Just a mish-mash of (mostly) lege-related stuff...
...Governor Jan Brewer has vetoed HB2462, Rep. Ed Ableser's proposal to rein in predatory towing companies. In her veto letter (linked above to the word 'vetoed'), she cited a few reasons she was opposed to this bill, including that she felt that it added responsibilities to the Department of Public Safety (DPS) while not funding those new activities. What she didn't cite, in the letter anyway, was the fact that Rep. Ableser is known as one of the most progressive members of the Democratic and is vocal about his positions.
Including his opposition the Brewer's proposed sales tax increase (voting closes next Tuesday).
According to sources, one of the big motivations behind the veto was Ableser's vocal opposition to the tax hike because of its regressive nature.
Now to be fair, it probably wasn't her only reason for the veto - most Ds voted against the referral of the sales tax increase to the ballot, but there have been a *few* D-sponsored bills signed by Brewer.
Still, an aroma of "payback" is surrounds this veto.
...There's also a whiff of hypocrisy surrounding it, too. In her letter vetoing the bill, Brewer also cited a concern for maintaining local control of local matters.
This the same day she signed HB2281, barring local school districts from offering ethnic studies courses to their students.
...There is a rumor that there will be yet another special session of the lege (8 and counting so far). The plan for this one, if it goes off, will be to pass some version of the Republicans' corporate bailout bill (HB2250 in the regular session).
They'll want to do this ASAP, in order to maximize corporate spending on their campaigns, but this move may be bad tactically. They should have passed this *before* passing SB1070, Russell Pearce's "show us your papers" anti-immigrant bill. If they had, their corporate tax cuts would have been lost in the uproar over their scheme to suspend Bill of Rights protections for people with brown skin.
Now, the AZ lege is under a nationwide microscope, and anything they do will be dissected.
If more of the Rs had attended last week's Project Civil Discourse Town Hall on the sales tax (only House Republican leader John McComish was there), they might be rethinking their plans.
While there was a variety of perspectives on the sales tax proposal, one thread seemed to run through all the comments, whether supporting or opposing the referendum - almost nobody trusts the legislature to handle things properly.
...The Arizona Democratic Party has come out in opposition to the calls for a boycott of Arizona over SB1070. They feel a boycott will hurt the average Arizonan, most of whom have nothing to do with the bill, and prefer to rally support and change the composition of the legislature. (my paraphrase, so if any nuances have been missed, the fault is mine)
I understand the reasoning and even would agree with it, except that this is Arizona.
Here, the Republicans refuse to hear any of the voices raised in protest to their anti-immigrant law, but they will hear (and have heard in the past) the sound of closing wallets.
Until the ADP implements a "30 District" strategy to contest every seat in the lege and sticks with it, and either gains control of one or both chambers of the lege (or at least makes the Rs learn that they can't take control of the lege for granted), the Rs aren't going to change.
As such, while I agree that a boycott will have negative effects on many Arizonans that weren't involved in the passage of SB1070, those effects will be less bad than the effects of the law if it goes unchallenged.
...It looks as if even national Republicans are embarrassed by their Arizona counterparts. In what comes as a bit of a surprise, the GOP has bypassed Phoenix and awarded its 2012 convention to Tampa, Florida.
Tampa???? Phoenix was stood up for Tampa?? Thank you Russell Pearce and Jan Brewer...
Hmmm....wouldn't it be sweet if the Democratic National Committee now decides to hold its convention here? You know that the R whackjobs would crawl out from under every rock in the Southwest to make their presence known...colorfully...in front of half the TV cameras in the known universe.
Just randomly musing... :)
...Yesterday, I got a dirty look from a signature collector for one of the three Democrats who recently jumped into the race to challenge for John McCain's Senate seat. When she approached me for a sig, I advised her that I couldn't sign the petition because I had signed another candidate's paperwork (Rodney Glassman). The dirty look came when I further advised her that she and her candidate should have begun collecting sigs months before the deadline, not three weeks before.
The sad part is that I was trying to be helpful. I think a couple of the candidates are interesting, even intriguing. However, a candidate for a U.S. Senate seat can't make the run/don't run decision on the spur of the moment, and it looks like these three did so.
May 2010 is the time to start building the foundation for a 2012 run at Jon Kyl's seat, not for a 2010 run at John McCain's seat.
Later...
Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Monday, April 26, 2010
Kyl and McCain abandon average Arizonas for Wall St. bigwigs
Yeah, they served this one up like a BP fastball during baseball's homerun derby so it doesn't seem fair to hit it out of the park.
Too bad.
Earlier today, the U.S. Senate failed to invoke cloture (limit debate) on financial reform. The bill is something that Wall St. interests have been working diligently with the Republicans in the Senate to beat back. (AP coverage, via Yahoo! News, here)
Today, all of the Senate's Republicans, including Arizona's Jon Kyl and John McCain, and one Democratic defector (Ben Nelson of Nebraska) teamed up to put Wall Street's interests before that of Main Street's.
This is nothing new from the McKyl brothers, but it is still a little disappointing and more than a little surprising. In this year where the only people held in lower esteem than long-time elected officials (you know, like Senators McCain and Kyl) are Wall Street executives, this should have been an easy call for our Jon and John.
OK, it probably *was* an easy call for them - both have well-documented histories of placing the interests of deep-pocketed donors above the interests of the people they were sent to D.C. to represent.
Too bad.
Earlier today, the U.S. Senate failed to invoke cloture (limit debate) on financial reform. The bill is something that Wall St. interests have been working diligently with the Republicans in the Senate to beat back. (AP coverage, via Yahoo! News, here)
Today, all of the Senate's Republicans, including Arizona's Jon Kyl and John McCain, and one Democratic defector (Ben Nelson of Nebraska) teamed up to put Wall Street's interests before that of Main Street's.
This is nothing new from the McKyl brothers, but it is still a little disappointing and more than a little surprising. In this year where the only people held in lower esteem than long-time elected officials (you know, like Senators McCain and Kyl) are Wall Street executives, this should have been an easy call for our Jon and John.
OK, it probably *was* an easy call for them - both have well-documented histories of placing the interests of deep-pocketed donors above the interests of the people they were sent to D.C. to represent.
Arizona Republicans - consistently inconsistent
Just a quick hit...
It's been fun (of the "partisan political geek" variety, anyway) watching the Republicans in CD5 campaign against Rep. Harry Mitchell for being "too partisan" (voting with his fellow Democrats too often) while they have been railing against their own Sen. John McCain for not being Republican enough.
The entertaining problem with that: their accusations contradict each other.
- In the 110th Congress (the last completed session of Congress), Republican John McCain voted with his party 88.2% of the time (source: Washington Post).
- In the same 110th Congress, Harry Mitchell voted with his fellow Democrats only 80.7% of the time (same source)
BTW - "consistently inconsistent" is a euphemism for "consistently hypocritical." Just in case you didn't pick up on that. :)
It's been fun (of the "partisan political geek" variety, anyway) watching the Republicans in CD5 campaign against Rep. Harry Mitchell for being "too partisan" (voting with his fellow Democrats too often) while they have been railing against their own Sen. John McCain for not being Republican enough.
The entertaining problem with that: their accusations contradict each other.
- In the 110th Congress (the last completed session of Congress), Republican John McCain voted with his party 88.2% of the time (source: Washington Post).
- In the same 110th Congress, Harry Mitchell voted with his fellow Democrats only 80.7% of the time (same source)
BTW - "consistently inconsistent" is a euphemism for "consistently hypocritical." Just in case you didn't pick up on that. :)
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
Glassman makes it official - the race for the Senate is on
On Tuesday, Rodney Glassman ended months of speculation (OK, it wasn't really "speculation" when he has an exploratory committee open and has been raising gobs of money :) ) when he resigned from the Tucson City Council to focus on his race for the U.S. Senate.
From the AZ Daily Star -
Glassman has been receiving support from all over the state as community leaders and average Arizonans alike have come to realize that John McCain no longer represents Arizona in D.C., just himself and lobbyists:
From Rodney himself, via email -
Today, I am pleased to announce my decision to run against the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate. It is official.
I spent several months traveling throughout Arizona listening to you. Across Arizona, I heard a single message: Arizona needs a U.S. Senator who works for Arizona’s future.
We need someone who lives and works in Arizona. Someone who loves Arizona. Someone who is more concerned with creating jobs in Arizona than clinging to his own job in Washington, D.C.
My campaign team and my supporters understand that beating a lifelong U.S. Senator will not be easy. We are running because we believe in you. Across Arizona, you have made bold declarations that you want Arizona to have a better future. I am answering that call.
My Promise to You:
As Vice Mayor, my door was always open. I have been accessible. I even printed my mobile telephone number in the paper on several occasions. I make this promise to you today: When you elect me to the U.S. Senate, I will continue to be open and accessible to every Arizonan who needs my help.
I believe in this campaign because I believe in you.
Your Friend,
Rodney Glassman
P.S. Please join our campaign today for Arizona's future, and share our website with your friends at www.rodneyglassman.com.
As pleased as I am to see Glassman's official entry into the race, as a writer I'm going to find the spitting match between John McCain and JD Hayworth a lot more fun to cover.
To whit: Recently, Grant Woods, a McCain advisor and former AZ Attorney General was quoted in a Newsweek Magazine article as saying "[t]o have just a caricature of the opportunistic, bombastic politician throwing grenades at him at this stage of his career is really a sad commentary. Someone needs to drive a wooden stake through this guy's heart."
