In a sharp departure from Governor Susana Martinez's focus on economic expansion and job growth for New Mexicans, Governor Michelle Grisham is reorienting the state's priorities to encourage more illegal immigration into the state, seeing it as an alternative form of economic expansion. 

Grisham has joined with Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller and City Councillor Pat Davis in diverting New Mexico taxpayer dollars toward encouraging illegal immigrants to settle in Albuquerque, claiming that the people wandering in from Honduras and other Central American countries are "asylum-seekers," akin to famous dissidents such as Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Andrei Sakharov. 

EXPO NEW MEXICO TRANSFORMED into a HOUSING UNIT for ILLEGALS

Expo New Mexico, the home of the New Mexico State Fair, is now prepared to house illegal immigrants on its 236-acre property in central Albuquerque. The families will stay in dormitories which had only been used by New Mexico children showing their livestock at the State Fair. More than 2,000 illegal immigrants have come through Albuquerque in recent months claiming to be seeking "asylum."

However, there are no actual asylum seekers identified thus far—none of the illegal immigrants have been shown to be dissidents, or to hold any standing at all of concern to the Central American countries from which they are emigrating.

Instead, they are abandoning their homes, essentially at the open invitation of US Democratic Party elected officials as part of their efforts to grow voter rolls—regardless of the cost to American taxpayers. 

As we have reported before, a number of otherwise intelligent voters we have interviewed, including attorneys and other professionals, have mimicked the lines used by Nancy Pelosi, telling NMPJ that what appears to most Americans to be an obvious crisis at the border is in fact "a manufactured crisis invented by Trump." 

Grisham promotes the same concepts in discussing the illegals, saying:

"These asylum-seekers are primarily women and children and are not a danger to us; they need rest, hydration and minor medical checkups before they resume their journeys,” she said. “I’m proud of the courageous nonprofit network that has done such incredible work on the border and in Albuquerque.”

But our own interviews with Border Patrol agents reveal a different story. Relatively few of the supposed "families" are in fact even related, as mules and coyotes and single men work together, linking abandoned children with unattached males and females to engage in the ruse of presenting a nuclear family—one of the requirements for obtaining refugee or asylum status.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

NEW MEXICO YOUTH ORGANIZATIONS TOSSED ASIDE BY GRISHAM and EXPO MANAGEMENT

By Tim Eichenberg, New Mexico State Treasurer*

Imagine the police officers in your hometown take an oath to serve and protect. But then instead of serving and protecting, they do the opposite and begin raiding the bank accounts and retirement funds of you and your neighbors.

And imagine if the bosses of those officers—the police chief, the mayor and the city councilors—know about the illegal pilfering of their constituents and do nothing: they turn a blind eye and keep silent.

There would be outrage and investigations everywhere. Newspaper editorials would be screaming for resignations and prosecutions.

It has been happening at the Public Employees Retirement Association of New Mexico, and the agency’s executive director, general counsel and several members of its governing board are the culprits. PERA’s executive director has basically given himself and other PERA employees tens of thousands of dollars in raises without full board of trustees approval.

In 2014, executive director Wayne Propst, who currently makes $166,290 a year, convinced the then-board chair to give him a $14,000 (or 10%) raise. The full board never voted directly on that raise. And Mr. Propst got two additional raises without full board approval. Overall, he received approximately $25,000 in raises without full board approval. In 2018, Mr. Propst handed out $633,158 in raises, promotions and salary adjustments to PERA employees.

I have called the raises illegal and have asked the New Mexico Attorney General’s office to investigate. Why do I say the raises were illegal, especially the ones Mr. Propst orchestrated for himself? Because of what state law says about how PERA is supposed to work:

“The Retirement Board shall employ professional, technical, clerical and other services as required for the operation of the Association. The compensation for employed services shall be fixed by the retirement board.”

Mr. Propst works for the board and has the same fiduciary responsibility to the retirement trust fund as do board members. The $25,000 in raises that Mr. Propst gave himself will amount to more than $600,000 in salary and retirement benefits for him over his lifetime. And every penny of that money comes directly out of PERA’s trust funds that pay retirement benefits to 40,000 retirees and, eventually, 50,000 current public employees.

