The best line in Rocky 3 is Mr. T's prediction of the outcome. "I predict pain." Indeed pain is what the Democrats served up on Tuesday. Congratulations are in order for Governor Napolitano, Terry Goddard, Harry Mitchell the local Democratic Party and the Arizona Republic who worked hard to make it happen.

However, we need a little perspective. When I came on the political scene in the 90s, the Democrats held one of the two Senate seats, three of the six Congressional seats, the Governorship, Secretary of State, the ACC, Superintendent of Public Instruction and the State Senate. I was one of only 33 Republicans in the State House--16 of whom were moderates.

Republicans made steady gains throughout the 90s and some of those gains were scaled back in 2002 when the Napolitano and Goddard picked up two of the crown jewels. The Republican gains were further eroded on Tuesday. The Democrats now have the Governorship, Attorney General, 4 of the 8 Congressional seats and the Republic Editorial Board.

The Republicans now have both U.S. Senate seats, Secretary of State, all five seats on the ACC, Superintendent of Public Instruction, 19 of 30 Senate seats, 36? of 60 House Seats, and by golly, don't forget that Joe Hart is the Mine Inspector.

Congratulations are indeed in order. Napolitano and Goddard's victories were more than convincing and Harry Mitchell woke up this morning and said to himself..."I can be President." At this rate, who am I to doubt him.

November 7, 2006

Dirty Tricks

Here's a section from the latest flyer in the District 24 Senate Race.

Notice the first four words?

Every political junkie in the state knows that District 24 is a swing district in which the two State Representatives are vying for an open Senate seat. Amanda Aguirre is not a State Senator.

Here's how the Associated Press covered the story.

A campaign flier that was mailed to voters in Yuma County claimed erroneously that a candidate for the Arizona Senate was already a senator.

The Arizona Democratic Party, which mailed the flier, said the claim was a typographical error. The incorrect claim originated with a consultant and wasn't spotted during reviews of the campaign literature, the party said.

Oh. It's a "typo." Give me a break. Misspelling "Senator" is a typo. Calling someone a Senator is a late-breaking dirty trick.

I would be much more inclined to believe this was a mistake if the Democrats hadn't spent the entire campaign pretending that Aguirre was in the Senate. Here's a picture of the banner that Aguirre has been using throughout the campaign. I first ran the picture in July. Typo indeed.

Twilight Zone

Somewhere in a lonely hotel room
There's a guy starting to realize
That eternal fate has turned his back on him...
It's 2 A.M......

At some point today, Jim Pederson is going to realize that he spent $12 million only to lose by double digits. Along the way, he disavowed his party "I don't care if it's a Republican idea or a Democratic idea." And now the whole world knows that he declared bankruptcy and denied it under oath on five separate filings.

Perhaps worst of all, this federal probe will probably have some legs.

One thing's for sure--he's Nobody's Senator

The Values Voter

Bishop Olmstead's book "Catholics in the Public Square" is getting quite a bit of attention. He doesn't mince any words.

Here's an example.

Is it mandatory for Catholics to follow what the Pope or bishops say on political issues?

Because they are the leaders of the Church, it is always important to respect statements from the Church's hierarchy. It is the role of the Pope and the bishops to teach clearly on matters of faith and morals, including those touching on political issues.

There are some matters, however, on which Catholics may disagree with the Church's hierarchy. In some cases, for example, a Catholic may agree with the teaching of the Church, but come to a different prudential judgment about its application.

Examples of these issues might include an instance where someone agrees with the Church's teaching on “just war” or “capital punishment,” but reaches a different conclusion as to whether the facts of the situation constitute a “just war” or the “rare” circumstances where capital punishment may be used under Church teaching.

It should be emphasized, however, that despite these examples, there are other issues, such as abortion or euthanasia, that are always wrong and do not allow for the correct use of prudential judgment to justify them. It would never be proper for Catholics to be on the opposite side of these issues. (Emphasis added)

November 6, 2006

Dennis Cahill: "Did you know Munsil's a Bigot?"

The College Republicans showed up at Democratic Rally in Tempe on Sunday. They stood in the back, didn't interrupt the speakers, and held Munsil signs.

But former Tempe City Councilman Denis Cahill, husband of Senate Candidate Meg Burton Cahill came over to give them a piece of his mind. It doesn't look like he has much mind to spare.

Real News

If this had happened in a Republican administration, the Republic would be all over it.

Check out this amazing New Times story on CPS.

Janet Napolitano, elected governor that fall, made the newspaper's mission her own. Fixing CPS, she announced, would be one of her top priorities. Children needed to be protected.

But Emily Mays didn't die in 2002.

She died three years into Napolitano's tenure, in the summer of 2005 — after the reforms, after massive budget increases, after Napolitano's vow that kids need to be kept safe above all else.

Agenda Journalism 101

Today's question boys and girls is: how can we manipulate the reader by using information that is completely accurate?

Here's a great example from the Republic's Chris Ramirez.

Arizona Capitol Mall Commission chairman Tom Smith is calling for the state's 9/11 Memorial to be covered up until the group that OK'd it meets again and revises its controversial etchings.

So far so good. Smith is the head of the Capitol Mall Commission, he chaired the meeting that took input on the memorial; he's a former State Senator and a retired Marine. His opinion matters, and he's an excellent source for the article.

It goes down from there.

A Republican, Smith is listed on GOP gubernatorial candidate Len Munsil's campaign Web site as a supporter. He said he signed a petition of support for the candidate, but has never met him.

Excuse me, were we discussing Len Munsil? The reporter attacks Smith's credibility by pointing out that Smith supports Munsil. This implies that Smith's comments are politically motivated.

Actually, since Smith is a FORMER State Senator, his endorsement isn't a very big deal. In fact, Smith is the 1,750th name on this list of supporters.

That's a subtle trick that reporters use all the time. But this article gets worse.

Tom Smith's counterpart in this saga is the 9/11 Memorial Commission Chairman Billy Shields.

Billy Shields, who heads the 9/11 Memorial Commission, has asked his group to meet again to reconsider some of the statements. That meeting isn't expected until after the Nov. 7 election.

How's that? Tom Smith is a Munsil supporter, but Billy Shields is just Billy Shields?

Shields didn't comment for the story, and he has made it clear that he doesn't want any more attention focused on the memorial until after the election.

Might those actions be politically motivated? Since he's just "Billy Shields" I guess we don't know.

Of course, Billy Shields is a huge Napolitano supporter, and unlike Smith, Billy Shield's support is a very big deal.

Here's his organization's endorsement from 2002.

http://www.governor.state.az.us/press/press_10_07_02.htm

“Over the past six years Arizona fire fighters have partnered with Janet Napolitano on numerous issues,” said Billy Shields, president of the United Phoenix Firefighters. “Through Janet’s dedication, hard work, and leadership, she has proven to be an advocate for all Arizonans.”

“This is why the Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona proudly endorse Janet Napolitano for Governor.”

(Notice the press release is on her official website, not her campaign website.)

Napolitano continues to enjoy the support of the Phoenix Fire Fighters under the direction of Billy Shields. But you won't read about that in the Republic. After all, we wouldn't want to imply that his actions with regard to the Memorial are somehow political, now would we?

November 4, 2006

Jeff Groscost 1961-2006

I used to keep a personal journal. I searched through it last night for the first reference to Jeff Groscost. The first mention was over 14 years ago. Here it is:

Tuesday, August 25, 1992 11:09 PM

Waiting for Jeff Groscost. He's an hour and a half late. We are going to put up the rest of my signs.

That entry says a lot. I was running for my second term in the House while helping Stan Barnes in his Congressional Campaign against Jay Rhodes.

Jeff was running for the House and he called me to ask if he could help me put up my campaign signs. I was in a tough race; Stan's race was overwhelming. Burger King had a special on Double Whoppers that summer and we had been living on them for weeks.

Jeff's call came at a good time. I was using 4 x 8 plywood signs that must have weighed 40 pounds each; I had 25 more to get up and the election was two weeks away. I really needed the help.

Jeff was running for an open seat but he had plenty of free time because he had managed to avoid having an opponent. Running unopposed for an open seat is unheard of. To this day, I don't know how he engineered it.

He showed up at Stan's campaign headquarters around midnight and we put up my 4 x 8s until about 2:00 AM.

At about 1:30, we were nailing a sign to an abandoned building in South Scottsdale and I asked him why he was helping me put up campaign signs in the middle of a Tuesday night.

He winked at me and said "so you'll owe me." I thought to myself. "My gosh, he's a genius. This kid is going to be President."

That evening is a great example of Jeff's service. He had no sense of time, but a great sense of timing. He engineered his own race and then spent the extra time helping other candidates.

He was there when I needed him even before I knew him. He was running for Speaker before he was elected.

I served with Jeff for two years; they were really good years. I would be less than honest if I didn't admit that our relationship had its ups and downs. But I am deeply saddened to learn of his death.

I offer my deepest condolences to his wife and six children.

A Sign of Class.

I want to congratulate Republic reporters Art Thomason, Senta Scarborough and Mike Cronin for the extremely tasteful piece that they wrote about Jeff.

Friends and political allies of former Arizona House Speaker Jeff Groscost were stunned at news of his death in a Mesa hospital emergency room where he was rushed from his home on Friday .

The article goes on to interview Jeff's friends and supporters. It mentions his service, his accomplishments and his family. It does not mention Alt Fuels.

One Last Hit Piece

Shame on Howie Fischer for taking the opportunity to write one last hit piece on Jeff.

The 45-year-old Republican served four two-year terms in the House before losing his bid in 2000 to move to the state Senate. His loss was widely attributed to his role in pushing through a tax credit on alternative fuel vehicles - a credit that had to be quickly repealed when it was discovered it could cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars.

Fischer's article goes down from there, dredging up as much negative history as Howie could fit into 500 words. Astonishingly, Howie can't find one positive thing to say about Groscost...not one mention of his family, his supporters or his career.

Let me remind Howie of the requirements of the society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics

Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect. Journalists should: Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage.

There comes a time when you need to put the long knives away Howie.

Judging the Judges

I'm always frustrated when media types aren't willing to respond to new facts. Consider the recent changes in downtown Phoenix--light rail, new Civic Center, government sponsored hotel--but the Jon Taltons of the world still spend three columns a week telling us that Phoenix sucks and we should move to Denver.

I try to be a bit less reactionary than that.

I've been disappointed that some of my fellow conservatives and even fellow bloggers are recommending that we vote "no" on Justices McGregor and Hurwitz.

Conservatives maintain that we just want smart judges who will simply rule on the law. We don't want them to make up the law, re-write the law, or play games with the law.

We recognize that the law is sometimes not clear and that judges will be forced to apply the law to unforeseen situations. Maybe if statutes were more clear, judges would have less room to play games.

If we want to determine if judges are of the activist stripe, we need to look their decisions, not their resumes. When we find judges who happen to be Democrats, were appointed by Democratic administrations--or both, we need to examine the record before we recommend voting no on their retention.

I think it's clear that Justices McGregor and Hurwitz are not of the activist ilk, and I offer three pieces of evidence.

The first is Governor Napolitano's abuse of the line item veto. The Supreme Court could have easily punted the question. They could have claimed that the parties lacked standing or they could have called it a political question. But they didn't punt. They met the issue head on and by a 5-0 vote slapped the Governor down.

The second opportunity the justices had to play politics was Prop. 107. Take a look at the language of the amendment. Reasonable people can disagree, and I'm not a lawyer, but that looks like two subjects to me.

It would have been pretty easy to claim that the proposition violated the single subject rule and remove it. The Court knew that the amendment would drive Republican turnout. They had a ready reason to remove it from the ballot and they chose restraint. Judicial restraint, what a concept.

Finally think back to last July when the lower courts removed Republican Senate candidate Russ Jones from the ballot. Here's what the Democrats said at the time

“Today the court rejected Russ Jones’s attempt to cheat his way on to the ballot,” said Democratic Chairman David Waid. “This ruling reinforces the principle that politicians are not above the law.”

Well, the ruling went to an Arizona Supreme Court that is dominated by Democrats and they put Mr. Jones back on the ballot. Jones' Democrat opponent has been tainted by the whole affair and it looks like the Republicans are going to pick up a critical Senate seat.

Those were tough decisions. All three of them were in a legal grey area and in each case the rulings went against Democratic interests.

It looks to me like we have a group of bright judges who simply apply the law.

It Must have Been a Long Flight

There's an interesting story about Justice Hurwitz that I assumed was an urban legend, but I have done a little research and discovered that it's true.

Hurwitz was clerking for Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart and decided to move to Arizona. He had already passed the bar, but everyone who wants to practice in Arizona has to take the Arizona bar exam.

The move was hectic and Hurwitz didn't have time to study for the bar exam. So he resolved to study during the one time that he knew he would be free of distractions. His only preparation for the Arizona Bar exam was on the plane trip to Arizona.

He had the highest score on that year's bar exam.

Who's Your Bully

This is the third in a series of posts on the Republic's decision to label JD Hayworth a "bully." The editorial was written by Dan Nowicki with a bit of help from Doug MacEachern. If you haven't read my previous posts, start here and then work your way back up to the top.

