11/30/2006 12:17:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Robbie Sherwood is leaving the Arizona Republic. He will be working for a firm that handles publicity for, among others, Joe Arpaio and Grant Woods. I guess that means he'll write fawning press releases about what a great guy Arpaio is. So, he'll be essentially doing the same thing he does now for more money, right? I kid because I love.|W|P|116491483572216511|W|P|Sherwood Leaves Republic|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/30/2006 10:39:00 PM|W|P|Blogger GOPinsider|W|P|Apparently he saw the big money that Chip Scutari is making now at Moses Anshell.11/30/2006 07:03:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|The Republicans are gearing up for a fight for State Chairman. They lost two US House seats and more legislative seats than any observer would have expected even a few months ago. At least judging from the blogs, I don't hear as much grousing about the governor's race as I do about the legislative and congressional races. I guess in retrospect they realize that Janet Napolitano's popularity would have given any candidate trouble no matter who was running the party. This is what kept higher profile candidates out of the race after all. The candidates at this time seem to be conservative activist Randy Pullen and Lisa James, who works for Gordon C. James Public Relations as a financial officer. It is already being touted as a battle between the ins and outs, as well as possibly a proxy war against John McCain. Other candidates that have been talked about are Senator Ken Bennett and former Governor Fife Symington. Symington played down such talk while he was running a race for District 11 chair. His loss in that race may either free him up to run for State Chair, or it could tell him that it is a losing cause, who knows? The talk about Bennett seems to be wishful thinking. The arguments from Pullen's crowd are not just the typical "Our candidates would have won if they would have just been more conservative." I wonder about those arguments, because I don't know if you can fault losing candidates like Al Melvin, Doug Quelland or Randy Graf for a lack of conservatism. Pullen's folks are also arguing that the crew that currently runs the State party is incompetent to win an election. They may have a point there. Many of us on our side got a laugh out of silliness like Republican Staffer Garrick Taylor's claim of Karnack like abilities during the whole "Janet stole our stuff" incident. This incident and others were indicative to many of the Keystone Cops operation that seemed to be afoot at the headquarters. It is easy to see why folks wouldn't be too excited about James, who can only really promise more of the same. James is also apparently an associate of not-quite-corrupt-enough-to-get-arrested consultant Nathan Sproul, who many activists are blaming for Republican losses and the defeat of the so-called "Protect Marriage Arizona" ammendment. I have no love for Sproul, but it is hard to see how Len Munsil or Bill Montgomery were going to win, even if Matt Salmon had managed to resurect Mark Hanna. Me? I don't care either way. Someone buy me a hot dog so I can watch the fun. NB - Connections between James, the firm she works for and some of Sproul's activities are detailed here.|W|P|116489626907727388|W|P|Chairman Folies: the Republicans|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/30/2006 01:25:00 PM|W|P|Blogger phx kid|W|P|It looks like Lisa might be having a little trouble on her way to being Chairman.11/30/2006 02:14:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Phx kid -

More than a "little" trouble.

She did run for Rep state committee in LD8; out of 82 candidates for 72 spots, she came in

82nd.

http://www.d8azgop.org/11/30/2006 06:07:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Joe Baby|W|P|Are you sure there were only 82 candidates running? I suspect there may have been more, and the district only listed 10 alternates.

Still doesn't answer the ultimate question, however.11/30/2006 07:38:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|The problem with the linked article is that although Sproul & Associates used to be located in the same office building as Lisa & Gordon C. James Public Relations, the article confuses the Meghan Rose who worked for Gordon James with Meghan Cox who still works for Sproul.

P.S. For anyone who's still wondering why Munsil did not do better against Napolitano, look how few votes he got for State Committeeman in his own district. He made it, but his drop-off in support among his fellow Republicans is obvious even in a district election.11/30/2006 10:22:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Joe Baby -

No, I'm not sure there were only 82 running, but Donna Reagan (outgoing district chair) and Michele Reagan (her daughter and incumbent state rep) got 89 votes each.

If anyone in the LD8 Rep organization was going to get 100% support (or close to it), it would be those two. Since 89 is close to 82, and not every PC wants to be on the state committee, I figured it was close enough to say that 82 candidates ran.

If you have info that more ran, great.

P.S. - it must have ticked off Colette Rosati to once again finish behind Carolyn Allen after Sen. Allen thumped her in the primary.12/01/2006 08:13:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Zelph|W|P|I think State Senator Karen Johnson would make a most excellent State GOP Chairman.11/29/2006 06:20:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I'm sure all of you have already read about the "testy exchange" between and President Bush. Darnit...I love that. I have already heard talk that Webb will somehow be an out of control maverick who will be just as likely to vote against the Democratic caucus as with it. I don't buy it for a couple of reasons. First, the only example that most commentators point to is that Webb's position on gun control is far to the right of most democrats (he is against any, not most, any, restictions on gun ownership). Unless this next session of congress will only be a protracted discussion on the Second Ammendment, I don't think this will come up often enough to be a problem. Besides, there are already splits among the Democrats on gun issues, so this will not exactly be a new thing. Second, the guy is very much an economic populist. Check out this eviceration of globalization, class divisions and the corporate power structure that Webb wrote in the Wall Street Journal. Conservative Democrat? This guy sounds like more than he sounds like any DLC position paper. The cojones this guy has! Heck, first the guy goes after CEO pay right there on the pages of the Wall Street Journal, then he tells the President to get stuffed in his own house. This guy ain't afraid of nothin'. Always send a marine when you need the job done.|W|P|116485088307174640|W|P|What the Heck, I'll Start It...Jim Webb for President!|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/29/2006 07:48:00 PM|W|P|Blogger NetrootsDemocrat|W|P|I completely agree, Ted.

The only bona fide moderate/conservative elected was Shuler in NC (but look at where he is on trade). But that hasn't stopped the MSM from repeating the meme of the new elected Democrats being conservatives ad nauseum.

I even had a troll on another site slam Democrats and liberals and then go on to say that he was a "Blue Dog." And that we need to take more ideas from Republicans and that Webb and tester were rightwing.

Now, Webb and Tester on for choice, they are against the GOP's anti-gay agenda, they are for rolling back Bush's tax cuts for the top 1%, they are against these trade deals that sell-out the American workers in the name of corporatism, they are for environmental protections and doing something about climate change. Hmmm, where's the conservatism come it?

Oh, yes, a lot of them are pro-gun. As am I, as a matter of fact. I am socialist on ALL issues except for guns. And the only way for people like Tester, Webb, McCaskill, et. al. to win in rural America is to not be anti-gun.

So they use ONE issue and go with that. They also mention Heath Shuler ad infinitum but ignore Yarmuth in Kentucky, McNerney in California, Loebsack in Iowa, Shea-Porter in New Hampshire; the list goes on and on.11/29/2006 10:10:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|WHAT,
Net rot you have to be kidding me. If any of these readers want to look over what was said tell them where to look. My c Pontificate all you want
http://www.espressopundit.com/
Look under Sunday Square off comments 11/24/06it is the post above Fife

I am against the Greens who crawled in to the Democratic Party after Nader lost.
Socialist like you is destroying the Democratic Party.
Never forget that MLK tossed the reds (what you call socialist) Chavez tossed the Marxist out of the movement and Labor got rid of the Socialist.
A Lie of omission is still a lie.11/29/2006 10:35:00 PM|W|P|Blogger cc burro|W|P|Someone can can surely be an economic populist and also be anti-communist/anti-socialist/anti-Marxist.

People love to throw not very useful labels around. Heck, Bush probably mistakenly labels himself a conservative.11/29/2006 11:08:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Net root don't forget Casey in PA Lieberman in CT, Moore in KS. Harry is even talking to the Blue Dogs. If you really believe Heath Shuler was the only Mod/Cons Dem elected you are fooling yourself. Look over http://www.bluedogdems.com/ , http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bluedogmoderatedemocrats/ and http://www.westerndemocrat.com/2004/11/let_us_look_wes.html.
This sums up the centrist views held by most rank and file Dem. I NEVER slammed Democrats or even Liberals. Just Socialist, the same type who actively supported Green candidates.11/29/2006 11:40:00 PM|W|P|Blogger NetrootsDemocrat|W|P|Well, AZ Blue Dog,

you stated FIVE issues that we lose on. and those are very near and dear to about ninety percent of Dems.

IIRC, those include choice, gay rights, embryonic stem cell research, etc...

I am no socialist, but the fact that we have no national health insurance in this country is disgraceful and embarrassing.

Also you bring up Nader. I loathe the Naderites. For it was they who by their vote gave us Alito and Roberts because Gore wasn't there to make a choice.

Furthermore, I am not stupid, I know it takes the dogs to win in a lot of southern and conservative districts. but our entire agenda should NOT be dictated by them just as it should not be dictated by Barbara Lee of Oakland.

And please refrain from the "net rot" stuff. That just makes you looks sophmoric and undermines your credibility.

One question for you, Blue Dog: would, if you lived in his district have voted for Raul Grijalva? The answer to this would reveal a lot about who you are, because Raul is one of my faves and a progressive champion.11/30/2006 12:29:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Net Root,
You are right about the name calling.

From RRR: your words
"I am socialist on ALL issues except for guns."
Now you are not a socialist.
"I loathe the Naderites. For it was they who by their vote gave us Alito and Roberts because Gore wasn't there to make a choice."
From Espresso Pundit: your words
"I know Ms. Sinema and I am a huge supporter of hers"
She ran as a Green, not just voted for Nader, but also actively supported the Greens with her campaign manager Chad (LD 14). In 2000

From RRR: your words
“You stated FIVE issues that we lose on. and those are very near and dear to about ninety percent of Dems. “

My words from EP:
“Democrats never win elections with out the Roman Catholic vote. Never have and never will. The FDR coalition was built on Roman Catholic, Union, Jewish, Southern Democratic, and working Democratic voters. That is the alliance that has won it for us this time.
Furthermore “The people who are reading this blog are EXACTLY the people Democrats need to be reaching out too. With the exception of the 5 Issues of Conscious (3rd trimester abortion, fetal stem cell research, the capitol punishment, Gay marriage and euthanasia) Democrats win.”

As a Democrat and A Roman Catholic I know we don’t win with out this vote.

Raul Grijalva?, I would not only vote for him if I lived in S AZ, I walked for him in 04.

The def of a Blue dog is Taken from the South's long time description of a party loyalist as one who would vote for a yellow dog if it were on the ballot as a Democrat, the "Blue Dog" moniker was taken because their moderate-to-conservative-views had been "choked blue" by their party.

Sorry if I got worked up but you came on jsut as strong
Sign me the AZ Blue Dog troll11/30/2006 12:58:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|I was in bed and realized my years aer off, man it is late. I need a new hobby11/30/2006 06:17:00 AM|W|P|Blogger BrittF|W|P|I like the French Socalist, you should check out Seoglene Royal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segolene_Royal

Shs is a Third Way Socalist, plus a total hottie. She has really good ideas. I have minimum communist leanings, but I consider myself a Democratic Socalist. I am far from 'Red'.

As for Jim Webb, he is a great person. The State of Virgina has one of the biggest gaps between rich in poor. Most of what he was saying was just merely observations. Yes Webb at times may be on the conserative side when it comes to firearms, but so is most of the Commonwealth of Virgina.

He is refelcting the views of his area.11/29/2006 11:27:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I spoke to a friend who wanted to know if I was going to ride on Portland's trolley, then blog about it. Geez, I told him, I don't blog about trolleys, that's what Steve Farley's blog is for. I rode the trolley and the MAX, which are both part of the Portland area's TriMet (Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon, so romantic) transit system. The MAX is a network of trains that run from the suburbs to central Portland (labeled on all maps ominously as "FARELESS SQUARE"). The trains were clean and run frequently. Although it crosses the roads, it doesn't seem to tie up traffic for very long (the three car trains seem to clear intersections in less than a minute). According to my friend that lives there, the only deaths from train accidents have been a few suicides, and there was one accident involving a train and a fire engine. Each stop of the MAX has two or three kiosks where one can get passes to ride the trains. The kiosks are suprisingly free of graffiti. I think this may be more because of community attitudes rather than maintenance. I observed one kiosk at Pioneer Square with a wee bit of vandalism on it. A homeless couple looked at it and the woman said, "See, that's the sort of thing that gives us homeless a bad name." It seemed that the stops I went to always had one kiosk that was out of order. There are not folks "taking tickets" when you board the MAX, and apparently there are only employees to check passengers for passes during peak times. I have a feeling that locals know this and may not always buy passes. There are lower fare passes available for students and senior citizens ("honored citizens" as they put it), and many downtown businesses give monthly passes as a job perk. I also rode the trolley, which is free, as well as the bus (which is free within downtown). The trolleys are manufactured in the Czech Republic. What, we don't know how to make trolleys anymore? Portland is a very different town than Tucson is, the downtown is much higher density, for example, but the MAX system serves suburbs that are just as spread out and low density as we are here. Still, Portland isn't Boston or New York. Transit detractors always claim that such a system works well in larger, higher density eastern cities, but could never work in the west. Although the downtown was larger and higher density, the rest of the city was lower density and resembled the sort of thing that you would see in other Western cities like Phoenix and Tucson. I could see why the system would not be as extensive here, but it be done with proper planning. Before I left, I heard that the argument over a train system in Scottsdale had heated up, with the realtors angrily weighing in giving two bogus arguments: that the system would not cut down traffic and that the line is not moveable the way a bus line is. A traffic engineer would tell you that an alternative transit system would not have to actually cut traffic by much, just enough so that the roads are below peak capacity. It would be hard to believe that the system would not cut down traffic at all, somebody would be riding it, right? Yes, they are right, a train route could not be moved to reflect growth in the community. The same could be said of a freeway, of course. I think what they are mad about is that the community would actually have to plan growth, long term even, if there was a train system. Heaven forbid. NB - One of the points of pride for the operators of TriMet is that public art is incorporated into the system. We already have a 1% set aside for public art in freeway budgets (which is one of the things that keeps me employed), so we could easily apply that precedent to any transit system here.|W|P|116482682109320974|W|P|Portland Transit|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/29/2006 05:01:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|I did not get a chance to ride on the transit system when I visited Portland. For some reason I have been leery of trying another city's system since I nearly got lost in New Orleans.

However once my friend in Portland was riding the bus and was in the back listening to some music. He saw the bus driver waving at him but he did not respond. Eventually the bus driver had to come back to where my friend was sitting and tell him to turn the music down. I guess that is what happens when you listen to the Fall on the bus with really good headphones.11/30/2006 09:31:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Sonoran Sam|W|P|Today's Republic has an article talking about an extension of the Light Rail System into West Phoenix. http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/1130westextend1130.html
Steve Farley take note!11/29/2006 11:07:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I came back from Portland just in time to run for Chair of the District 28 Democrats. I lost to Mohur Sidwa, who is a bit of a newcomer to the party but not new to organizing and campaign work. She'll do a good job, and was actually gracious when she won and said nice things about me. I think some folks in the room were a bit taken aback when I declined the nomination for First Vice Chair. I had previously promised Wood Sanders (who didn't run for chair because he was recently elected president of my neighbrohood association) that I would support him. I ran for and was unanamously elected Second Vice Chair. In that position I hope to do some of the things I wanted to do as chair, like helping our legislative delegation get some bills passed. Yes, that is his name, Wood Sanders. Sounds like a sale item at Ace, but that is the name. I actually got some blogging done from Portland, there is still much to catch up on though. Expect some more posts later today.|W|P|116482423155426024|W|P|That's Second Vice Chair to You, Pal.|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/29/2006 02:20:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|Actually demotions are good.

I am presently the first Vice Chair of our county Democratic party. Part of the reason why is that in 2002 when I first became a P.C., I was one of two in the entire county.

This year, we have 29 P.C.'s. Still a ways to go, but that is better than a 14 fold increase over two years ago. Last time we had elections, I ran again and succeeded myself, but this coming year (our by-laws stagger positions) I am looking forward to NOT running and electing one of our good, dedicated NEW people to the position.11/29/2006 04:57:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Last district meeting I was at had 65 people.

The room was very warm. Much warmer then today.

Congrats on your new office Ted.11/29/2006 05:49:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tony GOPrano|W|P|Comrade Ted,

Guess your not Communist enough to be a Democrat District Chair.11/29/2006 08:43:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Mexilina|W|P|I think 2nd vice chair is way better. Besides, if Wood is not able to fulfill his duties as 1st vice chair, you get to step in! (I think that you have to pay for your own crown and sash, though).

Felicidades!12/03/2006 09:02:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Wood is a hard worker and a thoroughly reliable person. Whatever he says he will do, he will do and do well. You can count on that! Wood and I served on Donna Branch-Gilby's committee to recruit and train PC's and he was thorougly reliable, pleasant and nice to work with!! His experience in the party will be an aid to the chair who has somewhat less experience within the party.11/27/2006 08:38:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Espresso Pundit has been writing much about the possibility of former Governor J. Fife Symington III running for chairman of the District 11 Republican Committee. Seems like a bit of a step down for a guy who a little more than a decade or so ago was proclaimed as a possible presidential candidate by no less than conservative icon Arthur Laffer in an article in the New Republic. The funniest is still this little tid bit from an interview that Greg Patterson had with Symington:
I'm a grass roots guy.
Yep, whenever I think Fife Symington, I think regular joe, out there on the hustings, get your hands dirty sort of political organizer. Symington is the Republican Katie Bolger and I just didn't know it. Okay, aside from me being snarky, there is a bit here that could be important. Symington would be running against current chair Rob Haney, who led that district committee's effort to censure . Many Republican office holders consider the guy to be an embarassment. It seems to be a bit of overkill to bring in an ex-governor to take the guy out, but this may also be because Haney is a good organizer, and maybe it might take that much oomph to take him down. Somebody somewhere may try to make this into a battle between moderates and conservatives in the Republican party. God help us if the table is now so tilted that Symington is now a "moderate." No, it seems more like this is the Republican establishment trying to wrest control back from what they consider to be an out of control grassroots. There may be some worry that these guys may be more concerned about winning arguments than winning elections. Haney's antics, for example, got him press, and may have even helped nominate more conservative candidates in the primary (defeating incumbent John Allen, for example), but ended up losing them a seat in the general election. A letter went out to District 11 committee members from several Republican office holders, few of whom would be called moderate on any political spectrum (Andrew Thomas is on there for God's sake!) asking them to support Symington. Could this sort of heavy handedness backfire? If there is this much of a fight over their district chairs, what is it going to be like when they elect their state wide officers? Some more stuff, because these internets are rife with posts: Haney's response to the Symington interview is posted here. A response from RNC member and Haney supporter Randy Pullen is posted here, in which Pullen points out that the loss was expected because Napolitano won the district over Matt Salmon. Of course, this just makes the point that Haney's politics are out of synch with even Republican voters in the district, doesn't it? The blog Hot AZ It Gets also has a summary of the race here. Oro Valley Dad over at Sonoran Alliance even weighs in here. Wow, bringing up the Keating Five again...this is going to get bad. NB - Oro Valley Dad also has an account of the LD 26 Republican meeting, where they re-elected the same crew that ran the district before. OVD describes one candidate for chair as "a troublemaker from the far-right," which begs the question: how far right could the guy be that even the guys on Sonoran Alliance think he's too far right? Anyway, check the interesting comment that spins the LD 26 general election results as good for conservatives, even though it was a victory for two Democats and a Republican they despise. They got their boys nominated, and that's a win. This would be tantamount to the anti-war left calling the 1972 presidential election a solid victory. Oh yeah, before anyone writes me about this: Haney's resolution may not have directly caused the defeat of a Republican nominee in his district. But, I'm pretty sure that the powers that be are wondering if he is spending too much energy censuring Republican office holders than trying to help get more of them elected.|W|P|116464566000691483|W|P|Governor Three Stick and District Two Stick|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/27/2006 11:39:00 AM|W|P|Blogger OVD|W|P|Ted,

Re: Sonoran Alliance summary of LD 26 elections.

Just because we called him “a troublemaker from the far-right” doesn’t mean we think he’s too far right.

Oh, thanks mentioning us :)11/27/2006 06:34:00 PM|W|P|Blogger NetrootsDemocrat|W|P|I used to lobby at the capitol and John Allen was one of the laziest reps I ever had the oportunity to work with. If he ran his campaign as lazily as he did his job as a state leg, it's not hard to see how someone to his right did the work necessary to oust him.

I think I just typed "someone to his right." Wow, no wonder they lost one of the two seats. Scottsdale is perhaps the most Republican area of Arizona by the numbers, but it is right smack in the middle as far as ideology is concerned.

Look what happened to Burnel Smith.11/25/2006 12:05:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Writing this blog, it's like being in the mob. I keep wanting to leave but they keep pulling me back in... I am still able to read the on-line edition of the Star, of course. Here was a bit from Daniel Scarpinato in today's Political Notebook column:
On ABC's "This Week," host George Stephanopoulos asked why he supported the measure [Arizona's Proposition 107], saying it "actually denied any government benefits to civil unions or domestic partnerships. Are you against civil unions for gay couples?" First McCain said: "No, I'm not." "I think that initiative did allow for people to join in legal agreements such as power of attorney and others," he said. "I think that there was a difference of opinion on the interpretation of that constitutional amendment in Arizona." "So you're for civil unions?" Stephanopoulos asked. "No," he said. "I do not believe gay marriage should be legal. I do not believe gay marriage should be legal," he repeated. "But I do believe that people ought to be able to enter into contracts, exchange powers of attorney, other ways that people have relationships can enter into."
First of all, McCain is mischaracterizing the proposition. Prop. 107 would have made any government recognition of unmarried (same sex or no) couples illegal. This wasn't a matter of difference of interpretation, it was what the backers intended and a big part of why the proposition failed. So, why would McCain claim to be for giving marriage like rights (his words: "contracts, exchange powers of attorney, other ways that people have relationships can enter into") but embrace the backers of a proposal which would prevent government from recognizing those rights? That would render any of those "contracts" or whatever he's talking about as useful as that bachelor's degree certificate I have from Miskatonic University. What we have here is a game that he's got to play over the next year and a half: yes you moderates, I'm still the McCain you loved from 2000, but hey, conservatives, I'm one of you too. I just hope he can do it without giving himself an aneurysm. I'm waiting to see Rudy Giuliani pull this one too.|W|P|116448315365648155|W|P|More "Straight Talk" From John McCain|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/25/2006 05:15:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|McCain's new nickname is Seesaw.11/25/2006 08:59:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|Good one, e.r.

My best line on McCain is this:

If John McCain thought he could get votes by claiming he was a squid, he'd claim he was a squid.11/26/2006 12:07:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|If you want to see some really good GOP anger check out esspressopundit.com seems as if Mr. McCain is attempting to take out a Dist Chair who is not happy with him
AZ Blue Dog11/26/2006 05:03:00 PM|W|P|Blogger phx kid|W|P|az blue dog,

Here is the hyperlink for Espresso Pundit.

Sonoran Alliance is also getting in on the fun.11/27/2006 12:23:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|You know that old Joni Mitchell song, 'Both sides now?'

Here is the 'John McCain version', "Both sides howdy"

'Once Iraq was popular, I banged the war drums, loud all day!
Approval was in the stratosphere, I've looked at Iraq that way,

But now guerillas block the sun, the bad news gets to everyone,
So many things I would have done, but polls got in the way!
I've looked at Iraq from both sides now, from up and down, and still somehow,
it's those illusions I still spin, I really don't know Iraq at all.

I used to know to avoid, 'gay', And what to do and what to say,
But the 107 'fairy tale' went down,
I'll look at 'gay' 'nother way,

Civil unions I'll say I did support,
as a last resort,
to change that report,
Don't give myself away,

I've been on 'civil uions' on both sides now,
For and against, with both sides,
I'ts a fine illusion I put forth,
I really don't know gay issues, at all.

I used to talk just like a moderate, But I couldn't win a primary,
So I changed my tune, I changed my song,
Dreams and schemes and circus crowds.
That's what I'm about today,

But now old friends are acting strange
They shake their heads, they say I've changed
Well somethings lost, but somethings gained
loony right wing votes,

I've looked at running from both sides now, from win and lose, and still somehow,
It's political illusions I cling to,
I really don't know voters, at all.11/24/2006 04:48:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Well, I'll be in the great Northwest for a few days of over-strong coffee and endless rain. I hear it's hipper up there though. I'll be flying on US Airways. I usually bring my copy of the Benedictine Handbook with me, it's got a psalter and prayers in it. I'd better be careful though. Apparently, prayer isn't allowed at US Airways these days. Here's something to think about for a bit, since I won't be posting for a couple of days: what would the uproar be if four protestant ministers were thrown off of a plane? We know that that would never actually happen, which may be why the right wing talkers aren't mad about this. You can't get a serious answer to the question "what if the shoe were on the other foot?" when the people you are asking know that the shoe will never fit on that foot. Chew on that for a while. See you next week.|W|P|116436940878836924|W|P|Out of Town for a Few Days|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/23/2006 11:48:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|91 people have already checked this site today. 91 on Thanksgiving. What is with you people? I suppose that means you will be expecting a new post. Well, I actually don't have one. But, you may want to read this account of the Southwest's first Thanksgiving, which happened along the Rio Grande in 1598, predating our friendly pilgrims of Plymouth Plantation by a couple of decades.|W|P|116430814394415255|W|P|It's Thanksgiving...But Y'all Still Expect Me to Post, Don't You?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/23/2006 01:29:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Ummm...so who is worse -

People checking your site on a holiday for a new, and probably informative, post?

Or people who check their site traffic on a holiday?

Inquiring minds want to know... :))11/23/2006 02:42:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Happy Thanksgiving Ted.11/23/2006 09:03:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Mexilina|W|P|Hey.. it's an addiction!11/24/2006 03:12:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tony GOPrano|W|P|The answer is simple Teddie!
Liberals, after finishing their cannibalism dinner ( all Libs are turkeys), the triptophane from their brothers/sister Turkey kicks in and tells them to 'Go to Rum, Romanism and Rebellion' to see what brother Ted has posted today. Gobble Gobble...noticed I, as a Conservative, didn't check your Blog until Friday. Waiting till tomorrow...GO SUN DEVILS!!! Wait a second? If ASU wins, Smirk Koetter keeps his job? Its OK if U of Who wins as long as Smirk gets the AX...LOL!11/22/2006 09:53:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I read once that Russell Baker was having trouble thinking of a column to write, so he went outside to take a walk and a potato fell out of a window. When you are Russell Baker, that takes care of your column right there. This morning I woke up wanting to write something interesting, but I couldn't really. There were some things over on Sonoran Alliance that I wanted to respond to, but alas, the synapses weren't firing. Before work, I stopped over at LeCaves, a southside institution. Their donuts have been confirmed by taste tests to be better than Krispy Kreme. The hordes that flocked to Krispy Kreme would have none of this, but which place is still open? On my way in, I ran into my friend Eric who said, "Oh, that's right, you work on the South Side, and as we know, you are worried about your car getting stolen." "Eric, have you been reading the Star and Citizen message boards again?" Yes, I do talk like this. And, by the way Eric is a South Side resident who made his statement most satiricly. "Yeah, did you see those comments?" A few words about the Star and Citizen message boards: I sincerely hope that out of towners don't judge the whole of our populace by the slope headed, slack jawed, knuckle dragging bigots that post to the boards. Apparently, there is a whole crew of neanderthals that have figured out how to type and do so in between readings of the Turner Diaries. Their vitriol is so unapologetically racist that one wonders if after reading it, the NAACP would consider giving a medal to Michael Richards. The article in question was one about the rezoning of 68 acres near Irvington and I-19 for an "outdoor shopping mall." I am a bit suspicious of the phrase, which sounds like another way of saying, "newer looking stip center." That aside, it will be nice to see a movie theater and decent shopping in an area of town that has been neglected for a way too long. It didn't take long, the first comment was from Beto N. (Is it former New England Revolution midfielder Alberto Naveda? I always wondered what happened to him.):
Another southside place to get robbed or have your car stolen while you enjoy a movie.
An ignorant statement for a couple of reasons. One is that there are no first run theaters on the South Side now, which would make it hard for it to be "another southside place to get robbed...while you enjoy a movie." It is also ignorant for another reason: the South Side has it's problems (I know, because I work here) but it is not the den of crime that folks seem to believe. You don't have to believe me, you can check the crime statistics maps on TPD's website. For each category, there is a small cluster on the south side, and one on the east side and some places here and there in midtown. But what is this dark green and black stipe in the middle of the map? A sliver of neighborhoods between First and Oracle moving north, yes north, from Downtown to River Road. Golly. I take it from Beto's name that his assumptions about the South Side are not about race, but are instead about geography and the generations long assumptions that any person wandering the South Side is subject to all manners of predations. I hear this all the time from people who really ought to know better. Of course, it was only the second time out that we get the racial comment:
You'll need a translater if you don't speak Spanish to go shopping in that part of Tucson. I've been to the Super Walmart out that way and it felt like I drove down to Mexico to go to Walmart.
Being one that has actually shopped on the South Side, I can assure you that you are free to use English anytime you want. I am also pretty sure that most of them even know the proper spelling of the word "translator." Have these guys ever actually been South of 22nd? Or even Broadway? I'm sure that this person would tell me that it isn't about race, but would he say such a thing if he was comfortable around Hispanics? Some of the comments degenerated straight into outright racism, one fella who calls himself Socrates O. alleges that Hispanics are just not polite and civil, but the tone of his comments just proves that lack of civility is not unique to the Hispanic community. Of course, Socrates claims he isn't racist or anything, he just knows the truth. Oh, yeah, and those Messicans will steal your car because this mall will be closer to the chop shops, which are apparently all over the South Side. One fella name Shea B. has an explanation for the conflict between the prejudiced notion of the South Side and reality: South Siders don't call police because they are all worried about getting busted by the Border Patrol. Shea isn't racist, he just assumes all Hispanics are illegal aliens. He helpfully provides this little dialogue, aparently inspired by the ground breaking work of Bill Dana and Speedy Gonzales:
all the victims on the southside are illegal...this is how it goes... lady says: aye chihuahua someone stole the carro!! call the policia!! husband says: shut up puta! dont you know that if we call police, la migra comes!!! then they take us back to the border, and damnit, ill leave your ass before i try to get stuffed in the dashboard of a car again!!!!
Who the heck are these people who post to these boards? Oh yeah, and although these comments are pretty ignorant, the racism is pretty mild compared to what I sometimes see on the boards.|W|P|116421844681805681|W|P|More Enlightened Commentary From the Star/Citizen Message Boards|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/22/2006 01:52:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|Interesting observations, Tedski.

I've thought about racism more in the last few years than I have in a very long time. When I was a kid growing up in the south most of the adults I knew were racists to some degree and didn't think twice about racial slurs. Lucky for me, the Dominican nuns who taught at my school were not southerners and they were not racists. Nonetheless, racism was ever present and disturbing. In the post Civil Rights era, social pressures to curtail outward signs of racism grew to the point that people were not so loose with their tongues regardless of how they felt. I thought this was a good thing, because even as a child I understood that leopards do not change their spots and we would have to wait and hope that the next generation would be more enlightened. But, in the interim, some of the worst racists had to engage the filter between their brains and their mouths. I was hopeful back then.

Eventually, I learned that racism is not regional, it can be very subtle, and it's everywhere. But what I've noticed these last few years is a resurgence of that in-your-face type of racism that I grew up with and I've got to say that this is extremely disturbing. I believe that the two predominant issues are hatred of illegal immigrants and hatred of Mideastern people. All of this focus on illegal immigration and the "war on terror" has more or less sanctioned a more vocal and blatant form of racism not unlike that in the pre-civil rights era. The victims may have a different ethnicity, but the hatred is essentially the same.

In the blogosphere, of course, anyone who is even partially literate and able to access the Internet can write anything without suffering social consequences. It is the perfect forum for racists to spew their hatred, find their kindred spirits, and to shock the nonbelievers.

Don't look for it to get better, my friend, at least not any time soon.11/22/2006 04:23:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Back when I lived on the west side of Phoenix, everyone used to tell me that it was a crime ridden place, that I should never walk around at night because I would be beaten up and all sorts of bad things would happen.

Nothing ever did but I was once asked directions by a lady who was on something while walking home on Van Buren at 11 at night.11/22/2006 09:30:00 PM|W|P|Blogger George Tuttle|W|P|When you take a look at who publishes their inner most thoughts on the Star's and Citizen's message boards-I am comforted by one thought:

It's a very minute part of the population.

You have to remember one thing about those boards-it is Lee's and Gannett's way of increasing citizen participation within the newspaper community.

Unfortunately, it is those who still have their sticker of Calvin peeing on a Chevy logo on the back window of their 75 Ford F-100.

In all seriousness-the type of comments you see on the Star's and Citizen's boards only enforce my thought that the posters are a representation of larger problem within this area of less enlightened people who seem to flock here.11/21/2006 11:17:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|There is an article on the front page of this morning's Arizona Daily Star on the Fantasy Congress game. The article was inspired, in part, by the post about the game last week on this blog. I, your most supplicatory host, am quoted as a "Democratic die-hard" with a team. There was one thing that was a bit unclear though. My statement about "those guys get their names on a surprising number of bills" was not about or , but about the territorial delegates. The reporter was wondering why I had picked one, Madeleine Z. Bordallo from Guam. I can see the call from Grijalva already. "Hey, so what are you saying, that it's suprising that I get my name on bills? You're killing me, man." Lucky for me, Senator Cochran doesn't know who the heck I am. Apparently, this blog was also mentioned by fellow blogger Zelph over on the Truth to Power Hour on Air America Phoenix. The evidence of this is still up on that show's blog. NB - I think there is still room for more members in our league on Fantasy Congress. Look up the league name "R Cubed" and the password is "udall."|W|P|116413457248222902|W|P|Further Conquests of the Mainstream Media by this Humble Blogger|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/21/2006 03:06:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|The only thing is it is structured differently from other fantasy games in that more than one person can pick the member of Congress.

Which is probably good for me since I joined late and still got to pick Sen. Byrd.

I do notice however that they aren't very regular about updating their point totals.11/21/2006 03:39:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|And Ted--

If you're humble then I'm young.

See ya on the second.11/21/2006 06:00:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|My team is number two! :D11/21/2006 08:43:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Zelph|W|P|I do a weekly feature on the "Truth to Power Hour" called "Focus on Arizona" at about 2:15pm every Saturday. I rely on your blog as well as other Arizona bloggers to keep me up to speed on what is happening, since our local media does such a terrible job at covering state politics. I've plugged Eli's blog as well as yours.11/21/2006 05:39:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Assistant Attorney General Paul Eckerstrom is being talked up as a candidate to run against Barbara Lawall for County Attorney. Eckerstrom had been talked about before, but the talk seems to be a bit more serious now. Eckerstrom has worked both sides of the courtroom, as a public defender and as a prosecutor. He currently works in the Attorney General's Southern Arizona office here in Tucson. His brother, Peter Eckerstrom, was appointed a judge on the court of appeals in 2003. He's got some strong roots in the coummunity. His father, if I remember right, was a minister (thus the names Peter and Paul) who ran an off-campus hang out spot for students in the late 60's. The cafe featured a number of performers, including a young Linda Ronstadt. Eckerstrom has been involved in politics for years. He was a staffer for Bruce Babbitt's presidential campaign back in 1988, working several Iowa counties for him. He supported Bill Bradley in 2000, but felt he had to be neutral in 2004 because of his chairmanship of the Pima County Democratic Party. It probably ticked him off to have to sit on the sidelines of that one. He ticked off some activists when he recruited Nina Trasoff to run for city council when Steve Farley had already declared in that race. He was very active in Patty Weiss's campaign for congress, and claimed some credit for encouraging her to run. I'm waiting to see if he gets Colleen Bagnall or Erica Hartquist to run for something. There are a number of folks who have grievances against Lawall: there were some serious questions about the handling of the El Grande Market case, where false testimony may have been encouraged by prosecutors, and with the handling of the more recent murder of Dr. David Brian Stidham, where all maner of problems with personel in her office were revealed. There has also been criticism of the long standing (pre-dating Lawall) policy of "over charging" and not accepting plea agreements, which some say has led to expensive trials in cases that could have been settled without them. Finally, SEIU had some problems with Lawall's interference with their efforts to organize county employees. Talk has been that Lawall has already been talking to some of Eckerstrom's supervisors, maybe trying to get him fired, maybe just trying to make his life difficult. Lawall's supporters are already spreading the story that Eckerstrom has been too busy mucking around with local politics to do his job. Eckerstrom, however, has one of the largest case loads in the Southern Arizona office and is regarded by his colleagues (and most importantly, Terry Goddard) as a hard working prosecutor. It remains to be seen whether all of these troubles add up to the number of votes necessary to displace Lawall. With Eckerstrom running, we are at least guaranteed that it won't be a quiet campaign.|W|P|116411547413408786|W|P|Lawall Gets a Primary Challenge?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/21/2006 03:57:00 PM|W|P|Blogger George Tuttle|W|P|This is particullary old news.

