Haven't done one of these in a while...
...Gloating time: The Arizona Republic has published a significant number of its primary election endorsements, and as I predicted, they endorsed Susan Bitter Smith in the CD5 Republican primary.
I so love being able to say "I told ya so."
...Credit where it's due time: Republican Greg Patterson at Espresso Pundit wrote pretty eloquently on the Shirley Sherrod/"racist" comments/summary firing/apologetic rehiring mess from earlier this week. He observed unequivocally that the video clip that was originally publicized by conservative blogger Breitbart and then Fox News was grossly out of context.
Now, being a loyal Republican, Patterson didn't criticize Breitbart and Fox News for their deceptive and unethical editing of the video, but neither did he go after the White House and the U.S. Department of Agriculture over their unthinking response. He earned some slack because of that.
I'm a loyal Democrat, as strong a D as Patterson is an R. As such, *I'll* criticize the White House et. al. for their response.
Making decisions based on information from Breitbart and Fox News? People and organizations with a documented history of taking statements out of context and even doctoring video (see: ACORN)?
The White House is supposed to be better than that. They're supposed to be smarter than that.
BTW - While Patterson was even-handed in not directly criticizing the principals involved in the dust-up, the commenters on his post were less so. Even though the White House had nothing to do with the fabrication, the commenters laid the blame squarely at the WH's feet while giving a free pass to Breitbart and Fox News.
...Arizona's fiscal plummet continues time: AKA - "More signs of the success of Jan Brewer's fiscal policies time" - In a story that, if not buried, has been downplayed by the AZ Republic, the state's debt rating has been downgraded yet again, making any future debt issued by the state (like school construction bonds) more expensive. In short, it will be even tougher in the future to balance the state's books because of ever-increasing debt-service costs.
....Later...
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Brewer's election year economic posturing: More of the same garbage that got us in the mess that we are in...
...And it's the same garbage that has gutted the underpinnings of America's once-robust economy...
There was an interesting coincidence today - the Arizona Republic ran a piece touting the economic record and proposals of Jan Brewer while she's been governor of AZ while Business Insider ran a piece (with a related blog post from Yahoo! Finance) highlighting 22 statistics that show that America's middle class, once the envy of the world, has all but disappeared.
While minds far more perceptive than mine and voices far more eloquent than mine can parse and discuss the details, essentially the wealth of the middle class has been siphoned off to pad the wallets and bank accounts and property listings of America's wealthiest (what, you thought that the wealthy were taking from the poor? The poor don't have much worth taking. That's why they are called "poor"...)
The concentration of America's wealth into an ever-smaller segment of our society has been enacted/enabled by the corpratization/globalization policies fronted by Republicans (and yes, CorpraDems, too!) over the last 30 or so years.
And nothing in Jan Brewer's "Five Point Plan" is going to help AZ's middle class.
1. Structural Budget Reform. Possibly the least bad of her "points", but also the least meaningful. Not enacted yet, or even the subject of substantive proposals (aka - bills before the legislature)
2. Improve Proposition 105 - The Voter Protection Act. AKA - "Get rid of the Voter Protection Act." The measure was enacted to prevent legislative tinkering with things approved by a direct vote cast by the state's electorate. This has led to the lege's (and Brewer's!) inability to get rid of things like First Things First (an early childhood health and education initiative) and Growing Smarter (a program that gives Arizonans a voice in and some control over over growth in their communities and land conservation.
Things like societal infrastructure/safety net and citizen control of government and the world around them are antithetical to those Republicans (and CorpraDems) who are more concerned with protecting profit margins than with public service.
Those are things that Brewer and the Republicans running the lege have condemned since they were enacted by the voters, and the current budget crisis has provided the best hope that the Reps have had for a repeal - they hope that voters are frightened enough to roll over for them.
There are lege-initiated questions (here and here) on the ballot in November to push forward the anti-societal agenda.
3. Additional spending cuts. Well, that one *has* been enacted, mostly to the sort of spending that benefits society as a whole - education, AHCCCS, and other social safety net programs. One area set for an increase in spending is on the private prisons (and the deep-pocketed corporations that own them) that stand to benefit from Brewer's signature on SB1070, the anti-immigrant law scheduled to go into effect in less than a week.
There will be more cuts in the next budget cycle. In addition, there will be more cuts this year if one or both of the above measures aren't approved by the voters.
Not that destroying First Things First and Growing Smarter won't qualify as "cuts"...
4. Reform and modernization of Arizona's state tax structure. "Reform" and "modernization" are code words for "continue to shift Arizona's tax burden on to those who can least afford it (but also onto those who can least afford thebribes campaign contributions to the politicians who are "supposed" to represent their interests.)
5. Temporary Tax Increase – Increase state revenues by $1 billion per year. Brewer got this one. Of course, her temporary tax increase was to the incredibly regressive state sales tax, not to the already low property tax. Of course, increases to the property tax, even property taxes themselves, are considered corporate/upper class-UNfriendly, hence the lack of discussion of a more equitable tax structure in AZ.
In short, Brewer's economic "plan" is nothing more than "more of what is destroying America's future."
Giving her four years to implement her "plan" for Arizona is something that the average Arizonan cannot afford.
...Earlier this month, John McCain accused President Obama of "generational theft"; McCain should look across the table at his fellow Republicans like Brewer (as well as in a mirror) before throwing around such accusations.
There was an interesting coincidence today - the Arizona Republic ran a piece touting the economic record and proposals of Jan Brewer while she's been governor of AZ while Business Insider ran a piece (with a related blog post from Yahoo! Finance) highlighting 22 statistics that show that America's middle class, once the envy of the world, has all but disappeared.
While minds far more perceptive than mine and voices far more eloquent than mine can parse and discuss the details, essentially the wealth of the middle class has been siphoned off to pad the wallets and bank accounts and property listings of America's wealthiest (what, you thought that the wealthy were taking from the poor? The poor don't have much worth taking. That's why they are called "poor"...)
The concentration of America's wealth into an ever-smaller segment of our society has been enacted/enabled by the corpratization/globalization policies fronted by Republicans (and yes, CorpraDems, too!) over the last 30 or so years.
And nothing in Jan Brewer's "Five Point Plan" is going to help AZ's middle class.
1. Structural Budget Reform. Possibly the least bad of her "points", but also the least meaningful. Not enacted yet, or even the subject of substantive proposals (aka - bills before the legislature)
2. Improve Proposition 105 - The Voter Protection Act. AKA - "Get rid of the Voter Protection Act." The measure was enacted to prevent legislative tinkering with things approved by a direct vote cast by the state's electorate. This has led to the lege's (and Brewer's!) inability to get rid of things like First Things First (an early childhood health and education initiative) and Growing Smarter (a program that gives Arizonans a voice in and some control over over growth in their communities and land conservation.
Things like societal infrastructure/safety net and citizen control of government and the world around them are antithetical to those Republicans (and CorpraDems) who are more concerned with protecting profit margins than with public service.
Those are things that Brewer and the Republicans running the lege have condemned since they were enacted by the voters, and the current budget crisis has provided the best hope that the Reps have had for a repeal - they hope that voters are frightened enough to roll over for them.
There are lege-initiated questions (here and here) on the ballot in November to push forward the anti-societal agenda.
3. Additional spending cuts. Well, that one *has* been enacted, mostly to the sort of spending that benefits society as a whole - education, AHCCCS, and other social safety net programs. One area set for an increase in spending is on the private prisons (and the deep-pocketed corporations that own them) that stand to benefit from Brewer's signature on SB1070, the anti-immigrant law scheduled to go into effect in less than a week.
There will be more cuts in the next budget cycle. In addition, there will be more cuts this year if one or both of the above measures aren't approved by the voters.
Not that destroying First Things First and Growing Smarter won't qualify as "cuts"...
4. Reform and modernization of Arizona's state tax structure. "Reform" and "modernization" are code words for "continue to shift Arizona's tax burden on to those who can least afford it (but also onto those who can least afford the
5. Temporary Tax Increase – Increase state revenues by $1 billion per year. Brewer got this one. Of course, her temporary tax increase was to the incredibly regressive state sales tax, not to the already low property tax. Of course, increases to the property tax, even property taxes themselves, are considered corporate/upper class-UNfriendly, hence the lack of discussion of a more equitable tax structure in AZ.
In short, Brewer's economic "plan" is nothing more than "more of what is destroying America's future."
Giving her four years to implement her "plan" for Arizona is something that the average Arizonan cannot afford.
...Earlier this month, John McCain accused President Obama of "generational theft"; McCain should look across the table at his fellow Republicans like Brewer (as well as in a mirror) before throwing around such accusations.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Stopping drug smuggling cartels: Terry Goddard's testimony before Congress
Goddard's work combatting the cartels by going after their money isn't sexy (hey, anything that involves accountants tends to be pretty boring :) ), and it certainly isn't the policy of
AZRep coverage of the efforts of the Attorney General's office here; Voice of America coverage of Goddard's testimony to Congress here.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Don't bother with contacting a state agency on Friday: Furlough day tomorrow
As part of the Republicans' budget "plan", tomorrow is the first of five "furlough" days for state workers between now and the end of the year. "Furlough" is a euphemism for "unpaid day off."
Most state workers won't be in the office/at work tomorrow. The main exceptions are those in law enforcement, judicial, and public safety roles.
The complete lists of agency closures and statuses can be found here, on the website of the Arizona Department of Administration.
Most state workers won't be in the office/at work tomorrow. The main exceptions are those in law enforcement, judicial, and public safety roles.
The complete lists of agency closures and statuses can be found here, on the website of the Arizona Department of Administration.
Two candidates for Scottsdale City Council cite feud with C of C when backing out of debate
From the Arizona Republic -
-endorsed-praised candidates mostly didn't win, and those candidates who didn't gain the Chamber's favor but won anyway have been exacting a little payback. (More background on the matter here)
While incumbent Littlefield and candidate Phillips are portraying their "boycott" of the C of C's forum as a matter of principle, neither one was likely to earn the Chamber's endorsement - Littlefield has been railing against the C of C for years and Phillips is a Tea Party type who doesn't approve of public infrastructure.
Since this post is more about commentary than news, here are a few points -
1. The C of C should just shut up, pay their fines, and not do it again. Despite their protestations to the contrary, the 2008 ads *were* an attempt to influence the election. That means that campaign finance laws apply, including disclosure of donors. By not accepting responsibility for their actions in 2008, they've kept the issue alive for the 2010 election cycle.
2. Littlefield and Phillips should quit the "high road" pretense. It's an election year, and part of any office holder's (or candidate's) job is to reach out to voters. Ditching the forum does nothing to help inform voters or allow them to compare candidates.
