Thursday, September 30, 2010

Do the Republicans really think "arrogant snit" is a viable political position?



















Picture from the R blog Sonoran Alliance


A new group advocating for the interests of Arizona's taxpayers has formed, and damn, are the Republicans pissed.

Sonoran Alliance has a press release up from the Arizona chapter of the industry front group Americans for Prosperity in which AFP announces a press conference on Friday and decries the new group as "fake" and "so-called"...

ICArizona (aka the Goldwater Institute's press release webpage) has the same piece up also touting the press conference on Friday.  And calling the new group "fake" and "so-called"...

Greg at Espresso Pundit was more original, but also went completely over the top - he equated the new group to the faux-Green candidates that the Rs recruited for a number of close races to fool voters who might otherwise vote Democrats.

This must be a pretty dastardly group to rouse the ire of such steadfast and proper defenders of corporate profit margins *decent Americans.*  Who could be behind such a devious group?

Democrats.

Seriously, their biggest complaint is that the group Arizona Taxpayers Association is headed by Democrats.

Apparently, they are deeply offended by the mere idea that anyone other than them could dare to speak for Arizona taxpayers.

Even though Patterson, Sonoran Alliance, the Goldwater Institute, and Americans for Prosperity don't actually care about Arizona's taxpayers, their families, their communities or the state as a whole.

BTW - the only way that the "fake" finger-pointing or the analogy to the faux-Green candidates would work is if the people behind the Arizona Taxpayers Association do not now and have never paid any taxes.

Patterson et. al. have presented no evidence to that effect, nor do I expect them to ever present independently verifiable evidence to that effect.

4 comments:

me said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
me said...

Removed prior comment because I read this through the wrong side of my glasses.

It might not be viable, but my boy pointed out the sign on our way to school and said, "Wow, mom. THAT looks serious."

Ah, to see the world through the innocent lens of a child....

Pamela said...

Personally, I think we should vote "no" on everything but Prop 203. :)

All the 100s and 300s were put on the ballot by the Arizona Legislature. That alone is a reason enough to vote "no"!

Prop 302-- stealing the funds from the last remaining children's healthcare fund-- is particularly heinous. There is a special place in hell for people who hurt children. I hope our Legislature likes it there.

Ann said...

I agree with Pamela, with the possible exception that I will vote yes on 110, the state land swap measure. I do believe that the state consitition needs to be amended to allow for open and transparent land swaps. We have new data, for example, on wildlife corridors, and other lands that should not be sold to the highest bidder for development. If the state could swap those lands for ones of equal or higher development value, but perhaps lesser conservation value, I think that would be a good thing.