When I worked on the Farley campaign for City Council, we all knew that Eckerstrom was going to make a run for it. In fact, meny speculated when he ran for Demo County Chair-he had his eyes on the County Attorney's job.11/21/2006 05:02:00 PM|W|P|Blogger SonoranDesertRat|W|P|I am so disenchanted with Barbara LaWall that I voted Green last election. And this was before the whole Schwartz - Lopez thing blew up.11/22/2006 08:35:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Tedski|W|P|George-

I know it has been talked about for a while. It was even talked about in 2004. The talk seems to be a bit more serious now, that's why I decided to write about it.12/08/2006 03:08:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Roy Warden|W|P|Tedski, why don't you do a little homework?

LaWall has used her office to implement left wing political policies, including the flooding of the entire SW United States with Mexican Aliens.

Also, she refused to prosecute pal Dr. Michal Mahl for serial child molestation and child rape. Dittos when it came to the prosecution of that scum-bag cop CK Walters, you know, that fat slob who used a police computer several years ago to solicit sexual favors from underaged girls.

I beat two of her punk prosecutors for political prosecutions. But you don't want to go there, do you?

Why don't you do something about these scumbags besides shooting off your mouth?

http://www.wardenburnsmexicanflags.com11/20/2006 07:05:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|The State Democratic Party is going to be electing a chair in January, and there is already some speculation about possible candidates. Of course, this speculation is premised on current chair David Waid not running. I don't know if he has made a decision either way as of yet. There are a few activists who were uncomfortable with Waid being a staffer who was elevated to the chairmanship, but they failed to mount any sort of challenge against him when he ran all those months ago. There have been a couple of candidates mentioned. One is recent US Senate candidate Jim Pederson. I know, Jim Pederson as chair, who would think of such a thing? It would be recalling those thrilling days of, um, last year. Despite his loss, Pederson's chairmanship rejuvenated the Democratic party so it could do things like mount a serious challenge to . Even so, look to Republican wags to post about this "loser" getting a consolation prize. I even expect the state Republican party to send out a press release to this effect, which will be funny because it will no doubt quote Matt Salmon. Former State Senator Sandra Kennedy has mentioned running for chairman if Pederson doesn't. Kennedy ran for chair way back in 1991 against then-Pima County Chair Bill Minette. I remember at the time not knowing a lot about her motivation for running, and I don't know a lot about what her plan would be if she ran this time. One name that has been mentioned is Jeff Latas. When I first heard Latas's name, I thought it was a dream on the part of Latas supporters who wanted to keep their guy prominent. But now, a few people in Phoenix are talking about him running. He's got a couple of barriers to his candidacy. One is that he's from Pima County. We used to have a fairly decent amount of chairs from Pima County: Minette, Lars Pederson and Sam Goddard first became Chair as a Pima County resident. Heck, we've even had a chair in the 1920's that was a Ronstadt, and Cochise County even had a turn with John Pintek as chair a few decades ago. The political center of gravity has shifted, however. I'm not sure that many activists in Maricopa County (who will form the lion's share of the vote) would vote for anyone from Pima County without an awful lot of massaging on the candidate's part. It must also be remembered that the chief job of the party chair is fundraising. It remains to be seen whether Latas or Kennedy have the fundraising chops necessary for the job.|W|P|116403388422266146|W|P|More Looking Ahead|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/21/2006 09:40:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|Then there is also former chair Harry Mitchell-- oh, wait-- he already got a promotion courtesy of the stronger Democratic party that has been built up over the past few years.11/21/2006 12:18:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tony GOPrano|W|P|Hey Teddie you could use a job couldn't you?11/21/2006 12:24:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tedski|W|P|Not that one. It would require too much time in Phoenix.11/21/2006 05:01:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Aaron|W|P|The name I have heard is Randy Camacho, but I wonder who the governor wants to do the job? It seems to me that's how it works these days.11/19/2006 05:26:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Some of you may be familiar with the lottery system for congressional offices. Before each new congress, offices that have been vacated by retiring or defeated members are put into a pool, and other members get those offices based on seniority and, in the case of ties, a lottery. Offices vacated by members moving up are then given to other members moving up and so on. The basic idea is that long time members can move up into larger and more presitigious offices, while newer members get the smaller offices befiting their positions at the bottom of the House food chain. , being a long time member and one that was moving up in the House leadership, had swanky digs in the Rayburn House Office Building. The office was not only on an upper floor, but in a corner with a nice view. For a number of reasons, not least being that his re-election bid was officially up in the air, Hayworth's office was never entered in the lottery. Oops. So, Hayworth's old office was allocated to the member that defeated him, Harry Mitchell. Most freshman and even sophmore members get offices in the depression-era Longworth House Office Building or the cramped and decrepid Cannon House Office Building. Mitchell got to leap frog all of that and get Hayworth's much sought after space. There are more than a few senior members who are less than amused. Hayworth showed some grace and took Mitchell on a tour of his new office. NB - Does Mitchell also inherit Hayworth's creepy talking website?|W|P|116398347269249959|W|P|The Lottery Ads Were Off: Hayworth Didn't Play, So Mitchell Won|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/19/2006 06:04:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Joe Thomas|W|P|"Well we're movin' on up"

Nice catch, Tedski.11/19/2006 06:23:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Luke|W|P|Tedski,

Fabulous post!! Have no clue how you learn this stuff, but keep it up!

(This is x4mr, by the way. Yea, went beta and got locked out.)11/19/2006 06:28:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|I have frightened more then one person with that creepy website. :D11/19/2006 08:30:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tony GOPrano|W|P|Enjoy your one term SS Harry Mitchell....can you say Sam Coppersmith? ROTFLMFAO!!!!11/19/2006 08:39:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|My question is: was this due to the delay in confirming Mitchell's win, or was it due to the gratitude of the Dem leadership for finally ridding them of JD?11/20/2006 06:10:00 AM|W|P|Blogger BrittF|W|P|Rayburn looks like a spider. It has the bigger offices, but is a total bitch to get around. But, he should be thanking his lucky stars that he does on have to take the elevator in Cannon. What a bitch.11/20/2006 08:03:00 AM|W|P|Blogger sirocco|W|P|I had heard this last night and was gonna mention it, but Tedski has beaten me to the punch! Doh!11/20/2006 08:04:00 AM|W|P|Blogger sirocco|W|P|Hey, Tony G.,

That one term is already one more term than you were predicting he would have a couple months ago.

Who knows what will happen in two years. I expect Mitchell to have a hard time defending the seat. Of corse, six months ago he wasn't expected to win in the first place.11/20/2006 08:12:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Jane Arizona|W|P|My nightly AZCW routine was like this:

http://www.house.gov/renzi

http://www.house.gov/franks

http://www.house.gov/shadegg

[skipped Pastor, he never has news]

http://hayworth.house.gov

[realize that my sound is on]

"HI THIS IS CONGRESSMAN J.D. HAYWORTH-"

[oh jesusgod turn it OFF already]

[turned sound off]

http://www.house.gov/flake

...

Anyway, the point -- please, Harry, no talking websites. Sight-impaired people have special tools that read websites for them. Please think of the bloggers!11/20/2006 10:31:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Tedski|W|P|What Jane, no Raúl?11/20/2006 11:32:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|I'll give you all the dish on the talking website.

State Rep. David Bradley's (D-28) son, Nathan, is an owner of the company audioeye.net. When I was working in the Phoenix area, Nathan approached me more than once to have this "technology" installed on my company's website. He even brought Barry Goldwater, Jr. along for support. My guess is that he approached JD and managed to sell him on it. I don't remember that exact price tag but it was in the $10k's.

Also, if you check out www.azleg.gov, they have the same audioeye.net "technology" available for use. I don't believe Dave Bradley was connected to the legislature wasting on that money on Nathan's company.11/19/2006 05:12:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|The Chairman-designee of the Powerful House Ways and Means Committee, , says he will introduce legislation to re-instate the draft. Since I'm 36 years old now, I am all for this.|W|P|116398180623656205|W|P|But, Will We Be Drafting Barbara and Jenna?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/19/2006 06:30:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|I will be okay with it if we have women in the draft too. No reason why us women cannot blow the crap out of enemies.11/19/2006 07:31:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Sonoran Sam|W|P|I've got a 16 1/2-year-old son.

This idea is dumber than George W. Bush after a five-day drunk.11/19/2006 08:06:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|by the way Ted, the new bill will have the ages 18-42.

Heehee11/19/2006 11:30:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|I'm 44.

Heeheeheeheehee.

Oh, and I wonder what they will do when a bunch of young people all write letters to the draft board coming out as being openly gay.11/20/2006 08:01:00 AM|W|P|Blogger sirocco|W|P|Rengel's rationale is our current all-volunteer setup means the vast majority of the armed forces comes from the ranks of the poor.

He seems to feel if there is a draft,and the children of the wealthy and of legislators could end up being drafted, then congress will be less likely to back entering into unnecessary wars.

I don't really agree - those folks will always find _some_ way out if they need to., Look and Bush the younger vis-a-vis Vietnam.11/20/2006 11:05:00 PM|W|P|Blogger cc burro|W|P|I agree with SIROCCO. The rich will find a way out of it. And there will be a large mass of illegal immigration going INTO Mexico. Perhaps this is the real reason for building the fence.11/19/2006 09:20:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P||W|P|116395383185268430|W|P|Bishop Manuel Duran Moreno|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/19/2006 04:41:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Mexilina|W|P|? Your forgot the

1930 - 200611/19/2006 05:19:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tedski|W|P|I didn't forget...I just neglected it.11/19/2006 07:59:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Mexilina|W|P|heh11/18/2006 11:34:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|A correspondent has pointed out an article in yesterday's Yuma Sun. Apparently, final results have been tabulated in District 24 (I don't know if they have been officially certified) and they show Amanda Aguirre elected to the State Senate, and Lynne Pancrazi and Theresa Ulmer will be novice House members in January. Not only are all three of these folks Democrats, but they make up an entirely female delegation. As I said before, this is a remarkable victory in a district where only a few months ago the Republicans were counting on wins to get their 2/3 majority. I'm inviting response from y'all on this: is this the only distaff delegation in the current legislature? The last three-woman delegation that I remember was from the old central Tucson District 14 in the mid 1990's. That slate first consisted of Sen. Cindy Resnick, and Reps. Ruth Solomon and Herschella Horton. Resnick made a bid for the US Senate and Solomon took her place in the State Senate, so Marion Pickens rounded out the trio.|W|P|116387528602943466|W|P|Final Results from District 24: It's the Good Yuma Women|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/18/2006 12:36:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Interesting...do you know this stuff off the top of your head or do you do research?11/18/2006 11:53:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|The election for Dems in the state legislature looks a little better than I thought. Maybe a pickup in the Senate now...and what 5-7 in the House. It is still not what I would have expected or thought from a big year like this, but here is hoping it moderates the legislature a little and that it at least gives a little more power to Republicans like Burns.11/19/2006 07:05:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Chris|W|P|District 8 sent Michele Reagan, Collette Rosatti, and Carolyn Allen to the legislature in 2002 and 2004.11/19/2006 09:07:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|I still have not forgiven D8 for Collette Rosatti.11/18/2006 10:42:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|So, here is another media "meme" I'm trying to figure out: The Republicans had contests for all three of their leadership postions. defeated 168-27 for Minority Leader, defeated our own 137-57 for Majority Whip, and had to beat back several candidates for Conference Chair. The only leadership position that was uncontested was one of the more minor positions, Conference Secretary, won by a Texan named , who is, of course, Warlord of Mars. The Democrats, on the other hand, elected by acclamation, and elected Majority Whip unanamously after and dropped out for the sake of party unity. The only serious contest was that between and , which Hoyer won 149-86. Emanuel was elected chair of the Democratic Caucus. If there was a contest for that one, it must have been friendly since I can't find a mention of it. Despite this, we have been treated to several days of stories about how those Democrats are all out to stab each other, and those Republicans are unified. This seems silly for a number of reasons, the number one reason is that the contest beween the Republican candidates seemed to be more about ideology and general questions about the direction of leadership, where as the Hoyer - Murtha contest cut in so many directions it is hard to really draw a fault line. Boehner and Blunt have gone so far as to say that the votes for Murtha are an indication that they can form a majority to undercut the Democratic agenda. Given that many of those votes for Murtha were likely from liberal members who admired his stance on the war, I'm confused how this is supposed to work. Never mind all that, we are supposed to continue to buy into the story that Democrats are a confused confederation of conflicting interests because that's what reporters have been writing since Will Rogers was around. The media ain't liberal, it's lazy.|W|P|116387457284327627|W|P|And Here is Another...|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/18/2006 12:35:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Well if it was not for the well known liberal bias of reality...11/18/2006 01:27:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Joe Thomas|W|P|Nice dissection. I 'trackbacked' the story at my blog, www.shutupandteach.org.11/19/2006 11:21:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|Gosh, Ted, I thought I was the only one still around who had read Burrough's Barsoom series.

But I would agree with you that the Republican leadership is on Mars on this one. Besides anti-war Democrats, most of the rest who voted for Murtha are Pelosi loyalists.

And to be honest, I'd be more worried about the Republicans finding some creative ways to get their legislation in if they'd voted for Pence and Shadegg. By choosing Boehner/Blunt, they have in effect re-elected Dennis Hastert's leadership without voting for Dennis Hastert. Sort of like when a car breaks down after 200,000 miles and they just took it in to the mechanic, replaced the particular part that broke, got it running and are planning on another 100,000.11/17/2006 07:09:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I was going to wait a couple of weeks before I wrote about the 2008 congressional race. Darnit, though, Jim Nintzel already starts writing about it in the Skinny. My hand forced by Nintzel, gawd. One thing to bear in mind, 2008 will not be 1984. Sure, like 1984, the 2008 election will follow a Democratic sweep that brought a Democratic victor in Southeast Arizona (in 1982, Jim McNulty in what was then called CD 5), but I think the local dynamics will be a heck of a lot different. narrowly lost to McNulty in 1982, and basically didn't stop running. I have serious doubts that Randy Graf could do something similar. If he makes another go of it (he has already said he won't), it would be his third run in a row. Whatever problems I have with Graf, I think he has enough sense to know that this would make him into Joe Sweeney with more sanity and better hygene. McNulty's margin over Kolbe was a scant 1.4%, Giffords's margin over Graf was 10.0%. 10% is not the sort of margin that leaves you clamoring for a rematch. Rep.-elect Gabrielle Giffords has McNulty's son, Michael, as a chief advisor and I'm sure he has kept her apprised of whatever mistakes his father made in his single term. In the Skinny, Nintzel names Bruce Ash and Ray Carroll, both mentioned as candidates this year, as options for the Republicans in 2008. This begs the question, if Carroll and Ash weren't willing to make a go of it when it was an open seat, what would make them do it if the race was against an incumbent? One observer pointed out to me that Carroll's term is actually up in 2008, and unlike this year's race, he would not have to resign his seat. Nintzel mentioned Tim Bee, who seems to be the most likely candidate of the bunch. Bee's boosters had been talking him up even before the election; it was nice to see so much confidence from Graf's fellow partisans. They are assuming that Giffords will be unmasked as some sort of unabashed leftist and voters will be begging for a conservative after two years of Trotskyism. I have my doubts that that will be the case, but Bee is already making a name for himself. He fired long time staff members at the Senate, many of whom worked to block legislation that benefitted Tucson, and looks set to be a high profile Senate president. However, he'll be running against an incumbent and the legislature as an institution is not held in high esteem here in Baja Arizona. No sitting state legislators have been elected to congress from Southern Arizona. Giffords is probably the closest to an incumbent that we had get elected from this part of the state. If Bee runs, look for apian puns in the press and on this blog. We will never get tired of it, I promise. A name that Nintzel didn't bring up is Jonathan Paton. With the defeat of the conservative slate in LD 26, Paton is arguably the most conservative legislator in Southern Arizona. He's got that strong conservative record, but lacks the growl and tactlessness of Graf. His stint in Iraq gives him credibility on the war issue that most of Bush's cabinet doesn't even have. Even though he will be the first to agrue that his wading into the Dolores Huerta/Tucson High controversy was not done to score points, the fact that it was seen as a shot at probably earned him plaudits from East Side Republican primary voters. Unlike Bee, who is term limited and has only the options of move up or go home, Paton will only now start his second term. I don't even know for sure if he is thinking about it, and he has plenty of time to wait for other things to open up, but I sense a hunger in him. Not that I'd ever vote for the guy, of course. If Paton is seriously entertaining the notion of running, what does Bee do? The last thing that the powers that be want is for there to be a divisive primary, but they did such a great job of stopping one this time. If both are thinking about making a go of it, the maneuvering is going to be great fun to watch.|W|P|116377419913318395|W|P|2008 and All That|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/17/2006 12:42:00 PM|W|P|Blogger George Tuttle|W|P|Remember this name in 2008:

"Christine Toretti Olson"

So crazy, it might work!11/17/2006 12:56:00 PM|W|P|Blogger phx kid|W|P|tedski,

“Paton is arguably the most conservative…”

How did you come up with that? The Arizona Federation of Taxpayers rated Tim Bee “Taxpayer Ally” while Paton earned “Needs Improvement.” Bee got a C (53%) from the Goldwater Institute for 2006 and Paton got a D (44%. In 2005 CAP gave Bee scored 100% and Paton 75%.

You’re not just buying into conventional wisdom without checking your facts are you?


george,

Nice dream but Christine would not collect enough votes from the conservatives to put a scratch on Gabby.11/17/2006 01:09:00 PM|W|P|Blogger sirocco|W|P|Going by memory here, but didn't Giffords defeat Paton in 2000 for one of the District 13 house seats?11/17/2006 01:41:00 PM|W|P|Blogger phx kid|W|P|In the 2000 general for LD 13 votes were as follows: (see Arizona Secretary Of State)

Giffords 25,160
Somers 22,687
Downing 21,684
Paton 20,869

Looks like he lost to more than Gabby.11/17/2006 03:29:00 PM|W|P|Blogger George Tuttle|W|P|phx kid-Not dreaming by any means, just a thought. I don't know what in the heck you meant by not collecting enough votes from conservatives? When you read some of her stuff, she seems pretty conservative-to me at least. Or do you simply mean they won't vote for a woman?

