The following is the text of a campaign radio spot running on Phoenix area radio stations for Ben Quayle, (former VP Dan’s son) who’s locked in a primary battle with fellow Republican David Schweikert for the Republican nomination to an Arizona congressional seat:
I’m Congressman Ben Quayle. Washington has treated Arizona with contempt. Instead of securing our borders President Obama has sued our state and made a mockery of our laws . . .
Deadly drug cartels terrorize Mexico and menace our communities. And the Obama Justice Department gives us “Fast and Furious,” an outrageous scheme to sell thousands of guns to ruthless criminals. Those guns and criminals killed border agent Brian Terry. And the Obama administration accepts zero accountability for this disaster.
Attorney General Holder is stonewalling the Congress, hiding the facts and hanging subordinates in the wind. Arizona’s largest trading partner is in crisis. And that crisis is on our doorstep.
Washington’s response? Send thousands of guns to vicious killers and lie about it when the scandal breaks. The attorney general has been playing fast and loose with Fast and Furious. He must tell the truth and then resign his post. And those responsible should be prosecuted. And the President owes Arizona his loyalty and service – not his contempt.
I’m Ben Quayle, candidate for Congress, and I approved this message.
[h/t Landis Aden]
Awesome. Just hope he can spell “potato.” 😉
Well, OK Ben. I agree with most everything you’ve outlined here.
What are you going to do about it?
The sins of the father could be held to the fire for this man, but cooler thoughts have prevailed. All I can say is that the issues the esteemed candidate has brought up are not only valid, but worth addressing on a national stage.
The illegal immigration problem dove-tails nicely with the rise of violent crime along our southern border, as does the influx of drugs that only funnel more cash back to the cartels that are destroying the sovereign credibility of our neighbor-nation. If this administration and the “political appointees” cannot (or just blatantly refuse) to accept this, then accountability must be demanded at the ballot.
There is no doubt left (in my mind) that our federal government has taken a turn for the “I just do not give a damn” in concerns to the security of our nation, this continent, our allies and the world in general, but the simple issue of recognizing the laws passed by a state are in direct relation to the security of that state decidedly make this worth a closer look.
I am scrutinized as a criminal when I board a plane (I was on a “No-Fly” list for the commonality of my name alone) and am often treated as a common thief when cashing a check, so what is so unconstitutional about presenting supporting documents (a driver’s license) when stopped in traffic? What is so unconstitutional about deporting people who are breaking the laws of this country when living here illegally? If this administration wishes to pick and choose which laws are just, then perhaps there is no longer a need for the state bodies, and they should disposed of…
Scary stuff. This was the real cause of our Civil War. Granted, one of the core reasons was based on a criminal mistreatment of others (slavery), but the issue stands for discussion. States rights versus Federal directive. I have no (read that zero) desire to see a conflict arise here that would pit me against my fellow Americans, but this administration seems bent on just that outcome.
Think it over.
He really looks more like his Mom.
Quayle family used to live about a half hour ( Huntington) from my former house in Decatur.
FYI, Dan Quayle is the chairman of Cerberus Capital Management’s Global Investments Group. So he kinda sorta led the “parting of ways” of Bullet Bob Nardelli from The Freedom Group.
I think what precipitated Nardelli’s departure was losing that lucrative government contract with the ATF to supply the Sinaloas.
Rep. Quayle also had some good question for Eric Holder so don’t dismiss him.
Guns don’t kill people, people do. To express outrage vis-a-vis Fast & Furious is logically inconsistent with standard gun rights ideology. And, eventually, self-defeating.
True but selling guns to another country engaged in a war against us is treason. And aren’t those drug gangs on the other side of the “war on drugs”? Sure that’s a flimsy argument. But such things work for liberals. Maybe we can do the same thing and lock up the gun runners (not gun “walkers”) who are in charge of this country. It’s treason. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
You are only right in a most eventual, convoluted way. When someone is shooting at you, your family, or your constituents, do you hand them more weapons??
It’s basically like a felon dressed in black with a mask and a crowbar is outside your window at night. The local Chief of police hands him a couple guns so he can yell, “Look out”, and save you in the process of showing you how this bad guy with guns was trying to rob you. Then when the bad guy shoots your son while the cop’s at Donutland they can say, “It wasn’t the guns I gave him that killed your son, it was the criminal. After all guns don’t kill people do.”
That is the type of crap AZ and the rest of us are dealing with from these bozos.
“To express outrage vis-a-vis Fast & Furious is logically inconsistent with standard gun rights ideology.”
I’m not sure what is “logically inconsistent” in :
1. Stating that the violent people who use guns to murder innocent people, and not the guns used as tools of murder, should be punished by the law, and
2. Holding responsible as accomplices to murder, those officials of our government who KNOWINGLY and WILLFULLY provided the weapons used in murder to drug cartels they had every reason to know would use them to commit murder.
We need more guys like him in Congress.
I was thrilled to be able to vote for him when he last ran. Since that time, he’s given me very few reasons to regret my choice.
The only inconvenient thing about him is that he’s caucasian. That’s getting to be a tough sell around these parts.
Dude looks like a piranha.
Ok, Ben. So far, so good. But drop the, ‘I approved this message’ lunacy. It makes everyone look stupid.
It’s required by the Stand By Your Ad provision of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), enacted in 2002. All candidates for Federal office must use a similar phrase.
I did not know it was required. Thanks for the information, Stephen.
Before the election ” Blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah….”
After the election “crickets chirping ” and you can’t find them anymore.
Want to impress me? Propose and submit a bill to repeal GCA-68. BTW, when was that last tried?
That’s right, we don’t do repeals anymore, unless it concerns your constitutional rights and individual freedoms and general liberty. Because you see our statutes have supremacy, over the constitution and bill of rights and if you don’t think so, just ask one of our judges!
“I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. . . . My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them.”
Barry Goldwater
I may be the only pro-gridlock guy on my block. City. State. Country?
I really don’t care if he can spell, that whole thing showcased just how biased the media is. A leader leads by his skills with people, his ideas, his courage. They have secretaries for spelling. If Mr. Quayle is sincere in what he says in this ad, my regret is I can’t vote for him because I am a PA resident.
Joe you are so right. The media stands behind the liberal line Obama & Holder have created. Mr Quayle has offered his neck by standing up against the administration’s offensive disregard of the Constitution and that is courage. I wish I could vote for him here in the state of Hellinois. Long live Arizona.
Comments are closed.