A great trick the Mainstream Media uses to manipulate you is to take a candidate's behavior out of context. Nowicki and MacEachern didn't provide any real evidence that Hayworth is a bully. But what if it were true? Should bullies be tolerated in politics?

The editorial opened with this line The biggest problem in Congress is extreme partisanship,

Really? I thought earmarks, deficit spending and corruption were the biggest problems in Congress. But for the sake of argument, let's assume that raw partisanship and boorish behavior are unacceptable and that a candidate who exhibits these qualities deserves the Republic's wrath.

Some would argue that Hayworth can be a boorish partisan. But everyone would concede that Governor Napolitano exhibits these qualities. In short, Napolitano falls squarely within the Republic's definition of a bully.

Veto Queen

Consider the glee with which she uses the veto stamp. She holds ceremonies to veto bills. She takes the veto show on the road and she steadfastly refuses to comment on bills as they wind their way through the process. Her boorish style and partisan glee has allowed her to veto more bills in the her first three years of office than Bruce Babbitt vetoed in his nine year tenure.

You may argue that holding the legislature in check is an important function, and indeed it is, however Babbitt was a Democratic Governor who worked with a Republican Legislature and actually got things done.

The Governor got a bit too overeager with the veto stamp and tried to make a policy change in a piece of legislation. The Legislature was forced to sue her and she lost 5-0.

So much for playing well with others.

What's Eating Crow

But maybe that's not your definition of a bully. Maybe this is more your style. Here's how one reporter described a Napolitano meeting with Michael Crow.

There is no story told with more relish, from both supporters and de-tractors, than the story of Governor Janet Napolitano throwing the ASU president out of her office last year - slamming the door so violently as his derriere crossed the threshold that her DPS guards came running, thinking it was a gunshot.

Wow, that sounds rather boorish. But that's not real hardball.

Piestewa Peak

Here's some hardball. The Governor wanted the Board on Geographic and Historic Names to name rename Squaw Peak. The Board wasn't interested, so she made them an offer they couldn't refuse.

When this proposal was submitted to the board, chairman Tim Norton refused to consider it because a 5-year waiting period is required before naming a place after a deceased person. This enraged the governor, who asked Norton to resign. The governor's assistant, Mario Diaz, called Norton's boss and insisted that Norton be forced to obey the governor's wishes.

Chamber of Horrors

The latest example of gubernatorial knee breaking occurred when the Governor insisted that the Arizona Chamber of Commerce change their long-standing policy against endorsing candidates.

Here's how hotazitgets tells the story.

After this ultimatum, the Board discussed it. Half of the members wanted to interview all of the gubernatorial candidates before making an endorsement, following proper procedures, whereas the other half wanted to accede immediately to the governor's demands. By a 13-12 vote (or it might have been 13-11), the pro-Napolitano members prevailed. The pro-Napolitano board members then called the Governor's office and let her staffers know which members of the board had voted against acceding immediately to her demands. The staffers called up the employers of those board members and threatened, yes threatened them saying that their employees' votes will create problems for them in the future!

This is a great story, but it hasn't been covered in the Republic. Funny, they have had plenty of room for stories on David Petersen and Russell Pearce, but the story about the Governor shaking down Chamber members for their endorsement must have slipped through the cracks.

So there you have it. If JD Hayworth is bully then Napolitano is Tony Soprano.

But when the Republic endorsed Janet, you didn't read about her boorish behavior or her extreme partisanship. They didn't mention her habitual threats, her throwing a University President out of her office and slamming the door. The Republic didn't mention the vetoes, the power grab or subsequent Supreme Court slap down.

No. JD Hayworth is a bully, but Janet Napolitano:

"has worked effectively with leaders in government, academia and business to put Arizona in a position to compete in a knowledge-based economy. All-day kindergarten is a reality, thanks to her vision."

Not that they are biased or anything.

UPDATE: Bob Robb provides this little did at his own editorial board

Hayworth's natural political mode is to be on the attack, all the time. That doesn't make him a bully. Unfortunately, it just makes him a typical modern-age politician.

My point exactly.

November 2, 2006

Revenge of the Rubes

The Democratic Party has turned the the Republic editorial board's "Hayworth is Bully" editorial into a very effective political commercial. It's effective because it's rare that a campaign can find a purely personal attack from an ostensibly credible source.

Republic editorials used to be important in their own right, but those days are long gone. Circulation is way down while the population has skyrocketed, so overall penetration has plummeted. The predictably shrill tone and often vapid reasoning decrease the effectiveness of the overall message and there are now plenty of other news sources.

However if someone wants to put half a million dollars behind the Republic's personal attacks against JD Hayworth, they can move some votes.

Let's Review

I pointed out my problems with the editorial here. The gist is that the Republic only had two examples in which JD was "bully." They didn't like his hard-line stance on immigration and he sat too close to Mitchell in the candidate interviews.

The second charge is so childish as to not need rebuttal. The first charge is obviously disingenuous because Mitchell is attacking Hayworth's immigration stand from the right. Mitchell is accusing JD of not being tough enough on immigration. Yet the Republic is blasting Hayworth for being too tough.

The Republic also ignored the Mitchell commercial that has Hayworth in a sniper scope as well as the bullying tactics of Mitchell's supporters.

There was one bullying tactic that I left out. Look at the snipe that Mitchell supporters have affixed to Hayworth's sign.

Obviously, you are not allowed to attach signs to your opponent's sign. This is past hardball--it's illegal.

The real irony of course is that in 2000, Gary Richardson printed signs that reminded voters that Mitchell voted for the alt fuels bill. The signs were free-standing and were placed near Mitchell's signs.

Mitchell stole the signs and threw them away. Mitchell was brought up on charges that were eventually dismissed.

The Republic Editorial Board was disappointed in Mitchell. Here's what they said at the time.

State Sen. Harry Mitchell stole his opponent's campaign signs in an election eve fit of political pomposity.

He admits it and passionately argues his justification for abridging a man's free speech rights and taking his property.

Passion aside, Mitchell was wrong. He should acknowledge as much, and he should be held accountable.

At the time, Mitchell argued passionately that it wasn't fair for Richardson to place signs NEAR his signs. He admitted stealing them and argued that it was ok.

Now Mitchell's camp is engaging in similar--but far worse--tactic of actually attaching his snipes to Hayworth's signs.

Who is the bully?

More importantly who is the rube?

The professionally trained journalists at the Republic have been duped. They wrote a personal attack on JD Hayworth that doesn't withstand even cursory scrutiny and the Democratic Party is spending heavily to ensure that the entire district knows about it.

The Hayworth/Mitchell race is going to be very close. I have no idea who is going to win. But if Hayworth survives he will be invincible. If a candidate of Mitchell's stature can't win--with as much money as Mitchell has, in a year that's this bad for Republicans--then no one can beat Hayworth.

One thing's for sure. Either way, he has no need to speak to the Republic again.

Convicted?...No, Never Convicted

If you are an American Male in your 40s you will have to concede that the collected works of Bill Murray have had an enormous impact on your life.

Find a group of middle aged guys and say "He's on the 9th Green at Augusta..." and they will respond in unison "...a Cinderella story, about to become the Masters Champion."

One of Murray's best efforts was Stripes. The story of a complete loser who joins the Army. At the recruiting office, the Sergeant asks if he's ever been convicted of a crime. Murray strokes his chin and says:

"Convicted?...No, Never Convicted."

Yesterday I printed the picture of Gabby's group hug with District 30 Candidates Clarence Boykins and Jeff Chimene. I linked to a Star story about Chimene going into a Twinkie induced rage and attacking his girlfriend with a two by four.

The Star story says that Chimene was "convicted." Well, I received this letter from Mr. Chimene's attorney.

The letter assures me that "Mr. Chimene was not convicted of that charge..." and informs me that I am "on notice not to further publish the slanderous statement that Mr. Chimene has been convicted."

So noted.

Let me make it clear. "Convicted?...No, Never Convicted"

I couldn't help noticing the resemblance...and that's the fact, Jack.

November 1, 2006

Gabby Should Choose Better Friends

This is a picture of Democratic Superstar Gabby Giffords with District 30 Candidates Clarence Boykins and Jeff Chimene.

Both of Gabby's friends have become somewhat notorious in the waning days of the campaign. Boykins has been the only guy in the nation dumb enough to criticize Representative Jonathon Paton's service in Iraq, and Chimene hit his girlfriend with a a two by four because he was high on Hostess Twinkies.

Here's the Star on Boykin's attacks (Boykins looks a lot better in my picture.)

On Paton's departure to conduct military intelligence work, Boykins calls the move "brilliant" and says "it came timely." His frank talk is the first public criticism of Paton, an Army Reservist, since he announced in August that he was being voluntarily deployed to Iraq.

Here's the Star on Chimene's assault.

"We were having severe problems by that point, and I was thinking of leaving, and she really had a hard time with that," he said. Chimene said she placed herself in his car to prevent him from leaving, and he tried to get her out of the car.

"It wasn't a two-by-four," he said. "It was a stick, a two-by-two. A piece of tree or something." Chimene said the woman intentionally tried to anger him, and his low blood sugar made him irritable.

I don't mean to point fingers. I mean who among us hasn't overdosed on Twinkies and hit is girlfriend with a two by four.

But consider the double standard.

Democrats demanded that Len Munsil distance himself from Russell Pearce. And after Pearce's email incident, JD Hayworth withdrew his endorsement. When a Republican crosses the line other Republicans distance themselves from him.

Here we have Gabby Giffords in a group hug with the guy who considers Paton's service in Iraq to be opportunistic and they guy who beat his girlfriend.

Where are the calls that she disavow these losers?

Naturally, the media is making no calls.

Not that they are biased or anything.

Deep Roots In the Community

Even though Arizona has a pretty transient population, voters want to know how long a candidate has lived in the district. Some candidates brag about being, say, third generation Arizonans.

When I ran for office, I had lived in the district for a long time, but I lived in an apartment on Indian School and I was concerned that it would be used against me. I solved the problem by writing "suite" before my apartment number on all my campaign material. I still got my mail and my opponent assumed I had a headquarters. So, I'm not critical of folks who campaign out of apartments.

I am however critical of people who campaign out of hotels.

District 17 House Candidate David Schapira lives at 1535 North Scottsdale Road # 1025.

Here's what you get when you Google that address.

Oakwood Worldwide Corporate Apartments

Unlike ordinary hotel rooms, Oakwood apartments have an inviting, home-like feel, and a lot more space to relax and unwind... making it perfect for extended stay business travelers, relocating employees, entertainment industry clients, and others seeking a spacious and cost-saving alternative to hotels. Everything is included in an Oakwood furnished rental, from designer furniture to home electronics to all utilities. Partnered with world-class service and amenities, Oakwood maintains its earned reputation as The Most Trusted Name in Corporate Housing Worldwide.^SM

Well, at least it's an extended stay hotel. Wouldn't want to look like a carpetbagger.

CORRECTION: One Schapira's supporters assures me that Schapira lives in the non-hotel side of this complex.

October 31, 2006

¡Sí, Se Puede!

Arizona 8th is reporting an interesting factoid.

Cochise County workers are reporting that of 12,000 jury summons sent to registered voters, 500 recipients called back to say they could not serve because they are not citizens. Assuming a random sample, that's over 4% of registered voters that are not U.S. citizens—an interesting report given the issues in this year's election

The Mail Box Rules

Greg,

I received a letter Friday from ACT urging me to vote against Prop. 107. Normally, this wouldn’t be noteworthy, but it was addressed to me at my work address which is only used for my State Bar membership. I assume that the State Bar either donated or sold my name and address to the anti-Prop. 107 crowd.

I’d love to find out if other lawyers received the anti-prop. 107 mail at the address they use for the State Bar.

Name withheld

If you had a similar experience, let me know.

Death of a Thousand Cuts

Two years ago, the Business Journal reported that the Republic's circulation numbers were in steep decline.

The average daily circulation for Monday-Saturday distribution of The Republic is 413,268. That's a 4.4 percent drop from its 432,285 paid subscribers in September 2003 and a 7.9 percent drop from 2002. That translates to a loss of 35,000.

Circulations numbers come out every six months and they are down every six months. They were issued again yesterday and it's no surprise that they are down again.

In fact, circulation has dropped below the psychologically important 400,000 mark--down another 2.5% to 397,294. Maricopa county is one of the fastest growing in the nation and is now up around 3.5 million. The Republic's penetration has plummeted. Its influence has dropped even faster.

Here's an interesting graphic. The red line is obviously the population of Maricopa County and at the bottom, I've drawn an approximation of the Republic's circulation during the last 20 years or so. It looks, well, shall we say, somewhat flaccid.

Young Talented and Wired

The Arizona Blogosphere is starting to mature.

Here's the Republic's worst nightmare. These guys have time and talent.

If you enjoy reading espresso pundit, be sure to check out these blogs.

http://hotazitgets.com/

http://www.sonoranalliance.com/

http://franciosi.blogspot.com/

http://arizonaeighth.blogspot.com/

http://thinkrightaz.blogspot.com/

And here's a new one dedicated to my favorite topic.