The name recognition from the Olson side would be a huge plus and the fact that she can raise money should be a big plus as well.

We all know that 2008 will be Gabby's hardest campaign to come, even harder than this year. If she wins term number two it will be all over for the Repubs and their dreams of taking back the seat.11/17/2006 04:38:00 PM|W|P|Blogger phx kid|W|P|A Republican nominee has 3 voter segments to pull from. Moderates, independents, and conservatives. Gabby appears to do very well with the moderates and independents so it will be tough for an opponent to do defeat her without having ever conservative vote. A large block of those conservatives are social conservatives and Olson’s pro-abortion position will not get her very far with that crowd. Sorry, she can spend all the money she wants and does have the fame but she does not get the votes to take out Gabby.11/17/2006 06:00:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Rex Scott|W|P|Frankly, I think Gabby will do a great job of demonstrating why she is uniquely suited to represent this diverse district. Those who voted FOR her will have ample reason to do so again. She will not be easily categorized (or pushed around!) on Capitol Hill.

What will be interesting to see is how those who voted AGAINST Randy or Bush or the GOP in its current state vote in two years. Republicans will still have a registration edge in 2008 and the district lines will not change. Thus, Gabby's greatest concern would be to go up against a Republican who can unite their party and peel away a chunk of her independent support. Granted, the indies are less susceptible to defections unless she votes in ways they dislike...or her opponent successfully spins her voting record in a negative way.

Using these criteria as a guide, Tim Bee may be a very formidable opponent. Reliably conservative on most issues, he has a strong record of support for public education, receiving the AEA endorsement in virtually all his races. He has a base in eastern Pima County that cuts into Gabby's edge there and he and his brother Tim are well-liked in Cochise County, too.

Carroll would also be a strong foe...but how can a guy say he wants to stay here to raise his kids and sound credible changing his mind a mere two years later? I take Ray at his word that he is not planning a congressional run and The Weekly said he would likely run for re-election in 2008.

Mike Hellon might make another run and he would offer some of the same assets Bee and Carroll do. He was the voice of reason and maturity in this year's GOP primary and has the connections to raise bucks in a field less crowded than the one he had to confront this year. Don'tr count him out.

What I truly hope does not happen is for Gabby to face a challenge from the left in the primary, but it wouldn't surprise me a bit if she did.11/18/2006 01:32:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Paton is easily a better fit for the district than most anyone running. He's a real Republican--not like Huffman, but I think he appeals to all three of the groups Phx Kid was talking about. He'll go toe-to-toe with people like Grijalva, but unlike Graf, he's got a great background, education and a sense of humor. He has strong ties with the business community and the military. He was the most successful freshman lawmaker for the past two years. Look at the sheer number of votes he got in the primary.

Gowan was supposedly the most "conservative" candidate in the most conservative district in Southern AZ and Paton has crushed him twice. Even though Gowan (in two elections in a row) outspent him with clean elections dollars and was heavily endorsed by Graf.

As for district 13, that district was a lot different than CD-8--it was evenly split and it was a four-way race (not to mention it was 6 years ago--a lifetime in politics).

Bee is a great guy too. He's a lot quieter. He would make a great congressman, but he hasn't had a serious challenge since he beat Bill McGibbon in 2000. He'll have to ramp up his presence (and not up in Phoenix) in Southern AZ in order to make a strong showing. But if he could get in, he would be a great asset for So. AZ.

The interesting thing is that Paton and Bee work together quite a bit on legislation and seem to be good friends.11/20/2006 10:51:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Zelph|W|P|The buzz is that Tim will be busy as a bee in his new position as Senate President. He's already begun clearing the hive of long time political drones. Tim and his honey Grace will likely be more time in Phoenix.11/24/2006 08:49:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|I think Wally summed it up pretty well; and Rex made some good points too. However, is everyone forgetting the 800 pound gorilla in the room? How does a John McCain-led ticket affect Gabby and either Paton or Bee? It may be a pipe dream, but the McCain coat tails might be the silver bullet in CD 8, and in the CD5 (formerly know as J.D. Hayworth's district).11/17/2006 07:01:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|With this week's media buzz about Rudy Giuliani taking yet another step to run for president, I am having a wee bit of trouble wrapping my head around the punditry's "meme" about this guy's candidacy. Here's what the pundits say: Giuliani's liberal views on abortion, gun control and gay rights makes him pallatable to mainstream voters, but those same views from a Democrat make that candidate horribly out of touch with those same mainstream voters. A lollypop to anyone who can explain how that works.|W|P|116377215377927579|W|P|Hey! Giuliani|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/17/2006 08:45:00 AM|W|P|Blogger sirocco|W|P|Everything is good for Republicans, bad for Democrats. It's not hard.

For example: "The thumping we just took in the election is good for us, beacuse it will give people a chance to see what Dems are _really_ like before the 2008 Presidential race. After that exposure, the voters will surely back us in record numbers."11/17/2006 11:28:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Framer|W|P|Sirocco & Tedski,

I think the general concensus is that it was much better for Republicans to have a meltdown this year than in 2008. With the direction they were headed, this was bound to happen. Fortunately, the Democratic hill to climb really isn't that high, and "We hate Bush!" is no longer going to be your only selling point. Democrats are going to have to lead, and so far there has been precious little proof that this can happen, especially as this is not the 90's when hard decisions could be avoided.

If Hoyer were the Speaker, Obama or Ben Nelson head of the Senate, and Warner the most likely Presidential candidate, I would be fretting a little more to be honest. Pelosi, Clinton, and Reid make me like our chances in 2008 for both Houses and the Presidency.

And as far as far as abortion, gun control, and gay rights, there is a good chance that these stands could cost him the nomination. However, there is a far difference between Guiliani having these beliefs and his making them a priority if President. Clinton, and most other Democrats, on the other hand believe in them enough to place them in their agenda.

My gut is still that Rudy isn't quite ready.11/17/2006 01:03:00 PM|W|P|Blogger sirocco|W|P|Framer,

Considering Dems aren't in the majority until Jan., isn't it a little early to have expected much on the agenda front yet?

I _do_ agree it helps Republicans to have had this out now rather than two years from now.11/17/2006 08:28:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tom-AZ|W|P|This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.11/17/2006 11:02:00 PM|W|P|Blogger shrimplate|W|P|What are republican religious fundamentalists going to say about Rudy when stories of him sleeping with his mistress in the mayor's mansion while wifey and the kids slept upstairs are repeated all over again?

Poor copy, that.

And besides, he's Catholic so fundametalists will not be able to forgive him. Oh the irony.11/16/2006 11:41:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Word from DC (not the comic company) is that has defeated for majority leader. Since I strive to find local connections, Hoyer got into a shoving match with our own a few years back. I don't know who actually came out on top there, but suffice it to say that Hoyer is not a small man. At the 2000 convention, the Maryland delegation was seated near us. I knew someone on Hoyer's staff so I brought him over to meet the delegates and I introduced him as the guy that got into a fight with Hayworth. Hoyer asked how soon we were getting rid of the guy. I said, "Just wait, we'll take him out in 2006." Okay, I didn't really. I've known some people that worked for him, and I've asked all of them what "Steny" is short for. They have all insisted that it stands for Steny. I have my doubts and the full resources of this blogging empire will be put into finding out. By the way, Hoyer was the First Vice President (now called Executive Vice President) of the Young Democrats of America from 1969-1971. The current EVP is Alexis Tamerón of Superior. We expect big things from you, Alexis.|W|P|116370403211394185|W|P|It's Steny|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/16/2006 12:09:00 PM|W|P|Blogger TimWilsonAZ|W|P|Alexis has already done big things. She was Harry Mitchell's campaign director, I believe.11/16/2006 03:22:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|That is his real name.

He was born Steny Hamilton Hoyer, in New York City on June 14, 1939.

I don't know the origin of the name, but his birth certificate says, 'Steny.'

And if he got into a shoving match with Hayworth, it sounds like he's the right kind of guy.11/16/2006 03:34:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Sonoran Sam|W|P|I don't want to take anything away from ONE Rising Star, but I don't want to ignore another one....

Harry Mitchell's Campaign Manager was Kelly Ward. She is a UA Grad and Campus Dem chair who was volunteer coordinator for Elaine Richardson and worked for the state party after that, before working briefly for the Gov and going back to college to get a graduate degree.

She's bright, she's got more energy than any 10 normal human beings, and Harry was extremely lucky to find her.11/20/2006 11:02:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Zelph|W|P|Steny Hamilton Hoyer was born on June 14, 1939, in New York to a family of Danish origin — his name is the diminutive of his father’s, Steen.

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V126/N54/long3.html11/16/2006 06:25:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|As reported in the Arizona Daily Star yesterday, newly elected Senate President Tim Bee has gotten rid of four staffers: Greg Jernigan, Rob Dalager, Mark Swenson and Nick Simonetta. One capitol observer also told me that another staffer has also been let go, but I haven't been able to confirm this. A couple of things are going on here: one thing is the obvious, Bee would like to hire his own allies. This is natural and expected. Bee also needs to show that his leadership will be different than that of Ken Bennett, and this is the best way to show it right away. There was dissatisfaction with the control that these staffers had over legislation. For example, Swenson (a former Tucson reporter) was often refered to as "Senator 31" because of the virtual veto power he had over legislation, often exercised on the narrowest ideological grounds. Many Senators were unhappy that unelected staff were making decisions that should have been left to those that had been elected. Even though Bee is showing backbone here, some at the capitol are already saying that he wouldn't have done this without the consent of newly elected majority leader Thayer Verschoor. I'm wondering if this is the first of many staff decimations on the Republican side. I have heard complaints from Republicans about two long time, high profile consultants, Constantine Querard and Nathan Sproul. Querard consulted with campaigns in LD 26 and Randy Graf's congressional campaign, all of which were Republican seats that went Democratic. The style of the campaigns were cookie-cutter Maricopa County conservative campaigns that would have been sucessful had they not been waged in more moderate, albeit still Republican, areas in Southern Arizona. Sproul was the one of the architects of Proposition 107, the anti-gay marriage measure that was supposed to bring Republicans to the polls but its language was so broad that it narrowly lost. The campaign for the measure was nearly invisible and had little effect on Republican turnout. One blog, Arizona 8th, called for Sproul's exile last week. Both of these consultants have been touched by scandals over the last couple of years as well. CLARIFICATION - I had spoken to an activist in Phoenix who named an Alan Richardson as someone else who was terminated. I put his name as one of the people who Bee cut in my original post. I recieved an e-mail from a capitol staffer who told me that he'd never heard of the guy. I took his name off of the post. I then recieved an e-mail from Richardson, who refered to himself as "low-level" (which may be why the other person didn't know who he was) and said that he had submitted a letter of resignation before the election.|W|P|116368664170223091|W|P|Republicans Clean House, Well, Senate, Really|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/16/2006 07:49:00 AM|W|P|Blogger phx kid|W|P|Tedski,

You have your facts wrong again. Constantine produces campaign materials, pamphlets, mailings, commercials. He is not a financial consultant and was not the treasurer of the candidates that had troubles. Your accusation is like casting aspersions on the person who cleaned the carpets for David Burnell Smith.

His work in LD 26 was not the reason that they lost. Each candidate made his own decisions up there. The most fateful one being to challenge Toni Hellon. (Sorry, that was not Constantine’s decision.) Combine that with the sour mood from the CD 8 primary and the national mood and you had some tough headwinds. Further, one of the candidates gave the press so much to work with it was not even funny.

Constantine had very little to do with the Graf campaign. For that race you should correctly reference Steve Aiken and R.T. Gregg.

As to Sproul, there is not much to say about a retromingent.11/16/2006 12:19:00 PM|W|P|Blogger 206isCancer.com|W|P|Senator Bee had told me once during the election cycle that it infurated him (This might just be my word, I can't actually see Senator Bee mad) when he would overhear staffers in the hallway talking about the need to push for their legislation. Bee told me that staffers are not supposed to have any legislation. They are supposed to be doing the bidding (once again my word) of those who have been elected by the people. So, I'm glad to hear that Bee has already started his House (Senate) cleaning.11/16/2006 05:51:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I got an e-mail yesterday saying that in the continuing count in Yuma County, Amanda Aguirre pulled ahead of Russ Jones in the District 24 State Senate race. At the time, Aguirre was about 251 votes ahead. According to the Secretary of State's website (last updated at 8:17 last night), that lead is at 150 votes. Yuma County officials reported that they sould have been done with early ballots as of yesterday, and the last provisional ballots should be counted by Friday. La Paz county is reported to be done with it's count. This also is accompanied by some news from the house race in that district. Democrat Lynne Pancrazi is still maintaining her healthy first place in that contest, but Theresa Ulmer has knocked Ken Rosevear from second place. Her lead is down to 24 votes, but if this holds, it will mean the Democrats swept a district where the Republicans counted on a win to get their "2/3 majority" they were going on about a few months back. These results would also be a reversal of one of the few apparent pickups that Republicans had on election night, when it looked like Jones eked out a win. Also, the Pinal County counting is done, and Democrat Barbara McGuire of Kearny has edged out Republican Frank Pratt of Casa Grande for the silver. This would be a pick-up in the district where Democrat Cheryl Chase switched to the Republicans. In Maricopa County, Jackie Thrasher's lead is back up to 115 votes against Doug Quelland. Earlier in the day, the lead was as small as 59 votes, nearly small enough to trigger an automatic recount. We may actually know how this turns out before the State of the State address. NB - No real good reason for the title, 'cept to be a smart alec.|W|P|116368317193768029|W|P|Aguirre, the Wrath of God|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/16/2006 08:01:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Mexilina|W|P|Last I heard, we'll know for sure by Monday. I have my candle lit that Yuma's Angels will all win..11/15/2006 08:18:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I went ahead and registered a league on Fantasy Congress. Fantasy Congress gives us political geeks a chance to do what NFL geeks have been doing for years: get obsessive about stats. Go over to the Fantasy Congress page, and check out the R Cubed league (you can look it up, it is called "R Cubed," easier to spell that way). The league password is "udall." You all (yes, even you Greg) are invited to sign up and draft a "team." I will activate the league as soon as I have at least five players.|W|P|116364715016370895|W|P|R Cubed Fantasy Congress League|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/15/2006 09:52:00 PM|W|P|Blogger DeRose|W|P|Prepare to get owned.11/15/2006 09:54:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Sure Chris.

Thank you Ted for putting this on. :)11/15/2006 10:44:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Great idea Ted!

I thought about drafting JD just so I could have the joy of waiving him at the end of his term, but I decided that would be petty of me.

It was a close call, though. :)11/17/2006 12:06:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Tony GOPrano|W|P|Team Kick Dems ASSES is reporting for duty...NO Prisoners taken Teddy so be ready for WAR!!!

Forgetaboutit!!!

TonyGOPrano
Conservative Republican Warrior & Hit Man11/15/2006 06:52:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|So, this weekend, my boys in the New England Revolution played in the MLS Cup final for the third time in five years. The last two cups went into overtime and resulted in eventual losses to the Los Angeles Galaxy (in addition, the 1999 US Open Cup was also against the Galaxy and was an overtime loss). This weekend, the Revolution played against the Houston Dynamo, which was already a good sign since there was no need to battle the Galaxy bugaboo. The game was scoreless throughout the first ninety minutes and went into a second overtime period still scoreless until Taylor Twellman nutmeged a Dynamo defender and scored a goal. The Revs and their fans (out numbered since the game was in Texas), went nuts. The Revs hadn't even managed to score a goal in any MLS Cup match, but were now ahead with only seven minutes left. What could possibly happen? Well, 72 seconds later, a defensive breakdown allowed Dynamo forward Brian Ching to score, tying the game. The game went into a penalty kick shootout, always a crap shoot. The Revs lost on a miffed shot by Jay Heaps. Anyway, the lesson here is not getting giddy about victories. Some can be very, very temporary, especially when you spend your time celebrating, getting full of yourself and forgetting how you got to the spot that let you get that victory in the first place. I'm not thinking of any particular group of people here...|W|P|116359989234644871|W|P|Another Tortured Soccer Metaphor|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/15/2006 04:05:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|So you think that having John Murtha as Majority leader would be a bad thing?11/15/2006 05:45:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tedski|W|P|Um...no...but Alcee Hastings on intelligence just because you can would be.11/15/2006 10:53:00 PM|W|P|Blogger cc burro|W|P|Information from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has information that appears to indicate that Murtha is surrounded by an ethical "cloud".

CREW mainly goes after Republicans for ethics violations.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington--
http://www.citizensforethics.org/

September 2006--List of 20 most corrupt members of Congress, plus 5 to watch for--
http://www.citizensforethics.org/press/newsrelease.php?view=156

Their report on John Murtha--
http://www.beyonddelay.org/files/Murtha.pdf

Putting him at the 2nd most powerful post in the House does not indicate that Pelosi is totally sincere re fighting corruption--very discrepant behavior since the Democrats were running against the Republicans "culture of corruption".

We need to clean house.11/16/2006 06:27:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|She is loyal though, that is what I think this was.11/14/2006 07:13:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I keep hearing commentators say that 2008 will be the first contest not featuring a sitting President or Vice President since 1952. ¡A lo contrario! Alben Barkley, who was Vice President for Harry Truman, ran in a few Democratic primaries that year before he realized that the country was not yet ready for a President named "Alben." His middle initial was "W," however. You would have to go back to 1928, when Calvin Coolidge's Vice President, Charles Gates Dawes, chose not to seek the nomination. Despite the fact that he was a Nobel Laureate, the man became a laughing stock in Washington after a few self-argandizing gaffes and campaigning against the fillibuster. He probably would have had a great deal of trouble winning the nomination. Dawes and Barkley did have an interesting legacy though. Dawes had a frequently paraphrased quip he made in remarks to Barkley, then a Kentucky Senator:
I can only do two things: one is to sit up here and listen to you birds talk, the other is to look at the newspapers every day to see how the president's health is.
|W|P|116355874917134170|W|P|Because This Is Exactly the Sort of Trivial Nonsense That You Read This Blog for, That's Why|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/14/2006 05:47:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|"Hey, just conceded." "He's not just concieted, he's an egomaniac." "No, no, he just conceded." "Oh, why didn't you say so?"|W|P|116355212357087598|W|P|J. D. Stands for "Just Defeated"|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/14/2006 08:57:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Mexilina|W|P|Team Mitchell All the Way!! I love it how classy he is!!

