8. Respondent agrees to pay to the Commission, within 30 days of the date of this Settlement Agreement, a civil penalty in the amount of $1,566.03, which is the sum of the reimbursements for expenditures that were not reported on the same day the expenditures were made. 9. Respondent acknowledges that the Commission has the authority to fine Respondent ten times the amount by which expenditures exceeded the applicable limits pursuant to A.R.S. §16-942(B), which is $15,660.30. 10. The Commission declines to impose the maximum penalty based on the following reasons: • Respondent cooperated fully with the audit, investigation and resolution of this matter; • Absence of prior enforcement action before the Commission • Respondent made a good faith effort to comply with the Act and attended a Commission-sponsored training class on November 12, 2003; and • Respondent did not seek or gain an advantage from the violations outlined above because at all relevant times his campaign had adequate funds to make the payments directly from his campaign account.

12/13/2005 12:16:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|The aforementioned A-Rod announced for Congress today in CD - 8. Sorry to beat you to the punch yet again - but keep trying champ....12/13/2005 12:25:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Also, to keep beating you to the punch Downing has decided not to run for Congress and is instead lobbying the sups. to get the State Senate seat.12/13/2005 07:13:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Some of you may have read about the attempts by the White House to recruit Surgeon General Richard Carmona and Lute Olson's wife, Christine Toretti Olson, to run in the now-open Congressional District 8. Let's think about these choices for a minute. Carmona has been an important member of the local community, but his previous political experience has been on behalf of Democrats. He was appointed by a Democratic Board of Supervisors to run various parts of the health care system, and he has been a supporter of Democratic Sheriff Clarence Dupnik. He is currently registered as an independent. Olson's connection to the district is tenuous. She had raised money for the Pennsylvania Republican Party, where she still resides. Her only connection to the district is her marriage to Lute Olson two and a half years ago. At the time she said that she wasn't interested in moving to Tucson. That may have changed, but it still makes her, at best, a newcomer. So, the White House either wants a guy who isn't a Republican to run, or they want a woman who is a Republican but doesn't really live here to run. All you local Republican elected officials and politicos, who have been loyal to your party and your community, none of you are good enough for your national party. Consider yourselves dissed.|W|P|113448399779871192|W|P|So Much for Loyalty|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/13/2005 07:38:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|I heard that Carmona didn't vote in the last election, but that's just hearsay.

BTW, are you really running for Gabby's seat?12/13/2005 05:35:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Greg Patterson at Espresso Pundit says nice things about me at times, which worries me. Over the last couple of weeks, he has gone after two Democrats, it seems in an attempt to deflect criticism away from the Republicans. For example, yesterday, he went after Rep. Ted Downing for being a university professor. Patterson's trouble is that he has been opposing a bill giving community colleges the ability to give four year degrees. The bill itself is deeply flawed, and even opposed by some community colleges. I was actually going to write a bit about this bill way back in October; the motives and conflicts involved are bizarre. Then Kathleen Dunbar started suing people, and let's face it, that was more of a fun story. In this case, a Republican staffer named Kim Sheane was working on the committee handling the bill, while at the same time being on the payroll for the Arizona Community College Association. The leadership was embarassed by this, since she wrote the bill and helped guide it through committee. There is a huge problem with the power of unelected staff and the power they have over legislation. I worked as a citizen's lobbyist at one point, and I was shocked to find how many bills were written by staff or lobbyists and then introduced by legislators who did not bother reading the bills. So, to counter this, Patterson brings up Rep. Ted Downing. Downing works for the University of Arizona. Now, Patterson brings up a state law that may actually prohibit Downing from serving because of his position. If this is true, which would be odd given how many university employees have served, then he should step aside. But Patterson seems to suggest that his conflict of interest is somehow worse. There is a huge difference. The people of District 28 knew where he worked, and voted for him. Sheane served at the pleasure of the Republican leadership, her conflict of interest could never be evaluated by the voters. Patterson also does something that conservatives have been guilty of lately: whining that they are oppressed. He ends his post with:

Ted Downing is untouchable. Kim Sheane is expendable.

Oh, puh-leeze. Sheane, as an unelected staffer and lobbyist, has probably gotten her way on more bills than Downing. Downing, like many members of the Democratic caucus (or moderate Republican members, for that matter), has a tough time getting his bills scheduled by a committee. There was even an attempt to prevent him and other members from asking questions on the floor. But, we are supposed to pity the poor Republicans. Next, we'll find out that a Democrat said "Season's Greetings." By the way, Sheane, near as I can tell, did not lose her job. I have been writing an awful lot about Rep. David Burnell Smith, who is STILL THERE. Many Republicans in response to this have been bringing up Democratic candidates, mostly losing Democratic candidates and claiming that they have been going unpunished. Patterson has been harping on the case of Edward Ableser, who was a candidate in Tempe. I met Ableser at a Young Democrats meeting and he is a decent guy, but he obviously messed up here. I think he was a quality candidate, this whole incident will make it more difficult for him to run again. Like Smith, he also overspent, and he will be fined. This is where the differences with Smith start. Ableser has not challenged the commission's power, as far as I know. He may see if he can get the fine reduced, but he hasn't said that the commission, who he signed a contract with and was created by a public vote, is illegal and that he is somehow beyond campaign finance laws. He isn't dragging his case through the courts to render any punishment moot. I have read various letters to the editor and comments from Republicans who say that people like Ableser are not being punished as severely as Smith. Well, you are right. Ableser is not being asked to vacate his office, because, well, he lost. There is also this implication that somehow Ableser through his actions denied Rep. Mark Thompson his office, as if Thompson was somehow entitled. Thompson came in fourth. An incumbent comes in fourth, there are other problems with his candidacy. I have to give Patterson props for breaking the story though, he did a wee bit of investigation, and it popped up. Golly, think about it. Maybe our papers should hire people who are specially trained to do this sort of research, you know, they study it in college, and then they can write about it. Hmm...what a concept. NB - Looking back through Espresso Pundit's posts, I found an item there about the dangers of predicting a race this far ahead:

Remember that the last time Arizona had open congressional seats NO ONE picked Grijalva, Franks and Renzi. The conventional wisdom was Richardson, Atkins and flip a coin for the Mormon up north.