The Last Days of the Republic.

Read these blogs for a week and you will realize that these guys provide better coverage in their spare time than the current crop of political reporters provides full time.

JD and the Bullies

The Republic editorial board members showed an amazing lack of professionalism and class last week when they resorted to name calling and declared that Congressman JD Hayworth is a "bully."

It is high time to hit this matter squarely: J. D. Hayworth is a bully. He may not yet have reached the point where you can't take him anywhere, but you certainly can't take him to a calm, civil discussion.

The Republic presents two pieces of evidence that JD is a bully. First, he's a hawk on immigration.

During this past term, Hayworth has devolved from a windy and sometimes cartoonish politician into an angry demagogue who has shamelessly and divisively exploited the immigration issue, arguably the No. 1 concern of Arizonans.

Fair enough. Reasonable people can disagree on an immigration strategy. But the Republic's stance on JD is revealed to be completely disingenuous when we remember that Mitchell is attacking Hayworth from the RIGHT. Mitchell was nailed by "3 on Your Side" for falsely claiming that Hayworth has voted for "amnesty" four times.

That's right, the Republic is nailing Hayworth for being too strident on immigration while Mitchell is pounding Hayworth for not being tough enough on immigration--and JD is the bully.

The second charge against Hayworth is laughable.

In a meeting last week with The Republic's Editorial Board, Hayworth repeatedly positioned himself like a smirking hawk, inches from the face of his "prey," Mitchell, while the Democrat responded to questions. For that overbearing attempt at intimidation, Hayworth deserves a sound rap on the knuckles.

Sitting too close? Did Mitchell raise his hand and say "Mr. Boas, JD is touching me." What a wimp. This is Congress. Grow up.

That's it. Two examples. JD sits too close and he's too strident on immigration. Wow, what a bully.

But the Republic neglects to mention the behavior of Mitchell and his supporters. In addition to attacking Hayworth with false charges of voting for "Amnesty," Mitchell has engaged in other questionable tactics.

I was the first person to print this picture--then it went national. The sniper picture was featured on Fox news, and it's a big part of the "3 on Your Side" piece that I mentioned above.

Mitchell claims it's a camera lens. Give me a break. I've taken a lot of pictures and that's not a lens; it's a scope. If putting your opponent in a sniper scope isn't a bullying tactic, I don't know what is.

And how about Mitchell's supporters? How have they been treating JD Hayworth?

Here's a letter that I received from Rep. Laura Knaperek.

Hi Greg,

Thought you would find it amusing that while attending several GAIN (National Neighborhood Association Night Out) picnics in Tempe with JD Hayworth, I witnessed the hostess of one of the neighborhood associations ask (the last one we attended) ask JD Hayworth to leave. She told JD that some folks were complaining that he was there. Just so happens that she is a Mitchell supporter. JD and I left. As we left the Mayor pulled up and asked the woman why she sent her elected officials away. She said that "Laura could stay, but JD was not welcome". With that the Mayor responded by saying, "If JD is not welcome than I am leaving, too". A few minutes later it was reported that Harry Mitchell showed up and was warmly welcomed.

Ahhh, another day in Tempe...

Laura

Golly, Mitchell supporters were acting like, well you know, bullies.

Here's another example. Political junkies will be familiar with the disastrous appearance of a Hayworth representative at the Temple Beth Israel forum. Nowicki has full coverage here.

More than half the crowd claimed to be offended and walked out. But it appears that the entire event may have been orchestrated. Here's a letter from an audience member.

Much of the audience acted like a mob. To say the behavior was spontaneous is to stretch one's imagination. I can only suggest that it was orchestrated from the start. I was so appalled that I did not stay for Mr. Mitchell and Congressman Hayworth's representatives. My wife, a lifelong Democrat and not a supporter of Sen. Kyl or Congressman Hayworth, did stay. From the moment that Congressman Hayworth's representatives took the platform, there were loud boos and catcalls. This continued the whole time they were there.

So there you have it. Elections are a rough and tumble business and when you are in a tough race, you can expect that your opponent's supporters will kick you out of neighborhood meetings, hoot down your representatives at a Temple forum and lie about your record.

In a really tough race, you may even expect that your opponent will be desperate enough to flash a subliminal image of you in the crosshairs of a sniper scope.

What you shouldn't expect is that the largest newspaper in the state will consider your opponent's use of the sniper scope, the false commercials, the rude supporters and claim that you are the bully because you sat too close to him in the candidate interview.

No wonder it's a dying industry.

October 30, 2006

Dude, Immigration has Two Ms.

(Of course it only has one M in Spanish.)

'Nuff Said

Yes, I'm following the latest Gabby Giffords story. No I'm not going to print any of it.

The Communists are Getting Excited

The Communist Party is trying to "retake" Congress and they are getting pretty excited about their prospects in Arizona.

Here's how the People's Weekly World describes itself.

We enjoy a special relationship with the Communist Party USA, founded in 1919, and publish its news and views.

Here's what they think of their prospects in Arizona.

TUCSON, Ariz. — In spite of last week’s U.S. Supreme Court decision that cleared the way for Arizona to require voters to show identification before casting a ballot, public opinion polls show several incumbent right-wing congressmen in deep trouble.

In Arizona’s 8th Congressional District, in a race for a seat vacated by the retirement of Republican Jim Kolbe, Democrat Gabrielle Giffords is way ahead of Republican Randy Graf. Graf, who is the darling of the anti-immigrant militias, is so far to the right that he has been repudiated by many Republicans, including Kolbe. However, he has been endorsed by Arizona Sen. John McCain, who sometimes tries to pose as a moderate. Giffords, who began her campaign last spring refusing to call for withdrawal from Iraq, has gradually shifted her position and is now calling for ending the occupation by the end of 2007.

In northern Arizona’s 1st CD, which includes most of the Navajo Nation, progressive ACLU attorney Ellen Simon is leading incumbent Rick Renzi in the latest polls. Renzi has been described as one of the most corrupt members of Congress. Simon has the support of labor, the Sierra Club, Emily’s List and Navajo elected officials. She is calling health care a “right” and demanding an immediate end to the war on Iraq. Simon minces no words, describing Renzi as “a tool of big business interests, supporting gas, oil and pharmaceuticals over the average person.”

In Phoenix’s East Valley suburbs another Democrat, Harry Mitchell, is in dead heat with Christian-right Rep. J.D. Hayworth. Hayworth is so right-wing that when he first ran for Congress in 1992, former Republican Sen. Barry Goldwater called for his defeat. Mitchell, who is a former state senator and mayor of Tempe, is not running a particularly progressive campaign, concentrating instead on Hayworth’s vile record in Congress. A stronger stand against the unpopular war in Iraq might be enough to ensure a Mitchell victory, analysts say.

In an unsigned opinion on requiring voters to show ID, the Supreme Court reversed a ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that had blocked the Arizona law from taking effect this year. At least half of Arizona voters are expected to vote by mail and will not be affected.

One Small Correction

In the post below, I mentioned that the outrageous quote from Mayor Scruggs was sparked by a letter from a Precinct Committeeman.

That's not exactly right. I received this correction via email.

Greg

Just to be 100% correct:

The motion to send that letter was moved, seconded and passed unanimously at the LD-4 meeting held on October 16, 2006. The letter was signed by the executive board members of LD-4. I am extremely proud of the members of LD-4 who voted for this action.

I find it interesting that one who holds a supposedly 'non-partisan' elected position that they would stoop to entering a partisan race by officially using that position to endorse someone in a partisan campaign.

I also understand that Ms. Scruggs campaigned in front of Republican groups, touting her 'Republicanism' in an effort to gain their votes.

Somehow, she seems to have conveniently forgotten that now, along with the Republican Party Platform.

Let me be perfectly clear: LD-4 is not trying to tell Ms. Scruggs how to vote when she enters the voting booth; we just want elected officials who claim to be Republicans to remain loyal to their party, or at the very least, not to publicly flaunt their disloyalty. To do otherwise will (and should) draw the wrath of loyal party members. Since this action became public, I have received many emails and comments of "thanks", "well done", and "it's about time". I spent part of yesterday and today at the State Fair in the Republican booth, and was amazed at the positive comments from those attendees stopping by.

Lyle Tuttle, Legislative District 4 GOP Chairman
Home of 68,975 Republicans!

October 28, 2006

Mayor Scruggs has Spoken the Nasty Secret.

There is a nasty little secret at the state capitol. The Conservative core of the Republican caucus has always been held in low regard by the moderates, democrats, democratic staff, some lobbyists and reporters. These groups have always had nick names for the Conservative wing of the party...and those names have become increasingly hate filled.

When I served in the 90s, the Conservative caucus was called the "Mean 13." Conservative representation in the caucus grew and a reporter coined the term "Wackos." The name stuck and Conservatives in the legislature were referred to "Wackos" or "Wacks" throughout most of the 90s. Moderates have always been called the "Mods."

Something changed in about 2001. Thanks to Clean Elections, Conservatives came to dominate the Republican caucuses in the House and the Senate and the tone became much more shrill. Since 2001 Conservatives have been known as the "Kool-Aid Drinkers."

The term is incredibly offensive but is widely used by reporters, staffers, lobbyists, moderate Republicans and Democrats. Whenever I confront people who use the term "Kool-Aid Drinker" to describe a Conservative, they always point out that most of the conservatives don't drink alcohol and many of them are Mormon so they don't drink tea or coffee either. So they tell me with a knowing grin that most conservatives drink Kool-Aid.

That's bunk. I've never met a Conservative who drinks Kool-Aid. Most of my Mormon friends drink lemonade.

We know what the folks at the capitol are referring to, and you know it too. They are referring to Jonestown.

Here's CNN on what happened at Jonestown.

What is known about the end of Jonestown is that on November 18, 1978, Jones ordered more than 900 of his followers to drink cyanide-poisoned punch. He told guards to shoot anyone who refused or tried to escape. Among the dead: more than 270 children.

Glendale Mayor Elaine Scruggs has finally let the cat out of the bag.

Scruggs is unhappy because some Conservatives are asking her to resign since she is endorsing Napolitano despite being a Republican elected official.

Here's the Mayor's response.

This reminds me of Reverend Jim Jones saying, 'Stand in line and drink the Kool-Aid,' " Scruggs said, referring to the cult leader responsible for the 1978 Jonestown, Guyana, mass suicide. "That's how this message comes across to me. What this says is, we are not to think; we are not to make decisions."

Yeah, that's the ticket. Scruggs got a letter from a Republican Precinct Committeeman asking her to resign and that reminds her of the cult leader who killed 1,000 people.

Can you imagine if a comparison like that was made to any other group at the capitol? Can you imagine the reaction if the Democrats or the Hispanic caucus were described in similar terms?

And what about the overt religious bias? Do we describe Jewish representatives in disparaging terms? How about the Native American members? Do reporters refer to them as the the Peyote smokers?

Why didn't the reporter react to the slur? Why didn't he say "Wait a second Mayor, are you really comparing this letter to the murder of a thousand people?"

He didn't question her because he hears the term every day. He hears it in the press room; he hears it in the halls; he hears it from the Democrats; and has probably spoken it himself.

I will once again emphasize the double standard. Russell Pearce referred to a 50s era program by its official name "Operation Wetback" and all hell broke loose.

Reporters, staffers, lobbyists and moderates routinely use a denigrating term to describe religious conservatives and compare them to a mass murderer and the political community yawns.

Post Script

Conservatives don't build Utopian Communities. We don't have enough faith in human nature to believe people can all get along in some sort of communal life, free of the constraints of law and property.

Pretty soon someone covets your ox. Then he shoots you.

While liberals like to point to people like Jim Jones as a warning about Conservative authority, Jones was a liberal. His utopian experiment--like all utopian experiments--was undergirded by brute force.

Here's another point from the CNN article.

Only two years before, Jones -- the charismatic leader of the Peoples Temple, an interracial organization that helped the desperate -- was the toast of San Francisco's political circles.

Kool-Aid drinkers indeed.

This is the funniest commercial of the Season.

There is a rally at the 9-11 Memorial Saturday at noon.

October 27, 2006

Rios Residence Revelations Review

Ok, gang, let's review. Earlier this week I mentioned that Rep. Pete Rios's Democratic running mate--Barbara McGuire--is running an advertisement in which she claims to be the only Democratic candidate who lives in District 23.

This is extraordinary. It's no longer just me shouting in the wilderness that Rios doesn't live in his district. His running mate is PAYING to run an ad in which she claims to be the only Democratic candidate who lives in the district.

On Wednesday, I received a letter from Ms. McGuire's campaign manager in which he confirmed that he and Ms. McGuire believe that neither Pete or Rebecca Rios live in District 23.

He mentions that he supports the Rioses and that he doesn't think it's a problem that they don't live in the district.

Since then I've done a little research and confirmed that Senators and Representatives indeed have to live in their district.

See ARS Sec. 38-291, Par. 5, which states that "an office shall be deemed vacant" when a legislator " {ceases} to be a resident of the district". This provision is automatic in its application.