Hayworth says that last bit about the wooden stake is a threat to his life and has demanded an apology from Woods.
Most people understand that the "stake" comment was a metaphor (political careers, like vampires, aren't dead until you've driven a stake through their hearts), but it's an election year, so a little self-righteous posturing is par for the course.
Woods responds in this AZ/DC blog entry from AZCentral.com with one of the best lines of the election cycle so far -
Classic. :)
Later...
From the AZ Daily Star -
Tucson City Councilman Rodney Glassman has resigned to run for the U.S. Senate. Glassman hopes to win the Democratic nomination to take on incumbent Republican Sen. John McCain in the November general election.Arizona Capitol Times coverage here.
Glassman has been receiving support from all over the state as community leaders and average Arizonans alike have come to realize that John McCain no longer represents Arizona in D.C., just himself and lobbyists:
“Having served in the House of Representatives for four terms, it would be nice to finally have an Arizona Senator that is willing to work with our entire Congressional delegation regardless of party affiliation,” said Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.). “Rodney has a unique desire and ability to work with everyone and provide everyone with equal set at the table.”
“Arizona needs someone representing us who has the interests of our state, not Washington, D.C. bureaucrats, in mind. We need someone approachable and involved in Arizona,” said Arizona Sen. Paula Aboud (D-Tucson). “We need someone who doesn't need a GPS to find his way around Arizona. Rodney Glassman knows his way around our state and he's working for us.”
"It is refreshing to see an elected official who is enthusiastic about trying new approaches to solve old problems. And, Rodney really means it when he says he wants to take a bipartisan approach to policy-making. His track record proves it. Isn't it about time we saw that from Arizona senators?" said Mesa City Councilman Dennis Kavanaugh.
From Rodney himself, via email -
Today, I am pleased to announce my decision to run against the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate. It is official.
I spent several months traveling throughout Arizona listening to you. Across Arizona, I heard a single message: Arizona needs a U.S. Senator who works for Arizona’s future.
We need someone who lives and works in Arizona. Someone who loves Arizona. Someone who is more concerned with creating jobs in Arizona than clinging to his own job in Washington, D.C.
My campaign team and my supporters understand that beating a lifelong U.S. Senator will not be easy. We are running because we believe in you. Across Arizona, you have made bold declarations that you want Arizona to have a better future. I am answering that call.
My Promise to You:
As Vice Mayor, my door was always open. I have been accessible. I even printed my mobile telephone number in the paper on several occasions. I make this promise to you today: When you elect me to the U.S. Senate, I will continue to be open and accessible to every Arizonan who needs my help.
I believe in this campaign because I believe in you.
Your Friend,
Rodney Glassman
P.S. Please join our campaign today for Arizona's future, and share our website with your friends at www.rodneyglassman.com.
As pleased as I am to see Glassman's official entry into the race, as a writer I'm going to find the spitting match between John McCain and JD Hayworth a lot more fun to cover.
To whit: Recently, Grant Woods, a McCain advisor and former AZ Attorney General was quoted in a Newsweek Magazine article as saying "[t]o have just a caricature of the opportunistic, bombastic politician throwing grenades at him at this stage of his career is really a sad commentary. Someone needs to drive a wooden stake through this guy's heart."
Hayworth says that last bit about the wooden stake is a threat to his life and has demanded an apology from Woods.
Most people understand that the "stake" comment was a metaphor (political careers, like vampires, aren't dead until you've driven a stake through their hearts), but it's an election year, so a little self-righteous posturing is par for the course.
Woods responds in this AZ/DC blog entry from AZCentral.com with one of the best lines of the election cycle so far -
Woods laughed about Hayworth's overwrought reaction."J.D. sucks, but he's no Dracula."
"I am a Dracula fan. I do think J.D. sucks, but he's no Dracula," Woods quipped to AZ/DC.
Classic. :)
Later...
Monday, February 15, 2010
OK kids. Can you say "stalking horse"?
The headline of the article says it all...
From AZCentral.com -
The timing of today's announcements by Simcox (withdrawing from the race and immediately endorsing Hayworth) lead me to believe that Simcox was a knowing participant in Hayworth's use of his candidacy to gauge the viability of a run at McCain from the far right.
BTW - Am I the only one who looks at the list of people at Hayworth's announcement, those listed as "allies" (Arpaio, Gray, Gould, and Simcox) and wondered "With friends like these...?"
Later...
From AZCentral.com -
Hayworth announces against McCain, Simcox drops outThe definition of "stalking horse," from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary -
Former Arizona Congressman J.D. Hayworth on Monday officially announced his much-talked-about Republican primary challenge to incumbent GOP Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
Hayworth, a well-known critic of illegal immigration, was joined at the hourlong event in northeast Phoenix by political allies such as Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, State Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Gray, R-Mesa, and state Sen. Ron Gould, R-Lake Havasu City.
A surprise came with the endorsement from Chris Simcox, the founder of the border-watch group Minuteman Civil Defense Corps who on Monday withdrew from the Senate race and threw his support to Hayworth.
...a candidate put forward to divide the opposition or to conceal someone's real candidacyNow, not being someone who travels in nativist circles, I can't state with any certainty that Mr. Simcox was a willing or even knowing part of the "stalking horse" part of his campaign. However, that wouldn't have an impact on the Hayworth camp's use of Simcox' candidacy as a stalking horse.
The timing of today's announcements by Simcox (withdrawing from the race and immediately endorsing Hayworth) lead me to believe that Simcox was a knowing participant in Hayworth's use of his candidacy to gauge the viability of a run at McCain from the far right.
BTW - Am I the only one who looks at the list of people at Hayworth's announcement, those listed as "allies" (Arpaio, Gray, Gould, and Simcox) and wondered "With friends like these...?"
Later...
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Other possible candidates in CD3 emerging
Warning: this post is mostly borne out of the fact that I am feeling under the weather and don't have the energy for anything more in-depth...
In addition to the previously mentioned names of folks entering the Rep primary to replace John Shadegg in Congress (Sens. Gorman and Waring, Rep. Crump, Mayor Parker, and Blogger Noble), other, more obscure names have been floated as having an interest. I make no guarantees about the accuracy of these sources (including the one where I'm the source).
Some of the names that are out there -
...Benjamin Quayle, the lawyer son of former U.S. VP Dan Quayle. My guess is that with a lawyer's education, he knows how to spell "potato" but I wonder if he learned the other main lesson of his father's career in elected office - don't get into an argument with a fictional character...and lose?
...Tom Smith, founder of TASER (source: the same New Times' article linked to Ben Quayle's name)
...Ed Winkler, former Mayor of Paradise Valley. May have even less name rec than the current mayor, Vernon Parker. At 65, Winkler is 5 years older than Shadegg, the man who is retiring. Not sure what that says about either of them.
The above-named contenders would be dark horses even if they actually enter the race, but I'm going to throw out a name just for giggles who would make the above dark horses look like Secretariat (and if you don't understand that reference, you are too young for my cliches :) ).
John Keegan, the Justice of the Peace for the Arrowhead Justice Precinct. Keegan gained some notoriety early in 2009 for throwing out the photo radar-generated ticket received by AZGOP Executive Director Brett Mecum. He is also known for being married to GOP operative/former State Superintendant of Public Instruction Lisa Graham Keegan (who, I suppose, could also choose to make a run at CD3.) So far as I know, neither Keegan lives in CD3, but that is a non-factor under Arizona law.
Keegan announced that he won't be seeking reelection as a JP in order to re-enter private business or to "pursue some other opportunity."
CD3 would certainly qualify as "some other opportunity."
It should be noted that the above Keegan entry is purely idle speculation on my part. I have no concrete evidence that Keegan is even remotely interested in the CD3 seat, much less seriously mulling a run. He's just an elected official who isn't running for reelection to his current office.
That's just an open invitation to wiseass bloggers like me. :)
Edit on 1/31 to add something I forgot to add while I was originally writing this post:
Folks should also remember that Keegan was a candidate for CD2 in 2002, coming in a respectable 3rd in a seven-way Republican primary, behind Lisa Atkins and eventual winner Trent Franks.
...End edit...
The first group of names (Gorman et. al.) qualify as "first tier" candidates as except for Noble, they currently hold (or extremely recently held) elected offices in the district. Noble makes the "first tier" list if he enters the race because of his close ties to Shadegg - he used to be Shadegg's chief of staff.
The newer names qualify as "second tier" because they are first-time candidates (Quayle, Smith), former office holders (Winkler), or are from outside of the district (the Keegans.)
However, any of them could move into serious contention if they enter the race and have good advisors - Quayle and Smith have access to tons o' cash, Winkler may have light name rec in the district, but he does have some, and the Keegans, especially Lisa, have ties to John McCain and may be able to call on his support if Noble doesn't enter the race.
Of course, the GOP in CD3, especially that in LD11 (McCain's home LD), is so fractured that McCain's support could impede, not help, a candidate.
Heh heh heh - and it's only January. :)
In addition to the previously mentioned names of folks entering the Rep primary to replace John Shadegg in Congress (Sens. Gorman and Waring, Rep. Crump, Mayor Parker, and Blogger Noble), other, more obscure names have been floated as having an interest. I make no guarantees about the accuracy of these sources (including the one where I'm the source).
Some of the names that are out there -
...Benjamin Quayle, the lawyer son of former U.S. VP Dan Quayle. My guess is that with a lawyer's education, he knows how to spell "potato" but I wonder if he learned the other main lesson of his father's career in elected office - don't get into an argument with a fictional character...and lose?