*sigh* I can sleep at night now..11/14/2006 10:38:00 PM|W|P|Blogger azwildcat88|W|P|That was probably the hardest thing that JD has ever had to do!

I was SURE that he would fight to the bitter end, cry foul, call for a re-countand/or hold up in his office, forcing SWAT to drag him out by his heels....11/14/2006 10:50:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|The reason it is such a good thing that J.D. is gone is that he pretty much seems pathologically incapable of anything except partisan acrimony. This stands him in sharp contrast to even other Republicans in the delegation-- could you imagine Jeff Flake (or even Trent Franks) offering a resolution like the one Hayworth talked Duncan Hunter into offering last year on Iraq in which he effectively shut off what had the potential to be a productive debate by forcing a vote on 'whether to support the President or withdraw immediately?' And keep in mind that he has served in a Congress in which Democrats were never in the majority, and he still thought that partisan warfare was the most important thing in Washington.

What this election does show is that the redistricing commission, whatever their flaws were, was a good idea. If the legislature had drawn the lines (back when Calamity Jane was the Governor to sign off on it) they'd have made sure that this never happened.

Oh, this is priceless: Word verification is 'riidsuss'

As in 'rids us' dragged way out, just like this election.11/15/2006 03:54:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|I know I smiled at the news. :)

And Harry has honourably decided to wait until the votes are counted before doing a victory dance.11/14/2006 11:18:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Patty Weiss is having a "thank you" picnic for supporters on the 18th. So, that leaves a question, what exactly is she going to be up to over the next year or so? I have heard speculation that she may be tapping her supporters for some cash to pay off some campaign debts. This would be a short term goal at best. The question on most minds is: does she plan to run for another office? The talk among some Democrats is about a run at the mayor's office. Bob Walkup recently announced that he will be running for another term. For all of the handwringing about the 2003 race, it must be remembered that Walkup didn't even manage 50% of the vote in that race. On the surface, a figure as well known and well liked as Weiss is could easily win a race like that. A couple of hurdles here: in 2003, Walkup could be easily identified with the unpopular council majority led by Fred Ronstadt and Kathleen Dunbar. Both were dumped by large margins in last year's council elections. Without that baggage, Walkup's image is now back to where it was before: a sunny, friendly executive. It may prove to be harder to run a race against that Walkup than the 2003 version. The other hurdle is that Weiss may not be interested. I asked one person involved in Weiss's campaign if speculation about the mayor's race was a "pipe dream" and he said yes. I suppose I could show up to the picnic on the 18th and ask her. Naw... NB - I asked this before: with Carol West's recent announcement, Walkup loses his last reliable ally on the council. With little prospect of another Republican winning next year, does he reconsider his decision to run for a third term?|W|P|116352944985962645|W|P|What is Patty Weiss Up to?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/14/2006 01:36:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|Why would anyone want to be the mayor of Tucson?11/14/2006 01:48:00 PM|W|P|Blogger sirocco|W|P|I supported Giffords in the race, obviously ... but if Patty was collecting funds to pay off debt from her run, I would contribute to the cause.

I would also like to know if she plans to run for another office, as I would be liekly to support her.11/15/2006 07:25:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Tom Prezelski|W|P|Well, gee, Liza, maybe a sense of civic responsibility might make one want to be mayor of Tucson.

But, I guess you are right. There is absolutely no prestige in being mayor of a diverse 231 year old city with a world class university and internationally known arts and music scene. I guess one would be better off moving to Maricopa County and becoming mayor of some soulless stucco and chicken wire satelite of Phoenix. Heck, it was good for Ron Drake's career.11/15/2006 10:54:00 AM|W|P|Blogger George Tuttle|W|P|Tom-since you are so high on it-Run!11/15/2006 02:34:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|Tom,
Okay, I'm sorry that I offended the natives. I guess that I was thinking of, let's just say the "challenges" of a poor transportation infrastructure, limited water supply, limited mass transit, lack of a cohesive growth plan for the last several decades, etc...But, you're right about the University.11/15/2006 08:47:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tom Prezelski|W|P|I already have an elected office that keeps me quite busy, "George."11/15/2006 09:14:00 PM|W|P|Blogger George Tuttle|W|P|Well, "Tom" you could resign to seek the office. You seem to know where you want to go and where you want the city to go.

Come on man, where is your sense of civic pride?11/13/2006 07:59:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|The "Protect Marriage Arizona" ammendment is still failing by approxamately 40,000 votes, according to the Secretary of State's website. So, why did we not pass this in Arizona, when such ammendments have passed easily in other states? I have a couple of theories. One is that this particular ammendment over-reached. Had the ammendment been strictly drawn to only declare gay marriage illegal, it probably would have passed. However, it included language that opponents claimed would have denied any sort of government recognition of unmarried couples of any stripe. This came off to many voters as mean spirited. Also, the demographics have changed greatly in this state. Although the ammendment failed in three rural counties (one was the Flagstaff dominated Coconino County), it passed overwhelmingly in most of them. Even ten years ago, similar percentages in the rural counties would have made this ammendment pass by a decent margin. However, there just seemed to not be votes in the rural areas to make up for the margins it failed by in the urban counties. For example, the votes that were cast in favor of the ammendment in relatively populous Yavapai county (34,896) were nearly whiped out by the margin by which the ammendment lost in Pima County (32,854). In fact, the losing margin in Pima County alone was more than the total votes cast on the ammendment in 9 of the state's 13 counties. We still like to think of Arizona as the "Old West," but the state has been dominated by the urban areas for years, and is becoming more so every month. I think there was also a mis-reading of the conservatism of the electorate. We have our share of social conservatives here, but when I talk to voters, their conservatism tends to be of the small-l libertarian brand. Look at who Arizona's conservative hero is: Barry Goldwater. Goldwater was often silent on social issues, and on the few occasions that he was vocal he would usually be on the opposite side of the so-called "values voters." The last hot button social issue that made the ballot was Proposition 110 back in 1992. 110 would have restricted abortion. It only passed in two counties (ironically, one was Apache county, which didn't pass this one). As before, Arizonans have a live-and-let-live streak that wasn't appreciated by the backers of this ammendment.|W|P|116343230102559926|W|P|Prop. 107: Still Failing|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/13/2006 09:29:00 AM|W|P|Blogger TucsonMark|W|P|Try more than 40,000 votes according to the Pima County Election's page, which shows it, as of 11/10 618 pm, 110276 yes, 150,663 no. Jan may not be updating this page, which shows it updated as of 11/13 and still shows the 33,000 vote difference in Pima, but shows it narrowly failing in Apache by 72 votes now. Maricopa and Coconino's figures are right as well.11/13/2006 11:24:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Tedski

I think two things account for the defeat of Prop. 107.

I agree with you in part on the overreaching of benefits, however, a number of other states have included benefits in their successful marriage amendments.

I agree that we are less of a conservative state than many people suspect, but less than Michigan and Ohio? Both states have passed a Marriage Amendment that also bans civil unions.

What was unique in Arizona was the "No" campaign run by Arizona together. They made it about benefits from day one, and featured heterosexual couples in their advertising. By contrast, the "Yes" campaign never addressed the issue of benefits, and ran a horrible, invisible campaign.11/13/2006 11:24:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Tedski

I think two things account for the defeat of Prop. 107.

I agree with you in part on the overreaching of benefits, however, a number of other states have included benefits in their successful marriage amendments.

I agree that we are less of a conservative state than many people suspect, but less than Michigan and Ohio? Both states have passed a Marriage Amendment that also bans civil unions.

What was unique in Arizona was the "No" campaign run by Arizona together. They made it about benefits from day one, and featured heterosexual couples in their advertising. By contrast, the "Yes" campaign never addressed the issue of benefits, and ran a horrible, invisible campaign.11/13/2006 06:25:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tony GOPrano|W|P|The domestic benefits part of the Proposition killed this. Look also at who ran this campaign? Nathan Sproul....failed in 2004 in Nevada gathering signatures; failure in 2006 in the Governor's race (Len Munsil) and the Prop 107. The only good thing is , Sproul will be finished as a GOP consultant in Arizona.11/13/2006 07:29:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Joe Thomas|W|P|" Had the ammendment been strictly drawn to only declare gay marriage illegal, it probably would have passed."


probably? :)

If 107 had only been about gay marriage it would have passed by over 60%. It would have been "bundled" with the anti-immigration measures.

All the points about Arizonans' unique status are true, but without domestic partner benefits, there would have been very little for opposition to gain traction with.11/13/2006 08:32:00 PM|W|P|Blogger NetrootsDemocrat|W|P|I think the "overreach" part is partially spin from the other side. Look at Wisconsin's. It passed with 57% yes votes and was worded the same way.

No, this has much to do with the libertarian west versus the more evangelical midwest and south.

I am gay and have never been treated differently in Arizona because of it. The transient population seems more live and let live than other places. Plus, Arizona is no stranger to gay politicians.11/13/2006 09:25:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|Arizona Together did not make it about benefits since day one. In fact, there was quite a bit of back-and-forth about strategy. There were divisions and disagreements galore over the past two years. Ultimately, Pima County split off from AT and created its own parallel campaign, No on 107. The win can be attributed to CAP's overreaching, small-l libertarians, and the coordinated efforts of local campaigns in Pima County (No on 107) and Maricopa County (Arizona Together). Local people running local campaigns put the no vote over the top where it counted, in the urban counties that decisively defeated this hate amendment.11/11/2006 04:48:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Some of the students I work with have, well, a history with our justice system. Inevitably, they are always blameless for their arrests, or, they were arrested because the victim "snitched." I don't know why it counts as snitching when it's the victim, but that's how it goes. Republican lobbyist, strategist and svengali Grover Norquist, from an article in the Financial Times:
[he means Don Sherwood] seat [in Pennsylvania] would have been overwhelmingly ours, if his mistress hadn’t whined about being throttled.
|W|P|116328938947908500|W|P|And These Guys Wonder Why They Lost?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/11/2006 04:29:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Well, Captain Al's ship is about to be decomissioned. Charlene Pesquiera's lead on Al Melvin, which was as low as 50 votes some moments on election night has widened to 355 votes. There are 5,000 votes early ballots yet to be counted, plus an additional 11,000 ballots countywide, but only a fraction of those would be in District 26. Some have pointed out that there are also many outstanding ballots in Pinal County. I know that some Republicans are taking hope in this, since Melvin had strong support in Saddlebrooke, the only Pinal County community in the district. However, those outstanding ballots are far more likely to be from the half-dozen or so larger communities in the county rather than Saddlebrooke. Congratulations, Charlene.|W|P|116328839626711641|W|P|Pesquiera Widens Lead|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/11/2006 07:44:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Rex Scott|W|P|Not only did Charlene run an aggressive grass-roots campaign, (masterfully coordinated by Katie Bolger, who also worked on behalf of LD26 state representative winner Lena Saradnik) but Melvin's case is instructive for future candidates from EITHER party. That is, you can't appeal to the extremes in your party in order to win a nomination and then expect to seem appealing to the broader electorate in a general election. David Jorgenson made the same mistake in LD26...and Pesquiera and Saradnik (assisted by numerous mailings from the Arizona Democratic Party) were relentless in reminding the voters of some of the reactionary positions both he and Melvin espoused. Along with the retail politicking, it was a winning combo in moderate-leaning LD26.

I would suggest that Ned Lamont made the same mistake in Connecticut. He came across as a single-issue partisan with no prior experience and he tried to oust a loyal Democrat who had been a force for social progress in his state since the 1970's. It didn't work and I hope many of the bloggers who were quick to demonize Joe Lieberman remember this case as we approach 2008 and start to throw the ugly label "DINO" around again. It didn't work against Lieberman...or Gabby Giffords in CD8, for that matter.

Giffords, Lieberman, Pesquiera and Saradnik won NOT by posturing as ideologues, or by banging on one drum. They talked about all the issues they will have to confront in the offices they won and impressed voters as sensible, pragmatic and able to work on behalf of the interests of the many, not some narrow elite. They represent the sort of candidate (Napolitano is another one and so was Tim Kaine in Virginia's governor race last year) that are winning elections because voters are tired of shrill voices that spout exclusive messages on both sides of the aisle.11/12/2006 12:53:00 AM|W|P|Blogger cc burro|W|P|Saddlebrooke had large turnout. The postings indicated that over 5000 of their 6400 registered voters [80%] had voted. It is looking very good for Charlene.

Ironic--Melvin was losing by 146 votes when the vote totals [excluding provisionals and the mail-in ballots dropped of at the polls on Tuesday] were posted yet he chose to go to Phoenix for a tour. I guess he can't imagine that he could lose this race.

REX--Definitely. Any party that rejects its "moderates" will not last long as a majority party. But keep mind--a "moderate" is usually someone who has a mix of liberal/moderate/conservative positions--depending on the issue.11/12/2006 10:10:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|Very well said Rex and CC Burro. I hope to see progressives get their ideas across and discussed, but without building a movement by bashing moderates.11/12/2006 01:05:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|By the way, folks should take a gander at the George Tuttle's site www.gilamonsterville.blogspot.com.
I have had a bit of an exchange on a topic related to this and probably stirred up a bit of a hornet's nest on this as well (I am not always as eloquent as CC Burro and Rex are).

It is interesting, however, and makes me wonder what movements will be occurring inside the Democratic party as steps are taken toward the next city election and 2008.11/13/2006 08:50:00 AM|W|P|Blogger TucsonMark|W|P|Tedski, thank you for this post. It shows that either Mr. Nelson hasn't reported the numbers to Jan or she ain't posting them! These numbers are not at azsos.gov as of 841 am, 11/13. Either are any update figures from Pima, which last update was Friday, 11/10, 618 pm!11/13/2006 11:17:00 AM|W|P|Blogger The Screaming Centrist|W|P|Man, we have some hawt politicians in this state.

I don't remember what your post said, but I'm sure it was very profound.11/13/2006 01:52:00 PM|W|P|Blogger SonoranDesertRat|W|P|From Joe Pyritz, Public Information Officer of Pinal County:
2000 provisional ballots are all that are left to count in Pinal. The 2000 are countywide, and they don't know what the precinct breakdown is. All other ballots are in, and the counting needs to be done so that the Board of Supervisors can certify the canvass at Wednesday morning's meeting.

So that sinks Melvin's hopes a little further, but I'll believe Charlene has won once this is all over - just been burned once too many times to declare victory yet.11/13/2006 06:25:00 PM|W|P|Blogger cc burro|W|P|Pinal finally did an update today for LD 26 state senate. 108 votes were added--57 for Pesquiera and 51 for Melvin.

It's still lookin' good for Charlene!11/14/2006 11:21:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Luke|W|P|First of all, this is x4mr. Luke is a sign on from forever ago. I think I used it once, and no, it's not my real name. More on that later.

I just love what happened in LD26 this election and posted twice about it over at my place. Checked last night, and latest update looks fabulous for Charlene.

I love it.

Roger,
Strongly encourage you to stay away from Tuttle's site. Just don't go there. Now the guy has literally posted a story dedicated to, guess who? What an ass.

The guy already withdrew all financial support when someone said "Congresswoman" in recognition that either Giffords or Weiss had the nomination.

That blog is not worth your time.

Suggest you stick around here at Tedski's marvelous place, and your readership and remarks are certainly most welcome in my neck of the woods.

You raise intelligent questions and remarks. Not sure which guru, perhaps Christ, that introduced notion of "pearls before swine."

IMPORTANT NOTE: This beta blogger thing is causing some real headaches. Won't post anything long here, but you should know about this. Details I have are at my latest post here.11/15/2006 08:47:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|So what happens two years hence when Pete Hershberger is term-limited out of the House and runs for this Senate seat? I'd really love some insight on that dynamic.

P.S. I'm also not thrilled about Blogger Beta. If you're thinking of switching, wait until the final release rolls out. You can't switch back once you've switched over.11/10/2006 02:42:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|In the latest count, has gained on Harry Mitchell. All of us Democrats counted our chickens too soon and they have come to bite us in the butt. Oh, such hubris, such vanity, such presumption! We were probably high from the fumes of our Volvos and triple lattes. What ever made us think that we could defeat a high minded public servant such as J. D. Hayworth, especially with such a disreputable low life like Harry Mitchell? Hayworth has gained, oh it hurts me to even say so... He has gained 23 votes on Mitchell. This is devastating to me. Please, everyone, keep me away from the pills and razor blades. If this continues every day for the next eight and a half months, Hayworth will be the unquestioned victor. I really don't know why we thought we could win.|W|P|116319556879818780|W|P|Uh Oh...Looks Like Harry Mitchell Better Polish Up that Resume|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/10/2006 04:28:00 PM|W|P|Blogger phx kid|W|P|Watch it with the Volvo analogy. Even a right-wingers like owns one. Maybe you should have said Saab.11/10/2006 05:09:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Mexilina|W|P|That's lattes!! (vanilla, pls.. and bought in a locally-owned coffee shop). Oh say it isn't so, Ted!! Please keep us updated on this one!!!11/10/2006 06:29:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Well Mexilina, I went up by 388 votes compared to my opponent's gaining 323. Does that make you feel better?11/10/2006 09:19:00 PM|W|P|Blogger eckeric|W|P|We need to get Ted over to Coffee Etc. here on the southside.

Oh, and Elizabeth, great job!11/10/2006 10:51:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Mexilina|W|P|*sigh*.. yeah, I feel a little better, Elizabeth.. but sniff sniff.. great, now I won't rest this weekend.. :-S11/12/2006 09:08:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Dogma|W|P|As of 5PM on Saturday, Harry's lead was still holding at 5657 votes over JD...11/12/2006 05:46:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|You never did send me that picture of Ted with the cute little horns on it Mexilina.

And my lead is growing, which is weird when Harry's is slowly going down a bit.11/10/2006 02:28:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Ohio's 18th District will now be represented by a guy named Zack Space. The name sounds to me like one from a comic book. Not Marvel or DC mind you, but maybe 70's era Atlas or Charlton. Of course, the Republicans had a field day with his name. Note for next time guys: you need more theramin.|W|P|116319451247092784|W|P|And the Best Name of this Election Cycle Is...|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/12/2006 09:01:00 PM|W|P|Blogger shrimplate|W|P|OK, I got the Theramin joke, not that I'm proud. Hands showing evrybody else who did?11/13/2006 08:56:00 PM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|I got it.11/15/2006 03:44:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|Hey, I have a friend who I met online (a blogging buddy in fact) who worked very hard to get Zack Space elected.