Um...no one picked Grijalva? Observers who took the time to examine the race thought that the best Richardson could do was have a really close race with Grijalva. Two candidates ditched the race entirely because of the strength of Grijalva (both tried to run in CD1). National organizations, such as the Sierra Club, lined up behind Grijalva as a sure winner. I worked for the State Party at the time, and they were betting on Grijalva too (quietly, of course) because of his organizational aptitude. The only people who thought that the race belonged to Richardson were the Phoenix media who seem to think that the only serious candidates are those that work in Phoenix. Patterson, however, did quote me though when I "skewered" the Buisiness Journal of Phoenix for this same attitude in this year's CD 7 race.|W|P|113448143286449573|W|P|Parity: Not Just for NFL Teams Anymore|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/12/2005 05:23:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|One of the odd features of our politics is that the best way to show that you are "doing something" is to engage in some meaningless gesture that attacks a problem that doesn't exist. I remember several years ago when Rep. Jim Kolbe, who at the time had already served more than half a dozen terms in congress, introduced a bill requiring a four-term limit for US House members. Never mind that he didn't seem to think that he was part of the problem, or that such a bill would never seriously be considered. The local media all dutifully reported Kolbe's "actions." I remember watching the morning news on KVOA, and seeing weatherman Jimmy Stewart say, "About time someone does something..." In 1994, Rep. Jon Kyl, who was then a Senate candidate, declared that he would introduce a bill to make election day the same as tax filing day. He claimed it would be so people would think about their taxes when they vote. He got a good press release out of it, but the bill has still remained unintroduced*. I know, he's working on it, these things take time. Our latest example is Rep. J. D. Hayworth's Hayworth Enforcement First Act (I always make sure to enforce my Hayworths first, especially Rita). Buried in this bill is a provision to punish activities such as voting in a foreign election or serving in a foreign army with a $10,000 fine. I say buried, but Hayworth seems to be mighty proud of this provision. He's put out a press release on this topic. The only trouble is, how in the world is this supposed to stop the tide of illegal immigration? If someone is a dual citizen, that means that they are, well, a citizen. That means that they are legally here, J. D. Like many half baked pieces of "I'm doing something" legislation, this one has all sorts of unintended consequences. The population that I'm assuming it is supposed to go after is Mexican-Americans. I have been unable to find any statistics on the number of dual citizens, only a single right wing editorial that said that there are "millions" of Mexican-American dual citizens. I find this unlikely, since Mexican dual citizenship has only been possible since 1998. There may be immigrants who have arrived since then who have not renounced their citizenship, but this can be a complicated process. Countries have been reluctant to easilly give up their citizens to another country. So, which dual-citizens are going to be gone after? As I said before, statistics on this are hard to come by, so I have to go anecdotal on you. Among the people I've met, the most common "dual citizenships" have been Irish and Israeli. Ireland has some very liberal rules on dual citizenship, and many Irish-Americans go for dual citizenship out of pride and to make travel a bit easier. Israeli dual citizenship is a smiliar matter. Because of the "right of return" in the Israeli constitution, just about anyone of Jewish extraction is a possible "dual citizen." This became a problem a few years ago in the "Crazy Eddie" case, where a man wanted for tax evasion was able to claim asylum as an Israeli citizen. There are important historical reasons for both of these countries' policies. Of course, many of the people I know that are Irish or Israeli dual citizens do not vote in those countries' elections, but is Hayworth willing to go after those who do? Naw, that's not what he meant. Those people are whiter. In the last round of Iraqi elections, there were significant numbers of Iraqi-Americans that voted. NPR's Weekend Edition featured an interview with one Assyrian-American that was born here, and that had never set foot anywhere near Mesopatamia. She gladly voted in the Iraqi election, most likely encouraged and aided by our own State Department. So, Hayworth would be willing to punish people like her? Our history is full of American adventurers fighting for foreign armies. World War II featured many such as the Flying Tigers, who flew for the Republic of China before we declared war on Japan, volunteers for the Commonwealth forces against Germany, even the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. These guys are now considered to be heroes that fought imperialism and fascism before the rest of the American public, including such "great Americans" such as Henry Ford and Charles Lindberg, thought these things were problems. Hayworth would have slapped fines on them. This provision would probably be difficult to enforce, and probably not enforced at all. It is exactly this sort of "all for show" legislation that leaves people cynical about the whole political process. NB - Apparently, some on the right do want to go after Iraqi-Americans that vote in Iraq. Check out this article from the conservative FrontPage Magazine. There are some problems with Hayworth's website (I know, tragedy). The above links to his website may not work. CORRECTION - Who knew that Senator Kyl's DC staff reads my humble blog? Scot Montrey, who works for the Senator, informed me that the bill has been introduced not once, but four times. Once, when he was a house member, and three times as a senator. The bill never has made it out of committee. R Cubed regrets the error.|W|P|113439425799785822|W|P|Why Do Anything When You Can Get a Good Press Release|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/12/2005 09:33:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Two things worth mentioning, one is pedantic:

1) You forgot to list the American Legion of Honor, which was composed of Union Army veterans who went to Mexico to fight for Juarez after the Civil War. I always thought it strange that our popular culture (books, TV and movies) makes so much of the handful of Confederate veterans who went south to fight for the despotic Emperor Maximilian, but completely ignores the far more numerous and historically significant brave Americans who fought for democratic ideals in Mexico.

2) It is worth pointing out that the Arizona Republic and the Tucson Citizen have both reported that our Tucson congressmen, Grijalva and Kolbe, are the only members from Arizona that have actually passed legislation. It must be giving the Republic fits to admit that their Maricopa favorites are largely ineffective.12/12/2005 02:02:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|The third thing is that only one 'r' is needed in the word 'buried', Senator Ted.12/12/2005 04:00:00 PM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|He better think something else through: Thousands of American Jews serve in the Israeli army. And that makes it less likely that the U.S. army will someday be called on to go defend Israel (which still has fewer Jewish citizens than New York state).12/12/2005 04:02:00 PM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|Tom:

It is true, of course that it is easy to propose legislation and excruciatingly hard to pass it-- especially if you are in the minority party (of course, you already know that).12/12/2005 11:41:00 PM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Ted, how could you forget the incredible Frederick Townsend Ward of Salem, MA who did not just serve in a foriegn but actually LEAD the Chinese-Western army against the Taiping Rebellion in 1860-1862.

Or William Walker "the Grey Eyed Man of Destiny" who was not only pro-slavery to the point of raising an army to invade Mexico and ask for annextion of the new state to the Union as a slave state.

Tsk tsk.12/12/2005 11:42:00 PM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Sorry I meant to say "who also raised armies for whatever nation wanted him to."