...Tom Smith, founder of TASER (source: the same New Times' article linked to Ben Quayle's name)
...Ed Winkler, former Mayor of Paradise Valley. May have even less name rec than the current mayor, Vernon Parker. At 65, Winkler is 5 years older than Shadegg, the man who is retiring. Not sure what that says about either of them.
The above-named contenders would be dark horses even if they actually enter the race, but I'm going to throw out a name just for giggles who would make the above dark horses look like Secretariat (and if you don't understand that reference, you are too young for my cliches :) ).
John Keegan, the Justice of the Peace for the Arrowhead Justice Precinct. Keegan gained some notoriety early in 2009 for throwing out the photo radar-generated ticket received by AZGOP Executive Director Brett Mecum. He is also known for being married to GOP operative/former State Superintendant of Public Instruction Lisa Graham Keegan (who, I suppose, could also choose to make a run at CD3.) So far as I know, neither Keegan lives in CD3, but that is a non-factor under Arizona law.
Keegan announced that he won't be seeking reelection as a JP in order to re-enter private business or to "pursue some other opportunity."
CD3 would certainly qualify as "some other opportunity."
It should be noted that the above Keegan entry is purely idle speculation on my part. I have no concrete evidence that Keegan is even remotely interested in the CD3 seat, much less seriously mulling a run. He's just an elected official who isn't running for reelection to his current office.
That's just an open invitation to wiseass bloggers like me. :)
Edit on 1/31 to add something I forgot to add while I was originally writing this post:
Folks should also remember that Keegan was a candidate for CD2 in 2002, coming in a respectable 3rd in a seven-way Republican primary, behind Lisa Atkins and eventual winner Trent Franks.
...End edit...
The first group of names (Gorman et. al.) qualify as "first tier" candidates as except for Noble, they currently hold (or extremely recently held) elected offices in the district. Noble makes the "first tier" list if he enters the race because of his close ties to Shadegg - he used to be Shadegg's chief of staff.
The newer names qualify as "second tier" because they are first-time candidates (Quayle, Smith), former office holders (Winkler), or are from outside of the district (the Keegans.)
However, any of them could move into serious contention if they enter the race and have good advisors - Quayle and Smith have access to tons o' cash, Winkler may have light name rec in the district, but he does have some, and the Keegans, especially Lisa, have ties to John McCain and may be able to call on his support if Noble doesn't enter the race.
Of course, the GOP in CD3, especially that in LD11 (McCain's home LD), is so fractured that McCain's support could impede, not help, a candidate.
Heh heh heh - and it's only January. :)
Saturday, January 09, 2010
Word of the day: Irony
A quick hit, because this was just too good to pass up on...
From AZCentral.com's AZ/DC blog -
This stuff won't help either one in the general election - few Independents and fewer Democrats listen to Hayworth's gabbing, and fewer still are actually influenced by it. Of course, at this point both are focused on just winning the R primary.
Rodney Glassman for Senate. He'll work for the entire state, not just the teabaggers.
From AZCentral.com's AZ/DC blog -
Sen. John McCain this week launched his first re-election radio ads of the 2010 race, declaring that he is "Arizona's last line of defense" in the battle against President Barack Obama's liberal agenda.So who wins the irony war here? McCain because he is using his putative challenger's own soapbox to get out his message? Or Hayworth because his potential target is providing revenue to his radio show and by doing so, creating even more buzz about the possible race than there had be previously?
{snip}
Not lost on any observers is the fact that McCain's paid political announcements inject his point of view onto the airwaves of conservative Phoenix radio station KFYI
(550 AM), where former Rep. J.D. Hayworth, R-Ariz., attacks him on a seemingly constant basis. Hayworth, who hosts an afternoon drive-time program, repeatedly has said he is considering a challenge to McCain in the Aug. 24 Republican primary.
This stuff won't help either one in the general election - few Independents and fewer Democrats listen to Hayworth's gabbing, and fewer still are actually influenced by it. Of course, at this point both are focused on just winning the R primary.
Rodney Glassman for Senate. He'll work for the entire state, not just the teabaggers.
Monday, December 28, 2009
To Arizona's Republican bloggers: be careful what you wish for...
...'Cuz you just might get it...
Conservative bloggers and pundits all over the country have been jumping on the anti-Napolitano bandwagon over this weekend's abortive terror attack on an international flight into Detroit. They're looking at her initial statement that "the system worked" followed by a retraction of that statement as evidence that she should be blamed for the attack. Some are even hinting that she should lose her job over this.
I'm not so sure that will happen - no one was hurt and the security failures occured overseas in other countries that were, are, and will continue to be out of her jurisdiction - but let's just assume for the moment that the Obama Administration decides that they need a scapegoat for this andfires her accepts her resignation.
If she becomes unemployed, she again becomes the favorite over John McCain in next year's election for a seat in the U.S. Senate.
With all due respect to Tucson City Councilman Rodney Glassman, he's got a better chance to win the seat if JD Hayworth is successful in his quest to knock off McCain in a primary.
McCain would be a tough, almost unbeatable, opponent in the general election; Hayworth less so.
Far less so.
Anyway, back to the main point...Napolitano was the Democrats' best bet at dethroning McCain before she went to D.C. with Obama. She's shown that she can win statewide elections (3 of them! 2 without winning Maricopa County!) and was smart enough to keep the loons in the lege in check while she occupied the 9th Floor.
While there was no guarantee that she *would* have won a race against McCain, it was a race that most political junkies in AZ wanted to see in the same way that fans of the two biggest-name heavyweight boxers from rival promotions want to see their fighters face off.
That all went away when Napolitano took the promotion to Secretary of Homeland Security.
If she ends up losing that job over something out of her control, she would then have the time on her hands for a run at the Senate seat held by McCain.
And while the Republican blogosphere in AZ hates John McCain with a fiery passion, something tells me they'd hate the idea of "Senator Napolitano" even more.
BTW - I'm not exactly Napolitano's biggest fan. Hindsight being 20/20, she *never* should have left AZ. While the state would still face the same fiscal crisis, I firmly believe that "Governor Napolitano" would have done a far better job of wrangling the legislature into fiscal sanity than "Governor Brewer" has.
Conservative bloggers and pundits all over the country have been jumping on the anti-Napolitano bandwagon over this weekend's abortive terror attack on an international flight into Detroit. They're looking at her initial statement that "the system worked" followed by a retraction of that statement as evidence that she should be blamed for the attack. Some are even hinting that she should lose her job over this.
I'm not so sure that will happen - no one was hurt and the security failures occured overseas in other countries that were, are, and will continue to be out of her jurisdiction - but let's just assume for the moment that the Obama Administration decides that they need a scapegoat for this and
If she becomes unemployed, she again becomes the favorite over John McCain in next year's election for a seat in the U.S. Senate.
With all due respect to Tucson City Councilman Rodney Glassman, he's got a better chance to win the seat if JD Hayworth is successful in his quest to knock off McCain in a primary.
McCain would be a tough, almost unbeatable, opponent in the general election; Hayworth less so.
Far less so.
Anyway, back to the main point...Napolitano was the Democrats' best bet at dethroning McCain before she went to D.C. with Obama. She's shown that she can win statewide elections (3 of them! 2 without winning Maricopa County!) and was smart enough to keep the loons in the lege in check while she occupied the 9th Floor.
While there was no guarantee that she *would* have won a race against McCain, it was a race that most political junkies in AZ wanted to see in the same way that fans of the two biggest-name heavyweight boxers from rival promotions want to see their fighters face off.
That all went away when Napolitano took the promotion to Secretary of Homeland Security.
If she ends up losing that job over something out of her control, she would then have the time on her hands for a run at the Senate seat held by McCain.
And while the Republican blogosphere in AZ hates John McCain with a fiery passion, something tells me they'd hate the idea of "Senator Napolitano" even more.
BTW - I'm not exactly Napolitano's biggest fan. Hindsight being 20/20, she *never* should have left AZ. While the state would still face the same fiscal crisis, I firmly believe that "Governor Napolitano" would have done a far better job of wrangling the legislature into fiscal sanity than "Governor Brewer" has.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
McCain, Hayworth camps taking swipes at each other
Posted without much comment, mostly because the sight of Republicans tearing strips off of each other is highly entertaining on its own merits. :)
From AZCentral.com -
*SMACK* goes the McCain campaign. :)
From AZCentral.com -
A former Arizona attorney general filed a federal complaint Tuesday seeking to stop KFYI radio-talk show host J.D. Hayworth from using his microphone to promote a potential primary race against Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
The complaint filed by Grant Woods with the Federal Election Commission claims Hayworth, a former Republican congressman, cannot use his radio show to further his latest political aspirations. Woods estimates Clear Channel Communications, which broadcasts Hayworth's program, is effectively providing air time to Hayworth that would cost $540,000 each week to rebut in radio ads.
{snip, to include my favorite line in the article, emphasis mine}
"He's [McCain's] more distraught about the Cardinals' (loss Monday night) than a potential Hayworth candidacy," Woods said.
*SMACK* goes the McCain campaign. :)
Sunday, December 13, 2009
This stuff would be funny...any place else.
But since this is all here, it's more scary than funny...
You know, in this down economy (an outright depression in AZ), I am grateful to have a job.
Because of my work schedule though, it's sometimes difficult to write during the second half of the week.
This was one week when I *really* wished I had a schedule that allowed for some serious blogging time after Tuesday.
Let's see. This week saw...