Mr. Propst and the board members who choose to turn a blind eye to his pilfering of retirees’ pensions have a fiduciary duty to PERA’s 40,000 retirees. The definition: “The legal duty of a fiduciary is to act in the best interests of the beneficiary.”

It seems that Mr. Propst’s law school didn’t have an Executive Director 101 class that would teach, “When acting as a fiduciary, you don’t circumvent or disregard the law for personal gain.”

Mr. Propst will offer explanations for the raises he orchestrated for himself. But he can’t run from the fact that he has a fiduciary responsibility to the retirement trust fund and that he never should have taken the money without approval of the full board of directors.

PERA retirees and active members, the board’s next meeting is May 7. Our budget is on that agenda, and it includes another 4% raise for Mr. Propst and other PERA employees.

Retirees, what will you do? Active employees, what will you do? PERA Board of Trustees, what will you do?

*Tim Eichenberg is the New Mexico State Treasurer and a member of the PERA board of trustees. This column represents the opinion of Mr. Eichenberg alone, and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of New Mexico Political Journal (NMPJ). As has always been our policy, NMPJ welcomes opinions and discussions of issues of importance to the people of New Mexico.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

42% APPROVAL for MARTINEZ = DEATH IMMINENT.

BUT 41% APPROVAL for GRISHAM = PRETTY DARNED GOOD

A Morning Consult poll last week found that Governor Grisham has only a 41% approval rating. For the following reasons, that's actually amazingly low. Here's why: 

Governor Michelle Grisham:

• Just got elected by a landslide and is in the honeymoon period
• Just 45 days ago got just about every single thing she wanted from a recent legislative session
• Just about 15 days ago finished signing a slew of bills with maximum fawningly positive press coverage
• Has received no scrutiny whatsoever from the media
• Had a dark money group spend hundreds of thousands of dollars supporting her for 60 days during the legislative session

All of that should have her in the mid- to high-70s—at a bare minimum. But the reality is that Grisham did quite a few things that could easily explain why she’s 35 points below where she should be. Grisham also did the following:

• Raised taxes as if we were in a world war and New Mexico had to pay for the entire thing
• Raised taxes despite being left with an all-time record budget surplus
• Attacked gun owner rights in a state where Hispanic Democrats and many independents believe in the 2nd Amendment
• Went all-out for abortion of actual live babies—well beyond “pro-choice” abortion arguments
• Gave away our electoral votes—allowing California to decide how New Mexicans vote

So, despite where she should be in approval ratings, she has a mere 41% approval rating. 

How did the New Mexico Press Handle Governor Grisham's 41% Approval Rating?

So how did the press handle Governor Grisham’s 41% approval rating? They defended and spun for her, of course. Apparently, when Grisham hired the Santa Fe New Mexican reporter who covered the election to be her communications director, she must have also got the rest of the paper as her surrogate spokesperson in sort of a package deal.

Now, we will openly concede that a single poll does not a trend make. Our interest is not in arguing the validity of the poll, but rather the disparity of the press coverage in how the press handled similar polls about Governor Martinez.

When Martinez had a 42% approval rating in 2017, during her second term, the media almost lost their minds in condemnation and attacks. The Santa Fe New Mexican wrote a story titled, “Martinez approval rating sinks in new poll.”

Heck, even when Martinez had a 55% approval rating in 2014, the headline of the Santa Fe New Mexican was:

“Poll: Gov. Martinez Approval Rating Dips"

and the lede was:

“A new poll published this week suggests Gov. Susana Martinez’s approval ratings are dropping.”

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/legislature/poll-gov-martinez-s-approval-ratings-dip/article_e4cffe68-8bb9-5aa3-9abb-3f81a8b26e4f.html

But back to the coverage of the recent Grisham poll...

The Santa Fe New Mexican editorial page editor took a break from her non-stop promotion of Democrat presidential candidates (we think she has a crush on Cory Booker, by the way) to tweet that the poll just reflects how Americans are skeptical of everything and everyone these days.  Nothing to see here:

Inez Russell Gomez @inezrussell Apr 25  ‏ 

Another Santa Fe New Mexican correspondent, Steve Terrell, wrote a long column "splainin'" why the Grisham poll is, well, just plain meaningless, but how Martinez is, well, just plain terrible. This is the same Steve Terrell who covered Martinez’s 55% approval rating by saying it was a sign of weakness, and later pointing out that her 42% rating was a sign of political death!