I also asked the question "where does Rebecca live?" I received this email yesterday.

Greg -

To answer your question about where Rebecca Rios lives, (or lived as recently as a year ago) she claimed her address was 7642 S. 41^st Place, in Phoenix. This is in the 16^th Legislative District. She listed this address as her permanent address in court records during her divorce as recently as November 2005.

Permanent? That seems so, well, you know, permanent.

Of course you won't read this in the Republic because, they are, like you know, Democrats.

Let's Give Janet the Legislature She Deserves

This is a picture of the Governor with District 30 Senate candidate Jeff Chimene. You can see from the endorsement on the bottom left that Janet thinks "Jeff will make a great legislator."

I noticed that Jeff's issues don't include Domestic Violence. Too bad, because it seems like he's got some experience in that area.

Chimene's girlfriend, who said she was beaten with a two-by-four, later sued and was awarded $25,000 for her injuries and in punitive damages.

"It wasn't a two-by-four," he said. "It was a stick, a two-by-two. A piece of tree or something."

Chimene said the woman intentionally tried to anger him, and his low blood sugar made him irritable.

"I recognize what I have done, and I've done a lot to control my diet and things that led to that," said Chimene, who expected the incident to come up when he decided to run for office.

His ex girlfriend must not have spent much time at Home Depot because she doesn't know her lumber. Chimene has a point. "It wasn't a two-by-four, it was a two-by-two." Well, that's much better.

Then he adds the Twinkie defense. He's rehabilitated himself by...getting control of his diet. Yeah, that's the ticket.

So is the Governor going to withdraw her endorsement? Is the media going to ask her about it?

Can you imagine if Chimene was a Republican and he had a picture standing next to Len Munsil? The media would write a story every day for the next 2 weeks demanding that Munsil denounce the Republican wife beater.

When Mom's not Happy, Nobody's Happy

Last week, I mentioned that State Representative Kyrsten Sinema who chairs the "No on 107" Committee made these comments in a magazine called 944.

"For instance, this supposed New Feminism. These women who act like staying at home, leeching off their husbands or boyfriends, and just cashing the checks is some sort of feminism because they're choosing to live that life. That's bullshit. I mean what the fuck are we really talking about here?"

Apparently, some moms found these comments to somehow be offensive. Well, you might not be shocked to learn that a bunch of them showed up at the Capitol to protest this expletive charged rant.

I especially like this youngster.

Paul Davenport has excellent coverage for the Associated Press.

Supporters of the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage on Arizona's Nov. 7 ballot criticized the opposition campaign's leader Thursday for published comments in which she referred to stay-at-home women as "leeching off their husbands or boyfriends."

The funniest part of the rally was when reporter Howie Fischer asked one of the speakers if she supported women who choose to work.

That didn't go over well. One of the women yelled "we do work."

It may have been my imagination, but I think the crowd actually surged forward.

Howie just stared at his shoes.

October 26, 2006

Check out this Commercial for Rep. Paton.

Look Who Just Got Punk'd

Remember the big political gimmick of 2005? That's what I call the hundreds of illegal 4 X 4 black and white signs that asked if Arizona's kids were getting "Punk'd." I didn't have any idea what "punk'd" meant on account of my not having cable TV. But I did a little research...

Apparently, MTV played quality music like the Cars and Dire Straits until about 1985. Then they switched to Rap, until those guys all killed each other and now MTV is some sort of reality show where people ride bikes off buildings and play jokes on each other. When someone finds out that they have been the victim of a joke, they realize that they have been "Punk'd."

The guys who sponsored those signs last year rolled the ad campaign into an initiative to raise the cigarette tax 80 cents a pack so they can spend the money on programs "for the children." Which is a great idea, because the state obviously doesn't spend any money on children now.

Well, it turns out that there are two types of people in the world--lawyers and people who can do math. Because it looks like the folks who drafted the initiative itself got it right, but when the folks wrote the description for the ballot they wrote ".80 cents" instead of "80 cents" or ".80 dollars."

If you have a third grader, you are probably up on the "new math" thing called "fractions" and "decimals" so you will know that ".80 cents" is just under a penny. It's 1/100th of "80 cents." Mary Jo Pitzl has full coverage here.

The Republic calls it a "typo," but it's actually a drafting error. This makes for an interesting legal case. Some folks are going to go into the polls and read the initiative for the first time. The language on the ballot says that the tax is less than a penny a pack. In reality, the tax is 100 times greater than that.

Surely that's going to make a difference to some voters. But will it make a difference to the judges?

Stay tuned.

District 23 Dems: Pete and Rebecca Rios don't Live Here

Yesterday I pointed out an ad by District 23 Democratic candidate Barbara McGuire in which she claims to be the only Democratic candidate "Physically Residing" in District 23. I emailed her campaign and asked them to tell me what they meant by the line "physically residing." I received this extraordinarily candid letter from her campaign manager Thomas Elliot.

Hi Greg,
We have had that in Mrs. McGuire's ads since the primary. In fairness to the other candidates, I don't believe there is anything in the Arizona
Constitution that would make it illegal for them to live outside the
district they represent in the Legislature.

In the case of Rep. Pete Rios who says he is from Dudleyville, there is much controversy, but indeed he has in the past lived there in LD23 and even owned a business there at one time. He lives in Apache Junction and his daughter Sen. Rebecca Rios lives there too. It is a way for him to be in between Phoenix and Dist 23 that he represents. I think however, he actually lives in LD22. You can check Maricopa County Recorder and Pinal County Recorder property records. He, however is not the only one. I heard that there is a candidate running for Peoria who actually lives in Tucson.

The thing is, that if the people want those guys and ladies representing
them its what they get. I just think that Mrs. McGuire has an advantage for the people of her district in hearing their concerns daily at her business, at the neighborhood store and all the areas she travels to in Dist 23 in her role as Salvation Army Director. I think she can best represent the people of Dist 23.

In so far as Rep. Rios is concerned, he is a likeable guy and maybe he stays in touch with his district through his many relatives who do live in LD23. I hope he and Mrs. McGuire get elected. Mr. Rios has a lot of experience and switched to be a Rep as he exhausted his Senate term limits and so he swapped roles with his daughter in the fact that she is now a Senator and he is a Rep. I think Rios Rios and McGuire is a good team.

Wow. What a great letter.

Let's set aside the requirement to live in his district for now. Pete Rios is reimbursed thousands of dollars each year for the mileage to and from the Dudleyville trailer.

If Mr. Elliot is correct and Pete Rios doesn't actually live District 23, then at least some of his mileage reimbursements are based on fraudulent claims.

Let me point out that State Treasurer David Petersen is about to resign from office because investigators have learned that he legally earned, but improperly reported, $4,200 of outside income.

The media know about Rios's residency issues; they simply don't report them. Why? Well, there's one big difference between Rios and Peterson. If you look closely at the ballot, you will see that Rios has a "D" by his name. Pedersen has an "R" by his name.

Two Quick Points

In case you think that I play the same game that the Republic does, remember that I'm the one who broke the Pederson story. And I was the first one to print the famous memo that brought him down. The difference is that the local media actually followed up on the Pederson story and buried the Rios story.

The second point is this. Where does Rebecca Rios live? We have long suspected that she doesn't live in District 23. But unlike Pete Rios's Apache Junction home (in District 22), it's hard to figure out exactly where Rebecca lives.

Is Thomas Elliot correct? Does she live in Apache Junction? Elliot may not know where she lives. But he has a pretty good idea where she doesn't live...District 23.

Here's the Wall Street Journal's John Fund on the Memorial

Monument to Correctness

A controversial memorial to the victims of 9/11 has become a campaign issue in next month's elections in Arizona. When the memorial was unveiled on Phoenix's Capitol Mall on the fifth anniversary of the attacks, its "moral equivalence" message sparked immediate protests.

Members of the committee that approved the memorial insist it honors those who died on 9/11 in an "even-handed" way. But critics say it's inappropriate that among the memorial's 54 inscriptions are such statements as "You don't win battles of terrorism with more battles." Other messages feature a discussion of an "erroneous U.S. air strike" and the "fear of foreigners" that is prevalent in America. Perhaps most controversial of all was the fact that the signature phrase uttered by passengers on United Flight 93 as they charged the pilots' cabin on 9/11 -- "Let's roll" -- was rejected as a possible inscription.

"As an American, I am disgusted by this memorial," says Mike Broomhead, whose brother was killed in a checkpoint shooting in Iraq. Tom Smith, a former state senator who chairs the Capitol Mall Commission, is calling for the memorial to be covered up until the committee that designed it can meet again to reconsider revising the most controversial inscriptions. Unfortunately, committee members, with the support of Democratic Governor Janet Napolitano, are refusing to reconvene or make any decision about the monument until after the November elections. Meanwhile, state legislators are being put on the spot by questions about where they stand on the memorial, and GOP gubernatorial candidate Len Munsil says he will tear down the monument if elected.

Some legislators privately admit the memorial's inscriptions are needlessly polemical. The northern Arizona town of Winslow had a better idea. Its 9/11 memorial is a twisted 20-foot steel beam that was pulled from the rubble of the World Trade Center. It contains no inscriptions.

"That's how a 9/11 memorial should be," said Michael Herald, a Phoenix resident, whose brother was killed in the World Trade Center attack. "All we wanted was a stone in the ground."

-- John Fund

October 25, 2006

Is Pete Rios' Running Mate Claiming he doesn't live in the District?

Democrat Barbara McGuire is in a hotly contested race for the State House of Representatives. Pete Rios has one of the District 23 House seats and several candidates are vying for the open seat vacated by Cheryl Chase.

It's been rumored for years that Pete Rios doesn't actually live in his district. Earlier this year I pointed out that there isn't a dwelling at the location that Rep. Rios lists as his Dudleyville address.

Rep. Rios pounced on me as soon as I raised the issue. We finally came to the conclusion that Mr. Rios has parked this trailer on a friend's lot and he considers it his primary residence. The nice house that he owns in Apache Junction--two blocks out of his district--is his "session" home.

The interesting issue, of course, is that Rios claims that he drives the extra 75 miles to the trailer every week and charges the state for thousands of dollars annually in mileage expenses.

Rios ended our email exchange by threatening to "punch me in the gut." The media never picked up the story and that's where the issue ended.

But then I noticed this ad that Barbara McGuire placed in the "Hot Spot Journal." Here's the relevant portion.

"Barbara... is the only democrat candidate physically residing and working full-time in her district."

"Physically residing" is an odd phrase. As opposed to what? Legally residing. After all, no one really questions whether Rios could call the trailer his "legal" residence.

There are a couple ways to interpret that sentence, but it looks to me like she's saying that her running mate doesn't "physically reside" in the district. The sentence doesn't make much sense otherwise.

Of course the only way the voters of District 23 will know this information is if they read espresso pundit or "The Hot Spot Journal"...you know...the real media.

"We've got to Get Him Out of Here"

Here's great video of "3 on Your Side" interviewing Harry Mitchell. Mitchell refused to be interviewed, so the news crew caught up with him in a parking lot by the Capitol.

The interview was going badly...Mitchell was trying to explain why his commercial puts JD Hayworth in a sniper scope and justify his ridiculous claim that Hayworth voted for amnesty.

Two minutes and forth seconds into the nightmare, someone on his staff yelled, "We've got to get him out of here."

But don't worry, Harry Mitchell wasn't retreating, he was "redeploying to the perimeter."

Back stabbing, Back firing and Back peddling

The Pima County Democratic Party has attacked Rep. Jonathon Paton for his decision to serve in Iraq during the election and the first part of the Legislative Session.

Their attack has gone nowhere and other Democrats are conspicuous in their silence.

It's looking like the Democratic Party called on some vets to make a statement and then when it went badly, the Party backed off and left them hanging.

One guy who looks incredibly bad is former Congressional candidate Alex Rodriguez. Rodriguez is on the TUSD school board and one of the people who helped get him there was Jonathon Paton. It looks like Rodriguez is beginning to regret his comments.

Rodriguez says he wrote his comments after being contacted by the Democratic Party, but he rejected the notion that it was a partisan move, calling Paton a friend.

Rodriguez said he thinks Paton should step down, but said he isn't criticizing Paton — he's trying to educate voters.

Sure, he's trying to "educate voters."

It would serve him right if Rep. Paton came back from Iraq and kicked a little A-Rod butt.

October 24, 2006

Driver's Licenses for Illegals...

Click here to see Len Munsil's newest mail piece.

Rep. Sinema and the F-Bomb

Rep. Sinema's expletive filled rant about stay-at-home moms is getting some attention. I mentioned the story last week. Here's the Business Journal's version.

The Democratic state lawmaker who chairs the main opposition group to a gay marriage ban referendum has made some disparaging remarks about stay-at home moms and conservative Republicans.

State Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, told the 944 magazine in a recent issue that women and moms who stay at home and don't work are dependent on men and "leeching off their husbands." Sinema also called conservatives "Neanderthals".

Speaking of the F-Bomb

Speaking of politicians who drop the F-Bomb in magazine interviews...you would be amazed at what turns up when you Google local politicians and some key nasty words. Here's the lede paragraph from a 1998 Phoenix New Times article.