...AZ Senator John McCain facing an ethics complaint over his use of campaign funds toprotect the interests of his Big Insurance clients conduct Senate business when he created a series of robo-calls urging recipients to call their own Senators in support of McCain's effort to gut the Senate health care reform measure...
- Brett Mecum, Executive Director of the AZGOP, in trouble for using voter registration records to stalk a woman (thanks to Blog for Arizona for the heads-up on this)...
- Senate President Bob Burns (R-AZ9) purging fellow Republicans Ron Gould, Pam Gorman, and Jay Tibshraeny from leadership positions by stripping them of their committee chairmanships (in Gould's case, he dissolved the entire committee.) Gould's and Gorman's ousters weren't surprising - they've made a spectacle of their "more conservative than thou" jihads against anything resembling good governance...or, as is the case in what has come out of this legislature and governor, anything resembling governmance that is only moderately horrific.
They've embarassed Burns, and payback is as much a part of politics as elections.
I'm not sure what is going on with Tibshraeny. He's had his differences with Burns, but has been civil and professional about it (two terms that are not necessarily applicable to the words and actions of the other two). He's as conservative as they come in the Senate, but will occasionally oppose some of the more draconian measures that come before the Senate. He's a former mayor (Chandler), so maybe he understands that the wingers' games have real world impacts that stretch far beyond the ideological cat box on West Washington.
Or maybe he just has a conscience.
Either way, the fact that he is on Burns' bad side doesn't bode well for Arizona - all expectations are that the coming session's budget battles will be even uglier than last session's.
- However, none of that begins to hold a candle to the fireworks taking place between the various politicos at Maricopa County.
Just this past week, we saw...
...a federal lawsuit alleging a vast conspiracy among judges, attorneys, and county officials to interfere with investigations...
...indictments of Don Stapley and Mary Rose Wilcox. two county supervisors; indictments that probably won't hold up under scrutiny, but they get plenty of press coverage for Arpaio and Thomas...
...an Appeals Court quashing, at least temporarily, any MCSO search warrants of a judge's home and/or computer.
...A judge facing charges from County Attorney Andrew Thomas. It probably isn't a coincidence that the judge is the one who ordered an MCSO officer jailed for contempt for stealing papers from an attorney's briefcase in open court ...or that Thomas and Arpaio released the judge's home address...
...afishing expedition raid at a public advocacy agency...one that just happens to be focused on the needs of Arpaio's pet "boogeymen" - Mexicans...
I don't know if Arpaio, Thomas, et. al. have violated any federal laws, but given their total control of Maricopa County's law enforcement apparatus and their pre-empting of a state investigation by their own investigations of the state Attorney General, Terry Goddard (there's no substance to those, but an investigation by the AG might be seen as "retaliatory" and a conflict of interest), sooner or later, federal intervention will be necessary in order to clean up Maricopa County government.
In case anyone from the U.S. Attorney's office is reading this:
Sooner would be better than later.
Later...
You know, in this down economy (an outright depression in AZ), I am grateful to have a job.
Because of my work schedule though, it's sometimes difficult to write during the second half of the week.
This was one week when I *really* wished I had a schedule that allowed for some serious blogging time after Tuesday.
Let's see. This week saw...
...AZ Senator John McCain facing an ethics complaint over his use of campaign funds to
- Brett Mecum, Executive Director of the AZGOP, in trouble for using voter registration records to stalk a woman (thanks to Blog for Arizona for the heads-up on this)...
- Senate President Bob Burns (R-AZ9) purging fellow Republicans Ron Gould, Pam Gorman, and Jay Tibshraeny from leadership positions by stripping them of their committee chairmanships (in Gould's case, he dissolved the entire committee.) Gould's and Gorman's ousters weren't surprising - they've made a spectacle of their "more conservative than thou" jihads against anything resembling good governance...or, as is the case in what has come out of this legislature and governor, anything resembling governmance that is only moderately horrific.
They've embarassed Burns, and payback is as much a part of politics as elections.
I'm not sure what is going on with Tibshraeny. He's had his differences with Burns, but has been civil and professional about it (two terms that are not necessarily applicable to the words and actions of the other two). He's as conservative as they come in the Senate, but will occasionally oppose some of the more draconian measures that come before the Senate. He's a former mayor (Chandler), so maybe he understands that the wingers' games have real world impacts that stretch far beyond the ideological cat box on West Washington.
Or maybe he just has a conscience.
Either way, the fact that he is on Burns' bad side doesn't bode well for Arizona - all expectations are that the coming session's budget battles will be even uglier than last session's.
- However, none of that begins to hold a candle to the fireworks taking place between the various politicos at Maricopa County.
Just this past week, we saw...
...a federal lawsuit alleging a vast conspiracy among judges, attorneys, and county officials to interfere with investigations...
...indictments of Don Stapley and Mary Rose Wilcox. two county supervisors; indictments that probably won't hold up under scrutiny, but they get plenty of press coverage for Arpaio and Thomas...
...an Appeals Court quashing, at least temporarily, any MCSO search warrants of a judge's home and/or computer.
...A judge facing charges from County Attorney Andrew Thomas. It probably isn't a coincidence that the judge is the one who ordered an MCSO officer jailed for contempt for stealing papers from an attorney's briefcase in open court ...or that Thomas and Arpaio released the judge's home address...
...a
I don't know if Arpaio, Thomas, et. al. have violated any federal laws, but given their total control of Maricopa County's law enforcement apparatus and their pre-empting of a state investigation by their own investigations of the state Attorney General, Terry Goddard (there's no substance to those, but an investigation by the AG might be seen as "retaliatory" and a conflict of interest), sooner or later, federal intervention will be necessary in order to clean up Maricopa County government.
In case anyone from the U.S. Attorney's office is reading this:
Sooner would be better than later.
Later...
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
The John Sydney McCain Memorial Crappie Award
Last year, this award was created as the Sunday Morning Crappie Award to recognize that week's most egregious example of political flip-floppery. Shortly after creating it, I noticed that Arizona's senior U.S. Senator was winning the Award or was one of the leading contenders every single week.
In the interests of giving every (usually) Republican elected hypocrite their moment in the glare of the spotlight, at that time I named the Award after Senator McCain and deemed him ineligible for future Awards.
However, from time to time Sen. McCain does or says something so outrageously hypocritical that he merits receipt of this eponymous award.
Today is one such time.
Yesterday, McCain introduced an amendment to the health care reform bill in the Senate that would remove any cuts to Medicare funding (the current proposal calls for $500 million in cuts - remember that number)
Sounds like he cares about seniors, or at least that he figures GOP seniors are more frightened of any changes to Medicare than they are of immigrants (giving him a leg up in next year's primary battle versus JD Hayworth), right?
Not so much.
During last year's campaign, McCain proffered his own plan for health care "reform".
At that point in time, he was so concerned with protecting Medicare, his proposal called for $1.3 trillion in cuts.
For this reverse inward twisting 2 1/2 somersault of an expedient political flip flop, the John Sydney McCain Memorial Crappie Award goes to...
John Sydney McCain.
Note: It wouldn't surprise me a bit to see more flip flops and position triangulations from McCain in the coming months - he's got fewer fundraisers since they started getting busted for racketeering and fraud. Whether the biggest threat to his job security comes from within the GOP in the rather loud and blustery form of Hayworth or from the Democrats in the rather tall form of Tucson City Councilman Rodney Glassman, McCain is going to have to work hard, on the issues and on the ground, to gain re-election this time around.
Note2: According to the FEC, the Florida attorney cited in the linked "racketeering" article raised or donated over $100K for McCain's presidential run last year.
Coverage from...
...The New Republic here.
...Tedski at R-Cubed here.
...Washington Monthly here.
...TPMMuckraker here.
Later...
In the interests of giving every (usually) Republican elected hypocrite their moment in the glare of the spotlight, at that time I named the Award after Senator McCain and deemed him ineligible for future Awards.
However, from time to time Sen. McCain does or says something so outrageously hypocritical that he merits receipt of this eponymous award.
Today is one such time.
Yesterday, McCain introduced an amendment to the health care reform bill in the Senate that would remove any cuts to Medicare funding (the current proposal calls for $500 million in cuts - remember that number)
Sounds like he cares about seniors, or at least that he figures GOP seniors are more frightened of any changes to Medicare than they are of immigrants (giving him a leg up in next year's primary battle versus JD Hayworth), right?
Not so much.
During last year's campaign, McCain proffered his own plan for health care "reform".
At that point in time, he was so concerned with protecting Medicare, his proposal called for $1.3 trillion in cuts.
For this reverse inward twisting 2 1/2 somersault of an expedient political flip flop, the John Sydney McCain Memorial Crappie Award goes to...
John Sydney McCain.
Note: It wouldn't surprise me a bit to see more flip flops and position triangulations from McCain in the coming months - he's got fewer fundraisers since they started getting busted for racketeering and fraud. Whether the biggest threat to his job security comes from within the GOP in the rather loud and blustery form of Hayworth or from the Democrats in the rather tall form of Tucson City Councilman Rodney Glassman, McCain is going to have to work hard, on the issues and on the ground, to gain re-election this time around.
Note2: According to the FEC, the Florida attorney cited in the linked "racketeering" article raised or donated over $100K for McCain's presidential run last year.
Coverage from...
...The New Republic here.
...Tedski at R-Cubed here.
...Washington Monthly here.
...TPMMuckraker here.
Later...
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Rodney Glassman getting closer to a Senate seat
...A nativist winger knocking off McCain in the Republican primary would immediately make Democrat Rodney Glassman a serious threat to win next year's race for the U.S. Senate, if not the outright favorite.