And the citizens in SE Ohio now have a real Congressman they can be proud of in contrast to Jack Abramoff's golfing buddy (Bob Ney) who is on his way to prison.11/09/2006 09:42:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|The House Democratic caucus re-elected Phil Lopes as minority leader. They also elected Jack Brown, a long time moderate-to-conservative legislator from St. Johns, as assistant minority leader and Phoenix Representative Steve Gallardo as minority whip. The caucus will have somewhere between 25 and 27 members (depending on where uncounted votes end up), which is the largest Democratic house caucus since the 1970's. This opens up many chances for Democratic members if they are smart and play their cards right. On the Republican side, there are some odd developments. Jim Weiers, who was only narrowly re-elected to his house seat, was selected by his Republican colleagues to be their leader, and presumptively the Speaker of the House. However, there is trouble brewing. Normally, the election of Speaker by the full membership is a formality: the Republicans naturally have the 31 votes necessary to elect their leader Speaker. Even someone that didn't get a unanimous vote in caucus would have had at least 31 votes there and other members of the party would fall in line for the floor vote since that person would inevitably win. Well, as it turns out Weiers didn't get 31 votes in the caucus, at least not 31 that can vote for him on the floor (I'll get to that). He had enough votes to be elected Speaker, but folks that were privy to the goings on in that closed door meeting say that the more conservative Andy Biggs had enough votes to keep his total under 31. The Biggs candidacy was driven by a couple of things. First of all, there has been some disatisfaction from conservatives that Weiers is too friendly with some Democrats. But the thing that has really fueled opposition to him is his leadership style, which some see as overbearing. An example of this was at the meeting yesterday. Weiers was worried that he did not have the votes to be re-elected, so he cajoled the caucus into allowing members that had been defeated to vote on leadership. Members whose elections are in doubt are often allowed to vote, but allowing members who are obviously not going to serve in the next session is a crossing a line. So, what happens in January? Do the rebel members fall back in line and vote for Weiers? Do they line up with the newly empowered Democrats to agree on a comprimise candidate? Who would that be?|W|P|116313550311473576|W|P|Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/09/2006 11:08:00 PM|W|P|Blogger grannuaile|W|P|If the Republicans who didn't want Weiers wanted Biggs, why would they team up with the Dems to compromise on someone presumably more progressive than either Biggs or Weiers? Or do they just distrust Weiers enough that they're willing to vote for, say, a Konopnicki just to get rid of him?11/10/2006 09:04:00 AM|W|P|Blogger espressopundit|W|P|The Democrats had 27 House members in 1992.11/10/2006 09:16:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Joe Thomas|W|P|Biggs and Weiers?

These are the choices?

(sigh)

Having Andy as Speaker is as close as Eddie (Farmsworth) will ever get to it again.11/10/2006 09:44:00 AM|W|P|Blogger skoora|W|P|Ted,

Which members that are "obviously not going to serve in the next session" were allowed to vote in the meeting? I know two members whose races were up in the air were allowed in, but one was slightly leading and another was only down by 8 votes. Since the meeting, both are leading by 100-plus.11/10/2006 11:32:00 AM|W|P|Blogger skoora|W|P|Sorry for the double-post, but I also wanted to add that, just because the more conservative Republicans didn't support Weiers in the caucus doesn't mean they won't support him on the floor in January. The organizational meeting is done to determine who the caucus - as an entity - will support.

If any group were to conceivably split from the group, it would be the moderate Republicans, not the ultra-conservatives that supported Biggs over Weiers in Wednesday's meeting. They will all fall in line and elect Weiers speaker come January 8.11/09/2006 09:51:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I ran into Phil Lopes yesterday, and he told me that he could take me. Okay, not really. But Lopes was having a problem that he didn't anticipate. He had to make arrangements to move today's Democratic caucus meeting to a different room to accomodate four members more than anticipated. Not exactly the sort of problem that is really a problem though, is it? Lopes is running for re-election to be house minority leader in a caucus today, and another Tucson legislator, Linda Lopez, is hoping to replace him. Yesterday, the Republicans had their meeting and re-elected Jim Weiers (something that the voters almost didn't do). That meeting was closed, so I have no good gossip for you. I have a feeling that Lopes (with an "S") will be re-elected. He has done a good job leading a loyal opposition and also made sure that candidates like Lena Saradnik got support from the State Party when they otherwise might not have been able to. I'm not sure what case can be made against his continued leadership. Lopez (with a "Z") just became president of the Sunnyside School Board and may have to fight a recall soon. I've said this before, I don't know how anyone, no matter how talented, can do both jobs and do them well. Something I'm curious about, do the overwhelming victory of Janet Napolitano and the gains by Democrats make the Republican caucus reconsider some of their tactics of the last couple of years, or did we just make them angrier?|W|P|116309196343208041|W|P|Caucus, And I Don't Mean Azerbaijan|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/09/2006 11:53:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Squib aka TwistedOreo|W|P|That last question is a very interesting one. I have no doubt that they are hoppin' mad at their Party leadership and that should make for one hell of an interesting fight.

You would think that with Democratic house gains, they might take some heed. What I think you might see happen is that those Republicans who once were much closer to the middle, but felt that they had to move further to the right in the last sessions environment, may actually feel like they can re-moderate themselves, which may not tone down some of the rhetoric, but may make it more difficult for this Legislature to push their agenda. (Think John Nelson)11/09/2006 09:15:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Ward 2 councilmember Carol West has announced that she will not be running for a third term. Last year, West changed her party affiliation to independent after several years of criticism for being to close to Republicans Bob Walkup, Kathleen Dunbar and Fred Ronstadt, as well as frequent conflicts with her Democratic colleagues. She has told reporters that she never planned on running for a third term. Running would have been difficult as an independent in any case, although some in the business community were hoping that they could pressure the Republicans not to run a candidate. Given some of the Republican nominees this year, it is hard to see how much influence the "Country Club" crowd would have had over the nomination process. Walkup recently announced that he is running for re-election, but with West gone, he loses his only reliable ally on the council. That, coupled with few decent shots at electing any other Republican members next year, may lead Walkup to reconsider his decision. A possible Democratic candidate for the seat is Clarence Boykins, who is finishing up his final term as NAACP president and is a Viet-Nam veteran. Boykins has extensive ties to the community, and should he win, he would be the first African American on the council since Chuck Ford left the council in the 1980's. I spoke to Boykins the other night, and he told me that he enjoyed running for office and is eager to do it again. NB - In the article in this morning's Star, they say that no Republican has served as a Ward 2 councilmember since Brent Davis served in the seat. Well, you'd have go go further back than that since Davis is a Democrat. Davis, by the way, is mentioned as a candidate for mayor. CORRECTION - My original post refered to West's constituency as Ward 3 when it is really Ward 2.|W|P|116309090757055453|W|P|West Opts Not to Run|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/09/2006 04:34:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Graf 06|W|P|I think your numbering may be a bit off, I thought 3 was Uhlich and the last republican there would have been Dunbar.
West is/was 2.
Unless they went around renumbering. Happens too often.11/09/2006 05:13:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|Carol West represents Ward 2 on Tucson's eastside.11/09/2006 05:18:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tedski|W|P|Oops..y'all got me. I'll fix it.11/10/2006 02:45:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Michael|W|P|And Kathleen Dunbar is apparently moving to Prescott. I'm not sure what to make of that, but I'll keep my snark to myself.11/09/2006 07:39:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|As if things weren't bad enough for , in addition to losing his race, he had to watch as his 2004 opponent, Elizabeth Rogers, won a term as a Justice of the Peace in Maricopa County. ¡Pobrecito! I recieved not one but two emails yesterday requesting volunteers to help in a hand recount of the CD 5 race. Republicans are enthusiastic about a hand recount? Weren't they calling us whiners for asking for the same thing back in 2000? I would never call them hypocrites, of course.|W|P|116308364680799867|W|P|Salt in the Wound|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/09/2006 11:35:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|wait, they ask for volunteers? May I ask why?11/10/2006 06:49:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Tedski|W|P|The e-mail gives the impression its for a re-count in CD-5, but I think it was actually for the audits that are now authorized by the new Downing/Johnson law. Probably easier to ask for volunteers for a "recount" in a close race that volunteers for an audit that will not effect the outcome.11/10/2006 08:05:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|That seems a bit more sensible. Hopefully no one will "riot" like they did in 2000.11/09/2006 07:11:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|As all of you no doubt know, Gabrielle Giffords will be the third woman to serve in congress from Arizona. You know this because you read this blog and are thus well informed. Here is something interesting: if she serves two complete terms, she will serve more time in congress than either of the previous distaff occupants, Karan English and Isabella Greenway. She will serve longer than Greenway before she has her fourtieth birthday. By her second re-election (knock on wood), she will be in congress longer than the two of them combined. English only managed one term before being defeated by some guy whose name escapes me because he is no longer relevant. Greenway's first election was to fill the unexpired term of Lewis Douglas, then she was elected to a full term. At the end of that term, she retired from congress.|W|P|116308257383648507|W|P|Trivia From the R-Cubed Library of Fascinating Facts|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/09/2006 08:22:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Shane Wikfors|W|P|Karan English was defeated in 1994 by non-other-than JD Hayworth. Of course you knew this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karan_English11/08/2006 07:12:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I wrote a bit yesterday about Russ Dove doing his Constitution Enforcement Voter Intimidation routine. showed up early to vote (apparently before Dove got there), and there was Roy Warden, el gran pendejo quemador de banderas, ready for him in the parking lot. I don't know if he picked that polling place because it was Grijalva's, or just because it was a Hispanic neighborhood. Warden proceded to harangue Grijalva. Grijalva turned to him and said, "Always good to see you in the morning, Roy." There was also an "election observer" at my brother's precinct. My brother's precinct is very Hispanic, however there is a bit of a problem with the assumption that there are illegal aliens voting there. That neighborhood is also known as Barrio Viejo, the oldest neighborhood in Tucson. The immigrant population of the precinct, legal or otherwise, is negligible at best. Chicano families that live there have been there for generations, even centuries. The fact that anti-immigration activists picked that neighborhood as some place to keep an eye on just confirms for me that these guys are making judgements about people based on nothing more than what vowel their last name ends in, and makes me wonder what the true extent of their agenda is.|W|P|116304063861787937|W|P|Like I Need To Give You More Evidence: Roy Warden Is Still A Jerk|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/08/2006 08:19:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Roy Warden|W|P|Yo Tedski, Listen Up!

Nobody ever heard about your blog until you started writing about me. Now you've made the "big time."

Tell your "amigos" to be afraid of "Cinco Cosas": La Noche, La Chupacabra, La Migra, the American Rule of Law, and Warden, the Notorious Mexican Flag Burner.

You tell them: "If your back is still wet, Warden doesn't care if you've been in this country for 30 years. He'll find you and see you deported."

Time to stop shooting off your big fat mouth, Teddy-Boy. Quit talking, get to fighting or get to running.

http://www.wardenburnsmexicanflags.com11/08/2006 08:43:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tedski|W|P|You know, Roy, I think I could take you.11/08/2006 09:00:00 PM|W|P|Blogger azwildcat88|W|P|Roy, sorry, put I never heard of YOU until Ted wrote about YOU!!11/08/2006 09:55:00 PM|W|P|Blogger NetrootsDemocrat|W|P|Today's Republicans are the EXACT equivalent of the 1920's Ernst Rohm brownshirts.11/09/2006 12:27:00 AM|W|P|Blogger SonoranDesertRat|W|P|Roy, you and your friends' little publicity stunts were just that - stunts. No one is impressed except for a few racists who are looking for company.

You are, however, guilty of voter intimidation, which is one of the most severe forms of damage anyone can do to a democracy. Want to protect America? Quit threatening people and leave voters alone. That will do far more for America than trying to instill fear in citizens.11/09/2006 08:07:00 AM|W|P|Anonymous Anonymous|W|P|And I, like so many others benignly smiling, said "Who? Roy who?"

Someone check that young man's ancestors. I'm willing to be there was a land thief, a rapist, a criminal, and or an illegal runaway indentured servant.

Who's the illegal alien, pilgrim?11/09/2006 08:45:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|This is from yesterday's headlines on Democracy Now:

"With around eighty percent of the electorate casting at least one vote electronically, voting problems were reported in scores of districts across the country. In Denver, hundreds of people were forced to wait long past the 7 p.m. voting deadline. Voting hours were extended in eight states. Hundreds of precincts in Florida, Indiana and Ohio turned to paper ballots amid problems with electronic voting machines. The Electronic Frontier Foundation reported dozens of complaints that touch-screen machines recorded votes for the wrong candidates. There were also scattered reports of voter intimidation. In Virginia, voters reported receiving telephone calls telling them to stay home or face criminal charges. In Arizona, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund reported Latino voters were stopped and questioned by three armed men outside a precinct in Tucson."

Gee, what good is national recognition if they don't even get your name? Maybe that's why no one heard of Roy Warden until Tedski started writing about him.11/09/2006 09:07:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Roy Warden|W|P|Yo Tedski, Listen Up!

You can "take me?" Sounds like a threat to me.

Why don't you strap on a hog leg and come looking for me? Jump into my circle, like that "Pendito" Arturo, and see what happens!

Warden11/09/2006 09:41:00 AM|W|P|Blogger DRP|W|P|Get a life, Mr. Roy Hate.

I respect your right to burn flags, but don't mess with anyone in my neighborhood or you might get beat down or shot dead (not by me). People here don't tolerate racist scumbags like you.

How about you move to Idaho and join the racists there to attack Canadian migrants?

You give white men a bad name.11/09/2006 10:05:00 AM|W|P|Blogger DRP|W|P|Looks like Warden, et al. were likely breaking the law Tues. with weapons at a polling place. Why didn't TPD arrest? Will there be a prosecution?

http://www.dps.state.az.us/ccw/3102.asp

FIREARMS ARE PROHIBITED OR RESTRICTED IN THE FOLLOWING PLACES (with or without a permit)

* Polling places on election days (peace officers are excepted)11/09/2006 11:18:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|What surprises me most about Roy Warden is that he is able to construct a sentence. Check it out. He uses quotation marks, colons, and commas. Amazing.11/09/2006 11:50:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Kiva|W|P|Precinct 49 was specifically chosen because it's where Grijalva votes. Dove has confirmed this.11/09/2006 01:33:00 PM|W|P|Blogger eat|W|P|DRP, good point. Roy also has ties to domestic terrorism (US Code Title 18, 2331) through the Minutemen and Laine Lawless.11/13/2006 03:51:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Russ Dove|W|P|Pct. 49 was selected because it had a very high population and voter registration increase and it was only after the fact that it was selected that I learned that Ralph G. and I. Garcia voted there. Kynn miss quoted me or like with everything else he wrote used my words to tell the story he wanted to not the one I told. Typical lost-mind-syndrome . . .

We are and will continue to be a LAWFUL Nation!11/13/2006 11:50:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Roy Warden|W|P|Eschuchanme, Pendejos!!

Russ Dove and I are very bad men and, if you are illegal we are coming to get you.

Be afraid of Chupacabras and Dove; be afraid of La Noche and Warden.

Estamos veniendo!!

http://www.wardenburnsmexicanflags.com11/08/2006 06:52:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|The AP and NBC have called the Virginia Senate race for Jim Webb.|W|P|116303723635914328|W|P|51!|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/08/2006 07:31:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Yay!11/08/2006 08:31:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|This is quite fun!11/08/2006 08:35:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|Ok...Im very excited and wish I had bet. Yes, shameless self promo here BUT, here was my election prediction the morning of the election...posted on Arizona 8th as a comment. I got some early laughs...but check it out:

"I think Whitehouse will win, I think Allen will lose, I think Corker will win in a slim, close race, I think Burns is toast, I think DeWine and Talent are toast as well. I honestly think that the Republicans will loose the house and Senate tonight. I think the Republicans will lose about 30 seats in the House and will lose the Senate by 1 seat.

I don't think under any circumstances that the Delay and Foley seats will remain Republican. It is a difficult thing to write in a candidate and it is a difficult thing remember late entries. They are also stained massively.

Despite the turnout machine of republicans, I think that this year independents and democrats are going to break democrat. I also think the gender gap is back in a big way. I also think any gains with Hispanics are gone.

I finally think that most polls will not adequately capture the anger of voters and the size of turnout for Democrats. Any race that is within the margin of error could easily go democrat with any of the reasons I state above. But the biggest issue is that most polls are based on "likely midterm voters"...a measure of the past. Polls in 94 and during Watergate did not adequately capture "the perfect storm."

I think we will see the effects of this storm today.

Oh..and before the voting ends, I want to say "Good luck Framer and The Committee". Thanks for your predictions and for all the fun on here the last few weeks. Sincerely.

8:15 AM"11/08/2006 09:03:00 PM|W|P|Blogger azwildcat88|W|P|Oh yes!... Time for McCain to be put on suicide watch!!!

azw88.blogspot.com

Ya gotta love it!!!!11/09/2006 08:51:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|I hope that McCain does get the Republican nomination. Even though his fans haven't noticed that he is 800 years old, the rest of the nation will. He'll lose.11/08/2006 11:10:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Over at Talking Points Memo, Josh Marshall is reporting rumors of Donald Rumsfeld's impending resignation. I bet it's so he can spend more time with his kids.|W|P|116300977505068837|W|P|Wow, I Guess Things Are Changing Already|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/08/2006 11:27:00 AM|W|P|Blogger boredinaz|W|P|Bush has already announced Robert Gates will replace Rummy.

So I guess Dubya was just waiting for the election to pull the trigger. Interesting. I'm sure we'll hear the Monday morning QBs wonder if it would have made a difference if he'd left before Tuesday.11/08/2006 11:30:00 AM|W|P|Blogger azwildcat88|W|P|RUMMY has indeed RESIGNED!! Mark him as the FIRST post-election casualty!
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/08/rumsfeld.ap/index.html11/08/2006 11:35:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|It is pretty sweet.11/08/2006 11:39:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|This is just so typical. We lost so let's lop off a head or two and the people will think we got their message. Sorry, Rumsfeld head even on a silver platter is not enough!