"Martha, turn on the fucking air!"
Actually, Janet Napolitano and her campaign staffer Martha Fraser Harmon get along much better than that. But it's hot in the back of the Acura and Janet has a cold and Martha's stalling, getting her seat adjusted and the keys out, and everyone's worried about being late to the first campaign stop of the day at the Green Valley Senior Center.

Wow, I'm glad that I'm not the Governor's Latte Fetcher--even if the job does pay six figures.

Memorial Rally this Saturday.

I want to thank everyone for supporting our efforts to change the 9-11 memorial to something appropriate that Arizona can be proud of. We are going to have a rally at the memorial this Saturday 10-28-2006 at 12noon. We invite you to join us. We'd like to have a large turn out to show the Governor and the commission that we want this memorial changed NOW!

Political Science 101

There is a weird conspiracy theory going around the lefty blogs. The theory is that Congressman Rick Renzi has been indicted but the US Attorney for Arizona is sitting on it so that Republicans don't lose the seat.

Here's Tedski's take on it.

The allegation that is being discussed in political and press circles up in Phoenix is that Paul Charlton, a Bush appointee, is sitting on the indictment until after the election. It would be hard to keep a lid on this thing now with this much buzz about it.

Hmm, let's think this one through. If this were a Senate seat the allegation would make some sense. After all the Senator could win the election and then resign or be removed and the Governor would have to replace him with someone from the same party. Democrats would be frozen out of the seat for at least 6 years.

However, unlike the US Senate, House seats must be filled by election. If something were to happen to Renzi--which strikes me as highly unlikely--then there would be a special election to fill his seat.

Why would Paul Charlton risk his career for a blatantly political move that would provide no long-term benefits to Republicans?

October 23, 2006

Things are Getting Ugly

Rep. Pamela Gorman's son found a stack of vandalized signs on their patio Sunday morning. I guess someone decided to teach a lesson in political hardball.

On the way out, the jerk decided to spray paint the bumper sticker on the car in her driveway.

October 22, 2006

Isn't There Even one Issue that's Above Gamesmanship?

Here's the latest picture of State Representative Jonathon Paton in Iraq. Paton has been profiled in the New York Times, CNN, Fox and other national media outlets for serving on active duty during his term of Legislative service. People Magazine called me last week and asked my thoughts about Rep. Paton.

None of the articles have been critical. In fact none of the comments have been critical.

Paton made it clear that he would be back sometime in February and that he will miss very little of the legislative session. I've been impressed that the district 30 Democrats have been smart enough not to make an issue of the fact that he's unable to run an effective campaign from Iraq and that he will miss the first few weeks of the session.

I spoke too soon. The Pima County Democratic Party just issued this press release.

Local Veterans Comment on Rep. Paton's "Absentee" Campaign

Tucson, AZ (10/20/06) - Local Democratic military veterans commented today on Republican Representative Jonathon Paton's absentee political campaign for Legislative District 30 in the Arizona House of Representatives and the likelihood that he will miss much -- if not all -- of the 2007 Legislative Session if elected.

Paton has been absent for most of the campaign due to his recent voluntary Army Reserve service in Iraq and he has missed all candidate debates/forums for the General Election.

The Pima County Democrats wait in the weeds and two weeks before the election, they decide to pounce on Paton. So much for any bipartisan spirit.

Does this display of raw political gamesmanship represent the views of other Arizona Democrats?

What does Gabby Giffords think of this outrageous stunt? How about Governor Napolitano?

I'm not going to question anyone's patriotism. But pretty soon, I'm going to start questioning their judgment.

Come on guys, this is getting too easy

In the Sinema post below I point out that the Republic will never print Sinema's outrageous comments and I concluded with this sentence.

Remember that the next time that you read an article about Russell Pearce.

The media has had a couple days to digest the Sinema comments and in Sunday's Republic, there is a lengthy article about...Russell Pearce.

The article is a classic hit piece. It breathlessly rehashes the weeks old Pearce story and the hook that allows it to be printed is obviously fabricated.

Before I get an nasty email from reporter Mike Cronin about my choice of "fabricated," let me point out some facts. Here's the lede.

The second e-mail apology that Republican state Rep. Russell Pearce sent to supporters two weeks ago suggested to pollster Mike O'Neil that the three-term lawmaker may be in trouble.

That's the hook. That's the tidbit that allows the Republic to lead the Valley and State section with a huge B1 story that rehashes Pearce's travails of the last few weeks.

"...pollster Mike O'Neil that the three-term lawmaker may be in trouble."

But is there a poll? No.

Well, does the pollster think that Pearce is in trouble? Incredibly the answer is no. Here's the key line of the story.

"Look, that is still a very, very safe seat," O'Neil said of Pearce

Very, very safe? And this is a story about Pearce being in a bind?

Of course, Reporter Mike Cronin went to another pollster as well.

Like many others, Arizona State University pollster Bruce Merrill, predicted Pearce's deportation comments wouldn't hurt him on Election Day.

In fact, those statements "probably actually help him with the people in his district," Merrill said.

So there are exactly two pollsters quoted and neither of them think that Pearce is in trouble. In fact, Merrill believes that Pearce's statements actually help him in his race, and O'Neil thinks that Pearce is "very, very safe."

Shall we go back to my use of the word "fabricated?" The story is like one of those math riddles that you ask 2nd graders. Once you add up everything on one side and then factor in everything from the other side, the equation equals zero.

This story doesn't have to be debunked using external information. This story falls apart internally.

That's how hit pieces work folks. They are full of sound and furry yet signify nothing.

And Sinema? Well, her expletive filled rant about stay at home moms being leeches remains out of print.

Not that the media are biased or anything.

October 21, 2006

Kyrsten Sinema on Women who Choose To Stay Home.

I've mentioned that when a Conservative says something really stupid, they immediately get nailed and when a liberal says something equally stupid, the mainstream media snoozes through it.

I've often provided the example of Eddie Basha comparing Wal-Mart to Nazis with impunity.

I also used the example of State Representative Kyrsten Sinema complaining about working with "overweight white men." That quote was never picked up by the mainstream media.

In addition to her duties as a State Representative, Sinema is the Chair of Arizona Together, the group organized to defeat the Protect Marriage Amendment.

Sinema has an interview in this month's issue of a lifestyle magazine called "944". The magazine gushes over Sinema. In the intro, the magazine says "She's Bisexual, supports migrant rights and calls herself a socialist."

I thought this passage was really interesting. It seems Sinema's disdain isn't reserved for overweight white men. She not very fond of stay at home moms either.

Click here for the full interview.

Funny, when I served in the House I tried not to drop the F-bomb in magazine interviews. I didn't think my constituents would appreciate it and it would be hard to explain during school tours. Unlike Charles Barkley, State Representatives are role models.

Expletives aside, the rest of the statement is really stunning. Does she really believe that women who choose to stay at home are really just leeches?

Is the mainstream media going to mention those comments? Obviously not. Remember that the next time that you read an article about Russell Pearce.

There's a Movement Building

I ran into a Republic editor at a forum yesterday and I asked him about the Republic's bias. He was incredulous and I rattled off a quick list of examples like the ones above. He was still in denial. The whole paper is in denial.

I pointed out that the Republic helped pay for the 9-11 memorial and has only reluctantly covered the controversy.

Incredibly, he said "we broke that story." I said, "No, I broke that story." That set him back on his heals. Then he recognized me and couldn't deny it.

There is a movement afoot. Luther had his 95 theses, but it was Guttenberg who made it possible to get them to the masses.

I get a lot of email. I think people are fed up with the Republic. Many of them refuse to subscribe, but that only goes so far.

I think folks are starting to do more than merely cancel their subscriptions. I think people are thinking more long range; they are starting to look at who advertises in the Republic.

Every business has a financial tipping point. Every business model has a limit. People have limits as well. Those limits are being reached.

Slaughter Houses Cases

The Republic ran an editorial about prop 204 yesterday. The editorial featured graphic pictures of pigs in crates...they aren't Arizona pigs. They are from the publicity pamphlets that the Humane Farm folks are using.

Someone sent me a one-sentence letter.

When are they going to show pictures of partial birth abortion?

October 19, 2006

This Video Rocks Click Here to Play.

October 18, 2006

Once Upon a Time...

Dear Mr. Patterson,

I am writing to you as I thought this might interest you as I know that you care greatly for the fairness in our political process. My six year old daughter came home from school very excited today because she (and every other child in her class) was given a very nice “free” book at the public school she attends about Arizona. She was very excited to have me read it to her as her bed time story.

As we settled down to read you can imagine my outrage when I opened the book and on the front inside cover is a photograph of Janet Napolitano having a nice photo op reading to a bunch of children along with a nice letter to the ‘Dear Student” signed “your friend Governor Janet Napolitano”. This publicity took up the entire inside page of a book that measures 9”x10 ½”… a little hard to miss!

I just feel this is totally a political move to get her photo in front of kid’s parents 3 weeks before a gubernatorial election! I am sure Mr. Len Munsil would like to have a little bit of this type of free advertising I am well aware that this book project was sponsored by Phelps Dodge and Southwest Gas, but they could still have given this book away without the inside page being given over to the Governor (unless of course it was another secret donation, to avoid clean election reporting) or maybe it just really was one huge coincidence in timing, I’ll let you decide that one!

Name Withheld

The Most Effective Fundraising Message

Unless you are completely immersed in the political process, you probably think that the most effective fundraising pitch includes a statement like this...

"I've got a really tough race against a well financed opponent and I really could use your help. This one's going to be close. Please send whatever help you can; make checks Payable to Committee to Re-elect Senator Smith."

Let me tell you what a lobbyist thinks when he reads a plea like the one above.

"Dang, I hadn't realized that Senator Smith was in this much trouble. I had better not jump to deeply into this race because I could really tick off his opponent. Sure, I'll send Mr. Smith a small check... I should probably make sure that the Democrats in the firm send a check to Sen. Smith's opponent."

I received this email today. Get your check book out because this is the perfect fundraising pitch.

On behalf of Senator Jack Brown, we would like to encourage you to contribute to Jack’s re-election campaign.

Although he is lacking an opponent in the upcoming general election, Jack has only a small amount remaining in his campaign account, and he would like to raise some additional funds to complete a relatively modest campaign.

Ideally, Jack is hoping to raise an additional $6,000 to $7,000 in contributions for this election cycle.

We recognize that this request comes late in the election cycle, but any contribution amount is greatly appreciated by Jack.

Additionally, Senator Brown is still currently accepting PAC contributions.

Please send all contributions to:

“Committee to Re-Elect Jack Brown”

October 17, 2006

This should be Munsil's Theme Song.

It takes a while to load, but be patient...it's worth it.

http://www.mediamax.com/azpolitics/Hosted/01%20Janet.mp3

October 16, 2006

Kolbe's Situation Worsens

Things are looking worse for Jim Kolbe.

So far, I've resisted the temptation to insert puns into my Kolbe headlines, but Tucson Weekly's Jim Ninztel has broken the ice.

PAGE TURNER

So The Washington Post informs us that our retiring Southern Arizona congressman, Jim Kolbe, was told that Florida Congressman Mark Foley was sending disturbing e-mails to a teenage page way back in 2000.

Here's the Washington Post article on the investigation of Kolbe's camping trip.

Ex-Pages' Trip With Rep. Kolbe Examined

The U.S. attorney's office in Phoenix has opened a preliminary investigation of a 1996 camping trip that included Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) and two 17-year-old boys who had participated in the congressional page program, law enforcement officials said yesterday.

Meanwhile, Nowicki is reporting that Kolbe's spokeswoman is resigning.

"It was a pleasure working with all of you," Cline wrote in a mass e-mail that Plugged In received about a hour ago. "I have decided to pursue another job opportunity and today is my last day."

You will recall that her story flipped 180 degrees. She first claimed that Kolbe saw the emails and confronted Foley then she claimed that he didn't do either one. Here's what I wrote about it then. Nowicki points to another good site on the switched story.

Continuing Professional Education

I love reading Bob Robb columns. They remind me of my Accounting courses at UA. I enjoy getting a cup of espresso, a highlighter and a dictionary and setting aside a big block of time to go through one.

Bob doesn't like Prop 204, but he hates the "Hogwash" message that is being used to fight it. I've pointed out that I think "Hogwash" is brilliant. The topic is too complex to handle with much more than a slogan and erudite white papers don't make for good TV.

Here's Rob on Hogwash.

Too bad they can't seem to make a rational campaign argument.

Here's Rob's rational argument.

Having inveighed regularly against the Tedious State, the tendency by government to regulate every aspect of human activity, I certainly don't think its reaches should be extended to dictating appropriate living space for produce animals.

Well, that clears it up.

Somehow I don't think that would make it a very good 30 second commercial.

October 13, 2006

Munsil's First Commercial is Up.

Mary Jane for the Senate

This is Donna Gratehouse, the Democratic candidate for State Senate in Legislative District 20. She is running against incumbent State Senator John Huppenthal.

Here's a nice video of her advocating the legalization of marijuana.