The New Mexican Splainin'

In his "explanation" column, Terrell posited the notion that all governors get a honeymoon period and added the truly ridiculous throwaway line that he was (somehow) accused (by somebody) of being too soft on Martinez.

Right. During her first year, the New Mexican repeatedly accused her of corruption, and also attacked her continuously over the Downs at Albuquerque—for decisions over which there was not a shred of evidence to suggest any wrongdoing—and decisions by the way that completely revitalized Expo New Mexico.

Santa Fe New Mexican Accuses Martinez of Being a Virtual Illegal Immigrant

Most outrageously, the Santa Fe New Mexican actually concocted stories that Martinez's great grandfather was an illegal immigrant. We are not making this up. Their stupid story, in turn, created national stories and headlines. Their false story was later debunked when real reporters for real news outlets, and real editors, actually did the leg work to investigate—the kind of reporting requirements that never even occurred to the New Mexican. 

But why did the New Mexican do that in the first place? Because the paper itself has its own agenda, and near the top of the list was its support for driver's licenses for illegal immigrants. Susana was pushing to repeal that extremely stupid law, and it offended the New Mexican. Thus the motivation for making up their story. 

Scrutiny for Grisham?

Is there any scrutiny of anything supported by Grisham? No. Because the paper supports all of her agenda, no matter how hare-brained it may be.

Grisham says that there is no crisis at all at the border (something we heard verbatim when we interviewed a number of Democrat and independent lawyers recently—it's funny how people say the exact same things they hear on TV, but we digress).

Even Obama Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson says there is an enormous crisis at the border.

So Grisham pulls the National Guard from the border. But does any New Mexico media person ever approach Grisham and ask if she still stands by her position? Even after very far Left Democrats have done so? No. They don't.

The Double Standard in Many Reporters.

We Don't Want to pick on Steve Terrell—There are a Number of Others, but You Should Know some Things

As an aside, Steve Terrell, who wrote the "explanation" column, is the same reporter whose son was working for the Democrat candidate's campaign to defeat former Republican State Representative Conrad James…a campaign Terrell and the New Mexican were covering.

Terrell didn’t even disclose that obvious conflict until after the election—and AFTER all of the grossly negative stories about Republican Conrad James that the Santa Fe paper chose to write about an Albuquerque legislative race—stories and headlines that most conveniently showed up in Democrat attack mail against Conrad James. How did that happen?

We are sure the New Mexican would argue that it was "just a coincidence." No way a father was working to create attack mail for a son. Nope. Nothing to see here. (Also, did anyone wonder why there was little or zero coverage of any other Albuquerque races in the Santa Fe paper?  

(Here we go again with the New Mexican—it's no wonder why the New Mexican and the notorious Lefty/Bolshie "free" supermarket giveaway paper, the Santa Fe Reporter, are just farm teams for each others' "reporters." They both editorialize all of their stories, and there is zero separation between the editorial page and the "news" coverage. But we digress.) 

THE DOUBLE STANDARD

In any case, the existence of this double-standard is no surprise to us, and probably no surprise to most of our readers. We could write a column like this virtually every week. But what we still find stunning is how reporters and editors continue to claim that they are fair and unbiased.

The first step is admitting the problem. Until then, the press will continue to lose public trust and readership. And they will continue to have more polls come out that they’ll need to dismiss: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/trust-in-media-hits-bottom-60-percent-say-sources-pay-for-stories

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

It’s astonishing to watch members of the New Mexico press media bemoan their dying circulation and complain about how unfair it is that the public increasingly sees them as biased and inaccurate.

The first concern is understandable—and we sympathize. These are tough, changing times for print media. And we recognize the need for solid, fair newspapers’ existence. They play an important role.

However, the second complaint is baffling.  It’s as if they lack any self-awareness at all. Last week provided some incredible examples of the bias and double-standard that exists in the New Mexico press corps.

COMPARISON of the COVERAGE OF UNM UNDER MARTINEZ AND GRISHAM

We pointed out last week how the President of the UNM Board of Regents conceded in a public hearing that Governor Grisham had called and had pushed him to support a massive student tuition increase at UNM. The coverage of the role of Governor Grisham chatting up the regents was buried deep in an Albuquerque Journal article about the meeting. And it was treated as a ho-hum nothing burger. 