Quite frankly, if they were smart, they would put Dick Cheney on the sacrificial altar. For one, he's the worst of the lot. And for two, they could pick a new VP who would have incumbent status in 2008. The problem is, of course, that Cheney has the goods on all of them and is hardly willing to resign.

Anyhow, good bye and good riddance to Donald Rumsfeld.11/08/2006 12:05:00 PM|W|P|Blogger azwildcat88|W|P|Liza, I suspect that Cheny WILL resign in the next 6 months or so, allowing Bush to nominate someone he feels can use the veep position as a springboard to the 08 presidential nomination. I have been saying this for quite a while now.


Bush faces a hard row ahead with the Gates nomination, as he has some hardcore baggage to carry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Gates11/08/2006 02:10:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Joe Thomas|W|P|Is it worse to have Rumsfeld answering questions in front of a Dem-led House "oversight" committee as the sitting Sec Def or as the former Sec Def?11/08/2006 06:40:00 PM|W|P|Blogger cc burro|W|P|AZWILDCAT88--

Can the President just appoint someone to the Vice Presidency if his Vice President resigns? I thought the Speaker of the House was next in the line of succession? [I'm ignorant on this--please clue me in if you know.]11/08/2006 07:12:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Just a couple of thoughts...I'll write more later when I'm a little more awake. Anyone remember fifteen months ago or so? I think the prediction was that was going to demoish Janet Napolitano and the Republicans were going to get a bullet-proof 2/3 majority in both houses so even if Napolitano won, she wouldn't be able to veto anything. So, how did that go? It seems like the supporters of Dave Jorgenson, Al Melvin and Randy Graf over estimated the conservatism of not only their districts, but even fellow Republicans. Take a look at District 26: yeah, Hellon was a moderate Republican, but so were her predecessors. It should have been obvious to Melvin that she probably represented the sort of Republican that lives in the district. Instead, he only strayed from his "RINO Hunter" rhetoric long enough to regurgitate Goldwater Institute talking points that had little do do with voter concerns. Ron Drake had a similar problem. I actually thought the guy would be a decent candidate. Now, I didn't think he could win, but I thought he'd be an articulate candidate who would fly the Republican flag, and then get crushed. Drake though seemed to be clueless about Tucson voters, who do comprise the largest share of voters in the district. His "you people in Tucson need to learn" statements in debates probably didn't win him much support down here. My only real encounter with his supporters was at the U of A debate, and they seemed to be composed entirely of students from the Phoenix area. They didn't understand popularity because they didn't understand and were dismissive of Tucson. And nationally: was there anywhere where the Democrats lost a seat? In 1994, no incumbent Republican lost, which was seen as a repudiation of Democratic policy. This year, not only did no incumbent Democrat lose, but no where where there was an open seat (so far) was a Democrat even replaced by a Republican. Even in 1994, where Tony Knowles was elected governor of Alaska and John Baldacci won an open house seat in Maine, the occasional Democrat was able to win a new seat. I remember the media buying the spin that this was a sign that voters were ticked at the Democrats. Already though, I'm reading spin that this arguably clearer victory was a repudiation of both parties. One of the people I've already heard spinning it this way: . More later.|W|P|116299817695245915|W|P|So, Let Me Get This Right: Gay Couples Can Live Together, They Just Can't Speak Spanish?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/08/2006 08:16:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|What a great night! Especially nationally. As I sit here and write, Democrats received pickups in the House in virtually every area of the country...rural, south, NE, and urban. Democratic strategists should especially look closely at the heartland pickups in Indiana, Ohio, and some of the southern pickup in states like North Carolina. I would study these hard and think about this hard for the 2008 election. I would also be careful too and take a look at how the south went. Not a whole lot changed there in states like S. Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, etc. Those candidates who appealed in North Carolina and in the heartland are the types of voters that have to be won over by the party in its attempt at taking back the White House. Can a Hillary do it? Or more reasonably, will it be someone else that appeals better?

Statewide, I was a little disappointed in ways and ELATED in others. Prop. 107 is the first ballot initiative of its type to go down in flames. Might have been more extreme than those in other states though. Also, how many pickups did we get in that state legislature total? House and Senate? This should have been a year, despite the structural issues, to pick up seats and I fear that it might have been very very few overall. The LD 26 races show great promise. When democrats focus on something, they can pull it off, but statewide? BIG problems still exist if they could not pick up MORE seats in a year like this one. There is clearly a talent issue that has to be addressed by the party statewide. The statewide races were filled with people with little to no name rec. at all. Sad, but below is cause for elation.

Giffords wins...Mitchell Wins...Prop 107 fails...min. wage wins...and of course we keep our Gov. and Att. General. All good candidates, all moderate, all painted as reasonable people and issues.


Oh...and on Arizona 8th, I predicted the national outcome (House by 30 or more...looking good...and the Senate...looking good). I need to switch jobs!11/07/2006 03:46:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Nuestro hermano Russ Dove apparently took his voter intimidation operation to Pima County Precinct 49, which includes the neighborhoods around Sixth Avenue just south of South Tucson. It also happens to be precinct. He showed with a camera and brought his friend who reportedly had a sidearm. That is a big no-no, especially when you are basically there to intimidate voters. Yeah, yeah, he says he is there to enforce the laws. I'm not sure how trying to scare viejitos who have been voting longer than Dove has been alive has anything to do with illegal voters or is supposed to stop illegal immigration. I keep having to remind myself it isn't about race, right? Well, it became a big hoo-hah, with the police and election observers from various campaigns showing up. It's probably exactly what the jackass wanted. The TV news was there, and no doubt will run stories tonight that portray Dove as some regular joe trying to do what is right by the Constitution. I don't know if that makes them worse than him or not.|W|P|116294019942812849|W|P|Claramente, Este No Es Clualquier Pendejo|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/07/2006 04:54:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Man Eegee|W|P|MALDEF was apparently notified according to TPMmuckraker.11/07/2006 06:25:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|He is a total F**K-head!

Sorry...it disgusts me...that is what this election should be about and I hope to god people answer.

By the way, the Demos are looking at an unexpected possible pickup in KY with Ann Northrup losing.

I predicted today...that dems take both the house and senate. This is a watershed type of election. A perfect storm.

I think Dems get more than 30 picked up in the house. This is going to be VERY fun.11/07/2006 11:05:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Jorge Fantasma|W|P|What ever happened to Russ Dove's write-in campaign for CD-8? Where are all his followers?11/08/2006 01:34:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|They were trying to intimidate citizens who had a right to vote...that is what!11/07/2006 05:55:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|A couple of weeks ago, I alluded to the day I met Randy Graf. A couple of you have written to remind me that I never posted about it, which is, after all, what I promised to do. Okay, here it goes. When we do graduations where I work, it is standard to invite a few public officials. The old director used to have me run the invitations to the offices of the elected officials. I was never sure why I was uniquely qualified to do this, but hey, got me out of the building for a bit. I took some invitations down to the legislative office downtown. When I got there, Randy Graf (then a State Representative) and Manuel Alvarez were using the small office spaces there that are shared by the legislators. I stopped to talk to Alvarez, who I knew from before. While I spoke with Alvarez, Graf kept walking by the doorway to the office and gave me a lookover that I, as a twin, have gotten used to. It was the look that said, "You aren't quite the person that I recognize, are you?" I told Alvarez, "Hey Manny, I think I'd better go explain myself to Mr. Graf." So, I went over to the office space that Graf was in. "Excuse me, Representative Graf, I just wanted to introduce myself. My name is Ted Prezelski, I'm Tom Prezelski's brother." "Oh! Well that explains it." "Yes, we are twins" "Well, I hope you are more reasonable than your brother." I looked at him for a second and said, "Nah." "You know, I think I can take you." How does one respond to that? "I'm sure you could," I said. "No, I think I can take you. You and your brother." I decided that that was a good time to leave. I won't pretend that I was offended or even insulted. It was just a strange way for an elected official to talk to a member of the public. Later, I related this story to one of Graf's colleagues, a very conservative one at that, and he laughed. "Sounds like Randy, you'd better be careful, he packs," he told me. Anyway, that is the story. I figured I had better post it now. After today, I don't know if I will ever get to write about the guy.|W|P|116290520060340323|W|P|Because You Demanded It! Not a Dream. Not an Imaginary Tale.|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/07/2006 06:46:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|I guess I will post this here. Last night I got one robo-call. I was excited thinking it would be one of the last ones for a long while. Much to my amusement (and horror), it went:

"This is Kathleen Dunbar. I wanted to talk to you about my friend Randy Graf..."

Astonished, I hung up...thinking, is this supposed to help him?11/07/2006 06:50:00 AM|W|P|Blogger cc burro|W|P|KRAMAJALES--

Hah-hah-hah!!!! Dunbar!!!! Great strategy.

TEDSKI--

Randy Graf WOULD need to pack to take you and your brother on. I met him for the first time last week at the Church of the Nazarene forum and I don't think he was taller than 5'5".11/07/2006 07:28:00 AM|W|P|Blogger azwildcat88|W|P|Graf is what my grandmother would call a banti rooster, apearantly a small rooster that acts tough because it is small.
I am not surprised that this is how Graf acts.

Sadly, I doubt that you will no longer write about him, because he won't go away. He will run for something in 2008. He is Joe Sweeney with more money.11/07/2006 07:52:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|CC Burro,

I thought you might enjoy that! I'm still a little stunned.

Azwildcat88,

The republicans better really hope that he doesn't run again in 2008. If he does, he will be a formidable opponent. The right wing in his party just loves him. I think he could get 35% anytime he ran in a primary, which means they have to deal with him, his name recognition, and that they face a primary test.11/07/2006 07:56:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|Oh...I will see everyone at the Giffords election night party. Get out and vote.

Remember Pederson and remember the state legislative races. It blows my mind how little focus is given by the press to such an important institution. Pick ups by democrats in the state leg. races would be a big deal for our governor, state employees, schools, universities, health care and criminal justice policy.11/07/2006 08:24:00 AM|W|P|Blogger boredinaz|W|P|For future reference...

When some jacka-- says "I can take you," look him up and down slowly with a slight smile, purse your lips and say, "Yes, you can big boy. Anytime."

Completely disarms them.11/07/2006 09:03:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|Maybe Randy should focus on his golf game and see if he can qualify for the Senior PGA tour. You only have to be 50, and I think he's already 49. The timing is perfect!

Good bye, Randy.11/07/2006 09:04:00 AM|W|P|Blogger x4mr|W|P|Interesting, Tedski. That is bizarre behavior. My interactions with him were perfectly civil. Of course, I think he thought I was a supporter. That might help.

As to whether he is a "manly man" that's bullshit. The guy bought a couple cigars yesterday, those candy ass CAO Fruit Flavored kind.

Damned tempted to post a SED story with the "Graf a Confirmed Sweetophile" headline and put local lingo to get it into Lefty blogs and inform folks he smokes that crap.

Then I decided: Who cares?

His flavor of choice: Exotic Fruit and Vanilla.

Now if he had purchased the white chocolate truffle with Irish cream flavor, it would have pushed me over the edge.

By the way, where is the party tonight? Haven't seen a thing. Maybe they don't want me to come.11/07/2006 09:22:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|Yeah, that is a strange story about what Graf said to Tedski when they met. Men are so weird, but I think this is related to some kind of primitive behavior. In the animal world, size wins. In this case, maybe Randy felt threatened at some level and instinctively acted to assert dominance. Perhaps he was "packing" and that gave him confidence. But, the greatest likelihood is that he knew Tedski would not take him on.

I've seen my dogs act in a similar way when a larger dog is behind a fence. They know they can be aggresive and the larger dog can't attack. So, they take full advantage of the situation and it makes them feel like Rottweilers for a few seconds.11/07/2006 10:22:00 AM|W|P|Blogger azwildcat88|W|P|Kralmajales, what scares me about graf is that he does have some support, and that support has some $$ to back him. I could easily see him working for the next two years on winning the CD8 seat in 08.... It worked for Kolbe.

I hope Gabby can beat him so thouroughly that he gets seriously depressed and gives us the "you won't have Graf to kick around any more" speech.

x4mer, the democratic party is @ the Doubletree, and Michael Bryan, blogforarizona.com, has a gathering at the Trident. Check out his site for more details.11/07/2006 01:36:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Mexilina|W|P|If you are interested in another election "PACHANGA," A Whole Lot of People are going to be at Grijalva's Campaign Headquarters, 3301 S. 6th Ave, starting at 8:00 p.m. :-)11/07/2006 01:54:00 PM|W|P|Blogger sirocco|W|P|I'm pretty sure I could take Graf. Pretty sure I could take him and Roy Warden at the same time, actually.11/07/2006 03:08:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Jorge Fantasma|W|P|Graf may have support but it will remain at less than 40 percent. Stick a fork in him when he loses. But he could come back as a mouthpiece for the Minutemen.11/07/2006 04:19:00 PM|W|P|Blogger 206isCancer.com|W|P|Hey Rum-

I'm so sorry that happened to you. Oh poor little you! I feel like buying you blanky now so that you can feel comforted when you get bullied by the Big Bad Graf. And if you want I can get you a glass of milk to go with it, and read you a bedtime story, so that you don’t have nightmares about the Big Bad Graf. I’ll also make sure that your closet is closed, and I’ll check under your bed, so that you won’t have any monsters come get you in your sleep.11/07/2006 04:36:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|206,
Maybe you can caddy for Graf on the Senior PGA Tour. Everyone here in the blogosphere will really miss you, to be sure.11/08/2006 01:45:00 AM|W|P|Blogger cc burro|W|P|BOREDINAZ--

HAH-HAH! Too bad Ted and Tom weren't together and then they both could have said that to Graf. I would've liked to have seen Graf's response.11/06/2006 06:46:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|This is a story my brother told me in his continuing mission to tell me that he is hipper than I am. The very English alternative music icon Robyn Hitchcock has been hanging out in Tucson for a couple of weeks and played a show at Club Congress the other night. My brother went to the after party where local musician, and Tom's neighbor, Nick Luca introduced him to Hitchcock as "My State Representative." Hitchcock was interested in talking to him, and told Tom that he had attended the Bill Clinton rally at Reid Park. What, and he didn't offer to play? Wanker. Anyhow, my brother was excited to talk to him, and he told Hitchcock that he considers "I Wanna Destroy You" to be one of the best protest songs ever. "I Wanna Destroy You" was recorded by Hitchcock with his old band, The Soft Boys, back in 1980 for the Underwater Moonlight album. It was a hit in the UK, and a hit on college radio, then still coming into its own, here. The song has also been covered by the Goo Goo Dolls, Uncle Tupelo, Circle Jerks and Chicago alt-Country band Dollar Store. (Audio clip of a piece of the song here) The song is an anti-war anthem, but also takes scathing shots at compliant media and apathy. Hitchcock told Tom that he hadn't played it for years, but since Bush got elected, he plays it all the time.|W|P|116282243053048039|W|P|And Maybe If John Edwards Is Elected, He'll Bring Back "I Want to Be An Anglepoise Lamp"|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/06/2006 07:58:00 AM|W|P|Blogger benny06|W|P|I'm confused here. Are you talking about John Edward the medium, or Senator John Edwards, who was down in Arizona recently to help promote raising the minimium wage?11/06/2006 10:32:00 PM|W|P|Blogger shrimplate|W|P|Robyn Hitchcock is one of those amazing underexposed talents that college radio jocks have always raved about.

"Underwater Moonlight" and the later "Fegmania" are gems.

An old New Music Express record guide said this: "Drop what you're doing and go track down 10 copies of 'Underwater Moonlight' right now."

The Jonathan Demme concert film
"Storefront Hitchcock" is a good representation of what he's doing these days.11/06/2006 05:41:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I haven't had a chance to comment on a few things I saw in the media on Thursday. Is the name Hardball supposed to refer to the fact that going on the show is tantamount to something that is difficult? The only thing difficult on that show is wading through the thick substance created by Chris Matthews's ego, as far as I can see. Thursday night, I watched an interview with former White House Chief of Staff, Andrew Card. Here's what one can learn from this "hardball" interview:
  • Card is the second longest serving Chief of Staff, the first being Sherman Adams
  • The President likes Donald Rumsfeld
  • The President is the leader of the Republican Party
  • The President and the First Lady read in bed
  • The President likes the sports page
  • The President will support the Republican nominee in 2008
  • The President likes kids
This ain't even softball. Wiffleball? Nerfball? What, is the guy auditioning for Bear Essential News? After the Clinton rally, I came home and watched TV for a bit to see one of the KOLD newsreaders tease a story about the rally:
Democrats rally, but it was a personality and not politics that brought them out.
Eh? Yes, it can be admitted that the folks that came out to the rally came out to see Bill Clinton. There probably would not have been so many if it were, say, or something. But to say that it wasn't "political" was just silly; people were there ('cept for the protestors) to support the Democratic ticket. I don't know if this represents any "bias" on the part of KOLD, but it was not too insightful.|W|P|116281889774149902|W|P|Why I Get Frustrated|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/06/2006 09:01:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Garrett O'Hara|W|P|tee ball11/06/2006 01:37:00 PM|W|P|Blogger George Tuttle|W|P|Ummmm Ted-Erin Christiansen is a weather person over at KGUN and is no longer employed at KOLD.11/06/2006 07:46:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Mexilina|W|P|On behalf of Bear Essential News, which I read avidly (to my son), I am offended ;-). I'm pretty sure the interview was not even close to Bear caliber.11/07/2006 07:31:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Tedski|W|P|George-

Gawd...the random interchangeable news readers all look the same to me.