3. The Scottsdale Chamber of Commerce is *far* from perfect and God knows that I have my issues with their retail/tourism-centric vision for Scottsdale's economy. However, it is still the *Scottsdale* Chamber of Commerce. The anti-government.anti-society ideology that the likes of Littlefield, Phillips and Mayor Jim Lane are trying to foist off on the City has been crafted by Grover Norquist, Dick Armey and others to protect the interests of large interstate and international corporations. There's absolutely no room in the "ideology" for "maintain and improve Scottsdale's quality of life."
Note: the other candidates on the ballot, who are all scheduled to participate in the forum, are Linda Milhaven, Ned O'Hearn, Wayne Ecton (incumbent) and Dennis Robbins.
Two candidates running for Scottsdale City Council are boycotting an upcoming forum put on by the Scottsdale Area Chamber of Commerce to show their discontent with the business group's campaign-finance policy.The apparent conflict stems from the 2008 campaign season when the Chamber
Councilman Bob Littlefield and Guy Phillips said they will not participate in the Aug. 11 forum until the chamber reveals donors and pays fines associated with advertisements the group circulated before the fall 2008 city election.
While incumbent Littlefield and candidate Phillips are portraying their "boycott" of the C of C's forum as a matter of principle, neither one was likely to earn the Chamber's endorsement - Littlefield has been railing against the C of C for years and Phillips is a Tea Party type who doesn't approve of public infrastructure.
Since this post is more about commentary than news, here are a few points -
1. The C of C should just shut up, pay their fines, and not do it again. Despite their protestations to the contrary, the 2008 ads *were* an attempt to influence the election. That means that campaign finance laws apply, including disclosure of donors. By not accepting responsibility for their actions in 2008, they've kept the issue alive for the 2010 election cycle.
2. Littlefield and Phillips should quit the "high road" pretense. It's an election year, and part of any office holder's (or candidate's) job is to reach out to voters. Ditching the forum does nothing to help inform voters or allow them to compare candidates.
3. The Scottsdale Chamber of Commerce is *far* from perfect and God knows that I have my issues with their retail/tourism-centric vision for Scottsdale's economy. However, it is still the *Scottsdale* Chamber of Commerce. The anti-government.anti-society ideology that the likes of Littlefield, Phillips and Mayor Jim Lane are trying to foist off on the City has been crafted by Grover Norquist, Dick Armey and others to protect the interests of large interstate and international corporations. There's absolutely no room in the "ideology" for "maintain and improve Scottsdale's quality of life."
Note: the other candidates on the ballot, who are all scheduled to participate in the forum, are Linda Milhaven, Ned O'Hearn, Wayne Ecton (incumbent) and Dennis Robbins.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Jawdropper of the day
I don't normally counter-post something that an R blogger has put up, and I certainly don't publicize R campaign events, but this one is a press release and it features a combination of performers that is so stunning that it merits a post of its own.
The press release for this event was originally published by the R blog Sonoran Alliance here.
My first thought upon seeing this was "whatthehell does Joe Arpaio have to do with education?"*
* = OK, he probably thinks that the fact that there are still people in the county who don't worship the ground he walks on is evidence that there is *too much* education in Arizona, but other than that, he doesn't appear to have any ties to the education system in Arizona.
Of course, Thursday's forum is probably less about "education" and more about "winning the Republican primary". Huppenthal spent most of the last eight years in the state senate working to weaken the state's education system, and nothing about his embrace of Arpaio indicates that he is interested in fixing what he helped to break.
Of course, I'm just a cynic...
BTW - Normally, I don't bother attending R events, but this one should be fascinating in a "train wreck" sort of way...
The press release for this event was originally published by the R blog Sonoran Alliance here.
My first thought upon seeing this was "whatthehell does Joe Arpaio have to do with education?"*
* = OK, he probably thinks that the fact that there are still people in the county who don't worship the ground he walks on is evidence that there is *too much* education in Arizona, but other than that, he doesn't appear to have any ties to the education system in Arizona.
Of course, Thursday's forum is probably less about "education" and more about "winning the Republican primary". Huppenthal spent most of the last eight years in the state senate working to weaken the state's education system, and nothing about his embrace of Arpaio indicates that he is interested in fixing what he helped to break.
Of course, I'm just a cynic...
BTW - Normally, I don't bother attending R events, but this one should be fascinating in a "train wreck" sort of way...
The two reasons that Democrats will do far better this November than anyone expects
In most mid-term elections, the party in control of the White House loses seats in Congress.
It's a truism in American politics, one that is based in fact - even the mighty Ronald Reagan experienced that in 1982.
As such, it won't be a surprise if/when the Democrats lose some seats in Congress in November's elections.
However, most Republicans are gleefully gloating over their anticipation of an electoral bloodbath this fall, one that could give control of one or both chambers of Congress to the Republicans.
That glee may be a little premature however.
The poll compiler website fivethirtyeight.com published an analysis recently on regional and demographic trends that serve to minimize (but hardly eliminate) the Democrats' vulnerability this fall. While Republican gains seem to be all but certain at this point, their window of opportunity is smaller than what they need in order to gain control of Congress.
However, fivethirtyeight's analysis is all science and demographics and research, and I'm all about the snark today.
There are two other reasons that the Rs are in trouble this fall.
1. Their campaign platform is to oppose anything President Obama and the Democrats proposed while urging a return to the good ol' days of George W. Bush's economic policies (you know, the policies that led to an economic meltdown and a bailout of Wall Street during Bush's watch).
Independent voters aren't happy with Democrats' slow progress at cleaning up the mess left by the Bushies, but they do remember who caused it.
2. The internecine skirmishing among the GOP's leadership as they jockey for increased power in a failing organization, like mobsters knocking each other off when the FBI starts closing in, is distracting them from their task of helping Republicans win elections.
It's still going to be a tough fall, but with a lot of hard work by Democrats and the Republicans' continuing self-immolation - their candidates are running on institutionalizing bigotry (every R in Arizona), protecting large corporations (i.e. - the CD5 R candidates' positions on tax credits/incentives for renewable energy), and grinding the average Americans under their bootheels - the elections this fall present a great opportunity for those candidates and voters who support professional and competent governance.
It's a truism in American politics, one that is based in fact - even the mighty Ronald Reagan experienced that in 1982.
As such, it won't be a surprise if/when the Democrats lose some seats in Congress in November's elections.
However, most Republicans are gleefully gloating over their anticipation of an electoral bloodbath this fall, one that could give control of one or both chambers of Congress to the Republicans.
That glee may be a little premature however.
The poll compiler website fivethirtyeight.com published an analysis recently on regional and demographic trends that serve to minimize (but hardly eliminate) the Democrats' vulnerability this fall. While Republican gains seem to be all but certain at this point, their window of opportunity is smaller than what they need in order to gain control of Congress.
However, fivethirtyeight's analysis is all science and demographics and research, and I'm all about the snark today.
There are two other reasons that the Rs are in trouble this fall.
1. Their campaign platform is to oppose anything President Obama and the Democrats proposed while urging a return to the good ol' days of George W. Bush's economic policies (you know, the policies that led to an economic meltdown and a bailout of Wall Street during Bush's watch).
Independent voters aren't happy with Democrats' slow progress at cleaning up the mess left by the Bushies, but they do remember who caused it.
2. The internecine skirmishing among the GOP's leadership as they jockey for increased power in a failing organization, like mobsters knocking each other off when the FBI starts closing in, is distracting them from their task of helping Republicans win elections.
It's still going to be a tough fall, but with a lot of hard work by Democrats and the Republicans' continuing self-immolation - their candidates are running on institutionalizing bigotry (every R in Arizona), protecting large corporations (i.e. - the CD5 R candidates' positions on tax credits/incentives for renewable energy), and grinding the average Americans under their bootheels - the elections this fall present a great opportunity for those candidates and voters who support professional and competent governance.
So you say you want to be a state supreme court justice?
If you've been a resident and practicing lawyer in Arizona for at least 10 years, this opportunity may be just what you have been waiting for.
Michael Ryan, Justice on the Arizona Supreme Court, is retiring on August 6, and the search is on for a replacement.
The job pays $155K per year, less than most Joe and Jane Schmoe attorneys earn in private practice, but the perks and respect accorded to "Justice Schmoe" far exceed those accorded to "Attorney Schmoe."
The nominating commission is accepting applications (which can be downloaded from this page). After they've reviewed all of the applications, they'll submit three of them to the Governor for her to consider.
According to the AZ Constitution, no more than two of the nominees submitted to the Governor can belong to the same political party.
Traditionally, this process is conducted and completed without (much) consideration to partisan politics, but given that the vacancy has occurred during an election year marked by lies and race-baiting, and the decision falls to *this* governor (less interested in facts and merit than in fostering fear), don't be surprised if she finds someone like the Louisiana JP who refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple late last year.
On the other hand, if you are a bigoted Republican lawyer (and no, not all Republicans or Republican lawyers are bigots) or are a Democratic lawyer who can keep a straight face when surrounded by nativists, you may be interested in filling out and returning an application (available above).
From the posting notice/application:
Have fun!
Michael Ryan, Justice on the Arizona Supreme Court, is retiring on August 6, and the search is on for a replacement.
The job pays $155K per year, less than most Joe and Jane Schmoe attorneys earn in private practice, but the perks and respect accorded to "Justice Schmoe" far exceed those accorded to "Attorney Schmoe."
The nominating commission is accepting applications (which can be downloaded from this page). After they've reviewed all of the applications, they'll submit three of them to the Governor for her to consider.
According to the AZ Constitution, no more than two of the nominees submitted to the Governor can belong to the same political party.
Traditionally, this process is conducted and completed without (much) consideration to partisan politics, but given that the vacancy has occurred during an election year marked by lies and race-baiting, and the decision falls to *this* governor (less interested in facts and merit than in fostering fear), don't be surprised if she finds someone like the Louisiana JP who refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple late last year.
On the other hand, if you are a bigoted Republican lawyer (and no, not all Republicans or Republican lawyers are bigots) or are a Democratic lawyer who can keep a straight face when surrounded by nativists, you may be interested in filling out and returning an application (available above).
From the posting notice/application:
An original completed application, 16 double-sided copies, and one (1) single-sided copy must be received by the Human Resources Division, Administrative Office of the Courts, 1501 W. Washington, Suite 221, Phoenix, AZ, 85007, no later than 3:00 p.m. on August 20, 2010.BTW - Environmentalists may *not* want to apply. That requirement of 18 copies of the application (1 original, 16 double-sided, 1 single-sided), an application packet that is almost 15 pages long, before answers are filled out and other paperwork is added in, mean that each applicant will have to kill multiple trees to even be considered.
Have fun!
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
The CD5 R forum
It wasn't as interesting as the R Senate debates this week because there were fewer direct attacks on other candidates.
Other than that, however, there wasn't any significant difference between the two forums - all of the R candidates are running against brown people and for big business.
"Highlights" in no particular order:
David Schweikert blamed his 2008 loss to Congressman Harry Mitchell on the "toxic" environment for conservative Republicans engendered by the passage of TARP and the financial sector bailouts (on the plus side, even though he probably didn't realize it at the time, the makes Schweikert one of the few Rs to admit that the blame for the economic meltdown falls upon the Republicans' failed economic ideology and upon the Rs' keepers on Wall St.)
Lee Gentry, also a 2008 candidate, attributed his somewhat lackluster showing (706 votes, fewer than his number of signatures on his nominating petitions) to "building momentum" and equated himself to Michael Jordan when he was cut from his high school hoops team but went on to greatness anyway. I kid you not...
Chris Salvino wants to address issues along the U.S./Mexico border by building a high wall topped with razor wire and closely spaced blockhouses all along the border. Sort of a 21st Century Maginot Line, something that didn't work so well for the French in 1940, but...
Susan Bitter Smith blamed Arizona's economic woes on undocumented immigrants, saying that getting rid of them will cure all.
All of them hate Health Care Reform, wanting to repeal the bill passed earlier this year and replace it with tort reform and "the free market." Most of them mentioned tort reform even before they spoke about patients.
Misspeak of the night - Gentry with "we are a nation of native Americans and legal immigrants" and everybody else should take a number. I'm pretty sure Native American groups, some of which are in CD5 (Salt River Pima/Maricopa Indian Community), might have something to say about that one...
In a series of yes/no questions, all of them opposed extending Unemployment Insurance benefits for the long-term unemployed, earmarks, the DREAM Act, tax credits/incentives for solar and renewable energy efforts (unless existing energy sources, and corporations, are protected) and favor a Constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage (except for Gentry, who pledged to fight for LGBT issues if elected. It was the only serious break with Republican orthodoxy in the hour.) One candidate, I'm not sure which, opposed a Constitution amendment, but only because he thought it would devalue Constitutional amendments, not because he supported the rights of freely consenting adults to enter the relationships that they choose.
In short, the hour was spent with each candidate swearing loyalty and obeisance to the main tenets of Republican thought, and swearing that they were more loyal and obedient that the others - brown people bad, President Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Democrats in general bad, and tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy good.
Normally, I can watch one of these things find a candidate who, if not exactly "good", is less bad than the others, but not here. Other than Gentry's support of LGBT issues (and Gentry doesn't have a snowball's chance in Phoenix of making it through the primary), this bunch is reading from the same pages of the "more conservative than thou" playbook, a playbook that doesn't allow for candidates who will do anything for the districts that they are campaigning to "represent."
One interesting thing about the forum was something that *didn't* come up, something that could have afforded the assembled candidates the ability to separate themselves - abortion rights.
I don't know about the others, but Susan Bitter Smith has a pro-choice record.
It's the sort of thing that doesn't play well in Republican primaries. Given that the Scottsdale Republic was the sponsor of the forum, that omission may be a clue as to which candidate they plan on endorsing.
They probably don't want to undercut their preferred choice, before she even has a chance to become the nominee.
Not that I'm a cynic or anything... :)
Other than that, however, there wasn't any significant difference between the two forums - all of the R candidates are running against brown people and for big business.
"Highlights" in no particular order:
David Schweikert blamed his 2008 loss to Congressman Harry Mitchell on the "toxic" environment for conservative Republicans engendered by the passage of TARP and the financial sector bailouts (on the plus side, even though he probably didn't realize it at the time, the makes Schweikert one of the few Rs to admit that the blame for the economic meltdown falls upon the Republicans' failed economic ideology and upon the Rs' keepers on Wall St.)
Lee Gentry, also a 2008 candidate, attributed his somewhat lackluster showing (706 votes, fewer than his number of signatures on his nominating petitions) to "building momentum" and equated himself to Michael Jordan when he was cut from his high school hoops team but went on to greatness anyway. I kid you not...
Chris Salvino wants to address issues along the U.S./Mexico border by building a high wall topped with razor wire and closely spaced blockhouses all along the border. Sort of a 21st Century Maginot Line, something that didn't work so well for the French in 1940, but...
Susan Bitter Smith blamed Arizona's economic woes on undocumented immigrants, saying that getting rid of them will cure all.
All of them hate Health Care Reform, wanting to repeal the bill passed earlier this year and replace it with tort reform and "the free market." Most of them mentioned tort reform even before they spoke about patients.
Misspeak of the night - Gentry with "we are a nation of native Americans and legal immigrants" and everybody else should take a number. I'm pretty sure Native American groups, some of which are in CD5 (Salt River Pima/Maricopa Indian Community), might have something to say about that one...
In a series of yes/no questions, all of them opposed extending Unemployment Insurance benefits for the long-term unemployed, earmarks, the DREAM Act, tax credits/incentives for solar and renewable energy efforts (unless existing energy sources, and corporations, are protected) and favor a Constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage (except for Gentry, who pledged to fight for LGBT issues if elected. It was the only serious break with Republican orthodoxy in the hour.) One candidate, I'm not sure which, opposed a Constitution amendment, but only because he thought it would devalue Constitutional amendments, not because he supported the rights of freely consenting adults to enter the relationships that they choose.