According to the latest Rasmussen Reports poll -
Rasmussen's toplines are here.
A third candidate, Chris Simcox (founder of the anti-immigrant vigilante group The Minutemen) is polling at 4%. That would seem to help Hayworth, as it is probably safe to presume that in the event he drops out, his supporters would gravitate to Hayworth, but Simcox' 4% is within the margin of error. In other words, he could help Hayworth...or he could have no support at all.
While the comments on the AZ Republic's website and in the Republican blogosphere are somewhat jubilant at the thought of the nativist Hayworth unseating McCain, they should note -
The poll surveyed likely voters in the Republican primary, not in the general election.
John McCain has proven all but untouchable in general elections thus far (though Tucson City Councilman Glassman could do well enough to make McCain actually work this time around), Hayworth is anything but untouchable in a general election, as Tempe's Harry Mitchell proved in 2006.
To the GOP's "more conservative than thou" types -
Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.
Yeah, I know it's a cliche, but it works here. :)
According to the latest Rasmussen Reports poll -
Senator John McCain’s future in the U.S. Senate may be a little less assured than previously thought.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely 2010 Republican Primary voters in Arizona finds the longtime incumbent in a virtual tie with potential challenger J.D. Hayworth. McCain earns 45% of the vote, while Hayworth picks up 43%.
Rasmussen's toplines are here.
A third candidate, Chris Simcox (founder of the anti-immigrant vigilante group The Minutemen) is polling at 4%. That would seem to help Hayworth, as it is probably safe to presume that in the event he drops out, his supporters would gravitate to Hayworth, but Simcox' 4% is within the margin of error. In other words, he could help Hayworth...or he could have no support at all.
While the comments on the AZ Republic's website and in the Republican blogosphere are somewhat jubilant at the thought of the nativist Hayworth unseating McCain, they should note -
The poll surveyed likely voters in the Republican primary, not in the general election.
John McCain has proven all but untouchable in general elections thus far (though Tucson City Councilman Glassman could do well enough to make McCain actually work this time around), Hayworth is anything but untouchable in a general election, as Tempe's Harry Mitchell proved in 2006.
To the GOP's "more conservative than thou" types -
Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.
Yeah, I know it's a cliche, but it works here. :)
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Tuesday's elections - some lessons
Yesterday, there were a few relatively high profile elections on the East Coast.
Call them the undercard to next year's mid-terms.
If they were on the same even-year schedule as most other elections, we probably wouldn't be talking about them, but since they are the only solid thing for political commentators to, ya know, "commentate" on, at least until next year, they've grabbed a lot of attention.
Today, pundits all over cable news are making their pronouncements on "what it all means" on the heels of the results.
Most of them consider the fact that Republican candidates won the governorships in Virginia and New Jersey to be a repudiation of President Obama.
And, as expected, every Republican who can find a microphone is absolutely crowing about it.
Most of them, pundit and Rep operative alike, are ignoring what should be one of the real lessons to be taken from yesterday's results.
Tip O'Neill wrote it more than a generation ago -
All Politics Is Local.
Not "All Politics Is Partisan."
In each of the governor's races, as well as the special election to fill a vacant Congressional seat in New York's 23rd District, there were local factors that strongly influenced the outcome of the balloting in those races.
One gubernatorial race featured a weakened incumbent while the other featured a candidate who was just plain weak. And in both races, worries about the economy played a big role in the results, too.
...At the start of his reelection campaign, incumbent, and now outgoing, New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine was saddled with some of the highest property taxes in the country, one of the highest unemployment rates in the northeastern U.S. (9.8%), a pre-politics resume that included a lucrative stint as CEO of Goldman Sachs (not the jewel that it was pre-economic meltdown and bailout), and a level of personal unpopularity that sapped the enthusiasm of many New Jersey Democrats. That alone would have made his race something of an uphill battle, even for someone with his "self-funding" ability.
Mix in tawdry personal attacks on his opponent and a low turnout, and you have a recipe for an upset.
...In Virginia, the Democratic candidate could best be described as a "not ready for prime time" candidate. Creigh Deeds was an inarticulate and unenergetic "Blue Dog" wanna-be who was outfought for the political center by his opponent and the eventual winner, Bob McDonnell. McDonnell glossed over his extremely conservative social agenda in favor of a strong message on the economy.
Oh, and McDonnell had already defeated Deeds once before in a statewide race, the 2005 contest for VA AG.
In both races, while there were strong warning signs for President Obama, the Democrats, and incumbents of all political stripes ("it's the economy, stupid", low turnout among 2008 Obama voters), it seems to have come down local candidates and local conditions.
Of greater political portent may be the race to fill the vacant Congressional seat in NY-23.
After a race marked by a near-civil war within the GOP, with big-name "true" conservatives from all over the country flying in to support "their" candidate, a carpetbagger named Doug Hoffman, who was running as the Conservative Party candidate. They were so pugnacious in their criticisms of the GOP's own candidate, Dede Scozzafava, that she withdrew from the race this past weekend and endorsed the Democratic candidate, Bill Owens.
Those "true" conservatives rejoiced when Scozzafava exited from the race, figuring the way was now clear for Hoffman in a district that hasn't elected a Democrat in, like, *ever.*
Literally.
So naturally, Owens won.
What the "true" conservatives ignored is that fact that their candidate, Hoffman, wasn't actually from the district, nor did he know anything about it. When asked about the needs and priorities of the district, he standard response was "I'll get back to you on that."
Have no doubt about it - the GOP will reclaim the seat in next year's election, holding it for two years. At which point, the district will be probably be redistricted out of existence because of population shifts leading to NY losing one or two seats in Congress after next year's census.
But for now, the Democratic majority in the House has grown.
After the hubbub dies down, the "big minds" will have time to actually think about the results beyond their immediate gut reactions.
Once that happens, expect three things -
1. Democrats will work at motivating last year's Obama voters to turn out for next year's elections, while the Republicans will work at redoubling their voter suppression efforts.
2. Both major parties will look for candidates who are strong on local issues and ties, not just on having lots of funding readily available. In addition to the moneyed Corzine's defeat in NJ, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg nearly lost his reelection bid yesterday, even after spending over $100 million of his own money on the campaign.
It's still possible to buy an office, but it's not cheap, nor is it guaranteed.
3. The internal conflict within the national GOP will grow; the battle for the AZGOP is long over, with the wingnuts gaining victory over a decade ago, but the circular firing squad is just forming up nationally. NY-23 was just the hors d'eouvres. The GOP should be able to gain some Congressional seats next year (that the standard pattern in midterms, with the non-Presidential party gaining), but they are already working to blunt that effect.
Even here in AZ, where the wingers are well-entrenched and should have a well-established cadre of candidates on the bench, they are trotting out self-funded "more conservative than thou" carpetbaggers to challenge Democratic incumbents in CD1 and CD5, and seriously talking up a "conservative" challenge to long-time Republican Senator John McCain. He is borderline unbeatable in a general election, but the likes of JD Hayworth, Chris Simcox, and Russell Pearce consider him to be a "RINO."
Senator Glassman, anyone?
Later...
Call them the undercard to next year's mid-terms.
If they were on the same even-year schedule as most other elections, we probably wouldn't be talking about them, but since they are the only solid thing for political commentators to, ya know, "commentate" on, at least until next year, they've grabbed a lot of attention.
Today, pundits all over cable news are making their pronouncements on "what it all means" on the heels of the results.
Most of them consider the fact that Republican candidates won the governorships in Virginia and New Jersey to be a repudiation of President Obama.
And, as expected, every Republican who can find a microphone is absolutely crowing about it.
Most of them, pundit and Rep operative alike, are ignoring what should be one of the real lessons to be taken from yesterday's results.
Tip O'Neill wrote it more than a generation ago -
All Politics Is Local.
Not "All Politics Is Partisan."
In each of the governor's races, as well as the special election to fill a vacant Congressional seat in New York's 23rd District, there were local factors that strongly influenced the outcome of the balloting in those races.
One gubernatorial race featured a weakened incumbent while the other featured a candidate who was just plain weak. And in both races, worries about the economy played a big role in the results, too.
...At the start of his reelection campaign, incumbent, and now outgoing, New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine was saddled with some of the highest property taxes in the country, one of the highest unemployment rates in the northeastern U.S. (9.8%), a pre-politics resume that included a lucrative stint as CEO of Goldman Sachs (not the jewel that it was pre-economic meltdown and bailout), and a level of personal unpopularity that sapped the enthusiasm of many New Jersey Democrats. That alone would have made his race something of an uphill battle, even for someone with his "self-funding" ability.
Mix in tawdry personal attacks on his opponent and a low turnout, and you have a recipe for an upset.
...In Virginia, the Democratic candidate could best be described as a "not ready for prime time" candidate. Creigh Deeds was an inarticulate and unenergetic "Blue Dog" wanna-be who was outfought for the political center by his opponent and the eventual winner, Bob McDonnell. McDonnell glossed over his extremely conservative social agenda in favor of a strong message on the economy.
Oh, and McDonnell had already defeated Deeds once before in a statewide race, the 2005 contest for VA AG.
In both races, while there were strong warning signs for President Obama, the Democrats, and incumbents of all political stripes ("it's the economy, stupid", low turnout among 2008 Obama voters), it seems to have come down local candidates and local conditions.
Of greater political portent may be the race to fill the vacant Congressional seat in NY-23.
After a race marked by a near-civil war within the GOP, with big-name "true" conservatives from all over the country flying in to support "their" candidate, a carpetbagger named Doug Hoffman, who was running as the Conservative Party candidate. They were so pugnacious in their criticisms of the GOP's own candidate, Dede Scozzafava, that she withdrew from the race this past weekend and endorsed the Democratic candidate, Bill Owens.
Those "true" conservatives rejoiced when Scozzafava exited from the race, figuring the way was now clear for Hoffman in a district that hasn't elected a Democrat in, like, *ever.*
Literally.
So naturally, Owens won.
What the "true" conservatives ignored is that fact that their candidate, Hoffman, wasn't actually from the district, nor did he know anything about it. When asked about the needs and priorities of the district, he standard response was "I'll get back to you on that."
Have no doubt about it - the GOP will reclaim the seat in next year's election, holding it for two years. At which point, the district will be probably be redistricted out of existence because of population shifts leading to NY losing one or two seats in Congress after next year's census.
But for now, the Democratic majority in the House has grown.
After the hubbub dies down, the "big minds" will have time to actually think about the results beyond their immediate gut reactions.
Once that happens, expect three things -
1. Democrats will work at motivating last year's Obama voters to turn out for next year's elections, while the Republicans will work at redoubling their voter suppression efforts.
2. Both major parties will look for candidates who are strong on local issues and ties, not just on having lots of funding readily available. In addition to the moneyed Corzine's defeat in NJ, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg nearly lost his reelection bid yesterday, even after spending over $100 million of his own money on the campaign.
It's still possible to buy an office, but it's not cheap, nor is it guaranteed.
3. The internal conflict within the national GOP will grow; the battle for the AZGOP is long over, with the wingnuts gaining victory over a decade ago, but the circular firing squad is just forming up nationally. NY-23 was just the hors d'eouvres. The GOP should be able to gain some Congressional seats next year (that the standard pattern in midterms, with the non-Presidential party gaining), but they are already working to blunt that effect.
Even here in AZ, where the wingers are well-entrenched and should have a well-established cadre of candidates on the bench, they are trotting out self-funded "more conservative than thou" carpetbaggers to challenge Democratic incumbents in CD1 and CD5, and seriously talking up a "conservative" challenge to long-time Republican Senator John McCain. He is borderline unbeatable in a general election, but the likes of JD Hayworth, Chris Simcox, and Russell Pearce consider him to be a "RINO."
Senator Glassman, anyone?
Later...
Monday, October 05, 2009
Not the exactly the epitome of breaking news
From the Phoenix Business Journal -
I truly don't believe that Hayworth would have a serious shot against McCain, but I'm not a Republican insider (so that's not exactly the epitome of breaking news, either :) ). As such, I can't offer any definitive insights into the minds of Republican primary voters. Based on what I've seen though, the only way that McCain loses the primary next year is if he isn't *in* the primary.
However, there has been a quiet rumor, and I don't have details, that a Democrat with a higher profile than Stuart Starky is considering a run for U.S. Senate next year. That seems to indicate that some folks with better sources inside the GOP (or at least within the McCain camp) believe that McCain may end up retiring, creating a race for an open and poachable seat.
If the Reps nominate somebody like Hayworth, somebody who appeals only to their shrinking base, not the growing number of independents in AZ, it will give a major boost to the Democratic nominee, whoever he or she may be.
Hell, Starky may have been steamrolled by McCain in 2004, but even he'd have a fighting chance against somebody like Hayworth.
Later...
Conservative radio commentator and former Scottsdale congressman J.D. Hayworth is consider a run against U.S. Sen. John McCain in next year’s Republican primary.There has been speculation/expectations regarding this for months, both here and elsewhere. The Business Journal is something of a johnny-come-lately here.
I truly don't believe that Hayworth would have a serious shot against McCain, but I'm not a Republican insider (so that's not exactly the epitome of breaking news, either :) ). As such, I can't offer any definitive insights into the minds of Republican primary voters. Based on what I've seen though, the only way that McCain loses the primary next year is if he isn't *in* the primary.
However, there has been a quiet rumor, and I don't have details, that a Democrat with a higher profile than Stuart Starky is considering a run for U.S. Senate next year. That seems to indicate that some folks with better sources inside the GOP (or at least within the McCain camp) believe that McCain may end up retiring, creating a race for an open and poachable seat.
If the Reps nominate somebody like Hayworth, somebody who appeals only to their shrinking base, not the growing number of independents in AZ, it will give a major boost to the Democratic nominee, whoever he or she may be.
Hell, Starky may have been steamrolled by McCain in 2004, but even he'd have a fighting chance against somebody like Hayworth.
Later...
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
McCain gets promoted during his health care forum
During John McCain's forum opposing the health care reform proposed by President Obama, Shirley McAllister of Sun City asked a pointed question (emphasis mine) -
"Why are so many people opposed to a government-provided health care option? I believe you, Senator Kennedy...[crowd laughs]...I just promoted you...[more laughter]...Senator McCain, I'm sorry...I believe you have had access to government-provided health care for most of your life, and I would imagine that most of us here are on Medicare, and there may be some who would like to give up their Medicare. [shouts of "NO" from the crowd] No, none of us do, so what is so wrong with government-provided health care?"
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
McCain has a primary challenger
Breaking across the AZ blogosphere is the news that Republican Senator John McCain has a challenger in next year's primary.
Chris Simcox, head of the anti-immigrant group The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, will be announcing his candidacy for the Republican nomination for McCain's Senate seat, which is on next year's ballot.
As might be expected, he will be running at McCain from the right, not that McCain is a liberal. However, supporting Bush's torture regime isn't conservative enough for folks like Simcox. One must support torturing immigrants* to be conservative enough to suit Simcox and his fellow travelers.
* - Before Thane or another commenter goes off on that statement, let me be clear - that's just partisan hyperbole utilized to make a point. To the best of my knowledge, Simcox has never advocated torturing immigrants, just throwing them into jail or out of the country (or both.)
Simcox was featured prominently in the film "Crossing Arizona" for those looking for some unvarnished insights into him (note: while I wasn't particularly impressed by him, the film really is "unvarnished." It's not a hatchet job at all.
Anyway, Tedski at R-Cubed has more info here, including the tidbit that one Eric Johnson is working for Simcox' campaign. As he points out in his post, this Eric Johnson is not the great guitarist from Austin, Texas, nor is he the Erik Johnson who was a 2nd baseman for the SF Giants and thePhoenix Firebirds in the 1990s.
Nope, the Eric Johnson has been working the nativist candidate campaign circuit. Among others, he has helped Don Goldwater not win the AZ Governor's slot in 2006 and helped Russell Pearce with his abortive challenge to Jeff Flake in CD6 last year. Flake, like McCain, is only "not conservative" by the standards of the nativists.
By real world standards though, he and McCain are so conservative that they couldn't find "moderate" with written directions, a compass, and a GPS unit.
Honestly, I don't think that Simcox has a snowball's chance in Phoenix (in July!) of beating McCain in a primary.
And Simcox probably knows that. As far as I can find, he's never held or even run for elected office before, and while he has a little notoriety, most first-time candidates need some serious name rec if they plan to start at the U.S. Senate level (think: Al Franken or Hillary Clinton.)
While a Simcox candidacy could garner some support from certain extremes of the GOP, he's going to have a hard-time convincing the mainstream of the AZGOP that he is a better candidate in the general election than McCain.
However, what he can do is gauge support for a hardcore nativist candidate in a race against McCain, to see if it's worth a shot by a more well-known hardcore nativist such as JD Hayworth.
Of course, McCain could totally mess up everything by announcing his retirement.
If that happens, look for GOPers who are a lot more mainstream than Simcox or Hayworth to go for the seat.
A cattle call primary would actually give a full-blown winger a shot at the Republican nomination.
Which would give a Democratic candidate a shot in the general election.
Hmmm.... :))
- Speaking of cattle call primaries, in other campaign news, Republican Mary Lou Taylor has filed paperwork to form an exploratory committee for a run at State Superintendent of Public Instruction. She is currently the President of the Tempe Union High School District Governing Board (term expiring next year).
She joins Margaret Dugan (Deputy Superintendent at the AZ Department of Ed) and John Huppenthal (current state senator) as people who have formed committees of one type or another for the race, with current State Rep. Rich Crandall expected to join them in the race shortly after the start of January (when he won't have to "resign to run.")
Chris Simcox, head of the anti-immigrant group The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, will be announcing his candidacy for the Republican nomination for McCain's Senate seat, which is on next year's ballot.
As might be expected, he will be running at McCain from the right, not that McCain is a liberal. However, supporting Bush's torture regime isn't conservative enough for folks like Simcox. One must support torturing immigrants* to be conservative enough to suit Simcox and his fellow travelers.
* - Before Thane or another commenter goes off on that statement, let me be clear - that's just partisan hyperbole utilized to make a point. To the best of my knowledge, Simcox has never advocated torturing immigrants, just throwing them into jail or out of the country (or both.)
Simcox was featured prominently in the film "Crossing Arizona" for those looking for some unvarnished insights into him (note: while I wasn't particularly impressed by him, the film really is "unvarnished." It's not a hatchet job at all.
Anyway, Tedski at R-Cubed has more info here, including the tidbit that one Eric Johnson is working for Simcox' campaign. As he points out in his post, this Eric Johnson is not the great guitarist from Austin, Texas, nor is he the Erik Johnson who was a 2nd baseman for the SF Giants and thePhoenix Firebirds in the 1990s.
