to establish standards, to clear up the confusion – not for the good of the terrorists, but for the good of our soldiers and our country. The Captain closes his letter by saying, “I strongly urge you to do justice to your men and women in uniform. Give them clear standards of conduct that reflect the ideals they risk their lives for.” I believe that the Congress has a responsibility to answer this call – a call that has come not just from this one brave soldier but from so many of our men and women in uniform.
We owe it to them, Mr. President. We sent them to fight for us in Afghanistan and Iraq. We placed extraordinary pressure on them to extract intelligence from detainees. But then we threw out the rules that our soldiers had trained on, and replaced them with a confusing and constantly changing array of standards. We demanded intelligence without ever clearly telling our troops what was permitted and what was forbidden. And then when things went wrong, we blamed them and we punished them. We have to do better than that.
I can understand why some administration lawyers might want ambiguity, so that every hypothetical option is theoretically open, even those the President has said he does not want to exercise. But war does not occur in theory, and our troops are not served by ambiguity. They are crying out for clarity. The Congress cannot shrink from this duty, we cannot hide our heads, pulling bills from the floor and avoiding votes. We owe it to our soldiers, during this time of war, to take a stand.
And so while I would prefer to offer this amendment to the DOD Authorization bill, I am left with no choice but to offer it to this appropriations measure. I would note that I am offering this amendment in accordance with the options afforded under Rule 16 of the Standing Rules of the Senate. The amendment I will now offer combines the two amendments that I previously filed to the authorizing measure.
This amendment would (1) establish the Army Field Manual as the uniform standard for the interrogation of Department of Defense detainees and (2) prohibit cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of persons in the detention of the U.S. government.
Mr. President, to fight terrorism we need intelligence. That much is obvious. What should also be obvious is that the intelligence we collect must be reliable and acquired humanely, under clear standards understood by all our fighting men and women. To do differently would not only offend our values as Americans, but undermine our war effort, because abuse of prisoners harms – not helps – us in the war on terror. First, subjecting prisoners to abuse leads to bad intelligence, because under torture a detainee will tell his interrogator anything to make the pain stop. Second, mistreatment of our prisoners endangers U.S. troops who might be captured by the enemy – if not in this war, then in the next. And third, prisoner abuses exact on us a terrible toll in the war of ideas, because inevitably these abuses become public. When they do, the cruel actions of a few darken the reputation of our country in the eyes of millions. American values should win against all others in any war of ideas, and we can’t let prisoner abuse tarnish our image.
And yet reports of detainee abuse continue to emerge, in large part, I believe, because of confusion in the field as to what is permitted and what is not. The amendment I am proposing will go a long way toward clearing up this confusion.
Army Field Manual
The first part of this amendment would establish the Army Field Manual as the uniform standard for the interrogation of Department of Defense detainees. The Army Field Manual and its various editions have served America well, through wars against both regular and irregular foes. It embodies the values Americans have embraced for generations, while preserving the ability of our interrogators to extract critical intelligence from ruthless foes. Never has this been more important than today, in the midst of the war on terror.
The Army Field Manual authorizes interrogation techniques that have proven effective in extracting life-saving information from the most hardened enemy prisoners. It is consistent with our laws and, most importantly, our values. Let us not forget that al-Qaeda sought not just to destroy American lives on September 11, but American values – our way of life and all we cherish. We fight not just to preserve our lives and liberties but also American values, and we will never allow the terrorists to take those away. In this war that we must win - that we will win - we must never simply fight evil with evil.
This amendment would establish the Army Field Manual as the standard for interrogation of all detainees held in DOD custody. The Manual has been developed by the Executive Branch for its own uses, and a new edition, written to take into account the needs of the war on terror and with a new classified annex, is due to be issued soon. My amendment would not set the Field Manual in stone – it could be changed at any time.
The advantage of setting a standard for interrogation based on the Field Manual is to cut down on the significant level of confusion that still exists with respect to which interrogation techniques are allowed. The Armed Services Committee has held hearings with a slew of high-level Defense Department officials, from regional commanders, to judge advocate generals, to the Department’s deputy general counsel. A chief topic of discussion in these hearings was what specific interrogation techniques are permitted in what environments, with which DOD detainees, by whom, and when. And the answers have included a whole lot of confusion. If the Pentagon’s top minds can’t sort these matters out after exhaustive debate and preparation, how in the world do we expect our enlisted men and women to do so?