*blush*12/13/2005 05:33:00 AM|W|P| Tedski|W|P|I figured that William Walker he of "I had to introduce slavery to promote social democracy..." would be a poor example, you agree?12/13/2005 08:10:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Yes, William Walker and his band of misfits did invade Mexico (they were hardly unique in this regard, "filibustering" was a sort of hobby among frustrated California politicians back then), but they got their butts kicked back across the line at Tijuana. He later did the same in Nicaragua and even took over the country for a while. The Honduran Army and the British Navy captured and executed him, eventually.

How could you forget that part?

He's hardly in the same category as the Abraham Lincoln Brigade or the Legion of Honor, however.12/13/2005 07:50:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Kyl's people found my link to the TIME story within an hour of my posting it. They read.12/13/2005 11:27:00 PM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Noticed you two ignored the first guy I mentioned Ted and Tom. :p12/11/2005 06:04:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Corporation Commissioner Kris Mayes is concerned because three of the state's largest utilities are in danger of being unable to meet their pension obligations to the tune of $585,000,000. By far the largest share of the shortfall is Arizona Public Service's $472,000,000. This has been a big problem nationwide. Many corporations see their pension obligations not as a responsibility to the people that made them rich, but rather as another bothersome creditor. The other related trend seems to be to use bankruptcy as another competitive tool. Ironic, given the business community's support for gutting bankruptcy laws that protect normal citizens. What many large employers have done is declared bankruptcy, then they depend on the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation to take over their pension plans. To be fair, the PBGC is funded by many of those same employers. Although it is government administered, no taxpayer money goes into the fund. That could change soon, with so many companies jettisoning their pension plans. There may not be enough money in the fund to pay all of the pension obligations that these companies decided they aren't responsible for. Guess who would then be turned to to take up the slack? Yep, the taxpayers. One has to wonder how any Arizona utility can end up in this sort of situation. The Arizona Corporation Commission is known as the most powerful elected regulatory body in the country, much to the consternation of many in the business community who seem to have their way in most other levels of government in this state. There is very little that a utility can do without going to the Corporation Commission for permission. With as much hang wringing we see from Kris Mayes now, one has to wonder why she wasn't watching for the last few years. Of course, this could be yet another example of a utility crying poor to get a rate hike. This news out of APS is accompanied by a request to hike their tariff by 20%. The pattern in the 1980's was that the utilities would claim that they couldn't pay their employees without some huge hike in the rates. For some reason, these rate hikes never quite translated into money for their employees. This ended when commissioners like Renz Jennings and Marcia Weeks held sway over the commission. It is very possible that this is just a ruse to increase their profit margins. I have to give Mayes some credit here though. It sounds as though she isn't totally buying APS's story. I'm eager to see what her work uncovers. All of us should remember what a Corporation Commissioner does next election, and make sure that someone consumer minded gets elected. This is one place where government action directly effects the pocketbook of regular folks in an immediate way.|W|P|113430882043416832|W|P|That's What We Have a Corporation Commission for|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/11/2005 04:21:00 PM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Actually the issue I can see here is we Dems have few state wide appeal candidates. Or few people known all over the state. How do we fix that?12/12/2005 07:59:00 PM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|It would be wonderful to have a Democrat (even one) on the commission. Unfortunately, let me relate a true story to you to let you know what we're up against.

it was on the day when the headline in the paper was about the $60 million verdict against the state because of Jim Irvin's misconduct. Of course, Irvin was long before that known as slimy and corrupt.

I was talking to a lady I know in the library, with the newspaper displayed right there. I asked her what she thought about it. She said it was terrible. I asked her if she had voted for him. She said she didn't know, and she asked, "Is he a Democrat or a Republican?"

"He's a Republican," I answered.

"Then I guess I did vote for him," she said, "I only pay attention for the important races like the President and the Governor. After that I just vote for all the Republicans."

(sigh).

And I'm sure that there are thousands more like her.12/12/2005 08:04:00 PM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|kralmajales:

It sounds good, except that it seems that every time a new board or commission is announced, it's membership has already been determined (and it's usually a lot of the same people who were on the last commission to study something similar).12/12/2005 11:24:00 PM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Kral, that is a great idea and of course will only be implemented never. :p

I have made the suggestion that some newbies run in the never win elections (where the incumbent is superglued to the seat) and let the person get some campaign experience where it could only help rather then hurt the candidate.12/07/2005 08:28:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|The gnomes that live in my walls are telling me that Supervisor Ray Carroll has decided not to run for congress, and will announce this in the next few days. Carroll was probably the strongest possible Republican candidate if he got nominated. Pima County Supervisors are political rock stars (okay, maybe not rock stars, but very successful alt-country songsters?), they are on TV at least once a week and are in the papers constantly. His name ID and would make him hard to beat. Of course, the things that make him popular across the political spectrum would probably have made him radioactive in a Republican primary. He was friendly with people in the environmentalist community; he even has been known to hang out with Green Party leader Carolyn Campbell. Who had him appointed to the board of supervisors? A man who was then on the Board of Supervisors named Raúl Grijalva, public enemy number one among a sizeable chunk of Republican primary voters. All of this would have been used by a smart Republican running against him. Maybe even Rep. Randy Graf. Of course, Ray and Raúl get along like the Bickersons. But when has anyone let a fact get in the way of a juicy attack piece? This may mean that Rep. Steve Huffman could have the moderate side of the primary all to himself, since the other moderates that have been mentioned (Sen. Toni Hellon, Rep. Jonathan Paton, Mayor Bob Walkup) don't seem to have expressed an interest in actually running. Does Huffman win one-on-one versus Graf?|W|P|113401426539939884|W|P|Sugar Ray Out?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/07/2005 10:27:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Tedski-

Heard the same thing about Sugar Ray ... keep inquiring why doesnt he come out of the box and fight - what is he or Scott Egan afraid of?12/07/2005 10:55:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Isn't Huffman, Kolbe's ex?

Oh and to answer your question - I will bet you any amount of money that there will be more than two Republicans in that primary next year (and I'd even spot you one Joe Sweeney).12/08/2005 12:04:00 AM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|anonymous:

If there are more than two Republicans in the primary, it 1) could be good for Democrats because maybe they will brain each other, and 2) probably helps Graf because his almost cult-like supporters are less likely to leave him and wander into someone else's camp. I don't think they are a majority, even of the Republican electorate, but a large enough plurality, they probably are.12/08/2005 08:21:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|I liked the left-handed Neko Case reference. Did anybody else notice that one?12/08/2005 08:40:00 AM|W|P| Tedski|W|P|Naw...I was talking about Jeff Tweedy.12/08/2005 09:22:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Watch out for Ann Day.12/08/2005 01:44:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Ted -

You da man, once again!12/08/2005 10:48:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|A. Carmona (with the possible exception of Mayor Walkup) is the only candidate who should have no problem with Graf due to his superstar status - although it would be interesting to see how his failures are presented by primary and general election opponents, i.e.. TMC, Kino, and killing that guy with his full-clip of bullets - two would have proabably done the trick, but he's the doctor!