But hold on, that’s not how they covered the Martinez administration. If there was ever any hint that Martinez called any Regent, it was a scandal extraordinaire! The ensuing coverage was so breathlessly over-the-top that readers could have been forgiven if they assumed such actions were illegal—and that Martinez should have been brought up on charges!

But fast forward to Grisham. Not only did the New Mexico media give Governor Grisham a pass last week, in a move that stretches credulity to the breaking point, the Albuquerque Journal actually wrote a front-page story yesterday that once again trashed the Martinez administration for being too involved at UNM. 

Talk about no self-awareness! They're downright oblivious! There is no introspection, self-awareness, or apparently even a thought given to journalistic standards, or comparable treatment at all.

Not Even a Glance at the Martinez Administration’s Reforms

Left out of that story, and all stories, is the fact that reforms brought about by the Martinez administration DOUBLED the graduation rate at UNM. (Of course, when reporters themselves actually oppose all policy proposals it's easy to "forget" them.)

But hey, why report substance and results and when you can write “palace intrigue” stories? 

One can argue whether or not governors—who are, after all, duly elected to institute their own public policies—should have influence with the Regents they appoint when it comes to pursuing policy reforms in higher education.

(For the record, we have always argued—under King, Johnson, and Richardson as well—that it’s actually just plain common sense that governors should communicate to ensure their policies are instituted—whether it’s a Highway Commission, Game & Fish, or Regents. After all, that’s what elections are about.)

But regardless of where one comes down on that question, what’s striking is the double-standard of coverage. Martinez was treated as though she was committing a crime when she talked to Regents—while Grisham is given a complete pass.

THE BASKETBALL COACH "SCANDAL"

One of the most glaring examples of “media outrage” was when Lobo Men's Basketball Coach Craig Neal was fired and UNM had undertaken a coaching search. One of the finalists was a then-San Antonio Spurs assistant coach and Albuquerque native James Borrego. 

Borrego, an Albuquerque Academy graduate, happens to be married to the daughter of Paul Kennedy, a Republican attorney and former state Supreme Court justice. That connection was enough for the media to stir up all sorts of controversy about Borrego, arguing his inclusion was an example of Martinez cronyism. So Borrego was not given the job.

Wow, the hometown media concluded that UNM had really dodged a bullet by not hiring such an unqualified political hack. Except for one thing: James Borrego was hired last year to be the head coach of the Charlotte Hornets of the National Basketball Association, which is the job he currently holds.

That’s right. Our big-time “watchdog” New Mexico media was Johnny-on-the-spot to protect New Mexicans and UNM from the travesty of hiring an Albuquerque native who is now an NBA coach.

[EDITOR'S NOTE: Get this straight: If Grisham, or Diane Denish, or Gary King had been governor, there would have been no story at all—and Borrego would probably be the UNM coach. So the media's wishes being granted was pretty bad for us. But, most likely, pretty good for Borrego.]

SAME REPORTER, DIFFERENT TUNE

The beat reporter for the Journal at the time of all the Martinez-hating coverage was Jessica Dyer. It was embarrassing how she and others in the media would fawn over every snarky tweet by Daniel Libit who was constantly encouraging the media to relentlessly attack Martinez and her appointees.

Retweet! Like! Retweet!. Smiley face! Supportive comments. Pretty amazing stuff really—you know for “neutral,” unbiased, “straight reporter” types.

Dyer is now covering Albuquerque city government and Mayor Keller. Is she providing relentless scrutiny to Mayor Keller and the Democrat super-majority on the city council? We ask this question because, as her mentor and hero Libit dictated, “that’s the only way real journalists act.”

Well, to answer the question: Of course not. She's doing no such thing. ("Uh, that was then. This is now." Laugh out loud.)

$250,000 of Albuquerque Taxpayer Money for Illegal Immigration

We pointed out last week how the former Executive Director of Progress Now (which is an extreme, far Left, dark money organization that Lefty reporters try to shoehorn into the mainstream) Pat Davis, who is now a city councilor, is proposing that the city of Albuquerque spend $250,000 in taxpayer funds on illegal immigrants.

This is a ridiculous proposal in a city that is under a continuous crime siege. (They haven’t even investigated—let alone solved—a car theft since the original Henry Ford was the CEO of his company.) And there are homeless people everywhere, pooping, peeing, and harassing passers-by, and the city council supposedly "cares" about them. 

