Monday, November 05, 2012

Voting "against" a candidate: a guide

OK, the last post was all about the reasons to vote "for" particular candidates.  Anybody who has read this blog before this knows that I'm better at snark than anything else (and with Tedski suspending/retiring his blog, I may be the snarkiest writer in the AZ blogosphere), and I couldn't let this, the last full day of the election season, pass without a little snark.

Here's a little -

- Mitt Romney for President - Where to start?  The entirely wrong attitude toward being president (rule vs. server)?  The open contempt for a huge chunk of the country?  The never-ending changes in the positions that he espouses?

To be fair to Romney, I don't this that he has changed his positions so much as changed what he tells his audience of the day, hour, or minute.

Unfortunately for Romney, most voters want candidates and electeds with spines.  Changes to positions are acceptable when the changes are to honestly-held positions and are based on facts.  Such changes are a sign of an intellectually mature person.

There is no evidence that Romney is such a person.

- Jeff Flake for U.S. Senate - He has turned not doing his job of representing Arizona into a proudly-held "principled position".  He opposes pretty much every policy that is supportive of society and favors every policy that enhances corporate profits, even if that policy harms Arizonans.

Plus, a political campaign is nothing more than an extended job interview, with us as the prospective employer.

Should we hire someone who is brazen enough to lie and cheat during the interview process, and expect him to turn around and turn into an honorable man after getting the job, one with an almost ironclad six year contract?

- Vernon Parker for Congress (CD9) - Tea Party. 'Nuff said...

- Augustine Bartning (Senate) and Brian Kaufman (House) from LD24 - Not much snark here.  I met them at the LD24 Clean Elections debate in September, and they seemed to be decent enough sorts for Republicans, if more than a little naive.  Kaufman stated that one of the reasons that people should vote for him is so that the people of LD24 will have a voice in the crafting of the state's budget (presuming that the Rs retain control of the AZ House, which seems to be a safe presumption).

Problem:  If he were to somehow win a seat, he'd be a *freshman* representative.  Simply put, the R leadership in the lege wouldn't let him in the same room as the budget, much less give him a seat at the table.  Being an R means that he would get to see the budget a few hours before the Democrats in the legislature, but that's it.

- Joltin' Joe Arpaio for yet another term as Maricopa County Sheriff - Even if you can ignore the two decades of scandals and abuse of the authority of his office, and the rampant bigotry, and the misuse of public funds, and the raging media whore-ism, and the sacrifice of sex crimes victims on the altar of his jihad against the county's judiciary and against anybody with skin that's darker than a golfer's tan, nobody can ignore the body count.

The deaths of dozens of people in his jails, people who were in custody, unarmed, and in some cases, ill, is completely unacceptable in a civil society.

We will find out tomorrow if Maricopa County is part of "civil society".

- Bob Stump, Susan Bitter Smith and Bob Burns for the Arizona Corporation Commission - They are ALEC/corporate shills one and all who consider public service (and the public itself?) contemptible but are quite comfortable with shamelessly doing the bidding of their corporate and industry masters.  They claim to have a "plan" for producing sustainable energy in Arizona, which seems to most consist of superimposing pics of themselves over some solar panels, and for pushing for a trash-burning power plant (one that happens to be fronted by the brother of one of their former legislative colleagues, Bob Blendu). 

As for solar, their plan seems to primarily consist of them blowing sunshine up the asses of the voters.  Until the polls close on Tuesday night.

No comments: