Welcome to everyone, particularly those who have been referred here by the AZ Democratic Party's website.
When I wrote the original post about the LD18 candidate forum on Thursday, I was very tired, and the post reads like that.
Therefore, the purpose of this post is to provide a more readable summary. If you are interested in the raw report of the forum, the original post is here.
To regular readers of this blog - no new material is covered in this post.
__________________________________
On Thursday evening, approximately 300 interested residents met with Tammie Pursley (D) and Mark Anderson (R), 2 of the candidates for LD18 State Representative. Russell Pearce (R), the third candidate, was invited and confirmed his attendance with the organizers, Mesa ACORN, but was a last-minute no-show.
The format of the forum, held in the auditorium at EVIT in Mesa, was unusual for this type of event. The audience was responsible for asking all of the questions.
During their opening statements, both candidates stressed their committment to education issues. Mr. Anderson cited his experience in the legislature as Chair of the House K-12 Education Committee and Mrs. Pursley cited her own experience as a career public educator at the junior high and community college levels.
Mr. Anderson's (referred to as 'MA' after this) signature phrase from his opening statement was that the theme of his campaign is "the proper role of government."
Mrs. Pursley's ('TP' after this) signature phrase was "public education is the bedrock of our democracy."
During the evening, the audience's questions covered a variety of topics, but the most common area of interest was education and children's services.
TP used these questions to express her support for the public education system, and for Governor Napolitano's recent proposals to reduce the Arizona's high dropout rate.
She also advocated fully and equitably funding the school systems and programs such as KidsCare.
MA used the opportunity to tout his efforts to create and nurture the state's charter and religious schools, as well as school choice programs. In addition, he supports a preventative approach to addressing many of the social problems in the state, such as faith-based marriage training and character education.
On other issues -
...Both candidates displayed a strong willingness to meet with community groups to listen to and address their concerns. Rep. Anderson showed off his high school Spanish to the strongly Hispanic audience; Mrs. Pursley told of her efforts to become bilingual.
...The issue of the spousal rape bill was brought up early on in the forum. Mr. Anderson said that he was not familiar with the bill. Mrs. Pursley stated that she would have sponsored it.
[Note: This is an area of interest to many people, so let me be clear - One of the legislators (Mark Anderson) most responsible for killing the bill in committee last year publicly denied knowledge of it. Fortunately, it was reintroduced and passed during the most recent session.]
[Note2 - My own district's (LD17) Laura Knaperek was also one of the gang of four that killed the bill last year. Arrggghhhh!]
...Also of some significance, though I didn't realize at the time, were the candidates' responses when asked if they supported the initiative question on the November ballot to raise Arizona's minimum wage.
TP unhesitatingly expressed absolute support for it.
MA hemmed and hawed somewhat, but after saying that he didn't think it would accomplish much, stated that he would vote for it.
The audience was enthusiastic but courteous. Other than a couple of pointed questions directed at Rep. Anderson, the crowd was respectful of both candidates, applauding when appropriate.
The applause was a little louder and a little longer for Tammie Pursley, though. :)
The candidates were also courteous, toward each other and toward the audience, though Tammie Pursley did score points with the audience by reminding people of Russell Pearce's absence.
Overall, the forum was informative and entertaining, and I hope that after the primary there is another forum, attended by all candidates.
Thanks to everyone who read this. Any comments/criticisms are welcome, though please keep them civil.
Good night everyone!
Saturday, August 26, 2006
Harry Mitchell weighs in on Prop 401
I knew he wasn't perfect, and now I have proof.
We disagree on Prop 401, a Scottsdale-only referendum concerning sexually-oriented businesses.
On Thursday, he released a statement supporting the passage of Prop 401, saying that it would protect "the community's high quality of life. " He went on to praise Mayor Mary Manross' leadership on the issue.
Harry and I agree on most issues, but not this one.
I believe that the 2 strip clubs that were targeted by the Scottsdale City Council's ordinance have been good business citizens in the city for more than 20 years each. There have been few complaints about the businesses, and the few that have been lodged are not out of the realm of 'normal' for any bar or nightclub. The ordinance just created conflict where none existed before.
I cannot in good conscience support that. And on this one, my opinion may actually be more important than Harry's -
I'm a registered voter in Scottsdale; he's a voter in Tempe. :))
However, I'm not a 'one-issue' voter, and if I was, this would NOT be it. Not even close.
Trust me, Harry Mitchell still has my wholehearted support for the CD5 Congressional seat.
In fact, in a contrarian way, I like his position, even though I disagree with it.
Because watching JD Hayworth try to spin this into an attack on Harry while he himself takes the same position is going to be all kinds of perversely enjoyable entertainment, sort of like watching the contortionist in a cheap carnival sideshow.
In other news....
(From the Phoenix Business Journal) A bipartisan group of border governors, including our own Governor Napolitano, has called on Congressional leaders to pass "comprehensive [immigration] reform and address this critical issue before Congress adjourns for the year."
Fat chance of that with ideologues like JD Hayworth campaigning on the issue. They don't want to see the issue resolved or even just simmered down before the general election, and can be expected to obstruct any attempts to move forward on it.
...Also in the Business Journal is an article chronicling the Arizona Democratic Party's criticisms of ethical lapses in the State Mine Inspector's office and of Secretary of State Jan Brewer's appearance in "Don't forget your ID when going to vote" TV ads, saying that she is using the spots as thinly-veiled campaign ads. The link to the ADP's press release is here.
...In lighter but louder news, on October 6th and 7th Governor Napolitano will serve as co-grand marshal of the Legends Race at Manzanita with "Fred Ferguson, a longtime Valley resident who won the Medal of Honor during the Vietnam War."
This is just a guess, but I'm betting that this is a campaign-oriented appearance. Governor Napolitano has a wide variety of interests, but I've never seen an indication that she's a "floor it and turn left" fan.
On the other hand, after years of navigating the chaos created by the amateurs on the streets and highways of Arizona, maybe she just enjoys watching the pros do it right. :))
G'night!
We disagree on Prop 401, a Scottsdale-only referendum concerning sexually-oriented businesses.
On Thursday, he released a statement supporting the passage of Prop 401, saying that it would protect "the community's high quality of life. " He went on to praise Mayor Mary Manross' leadership on the issue.
Harry and I agree on most issues, but not this one.
I believe that the 2 strip clubs that were targeted by the Scottsdale City Council's ordinance have been good business citizens in the city for more than 20 years each. There have been few complaints about the businesses, and the few that have been lodged are not out of the realm of 'normal' for any bar or nightclub. The ordinance just created conflict where none existed before.
I cannot in good conscience support that. And on this one, my opinion may actually be more important than Harry's -
I'm a registered voter in Scottsdale; he's a voter in Tempe. :))
However, I'm not a 'one-issue' voter, and if I was, this would NOT be it. Not even close.
Trust me, Harry Mitchell still has my wholehearted support for the CD5 Congressional seat.
In fact, in a contrarian way, I like his position, even though I disagree with it.
Because watching JD Hayworth try to spin this into an attack on Harry while he himself takes the same position is going to be all kinds of perversely enjoyable entertainment, sort of like watching the contortionist in a cheap carnival sideshow.
In other news....
(From the Phoenix Business Journal) A bipartisan group of border governors, including our own Governor Napolitano, has called on Congressional leaders to pass "comprehensive [immigration] reform and address this critical issue before Congress adjourns for the year."
Fat chance of that with ideologues like JD Hayworth campaigning on the issue. They don't want to see the issue resolved or even just simmered down before the general election, and can be expected to obstruct any attempts to move forward on it.
...Also in the Business Journal is an article chronicling the Arizona Democratic Party's criticisms of ethical lapses in the State Mine Inspector's office and of Secretary of State Jan Brewer's appearance in "Don't forget your ID when going to vote" TV ads, saying that she is using the spots as thinly-veiled campaign ads. The link to the ADP's press release is here.
...In lighter but louder news, on October 6th and 7th Governor Napolitano will serve as co-grand marshal of the Legends Race at Manzanita with "Fred Ferguson, a longtime Valley resident who won the Medal of Honor during the Vietnam War."
This is just a guess, but I'm betting that this is a campaign-oriented appearance. Governor Napolitano has a wide variety of interests, but I've never seen an indication that she's a "floor it and turn left" fan.
On the other hand, after years of navigating the chaos created by the amateurs on the streets and highways of Arizona, maybe she just enjoys watching the pros do it right. :))
G'night!