We don’t even need to conduct a survey to know how wildly unpopular this diversion of Albuquerque taxpayers’ money is.

But did it receive an iota of journalistic inquiry? No. It was given completely one-sided coverage by Dyer and the Journal.  Where are all the exposés about Mayor Keller? Where is all the hard-hitting journalism?  It’s non-existent.

Mayor Keller ran on controlling crime and reforming the police department to reduce police shootings. We all heard from New Mexico media and their Progress Now allies how all the crime was the fault of Republican Mayor Richard J. Berry — Oh no, it wasn’t liberal judges at all.

And we read how the police shootings were the result of Berry allowing Darren White to report directly to him instead of through Albuquerque Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) David Campbell. We know that sounds ludicrous, but we are not making that up—Democrats’ chief blogger Joe Monahan actually made that argument, and it “somehow” seeped into the mainstream coverage.  

CRIME is out of CONTROL

Well, guess what, crime is way out of control and there has been a rash of police shootings under Mayor Keller. Where is the coverage?  It doesn’t exist. Jessica Dyer went from being Daniel Libit’s attack dog to reprinting press releases for Mayor Keller.

Yeah, there may be a story today about the crime statistics, but unlike during the Berry era, Keller is not being held accountable—there is no "analysis" interwoven into the stories examining why "his policies haven't worked." (Just check out the Berry stories for contrast.) 

When Berry was mayor, crime occurred because he was a "failure." Under Keller, it's "systemic problems" of gun violence. All "problems" in this new, enlightened era of Keller are things "he has no control over." While under a Republican mayor, problems were actually "caused" by the mayor himself.

All of this would be hilarious if it were being presented in a Communications 101 class of "How NOT to do good journalism.". Unfortunately, in Albuquerque, it is reality. And it isn't really funny.

TWO STRIKE ZONES in NEW MEXICO MEDIA

All of this is because there are two strike zones with the New Mexico media. One for Republicans and one for Democrats.  It’s silly that they even try to argue it. 

The Democrat Party can throw a ball in the dirt, and watch it roll all the way to the backstop, and you can bet that Milan Simonich, Steve Terrell, Dyer, or some editorialist will immediately stick that right hand up in the air and let fly a loud “SteeeeeRike!”

It’s absurd.

TOMORROW: PART II of the RIDICULOUS DOUBLE STANDARD

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

—a special interjection by Editor Emeritus Rod Adair—

This morning on MediaBuzz, Fox News commentator Howard Kurtz (who is actually almost always very fair and balanced) stated that Trump's usage of the term "coup attempt," to describe the actions of numerous actors in the FBI – Federal Bureau of Investigation as well as the so-called "intelligence community," is misplaced and incorrect.

To emphasize his point, Kurtz asserted:

"Obviously, Jessica, the literal definition of  'coup' is a military overthrow of the government."

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Kurtz is badly wrong on this point.

LITERAL MEANING of COUP

Literally, "coup d'État" means only a "blow against the state." Or as we would say in Latin America, "golpe de Estado." (I got to be a first-hand witness to an attempted one, in Venezuela, plus two other "internal" coups attempts against the military hierarchy, in Honduras.) There is nothing in the "literal term" (to cite Kurtz's expression) to indicate a requirement for military involvement. (Though, I have to state that the military was involved in all three events I witnessed.)

PRACTICAL MEANING

A successful coup results in the overthrow of an existing government, almost always as a result of unlawful or unconstitutional maneuvering by opponents of that government. (Although in popular usage it can refer to, in some limited circumstances, a lawful act. For example, an internal party "coup" in a parliamentary democracy in which a party leader is deposed in a sudden or surprising vote.)

But aside from that, even in its more common reference to an illegal overthrow, the term is by no means limited to military action. On this point, Kurtz is simply ignorant of both the language as well as the history of coups.

Certainly, a successful coup may most commonly be carried out by a military establishment, but—and this is where Trump has a point—it is not always the case. That's why we have so many modifiers for the term. A coup can be originated, planned, and executed purely by political factions within a country. Thus the term "bloodless coup" (which, to be fair, is something that can also be achieved by military forces when no opposition arises).