Confusion about the rules results in abuses in the field. We need a clear, simple, and consistent standard, and we have it in the Army Field Manual on Interrogation. That’s not just my opinion, but that of many more distinguished military minds than mine. I would refer you to a letter expressing strong support for this amendment, signed by 28 former high-ranking military officers, including General Joseph Hoar, who commanded Centcom; General John Shalikashvili, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs; RADM John Hutson and RADM Don Guter, who each served as the Navy’s top JAG; and LTGEN Claudia Kennedy, who served as Deputy Chief of Staff for Army Intelligence. These and other distinguished officers believe that the abuses at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and elsewhere took place in part because our soldiers received ambiguous instructions, which in some cases authorized treatment that went beyond what the Field Manual allows, and that, had the Manual been followed across the board, we could have avoided the prisoner abuse scandal. Mr. President, wouldn’t any of us do whatever we could to have prevented that? By passing this amendment, our service members can follow the Manual consistently from now on. Our troops deserve no less.
Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment
The second part of this amendment really shouldn’t be objectionable to anyone since I’m actually not proposing anything new. The prohibition against cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment has been a longstanding principle in both law and policy in the United States. Before I get into why this amendment is necessary, let me first review the history.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, states simply that “No one shall be subject to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the U.S. is a signatory, states the same. The binding Convention Against Torture, negotiated by the Reagan administration and ratified by the Senate, prohibits cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. On last year’s DOD Authorization bill, the Senate passed a bipartisan amendment reaffirming that no detainee in U.S. custody can be subject to torture or cruel treatment, as the U.S. has long defined those terms. All of this seems to be common sense, in accordance with longstanding American values.
But since last year’s DOD bill, a strange legal determination was made that the prohibition in the Convention Against Torture against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment does not legally apply to foreigners held outside the U.S. They can, apparently, be treated inhumanely. This is the administration’s position, even though Judge Abe Soafer, who negotiated the Convention Against Torture for President Reagan, said in a recent letter that the Reagan administration never intended the prohibition against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment to apply only on U.S. soil.
What all this means is that America is the only country in the world that asserts a legal right to engage in cruel and inhuman treatment. But the crazy thing is that it is not even necessary, because the Administration has said that it will not engage in cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as a matter of policy. What this also means is that confusion about the rules becomes rampant again. We have so many differing legal standards and loopholes that our lawyers and generals are confused – just imagine our troops serving in prisons and the field.
So the amendment I am offering simply codifies what is current policy and reaffirms what was assumed to be existing law for years. In light of the administration’s stated commitment, it should require no change in our current interrogation and detention practices. What it would do is restore clarity on a simple and fundamental question: Does America treat people inhumanely? My answer is no, and from all I’ve seen, America’s answer has always been no.
Mr. President, let me just close by noting that I hold no brief for the prisoners. I do hold a brief for the reputation of the United States of America. We are Americans, and we hold ourselves to humane standards of treatment of people no matter how evil or terrible they may be. To do otherwise undermines our security, but it also undermines our greatness as a nation. We are not simply any other country. We stand for something more in the world – a moral mission, one of freedom and democracy and human rights at home and abroad. We are better than these terrorists, and we will we win. The enemy we fight has no respect for human life or human rights. They don’t deserve our sympathy. But this isn’t about who they are. This is about who we are. These are the values that distinguish us from our enemies.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Saturday, October 08, 2005
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger looks to Mccain
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger looks to Mccain
is turning to one of the best known political reformers
Arizona Senator John McCain
for help promoting his "year of reform"
ballot initiatives.
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3952932&nav=HMO6
is turning to one of the best known political reformers
Arizona Senator John McCain
for help promoting his "year of reform"
ballot initiatives.
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3952932&nav=HMO6
Monday, October 03, 2005
A Time For McCain?
A Time For McCain?
Only 29 percent of Americans say they trust government,
down from 40 percent in 2000.
McCainism -- whether practiced by the senator or by
some other charismatic campaigner
will eventually have its moment.
http://www.washingtonpost.com
Only 29 percent of Americans say they trust government,
down from 40 percent in 2000.
McCainism -- whether practiced by the senator or by
some other charismatic campaigner
will eventually have its moment.
http://www.washingtonpost.com
Saturday, October 01, 2005
Peace mom meets Senator McCain
Peace mom meets Senator McCain
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan has met with a prominent lawmaker who supports the Iraq war. Sheehan thanked Senator John McCain for meeting with her Tuesday, but she came away disappointed.
The Arizona Republican also seemed disappointed in the Washington meeting. He says it had been misrepresented to him as including some of his constituents. Only one person in Sheehan's small delegation has ties to the state, and that person no longer lives there.
see more at.....
http://www.kcentv.com/news/c-article.php?cid=3&nid=3969
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan has met with a prominent lawmaker who supports the Iraq war. Sheehan thanked Senator John McCain for meeting with her Tuesday, but she came away disappointed.