Phoenix New Times on the Memorial

"The Bird" has found quite a few new facts about the 9/11 Memorial. It's worth reading in its entirety, so I've reprinted the whole post.

Come closer, bird-brains. This wicked whippoorwill wants to whisper the name of the radical, blame-America blowhard who partly inspired the controversial list of 54 factoids and quotes cut into the humongo steel Funyun down at Wesley Bolin Plaza, a Funyun otherwise known as AZ's 9/11 Memorial.

Noam Chomsky. Yep, the way-left loon's slim volume 9/11 was one of six books listed in the bibliography of research notes from which the memorial's designers cribbed statements to etch into the Funyun.

Mere mention of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology linguist and American foreign policy critic sends rightists into convulsive spit-fits along the lines of those induced by George Soros and Bill Clinton. Chomsky's slim, 128-page pamphlet is a fine example why. In it Chomsky alleges the United States is a "terrorist state," while simultaneously condemning the 9/11 attacks on America.

The fact that Chomsky's book is in the bibliography of these research notes, compiled by ASU historian Nancy Dallett on behalf of the commission, will be enough for Republigoober Len Munsil and fellow conservatives to conclude that the Funyun's phraseology is the fruit of fuzzy-headed liberalism.

The taloned one recently thumbed through the binder of Dallett's notes at the offices of AZ 9/11 Commission Prez Billy Shields. But Chomsky's screed was hardly the oddest mentioned in this wack-ass anthology.

There was also Media Representations of September 11, a compendium including "Rituals of Trauma: How the Media Fabricated September 11" by Indiana University prof Fritz Breithaupt. In Breithaupt's essay — reproduced in toto in Dallett's binders — the daffy don theorizes that folks "harbor a secret desire" for events like September 11, in order to feel condemned, then purified. Sorta like a hot-lead enema for your soul.

Another, 9-11 in American Culture, is a 2003 collection of tweedy types sounding off. A quote from the book: "It is time for the quiet and powerful wisdom of butterflies and salmon. Let out your wings and strengthen your fins."

Pardon The Bird while it takes a barf break . . .

Dallett asininely interviewed members of the AZ 9/11 Commission, and some of this PC bathos ended up on the Funyun.

For example, Paul Eppinger, commission member and exec director of the Arizona Interfaith Movement, told Dallett how he and his wife were on a road trip from Denver the morning of the attacks and came up with this script on the memorial: "You don't win battles of terrorism with more battles."

In other words, "Let's hug it out, Osama!"

From what little Matt Salenger, part of the architectural team working on the memorial, told The Bird, he, along with wife Maria Salenger and principal architect Eddie Jones, used Dallett's, er, "scholarship," to come up with almost all of the text fit to print. According to Shields, the commission then gave the verbiage thumbs up or down.

The memorial hubbub has come as "a real shock," squawked Salenger. He admitted that "there's probably a silver lining" to all the publicity. That's in addition to his fee for services rendered, which Salenger steadfastly refuses to reveal.

Considering the now near-universal scorn for Salenger's project, maybe the commission deserves a refund of whatever it paid these artistes — silver lining included.

Here's some Insight on Pederson's latest ads.

Greg,

I haven’t seen you comment on these two commercials and thought there were some interesting points to make.

In the ad featuring al the “so called” members of the military two points.

Notice the white background throughout the commercial…the interviews and when Peterson is speaking. Political ads usually use the background to convey an image, yet Peterson’s are blank white. Is this because he really has no message to convey? His strategy seems to be make outrageous claims about Bush and Kyl, and tell us nothing about himself. This ad does that.

The second ad claims that Kyl wants criminal prosecutions for women who have abortions.

The votes he sites are vote #245 9/2005 and vote #2 1/2006. These votes are the votes for Supreme Court Justices Roberts and Alito. Peterson is claiming that voting for these men means that Kyl has changed his position and now supports criminalizing abortion.

WOW what a stretch. The advertising during this season is reprehensible. This ad becomes the poster child for a season full of outrageous claims in ads by everyone. This one crosses the line

Richard Mays

And Another

Greg,

Have you seen the latest Jim Pederson ad with what appears to be active duty military personnel criticizing John Kyle and President Bush’s handling of the war? It is not legal for active duty military personnel to be overtly involved in political campaigns, particularly when it involves criticizing their Commander-in-Chief . . . Which begs the question, are they active duty military personnel? Probably not, but this new misleading ad of the week has set a new standard. It leads the viewer to think that these men are active duty because they are shown in uniform with their name and rank.

October 12, 2006

The Government Owns Everything

Here's a letter from Michael Monti, proprietor of Tempe landmark Monti's Las Casa Vieja.

Greg

They just don't get it...my Kyl sign was stolen from in front of the restaurant last night. Last week we had a very irate call from a Pederson supporter who thought that we should be obligated to put up a sign for him as well as Kyl because we have a "public place". And they wonder why we don't trust them in government...

Regards,

MLM

PETA's Next Initiative

This time it's the pigs, next time it will be the roaches.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals wants Six Flags Great America to scrap its Halloween-themed cockroach-eating promotion.

A spokeswoman for the animal rights organization says the contest at the amusement park's FrightFest is "gratuitously cruel."

The park in Gurnee, Ill., is joining other Six Flags parks in offering unlimited line-jumping privileges to anyone who eats a live Madagascar hissing cockroach. The bugs are up to three inches long.

Speaking Of Prop 204...

I think Stan Barnes gets the award for biggest bumper sticker...or maybe he just has a really small truck.

Here's a Letter About Pederson and His Friends from CAIR

Greg,

One thing that you haven't pointed out and that Nowicki missed too is
the timing. This fundraiser for CAIR was on the weekend of September
11th. In the Tribune's recent profile of Pederson they quoted him as
saying that Time's recognition of Kyl as one of the top 10 senators
didn't mean much because Time also named Osama man of the year once.

Pederson has the nerve to compare an expert on terrorism and national
security to Osama bin Laden and then he runs off to raise money for
Hamas on the weekend we commemorate the worst terrorist attack in our country's history.

Also, to dispel Pederson's ridiculous claim that he didn't know CAIR
was not a moderate group Google it and check the second site listed.
That AntiCAIR site lists all sorts of info about CAIR and their
actions. And, it even lists several places where their executive
director Nihad Awad is in full support of the Hamas movement. He was
the keynote speaker at the fundraiser.

Better yet, as you point out the MSM doesn't get how bad this really
is. For once, Pederson seems to realize how big of a problem this
is, he quickly added a policy paper on "Standing With Israel" to his
website. Funny thing is that he is playing defense on something that
the local MSM isn't asking questions about.

Also, one last ironic twist--guess where Schumer was when he made the statement that CAIR has ties to terrorists--it was the Judiciary
subcommittee on terrorism that Kyl chairs.

Name Withheld

Harry Reid: Culture of Corruption Tour Revisited

Early in the campaign season, the Democrats made a big deal about the "Culture of Corruption" of Republicans in Washington. They should have looked more closely into Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid's closet before they settled on the theme.

Harry Reid even came to Arizona last June...wagged his finger and complained about corrupt Republicans while standing next to Jim Pederson.

Soon afterwards, Democrats were embarrassed by the pictures of Harry enjoying free ringside tickets at the MGM Grand and now this:

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid collected a $1.1 million windfall on a Las Vegas land sale even though he hadn't personally owned the property for three years, property deeds show.

In the process, Reid did not disclose to Congress an earlier sale in which he transferred his land to a company created by a friend and took a financial stake in that company, according to records and interviews.

If the Democrats take the Senate does Jim Pederson support Harry Reid for Majority Leader? There's a question that I bet Jim won't answer. Of course, he won't have to because the local media won't ask it.

Here's what I Wrote Last June

Culture of Corruption

Of course, it's easy to get free tickets when you are the Senate Minority leader and the Senate is working on boxing legislation.

Here's what Harry Reid said when he came to Phoenix to speak on Jim Pederson's behalf.

Reid said in a recent interview that he and other Democratic leaders plan to introduce legislation this year to bring "complete transparency" to the relationship between lawmakers and lobbyists in a bid to restore public confidence in government.

"We have an arrogance of (GOP) power, and that power is corrupting," Reid charged. "There is a culture of corruption in Washington."

Notice that GOP is in brackets? That means, of course, that Reid didn't actually say it, but it was implied by the context. It looks like the original quote is more accurate. Indeed, a few days after showing up to bash Jon Kyl, Reid was linked to the Abramoff scandal.

Considering Reid's ongoing troubles and Congressman William Jefferson's recent actions the Democrats probably should have checked their own closets before they decided on the "Culture of Corruption" theme.

October 11, 2006

Jim Pederson C.A.I.R.s

One of my major themes is hypocrisy. When Conservatives make a mistake or say something really stupid the press comes unglued yet when the more "progressive" among us engage in similar behavior, the media gives them a pass.

That's why when Eddie Basha compares Wal-Mart to Nazis, or Kyrsten Sinema complains about "overweight white guys," there is no outrage.

That's why the Arizona Republic can run an A1 story that says Len Munsil had sex while he was single--twenty two years ago. But Napolitano's personal life is completely off limits.

That's why when Jim Pederson and Ken Bennett's sons get in trouble with the law, the younger Bennett is featured in dozens of news stories and Jimmy Pederson shows up once on B7.

Latest Example

In his book published in January, JD Hayworth discussed the positive role the "Americanization" program of earlier last century had in assimilating immigrants, quoting Henry Ford in the process. However, Hayworth made the "mistake" of not mentioning Ford's anti-Semitism. (The source for the Ford quote, the New York Times, didn't mention anything about Ford's anti-Semitism either.)

That's when the fan hit the ceiling. Nowicki has an excellent round up of the coverage here and here. Here's Montini's take on it. Sam Coppersmith chimes in here.

Now Jim Pederson has shot himself in the foot. But he must have used a silencer, because the mainstream media has...you guessed it...not written a word.

Seems that Pederson decided to speak at a fundraiser for CAIR--an organization that Counterterrorism expert Steven Emerson calls it "a radical fundamentalist front group for Hamas."

Here's how the Jewish News of Greater Phoenix covered the event.

Senate Democratic candidate Jim Pederson was a speaker at a recent annual fundraiser for the Arizona chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-AZ), an organization whose anti-Israel views are well known. He was the only candidate for public office from either the Republican or Democratic parties who attended the Sept. 9 event.

Nowicki covers it here. But there is zero coverage in the mainstream media. Where's Montini? Where's the A1 story in the Tribune?

Come on guys. A Senate Candidate attends a fundraiser for a group that Senator Charles Schumer describes it as an organization "which we know has ties to terrorism." and it gets no coverage?

The local press is going to ignore this story and it's going to percolate in the blogs and then go national and the local reporters will be embarrassed...again.

And how about Coppersmith? Where's his outrage? Not only is there no outrage, but Coppersmith is introducing Pederson at a Phoenix Temple on Thursday.

So much for consistency.

Here's some more background on CAIR.

But there is another side to CAIR that has alarmed many people in positions to know. The Department of Homeland Security refuses to deal with it.

Senator Dick Durbin (Democrat, Illinois) observes that CAIR is "unusual in its extreme rhetoric and its associations with groups that are suspect." Steven Pomerantz, the FBI's former chief of counterterrorism, notes that "CAIR, its leaders, and its activities effectively give aid to international terrorist groups.

"The family of John P. O'Neill, Sr., the former FBI counterterrorism chief who perished at the World Trade Center, named CAIR in a lawsuit as having "been part of the criminal conspiracy of radical Islamic terrorism" responsible for the September 11 atrocities.

The Monument Story Goes National...Again

Fox News has an astonishing interview with Memorial Commission Member Paul Eppinger. My Gosh, watch this clip. The rest of the country certainly is.

Here's one blogger's partial transcript

The commissioner interviewed, Paul Eppinger, defends it wholeheartedly, claiming that the inscription about "Middle East Violence Causes Attacks" reflects the "fact" that "our foreign policy for years has focused on total support of Israel."

He also thinks the inscription about the civilians errantly killed by a US airstrike in Afghanistan deserves to be there, as they're all -- 9/11 victims, battle casualties due to the War in Afghanistan -- "part of the tragedy, of war, terrorism, hatred, mistrust of everyone else."

Kolbe Changes His Story

Jim Kolbe's office confirmed to the Washington Post on Monday that Kolbe had seen the offensive emails and that he had confronted Mark Foley about his communications with House pages.

A Republican congressman knew of disgraced former representative Mark Foley's inappropriate Internet exchanges as far back as 2000 and personally confronted Foley about his communications.

A spokeswoman for Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) confirmed yesterday that a former page showed the congressman Internet messages that had made the youth feel uncomfortable with the direction Foley (R-Fla.) was taking their e-mail relationship.

Now Kolbe denies both incidents. He didn't see the emails and he didn't confront Foley.

I was not shown the content of the messages and was not told they were sexually explicit. It was my recommendation that this complaint be passed along to Rep. Foley's office and the Clerk who supervised the Page program. This was done promptly. I did not have a personal conversation with Mr. Foley about the matter.