SOFT COUP

What Trump referred to is known in politics as a "Soft Coup," or sometimes is called a "Silent Coup." Such an act involves a plan, or plot, of some kind, without the use of violence. And it may sometimes even be technically lawful. Or, as is alleged in the case of Trump, it may be completely unlawful, but so low-key and behind-the-scenes that its maneuverings are not recognized as glaringly illegal—until, perhaps, the full history of its machinations are unraveled. (Which one can argue may be about to happen with Attorney General Barr's investigation, and perhaps with the FBI Inspector General's upcoming report.)

A soft coup may be carried out in even haphazard and incremental ways, and become increasingly improvised as circumstances develop—such as, for example, the announcement of the final result of an election. (Again, this could easily end up being a description of recent events.)

In any event, Trump is correct. And Kurtz is simply wrong in this case.

Let us know what you think!

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

By Gerald A. Loeb*

Civility is slowly returning to the political discussion in America and it is the conservative’s role to keep it moving that way, says political commentator and youtube pundit Will Witt.

Witt finished his eight-city US tour in the Student Union at the University of New Mexico this past Tuesday evening, April 23. “It’s a lot tougher than it looks,” he remarked to the 150 souls who came to hear him give his opinions and thoughts. “Your mouth gets pretty dry under the lights,” he added as he peppered his 45-minute speech with sips from a bottle of water.

Unlike last year’s campus debacle when Milo Yiannopoulos’ appearance drew angry, debris-throwing hooligans, this year was as sedate and laid-back as New Mexico’s largest public university usually is this time of year. A mere half-hour before his appearance, the campus Quad was virtually empty.

 “The whole mood is a lot different,” said political science major and group leader Christian Portilla of Turning Point at UNM. Founded in 2017, the twenty-odd member campus club meets biweekly to discuss important young conservative issues. Portilla and the Turning Point at UNM club members held a successful meeting without rancor, interruptions or childish distractions.

Will Witt and His Turning Point

 At 25, Witt has emerged as a leading spokesman of young conservatives. “Just two years ago I was an atheist in college. My turning point was a Teacher’s Assistant pointing at me one day and saying, ‘your skin color automatically offends the young black woman sitting next to you.’ And she looked at the teacher and said, ‘No, he is not. His color doesn’t matter.’ It was at that moment I totally realized the Left’s capacity to divide us because it is the only way they can win.”

In his speech, Witt stressed the difference between the Liberals and the Left. “The Liberals are at times open to negotiation and compromise. You can talk to them,” Witt remarked. “They are not as bad as the Left. But the Left? You cannot reason or talk to them. It is a waste of time, especially on Social Media.”

He said his personal way of dealing with the Left is simple: “I ignore them. Their hate is their weakness.”

His youtube videos talking to uber-clueless college students and posing as a hipster have earned him an audience of some five million people, which is a hefty number in these Cyber-driven days of the 21st Century.

“Don’t sacrifice your values when dealing with the Left,” Witt told the attendees. “You don’t want Albuquerque to be like San Francisco.” This remark drew the largest laugh of the night.

Witt said two main pillars of his personal wisdom are God and the Ninth Commandment. “Thou shalt not bear false witness. Unfortunately, so many horrible things we see are built on lies by the Left: slavery was built on a lie, Jews under Hitler were persecuted because of a lie, and the Communist Party was built on a huge lie.”

 His answer? “Don’t be like them. Don’t lie. Tell the truth and be honest. The Left can’t stand that.”

Dealing with the other side can be exhausting, but “the brainwashing in general is really rampant,” Witt said in reply to a question about 54.6-percent overall average of voter turnouts nationwide.

According to TheHill, a “79 percent” rise in 18-29 year voters from 2014-2018 was “at near or historic levels.”

During the question and answer period, one admittedly young liberal audience member stood up and addressed the topic of climate change in a reasonable, civil way and was respectfully listened to by Witt and the crowd.

“This is what we need to see a lot more of,” Portilla remarked.

The crowd assembled to hear Witt talk fit that description. A large number of younger, interested, and engaged members of a new generation lined up to shake Witt’s hand after his presentation.

“This was really a good thing to see,” said attendee Mark Hildenbrant. “No craziness, no yelling and screaming at all. That has to be a good thing, right?”