The Arizona Republican also seemed disappointed in the Washington meeting. He says it had been misrepresented to him as including some of his constituents. Only one person in Sheehan's small delegation has ties to the state, and that person no longer lives there.
see more at.....
http://www.kcentv.com/news/c-article.php?cid=3&nid=3969
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
What percent of the Hispanic population in Arizona are here illegally?
What percent of the Hispanic population in Arizona are here illegally?
Republican - 33%
Democrat - 41%
Independent - 38%
Not registered - 45%
Caucasian - 36%
Hispanic - 41%
Other - 43%
Under 35 - 41%
35-54 - 35%
55 and older - 39%
Total - 39%
Source: Behavior Research Center
see more info at................
http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/news/94138.php
Republican - 33%
Democrat - 41%
Independent - 38%
Not registered - 45%
Caucasian - 36%
Hispanic - 41%
Other - 43%
Under 35 - 41%
35-54 - 35%
55 and older - 39%
Total - 39%
Source: Behavior Research Center
see more info at................
http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/news/94138.php
Sunday, September 25, 2005
abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S
Senator John McCain said Sunday that abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. soldiers, alleged anew in a report and under investigation again by the army, is hurting the country's image abroad.
"We've got to have it stopped," McCain (R-Ariz.) said on This Week on ABC.
"I don't know if these allegations are true or not, but they
have to be investigated."
Human Rights Watch issued a report Friday based on
interviews with a captain and two sergeants who served
in a battalion of the 82nd Airborne Division stationed
at a military base near Fallujah. The report alleged that army soldiers systematically tortured Iraqi detainees from 2003 into 2004, hitting them with baseball bats and dousing them with chemicals.
see Canada news at............
http://www.canada.com/news/world/story.html?id=69419b40-25f3-4c8f-81b8-f721eb84c893
"We've got to have it stopped," McCain (R-Ariz.) said on This Week on ABC.
"I don't know if these allegations are true or not, but they
have to be investigated."
Human Rights Watch issued a report Friday based on
interviews with a captain and two sergeants who served
in a battalion of the 82nd Airborne Division stationed
at a military base near Fallujah. The report alleged that army soldiers systematically tortured Iraqi detainees from 2003 into 2004, hitting them with baseball bats and dousing them with chemicals.
see Canada news at............
http://www.canada.com/news/world/story.html?id=69419b40-25f3-4c8f-81b8-f721eb84c893
Thursday, September 08, 2005
Happy Birthday Senator John McCain
Happy Birthday Senator John McCain!
Senator John McCain celebrated his 69th birthday with President George W. Bush last Monday, August 29th. Senator McCain greeted the President at Luke Air Force Base.
President Bush was in Arizona for a roundtable discussion on his way to Southern California to commemorate the 60th Anniversary of the end of World War II.
Senator John McCain celebrated his 69th birthday with President George W. Bush last Monday, August 29th. Senator McCain greeted the President at Luke Air Force Base.
President Bush was in Arizona for a roundtable discussion on his way to Southern California to commemorate the 60th Anniversary of the end of World War II.
Senator John McCain on the Death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist
Senator John McCain on the Death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist
"The Supreme Court lost one of its finest jurists and the Nation lost one of its finest legal minds. In his over 30 years on the bench, first as an associate and later as Chief Justice, William Rehnquist was an impartial and objective judge, who always held the Constitution above any personal beliefs or political persuasions.
"Chief Justice Rehnquist began his celebrated legal career in Phoenix, therefore, many Arizonans, including myself, are especially proud of his public service and his contributions toward furthering our Nation’s jurisprudence. The courage the Chief Justice exhibited in his battle against thyroid cancer while continuing his commitment to the American people and the Supreme Court was remarkable, but not surprising.
"There can be no doubt that our nation will miss Chief Justice Rehnquist’s scholarly demeanor and superb leadership. I trust that the same integrity he brought to the highest court of our land will guide the President’s choice and the Senate’s consideration of the next Chief Justice"
"The Supreme Court lost one of its finest jurists and the Nation lost one of its finest legal minds. In his over 30 years on the bench, first as an associate and later as Chief Justice, William Rehnquist was an impartial and objective judge, who always held the Constitution above any personal beliefs or political persuasions.
"Chief Justice Rehnquist began his celebrated legal career in Phoenix, therefore, many Arizonans, including myself, are especially proud of his public service and his contributions toward furthering our Nation’s jurisprudence. The courage the Chief Justice exhibited in his battle against thyroid cancer while continuing his commitment to the American people and the Supreme Court was remarkable, but not surprising.