In short, the hour was spent with each candidate swearing loyalty and obeisance to the main tenets of Republican thought, and swearing that they were more loyal and obedient that the others - brown people bad, President Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Democrats in general bad, and tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy good.
Normally, I can watch one of these things find a candidate who, if not exactly "good", is less bad than the others, but not here. Other than Gentry's support of LGBT issues (and Gentry doesn't have a snowball's chance in Phoenix of making it through the primary), this bunch is reading from the same pages of the "more conservative than thou" playbook, a playbook that doesn't allow for candidates who will do anything for the districts that they are campaigning to "represent."
One interesting thing about the forum was something that *didn't* come up, something that could have afforded the assembled candidates the ability to separate themselves - abortion rights.
I don't know about the others, but Susan Bitter Smith has a pro-choice record.
It's the sort of thing that doesn't play well in Republican primaries. Given that the Scottsdale Republic was the sponsor of the forum, that omission may be a clue as to which candidate they plan on endorsing.
They probably don't want to undercut their preferred choice, before she even has a chance to become the nominee.
Not that I'm a cynic or anything... :)
Monday, July 19, 2010
Truth time: I want JD Hayworth to win the R nomination for U.S. Senate
It may seem, to casual readers anyway, that someone as socially liberal and politically supportive of good government would despise self-centered, loud-mouthed blowhards in public office.
And I do. Thoroughly.
However, there are two reasons that I prefer that Hayworth gain the nomination.
1. He is far more beatable in the general election than McCain. To be sure, Hayworth's candidacy has weakened McCain, but he is still a formidable opponent. Hayworth, on the other hand, lost his last election in 2006 to Harry Mitchell. His big mistake then was that he was himself - loud, annoying, and extreme, without an understanding of real issues or the needs of his constituents. All that has changed since then is that Hayworth has gotten louder, more annoying, and moved ever further to the right politically, and still has a tin ear on matters of substance.
2. In the tragic event that Hayworth wins the general, as a writer, I would have a silver lining.
I would get the chance to coin and use the term "filibluster" to describe Hayworth's primary public actions in office.
OK, I won't really be the one coining it (it's already in use to describe the various R moves to block extended UI benefits and more), but still... :)
It doesn't speak well of me, but I'm really not sure which reason is more important to me. :))
And I do. Thoroughly.
However, there are two reasons that I prefer that Hayworth gain the nomination.
1. He is far more beatable in the general election than McCain. To be sure, Hayworth's candidacy has weakened McCain, but he is still a formidable opponent. Hayworth, on the other hand, lost his last election in 2006 to Harry Mitchell. His big mistake then was that he was himself - loud, annoying, and extreme, without an understanding of real issues or the needs of his constituents. All that has changed since then is that Hayworth has gotten louder, more annoying, and moved ever further to the right politically, and still has a tin ear on matters of substance.
2. In the tragic event that Hayworth wins the general, as a writer, I would have a silver lining.
I would get the chance to coin and use the term "filibluster" to describe Hayworth's primary public actions in office.
OK, I won't really be the one coining it (it's already in use to describe the various R moves to block extended UI benefits and more), but still... :)
It doesn't speak well of me, but I'm really not sure which reason is more important to me. :))
Sunday, July 18, 2010
This week's events...
Edit on 7/20 to correct a mistake on the date of one of the events...
Most of this week's politically-focused events are candidate forums, as should be expected as we approach the day when early ballots drop for August's primary.
...The final Clean Elections primary debates will be held this week (statewide list here; legislative races here).
- Tuesday, the Republican candidates for Corporation Commission (Brenda Burns, Barry Wong, and Gary Pierce) will face off on KAET's Horizon at 7 p.m.
-Tuesday, the Republican candidates for the House in LD22 will face off from 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM at ASU Polytechnic Campus, Cooley Ballroom, 7001 E Williams Field Rd., Mesa, AZ 85212
- Wednesday, the Democratic candidates for the Corporation Commission (Renz Jennings, Jorge Luis Garcia, and David Bradley) will have their debate, also at 7 p.m. on KAET's Horizon.
- Wednesday, the Republican candidates for the House in LD30 will face off from 6:00 PM - 7:30 PM at Pima Community College East Campus, 8181 E Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ.
Edit to correct the date of the event below...
- On Thursday, July 29, as previously noted, the candidates (both R and D) will participate in a forum on arts education. The forum will take place from 5:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. at the Musical Instrument Museum, 4725 E. Mayo Blvd. , Phoenix, AZ 85050. Open to the public, registration requested.
The highlight of the week, for me anyway, will be Monday's debate between the Republican candidates in CD5. It will take place at 2 p.m. in the studio of Scottsdale's CityCable11. It isn't open to the public (no room for an audience) but it will be broadcast live with a replay at 9 p.m. In addition, it will also be replayed on July 25 at 2 p.m., 6 p.m., and 9 p.m. Note: I couldn't find any indication that the forum will be broadcast on Tempe's version of CityCable11, though it wouldn't be a surprise if it eventually makes its way to that outlet.
This forum probably won't be as popcorn-riffic as Friday's Republican Senate debate (or, apparently, Saturday's), but look for front-runners (and perennial candidates) Susan Bitter Smith and David Schweikert to spend their time cutting each other down, while the other candidates spend theirs trying to elevate themselves into the top tier by clawing into the top two.
Later...
Most of this week's politically-focused events are candidate forums, as should be expected as we approach the day when early ballots drop for August's primary.