[Editor's Note: We are not sure the Will Witt appearance is, in fact, a triumph of civility at UNM. We suspect that Witt's ability to be heard may have been due to the organizers' careful planning, which did not alert Leftist elements in advance and therefore did not afford them time to plan anti-free speech efforts. We hope we are wrong, but of course future events will tell us. On another note, we are impressed that young Mr. Witt makes a pointed effort to distinguish between "liberals" and "Leftists," something that has been our editorial policy for many years.]

* Gerald A. Loeb is a four-time published author, journalist and Tribe Scribe based in Albuquerque, New Mexico. His website address is: themodernpoliticalderelict.com  (He covered the Witt event at UNM as a correspondent for New Mexico Political Journal.)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

Having followed #JoeBiden’s career since 1972, we have found him to be one of the most [unintentionally] entertaining characters on the political scene. In recent years we’ve tried to think of who it is from pop culture that he reminds us of.

QUESTIONS WE HAVE RECEIVED

Over the past 45 days we have been asked about the following subjects/issues (and have not responded, but we will in the coming days):

Following our article on Conrad James a few weeks ago, the national Republican political operatives came to New Mexico and met with the former state representative. They also met with former Lieutenant Governor John Sanchez. We don't have reports of any conclusions reached by any of those involved. As far as we know there were no meetings with the only announced Republican candidate, Gavin Clarkson. 

Why not Susana? Well, We'll Tell You—And It's Not What You Think. 

Susana Martinez, in our view, should be a superb candidate for the US Senate in 2020. After all, she came into office when New Mexico was in the throes of the economic downturn that had begun in 2008. She faced a $450 million structural deficit and she had no choice but to solve that problem immediately, and she did—even with a hostile, uncooperative state legislature.

For eight solid years, despite being attacked every single day by a hostile, unrelenting, constitution-ignoring state senate in the hands of the most recalcitrant, self-centered, political hacks that any governor had to face in the entire US, she persevered. In doing so, she turned a net 53,000 lost jobs in the last three years of the Richardson Administration into a gain of 63,000 PRIVATE SECTOR jobs over the course of her tenure.

And all of this was accomplished during the sluggish, no-growth Obama economy—which, by the way, he said would be permanent, with it being "impossible" that there would ever be anything over 2% growth again. She overcame that too, as New Mexico unemployment fell by 41%: She had inherited an unemployment rate of 7.8%, but when she left office it stood at 4.6%.

Martinez accomplished this with New Mexico being the most dependent state on federal spending. That dependency is the result of decades of bad public policy in New Mexico and it means our economy pays a steep price when the federal government enacts policies like sequestration and government shutdowns.

Recognizing this vulnerability, Martinez was the first governor who truly sought to diversify our economy by growing the private sector, rather than just growing the government. Her bold reforms resulted in the achievements we describe.

She reduced the size of government, cut political appointees, vetoed $130 million in spending and vetoed over $1 billion in tax bills passed by Democrats, while overseeing a doubling of New Mexico's permanent funds to an astounding $23 billion.

She cut taxes and fees 61 times and reduced the corporate income tax rate by 22%, while reducing permit approval time for oil and gas drilling from 8 months to less than two weeks. As a result, the New Mexico oil and gas industry has boomed and Martinez left office with an astounding $2 billion surplus.

She attracted numerous private sector companies including billion-dollar investments from companies like Facebook and Netflix. Her "New Mexico True” state brand led to seven years of record-setting tourism growth in the state and helped create thousands of new leisure and hospitality jobs across the state.

She worked with the Governor of Chihuahua to develop a binational economic corridor around the inland port of Santa Teresa, to which she worked to secure a massive $124 million Union Pacific rail facility.

New Mexico's annual exports increased by over $1 billion during her tenure, and Ernst & Young named New Mexico the best state in the western U.S. for manufacturing, and the Cato Institute recently recognized Governor Martinez with an A+ rating (one of only 5 governors to receive an A grade or better) for:

“…her repeated actions of vetoing wasteful spending and commitment to keeping New Mexico’s general fund budget flat, (in addition to pursuing) tax reforms to make her state more economically competitive, including cutting the state’s corporate tax rate, and consistently rejecting and vetoing tax increases proposed by the legislature.”

With a Record Like That, Why Not Run?