We're Going to Need a Bigger Boat.

The national press corps meanwhile smells blood in the water and MSNBC is reporting that two 17 year old pages were part Kolbe's entourage on a camping trip to the Grand Canyon.

Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) took two male pages with him on a three-day camping trip in 1996, former congressional pages and National Park Service officials tell NBC News. The pages, who were 17 at the time, went rafting and camping with Kolbe in the Grand Canyon over the July 4th holiday that year.

October 10, 2006

The Communist Party Wants to Take Back Congress.

Hmm, "Take Back Congress" that means that they don't have Congress now, but they used to. I wonder which party they associate with their views?

The logo is from the People's World Daily. Here's how they describe themselves.

The PWW is known for its partisan coverage. We take sides — for truth and justice. We are partisan to the working class, racially and nationally oppressed peoples, women, youth, seniors, international solidarity, Marxism and socialism. We enjoy a special relationship with the Communist Party USA, founded in 1919, and publish its news and views.

They enjoy a "special relationship" with the Communist Party USA. How touching.

So how do they plan on taking back Congress? Well, for starters, they would like you to vote for Harry Mitchell.

In the category of “leaning Republican,” which means that the Republican candidate is a little ahead but the Democrats have a very good chance of taking the seat, there are 16 seats, including four currently held by HIRC members. Incumbents include the following: anti-immigration extremist J.D. Hayworth in Arizona’s 5th CD. The Democratic candidate is Harry Mitchell.

I've always wondered why Mitchell used powder blue and pink on his signs. Now I know. It's a sign of Solidarity.

Good Enough for Government Work

Here's the Republican Party's slate card. Notice anything unusual about the Attorney General and Secretary of State races? Hmm, I don't think that Jan Brewer is running for AG and I'm pretty sure that Bill Montgomery isn't running for Secretary of State.

More troubling is that the guy who sent this to me says that Senator Tibshraeny and Reps. Nichols and Yarbrough are really swell guys, but they aren't from his district. But if he ever moves into that district, he'll certainly vote for them.

October 9, 2006

What did Kolbe Know and When did he Know it?

There's an ironic juxtaposition in today's Arizona Daily Star. First there is an editorial about the Foley mess. The Star opines that this incident is child abuse and someone should have informed informed the police, or at least made the incidents public.

The first hint of impropriety should have been reported. Surely, one of the pages who was an object of Foley's attention must have mentioned the notes to a parent, a friend or a co-worker. Even if, as reports suggest, some parents didn't want it pursued, there should have been an investigation and Foley's actions should have been reported to police.

The Star is right. Surely, one of the pages who was an object of Foley's attention must have mentioned the notes to a parent, a friend or a co-worker.

The editorial was obviously written before the Star--indeed the entire nation--became aware that the pages indeed confided in someone who was in a position of responsibility.

They confided in Arizona Congressman Jim Kolbe.

They confided in Jim Kolbe six years ago, and he didn't report it.

Kolbe discussed the incidents with Foley, but the behavior continued and Kolbe took the issue no further.

The Washington Post reported Sunday night that a former page showed the Arizona Republican some Internet messages from Foley that had made the page uncomfortable. Kolbe's press secretary, Korenna Cline, told the Post that a Kolbe staff member advised the page last week to discuss the matter with the clerk of the House.

Notice that last phrase?

Kolbe's office...advised the page last week to discuss the matter with the clerk of the House.

Last week? Sure, after the story broke, Kolbe advised the young man to report the incident to the authorities. That little tidbit makes it obvious that Kolbe didn't advise the page to report it to the clerk at the time.

With no idea that they are pointing to their beloved Jim Kolbe, the Star editorial continues.

The responsibility for Foley's folly is on many shoulders, including those who knew of the potentially abusive situation and failed to report it. They failed to stop it and the young pages suffered.

We're fortunate in Arizona to have mandatory reporting of abuse and a convenient hot line. We hope that members of our community who have a reasonable belief of child abuse pick up the phone and dial that toll-free number.

The Star is, of course, absolutely right. There is no excuse for silence in the face of child abuse.

We'll see if the Star follows up now that they know it was Jim Kolbe whose silence allowed the abuse to continue.

Farm Team?

In Light of the burgeoning scandal, am I the only one who finds this paragraph troubling?

In interviews with The Post last week, multiple pages identified Kolbe as a close friend and personal confidante who was one of the only members of Congress to take any interest in them. A former page himself, Kolbe offered to mentor pages and kept in touch with some of them after they left the program, according to the interviews.

So Who Won the Gubernatorial Debate?

Your answer to that question probably depends on you party registration. But I will say that Munsil had the video linked on his website almost immediately...still no reference to the debate on Napolitano's site.

Half the Story

Condemnation of Russell Pearce has been pretty much universal. I've noticed that even his colleges are distancing themselves from him. For example, here's Senator John Huppenthal in last week's Tribune.

I think he needs to take a lesson in political correctness,” said Sen. John Huppenthal, R-Chandler. “That might help him with his message.”

So are the comments negative, or is the reporting negative? This letter provides some insight.

Greg,

A reporter asked me to comment on the Russell Pearce story.

This is what I said: Back in 1986, I was talking with a physically small Asian-American man at a meeting in Mesa. He said that he had attended elementary school with a boy by the name of Russell Pearce. Because he was one of the smallest boys in the school and different, he was picked on by some other students. He told me that Russell Pearce always protected him and that no one messed with Russell Pearce. Russell Pearce is doing what he has been doing his whole life, protecting the people he was given the job to protect.

Then in humor, I said, "he just needs a class in political correctness".
And, I chuckled as I said this last sentence.

The story quoted my last sentence and completely skipped the story.

Sen. John Huppenthal

Golly, I'm shocked, shocked that a reporter would take the quote out of context.

Here's an Important Letter.

Dear Mr. Patterson,

I am the father of James Gadiel, age 23, who was murdered in the WTC on September 11.

I am deeply offended by the hijacking (I use that word intentionally) of an ostensible 9/11 monument for political purposes. I've read some of the inscriptions and am very angry that anyone would dare to exploit this mass murder to attack our country.

I am president of 9/11 Families for a Secure America, a group of family members concerned with securing our country's borders and with related issues. I believe that our board of directors would agree with me and that our group would support your efforts to fix this monstrosity.

Peter Gadiel

October 6, 2006

Sticking the Dismount

This is an incredible picture. Governor Napolitano is standing with President Bush, Jon Kyl and three Republican Congressman at a signing ceremony for a bill to build a fence along the U.S./Mexico Border.

The Tucson citizen wasn't impressed with the bill or the event.

President Bush, in Phoenix on Wednesday, made a grievous and costly error in signing a bill that includes more than $1 billion to build a 700-mile border fence.

The gesture was pure political theater, as Bush urged those attending a fundraising breakfast to "Vote Republican for the safety of the United States."

The Citizen goes on to quote the most memorable statement of Governor Napolitano's administration:

"You show me a 50-foot wall, and I'll show you a 51-foot ladder."

I think the Associated Press used the wrong picture. They should have used this one.

The flip flop is complete and Napolitano stuck the dismount. At the beginning of her administration, she supported giving driver's licenses to illegal aliens. As the years went by, she opposed Prop 200; she vetoed the bills that implemented Prop 200; she opposed sending troops to the border and she opposed building a fence--her 51 foot ladder quote was so clever that it made national news.

However, her office now claims that she has consistently worked to implement Prop 200; she used her State of the State address to call for troops on the boarder, and on Tuesday, she stood meekly next to George W. Bush, Jon Kyl, JD Hayworth, Rick Renzi and Trent Franks while Bush signed a bill to build 700 miles of fencing.

There are no issues left. She's flipped on all of them. At this rate, she's going to sit down with Russell Pearce and say "you know, that deportation idea of yours...let's chat about that."

The local media have given Napolitano a pass on these flip flops.

But to show you how ridiculous the coverage has been, the Republic's Mathew Benson went through the State Press archives looking for issues on which Len Munsil's opinions currently differ from the ones he held in college. Benson found two.

Then - Opposed the death penalty. "No matter what the crime, no matter how brutal the murder, our society does not have the right to condemn a man to death." (State Press, March 1984)

Now - Supports the death penalty.

Then - Referred to an effort to loosen Arizona's concealed-carry gun law as "urban cowboy fever." (State Press, February 1984)

Now - Calls himself a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and says the state's gun laws are appropriate.

Is that the standard? Munsil reconsiders two positions that he held during Reagan's first term and it's in Sunday's Republic? But Napolitano completely reverses on all of the issues associated with the most important issue in the campaign and the media doesn't mention it?

Dang, I'm starting to think that the papers have a favorite.

Mario Brothers

Did you see this article in Wednesday's Republic?

A coalition of community leaders representing Japanese, Jewish, Latino and African-American groups came together Tuesday to denounce a Mesa lawmaker's reference last week to a controversial 1950s federal deportation program.

I was struck by this sentence.

And Mario E. Diaz of the Arizona Latino Research Enterprise, a non-profit group that organized the news conference, described the pejorative term as "the most offensive, disgusting and hurtful word a Latino can be labeled." He said Pearce, the GOP's leading voice in the state on immigration issues, has "lost all credibility and common decency."

Mario E. Diaz of the Arizona Latino Research Enterprise?

Are there two guys named Mario E. Diaz? Because the Mario Diaz that I've heard of is a top tier Democratic Operative. And if a top tier Democratic Operative organizes a press conference to slam a Republican State Representative, perhaps the reporter should disclose that fact so the readers can consider the source.

Here's how the Business Journal describes Mr. Diaz.

He left as deputy chief of staff for Gov. Napolitano in September 2003 to run Kerry's state presidential campaign. He ran into a little controversy during that tenure when he was criticized for what some said was inappropriate pressure on the chairman of the Arizona State Board on Geographic and Historic Names to change the name of Squaw Peak to Piestewa Peak. Although known as a Democratic political operative, Diaz said his business is nonpartisan.

"In Deference to the Wet Ones"

I've spent the week pointing out the hypocrisy shown by the folks who are piling on Russell Pearce for referring to "Operation Wetback" by its official title.

I've received quite a few comments from folks who speak Spanish and remind me that one of the acceptable Spanish words for Illegal Alien is "Mojado." If you have ever been in a supermarket after someone spilled a soda, you will recognize the warning sign that says "Piso Mojado" on one side and "Wet Floor" on the other. Mojado simply means "wet."

I'm not completely up on Spanish slang, but it seems to me that Los Mojados is a perfectly acceptable term to describe illegal aliens.

Here's an example from Spanish media, with my attempted translation below.

En deferencia a los "mojados"

Una persona que expone su vida, se arriesga a sufrir la persecución de hombres armados y animales salvajes, atraviesa ríos, desiertos y rocosas montañas para poder alimentar a su familia y ofrecer un mejor futuro a sus hijos merece mi respeto y encomio.

Translated literally, the title says "In deference to the Wet Ones"

Here's the text.

A person who exposes his life, risks suffering the persecution of armed men, and wild animals, crosses rivers, deserts and rocky mountains in order to be able to feed his family and offer a better future to his children deserves my respect.

Doesn't sound like the guy's a racist to me.

October 5, 2006

In the Crosshairs: Dirty Harry's Sniper shot Goes National

Congressman Hayworth was on Hannity & Colmes to discuss the sniper image from Mitchell's latest commercial. Espresso Pundit got a quick mention.

Also, the good folks at Fox & Friends must be espresso pundit fans as well, because they picked up the story this morning.

That shows the incredible power of blogs. I posted the Sniper shot on October 4th and the local papers haven't responded, but the story--including my still shot and "Dirty Harry" theme--was on national news this morning. Direct from espresso pundit to Fox without a mainstream intermediary.

That's two local stories in the last week that went national after the local papers ignored them and I posted them on espresso pundit. That's not a commentary on my meager talent. It simply shows how the local press refuses to break key stories. This is the year in which the gatekeeper role of the Mainstream Media has been eliminated.

Speaking While Conservative

The Russell Pearce firestorm continues. Here's yesterday's Republic.

The comments by Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, about the program officially-named "Operation Wetback" have set off an angry backlash from those who object to his use of a pejorative term and references to a program they say violated the civil rights of many Mexican-American U.S. citizens.

Now, I think that rounding up and deporting massive numbers of immigrants is a really bad idea. The city of Chandler learned that lesson a few years ago and the modern name for the program would be "Operation Lawsuit."

However, this firestorm is interesting because it allows me to test one of my theories. It's not what you say...it's who you are when you say it.

Now you liberals in the audience are rolling your eyes, but check out the evidence. Last week I presented two examples. First, there was no outrage when Kyrsten Sinema was quoted in the national media complaining about the "overwheight white men" she works with. Second, there is no outrage when the PBS.org website described "Operation Wetback" by its official title--that's the exact context that Pearce used.

Now we have a press conference to denounce Pearce for his comments and Bill Straus shows up.

Bill Straus, director of the Arizona Region of the Anti-Defamation League declared at the press conference, "We are all in this together. We are all human beings and references to any one of us in terms less than that is an injustice to every one of us."