Thursday, August 24, 2006
Summary of Tonight's LD18 Forum
The Candidate Forum and Town Hall with the candidates for LD18 State Representative sponsored by Mesa ACORN was held tonight in the auditorium at EVIT.
All three candidates, Tammie Pursley, Mark Anderson, and Russell Pearce were invited and confirmed that they would intend, but Russell Pearce was a no-show.
His absence was on short notice, as the Forum was supposed to start at 7, but the organizers held off until they were sure he wasn't going to show up. Things got rolling around 7:25.
Incumbent State Rep Mark Anderson (R) started off the proceedings with his opening statement.
He thanked the audience for their attendance, noting the great turnout for a Thursday night in August. [Note: I don't know the exact number, but the turnout was very good. I'll guess 300 or so people showed up, easily making it the best attended of the 3 forums that I've been to this summer.]
He then went over his bio, his experience in the legislature, and noted that he is actually a neighbor of Tammie's.
As for his campaign, he stated that education was the big issue of his campaign, and that the "proper role of government" was the theme of it.
Tammie Pursley (D) opened her remarks by observing that Russell Pearce's absence was one of the reason's she is running - he's been in office so long that he doesn't bother to show up to speak to and listen to his constituents. [Big round of applause at this.]
She went on to cover a number of topics -
She, and her campaign, is all about "the politics of inclusion, not exclusion"..."building bridges"..."public education is the bedrock of our democracy."
She also believes that Arizona taxpayers should not "shoulder the burden" of a federal duty.
She received a rousing round of applause at the end of her remarks.
This forum was set up a little differently than the others that I have attended so far this election season. All of the questions tonight were from the audience.
[Note: this was faster paced than I am used to. The questions are all paraphrased, and if I haven't got the gist of the question correct, I apologize. If you were there, let me know about any errors in the comments section and I will be happy to correct any mistakes.]
The first question asked if the candidates supported Clean Elections.
Tammie Pursley (TP): Yes, absolutely. [Note: she is running as a Clean Elections candidate.]
Mark Anderson (MA): He's "not a big fan" of the Clean Elections system, and doesn't feel that it has made much of a difference. However, so long as it is the law, that's fine with him. [Not a Clean Elections candidate. Neither is Russell Pearce.]
The second question concerned the spousal rape bill that passed in the lege this past session [ it made spousal rape the same as other rapes, and imposed the same penalty.]
MA - He stated that he was "not familiar with the bill."
TP - She would have sponsored it.
[I was going to hold personal commentary until the end of the post, but on this one, I have to say something now. HE WAS PLAYING DUMB!! He knew all about it, since he tried to kill it the first time it came around in 2005. See the comment in the "Reminder" post I wrote before the forum.]
The 3rd question asked that if the candidates were elected if he/she would be willing to meet with a group of citizens, mostly Latino, to discuss issues of importance to the community.
MA - Yes.
TP - Absolutely.
The 4th question asked the candidates how they voted on the recent proposal in Mesa that sought to institute a property tax there.
TP - Yes, because it would have benefitted the schools.
MA - No, he voted for increasing the sales tax. He thought that was a good compromise.
The 5th question concerned what the candidates would do to ensure health coverage for children.
TP - Keep programs such as KidsCare adequately funded and work with community groups to support educational outreach efforts.
MA - Agreed with Tammie.
The 6th question was directed to Rep. Anderson and was about a constituent's concerns over inadequate streetlights in the area of University and Stapley.
MA - Stated that this was a city issue, and that the concerned constituent should contact the City or his City Council member. He stated that if the constituent were to contact his office about this and ask him to contact the city, he would be happy to help.
The 7th question asked what the candidates would do to raise the abysmally low rankings of AZ in most children- and quality of life-oriented areas.
TP - Her priorities would be to provide equitable funding for public schools and full funding for programs like KidsCare.
MA - He talked about how he thought the priority should be to provide help before the problems arise, not after. He also spoke about he has sponsored efforts and bills to provide faith-based marriage and relationship training and supports character education.
The 8th question was directed at Rep. Anderson. The audience member asked what improvements to K-12 education did he spearhead.
MA - He spoke about the bill that he sponsored to give more money to the education of gifted students and that he supports the "Teach for America" program which places some of the best and brightest college grads in teaching positions in low-income schools.
The 9th question asked Rep. Anderson to justify state funding going to private and religious schools.
MA - He cited the bill he sponsored in 1997 that basically set up the current AZ system of open enrollment across public, private, religious, and charter schools.
TP - Though the question was not asked of her, Mrs. Pursley had a response. She read a quote from a school choice group that stated that "safe and effective" charter and private schools were a better option than "chronically underperforming" public schools.
She noted that public schools would be safe and effective if they were adequately funded.
#10 was less of a question than a statement about Rep. Pearce's absence. The moderator advised the candidates to not respond since they could not know why he chose not to appear.
#11 asked the candidates what they would do to help decrease the dropout rate in Mesa's schools.
TP - Would drop the requirement that students pass the AIMS test to graduate. Too many students believe that they don't have a chance to pass it, so they stop caring about school.
In addition, she expressed support for the Governor's recently-announced proposal to raise the dropout age.
MA - Advocates making school curriculum "more exciting, more relevant." He spoke about EVIT, saying that his children had taken classes there.
He does not support the Governor's proposed increase in the dropout age. He doesn't think that will stop anyone interested in dropping out.
#12 was basically the same question.
#13 was directed at Rep. Anderson and asked him how he, totally removed from classrooms, could make education policy.
MA - He spoke about how he has children in school and he meets with teachers when he is invited to do so. He also mentioned the annual tours of school that legislators go on. During this response, he mentioned that he supports the AIMS test graduation requirement as a motivational tool.
TP - though not directed at her, she also had a response. She advised that this was one of the reasons she is running, to add the perspective of someone who actually works in public schools to the policy-making process. She added that, if she can work it out with the school district, she would like to continue as a teacher.
#14 asked about the ELL funding issue.
MA - He rambled a little, but to be fair, during his response I dropped something and missed most of his answer while picking it up.
TP - This is a big issue with her, she wants to ensure that money and resources actually get to the classrooms.
[Note: neither one was aware of the court ruling today that vacated the lower court's ruling and kicked the whole thing back to the lower court. I would have commented at the forum, but I didn't know the details and didn't feel comfortable bringing it up without some more details.]
#15 concerned the candidates' opinions on the pay day loan businesses that have swamped Mesa.
Both candidates dislike them, strongly.
#16 asked the candidates what they thought of the Latino community and culture.
TP - Embraces the culture and is trying to become bilingual.
MA - Considers it a positive part of Arizona's culture. Spoke a little Spanish left over from his high school days. [It wasn't much, but it was WAY more than my three words - "Si", "Salma", and "Hayek". OK, it's not the greatest joke, but it's getting late. :) ]
#17 asked if the candidates supported raising the minimum wage.
TP - Absolutely supports it.
MA - He hemmed and hawed a little, but stated that he is going to vote for it.
#18 was a question that I really didn't get too much of. It had something to do with the changing demographics in the district, the conflicts between groups caused by that fact, and what would the candidates do to help resolve the conflicts.
MA - Would work with community groups and organizations to help any way that he can.
TP - Agreed with MA, would help introduce and mediate between groups with conflicts.
#19 was spoken rapidly and softly and I missed most of it, but it concerned state employees and asked if the candidates would support the union's desire to meet and confer regarding a wage and compensation package.
MA - not sure. Hedged a lot here.
TP - Meet and confer is very important, and she supports that.
Closings were fairly simple.
Rep. Anderson thanked everyone for coming out, as did Tammie Pursley, who pointedly thanked the audience for taking the time to see the "two of us" in reference to the absence of Russell Pearce.
Personal observations section -
I am not a resident of LD18, so my opinion isn't worth much here, but if I did live in the district, I would wholeheartedly support Tammie Pursley. I already knew that, having met her at the voter registration booth at the Tempe fireworks on the 4th of July. However, I did expect that I would be able to write a 'lesser of two evils' post about Pearce and Anderson.
And when Russell Pearce didn't show up, I sort of assumed that Mark Anderson would be that lesser of two evils by default.
However, while he put a pleasant smile to it, he is very much an ideological hard-liner. His blanket support of cutting taxes and funnelling money to private business while decreasing appropriations for government services totally disqualifies him for elected office, imo.
In addition, his dumb act in response to the spousal rape bill question was repulsive. Even if he didn't want to talk about it, his way of avoiding the issue was sleazy.