Answer: Look no Farther than Steve Pearce and his Buddies, Yates, Murphy, Billingsley, et. al

Normally a Governor with Martinez's record would be an odds-on favorite, but she isn't. In fact, she isn't even thinking about running. 

Why is that?

We are continuously astounded that even Republicans—active ones who should know better—mutter inane, inaccurate statements about the Martinez Administration. When any of our correspondents ask where these perceptions come from the answer is always traced back to the Steve Pearce crowd.

Pearce, Yates, and the anti-Martinez "Republicans" began sniping (for reasons that are 100% personal and selfish) from the first day she entered the governor's office. Their small gripes have always been readily received by the (largely Democrat-leaning) press and opinion leaders.

But by dint of repetition, they've also taken deep roots with a lot of Republican rank-and-file. And in our continuous probing, they (the rank-and-file) cannot substantiate the gripes. Rather, they "just know [they've] heard them."

Even with our editor speaking to a great Republican crowd in Lubbock this past week, one of the questioners (an elected official no less) alluded to rumors and criticisms he had heard from Pearce.

John Sanchez will Probably Suffer Collateral Damage as a Result

What the Pearce/Yates crowd has done will probably hurt John Sanchez. A Democrat-sympathizing press, having memorized the Yates/Pearce "critique" will be all too happy to apply the same attacks to John Sanchez. True, it will be similar to the way in which Martinez tagged her 2010 opponent Diane Denish with the failures of the Richardson Administration...

BUT at least those criticisms were from a Republican to a Democrat—they were driven by genuine differences in political philosophy. What the Pearce crowd has succeeded in doing is have "Republicans" falsely accuse a Republican of having had a "failed" administration. In so doing they've simultaneously—and stupidly— tarnished John Sanchez as well.  

None of this was necessary. But this is what New Mexico now has.

For our part, because of the Pearce/Yates sniping, we continue to see Conrad James as the best possible alternative at this stage. Our previously-mentioned suggested CD 2 candidate, Claire Chase, could also emerge as a very viable alternative. But the Pearce crowd has probably done too much damage to the Martinez-Sanchez Administration for either the former governor or former lieutenant governor to survive what is sure to be considerable bashing by the Democrats and their opinion allies in much of the mainstream media.

Meanwhile, What is the Pearce Crowd Doing at the Republican Party of New Mexico?

As if leading the RPNM to the most catastrophic defeat in state history isn't enough, the Pearce-ites at party headquarters sit idly by, just watching political events unfold and saying nothing. Just this week the Albuquerque Journal reported that Governor Grisham is calling UNM regent Doug Brown to tell him to raise tuition (so it can help match her overspending).

If Martinez had called, say, Rob Doughty, the Journal and New Mexican would have been all over that like it was an impeachable offense. They would run articles about it for four or five consecutive days. There would be editorials condemning it as if it were an impeachable offense. That's what they, in fact, did do—about far less significant issues regarding Republican appointees.

Under competent leadership, the RPNM right now would be raising hell, at least pointing out the inconsistency in news coverage. They would also point out how Grisham's budgets are bloated and New Mexico students (and their parents) suffer collateral damage from her tax and spend carpet bombing of the state.

And Albuquerque City Councilor Pat Davis proposes giving away $250,000 to left-wing non-profits to "aid asylum seekers." That's outrageous, especially considering the needs of native New Mexicans—the homeless, at-risk kids, and myriad problems right here in the state. (In addition to the fact that no one coming from Central America actually meets the requirement for asylum.)

In the wake of these and countless other news items RPNM is silent—apparently, they're too busy concocting stories about someone spray-painting the HQ building. (Instead of speaking on behalf of New Mexico conservatives, RPNM staffers Anissa Tinnin, Stella Padilla, and Dinah Vargas, not unlike OJ, are out searching for the "real vandals.") Sigh.

And a catastrophic Pearce-engendered redistricting session is just around the corner while RPNM is broke. 

In short, the RPNM is being run just as it was under the incompetent Cangiolosi/Yates regime, as if it were nothing more than a "Steve Pearce for _________ Committee." (Who knows what?)

No money, no funding, no infrastructure, no guidance, no leadership, and no message—the same "plan" that led to the loss of the House of Representatives and the overwhelming Leftist majority in Santa Fe.

Meanwhile, the Democrats continue to implement their plans to establish a permanent Democrat majority. 

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.