B. We are lucky to have a superstar of our own considering a run in Patty Weiss - who better than the most popular television personality of the last 25 years (Bud Foster has had too many hair styles to beat her out) and if she is willing to put that name ID and all of her family's money on the line, I'd say welcome aboard and thank you for giving us the best shot of getting this seat back since Kolbe took it away from the great Jim McNulty 20 years ago.12/09/2005 12:29:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|What is your read on LD25 Rep. Jennifer Burns as a possible Republican candidate?12/09/2005 06:58:00 AM|W|P| Tedski|W|P|As talented as Jennifer Burns has been as a legislator, she has won largely because of the weakness of the democratic campaigns against her. Her seat would be a pickup for the Democrats, which would kibosh Republican plans for a veto proof majority.12/09/2005 02:25:00 PM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|Tedski:

Any possibility that Democrats can find a competitive candidate to run against her if she DOESN'T run for Congress?12/09/2005 02:41:00 PM|W|P| Tedski|W|P|There already is one, Pat Flemming of Sierra Vista.12/09/2005 03:37:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|so quick to assume tedski, leaking rumors and such. Such a shame, such a shame.12/09/2005 09:57:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|To 'anonymous'

Pat-- is that you? are you saying you've decided not to run?12/10/2005 12:07:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|What about LD 26? Who's going to run for Steve Huffman's open seat in LD 26????12/11/2005 07:37:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Another monkey on the wrench - how about a guy, Hispanic, with celebrity name ID - sounds like a baseball player, that is now a current, local low level official? Where would that take the Democratic race for CD 8 against Patty and Gabby?12/11/2005 10:30:00 AM|W|P| Tedski|W|P|Oh...you must be talking about Alex Rodriguez (I hope you don't mean Luis Gonzales, who isn't even in town right now for all sorts of fun reasons...)

I spoke to him last week, as a matter of fact. I don't think he's interested. He's got a fight ahead of him on deseg money, and I think he's interested in some local offices.12/11/2005 01:51:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Know of any Democrats thinking about running for the Huffman's LD 26 state rep seat, soon to be open?12/07/2005 03:39:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Maricopa Superior Court Judge Mark F. Aceto has upheld a ruling by the state's Clean Election Commission that Rep. David Burnell Smith violated campaign finance rules and that the commission had the power to remove him from office. The ruling stated:

The court finds that Representative Smith has usurped, intruded into and unlawfully holds or exercises the office of District 7 state representative.

Sounds pretty unequivocal to me. Before we hear about some judicial anti-conservative bias, Aceto was appointed to the Superior Court in 1995, during the administration of J. Fife Symington III, and served as an assistant Attorney General to Bob Corbin. Another point that people should keep in mind that I harp on constantly is that Smith voluntarily signed on to the Clean Elections system. Not only that, he is a lawyer admitted to the bar in three states and even brags on his legislative site that he has been a law instructor as well. It is safe to assume the man knew how to read the Clean Elections contract and knew the rules and the consequences of violating them. I don't know why Smith is so concerned about being forced to vacate his seat, since he hasn't shown much interest in being there. He has the worst attendance record in the house. Given that the session was mostly over by the time his legal struggles were in full flower, it would be difficult for him to argue it is because of his having to go to court.|W|P|113399698575662810|W|P|Yet Another Ruling Against Smith|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/07/2005 10:12:00 PM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|Ted, with the ammunition of his attendance record, it can be argued that he ran only to test this law.

I think Democrats in Phoenix should seriously consider a putting a resolution on the floor to expel Smith based on

1. Upholding the judge's order and the rule of law,

and

2. His attendance record.

The second gives them cover for Republicans using the first to claim it is a partisan witchhunt.

Then, any Republican who opposes the resolution can then be targetted in the election as 'refusing to fulfill their sworn duties to uphold the law by failing to enforce a judicial order'

But I don't know if the Democrats in the legislature are willing to be so bold.

One can only pray.12/08/2005 09:09:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Yeah, you're right. We're a buncha cowards. That's why we won't pass the "Free Mumia" resolution.12/08/2005 11:49:00 AM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|Tom:

OK, then the balls in your court. You don't want to introduce that kind of resolution (and I know it would lose a floor vote, but the point is to get the Republicans in swing districts like mine on record as being unwilling to uphold the law), then what do you propose to do about this?

I do have one other idea (don't know if it is a legitmate legal avenue): If there is ever a close enough vote on a bill (obviously one with bipartisan support, or conceivably a veto override) where Rep. Smith's vote makes the dfference, find someone who might be willing to challenge the legality of the law on the basis that the vote was decided by someone who is not, according to the judge's order, in the legislature. Make his presence a burden to his party.12/08/2005 01:40:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Careful about the gratuitous pot-shots at lefty activists there Representative Ponytail. Don't forget, we're a sensitive bunch and we're YOUR BASE.12/10/2005 05:35:00 PM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Eli has some good points Tom, why not try it?12/07/2005 09:51:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Reports are that "top national Republicans," including some at the White House, are urging Surgeon General Richard Carmona to run for congress. Why do I keep thinking of the last few lines of Raiders of the Lost Ark? I don't think Carmona is going to do it. He's got the best gig in DC. He also is one of the few people associated with homeland security that came out looking good after Hurricane Katrina. Why on earth would he want to give that up to risk losing a primary to some wingnut like Randy Graf? Carmona may be looking at Jerry Kilgore and wonder if White House support really means what it used to. Besides, as far as anyone knows, he isn't even a Republican. He is registered as an independent, and taken stands on things such as stem-cell research that run counter to the feelings of many Republican base voters that are going to vote in this primary. As recently as 2002, he toyed with running for the then-open CD 7 seat as a Democrat. It does indicate that the White House is worried about this seat. Not just for the most obvious reason that it is a possible Democratic pick up. There are currently several moderates, Rep. Steve Huffman and Supervisor Ray Carroll among them, that will split the vote against conservative Graf. Without a high profile moderate, like Carmona, there really is no one who could clear the moderate field to have a one on one shot against Graf. The anti-immigrant right has been ascendant as of late, with Jim Gilchrist capturing 25% of the vote in yesterday's special election in California. This worries the some national Republicans, since it not only ruins their plans for a better showing among hispanics, but also because the anti-immgirant crowd's positions run counter to many of their buisness and foreign policy goals. Something interesting I noticed about the special election yesterday was that Rep. Tomás Tancredo felt free to endorse a candidate against the Republican nominee. The national party must be really happy with that one. Another thing: this above linked article from the Business Journal of Phoenix is the second article I've read from them on the CD 8 race. In both articles, they talked to Phoenix based political consultants who have never worked a campaign in the district (although Stan Barnes lobbies for SAHBA). Do their phones have a block against the 520 area code? This time, they talked to Republican operative Jason Rose about what the Democrats are going to do. Other than the fact that his wife was a delegate at the 1992 Democratic Convention (she doesn't mention that one anymore!), what special insight would he have?|W|P|113397525274106655|W|P|Could We Be Due for a Rhythm Heritage Reunion?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/07/2005 11:08:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Carmona would keep it interesting at least. I read a reader's digest article on him ten or so years ago, and with all that he has done in his life, growing up working class back east, high school dropout, doctor, cop, surgeon general- I keep waiting for a tnt to make a movie of the week on him.12/07/2005 11:44:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|A. Carmona (with the possible exception of Mayor Walkup) is the only candidate who should have no problem with Graf due to his superstar status - although it would be interesting to see how his failures are presented by primary and general election opponents, i.e.. TMC, Kino, and killing that guy with his full-clip of bullets - two would have proabably done the trick, but he's the doctor!