...The final Clean Elections primary debates will be held this week (statewide list here; legislative races here).
- Tuesday, the Republican candidates for Corporation Commission (Brenda Burns, Barry Wong, and Gary Pierce) will face off on KAET's Horizon at 7 p.m.
-Tuesday, the Republican candidates for the House in LD22 will face off from 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM at ASU Polytechnic Campus, Cooley Ballroom, 7001 E Williams Field Rd., Mesa, AZ 85212
- Wednesday, the Democratic candidates for the Corporation Commission (Renz Jennings, Jorge Luis Garcia, and David Bradley) will have their debate, also at 7 p.m. on KAET's Horizon.
- Wednesday, the Republican candidates for the House in LD30 will face off from 6:00 PM - 7:30 PM at Pima Community College East Campus, 8181 E Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ.
Edit to correct the date of the event below...
- On Thursday, July 29, as previously noted, the candidates (both R and D) will participate in a forum on arts education. The forum will take place from 5:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. at the Musical Instrument Museum, 4725 E. Mayo Blvd. , Phoenix, AZ 85050. Open to the public, registration requested.
The highlight of the week, for me anyway, will be Monday's debate between the Republican candidates in CD5. It will take place at 2 p.m. in the studio of Scottsdale's CityCable11. It isn't open to the public (no room for an audience) but it will be broadcast live with a replay at 9 p.m. In addition, it will also be replayed on July 25 at 2 p.m., 6 p.m., and 9 p.m. Note: I couldn't find any indication that the forum will be broadcast on Tempe's version of CityCable11, though it wouldn't be a surprise if it eventually makes its way to that outlet.
This forum probably won't be as popcorn-riffic as Friday's Republican Senate debate (or, apparently, Saturday's), but look for front-runners (and perennial candidates) Susan Bitter Smith and David Schweikert to spend their time cutting each other down, while the other candidates spend theirs trying to elevate themselves into the top tier by clawing into the top two.
Later...
Army suicides up; VA outreach down. Harry Mitchell wants answers
This week, from the Stripes Central blog at Stars and Stripes -
In his opening statement, Mitchell questioned why the VA had discontinued successful public announcements, especially during a period of rising need.
He called for increased, not reduced, efforts to reach out to veterans suffering from long-term effects of their service.
From a press release -
More soldiers killed themselves last month than any other month on record. There were 21 active-duty and 11 reserve soldier suicides in June, including seven in Iraq or Afghanistan, the Army reported on Thursday.On Wednesday, Arizona Congressman Harry Mitchell chaired a hearing of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee looking into the efforts of the Veterans Administration to reach out to veterans suffering from PTSD and other service-related disorders. (Air Force Times coverage here)
The news came just weeks after Gen. Peter Chiarelli told Congress that the Army was encouraged by a 30 percent drop in suicides among active-duty soldiers this year compared to last year at this time. Although he said there was more to do, he thought the decrease showed the Army's prevention efforts were working.
But this latest data reflects more of the same. Through the first six months of 2009, 88 active-duty soldiers committed suicide. For this year, that number is 80. The trend is most troubling among reserve component soldiers; those deaths jumped from 42 to 65.
In his opening statement, Mitchell questioned why the VA had discontinued successful public announcements, especially during a period of rising need.
He called for increased, not reduced, efforts to reach out to veterans suffering from long-term effects of their service.
From a press release -
The VA can't just sit back and wait for veterans to come to them. They need to go to the veterans."
Friday, July 16, 2010
The Republican Senate Debate
Earlier this evening, the three candidates for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate appeared at a forum televised on Phoenix channel 3 (KTVK). (Video of tonight's forum, as well as last week's Democratic forum, can be found here)
I wasn't going to write about it as I figure the R bloggers in AZ will do that (figure Sonoran Alliance will annoint Hayworth the hands-down winner, Political Mafioso will do the same for McCain, and somebody will declare Deakin to be the "future of the Republican Party" or some such tripe), but I'm sitting through one of the ugliest innings that I have ever seen as the DBacks mail it in against the Padres,
As such, I have the time for a few comments.
First, the summary:
Candidate 1: You support amnesty/earmarks/big government! I'm the *real* conservative!
Candidate 2: I'm rubber and you're glue! Everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you!
Candidate 3: At least you both agree with me on that.
Seriously, this was less a candidate forum and more a remake of an 80s slasher flick - they were cutting at each other from the word go. Hayworth and McCain spent no time telling what they would do to serve Arizona and its residents. Neither did Deakin, but he was almost an afterthought as McCain and Hayworth spent the hour launching haymakers at each other.
McCain and Hayworth made it obvious from the beginning that participating in the forum wasn't one of the ir priorities.
Frequently, the answers they gave had very little or nothing to do with the questions asked and a lot to do with criticizing the other.
Hayworth dropped names, citing endorsements from Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association, and other nativist individuals and organizations.
McCain didn't mention people so much as run down the list of big corporations that he will aid if he is re-elected. (trolling for campaign cash?)
Deakin tended vacillate between "stop Obama" and "restore constitutional government!" He may have dropped some names, but by the time the third question was asked I was tuning out the responses. I kept an eye on the screen waiting/hoping that one of the candidates would jump across the lectern trying to throttle one of the others.
It didn't happen, but I kept hoping for a popcorn moment. :))
Anyway, the big winner(s) of Friday's debate had to be the Democratic candidates.
They were far from perfect during their debate, but they focused on the issues facing the state and the country while avoiding personal attacks.