"There can be no doubt that our nation will miss Chief Justice Rehnquist’s scholarly demeanor and superb leadership. I trust that the same integrity he brought to the highest court of our land will guide the President’s choice and the Senate’s consideration of the next Chief Justice"
Senators McCain and Coburn Call on Congress to Make Sacrifices to Fund Hurricane Relief Effort
Senators McCain and Coburn Call on Congress to Make Sacrifices to Fund Hurricane Relief Effort
U.S. Senators John McCain and Tom Coburn, M.D. issued the following joint statement today calling on Congress to "lead by example" by cutting back on pork-barrel and other unnecessary spending to help fund the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
"Hurricane Katrina is one of the worst national tragedies in our history. Whenever our nation experiences a tragedy Americans come together and make sacrifices to help their neighbors. Individual Americans who are donating their time and money and opening their homes to evacuees are reminding us what sacrificing means. Sacrificing means giving up something you want in order give someone else something they need."
"If Congress wants to inspire the American people to continue to make sacrifices we need to be making sacrifices of our own. The costs of the recovery and relief effort will be enormous. Congress must do all that is necessary to fund essential relief and recovery efforts and help those in need. However, to the extent that it is possible, we should pay for this effort now rather than pass on even more debt to future generations
U.S. Senators John McCain and Tom Coburn, M.D. issued the following joint statement today calling on Congress to "lead by example" by cutting back on pork-barrel and other unnecessary spending to help fund the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
"Hurricane Katrina is one of the worst national tragedies in our history. Whenever our nation experiences a tragedy Americans come together and make sacrifices to help their neighbors. Individual Americans who are donating their time and money and opening their homes to evacuees are reminding us what sacrificing means. Sacrificing means giving up something you want in order give someone else something they need."
"If Congress wants to inspire the American people to continue to make sacrifices we need to be making sacrifices of our own. The costs of the recovery and relief effort will be enormous. Congress must do all that is necessary to fund essential relief and recovery efforts and help those in need. However, to the extent that it is possible, we should pay for this effort now rather than pass on even more debt to future generations
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
Senator John McCain to Speak in the East Valley
Senator John McCain to Speak in the East Valley on Thursday
You are invited to a special meeting with Senator John McCain on Thursday, August 25th at 7:00 p.m. Senator McCain will discuss current events and take your questions.
The event is free and open to the public. Please email me at crystal@friendsofmccain.com if you have any questions.
Thursday, August 25, 2005
7:00 p.m.
Navajo Room at Mesa Community College
1833 West Southern Avenue
Mesa, Arizona 85202
You are invited to a special meeting with Senator John McCain on Thursday, August 25th at 7:00 p.m. Senator McCain will discuss current events and take your questions.
The event is free and open to the public. Please email me at crystal@friendsofmccain.com if you have any questions.
Thursday, August 25, 2005
7:00 p.m.
Navajo Room at Mesa Community College
1833 West Southern Avenue
Mesa, Arizona 85202
Monday, August 22, 2005
McCain Expresses Support for Judge John Roberts
Senator John McCain Expresses Support for Supreme Court Nominee Judge John Roberts
I am pleased that the President has chosen Judge John Roberts as his nominee to the Supreme Court. Judge Roberts would bring a wealth of experience to the nations highest bench having served as an attorney in private practice, as an advisor and Deputy Solicitor General at the Department of Justice and as a federal appeals court judge. I look forward to a smooth confirmation process and a swift up-or-down vote for Judge Roberts.
http://www.friendsofmccain.com/
I am pleased that the President has chosen Judge John Roberts as his nominee to the Supreme Court. Judge Roberts would bring a wealth of experience to the nations highest bench having served as an attorney in private practice, as an advisor and Deputy Solicitor General at the Department of Justice and as a federal appeals court judge. I look forward to a smooth confirmation process and a swift up-or-down vote for Judge Roberts.
http://www.friendsofmccain.com/
America's border crisis
America's border crisis
TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2005
America's border crisis
TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2005
Anyone who has been to the border areas in Arizona and New Mexico knows about some of the horrible things that are happening at America's edge. The news is so alarming and the hope for relief from Washington is so dim that the governors of New Mexico and Arizona have finally declared states of emergency in those areas. It is as if those counties bordering on Mexico had been hit by floods or hurricanes or any other natural disaster, except that this is not a natural disaster. The scenes of death, drug smuggling, kidnapping and more are manmade, a security emergency that should be fixed, soon, by politicians in Washington and Mexico City.