The forum was less polished than the last one I went to (not so good), but because of the audience-propelled topics of discussion, it was also a lot more free-wheeling (very good.)
The crowd was very much into things, but courteously so. They would applaud enthusiastically when one of the candidates made a point that they agreed with and respectfully when they did not, with no booing or heckling. A couple of the questions were nearly as much "attack" as "question", but they did not cross the line the moderator had established. Though the moderator did advise the audience that the line had been straddled and even smudged a little. :)
The crowd had a strong Hispanic representation (in keeping with the demographics of the district) and {TOTAL SPECULATION ALERT!} I think that may have contributed to Mr. Pearce's decision to pass on the forum.
I mean, why spend a couple of hours in a room full of people that he has demonized when he could go up the road and spend the time with JD Hayworth?
Anyway, it was a lot of fun, and I hope that after the primary next month and before the general election there is another forum, perhaps one that includes the State Senate candidates.
Good night!
All three candidates, Tammie Pursley, Mark Anderson, and Russell Pearce were invited and confirmed that they would intend, but Russell Pearce was a no-show.
His absence was on short notice, as the Forum was supposed to start at 7, but the organizers held off until they were sure he wasn't going to show up. Things got rolling around 7:25.
Incumbent State Rep Mark Anderson (R) started off the proceedings with his opening statement.
He thanked the audience for their attendance, noting the great turnout for a Thursday night in August. [Note: I don't know the exact number, but the turnout was very good. I'll guess 300 or so people showed up, easily making it the best attended of the 3 forums that I've been to this summer.]
He then went over his bio, his experience in the legislature, and noted that he is actually a neighbor of Tammie's.
As for his campaign, he stated that education was the big issue of his campaign, and that the "proper role of government" was the theme of it.
Tammie Pursley (D) opened her remarks by observing that Russell Pearce's absence was one of the reason's she is running - he's been in office so long that he doesn't bother to show up to speak to and listen to his constituents. [Big round of applause at this.]
She went on to cover a number of topics -
She, and her campaign, is all about "the politics of inclusion, not exclusion"..."building bridges"..."public education is the bedrock of our democracy."
She also believes that Arizona taxpayers should not "shoulder the burden" of a federal duty.
She received a rousing round of applause at the end of her remarks.
This forum was set up a little differently than the others that I have attended so far this election season. All of the questions tonight were from the audience.
[Note: this was faster paced than I am used to. The questions are all paraphrased, and if I haven't got the gist of the question correct, I apologize. If you were there, let me know about any errors in the comments section and I will be happy to correct any mistakes.]
The first question asked if the candidates supported Clean Elections.
Tammie Pursley (TP): Yes, absolutely. [Note: she is running as a Clean Elections candidate.]
Mark Anderson (MA): He's "not a big fan" of the Clean Elections system, and doesn't feel that it has made much of a difference. However, so long as it is the law, that's fine with him. [Not a Clean Elections candidate. Neither is Russell Pearce.]
The second question concerned the spousal rape bill that passed in the lege this past session [ it made spousal rape the same as other rapes, and imposed the same penalty.]
MA - He stated that he was "not familiar with the bill."
TP - She would have sponsored it.
[I was going to hold personal commentary until the end of the post, but on this one, I have to say something now. HE WAS PLAYING DUMB!! He knew all about it, since he tried to kill it the first time it came around in 2005. See the comment in the "Reminder" post I wrote before the forum.]
The 3rd question asked that if the candidates were elected if he/she would be willing to meet with a group of citizens, mostly Latino, to discuss issues of importance to the community.
MA - Yes.
TP - Absolutely.
The 4th question asked the candidates how they voted on the recent proposal in Mesa that sought to institute a property tax there.
TP - Yes, because it would have benefitted the schools.
MA - No, he voted for increasing the sales tax. He thought that was a good compromise.
The 5th question concerned what the candidates would do to ensure health coverage for children.
TP - Keep programs such as KidsCare adequately funded and work with community groups to support educational outreach efforts.
MA - Agreed with Tammie.
The 6th question was directed to Rep. Anderson and was about a constituent's concerns over inadequate streetlights in the area of University and Stapley.
MA - Stated that this was a city issue, and that the concerned constituent should contact the City or his City Council member. He stated that if the constituent were to contact his office about this and ask him to contact the city, he would be happy to help.
The 7th question asked what the candidates would do to raise the abysmally low rankings of AZ in most children- and quality of life-oriented areas.
TP - Her priorities would be to provide equitable funding for public schools and full funding for programs like KidsCare.
MA - He talked about how he thought the priority should be to provide help before the problems arise, not after. He also spoke about he has sponsored efforts and bills to provide faith-based marriage and relationship training and supports character education.
The 8th question was directed at Rep. Anderson. The audience member asked what improvements to K-12 education did he spearhead.
MA - He spoke about the bill that he sponsored to give more money to the education of gifted students and that he supports the "Teach for America" program which places some of the best and brightest college grads in teaching positions in low-income schools.
The 9th question asked Rep. Anderson to justify state funding going to private and religious schools.
MA - He cited the bill he sponsored in 1997 that basically set up the current AZ system of open enrollment across public, private, religious, and charter schools.
TP - Though the question was not asked of her, Mrs. Pursley had a response. She read a quote from a school choice group that stated that "safe and effective" charter and private schools were a better option than "chronically underperforming" public schools.
She noted that public schools would be safe and effective if they were adequately funded.
#10 was less of a question than a statement about Rep. Pearce's absence. The moderator advised the candidates to not respond since they could not know why he chose not to appear.
#11 asked the candidates what they would do to help decrease the dropout rate in Mesa's schools.
TP - Would drop the requirement that students pass the AIMS test to graduate. Too many students believe that they don't have a chance to pass it, so they stop caring about school.
In addition, she expressed support for the Governor's recently-announced proposal to raise the dropout age.
MA - Advocates making school curriculum "more exciting, more relevant." He spoke about EVIT, saying that his children had taken classes there.
He does not support the Governor's proposed increase in the dropout age. He doesn't think that will stop anyone interested in dropping out.
#12 was basically the same question.
#13 was directed at Rep. Anderson and asked him how he, totally removed from classrooms, could make education policy.
MA - He spoke about how he has children in school and he meets with teachers when he is invited to do so. He also mentioned the annual tours of school that legislators go on. During this response, he mentioned that he supports the AIMS test graduation requirement as a motivational tool.
TP - though not directed at her, she also had a response. She advised that this was one of the reasons she is running, to add the perspective of someone who actually works in public schools to the policy-making process. She added that, if she can work it out with the school district, she would like to continue as a teacher.
#14 asked about the ELL funding issue.
MA - He rambled a little, but to be fair, during his response I dropped something and missed most of his answer while picking it up.
TP - This is a big issue with her, she wants to ensure that money and resources actually get to the classrooms.
[Note: neither one was aware of the court ruling today that vacated the lower court's ruling and kicked the whole thing back to the lower court. I would have commented at the forum, but I didn't know the details and didn't feel comfortable bringing it up without some more details.]
#15 concerned the candidates' opinions on the pay day loan businesses that have swamped Mesa.
Both candidates dislike them, strongly.
#16 asked the candidates what they thought of the Latino community and culture.
TP - Embraces the culture and is trying to become bilingual.
MA - Considers it a positive part of Arizona's culture. Spoke a little Spanish left over from his high school days. [It wasn't much, but it was WAY more than my three words - "Si", "Salma", and "Hayek". OK, it's not the greatest joke, but it's getting late. :) ]
#17 asked if the candidates supported raising the minimum wage.
TP - Absolutely supports it.
MA - He hemmed and hawed a little, but stated that he is going to vote for it.
#18 was a question that I really didn't get too much of. It had something to do with the changing demographics in the district, the conflicts between groups caused by that fact, and what would the candidates do to help resolve the conflicts.
MA - Would work with community groups and organizations to help any way that he can.
TP - Agreed with MA, would help introduce and mediate between groups with conflicts.
#19 was spoken rapidly and softly and I missed most of it, but it concerned state employees and asked if the candidates would support the union's desire to meet and confer regarding a wage and compensation package.
MA - not sure. Hedged a lot here.
TP - Meet and confer is very important, and she supports that.
Closings were fairly simple.
Rep. Anderson thanked everyone for coming out, as did Tammie Pursley, who pointedly thanked the audience for taking the time to see the "two of us" in reference to the absence of Russell Pearce.
Personal observations section -
I am not a resident of LD18, so my opinion isn't worth much here, but if I did live in the district, I would wholeheartedly support Tammie Pursley. I already knew that, having met her at the voter registration booth at the Tempe fireworks on the 4th of July. However, I did expect that I would be able to write a 'lesser of two evils' post about Pearce and Anderson.
And when Russell Pearce didn't show up, I sort of assumed that Mark Anderson would be that lesser of two evils by default.
However, while he put a pleasant smile to it, he is very much an ideological hard-liner. His blanket support of cutting taxes and funnelling money to private business while decreasing appropriations for government services totally disqualifies him for elected office, imo.
In addition, his dumb act in response to the spousal rape bill question was repulsive. Even if he didn't want to talk about it, his way of avoiding the issue was sleazy.
The forum was less polished than the last one I went to (not so good), but because of the audience-propelled topics of discussion, it was also a lot more free-wheeling (very good.)
The crowd was very much into things, but courteously so. They would applaud enthusiastically when one of the candidates made a point that they agreed with and respectfully when they did not, with no booing or heckling. A couple of the questions were nearly as much "attack" as "question", but they did not cross the line the moderator had established. Though the moderator did advise the audience that the line had been straddled and even smudged a little. :)
The crowd had a strong Hispanic representation (in keeping with the demographics of the district) and {TOTAL SPECULATION ALERT!} I think that may have contributed to Mr. Pearce's decision to pass on the forum.
I mean, why spend a couple of hours in a room full of people that he has demonized when he could go up the road and spend the time with JD Hayworth?
Anyway, it was a lot of fun, and I hope that after the primary next month and before the general election there is another forum, perhaps one that includes the State Senate candidates.
Good night!
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) needs to hire better writers
Sen. Grassley, writing in The Hill's CongressBlog -
The link in the passage above takes the reader to a Grassley press release about Medicare Part D premiums that were mistakenly refunded to some 230,000 beneficiaries.
However, ignoring the link, the text of his post reads as if he thinks that the fact that Medicare has been working as intended is a problem that needs to be fixed.
Now, the cynic in me can believe that a Republican *would* think that any government program working as intended is a problem, but I don't think that any of them would put it in writing.
At least not during an election year. :)
...Yeah, it's not an Arizona post, but the AZ delegation has been boring so far today. I'm sure that will change though - JD is speaking at the meeting of the LD18 Republicans this evening. I'd go, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't blend in, with my 5 year-old pickup truck, Mitchell for Congress pins, and clipboard covered in the bumperstickers from various Democratic candidates. :))
Plus, I already have plans to be at the LD18 State Rep candidate forum.
Later everyone!
Medicare’s Mistaken Refunds
August 24th, 2006
For the vast majority of beneficiaries, the program has been working as intended. If this problem is the result of a system flaw, we need to fix that flaw so that we don’t see more errors down the road...
The link in the passage above takes the reader to a Grassley press release about Medicare Part D premiums that were mistakenly refunded to some 230,000 beneficiaries.
However, ignoring the link, the text of his post reads as if he thinks that the fact that Medicare has been working as intended is a problem that needs to be fixed.
Now, the cynic in me can believe that a Republican *would* think that any government program working as intended is a problem, but I don't think that any of them would put it in writing.
At least not during an election year. :)
...Yeah, it's not an Arizona post, but the AZ delegation has been boring so far today. I'm sure that will change though - JD is speaking at the meeting of the LD18 Republicans this evening. I'd go, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't blend in, with my 5 year-old pickup truck, Mitchell for Congress pins, and clipboard covered in the bumperstickers from various Democratic candidates. :))
Plus, I already have plans to be at the LD18 State Rep candidate forum.
Later everyone!
Road Closures in Scottsdale
Non-political post ahead...
I don't normally post anything this mundane, but because of the chaos that is Scottsdale traffic right now, I'm making an exception...
Just received an email alert from the City of Scottsdale, quoted in its entirety -
Oh, and to reiterate and clarify a point from the email - DO NOT try to drive across flooded washes and streets. You'll be featured on the evening news, either in the "Breaking Tragedy" section, or the "Arizona's Stupidest Drivers" section.
I don't normally post anything this mundane, but because of the chaos that is Scottsdale traffic right now, I'm making an exception...
Just received an email alert from the City of Scottsdale, quoted in its entirety -
While this morning's storm system has cleared out, the current radar picture shows more storms developing near Tucson. Not sure if they'll make it far enough north to affect the Phoenix area, but keep your eyes open and your windows closed tonight.TRAFFIC ALERT - ROAD CLOSURES DUE TO FLOODING
Many of the bridged and unbridged roadways across Scottsdale's Indian Bend Wash are closed at this time due to flooding.
Recommended east and west routes are Thomas Road and McDowell Road. Bridges north of Thomas may not be open across the wash because of high water.
North- and southbound traffic should use Scottsdale Road to the Loop 202 to avoid heavy congestion in the downtown Scottsdale area.
Closures could continue through tonight's rush hour. Motorists are advised to obey all traffic signs and avoid crossing any streets with flowing water.
Oh, and to reiterate and clarify a point from the email - DO NOT try to drive across flooded washes and streets. You'll be featured on the evening news, either in the "Breaking Tragedy" section, or the "Arizona's Stupidest Drivers" section.
Reminder: LD18 Candidate Forum Tonight
Just a reminder for anyone who's interested -
There's going to be a Candidate Forum and Town Hall for the candidates for LD18 Representative tonight at EVIT (1601 W. Main St., Mesa, AZ 85201 - on the south side of Main at Longmore) in Mesa. The forum starts at 7 with a free dinner from RigaTony's beforehand.
Democrat Tammie Pursley and Republicans Russell Pearce and Mark Anderson will be there.
Come out and help Tammie Pursley send one of the Republican reps to the legislative bench in November. And enjoy some good food as a reward for your efforts.
The event is sponsored by Mesa ACORN.
There's going to be a Candidate Forum and Town Hall for the candidates for LD18 Representative tonight at EVIT (1601 W. Main St., Mesa, AZ 85201 - on the south side of Main at Longmore) in Mesa. The forum starts at 7 with a free dinner from RigaTony's beforehand.
Democrat Tammie Pursley and Republicans Russell Pearce and Mark Anderson will be there.
Come out and help Tammie Pursley send one of the Republican reps to the legislative bench in November. And enjoy some good food as a reward for your efforts.
The event is sponsored by Mesa ACORN.
Governor Napolitano is busy this week....
Mostly compilation, with just a little commentary...
...She's in Austin, TX at a meeting of the governors of border states in the U.S. and Mexico.
...Wednesday, she announced that she is opposed to Proposition 302, a proposal to raise legislative pay. In her announcement, the Governor indicated that "she would be more inclined to support a pay hike if it were coupled to a stricter limit on the length of the legislative session."
Naturally, the Republican leadership, in the persons of Senate President Ken Bennett and House Speaker Pro-Tem Bob Robson disagreed.
While I support raising legislative salaries (believe it or not!), the Republicans set themselves up for this with their incessant partisan cheap shots on the Governor. They really should have prioritized working *for* the state and their districts, not working *against* the Governor during the last legislative session.
In addition to possibly garnering her support for a pay increase, they would have left their eventual candidate for governor with a stronger base of support. As it is, most voters, including Independents and some Republicans, trust Governor Napolitano as the only check on an out-of-control Republican legislature.
...She also called for raising the state's dropout age to 18 and to require school systems to offer qualified students algebra classes in 8th grade.
I'm not sure that just raising the dropout age alone will reduce Arizona's HS dropout rate, but it should help if it's part of a comprehensive effort to encourage students that are at-risk for dropping out to complete high school.
As for 8th grade algebra? I attended one of the worst school systems in Massachusetts (more years ago than I would care to think about) and even *we* had 8th grade algebra. (Got a 'B' :) )
There's no excuse for it not to be in every Arizona school system already.
Expect a position paper from the "non-partisan" Goldwater Institute condemning the proposals and defending "the right of Arizonans to be mathematically illiterate" unless the classes are conducted by private tutors or something.
...She asked for federal disaster aid in response to major storm damage in Pima and Pinal counties...
Governor Napolitano has also been travelling to the far-flung outposts of the electorate in this state...
In Kingman, she presented a check of almost $32,000 "to the Kingman Chamber of Commerce and the Historic Route 66 Association. The money is from a fund that is targeted toward upgrading visitor and tourist centers around the state.
...Also in Kingman, she picnic-ed (sp?) with Mohave County Democrats, speaking about the accomplishments of her first term.
Gee - she can campaign and do her job at the same time. Why does Congress need to take a month off from work to stump in their districts?
...She's in Austin, TX at a meeting of the governors of border states in the U.S. and Mexico.
...Wednesday, she announced that she is opposed to Proposition 302, a proposal to raise legislative pay. In her announcement, the Governor indicated that "she would be more inclined to support a pay hike if it were coupled to a stricter limit on the length of the legislative session."
Naturally, the Republican leadership, in the persons of Senate President Ken Bennett and House Speaker Pro-Tem Bob Robson disagreed.
While I support raising legislative salaries (believe it or not!), the Republicans set themselves up for this with their incessant partisan cheap shots on the Governor. They really should have prioritized working *for* the state and their districts, not working *against* the Governor during the last legislative session.
In addition to possibly garnering her support for a pay increase, they would have left their eventual candidate for governor with a stronger base of support. As it is, most voters, including Independents and some Republicans, trust Governor Napolitano as the only check on an out-of-control Republican legislature.
...She also called for raising the state's dropout age to 18 and to require school systems to offer qualified students algebra classes in 8th grade.
I'm not sure that just raising the dropout age alone will reduce Arizona's HS dropout rate, but it should help if it's part of a comprehensive effort to encourage students that are at-risk for dropping out to complete high school.
As for 8th grade algebra? I attended one of the worst school systems in Massachusetts (more years ago than I would care to think about) and even *we* had 8th grade algebra. (Got a 'B' :) )
There's no excuse for it not to be in every Arizona school system already.
Expect a position paper from the "non-partisan" Goldwater Institute condemning the proposals and defending "the right of Arizonans to be mathematically illiterate" unless the classes are conducted by private tutors or something.
...She asked for federal disaster aid in response to major storm damage in Pima and Pinal counties...
Governor Napolitano has also been travelling to the far-flung outposts of the electorate in this state...
In Kingman, she presented a check of almost $32,000 "to the Kingman Chamber of Commerce and the Historic Route 66 Association. The money is from a fund that is targeted toward upgrading visitor and tourist centers around the state.
...Also in Kingman, she picnic-ed (sp?) with Mohave County Democrats, speaking about the accomplishments of her first term.
Gee - she can campaign and do her job at the same time. Why does Congress need to take a month off from work to stump in their districts?
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Yet another reason for the far right to hate Mexican immigrants
Or maybe I should have said "fear" them, since they've been tainted by the mortal sin of 'sex education'.
Thanks to jobsanger for the pointing out this one...
From Chron.com (Houston Chronicle):
Apparently though, as noted by reproductive rights groups, "that Mexico's constitution prevents religious groups from interfering in education."
Separation of church and state. What a crazy concept. Who ever heard of such a thing????
And since any immigrant from Mexico could be infected by this radical idea, somebody should alert Congressman Hayworth and the Minutemen. They need to redouble their efforts to protect America from this infestation of heresy.
To inspire them, maybe we should promise that any Minutemen who give his life in performance of his sacred duty will get 72 virgins in the afterlife...oh, wait...I'm mixing up my fanatics...never mind. :))
Note: I kept trying to find a way to work the phrase "conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids" into this post, but I just couldn't find a way.
Must be slipping in my old age or something, LOL.
...On the other hand, it's easy to segue to the Hayworth campaign's latest press release, titled "Mitchell Immigration Plan to Cost $126 Billion."
JD, as usual, is playing fast and loose with the truth.
The bill, S2611, was sponsored by Arlen Specter, with co-sponsors Brownback, Hagel, Martinez, Graham, McCain, and Kennedy. Last time I checked, Harry Mitchell hasn't been elected to the US Senate at all, much less under any of those names, and had nothing to do with the writing of the bill.
Of course, JD is running against Harry, not against any of those senators (of course2, JD could be looking to 2010 with his strident opposition to the bill, but I digress.)
If JD keeps up his pattern, by the election we're going to see press releases from him that say things like "Mitchell rain storms cause bad hair days" and the like.
Later!!
Thanks to jobsanger for the pointing out this one...
From Chron.com (Houston Chronicle):
To be sure, Mexico's version of the theocratic right wing is all scandalized by this, and is doing their best imitation of our very own theocons.Mexico adds sex to school syllabusMEXICO CITY - When Mexican seventh-graders crack open their new biology books this week, they're in for a titillating surprise: Chapter four is all about sex.
And it's not the sterilized sex education of the past...
Church officials and conservative groups are outraged. They charge that the texts — which are required teaching — encourage promiscuity and "abnormal" sexual practices. They are pressuring the federal government to remove passages they consider offensive.
Apparently though, as noted by reproductive rights groups, "that Mexico's constitution prevents religious groups from interfering in education."
Separation of church and state. What a crazy concept. Who ever heard of such a thing????
And since any immigrant from Mexico could be infected by this radical idea, somebody should alert Congressman Hayworth and the Minutemen. They need to redouble their efforts to protect America from this infestation of heresy.
To inspire them, maybe we should promise that any Minutemen who give his life in performance of his sacred duty will get 72 virgins in the afterlife...oh, wait...I'm mixing up my fanatics...never mind. :))
Note: I kept trying to find a way to work the phrase "conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids" into this post, but I just couldn't find a way.
Must be slipping in my old age or something, LOL.
...On the other hand, it's easy to segue to the Hayworth campaign's latest press release, titled "Mitchell Immigration Plan to Cost $126 Billion."
JD, as usual, is playing fast and loose with the truth.
The bill, S2611, was sponsored by Arlen Specter, with co-sponsors Brownback, Hagel, Martinez, Graham, McCain, and Kennedy. Last time I checked, Harry Mitchell hasn't been elected to the US Senate at all, much less under any of those names, and had nothing to do with the writing of the bill.
Of course, JD is running against Harry, not against any of those senators (of course2, JD could be looking to 2010 with his strident opposition to the bill, but I digress.)
If JD keeps up his pattern, by the election we're going to see press releases from him that say things like "Mitchell rain storms cause bad hair days" and the like.
Later!!
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
That screaming you hear?
That's just Republicans reading the morning paper.
In the AZ Rep - "Minorities are now in the majority in Phoenix and Tucson, census data reveal."
In the East Valley Trib, Brookings Institute demographer William Frey observes -
In the AZ Star - "After dramatic growth from 2000 to 2005, minorities now outnumber whites in Phoenix and Tucson."
In other (fake) news, the Scottsdale Fire Department has deployed most of its available oxygen tanks to north Scottsdale to address a sudden rash of hyperventilation calls. :)
Later!
In the AZ Rep - "Minorities are now in the majority in Phoenix and Tucson, census data reveal."
In the East Valley Trib, Brookings Institute demographer William Frey observes -
...politicians have to accept that their constituencies have changed. ‘‘They will wake up one morning, and it will be a different city."
In the AZ Star - "After dramatic growth from 2000 to 2005, minorities now outnumber whites in Phoenix and Tucson."
In other (fake) news, the Scottsdale Fire Department has deployed most of its available oxygen tanks to north Scottsdale to address a sudden rash of hyperventilation calls. :)
Later!
Monday, August 21, 2006
More mud from JD today...
In his latest press release, he criticizes Harry Mitchell's education cred, citing a report from the "non-partisan" Goldwater Institute. He quotes the Goldwater Institute as saying that "Mitchell never received higher than a 53 percent with regards to education votes from 2003 to 2005."
Sounds damning, until you look at the Goldwater Institute itself, and find that it is an organization that's as fundamentally opposed to public education and academic freedom as JD himself.
With their grades for legislators, they consistently grade Republicans at 'A' or 'B', and Democrats at 'D' or 'F'.
Did a little research. For Legislative Year 2005, they graded 17 legislators at 'A' overall (not just in the area of education) , 21 at 'F' (I included Harry Mitchell's D- for the sake of this post). All 17 A's went to Republicans; all 21 F's went to Democrats.
Their A-listers include Russell "Teachers don't need no free speech" Pearce, Jack "Culture of Corruption" Harper, and Ron "Confederate Flag" Gould.
Their F-bombs? The list includes the likes of career teacher Harry Mitchell, ASU instructor Kyrsten Sinema, and UA professor Ted Downing.
The Goldwater Institute is NOT non-partisan; it's just non-credible. Especially in the area of education.
In addition, Hayworth goes on to tout his own education cred as stronger than Harry Mitchell's.
Not only did he vote for massive cuts in federal financial aid in an era of skyrocketing tuition, he has supported abolishing the Department of Education.
[Fun note: Found during the research for this post - JD's profile on MySpace.com. He's got some "interesting" friends, lol. While it reads like it's legit, I'm not absolutely sure how involved he is with the site/page.]
If you really are wondering about the candidates' education bona fides, know this:
Harry Mitchell has the endorsements of the Arizona Education Association and the National Education Association.
JD Hayworth received a grade of 'F' from the NEA for his work during the 109th Congress.
'Nuff said on this.
In other CD5 campaign news, the Mitchell campaign issued a press release criticizing the use of the Congressman's taxpayer-supported aide to conduct a campaign attack on Mitchell. Joseph Simon was the aide.
Writing in The Hill's CongressBlog, Congressman Hayworth argues, in regard to the President's warrantless surveillance program, that "individual civil liberties" shouldn't be allowed to interfere with the President.
He writes that "we need more tools, not fewer, to defeat the terrorists." What he doesn't say is that the government, specifically the FBI, did not need more tools prior to September 11, 2001; they had all the information they needed to know that there were some potential terrorists taking flying lessons. And not bothering with *landing* lessons.
They (meaning the political appointees assigned to administer and oversee the agency) just ignored the info.
Later!!
Sounds damning, until you look at the Goldwater Institute itself, and find that it is an organization that's as fundamentally opposed to public education and academic freedom as JD himself.
With their grades for legislators, they consistently grade Republicans at 'A' or 'B', and Democrats at 'D' or 'F'.
Did a little research. For Legislative Year 2005, they graded 17 legislators at 'A' overall (not just in the area of education) , 21 at 'F' (I included Harry Mitchell's D- for the sake of this post). All 17 A's went to Republicans; all 21 F's went to Democrats.
Their A-listers include Russell "Teachers don't need no free speech" Pearce, Jack "Culture of Corruption" Harper, and Ron "Confederate Flag" Gould.
Their F-bombs? The list includes the likes of career teacher Harry Mitchell, ASU instructor Kyrsten Sinema, and UA professor Ted Downing.
The Goldwater Institute is NOT non-partisan; it's just non-credible. Especially in the area of education.
In addition, Hayworth goes on to tout his own education cred as stronger than Harry Mitchell's.
Not only did he vote for massive cuts in federal financial aid in an era of skyrocketing tuition, he has supported abolishing the Department of Education.
[Fun note: Found during the research for this post - JD's profile on MySpace.com. He's got some "interesting" friends, lol. While it reads like it's legit, I'm not absolutely sure how involved he is with the site/page.]
If you really are wondering about the candidates' education bona fides, know this:
Harry Mitchell has the endorsements of the Arizona Education Association and the National Education Association.
JD Hayworth received a grade of 'F' from the NEA for his work during the 109th Congress.
'Nuff said on this.
In other CD5 campaign news, the Mitchell campaign issued a press release criticizing the use of the Congressman's taxpayer-supported aide to conduct a campaign attack on Mitchell. Joseph Simon was the aide.
Writing in The Hill's CongressBlog, Congressman Hayworth argues, in regard to the President's warrantless surveillance program, that "individual civil liberties" shouldn't be allowed to interfere with the President.
He writes that "we need more tools, not fewer, to defeat the terrorists." What he doesn't say is that the government, specifically the FBI, did not need more tools prior to September 11, 2001; they had all the information they needed to know that there were some potential terrorists taking flying lessons. And not bothering with *landing* lessons.
They (meaning the political appointees assigned to administer and oversee the agency) just ignored the info.
Later!!
Saturday, August 19, 2006
Surveys, Challenges, Bounties, and Quotes; Update for Saturday, August 19th
...Survey USA (courtesy Michael Barone of US News and World Report) has released its latest job approval numbers for US Senators, including our own Jon Kyl. More data here.
Sen. Kyl, with an overall approval rating of 53%, ranked 55th (by comparison, with a 63% approval rating, John McCain came in at 16th), shows an upward trend over the last few months. In May's survey, his approval rating bottomed out at 44%, and has risen since.
Something tells me that the Pederson campaign read the same survey, because...
...KVOA of Tucson is reporting that the Pederson campaign has challenged the incumbent to a series of three televised debates and that "[Sen.] Kyl has agreed in principal."
According to the story, challenger Jim Pederson wants the debates spread out geographically, one each in northern, central, and southern Arizona.
What the Pederson campaign should do is let the Kyl campaign pick out the locations of the debates, as long Jon Kyl has to stand in front of a huge poster of George W. Bush during the debates, LOL.
...The EV Tribune has the story on the Republican Party's bounty program for enrolling new voters into the GOP.
They say that $10 per new voter goes to the GOP organization (LD or club) that signs up the voter, not to individuals. However, the infamous Nathan Sproul has received 2/3 of the money paid out so far.
Wonder if he's found the lost Democratic registration forms from 2004 yet?
...In an AZ Rep story, Brian Hummell, spokesman for embattled Congressman JD Hayworth, is quoted as saying "we'll be glad to get past the (focus on) Abramoff-Keating funds..."
I'm sure they'll be ecstatic to slink away from the ethics comparisons - they spent the last couple of weeks flinging mud at Harry Mitchell, but none of it stuck.
Now, they look dirtier than ever by comparison.
Have a great weekend!
Sen. Kyl, with an overall approval rating of 53%, ranked 55th (by comparison, with a 63% approval rating, John McCain came in at 16th), shows an upward trend over the last few months. In May's survey, his approval rating bottomed out at 44%, and has risen since.
Something tells me that the Pederson campaign read the same survey, because...
...KVOA of Tucson is reporting that the Pederson campaign has challenged the incumbent to a series of three televised debates and that "[Sen.] Kyl has agreed in principal."
According to the story, challenger Jim Pederson wants the debates spread out geographically, one each in northern, central, and southern Arizona.
What the Pederson campaign should do is let the Kyl campaign pick out the locations of the debates, as long Jon Kyl has to stand in front of a huge poster of George W. Bush during the debates, LOL.
...The EV Tribune has the story on the Republican Party's bounty program for enrolling new voters into the GOP.
They say that $10 per new voter goes to the GOP organization (LD or club) that signs up the voter, not to individuals. However, the infamous Nathan Sproul has received 2/3 of the money paid out so far.
Wonder if he's found the lost Democratic registration forms from 2004 yet?
...In an AZ Rep story, Brian Hummell, spokesman for embattled Congressman JD Hayworth, is quoted as saying "we'll be glad to get past the (focus on) Abramoff-Keating funds..."
I'm sure they'll be ecstatic to slink away from the ethics comparisons - they spent the last couple of weeks flinging mud at Harry Mitchell, but none of it stuck.
Now, they look dirtier than ever by comparison.
Have a great weekend!
Friday, August 18, 2006
The Republicans are holding hearings, but they aren't listening to anybody
A few weeks ago, the House Intelligence Committee held hearings in Phoenix and Yuma concerning immigration.
Well, "hearings" might be overstating the situation a mite. As the AZ Republic editorial board noted on August 6th, "average Arizonans were not allowed to speak."
On Thursday, they held another in Sierra Vista.
Again (from the AZ Daily Star, via the AZ Daily Sun), "those present did not have a chance to address the committee."
The only people who were allowed to speak were certain officials who had to read prepared statements that had previously been submitted to the committee, in writing.
Same hot air, different day.
There's an interesting rhetorical two-step going on here, too -
From Rep. Rick Renzi (R- Mantech) at the Sierra Vista 'hearing':
From Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff in Nogales (courtesy the Tucson Citizen):
Either the border is more secure, or it isn't.
Somebody needs to tell the Republicans that those are mutually exclusive positions and pick one. Every time they try to have it both ways, they throw away yet more of their rapidly dwindling credibility.
On the other hand, perhaps it's too late for them to salvage their credibility.
From the August 6th Rep editorial (emphasis mine):
From today's article in the Sun (again, emphasis mine):
It looks like people on both sides of this issue are learning - it's an issue that Congressional Republicans want to talk about, but not actually do anything about.
What I wrote 2 weeks ago is still true today -
When Congress wants to crawl out from under their rocks and listen to the people most affected by illegal immigration and by the (mostly) crackpot 'plans' to address it, they'll be welcome.
Until then, they should quit wasting our time and money.