B. We are lucky to have a superstar of our own considering a run in Patty Weiss - who better than the most popular television personality of the last 25 years (Guy Atchley has had too many haircuts to beat her out) and if she is willing to put that name ID and all of her family's money on the line, I'd say welcome aboard and thank you for giving us the best shot of getting this seat back since Kolbe took it away from the great Jim McNulty 20 years ago.12/06/2005 08:09:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I didn't make it to the swearing in ceremony for Nina Trasoff and Karin Uhlich, I'm a blogger that works for a living. I heard about it though, and that is almost as good, right? Kathleen Dunbar showed up after all, but her behavior was reported as "ungracious" by those that were there. Another interesting attendee: Clear Channel Communications bought a table. There has been an ongoing lawsuit between the city and Clear Channel. Despite the city continuing to win in court, Dunbar and Fred Ronstadt kept trying to pass settlement agreements that amounted to give aways to Clear Channel. A couple of times, even Mayor Bob Walkup had to talk Ronstadt down and explain to him what a bad deal some of them were. Clear Channel has been divesting itself of its billboard properties in many communities. They haven't found them to be as useful to its business model as they thought they would be, and they are political problems in many communities. They and their predecessors, Whiteco and Eller, complained constantly about the "poor environment" for them in Tucson. "Worst in Arizona," they would say, despite the fact that there are communities that don't allow them at all. Look for them to try to find a way to sell off their Tucson billboards. There have already been a couple of changes in the way city government has been run. For example, two weeks ago, the mayor announced a change in the "stategic plan." It may not seem like much, but it says a lot about what direction the city is going to go. Mayor Walkup, in response to the election, announced that the city's priorities will now include programs for youth and the elderly, and that economic development will be expanded into being a city wide endeavor. The other is one that seems even more minor. The phalanx of security people that citizens would have to go through to visit city hall will be reduced. Some of you may remember a few years back when there was even a list of people who were not to be let in, the list included a couple of community activists and no one could say why they were on the list, or even who wrote the darned thing. There was supposed to be an investigation of this, but I don't think I even heard a resolution on it. Maybe TucsonMark can tell us? To me, it was emblematic of the way Walkup, Ronstadt and Dunbar carried themselves. If you disagreed, your opinions weren't welcome. The change in security is a welcome sign that things will be different for the next few years. NB - I never knew Trasoff's husband's last name. It's "Jilg." I now know why she kept her other name. And hey, maybe Patty Weiss has talked about running for congress to outshine Trasoff? I mean, the early 80's newscaster scene was cutthroat...bitter, bitter life long rivalries...Al Fogleman and Burt Sass with pistols at dawn.|W|P|113388374389500962|W|P|Swearing In But No Swearing At|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/06/2005 10:59:00 AM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|no12/06/2005 11:54:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Its sad I remember the huge stink with Al Fogelman Jr. and his onscreen beauty, Kathy Randall. Once when I was young, my parents happended to see them canoodling outisde a TGI Fridays or some such thing... what drama of the day!12/07/2005 06:38:00 AM|W|P| Tedski|W|P|Ah see...your memories must be failing you...TGI Fridays didn't get here until much later...must have been Farrell's.12/07/2005 12:46:00 PM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Farrell's Ice Cream Parlour! I used to go there when I was a kid!12/07/2005 10:59:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Oh... senior moments must be setting in early. It was Goog's or something like that.

I remember Farrell's at El Con and Park Mall. To this day anytime I hear Dixieland Jazz I think of icecream, and anytime I think of Ragtime music, I think of Shakeys on Drachman.12/10/2005 05:37:00 PM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|I want ice cream now.12/05/2005 10:15:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|One of the drawbacks to now being a rich and famous blogger, okay, a broke and mildly infamous blogger, is that people tell you things and then tell you, "You can't put this on your blog." Well, what fun is that? Someone told me something the other day. Now I have heard it from three people, which takes it over the threshhold of "secret" to "rumor." A "rumor" I can put in here. Former KVOA anchorwoman Patty Weiss is thinking about running for congress. Weiss is a well liked figure among long time Tucsonans, and she earned a great deal of sympathy from the community when she was unceremoniously dumped from the newscast. Under most circumstances, she'd be an intriguing candidate. However, in this year she's got a lot of things working against her. There is already a high profile woman in the race, and EMILY's List has probably already picked Sen. Gabrielle Giffords as their candidate. EMILY's list doesn't take kindly to women who declare against women that they have already chosen. Ask Lisa Otondo about that one. Weiss also has decent connections to both the local business community, as well as the arts community. Guess who else does? I doubt she will do it in the end. It does go to show what an open seat will bring out though. There is one Republican's name I haven't heard. A few years ago, a conspiracy loving friend of mine insisted that Jim Kolbe was waiting to step down until, get this, Steve Kerr retired from basketball. The theory went that although Kerr's father was a liberal internationalist, his assasination turned Steve into some sort of Arab hating right wing freak. I don't know that any of this even approaches the truth, but it was the crazy story that this guy, who is otherwise level headed, put forward. I haven't heard Kerr's name mentioned lately, but he has hung out in the past with Kolbe. Who knows?|W|P|113384849233252130|W|P|Another Name?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/06/2005 11:54:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|More proof that it's too early to anoint Giffords, sunshine. There are a lot of other more popular candidates out there....12/06/2005 03:42:00 PM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|I just hope that you Democrats down there don't make the same mistake us Democrats up here made in 2002. We had a free for all primary, the winner (with something like 25% of the primary vote) was George Cordova, a seriously flawed candidate who had no connection to the district and finished the primary deep in debt, and we ended up with Rick Rent-a-congressman, a Republican from Virginia (who still lives there, hence the nickname).