Short term, the administration simply has to beef up its border surveillance and control. Although patrols have increased and equipment is more sophisticated, other border areas have been closed off in California and Texas, making New Mexico and Arizona the preferred routes for thousands of illegal immigrants over the last few years. Many are simply aiming north to get jobs so they can feed their families back in Mexico. But too many are interested in shadier pursuits.
Almost everybody who thinks hard about the immigration problem knows that the solution is not simply to build a better fence. That won't work as long as there are low-level jobs that need doing and no American citizens willing to do them. Throwing as many as 11 million illegal immigrants out of the United States is simply not going to happen.
At present, Congress has two important bills covering reform. One comes from two Republicans, Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona and Senator John Cornyn of Texas. The Kyl-Cornyn bill is heavy on security - which would be a good thing as long as it included a true guest worker program, but so far, it does not. The other bill, from Senator John McCain of Arizona and Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, has a far better guest worker program, but not as much security. It's possible to see a way to combine these bills to make an immigration system that's better for everybody.
President George W. Bush has been promising immigration reform since he took office, and he promised once again last week that immigration would be a top priority. Through all these years, Bush, as a Texan, has made it clear that he understands this complex problem. But some of those in his party prefer to inflame the issue with anti-immigrant tirades - an embarrassment as old as America itself. The president will have to tame his own party before Americans can all move forward.
Anyone who has been to the border areas in Arizona and New Mexico knows about some of the horrible things that are happening at America's edge. The news is so alarming and the hope for relief from Washington is so dim that the governors of New Mexico and Arizona have finally declared states of emergency in those areas. It is as if those counties bordering on Mexico had been hit by floods or hurricanes or any other natural disaster, except that this is not a natural disaster. The scenes of death, drug smuggling, kidnapping and more are manmade, a security emergency that should be fixed, soon, by politicians in Washington and Mexico City.
Short term, the administration simply has to beef up its border surveillance and control. Although patrols have increased and equipment is more sophisticated, other border areas have been closed off in California and Texas, making New Mexico and Arizona the preferred routes for thousands of illegal immigrants over the last few years. Many are simply aiming north to get jobs so they can feed their families back in Mexico. But too many are interested in shadier pursuits.
Almost everybody who thinks hard about the immigration problem knows that the solution is not simply to build a better fence. That won't work as long as there are low-level jobs that need doing and no American citizens willing to do them. Throwing as many as 11 million illegal immigrants out of the United States is simply not going to happen.
At present, Congress has two important bills covering reform. One comes from two Republicans, Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona and Senator John Cornyn of Texas. The Kyl-Cornyn bill is heavy on security - which would be a good thing as long as it included a true guest worker program, but so far, it does not. The other bill, from Senator John McCain of Arizona and Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, has a far better guest worker program, but not as much security. It's possible to see a way to combine these bills to make an immigration system that's better for everybody.
President George W. Bush has been promising immigration reform since he took office, and he promised once again last week that immigration would be a top priority. Through all these years, Bush, as a Texan, has made it clear that he understands this complex problem. But some of those in his party prefer to inflame the issue with anti-immigrant tirades - an embarrassment as old as America itself. The president will have to tame his own party before Americans can all move forward.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/08/22/opinion/edborder.php
TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2005
America's border crisis
TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2005
Anyone who has been to the border areas in Arizona and New Mexico knows about some of the horrible things that are happening at America's edge. The news is so alarming and the hope for relief from Washington is so dim that the governors of New Mexico and Arizona have finally declared states of emergency in those areas. It is as if those counties bordering on Mexico had been hit by floods or hurricanes or any other natural disaster, except that this is not a natural disaster. The scenes of death, drug smuggling, kidnapping and more are manmade, a security emergency that should be fixed, soon, by politicians in Washington and Mexico City.
Short term, the administration simply has to beef up its border surveillance and control. Although patrols have increased and equipment is more sophisticated, other border areas have been closed off in California and Texas, making New Mexico and Arizona the preferred routes for thousands of illegal immigrants over the last few years. Many are simply aiming north to get jobs so they can feed their families back in Mexico. But too many are interested in shadier pursuits.
Almost everybody who thinks hard about the immigration problem knows that the solution is not simply to build a better fence. That won't work as long as there are low-level jobs that need doing and no American citizens willing to do them. Throwing as many as 11 million illegal immigrants out of the United States is simply not going to happen.
At present, Congress has two important bills covering reform. One comes from two Republicans, Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona and Senator John Cornyn of Texas. The Kyl-Cornyn bill is heavy on security - which would be a good thing as long as it included a true guest worker program, but so far, it does not. The other bill, from Senator John McCain of Arizona and Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, has a far better guest worker program, but not as much security. It's possible to see a way to combine these bills to make an immigration system that's better for everybody.