The Tucson Citizen has coverage of both the Sierra Vista hearing as well as Mr. Chertoff's Nogales visit. In addition, they have coverage of Congressman Raul Grijalva's (D-AZ7) forum held in Tucson as a response to the hearing, all here.
Well, "hearings" might be overstating the situation a mite. As the AZ Republic editorial board noted on August 6th, "average Arizonans were not allowed to speak."
On Thursday, they held another in Sierra Vista.
Again (from the AZ Daily Star, via the AZ Daily Sun), "those present did not have a chance to address the committee."
The only people who were allowed to speak were certain officials who had to read prepared statements that had previously been submitted to the committee, in writing.
Same hot air, different day.
There's an interesting rhetorical two-step going on here, too -
From Rep. Rick Renzi (R- Mantech) at the Sierra Vista 'hearing':
"Far too often the southern border of the United States is characterized as a porous crossing for illegal aliens looking for job opportunities in the United States," Rep. Rick Renzi, R-Ariz., of Flagstaff said as the meeting opened the Buena High School auditorium....
{snip}
"The reality is, however, that human traffickers, drug smugglers, narco-terrorists, violent criminal gangs, and yes, we even have to consider the possibility that international terrorist organizations are leveraging the same routes," Renzi said.
From Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff in Nogales (courtesy the Tucson Citizen):
Agents have seen a 43 percent reduction in apprehensions along the border because "smugglers now realize there is a substantial additional presence on the border and that is beginning to deter them," Chertoff said.
Either the border is more secure, or it isn't.
Somebody needs to tell the Republicans that those are mutually exclusive positions and pick one. Every time they try to have it both ways, they throw away yet more of their rapidly dwindling credibility.
On the other hand, perhaps it's too late for them to salvage their credibility.
From the August 6th Rep editorial (emphasis mine):
Had lawmakers listened, those who attended Thursday's the meeting in Phoenix could have heard from Valley residents who packed a hearing room at the Capitol.
From today's article in the Sun (again, emphasis mine):
...the meeting opened the Buena High School auditorium. The hearing was sparsely attended...
It looks like people on both sides of this issue are learning - it's an issue that Congressional Republicans want to talk about, but not actually do anything about.
What I wrote 2 weeks ago is still true today -
When Congress wants to crawl out from under their rocks and listen to the people most affected by illegal immigration and by the (mostly) crackpot 'plans' to address it, they'll be welcome.
Until then, they should quit wasting our time and money.
The Tucson Citizen has coverage of both the Sierra Vista hearing as well as Mr. Chertoff's Nogales visit. In addition, they have coverage of Congressman Raul Grijalva's (D-AZ7) forum held in Tucson as a response to the hearing, all here.
Events Calendar for LD17 and surrounding area
Update: The Mitchell Happy hour was moved to Macayo's due to an event at the Clubhouse at Karsten.
On another issue, I was able to verify the LD18 forum at EVIT on the 24th. Since I could only find the event listed on one site (Tammie Pursley's) I called Mesa ACORN. They confirmed that the event is happening next Thursday.
Later!
Friday, August 18, 5:30 p.m.
Happy Hour with Harry Mitchell and the LD8 and LD17 Democrats
At the clubhouse at ASU's Karsten Golf Course.
Contact: Doug Mings 480-966-2298
Meet Harry, the Democratic candidate in CD5, other Democratic candidates, as well as many other Democrats.
And it's a great golf course (if you decide to show up a little early :)) )
Saturday, August 19, 5:30 p.m.
LD8 Dems Super Sized Summer Barbeque/Fundraiser$25 adults/$20 students
Scottsdale Ranch Club House10585 N. 100th St.Scottsdale, AZ 85259
Contact Anne Bailey at 480.946.1564 for more info.
Tuesday, August 22, 7:00 p.m.
Happy Hour with Mark Manoil, Candidate for the Arizona Corporation Commission
At Four Peaks Brewery, 1340 E. 8th St., Tempe
Meet Mark and other Democratic candidates!
Thursday, August 24, 7:oo p.m.
LD18 2006 Town Hall & Candidate Forum
Meet Tammie Pursley, Democratic Candidate for LD18 Representative and the two Republicans that are also running. ;)
At EVIT, 1601 W. Main St., Mesa, AZ 85201
Contact Mesa ACORN for more info at (480) 834-9097
For anyone who's interested, I'll try to make it to the forum and write it up.
Saturday, August 26, 1:00 p.m.
Potluck with LD17 and LD18, including candidates Harry Mitchell (CD5), Meg Burton-Cahill, David Schapira, Ed Ableser, Angie Crouse, Rhett Wilson (all LD17) and Tammie Pursley (LD18).
INSIDE (aka In the air-conditioned!) Escalante Community Center 2150 E. Orange St. in Tempe
Contact: Doug Mings 480-966-2298
Many candidates will be holding neighborhood canvasses in the morning before the potluck. Contact your favorite candidates if you are interested in walking.
All above info gathered from candidate websites, and the websites of the county and state parties.
For a more comprehensive listing of events, visit the Maricopa Dems website or the Arizona Democratic Party's website.
On another issue, I was able to verify the LD18 forum at EVIT on the 24th. Since I could only find the event listed on one site (Tammie Pursley's) I called Mesa ACORN. They confirmed that the event is happening next Thursday.
Later!
Friday, August 18, 5:30 p.m.
Happy Hour with Harry Mitchell and the LD8 and LD17 Democrats
At the clubhouse at ASU's Karsten Golf Course.
Contact: Doug Mings 480-966-2298
Meet Harry, the Democratic candidate in CD5, other Democratic candidates, as well as many other Democrats.
And it's a great golf course (if you decide to show up a little early :)) )
Saturday, August 19, 5:30 p.m.
LD8 Dems Super Sized Summer Barbeque/Fundraiser$25 adults/$20 students
Scottsdale Ranch Club House10585 N. 100th St.Scottsdale, AZ 85259
Contact Anne Bailey at 480.946.1564 for more info.
Tuesday, August 22, 7:00 p.m.
Happy Hour with Mark Manoil, Candidate for the Arizona Corporation Commission
At Four Peaks Brewery, 1340 E. 8th St., Tempe
Meet Mark and other Democratic candidates!
Thursday, August 24, 7:oo p.m.
LD18 2006 Town Hall & Candidate Forum
Meet Tammie Pursley, Democratic Candidate for LD18 Representative and the two Republicans that are also running. ;)
At EVIT, 1601 W. Main St., Mesa, AZ 85201
Contact Mesa ACORN for more info at (480) 834-9097
For anyone who's interested, I'll try to make it to the forum and write it up.
Saturday, August 26, 1:00 p.m.
Potluck with LD17 and LD18, including candidates Harry Mitchell (CD5), Meg Burton-Cahill, David Schapira, Ed Ableser, Angie Crouse, Rhett Wilson (all LD17) and Tammie Pursley (LD18).
INSIDE (aka In the air-conditioned!) Escalante Community Center 2150 E. Orange St. in Tempe
Contact: Doug Mings 480-966-2298
Many candidates will be holding neighborhood canvasses in the morning before the potluck. Contact your favorite candidates if you are interested in walking.
All above info gathered from candidate websites, and the websites of the county and state parties.
For a more comprehensive listing of events, visit the Maricopa Dems website or the Arizona Democratic Party's website.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
Harry Mitchell has a [reality] check for Hayworth
Responding to the Hayworth campaign's charge that Harry Mitchell kept a campaign contribution from Charlie Keating all those years ago, the Mitchell campaign released documentation (including a copy of the check) that shows that he gave the $2500 in question to the Valley of the Sun United Way.
In 1990.
The Mitchell campaign's press release is here.
Plugged In's coverage is here.
The EV Tribune's coverage of the ethics dustup between the two campaigns is here.
In other CD5 coverage, the Phoenix New Times' column, The Bird, written this week by Stephen Lemons, has a take on the "JD and his idolization of anti-Semite Henry Ford" situation a few weeks back. He defends JD as a "boob," not an anti-Semitic bigot.
Well, like the rest of us, Mr. Lemons has the right to have and express his opinions.
My problem with his column is this line (emphasis mine) -
A couple of points here.
One, for the record, I have never referred to JD as an anti-Semite, just as someone who idolizes one. Most of the local bloggers covering this have handled the issue similarly.
JD's own book, and his defenses against the criticisms sent his way over this, prove our point.
Two, while I haven't read every blog out there (not enough time in the day to do that, and say, breathe :) ), most of the ones I read are well-thought out and well-written. Not 'crackpot' at all. Even the ones I disagree with, like Espresso Pundit.