Nope, the Eric Johnson has been working the nativist candidate campaign circuit. Among others, he has helped Don Goldwater not win the AZ Governor's slot in 2006 and helped Russell Pearce with his abortive challenge to Jeff Flake in CD6 last year. Flake, like McCain, is only "not conservative" by the standards of the nativists.
By real world standards though, he and McCain are so conservative that they couldn't find "moderate" with written directions, a compass, and a GPS unit.
Honestly, I don't think that Simcox has a snowball's chance in Phoenix (in July!) of beating McCain in a primary.
And Simcox probably knows that. As far as I can find, he's never held or even run for elected office before, and while he has a little notoriety, most first-time candidates need some serious name rec if they plan to start at the U.S. Senate level (think: Al Franken or Hillary Clinton.)
While a Simcox candidacy could garner some support from certain extremes of the GOP, he's going to have a hard-time convincing the mainstream of the AZGOP that he is a better candidate in the general election than McCain.
However, what he can do is gauge support for a hardcore nativist candidate in a race against McCain, to see if it's worth a shot by a more well-known hardcore nativist such as JD Hayworth.
Of course, McCain could totally mess up everything by announcing his retirement.
If that happens, look for GOPers who are a lot more mainstream than Simcox or Hayworth to go for the seat.
A cattle call primary would actually give a full-blown winger a shot at the Republican nomination.
Which would give a Democratic candidate a shot in the general election.
Hmmm.... :))
- Speaking of cattle call primaries, in other campaign news, Republican Mary Lou Taylor has filed paperwork to form an exploratory committee for a run at State Superintendent of Public Instruction. She is currently the President of the Tempe Union High School District Governing Board (term expiring next year).
She joins Margaret Dugan (Deputy Superintendent at the AZ Department of Ed) and John Huppenthal (current state senator) as people who have formed committees of one type or another for the race, with current State Rep. Rich Crandall expected to join them in the race shortly after the start of January (when he won't have to "resign to run.")
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
New Republican Candidate For Governor Now Available
Should have covered this on Monday, but other things came up...
From the blog of former D-Backs (and now "former Red Sox") pitcher Curt Schilling -
Now that Schilling is leaving baseball behind him, expect him to move into politics.
He's been popular in Republican circles for a while (of course, all that takes is a conservative viewpoint, a loud mouth, and deep pockets). There was talk about him running for U.S. Senate against John Kerry last year (which didn't happen last year, but if Ted Kennedy retires due to his medical issues, expect Schilling's name to crop up again) and he campaigned for John McCain during the 2008 presidential campaign.
With his ties to AZ (and the fact that MA is bluer than the North Atlantic), his political ambitions could take him back to the desert.
Of course, regardless of his Rep bonafides, gaining a nomination here in AZ will be tough. The Reps seem to be turning on Jan Brewer, signalling what could be a crowded and bloody primary for the governor's spot on the ballot. The seat, while not technically "open," it won't have an elected incumbent in it, so pretty much every Rep who's kissed a baby or worked the LD circuit is eyeing the seat.
They won't roll over for a newbie outsider, deep-pocketed or not.
...Now this post is either incisive speculation on possible 2010 candidates, or it's a cheap ploy to boost readership by mentioning someone famous.
You decide which it is. :))
Other 2010 candidate news -
- Somebody named Roy Miller has filed as a "$500 Exemption" candidate for Governor, no party affiliation listed. A "$500" committee for Governor would be more accurately called a "tilting at windmills" committee.
- State Sen. John Huppenthal has semi-confirmed the rumors of his future plans by forming an "exploratory" committee for Superintendent of Public Instruction. (SOS filer ID: 201000065 )
- John McCain's CountryFirst PAC has formed an AZ version of same (SOS filer ID: 201000066)
From the blog of former D-Backs (and now "former Red Sox") pitcher Curt Schilling -
"Turn out the lights, the party’s over"
I used to wait with bated breath for Don Meredith to start singing that on "Monday Night Football."
Normally, it was sweet music if the Steelers were playing. If I could get him to sing it again, I would. This party has officially ended. After being blessed to experience 23 years of playing professional baseball in front of the world's best fans in so many different places, it is with zero regrets that I am making my retirement official.
Now that Schilling is leaving baseball behind him, expect him to move into politics.
He's been popular in Republican circles for a while (of course, all that takes is a conservative viewpoint, a loud mouth, and deep pockets). There was talk about him running for U.S. Senate against John Kerry last year (which didn't happen last year, but if Ted Kennedy retires due to his medical issues, expect Schilling's name to crop up again) and he campaigned for John McCain during the 2008 presidential campaign.
With his ties to AZ (and the fact that MA is bluer than the North Atlantic), his political ambitions could take him back to the desert.
Of course, regardless of his Rep bonafides, gaining a nomination here in AZ will be tough. The Reps seem to be turning on Jan Brewer, signalling what could be a crowded and bloody primary for the governor's spot on the ballot. The seat, while not technically "open," it won't have an elected incumbent in it, so pretty much every Rep who's kissed a baby or worked the LD circuit is eyeing the seat.
They won't roll over for a newbie outsider, deep-pocketed or not.
...Now this post is either incisive speculation on possible 2010 candidates, or it's a cheap ploy to boost readership by mentioning someone famous.
You decide which it is. :))
Other 2010 candidate news -
- Somebody named Roy Miller has filed as a "$500 Exemption" candidate for Governor, no party affiliation listed. A "$500" committee for Governor would be more accurately called a "tilting at windmills" committee.
- State Sen. John Huppenthal has semi-confirmed the rumors of his future plans by forming an "exploratory" committee for Superintendent of Public Instruction. (SOS filer ID: 201000065 )
- John McCain's CountryFirst PAC has formed an AZ version of same (SOS filer ID: 201000066)
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Let's just proclaim March 18 "National Shameless Posturing Day"
...or maybe "National Triangulation Day"
Let's be clear - the posturing and triangulating wasn't confined to Republicans (though they did dominate in that department)...
Much of it stemmed from the U.S. House's vote on H.R. 1586 (to tax the AIG bonuses at 90%). The bill passed 328 - 93, with 6 Democrats (including CD5's Harry Mitchell) joining 87 Republicans in voting against it.
Everybody, and I mean everybody, who voted on this bill was posturing, since the bill itself doesn't stand a chance of actually becoming law.
It might fail to gain cloture in the Senate (it will only take a few Dems who aren't up for election next year to kill it, and AIG has given LOTS of campaign contributions over the years); if passed...
It might not get into law by President Obama; if enacted...
It won't survive a constitutional challenge (can you say "bill of attainder" or "ex post facto law", both of which are explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Constitution - Article One, Section Nine)
...Of course, the posturing and triangulation wasn't limited to the primary vote on the bill itself; once it became obvious that the bill was going to pass with or without their support, dozens of Republicans switched their votes from "no" to "yes".
...Over in the Senate, when Harry Reid tried to get the bill passed by unanimous consent, in spite of his (faux) criticisms of the bonuses, Jon Kyl objected (source: Countdown with Keith Olbermann)
...And in a move that would merit consideration for a Crappie Award for Kyl (if only he hadn't won one yesterday :)) ), Kyl joined fellow shameless hypocrite Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) in criticizing President Obama for taking time out of dealing with the economy and the AIG bonus scandal to fill out an NCAA Tournament bracket (his predicted winner: UNC; mine? Louisville. Sorry ASU. :)) ).
Besides the insult to Obama, that he was like his predecessor and can't handle more than one issue at a time without suffering from brainfreeze, Kyl and Alexander forgot to mention one thing.
Their friend and colleague John McCain did the same thing. He even selected UNC to win it all.
Just like the President.
Geez...a guy goes to work and all sorts of twisting with the wind, flip-floppery, and outright hypocrisy breaks out all over...
More tomorrow (maybe featuring the AZ lege...)
Let's be clear - the posturing and triangulating wasn't confined to Republicans (though they did dominate in that department)...
Much of it stemmed from the U.S. House's vote on H.R. 1586 (to tax the AIG bonuses at 90%). The bill passed 328 - 93, with 6 Democrats (including CD5's Harry Mitchell) joining 87 Republicans in voting against it.
Everybody, and I mean everybody, who voted on this bill was posturing, since the bill itself doesn't stand a chance of actually becoming law.
It might fail to gain cloture in the Senate (it will only take a few Dems who aren't up for election next year to kill it, and AIG has given LOTS of campaign contributions over the years); if passed...
It might not get into law by President Obama; if enacted...
It won't survive a constitutional challenge (can you say "bill of attainder" or "ex post facto law", both of which are explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Constitution - Article One, Section Nine)
...Of course, the posturing and triangulation wasn't limited to the primary vote on the bill itself; once it became obvious that the bill was going to pass with or without their support, dozens of Republicans switched their votes from "no" to "yes".
...Over in the Senate, when Harry Reid tried to get the bill passed by unanimous consent, in spite of his (faux) criticisms of the bonuses, Jon Kyl objected (source: Countdown with Keith Olbermann)
...And in a move that would merit consideration for a Crappie Award for Kyl (if only he hadn't won one yesterday :)) ), Kyl joined fellow shameless hypocrite Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) in criticizing President Obama for taking time out of dealing with the economy and the AIG bonus scandal to fill out an NCAA Tournament bracket (his predicted winner: UNC; mine? Louisville. Sorry ASU. :)) ).
Besides the insult to Obama, that he was like his predecessor and can't handle more than one issue at a time without suffering from brainfreeze, Kyl and Alexander forgot to mention one thing.