President George W. Bush has been promising immigration reform since he took office, and he promised once again last week that immigration would be a top priority. Through all these years, Bush, as a Texan, has made it clear that he understands this complex problem. But some of those in his party prefer to inflame the issue with anti-immigrant tirades - an embarrassment as old as America itself. The president will have to tame his own party before Americans can all move forward.
Anyone who has been to the border areas in Arizona and New Mexico knows about some of the horrible things that are happening at America's edge. The news is so alarming and the hope for relief from Washington is so dim that the governors of New Mexico and Arizona have finally declared states of emergency in those areas. It is as if those counties bordering on Mexico had been hit by floods or hurricanes or any other natural disaster, except that this is not a natural disaster. The scenes of death, drug smuggling, kidnapping and more are manmade, a security emergency that should be fixed, soon, by politicians in Washington and Mexico City.
Short term, the administration simply has to beef up its border surveillance and control. Although patrols have increased and equipment is more sophisticated, other border areas have been closed off in California and Texas, making New Mexico and Arizona the preferred routes for thousands of illegal immigrants over the last few years. Many are simply aiming north to get jobs so they can feed their families back in Mexico. But too many are interested in shadier pursuits.
Almost everybody who thinks hard about the immigration problem knows that the solution is not simply to build a better fence. That won't work as long as there are low-level jobs that need doing and no American citizens willing to do them. Throwing as many as 11 million illegal immigrants out of the United States is simply not going to happen.
At present, Congress has two important bills covering reform. One comes from two Republicans, Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona and Senator John Cornyn of Texas. The Kyl-Cornyn bill is heavy on security - which would be a good thing as long as it included a true guest worker program, but so far, it does not. The other bill, from Senator John McCain of Arizona and Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, has a far better guest worker program, but not as much security. It's possible to see a way to combine these bills to make an immigration system that's better for everybody.
President George W. Bush has been promising immigration reform since he took office, and he promised once again last week that immigration would be a top priority. Through all these years, Bush, as a Texan, has made it clear that he understands this complex problem. But some of those in his party prefer to inflame the issue with anti-immigrant tirades - an embarrassment as old as America itself. The president will have to tame his own party before Americans can all move forward.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/08/22/opinion/edborder.php
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
Abolishing Aviation Barriers Act of 2005 ?
SENATORS INTRODUCE BILL TO MAKE AIR TRAVEL MORE COMPETITIVE AND CONVENIENT
For Immediate Release
Tuesday, Aug 02, 2005
Washington D.C. – Last Friday, Senators McCain, (R-AZ) Ensign, (R-NV) and Kyl, (R-AZ) introduced the Abolishing Aviation Barriers Act of 2005. The bill is designed to remove the arbitrary restrictions that prevent Americans from having an array of options for non-stop air travel between airports in Western states and LaGuardia International Airport (“LaGuardia”) and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (“Washington National”).
“As many in the Senate know, I have been fighting against the perimeter rule for years. I continue to believe that Americans should have access to air travel at the lowest possible cost and with the most convenience for their schedule. Therefore, I have always advocated for the removal of any artificial barrier that prevents free market competition and will continue to do so,” said Senator McCain.
“Two airports should not dictate how Americans travel,” Senator Ensign said. “Opening these markets will increase competition and greatly improve consumer choice. I’m proud to join Senator McCain in opening the skies to more opportunities for the traveling public.”
“A frank and wide-ranging discussion of barriers to competition is long overdue, said Kyl. "I look forward to working with Senators McCain and Ensign to secure the much-needed pro-competitive changes provided for in this bill.”
~end~
For Immediate Release
Tuesday, Aug 02, 2005
Washington D.C. – Last Friday, Senators McCain, (R-AZ) Ensign, (R-NV) and Kyl, (R-AZ) introduced the Abolishing Aviation Barriers Act of 2005. The bill is designed to remove the arbitrary restrictions that prevent Americans from having an array of options for non-stop air travel between airports in Western states and LaGuardia International Airport (“LaGuardia”) and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (“Washington National”).
“As many in the Senate know, I have been fighting against the perimeter rule for years. I continue to believe that Americans should have access to air travel at the lowest possible cost and with the most convenience for their schedule. Therefore, I have always advocated for the removal of any artificial barrier that prevents free market competition and will continue to do so,” said Senator McCain.
“Two airports should not dictate how Americans travel,” Senator Ensign said. “Opening these markets will increase competition and greatly improve consumer choice. I’m proud to join Senator McCain in opening the skies to more opportunities for the traveling public.”