Get together among party leaders down there, hash it out, and decide on one person you will all work for.

--signed,

(a sadder but wiser blogger)

TEAM, guys, TEAM!12/06/2005 07:12:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Wow! Lisa Otondo, blast from the past! But she was virtually uknown (ok, completely unknown, but for a few traveling businessmen).

In this case, we are talking about two women who have lots of name recognition (actually, Weiss has more, thanks to the tube).12/06/2005 07:45:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|To TEDSKI--

I noticed that Gabrielle's Gallery no longer has the picture of her and Robert Reich [whom I like]. The photo selection/ordering is smart [but pretty transparent].12/06/2005 08:06:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|TO eli blake--

Request for confirmation--Are you indicating that Renzi was not living in Arizona when he ran for Congress???12/07/2005 10:27:00 PM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|cc burro:

He still lives in the same Burke, Virginia house that he has for years. His wife and kids still live there and go to school there.

Renzi (a staffer for Jon Kyl) hadn't had any connection to the district since 1986 when it became apparent that there would be a Northern Arizona congressional district. He quickly bought a house in Kingman (for residency purposes) and opened a front business there. Then when district lines were announced and Mohave county was (contrary to expectations) not in the district, he sold the house in Kingman and bought one in Flagstaff. In 2002, it served as an unofficial campaign headquarters, housing a bunch of Renzi staffers, but rarely Renzi. He has been back since mostly for photo ops. But the house is pretty empty most of the time (especially in odd numbered years), as he still lives in Burke.12/07/2005 10:31:00 PM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|kralmajales:

A well fought primary can be a boon, but what we had was a primary among about six people in which they all spent every buck they had (I think Steve Udall, who finished second still had a few dollars left in the bank with an eye towards the general, but then again, maybe that's why he finished second). And because of the crowded field, the winner, Cordova, was an unknown who had once had a business failure that was ruthlessly exploited by the Renzi campaign.12/07/2005 11:39:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|TO--Eli Blake

Thanks for the info re Renzi.

According to his Congressional and re-election campaign website bios, he has Arizona roots--graduated from high school in Sierra Vista and NAU, married his wife in Flagstaff in 1980 and then started 1st of 3 Arizona-based businesses. But I haven't yet been able to find on his website an indication that he and his family resided in Arizona after 1980. He lists his "hometown" as Flagstaff. He doesn't list his "residence".

A check of Project VoteSmart's interest group ratings of Renzi indicates that he is VERY conservative.

Any viable Democratic candidates to challenge this apparent out-of-state Senator?12/09/2005 12:19:00 AM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|ccburro:

Well, the candidate I am backing is former state rep. Jack Jackson, Jr.

Unfortunately, Renzi is not dumb. He has a ton of money from his eastern connections that he will certainly use, as he has in the past, to smear his opponents unmercifully. He also has brought in millions of dollars for the reservation (normally the Democratic core of the district) and became the first Republican in history to actually win it (51-49% over Paul Babbitt last year). So any fight against him is uphill, but I believe that Jackson (who represented the res for one term in the legislature, and his father did so for many years before that) is our best chance. The other announced candidates are unknown and have no clue what it will take to win.12/02/2005 06:12:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Former Tucson Mayor Lew Murphy died of a heart attack yesterday. Murphy, a Republican, was the longest serving Mayor in Tucson's history. He was first elected by defeating Democrat Jim Corbett (he liked the ladies) in 1971 and managed to serve until 1987. He was one of the few on the council that survived the mass recall that occurred in 1977, but was nearly always in the minority in a council dominated by Democrats, often very liberal ones at that. Murphy presided over the tail end of the unfortunate "urban renewal" that ripped the heart out of the city. He also believed that Tucson would not control its own destiny unless we annexed from "mountain to mountain." No one listened to that one and we are still dealing with the consequences. Murphy continued his public service after leaving the Mayor's office. He served as the head of the local chapter of the League of Women Voters.|W|P|113357319899576085|W|P|Lew Murphy|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/04/2005 10:46:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|many moons ago i met ol' lew. he was kind and larger than life. he had a charisma and sense of position that our dear Mr. Walkup just doesn't approach. even with all of his quirks, murphy was an asset to our community.12/02/2005 06:11:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Len Munsil is throwing his hat into the ring to get the chance to get flattened by Governor Napolitano. Munsil is the head of the Center for Arizona Policy, an organization for people that are angry that someone, somewhere, is sleeping with the wrong person. I checked out their home page. It, of course, features two prominent pictures of Mr. Munsil. It also features a sort of "open letter" of Mr. Munsil announcing his imminent departure from the organization.

I never planned to leave; this has been the most difficult decision of my life. But God has a way of interrupting our plans and moving us out of our comfort zone when we least expect it. All I can say is that we serve an amazing and challenging God who leads us on marvelous adventures!

Yes, God told him to resign. The Lord works in mysterious ways; funny how His plans always coincide with the political aspirations of right wingers. He also has a "prayer center." He has a call for fasting to battle the materialism of our culture, I have to give him props for that. But, he also has a call for "intercessory prayer," strange since I thought that was one of the things that we Catholics get criticized by Bible thumpers for. Munsil says:

CAP often stands alone publicly, taking on the multi-million dollar goliaths of the abortion, pornography and gambling industries, along with homosexual and liberal media groups. Public “persecution” and threats are common.

Yeah, those conservative evangelicals are so put down upon, with control of the presidency, congress and so many other institutions. They are the new Blacks. There have been at least two stabbing incidents that I know of on Fourth Avenue in recent years directed at gays. I think this sort of "Public persecution" would rank a bit higher than whatever Munsil suffers from. I checked out Jan Smith-Florez's page. Once again, a Republican is talking about restoring "traditional values" to Arizona. I'm confused about how a party can claim to advocate for small government but...ah never mind. On her "issues" page she says:

Unlike Napolitano, Jan Smith Florez will not hide from the challenges that Arizona faces. She will not allow future generations to be burdened with today's problems. She will not routinely ignore the will of the people of Arizona. Jan Smith Florez is Right for Arizona.