Whichever one is the eventual nominee can point to their performance and compare it to the Republican nominee's.
And no matter who the eventual nominees are, the D will come off as the candidate who is more professional, mature, and concerned for Arizona.
I wasn't going to write about it as I figure the R bloggers in AZ will do that (figure Sonoran Alliance will annoint Hayworth the hands-down winner, Political Mafioso will do the same for McCain, and somebody will declare Deakin to be the "future of the Republican Party" or some such tripe), but I'm sitting through one of the ugliest innings that I have ever seen as the DBacks mail it in against the Padres,
As such, I have the time for a few comments.
First, the summary:
Candidate 1: You support amnesty/earmarks/big government! I'm the *real* conservative!
Candidate 2: I'm rubber and you're glue! Everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you!
Candidate 3: At least you both agree with me on that.
Seriously, this was less a candidate forum and more a remake of an 80s slasher flick - they were cutting at each other from the word go. Hayworth and McCain spent no time telling what they would do to serve Arizona and its residents. Neither did Deakin, but he was almost an afterthought as McCain and Hayworth spent the hour launching haymakers at each other.
McCain and Hayworth made it obvious from the beginning that participating in the forum wasn't one of the ir priorities.
Frequently, the answers they gave had very little or nothing to do with the questions asked and a lot to do with criticizing the other.
Hayworth dropped names, citing endorsements from Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association, and other nativist individuals and organizations.
McCain didn't mention people so much as run down the list of big corporations that he will aid if he is re-elected. (trolling for campaign cash?)
Deakin tended vacillate between "stop Obama" and "restore constitutional government!" He may have dropped some names, but by the time the third question was asked I was tuning out the responses. I kept an eye on the screen waiting/hoping that one of the candidates would jump across the lectern trying to throttle one of the others.
It didn't happen, but I kept hoping for a popcorn moment. :))
Anyway, the big winner(s) of Friday's debate had to be the Democratic candidates.
They were far from perfect during their debate, but they focused on the issues facing the state and the country while avoiding personal attacks.
Whichever one is the eventual nominee can point to their performance and compare it to the Republican nominee's.
And no matter who the eventual nominees are, the D will come off as the candidate who is more professional, mature, and concerned for Arizona.
Arts Education forum for State Superintendent candidates
The Arizona Citizens for the Arts and the Arizona Alliance for Arts Education will be presenting a forum with/for all five candidates for State Superintendent of Public Education (Ds: Penny Kotterman and Jason Williams; Rs: Beth Price, Margaret Dugan, and John Huppenthal) .
From the announcement -
Time: 5:30p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
Place: Musical Instrument Museum
4725 E. Mayo Blvd.
Phoenix, AZ 85050
The forum is free and open to the public. Register here.
According to this AZCentral.com piece, as of yesterday, all five candidates have pledged to be there, though that is subject to change without notice.
From the announcement -
All Candidates for the post have been invited to the event where they will answer a series of questions related to the Arizona Arts Standards, development of arts education curriculum for students and their commitment to provide access to quality arts education in Arizona schools.Date: Thursday, July 29, 2010
Time: 5:30p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
Place: Musical Instrument Museum
4725 E. Mayo Blvd.
Phoenix, AZ 85050
The forum is free and open to the public. Register here.
According to this AZCentral.com piece, as of yesterday, all five candidates have pledged to be there, though that is subject to change without notice.
Meet and greet LD1 candidates to discuss education issues
Posting, with permission, an email from a regular reader in Sedona Karen McClelland, a Sedona Oak Creek School Board member -
ATTENTION ALL EDUCATION ADVOCATESLater...
DISCUSS EDUCATION ISSUES WITH ALL THE STATE LEGISLATIVE CANDIDATES
The budget news for Arizona for next year is still bleak. All of our local schools have reduced budgets for next year. Most laid off staff members and cut programs. We are hearing that we may face budgets cuts during the upcoming school year even before the budget for 2011-2012 is discussed.
It is more vital than ever that we let our state legislature know that we view Education as a TOP PRIORITY for the state. preserving and improving our public education system is vital for the future of Arizona's economy. We need to be sure sure that ALL our elected officials view education as an essential INVESTMENT in our future and NOT as an expense.
Please come and let all the candidates for State Legislature and State Senate in LD1 hear your concerns.
I am hosting informal houseparties for each candidate. These are not fundraising events and I hope that Republicans, Democrats, parents, community members, teacher and board members attend each meeting. The meetings will be at my home in the Village of Oak Creek, Sedona .
I do need RSVPs.
Please call me at 284-0001 or email me at klm@esedona.net and I will send you the directions.
The meeting dates are:
Monday, July 26 4 p.m. Lindsay Bell, Democratic Candidate for State Legislature
Wednesday, August 11 4 p.m. Noel Campbell. Republican Candidate for State Legislature
Wednesday, August 18 4 p.m. Karen Fann . Republican Candidate for State Legislature
Thursday, August 26 4p.m. Senator Steve Pierce, Republican Candidate for State Senate
Rep. Andy Tobin , Republican candidate for State Legislature will also be here in mid August and
Bob Donahue, Democratic Candidate for State Senate will be here the first week in September. We are still finalizing dates.
Karen McClelland, Vice-President Sedona Oak Creek School Board
Yavapai County Director, Arizona School Board Association
**and Candidate for re-election to Sedona Oak Creek School Board for a third term!**
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)