“A frank and wide-ranging discussion of barriers to competition is long overdue, said Kyl. "I look forward to working with Senators McCain and Ensign to secure the much-needed pro-competitive changes provided for in this bill.”
~end~
Thursday, August 11, 2005
GOP Leaders, Grassroots Republicans Butting Heads over McCain
GOP Leaders, Grassroots Republicans Butting Heads over McCain
By Dennis Durband, Editor
July 14, 2005
Arizona Republican leaders and the party faithful at the grassroots level butted heads last year over the border invasion and Proposition 200 -- and the grassroots GOP faithful won over the pandering politicians. The two groups are dueling again this year over opposition to senior U.S. Senator John McCain.
Three separate Republican grassroots entities have this summer either censured or condemned McCain for consorting with leftist politicos and ideals. While the people cry foul, the party leadership is trying to contain the political fire.
The cascade of contempt for McCain's dismal performance began June 11th with a unanimous censure by the Arizona Republican Assembly (ARA) during its annual convention. That motion was penned by Bruce Barton, borders columnist for The Arizona Conservative and an ARA board member.
Two more measures against McCain followed, both sparked by conservative activist Rob Haney, of Paradise Valley. Haney succeeded with a motion for censure of McCain in District 11, and then he led the Maricopa County Republican Party's Executive Guidance Committee to express its dissatisfaction with the representation of McCain. McCain, a 2008 presidential aspirant who is concerned about the dissatisfaction in his back yard, and Senator Jon Kyl sent representatives to the EGC meeting to defend the senator.
Congressman John Shadegg phoned Haney, the chairman in District 11, in opposition to his actions against McCain. Haney stood his ground and refused to back down.
First-year AZ GOP Chairman Matt Salmon is pressuring districts not to censure McCain. He claims that any further actions directed at McCain will hurt the Republican Party in the 2006 governor's election and may adversely affect the Protect Marriage Arizona (PMA) initiative.
Some Republicans are fearful that McCain will unleash a backlash to assist Democrat Janet Napolitano in her re-election campaign next year, and that he may also work hard to defeat PMA. But McCain already works closely with liberal Democrats, has supported Arizona Democrat candidates and opposes a federal marriage amendment. These betrayals of conservative Republicanism are precisely why so many red staters oppose the radical McCain.
see the complete..........
http://www.azconservative.org/GOP_McCain.htm
By Dennis Durband, Editor
July 14, 2005
Arizona Republican leaders and the party faithful at the grassroots level butted heads last year over the border invasion and Proposition 200 -- and the grassroots GOP faithful won over the pandering politicians. The two groups are dueling again this year over opposition to senior U.S. Senator John McCain.
Three separate Republican grassroots entities have this summer either censured or condemned McCain for consorting with leftist politicos and ideals. While the people cry foul, the party leadership is trying to contain the political fire.
The cascade of contempt for McCain's dismal performance began June 11th with a unanimous censure by the Arizona Republican Assembly (ARA) during its annual convention. That motion was penned by Bruce Barton, borders columnist for The Arizona Conservative and an ARA board member.
Two more measures against McCain followed, both sparked by conservative activist Rob Haney, of Paradise Valley. Haney succeeded with a motion for censure of McCain in District 11, and then he led the Maricopa County Republican Party's Executive Guidance Committee to express its dissatisfaction with the representation of McCain. McCain, a 2008 presidential aspirant who is concerned about the dissatisfaction in his back yard, and Senator Jon Kyl sent representatives to the EGC meeting to defend the senator.
Congressman John Shadegg phoned Haney, the chairman in District 11, in opposition to his actions against McCain. Haney stood his ground and refused to back down.
First-year AZ GOP Chairman Matt Salmon is pressuring districts not to censure McCain. He claims that any further actions directed at McCain will hurt the Republican Party in the 2006 governor's election and may adversely affect the Protect Marriage Arizona (PMA) initiative.
Some Republicans are fearful that McCain will unleash a backlash to assist Democrat Janet Napolitano in her re-election campaign next year, and that he may also work hard to defeat PMA. But McCain already works closely with liberal Democrats, has supported Arizona Democrat candidates and opposes a federal marriage amendment. These betrayals of conservative Republicanism are precisely why so many red staters oppose the radical McCain.
see the complete..........
http://www.azconservative.org/GOP_McCain.htm
Mohave County Republicans Air Public Grievance with McCain
Mohave County Republicans Air Public Grievance with McCain
By Dennis Durband, Editor
July 22, 2005
Join the crowd, Mohave Republicans! You’re the latest GOP organization to officially express displeasure with Arizona’s senior U.S. Senator, John McCain. That makes four Republican organizations – all at the county, district or state level – to express strong disapproval of McCain’s left-leaning representation in Washington, D.C.