"Right" there is not a synonym for "correct." When has Napolitano "ignored the will" of Arizonans? There are lots of things that the Governor has done that can be criticized by conservatives, but are they going to argue that her policies are unpopular? Please. Recent polling shows that the Governor is still very popular, which is why the Republicans have been having trouble recruiting a higher profile candidate. The Republicans, particularly those in the legislature, are living in some sort of bizarro world where their most neanderthal policies are supported by the vast majority of Arizonans, but a sensible moderate is a dangerous bolshevik. I guess they can keep convincing themselves of this, but they shouldn't be suprised when they lose, again, next year.|W|P|113353123953682047|W|P|Delusions of Piety and Delusions of Popularity|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/02/2005 08:27:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|They are the new Blacks.

Totally! The Ninth Circuit is keeping us all in chains, as well as expediting the Apocalypse. And professors! Practically grinding conservative students into the floor beneath their Birkenstocked heels!12/02/2005 12:47:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|That Munsil guy looks a little swishy to me. Not that there's anything wrong with that.12/02/2005 05:21:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|A couple of Len Munsil anecdotes for you.

When I was going to Arizona State in the mid 1980's, Len was editor of the State Press, which sucked as bad then as it does now (New Times was started by ASU Students disgruntled with the rag).

Len would do things like send reporters into the few left-wing poli-sci professors on campus and use tactics that would have made Tail-Gunner Joe McCarthy proud (quoting them inaccurately, out of context, and even incorrectly citing the details of the story (like what class they were in), which then made it the following day on the front page of his useless little birdcage liner of a newspaper.

The best man at my wedding was a distant cousin of his (won't say the name for the sake of my friend's privacy). He perpetually referred to Len's site of the family as the crazy ones. Born again in the worst sense of the word (and my friend's parents were pretty devout Christians at the time, so that's saying something), rabidly anti-choice, and misogynistic (as was also evidenced by his watch as editor).

As to his sexual preferences, nothing would surprise me. My friend's description always painted him and his immediate family as pretty creepy.12/02/2005 05:25:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|One other thing I forgot. If he's anything like he was 20 years ago as editor, his campaign will be entertaining.

The gaffes alone should provide great fodder for the Republic's snarky, if basically useless Political Insider columns.12/03/2005 09:14:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Judge Florez's website says "Thank you for your help in restoring leadership, honesty, and traditional American values to our wonderful state." Since you jumped only on the traditional American values I guess you are conceeding leadership and honesty?

I think most people believe that choice is a traditional American value and the fact that Napolitano opposes all school choice plans is just one of a number of examples. With the drop-out rate where it is we need real reform yet what has she done?

Surely you agree that limited government is a tradtional American value?

When has Napolitano "ignored the will" of Arizonans? How about Prop 200. Need I say more?

Napolitano is the veto governor. Her numerous vetoes are clearly not representative of the will of Arizona.

And lets hold off on using polls as the only defense of Napolitano. So far, the numbers have been all over the map with some polls showing her about tied with Goldwater. The truth is that polls are completely irrelevant until September of 2006 - and I promise you her poll numbers will not be what you think they are.

By the way, you say Napolitano's policies are popular with Arizonans. Which policy? Can you name one?12/04/2005 02:52:00 PM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Hey Anonymous:

The policy I know that a lot of people like outside of all day kindergarten would be the fairly easy, simple and major money saver CopperRx card.

Compared to the wasteful behemouth of the new Medicare drug act, it is simple, ease to use and it helps Arizona's seniors.

What more could a person want?

Plus those vetos are to prevent Arizona from becoming worse as well as preventing a LOT of harm to the citizens. If you are in favor of making Arizona worse then by all means support her opponents.

She is a sensible, thoughtful and careful leader of Arizona and to say otherwise is to show that you have no interest in good policies but in power for power's sake.12/04/2005 05:54:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|What utter nonsense. You are welcome to your beliefs and to support whomever you desire. But, where do you get off thinking that only your policies are good for AZ and all others are bad? Such arrogance!

The truth is that she is a lying, backstabing politician who has her eyes set on a VP slot or to be a Senator. She has lied to the Legislature so many times that there is not a soul up there that trusts her. Call up the Secretary of State's office or the Speaker of the House's office if you don't believe me. Talk about power for power's sake!

Those vetoes didnt prevent harm, they caused harm. They prevented real reform that is needed now like reforming our education system, which currently harms too many young students.

And after three years all you could come up with is all day kindergarten (which was already widely available) and the CopperRx card, LMAO. Hey our borders have 4000 illegals crossing a day and our schools are at the bottom of most ranking systems but she's fantastic because of the Rx card.

And you really support her because of those two issues regardless of all the problems we now face? Maybe you just prefer a democrat and will ignore serious policy issues as long as your 'guy' is in power. How sad!12/04/2005 10:41:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|so.. I'm curious anonymous... is there more than one of you? and... you seem to hold such strong convictions...why go as anonymous? are you a political insider? at times you come off as sounding a bit more in the know than your average marginalized joe/jane? i find it interesting the timing of which your comments have began to appear. did you just discover this blog...or is there more to it? i think difference voices of opinion is healthy, and is good to keep eveeryone one on their toes, just wondering where you are coming from...12/04/2005 11:57:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|I went anonymous cuz it was easier than creating an account. I really don't see how knowing more about my personal life affects anything but to help your curiosity: I am a Precinct Committeeman, have degrees in political science and history and am fairly knowledgeable regarding the current group of contenders. I found this blog about 2 weeks ago. Hope this helps. I'll use the handle McTex from now on....12/05/2005 10:16:00 AM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|So apparently s/he has a couple degrees, is a PC and claims to be fairly knowledgable...yet unlike me or many of the other people who can post their names on here (like a certain state rep) even without an account only goes by anonymous.

Plus I pointed out two programs (and when was All Day Kindergarten "widely availible"? Otherwise why would she have to demand it? Tempe and Ahwatukee is NOT widely availible) that she has helped create yet this Anonymous person only can say that her vetos and programs hurt people.
Prop. 200 was opposed by every Republican congressman in this state so saying that she was bad for opposing it also says that about them.