Their friend and colleague John McCain did the same thing. He even selected UNC to win it all.
Just like the President.
Geez...a guy goes to work and all sorts of twisting with the wind, flip-floppery, and outright hypocrisy breaks out all over...
More tomorrow (maybe featuring the AZ lege...)
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
AIG: It may be Obama's mess to clean up, but it isn't his fault
Many people, including me, are royally ticked off over the over $165 million in bonuses that AIG has given out to executives at the unit of their business that most contributed to AIG's fall.
While AIG cratered under the Republicans' watch (or to be more accurate, their "not-watch") and AIG's bailouts began last year, every Republican has pointed fingers not at themselves, or at the Bush Administration's utter contempt for common-sense regulatory oversight, but instead at President Obama, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, and Democrats in general.
From the beginning of the Bush Administration until the end of his time in office eight years later, the Bushies, with the enthusiastic complicity of their Republicanaccomplices caucus in Congress, a concerted effort was made to undermine regulations and laws restricting business.
It was open season on the average working American's freedom and economic security while corporate executives and the already-wealthy to feather their own nests in ways that that socialized risk (witness the bailouts) and privatized profit (witness the bonuses paid out of taxpayer bailout money).
Now that the financial industry's house of cards has been blown down by the winds of economic reality, the Reps are attempting to affix the blame for it everywhere except where it belongs - to the executives themselves, the ones who allowed their inveterate greed to rule the day, and to their cheerleaders, the 43rd President of the United States, his Administration, and their lackeys in Congress.
Today's hearing of the House Financial Services Committee concerning the issue, featuring current AIG CEO Edward Liddy, highlighted the likes of Republican Reps. Hensarling, Royce, and more blaming the current Administration, especially Geithner, for the bonuses, while blithely ignoring the long history of not-so-benign neglect and actual malice on their own part that led up to the collapses of the financial industry and the American economy.
Let me make my point, and make it clearly -
Blaming Barack Obama and his Administration for a mess that they inherited is not only predictably partisan (something which I can frequently, and justifiably, be called :) ), but it's the sort of foolhardy revisionist thinking that will lead to history repeating itself.
It's time to cut through the BS, deal with the misuse of public funds (which the bonuses most certainly are), and ensure that it doesn't happen again. I don't even think that it is necessary to excoriate the Bushies (unless something criminal and actionable can be proven, then we should nuke 'em...figuratively speaking :) ). Affixing blame is less important than determining exact what went wrong, both with AIG and the bail out, and figuring out ways to prevent it from happening again.
Note:
Some Republicans, like AZ's own Sen. Jon Kyl, have even gone so far as to rationalize paying the bonuses while calling the elected officials who have criticized the bonuses as "demagogues." (Huffington Post)
When I see behavior from elected officials that seems unexpected (right now, criticizing AIG is about as politically safe a move as there is in America), I tend to think to myself "Follow the money." That inspired a little research on my part into AIG's political contributions.
Turns out that AIG is bipartisan in its largesse. According to OpenSecrets.org, they've given $9.3 million since 1989, evenly splitting that between the two major parties. They're not dumb about it, as during the last election cycle they gave roughly 2/3 of their contributions to Democratic candidates. Of course, that just means that when the Reps were in power, they were the recipients of more money (logic: if receiving 2/3 of the contributions during the last presidential cycle brought the Dems even with the Reps, that means that the Reps had a significant lead before 2008).
Looking into Kyl's support for AIG, I found that he has received at least $15K from AIG's PAC and employees since 1998, which sounded significant.
Then I found that John McCain has received over $150K for his various campaigns.
Imagine how loyal Kyl would be if they just paid him like they've paid McCain and a few others?
Note2: My search through FEC records was a cursory one. I didn't try tracking payments to non-AIG PACs that in turn gave money to Kyl or McCain, nor did I do ZIP code or address searches to figure out how much was given by AIG spouses or family members who don't show up as AIG employees.
Later...
While AIG cratered under the Republicans' watch (or to be more accurate, their "not-watch") and AIG's bailouts began last year, every Republican has pointed fingers not at themselves, or at the Bush Administration's utter contempt for common-sense regulatory oversight, but instead at President Obama, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, and Democrats in general.
From the beginning of the Bush Administration until the end of his time in office eight years later, the Bushies, with the enthusiastic complicity of their Republican
It was open season on the average working American's freedom and economic security while corporate executives and the already-wealthy to feather their own nests in ways that that socialized risk (witness the bailouts) and privatized profit (witness the bonuses paid out of taxpayer bailout money).
Now that the financial industry's house of cards has been blown down by the winds of economic reality, the Reps are attempting to affix the blame for it everywhere except where it belongs - to the executives themselves, the ones who allowed their inveterate greed to rule the day, and to their cheerleaders, the 43rd President of the United States, his Administration, and their lackeys in Congress.
Today's hearing of the House Financial Services Committee concerning the issue, featuring current AIG CEO Edward Liddy, highlighted the likes of Republican Reps. Hensarling, Royce, and more blaming the current Administration, especially Geithner, for the bonuses, while blithely ignoring the long history of not-so-benign neglect and actual malice on their own part that led up to the collapses of the financial industry and the American economy.
Let me make my point, and make it clearly -
Blaming Barack Obama and his Administration for a mess that they inherited is not only predictably partisan (something which I can frequently, and justifiably, be called :) ), but it's the sort of foolhardy revisionist thinking that will lead to history repeating itself.
It's time to cut through the BS, deal with the misuse of public funds (which the bonuses most certainly are), and ensure that it doesn't happen again. I don't even think that it is necessary to excoriate the Bushies (unless something criminal and actionable can be proven, then we should nuke 'em...figuratively speaking :) ). Affixing blame is less important than determining exact what went wrong, both with AIG and the bail out, and figuring out ways to prevent it from happening again.
Note:
Some Republicans, like AZ's own Sen. Jon Kyl, have even gone so far as to rationalize paying the bonuses while calling the elected officials who have criticized the bonuses as "demagogues." (Huffington Post)
When I see behavior from elected officials that seems unexpected (right now, criticizing AIG is about as politically safe a move as there is in America), I tend to think to myself "Follow the money." That inspired a little research on my part into AIG's political contributions.
Turns out that AIG is bipartisan in its largesse. According to OpenSecrets.org, they've given $9.3 million since 1989, evenly splitting that between the two major parties. They're not dumb about it, as during the last election cycle they gave roughly 2/3 of their contributions to Democratic candidates. Of course, that just means that when the Reps were in power, they were the recipients of more money (logic: if receiving 2/3 of the contributions during the last presidential cycle brought the Dems even with the Reps, that means that the Reps had a significant lead before 2008).
Looking into Kyl's support for AIG, I found that he has received at least $15K from AIG's PAC and employees since 1998, which sounded significant.
Then I found that John McCain has received over $150K for his various campaigns.
Imagine how loyal Kyl would be if they just paid him like they've paid McCain and a few others?
Note2: My search through FEC records was a cursory one. I didn't try tracking payments to non-AIG PACs that in turn gave money to Kyl or McCain, nor did I do ZIP code or address searches to figure out how much was given by AIG spouses or family members who don't show up as AIG employees.
Later...
Monday, March 09, 2009
Both of AZ's U.S. Senators are in the top 10. That's a good thing, right???
Well...it depends what category's "top 10" we are talking about...
From ConsumerWatchdog.org -
So should we be proud that AZ is the only state where both members of our delegation to the U.S. Senate are in the "top 10"??
BTW, and this is certain to tick off commenter Thane and a few other folks - data like this, data that shows the bipartisan impact of industrylegalized bribes "campaign contributions" have on public policy only serves to strengthen the argument in favor of taking Arizona's system of publicly financed elections to the next level.
Later...
From ConsumerWatchdog.org -
WASHINGTON D.C. -- Health insurers and pharmaceutical manufacturers contributed $5.5 million to the top 10 recipients in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives during the last two election cycles - a period in which health care reform dominated political discourse, according to the nonprofit, nonpartisan Consumer Watchdog.
Health insurers contributed $2.2 million to the top 10 members of the U.S. Senate and House. Drug manufacturers contributed $3.3 million to the top 10 recipients in each legislative body. In all, health insurers and drug manufacturers contributed $24,220,976 to the current members of Congress in the last two election cycles.
The top 1o Senate recipients of Health Insurer Money (note: due to formatting issues, a direct copy and paste wasn't possible here) (emphasis mine) -
John McCain (R-AZ) - $251,834
Mitch McConnell (R-KY) - $200,200
Max Baucus (D-MT) - $183,750
Joe Lieberman (I-CT) - $101,400
Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) - $98,600
Susan Collins (R-ME) - $96,500
Jon Kyl (R-AZ) - $90,450
Mark Warner (D-VA) - $89,700
Orrin Hatch (R-UT) - $85,903
Ben Nelson (D-NE) - $83,300
Top 10 Senate recipients of Drug Co. Money -
John McCain - $294,603
Max Baucus - $229,020
Mitch McConnell - $225,200
Joe Lieberman - $196,540
Arlen Specter (R-PA) - $179,650
Robert Mendez (D-NJ) - $147,243
Mike Enzi (R-WY) - $134,500
Jon Kyl - $118,350
John Cornyn (R-TX) - $115,900
So should we be proud that AZ is the only state where both members of our delegation to the U.S. Senate are in the "top 10"??
BTW, and this is certain to tick off commenter Thane and a few other folks - data like this, data that shows the bipartisan impact of industry
Later...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)