I'll fix the post.11/05/2006 07:25:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Last minute "push polls" and negative calls are going on in districts all over the country. My number is not listed on my voter registration, which means I miss out on the fun ones here and have to depend on my vast network of operatives to tell me about them. I read about one particularly ironic one in Indiana, where the RNC has funded calls on behalf of . The call is a standard issue "my opponent is soft of those illegals" message:
The United States now is home to 11 million illegal immigrants, and the number grows every year. But instead of protecting our borders, congressional candidate Tom Hayhurst supports citizenship opportunities for illegal aliens.
Here's where this becomes funny: in Indiana, automated calls, or "Robo Calls," are illegal. So, how does one keep the costs down? You farm it out to a foreign call center, of course. Souder is angry because he feels the anti-immigration message is watered down when delivered by people with thick, foreign accents. Hey, if we don't hire the foreigners over there, we will have to hire them here. Robo Calls are legal here, and Randy Graf has taken some last minute advantage of that with an interesting twist. Callers hear a littany of reasons why if Gabrielle Giffords gets elected, this entire nation will become some sort of Marxist paradise and citizens will be forced to eat undercooked artichokes and listen to Death Cab for Cutie (my paraphrase may be inaccurate, I didn't get a call myself). After listening to the allegations, the recipient is given the option to join in on a conference call featuring Graf. One friend of mine listened and it sounded like a real conference call, with one Republican activist asking how to handle mail-in ballots. My friend was even given the option of asking a question. She asked why Graf is lying about the "sweetheart land deal" in his ads. They hung up on her. Many Democrats have gotten this call, including Giffords herself. Either the Graf campaign is wasting its money on calling people that will not ever vote for them, or this is some goofy strategy that I don't get. I am also trying to figure out if the conference is real. I find it hard to believe that Graf would sit around four days before the election and do a conference call with random voters. Heck, maybe he would, nothing else seems to be working for him.|W|P|116273904563950186|W|P|Psst, Hey Randy, Call Me|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/05/2006 09:35:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Death Cab For Cutie? Ew!11/05/2006 11:15:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Graf 06|W|P|What's your #? We'll call you.11/05/2006 11:46:00 AM|W|P|Blogger vetdem|W|P|elizabeth rogers,

What does that mean?11/05/2006 11:55:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Graf 06|W|P|If Ted wants on the next Town Hall Conference Call, he has to have a # where we can call him.11/05/2006 01:59:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Elizabeth Rogers|W|P|Call him at 1-800-968-9474.

Vetdem, I am not a fan of the current crop of young rockers. That is all.11/05/2006 08:42:00 PM|W|P|Blogger 206isCancer.com|W|P|You're info is WAY off. In the telephone town halls that Randy has done, he has allowed anyone to ask questions, even Dems. He has answered questions about Giffords' sweet land deal from a few callers, who were upset at the ad based upon the sloppy reporting in the Star and Citizen. Anyone who can read will be able to see that everything in Randy's ads are accurate. And Randy has even said that he is not suggesting that Giffords did anything illegal. The problem is probably more with the City of Tucson than the Giffords family. I mean, hey, why not screw over the city if they ask you to do it? But her defense of the whole thing has been hilarious. "I didn't run that business." I know that none of you are that dumb to just believe her. And when she actually asked the Sec. of State's office to remove her from the Articles of Incorporation, it was because she was accidentally put on the business even though her father's health was too bad to do anything? I smell B.S. Why can't she just say: "Those idiots at the City offered to clean up our environmental mess and pay my family and me $13 million plus at the same time! What do you think that I was going to say?" "No. We want to pay for this, and we like not making millions of dollars tax-free off this property."

But back to the telephone town halls, they are a very effective way to talk with voters on the last days. Instead of robo-calls, you get a live interview where callers can ask real questions almost like talk-radio style with Randy Graf. He has answered hundreds of questions on dozens of subjects from voters in the last few days in these town halls.

You actually kind of sound a little bit jealous that Gabby didn't think of it first or is too scared to actually explain her positions on the issues with voters, kind of like how she never actually answered the question during the debates. Don’t get your hopes up. That’s not likely to change anytime soon. I mean how could she actually answer the question: “So Gabby why is it that you voted to allow convicted child molesters to live next to schools but voted against allowing Boy Scouts to hold troop meetings in schools?”11/06/2006 05:38:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Tedski|W|P|206 -

Yeah, you got me. I am so jealous that Graf has run a brilliant campaign and I wish that the Giffords campaign was nearly as nimble.

If they were as good as the Graf campaign, just think about it, they'd be somewhere around 37% too!

Tedski11/06/2006 08:31:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Kralmajales|W|P|Randy Graf's campaign started and stopped with his extremist, hardball, view of Republican politics through and through. His biggest problem is that everyone knew that and he could only attract predominantly religious and border conservatives.

He did a masterful job at attracting a loyal and extreme base of republicans that wins you a primary, but he was not able to shed that image for the general...and expand his base of support (like Giffords was able).

Randy's campaign should have been working hard for the middle. He faced the difficult task of getting "normal" republicans to vote for him after that tough primary with Huffman and Hellon. While he was campaigning he found that he could not attract moderates, independents and the cross-over democrats that voted for Kolbe. In fact, his base of support did everything it could to label this type of person as somehow bad for the party.

This will be just part of the story of Randy Graf's loss tomorrow. A loss in a majority republican drawn district. The bottom line is that some of you Republicans and Graf supporters have made your tent quite quite small. Even if Randy gets closer in this election with tomorrow's final poll, the rest of the party will be looking hard at their candidates for the future...and the Graf supporters will be left saying that it was "just" one of those years.

I can also tell quite a good tale about why Gabrielle Giffords ran a masterful campaign. I will wait until tomorrow for that.11/06/2006 09:29:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Liza|W|P|I got the phone call from Randy Graf yesterday inviting me to participate in a "conference call." Well, I went for it, of course, but I didn't last long enough to get to ask a question. When I tuned in, Randy was talking to "Hildegard" who sounded like an elderly lady. Hildegard was gushing about how wonderful Randy is, she is a lifelong Republican, she supports him 100%, and she wants to work in his office after he gets elected. Also, Hildegard said that she felt it was her civic duty to get 10 people to vote for Randy and everyone should do this.

I couldn't tell if this was live or recorded, but I suspect it was recorded given how pro-Randy it was.11/06/2006 10:26:00 PM|W|P|Blogger cc burro|W|P|Talking about scummy tactics--

This past week, Al Melvin's campaign [state senate, LD 26] sent out 4 or 5 mailers which not only included misrepresentations and out-and-out lies of Pesquiera and her issue stances, they also included misrepresentations of Melvin's OWN ISSUE STANCES. One hit piece was on education and didn't once mention that Melvin supports voucherizing the entire K-12 education system--he tried to give the appearance that he moderate re education--WHEREAS during the forums, whenever he was asked about the issue of education--all he talked about was vouchers and competition and how they worked "every time". [NOTE: I have no problem with public education money supporting
PUBLIC charter schools and injecting competition into the public school system.]

This shows me that Melvin has very little integrity/honesty.11/05/2006 06:15:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Some of you may have read last week that Roy Warden was aquitted on assault charges stemming from one of his many flag burning incidents. The obvious conclusion from last week's news is that Pima County juries are incapable of convicting ex-Wildcat basketball players or xenophobic loudmouths. Warden, emboldened by this, has sent a warning for Hispanic voters:
WARDEN TO ILLEGAL MEXICANS: YOU BETTER NOT VOTE THIS TUESDAY!
Tucson Arizona November 04, 2006 Warden, the Notorious Mexican Flag Burner, has warned local illegal aliens: Those who vote this Tuesday are subject to arrest. "We already have cameras in place near Hispanic polling places," says Warden. "Patriotic Americans, who also happen to be Hispanic, have assisted us. is going to get fewer votes than he expects. Grijalva has proclaimed: 'Today We March, Tomorrow We Vote.' To which I now add: And the Next Day You Go to Jail!" Warden estimates 15-20% of Hispanic votes are cast by illegal aliens. "With Ann Rodriquez's [sic] help, Hispanic voter fraud has greatly increased in Pima County. And after the election we will subpoena election records and prove it." Warden claims to have face recognition software supplied by Homeland Security. "We're going to take thousands of photos of people entering and exiting polling booths on Tuesday. If they're illegal they can expect a visit from 'La Migra.'" Warden, acquitted on Wednesday on charges relating to burning the Mexican Flag in Armory Park on April 10, 2006, says he's deadly serious. "We will not permit La Raza, Derechos Humanos, and you Aztlan freaks to steal America. And we're not going to let our politicians sell it to you either!" "America is the Stronghold, and Pima County is the frontier. Here in Pima County we Americans will make our stand!"
At least this time, he didn't claim any sort of common ground with Emiliano Zapata. I suppose I could give Warden a bit of credit here. A couple of weeks ago, Tan Nguyen, a Republican running against , sent a letter to Hispanic voters alleging that if you are an immigrant it is illegal for you to vote.
Be advised that if your residence in the United States is illegal or if you are an immigrant, voting in a federal election is a crime that can result in incarceration, and possible deportation for voting without the right to do so. [emphasis mine]
He just said "immigrant," not non-citizen. Interestingly, the "immigrant" category would include Nguyen himself. At least Warden makes a distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. Of course, he goes on to allege that F. Ann Rodriguez, who near as I can tell has never been active in the immigrant rights movement or even in a politically meaningful Hispanic organization (and whose name Warden can't spell), is behind the number of supposed illegal immigrants on the voter rolls. I guess that because she is Hispanic, Warden concludes that she must be helping illegal immigrants register to vote. Of course, this dosn't make Warden racist, right? I still don't get why people on the right assume that there are all these illegal aliens who are anxious to put their names on government lists. I realize that many of my conservative readers won't like being lumped in with Warden, but I still hear Republican activists and even elected officials still allege that the victories of Grijalva and Janet Napolitano were due to the votes of illegal aliens. This is just plain silly. Heck, we can't get people born here to vote, but folks hiding from la migra are going to? Please. I'm still curious how Warden can tell an illegal alien from any other Hispanic. And, what if the illegal alien isn't Hispanic? Can Warden still tell? Maybe he can read invisible glyphs on people's foreheads like in those Riverworld novels.|W|P|116273554650859756|W|P|I Don't Care What the Court Says, Roy Warden is Still Guilty of Being a Neanderthal|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/05/2006 07:47:00 AM|W|P|Blogger sirocco|W|P|Hey, I remember really liking those Riverworld novels. Farmer, right?

After reading those I became very interested in Burton, and did a fair bit of reading about his life.

Revolution v. United today!

Oh, yeah, of course Warden is an ass.11/05/2006 11:23:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Roy Warden|W|P|Rum, Romanism and Rebellion?

You left wingers are not for "Rebellion" of any sort. Wake up: You have now become "The Establishment."

The Left Wing now controls the entire political/legal mechanism of Pima County, including City Council, Board of Supervisors, Mayor, Courts, Police Department, etc., against which I, Warden, the Notorious Mexican Flag Burner, am in open revolt.

Maybe you, as a lawyer, should do a little homework before shooting off your big, fat mouth about laws you don't know and trials you never attend.

For example:

1. Even though it was a bitterly contested legal issue, I did not have the benefit of a jury. I was denied a jury so Hays, "The Hanging Judge," could put me down. The fact he failed is due to extraordinary pre-trial activity, and 40 TPD officers who were under subpoena and prepared to testify I engaged in no criminal conduct whatsoever on April 10, 2006.

Go ahead and check the Municipal Court File CR 6027386.

2. You failed to report a central issue: The rank and file of the Tucson Police Department were sold out by Miranda and Barbara LaWall. Charges were never filed against the Pendejo Thugs who assaulted and injured TPD officers in Armory Park on April 10, 2006.

3. You failed to report that TPD Internal Affairs is now investigating the formation of a covert "political" unit, directed by Assistant Chief Kathleen Robinson, which instructs a group I identify as "Pendejo Thugs", who committ acts of intimidation and assault against their political opponents. (me) This same tactic was employed in the sixties by a covert FBI unit called "COINTELPRO."

Typical left wing hypocracy: In the sixties you bitterly opposed law enforcement when they engaged in "political activity." Now that you control law enforcement you are disinterested in the issue.

How about you and I meeting someday on the "Public Square" to debate the serious issues that now face our community? Or are you afraid of Public Debate?

As I said before, with your "debonair" pose and that flower in your lapel, you look a little limp wristed.

http://wardenburnsmexicanflags.com

(520) 881-053511/05/2006 03:04:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Travis|W|P|The good news is, thanks to evolution, neanderthals eventually die off, just like those ignorant race-baters of another era.

Glad to see my cousin Eugene is still holding court down south.11/05/2006 09:05:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Tedski|W|P|Roy -

I think you are getting me confused with another blogger. I think you have me confused with Michael Bryan over at blog for Arizona...he's an attorney and he's got a picture of himself with a flower in his lapel.

I don't know if Michael's mouth is any fatter than mine though.

And by the way...I wasn't arguing for or against anything in the sixties...I was born in January of 1970.11/05/2006 11:02:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Roy Warden|W|P|You're right, I did get you confused. And I appologize for confusing you with a lawyer.

Even though I practice law in my own defense with a lot more vigor, and effect, than any lawyer would, I detest lawyers, and become angry when well wishers suggest I become one.

However; I still think you would be fascinated to read the Court File on my prosecution. And I would like to engage in actual public debate on the issue of illegal immigration.11/04/2006 08:08:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I recieved an e-mail from a reader (you never can really trust them readers, can you?) who was miffed that is now featured in ads endorsing proposition 107. It really shouldn't be suprising. The thing that suprises me is the blinders that so many of us have regarding just how conservative McCain is and the lengths he will go to to keep the far right happy. Back in the early 1990's, there was a spate of anti-gay measures that in many ways were worse than the current marriage ban proposals. McCain went and met with the Oregon Citizen's Alliance, the main group that pushed one of the more onerous proposals in that state. McCain claimed that he was only trying to get them to be more moderate, which was probably the silliest thing he had ever said. Straight talk indeed. Needless to say, I am totally unsuprised that he is in the ads. He is basically a conservative Republican who needs these guys to get a presidential nomination. What do y'all expect? NB - Am I the only one who has noticed that the McCain ads endorsing Len Munsil and are nearly identical? Yeah, the Kyl ad features one reference to water legislation, and you can't do anything similar with Munsil because, well, he's never done anything. How effective can the ads be if the message doesn't even seem tailored for the candidate?|W|P|116269660211337192|W|P|Once Again, Memo to All of My Liberal Friends: John McCain Is Not Our Friend|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/04/2006 11:43:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Eli Blake|W|P|It's even worse when it IS tailored to the candidate. I got a message on my answering machine supporting scandal-ridden corrupt congressman of mine Rick Renzi, and he praised Renzi for tenacity, honesty and integrity beyond reproach.

That could come back to bite McCain if and when Renzi is indicted and makes national headlines (though of course it still won't be very visible to readers of the Arizona Republic), and if 'Mr. Straight Talk' is running for President at the time he could be very embarrassed by having issued that particular endorsement (though I hope that when it happens, Rick Renzi is an ex-congressman instead of being a congressman.11/04/2006 06:29:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|A veritable forest of signs is up in one yard on Tucson Boulevard south of Himmell Park, all of them Republican. You can spot Randy Graf and Bill Montgomery and...what's that...Richard Mack? Is this an indication that Mack may have enough support among Republicans that could hurt , or is it just a lone nut? Hey, it's my blog, I am allowed to hope.|W|P|116264749329117988|W|P|Hey, Just Let Me Draw Wild Conclusions Based on Iffy Anecdotal Evidence for a Minute|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/04/2006 08:52:00 AM|W|P|Blogger Garrett O'Hara|W|P|Maybe he just forgot to include the Barry Hess sign.11/04/2006 12:25:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Rex Scott|W|P|I am unsure as to how Mack was perceived in Graham County when he ended his tenure as sheriff. He could cut into Kyl's vote there if he is still held in some esteem. It is also plausible that he has pockets of support in other areas of Southern Arizona as he was once touted as a primary opponent against Kolbe back when he was a Republican.11/05/2006 03:56:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Sandy in Prescott|W|P|who is bill montgomery?11/04/2006 06:21:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|I was driving down Broadway the other day, and I saw a huge yellow sign:
Secondhand Smoke Kills!
Vote Yes on 200
This left me trying to figure out what a voter lottery has to do with second hand smoke. I'll call Mark Osterloh and ask him, he is an MD after all.|W|P|116264694859130799|W|P|But, What If You Spend the Million on Packs of Smokes?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/04/2006 05:49:00 AM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Some of us were very confused by the Star's endorsement of . The Star had been editorializing positions that were counter to everything Kyl is campaigning on, so it didn't make any sense for them to go ahead and endorse the guy. The rumor that has been making the rounds in journalistic circles is that the editorial board was ready to endorse Jim Pederson, but the publisher, John Humenik, who had up until December working at the syndicate's home state of Iowa, made the decision to endorse Kyl at the behest of Lee Enterprises. So much for local control. So, at what point to Republicans stop calling it the "Red Star"?|W|P|116264529229958139|W|P|I Guess It's "Red" In the Tim Russert Sense|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/05/2006 07:41:00 PM|W|P|Blogger Zelph|W|P|They'll stop calling it the "Red Star" about the time they stop making constant charges of "liberal media bias". That is to say, never. It's called working the refs.11/03/2006 09:34:00 PM|W|P|Tedski|W|P|Former House Speaker Jeff Groscost has died. I didn't agree with the guy on anything, but 45 is way to young to go.|W|P|116261510516823217|W|P|Jeff Groscost|W|P|prezelski@aol.com11/04/2006 10:26:00 AM|W|P|Blogger shrimplate|W|P|Has there ever been an Arizona politician who has cost the taxpayers of the state more on a useless boondoggle than Jeff Groscost?

My condolences to his bereaved family, on both his untimely death and the sad legacy he left.11/05/2006 09:14:00 PM|W|P|Blogger CarolW|W|P|Jeff Groscost was a great man, husband, and father. He served the citizens of the United States and Arizona with pride. His legacy as a visionary and leader is concrete and excellent. Did anyone else in Arizona do anything to prepare for the fuel crisis that we have all experienced and had to pay for in gas? The extra three dollars from my paycheck every week to pay for the Alt Fuel Legislation (an exaggerated overestimate)is nothing compared to more than two dollars a gallon I pay at the pump. Of course, the cost of the environment is far more.

I appreciate the service of all of our Representatives, even those with agendas separate from my own, and think it is very sad that they only make $24,000 per year. I make more than that much money in three months. They give up their personal lives and families to serve us all. Thank you to Jeff's family and friends. Please know that there are many of us out there that truley appreciate his dedication and service, and mourn for your loss.11/05/2006 09:19:00 PM|W|P|Blogger radicalmod|W|P|I don't blame anyone for assuming that Jeff was a doctrinaire conservative. I didn't necessarily like Jeff's style, which was always a victory of chaos over substance. But in the case of alt fuels, he had a strong personal conviction about the importance of alt fuels. He made a big mistake and he owned up to it. But his interest in alternatives to fossil fuel vehicles was genuine going back years before that bill became law. Odd to see a liberal blog say they disagreed with Jeff on EVERYTHING when I normally think that liberals like alternatives to oil.