As for my "only two programs." You wanted specific, I gave you specific. You want more, go elsewhere, I am sure you have heard of google and maybe you might learn a little more then "she hurts people!!! I know because my talking points say so!"12/05/2005 11:37:00 AM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|JaneAZ

Birkenstocks have heels?

What gets me is about how people on the right are always talking about being persecuted for their religion. Now, I am not aware of any Christian in America (outside of some black congregations in the South during the ugliest days of the civil rights movement and segregation, or Mormons during the 1800's) who have actually been persecuted for their religion (and at that, the persecutors in both cases were Christian fundamentalists).

I mean, Pat Robertson said a few years ago that there were gangs of gay people going around beating up Christians. But he couldn't even name one single documented example (examples of the reverse, sad to say, are all too numerous).

But I think some of these people look for anyone who looks at them cross eyed so they can jump up and yell, 'I'm being persecuted, I'm being persecuted!' They wouldn't know what real persecution is if it hit them in the face (which is generally where real persecution starts).12/05/2005 12:33:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|I have never posted to any blog or BBS using my own name nor will I. I think to do so is foolish and could lead to some kook trying to find out where I live etc. If you want to post using your own name then go for it and good luck!

BTW, I am not the first anonymous - I don't think Munsil looks swishy, lol.

Re: Napolitano's policies, you made my point - you have nothing to rally behind, she has no legislative success on anything of substance. All the real reform bills she killed because she is beholden to her base. Otherwise, she would have promoted real education reform.

And Prop 200 was not opposed by every rep. congressman, where did you learn that? Your talking points? And even if it had been, your point is moot. Once it was approved by the people it became law and it was after it became law that Napolitano UNCONSTITUTIONALLY prevented its application. Had she not backtracked at the last second she could have found herself in deep legal trouble, according to the Sec. of State that is.

-McTex12/05/2005 11:33:00 PM|W|P| Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|"I have never posted to any blog or BBS using my own name nor will I. I think to do so is foolish and could lead to some kook trying to find out where I live etc. If you want to post using your own name then go for it and good luck!"

Well run along now, you have proven to be nothing more then a troll. Have a nice day.12/06/2005 02:12:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|"Well run along now, you have proven to be nothing more then a troll. Have a nice day."

Such an incentive to stay!!!

Why dont you just cover your eyes so you wont see my posts?

Troll: An electronic mail message, Usenet posting or othe (electronic) communication which is intentionally incorrect, but not overtly controversial (compare flame bait), or the act of sending such a message. Trolling aims to elicit an emotional reaction from those with a hair-trigger on the reply key. A really subtle troll makes some people lose their
minds.

Is this me or you? lol Nah I doubt that you were intentionally incorrect - just dizzyingly confused!12/06/2005 07:07:00 AM|W|P| Tedski|W|P|Hey guys and gals...could we keep this from being personal, please?

I keep the "anonymous" option open precisely because I want people to be able to post here without being members. I want the biggest group of people possible posting. I welcome comments from Republicans, even if they are full of it.12/06/2005 07:35:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Yes to TEDSKI's comment.

Throwing names at each other does NOTHING to promote any communication/understanding, something which is desperately needed if we're to solve the real problems that we're facing now.

All that name-calling does is promote HATRED and WILLFUL CLOSURE to another person's point of view.

We have a $7-$8 trillion federal debt right now; we have jobs being outsourced and plants (GM--30,000 jobs) shutting down; we're in a quagmire of a [civil] war in Iraq that is costing us in $$$$ and lives and the Iraqis in MANY MORE lives; we have an immigration problem that the politicians do not really want to deal with; etc.....

Why not stick to providing specific [I hope documentable]facts when stating your position or concern???? Why not state something that appeals to the reader's reason???

Obviously part of the goal with the messaging is to have fun--but if you wish to influence someone else's opinion--there must be transmission of facts and open, well-reasoned debate.12/30/2005 12:57:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Anywhoo.....

I checked out the link to Smith-Florez's site. It says she teaches Sunday school in Spanish at her Nogales church. I wonder if she checks the citizenship of her students???

Inquiring minds want to know.

Sincerely,
A new anonymous12/01/2005 09:26:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Senator Gabrielle Giffords resigned her state senate seat today, although she did not officially announce a run for the congressional seat being vacated by Jim Kolbe. That cat is still inside a rather tanslucent bag. Interesting factoid that I touched on before: both of the previous two occupants of the southeast Arizona seat, Kolbe and Jim McNulty, were State Senators. Both were out of office before they ran and won. Giffords probably feels that it would be impossible to serve her constituents and run a successful campaign in a district the size of Massachusetts. Looking back on who has actually been elected to congress from Arizona, she's probably right. Arizona has eight congressmen, and only one is a former member of the legislature, Trent Franks. Franks was out of the legislature for years before he ran and won. Another little note: I have never claimed to be unbiased, but I hope I'm fair. I have known Gabby since we were eleven years old, and we even went to a Mexico-Yugoslavia game once. I will be supporting her in this primary.|W|P|113349846909948114|W|P|Shows What I Know|W|P|prezelski@aol.com12/01/2005 10:51:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Is that a picture of you with her? You have changed a lot since I've last seen you!12/01/2005 10:55:00 PM|W|P| Zelph|W|P|Yeah, but she's a Scrippsee. Eww!12/01/2005 11:29:00 PM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|It was pretty clear you were not being unbiased from the get-go, but your honesty is refreshing. You should get your candidate to stop making silly comments, like "hardest decision of her life" when everyone in town knew she was going to run. Clearly the person who called you a sycophant was on to something - has she offered you the job as her campaign manager? If nothing else, she would have the best website.12/02/2005 04:08:00 AM|W|P| Michael Bryan|W|P|How about some dirt on her choice to resign instead of waiting out the exploratory period and announcing in January?12/02/2005 11:15:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|The only reason could be that she wants the board of sups. to pick her replacement instead of the voters - maybe our host, Ted will be picked for that spot instead of the campaign manager job as earlier speculated. - Anonymous Gal12/05/2005 11:41:00 AM|W|P| Eli Blake|W|P|You contradict yourself, Ted.

First you say that Kolbe (and McNulty) were state Senators before they ran and won.

Then you say that of Arizona's eight congressmen (thereby still including Kolbe), only Trent Franks was a former member of the legislature.

Somewhere, there is a fallacy.12/05/2005 11:54:00 AM|W|P| Anonymous|W|P|Yeah, you might want to watch such malaprops in your interview with the supervisors.

http://www.tucsonweekly.com/gbase/Opinion/Content?oid=oid:76063