Three, Mr. Lemons? Even if you were correct in calling us all "crackpots", you don't exactly have a lot of credibility in this area.
Exhibit A: in your column, you refer to yourself as "[t]his rascally warbler."
Pot, meet kettle. :)
Later everyone! Time to go buy books for the upcoming semester!
In 1990.
The Mitchell campaign's press release is here.
Plugged In's coverage is here.
The EV Tribune's coverage of the ethics dustup between the two campaigns is here.
In other CD5 coverage, the Phoenix New Times' column, The Bird, written this week by Stephen Lemons, has a take on the "JD and his idolization of anti-Semite Henry Ford" situation a few weeks back. He defends JD as a "boob," not an anti-Semitic bigot.
Well, like the rest of us, Mr. Lemons has the right to have and express his opinions.
My problem with his column is this line (emphasis mine) -
... that's the insinuation of the Jewish News of Greater Phoenix, the Arizona Democratic Party, the Arizona Republic, and countless blogosphere crackpots...
A couple of points here.
One, for the record, I have never referred to JD as an anti-Semite, just as someone who idolizes one. Most of the local bloggers covering this have handled the issue similarly.
JD's own book, and his defenses against the criticisms sent his way over this, prove our point.
Two, while I haven't read every blog out there (not enough time in the day to do that, and say, breathe :) ), most of the ones I read are well-thought out and well-written. Not 'crackpot' at all. Even the ones I disagree with, like Espresso Pundit.
Three, Mr. Lemons? Even if you were correct in calling us all "crackpots", you don't exactly have a lot of credibility in this area.
Exhibit A: in your column, you refer to yourself as "[t]his rascally warbler."
Pot, meet kettle. :)
Later everyone! Time to go buy books for the upcoming semester!
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
I am SO going to miss JD Hayworth.
He's the best cure for writer's block known to man. :))
Things had been quiet for almost a week in the press release war between the Mitchell and Hayworth campaigns. The Mitchell campaign highlighted yesterday's NPR story about CD5 on their website, but it was an even-handed story and they didn't criticize Hayworth in their press release.
Then the Hayworth campaign decided to go after Harry Mitchell for a contribution from Charles Keating 16 or so years ago. They want Harry "to do the right thing by returning the tainted cash." They go on to defend their own candidate's ties to Jack Abramoff by claiming that "Abramoff never visited Congressman Hayworth's office and never held an official meeting with the Congressman" while Keating did meet with Harry.
Guess that means that if the payoffs aren't face-to-face, they don't count, according to JD's rationale, anyway.
They close the main thrust of the press release with some name-calling ("Hypocrite Harry") and a call for Mitchell to "donate his Keating contributions to charity."
The Hayworth campaign has called Mitchell's ethics into question for taking a $2500 contribution from Charlie Keating over a decade and a half ago. Fair enough.
Here are some numbers for the Hayworth campaign to consider:
From Tom Delay's...no, wait for it...the *indicted* Tom Delay's ARMPAC -
From Abramoff to JD's TEAMPAC -
From Preston Gates Ellis (Abramoff's firm) to JD -
From David Safavian (Abramoff associate)...no, wait for it #2...the *convicted* David Safavian to JD -
And, just for giggles - from Enron Corp PAC to JD -
Numbers courtesy fec.gov and tray.com.
That's a total of just over $19,000 that I was able to find without trying hard. That's a lot more money than the $2500 that they accuse Mitchell of accepting, and a lot more current, too.
That's just from donors that have been indicted or convicted, or in the case of Enron, operated by people that were indicted or convicted. It doesn't include money from clients or from spouses or aides, unless those aides were themselves indicted or convicted. It also doesn't include money funnelled through Native American tribes and other Abramoff clients. If it did, the total would be well in excess of $100,000.
JD has supposedly donated the contributions that went directly from Jack Abramoff to charity, but that still puts him over $14,000 ahead of Harry.
JD's not talking about that, though.
The campaign press release does talk about a demand. It demands that Harry issue an apology.
JD's good at that.
Not at apologizing. Oh no, not our JD.
Demanding that others apologize, that is.
I did a quick Google search (parameters "Hayworth apology") and found that he's demanded...
...that President Bush apologize to the Minutemen for referring to them as "vigilantes"...
...that the Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. apologize for saying something nice about Yasser Arafat...
...that former President Clinton's Press Secretary Joe Lockhart should apologize and resign for offending the Southern Baptist Convention...
Couldn't find a reference to an apology that he's issued, though.
Must be nice to be perfect when no one else is.
Note: if someone has a link to an apology issued by Congressman Hayworth for his own behavior or words, send it to me and I'll be happy to update this post.
In the final paragraph of the press release, the Hayworth campaign accuses Harry Mitchell and his campaign of trying to "smear Congressman Hayworth's reputation."
I have news for him, and them.
JD didn't need any help in that area - his own corruption, bigotry, and hypocrisy have smeared his reputation beyond repair.
Things had been quiet for almost a week in the press release war between the Mitchell and Hayworth campaigns. The Mitchell campaign highlighted yesterday's NPR story about CD5 on their website, but it was an even-handed story and they didn't criticize Hayworth in their press release.
Then the Hayworth campaign decided to go after Harry Mitchell for a contribution from Charles Keating 16 or so years ago. They want Harry "to do the right thing by returning the tainted cash." They go on to defend their own candidate's ties to Jack Abramoff by claiming that "Abramoff never visited Congressman Hayworth's office and never held an official meeting with the Congressman" while Keating did meet with Harry.
Guess that means that if the payoffs aren't face-to-face, they don't count, according to JD's rationale, anyway.
They close the main thrust of the press release with some name-calling ("Hypocrite Harry") and a call for Mitchell to "donate his Keating contributions to charity."
The Hayworth campaign has called Mitchell's ethics into question for taking a $2500 contribution from Charlie Keating over a decade and a half ago. Fair enough.
Here are some numbers for the Hayworth campaign to consider:
From Tom Delay's...no, wait for it...the *indicted* Tom Delay's ARMPAC -
3/27/1998 $5000
10/6/1998 3000
9/9/1994 14
10/14/1994 6
10/20/1994 3500
From Jack Abramoff to JD -
6/8/1998 1000
9/30/1996 250
From Abramoff to JD's TEAMPAC -
2/28/1999 1000
From Preston Gates Ellis (Abramoff's firm) to JD -
6/25/1999 1000
3/28/2001 500
From David Safavian (Abramoff associate)...no, wait for it #2...the *convicted* David Safavian to JD -
5/13/1998 783
6/8/1998 200
12/23/1999 250
And, just for giggles - from Enron Corp PAC to JD -
3/31/1998 500
8/11/1999 1000
11/5/2001 1000
Numbers courtesy fec.gov and tray.com.
That's a total of just over $19,000 that I was able to find without trying hard. That's a lot more money than the $2500 that they accuse Mitchell of accepting, and a lot more current, too.
That's just from donors that have been indicted or convicted, or in the case of Enron, operated by people that were indicted or convicted. It doesn't include money from clients or from spouses or aides, unless those aides were themselves indicted or convicted. It also doesn't include money funnelled through Native American tribes and other Abramoff clients. If it did, the total would be well in excess of $100,000.
JD has supposedly donated the contributions that went directly from Jack Abramoff to charity, but that still puts him over $14,000 ahead of Harry.
JD's not talking about that, though.
The campaign press release does talk about a demand. It demands that Harry issue an apology.
JD's good at that.
Not at apologizing. Oh no, not our JD.
Demanding that others apologize, that is.
I did a quick Google search (parameters "Hayworth apology") and found that he's demanded...
...that President Bush apologize to the Minutemen for referring to them as "vigilantes"...
...that the Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. apologize for saying something nice about Yasser Arafat...
...that former President Clinton's Press Secretary Joe Lockhart should apologize and resign for offending the Southern Baptist Convention...
Couldn't find a reference to an apology that he's issued, though.
Must be nice to be perfect when no one else is.
Note: if someone has a link to an apology issued by Congressman Hayworth for his own behavior or words, send it to me and I'll be happy to update this post.
In the final paragraph of the press release, the Hayworth campaign accuses Harry Mitchell and his campaign of trying to "smear Congressman Hayworth's reputation."
I have news for him, and them.
JD didn't need any help in that area - his own corruption, bigotry, and hypocrisy have smeared his reputation beyond repair.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)