The Mohave County GOP has passed a “Resolution of Displeasure over the Grievous Actions of Senator John McCain.”
The other organizations taking public exception to McCain include the Arizona Republican Assembly (ARA), GOP Legislative District 11 and the Maricopa County GOP. Due the ARA’s unanimous June censure of McCain, presidential hopeful George Allen, a U.S. senator from Virginia, has reneged on his commitment to speak at the September national convention of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies, in Scottsdale.
for the complete article see.........
http://www.azconservative.org/Mohave_McCain.htm
By Dennis Durband, Editor
July 22, 2005
Join the crowd, Mohave Republicans! You’re the latest GOP organization to officially express displeasure with Arizona’s senior U.S. Senator, John McCain. That makes four Republican organizations – all at the county, district or state level – to express strong disapproval of McCain’s left-leaning representation in Washington, D.C.
The Mohave County GOP has passed a “Resolution of Displeasure over the Grievous Actions of Senator John McCain.”
The other organizations taking public exception to McCain include the Arizona Republican Assembly (ARA), GOP Legislative District 11 and the Maricopa County GOP. Due the ARA’s unanimous June censure of McCain, presidential hopeful George Allen, a U.S. senator from Virginia, has reneged on his commitment to speak at the September national convention of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies, in Scottsdale.
for the complete article see.........
http://www.azconservative.org/Mohave_McCain.htm
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Mccain reactivate his PAC
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Sen. John McCain, often mentioned as a possible GOP
presidential candidate in 2008, has reactivated his political action
committee, known as Straight Talk America.
"He's inundated with invitations and requests
from candidates at all levels of the ballot as well as state and local party
committees," a McCain political adviser, John Weaver, said Wednesday.
see the ccn....
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/27/mccain.pac.ap/index.html
presidential candidate in 2008, has reactivated his political action
committee, known as Straight Talk America.
"He's inundated with invitations and requests
from candidates at all levels of the ballot as well as state and local party
committees," a McCain political adviser, John Weaver, said Wednesday.
see the ccn....
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/27/mccain.pac.ap/index.html
Friday, July 15, 2005
McCain gets 10 seconds of fame in 'Wedding Crashers' movie
McCain gets 10 seconds of fame in 'Wedding Crashers' movie
Sen. John McCain's newest movie opens today . . . nationwide.
Arizona's senior senator (right) has a 10-second cameo, along with Democratic political strategist James Carville, in the new Vince Vaughn/Owen Wilson film, Wedding Crashers. As an extra, McCain provides Washington credibility as backdrop for Christopher Walken, who plays secretary of the Treasury in the big wedding scene.
McCain was paid $695 for the spot, which he has donated to two Arizona charities. advertisement
You can read about it in Webmeister Matt Drudge's report "Sen. McCain stars in . . . raunch fest" at www.drudgereport.com.
Drudge quoted the senator saying he took the part because "it impresses my kids."
The film was rated R.
see the article see ...............
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0715B1-talkermug15.html
for Arizona Powerball lotto reports
Sen. John McCain's newest movie opens today . . . nationwide.
Arizona's senior senator (right) has a 10-second cameo, along with Democratic political strategist James Carville, in the new Vince Vaughn/Owen Wilson film, Wedding Crashers. As an extra, McCain provides Washington credibility as backdrop for Christopher Walken, who plays secretary of the Treasury in the big wedding scene.
McCain was paid $695 for the spot, which he has donated to two Arizona charities. advertisement
You can read about it in Webmeister Matt Drudge's report "Sen. McCain stars in . . . raunch fest" at www.drudgereport.com.
Drudge quoted the senator saying he took the part because "it impresses my kids."
The film was rated R.
see the article see ...............
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0715B1-talkermug15.html
for Arizona Powerball lotto reports
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
Mccain trying to slip his $2000 citizenship ticket thru the senate as an amendmnet
amentesy with fines ?
will fine include .......
past Arizona state taxes due
past federal taxes due
plus interest and penalities like any other taxpayer
plus
costs of any free medical services recieved
costs of any free educational services recieved
costs of any free food stamps recieved
costs of any free legal aid provided
a quick poll at lowdobbs.com shows a 95% disapprovel
to the idea of fines.
will fine include .......
past Arizona state taxes due
past federal taxes due
plus interest and penalities like any other taxpayer
plus
costs of any free medical services recieved
costs of any free educational services recieved
costs of any free food stamps recieved
costs of any free legal aid provided
a quick poll at lowdobbs.com shows a 95% disapprovel
to the idea of fines.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)