That's a strong statement. Does Bill Straus jump on everyone who crosses the line...or just the Conservatives?

A couple years ago, Eddie Basha uttered what is perhaps the most offensive comment made by an Arizona official.

"I call it the economic holocaust," Basha, chief executive of Bashas', the state's largest homegrown supermarket chain, said in an interview with The Arizona Republic. "It's no different than what the Nazis did in World War II. It's a blitzkrieg. They are doing economically what the Nazis did militaristically."

Wow, trivializing the Holocaust and comparing someone to a Nazi in the same paragraph. Sounds like the ADL needs to spring into action and hold Eddie accountable for his offensive comments. So what did Bill Straus say?

Knowing Eddie Basha, there are few great champions for justice in Arizona," said Bill Straus, Arizona regional director of the Anti-Defamation League. "With that said, I think the last thing in the world he intended to do is to trivialize the Holocaust. ...

That's right. Basha is a "great champion for justice." So he couldn't have really meant it. After all, Basha is a Liberal, so he can say anything he wants.

But Russell Pearce doesn't fit Bill Straus's definition of a "Champion of Justice." So when Pearce refers to the 1950s era program by its official title, we learn that:

"We are all in this together. We are all human beings and references to any one of us in terms less than that is an injustice to every one of us."

Speaking while Conservative...Peace should know better.

October 4, 2006

Harry to JD: Make My Day

Here's a still shot of an image that briefly flashes across the screen in Harry Mitchell's latest commercial. The subliminal message is obvious.

There is a thin line between legitimate campaign imagery and hate speech. Placing your opponent's head in the crosshairs of a sniper rifle crosses that line.

They don't call him Dirty Harry for nothing.

Monument Update: They Still Don't Get It.

The Republic has finally opined that the offending phrases on the memorial--that it helped fund--need to go. Commission Chairman Billy Shields has has also conceded that a handful of phrases on the 9/11 memorial will be removed.

Here's the Republic.

Likely to get a thorough scrubbing are such inscriptions as, "You don't win battles of terrorism with more battles," "Congress questions why CIA & FBI didn't prevent attacks," "Erroneous US air strike kills 46 Uruzgan civilians," and "Violent acts leading U.S. to war, 05-07-1915, 12-07-41, 08-04-64 & 09-11-01."

Critics have expressed frustration (to say the least) that the memorial refers to a U.S. air strike in Afghanistan that killed 46 civilians. Does this suggest that some believe the United States should not have struck back at the Afghan-based terrorists who attacked us?

It is virtually certain that some of the etchings will be changed. The memorial should unify, not split us. At the same time, critics vowing to tear the structure down need a fuller understanding of what also constitutes the memorial.

What the Republic editorial board and Billy Shields don't seem to realize is that removing the offensive phrases doesn't solve the problem. The Memorial isn't a remembrance of 9/11 PLUS some offensive and some trivial phrases. The memorial is exclusively offensive and trivial phrases. There is no traditional remembrance.

Please take a moment and re-read the letter below from Lt. Colonel Julian Lewis, USAF Retired.

(Here are a couple paragraphs, but the whole letter is worth reading.)

The anti-war, anti-American phrases jumped out at me, but more than that, the entire Memorial is a monument to political correctness. The words are trite, often inane, saying nothing. They trivialize what happened on 9/11 to the point no one would ever know anything happened at all if they weren’t already aware.

Phrases such as: ‘Scottsdale Students Founded Cultural Understanding Organization" -- "Patriot Square Rally "Standing With Muslims Against Terrorism"---"Grace of Phoenix Made Kids Giggle Again"---"Remembrance Garden Planted In Winslow"---"Arizona Interfaith Movement Promotes Understanding & Respect"----People of Yuma Planted Trees," stink of political correctness.

I agree. The Commission seemed to be afraid that if they said what really happened--that 19 terrorists flew hijacked planes into buildings and killed 3,000 Americans--someone's feelings might be hurt.

The monument isn't a memorial to 9/11. It is an altar built for the worship of post modernism's twin Gods of Moral Relativism and Tolerance.

Removing the references to dead Afghan civilians won't fix that.

But Does it Change Any Votes?

A Democrat friend of mine forwarded a copy of the Billy Shields email to me. I asked him about the memorial flap and its effect on the Governor's race. I think you might appreciate his insight. (My comments are in blue.)

Do you think it switches any votes?

Oh I definitely think it switches votes. Had some heated debates around my firm about that. Most partners think it gets him some votes, and more importantly, charges up a GOP base that doesn't have a lot of things to be excited about right now. Iraq and Bush are a mess; the federal budget is a mess; the anti-gay marriage initiative in Arizona is over-reaching and thus loses appeal - the red meat issues for the base are all ambivalent now.

Plus, this issues brings the America First-ers, the Evangelicals, and the Libertarians in the GOP together - right at the start of Len's campaign.

She should've held a presser and said: "Sometimes you ask a committee to design a horse and you get a giraffe. This memorial is a giraffe. I've directed my Staff to work with members of the veterans' community, local church and civic leaders, and members of the Legislature to make this memorial what it should be - a place for all Arizonans to come together, reflect on a terrible day, and gain a sense of hope."

But she didn't - and there may only be three reasons for that: One, she can't walk away from the MoveOn.org crowd. Two, she can't admit a mistake. Or, lastly, maybe she agrees with the meme.

All three of which are issues Len can raise over, and over, asking her which it is.

You are exactly right about the impact and about what she should have done. That's exactly what she should have said. If she gets re-elected, you should be her Chief of Staff.

Uh. Pass. Thanks for the offer though.

No kidding, I'm actually watching what she does on this before I vote. It's not just 'one issue' to me - it's a whole mindset. As you know, only the GOP's tendency to hate on people keeps me tethered to the D's. And year after year, I vote for a LOT of Republicans. If your party would just leave gays and immigrants alone...

Wow, here's the line that really stunned me.

I'm actually watching what she does on this before I vote. It's not just 'one issue' to me - it's a whole mindset.

My friend is a Democrat largely because he disagrees with the GOP on "gays and immigrants," yet he is considering voting for Len Munsil over Napolitano because he thinks the memorial issue reflects her mindset.

Wow.

October 3, 2006

Who Stands up for the Fat White Guys?

Last June Representative Kyrsten Sinema spoke at the Kos Convention in Las Vegas. The American Spectator was there.

The whooping got even louder when Sinema urged the public financing of campaigns to remove "overweight white men" in favor of candidates "more like myself, individuals of an oppressed minority."

There was absolutely no reaction to Sinema's comments in the local media. Here was my response to Sinema's comments at the time.

Can you imagine if a white guy said something like this? Can you imagine if Russell Pearce went to a minuteman meeting and was caught on tape discussing "overweight Hispanic women?"

Russell Pearce...how prophetic. Now we have a real life example.

It turns out that Pearce has called for mass deportations and referred to the official name of a similar 1950s era program called "Operation Wetback."

Let me be clear that I think mass deportations are a terrible idea. I'm interested in the reaction to Pearce saying the name of the program.

As you can imagine, a conservative white guy who uses the word "wetback" in any context will face the wrath of the Hispanic caucus and its enablers in the mainstream media. Here's the Republic article, and the Tribune version. Nowicki has full coverage, including the obligatory Mecham picture.

Here's a sample.

"It is sad to see someone who is seen as a community leader use words that describe people as less than human. Pearce found an excuse to say a derogatory term that is particularly offensive in this day and age, when we are aware of different cultures and should know better. Immigration is such an emotional issue right now, and all Pearce has done is promote fear and hatred." Richard Miranda, Legislative District 13.

Wait a second. Is it acceptable to refer to the program by its original official title?

Let's check the Bible of political correctness. Here's how the operation is described in the PBS.org website.

Operation Wetback

In 1949 the Border Patrol seized nearly 280,000 illegal immigrants. By 1953, the numbers had grown to more than 865,000, and the U.S. government felt pressured to do something about the onslaught of immigration. What resulted was Operation Wetback, devised in 1954 under the supervision of new commissioner of the Immigration and Nationalization Service, Gen. Joseph Swing.

Of course we all know that PBS is constantly promoting "fear and hatred."

Here's how the University of Texas at Austin describes the program.

OPERATION WETBACK. Operation Wetback was a repatriation project of the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service to remove illegal Mexican immigrants ("wetbacks") from the Southwest.

Where's the outrage over the PBS and UT's usage of the derogatory term? Obviously there is no outrage. Just like there was no outrage with Rep. Sinema complained about working with "overweight white men."

The Pearce comment is not offensive because of its content. The Pearce comment is offensive because it was spoken by Pearce.

How Much Distance Do You Want?

Democrats are calling on Munsil to distance himself from Pearce and must have been disappointed when Munsil immediately rejected the policy and the phrase.

Democrats also demanded that GOP party leaders renounce Pearce’s statements. Matt Salmon, chairman of the Arizona Republican, refused to comment. But officials with GOP gubernatorial candidate Len Munsil’s campaign characterized a mass deportation policy as “not practical.”

Munsil officials also scolded Pearce for using a derogatory term. “It is not a word Len Munsil uses or would ever use,” said Vernon Parker, a Munsil spokesman.

Look for the Democratic Party spokesman to demand proof that Munsil has removed Pearce from his Christmas card list and that Munsil vows never to travel East of Dobson Road.

El Gringo has an Idea.

El Gringo has some funny satire about the assertion that the Democratic Party didn't coordinate with the Democratic operatives who used an organization called the "Arizona Conservative Trust" to hit Len Munsil in the Primary.

Dear Arizona Democratic Party,

Please give me $100,000.

Sincerely,

El Gringo
President and CEO
Arizona Conservative Values Trust

The Arizona Clean Elections Commission believes that there is no evidence of co-ordination between the Arizona Democratic Party and the Arizona Values Coalition despite the fact that the Dems gave the AVC $100,000. Apparently, the Commission believes that:

1. The Dems frequently give unsolicited donations to groups with names like the Arizona Values Coalition and the Arizona Conservative Trust.

2. The donation was solicited but the Dems and the representatives of the Coalition spent all their time talking about the Coalition's valuable work in mobilizing pro-life voters instead of running a push poll against Len Munsil.

3. Co-ordination between two groups only means extensive co-planning of timetables and questions for push polls.

El Gringo believes that a donation with even the implicit understanding that it will be used for campaigning is, in fact, co-ordination.

LGF Has More Memorial Coverage...

...including some excellent pictures.

Our Man in Iraq

Here's a letter from Jonathon Paton.

Just a note to let you know I'm doing O.K. I arrived in Kuwait yesterday and then took a C-17 transport to BIAP (Baghdad Intl. Airport). All told, from Ft. Bliss to Bagdad it took me over 24 hours to get here, so I'm pretty wiped out right now. The pictures I'm sending are of me in front of the "Victory over Iraq" Palace Saddam had built (it's right next to the site of the "Victory over America" Palace he was in the process of building until we blew it up).

Everyone's been really nice to me so far. It looks like I have a lot of work to do, though. We'll be working 12 - 16 hours 7 days a week.

I hope all is well.

Jonathan

October 1, 2006

Changing the Story

Soon after the monument story broke, the Governor's office issued a statement claiming that the 54 quotes on the memorial came from only two sources. Billy Shields also sent thousands of emails making the same claim.

* The 54 quotes and dates used in the memorial came from two
sources.
o The first is the bipartisan national 9/11 Commission that was
appointed by President Bush.
o The second, from oral interviews conducted by a public historian
at Arizona State University's History Department. ASU was hired by the
Commission to conduct interviews and collect information from Arizonans who had personal connections to the tragedies.

I responded that the Governor and Mr. Shields were were obviously wrong. On the 26th, I wrote:

This response is bogus on its face. The 9/11 Commission report is available here. It only takes a few seconds to download the file and then if you hit the CTRL key and then the F key you can search the entire 585 pages of text.

There is no reference to Uruzgan civilians being bombed. The 9/11 Commission report makes no reference to the phrase "You don't win battles of terrorism with more battles."

Now the story is changing. Here's Shields in today's Republic.

But the decision was made to include some of these provocative inscriptions because through words and phrases - from newspaper headlines and verbal histories and the federal 9/11 Commission report - the memorial was designed to give meaning to the way Arizonans reacted on that dark day: the diversity of thought, opinion and actions and reactions.

Newspaper headlines? That would explain the partisan nature of statements about Afghan Civilians, the FBI Phoenix Memo and Congress questioning why the CIA and FBI didn't prevent the attacks.

Here's a Revelation

Shields said commission members debated for hours which inscriptions to use, and that some of them caused him a twinge in his stomach.

Did we know about this? Was there any coverage of the these meetings? Did Shields or the other Commission members raise any red flags or seek any advice? The answer to these questions, of course, is "no."

In fact, I have reviewed the power point presentation that was presented to the legislative committee and it only provided a sample of the phrases--none of the offending phrases were presented.

The Tribune's Paul Giblin was on Horizon last Friday and repeatedly said "where these guys (critics) 3 years ago? Where were they 6 months ago?"

Where was the media? Where were the Commissioners? Where was the Governor's office?

Hit Counter