- Oops! - 62 comments
- Pederson Retroactively Endorses Dean for President, I Guess - 57 comments
- CD 8 Polling Numbers Straight from the Wick Newspaperin' Empire - 56 comments
- Dueling Press Releases - 51 comments
- Howard Dean Endorses...? - 47 comments
- I Don't Know Albert, We Don't Know Anyone Named Ann Onymous - 47 comments
- Exploding. Plastic. Inevitable. - 45 comments
- My Opponent Is a Lying Cheat, But I Mean That in the Most Positive Way - 45 comments
- Hey Rocky... - 43 comments
- A Bit of a Response - 40 comments
A bit of an update from before: Lisa James's website is now up and active. Since it is still new, the "news" section is a bit thin, with only two entries.
One is a rather interesting choice: a post from ThinkRight Arizona that endorses James's candidacy. Why would it be odd to put up a lauditory article?
Well, here is how it starts:
For those of you out there in conspiracy land, take the aluminum foil off of your head.Great way to start, call those of you that aren't on your side a bunch of whack jobs. That'll win them over. As if who ThinkRight was pointing to was not clear, here is his closer:
But, I guess, if she’s not YOUR conservative, then she don’t count.Yep, go ahead and call them out...excellent. Yes, I know, she didn't write it. But why post something on her site that alienates most of the people that she hopes will be voting for her? Heck, if this indicates how she will run the Republican Party, then go ahead guys, put her in charge. We'll have the governor's office for another twenty years. I gotta give credit to Zelph for pointing this out to me. He made an excellent point: this from a woman works for a PR firm?|W|P|116758351416209928|W|P|Vote for Me, You Paranoid Whacko!|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
Zelph|W|P|You left out my favorite line though:"Things are not being scripted by the underworld."
I thought this was an interesting thing to say given Henley's connection to Kemper Marley. John McCain's wife is now in charge of Hensley.
Jim Hensley, Cindy's father, was supposedly given his beer distributorship in return for doing prison time for illegal beer distribution and keeping his mouth shut about Marley's criminal activities.
http://tiodt.blogspot.com/2006/12/married-to-mob.html
A question for Republicans: Is a appointed precinct committeeman eligible to run for State Chairman of the Repuplican Party?
This might be an innocent observation by the MSNBC folks, you know, hey, look, a rich guy that gives a damn. My worry is that this is once again the Republican spin from 2004: Edwards is a hypocrite for talking about working people while he himself is wealthy. The Republicans can say this because they are against the elites and no millionaire in America is a registered member of the Republican party, right?
I'll forget this whole thing if the next time they show the President "clearing brush" on his ranch they put up something like "Wealthy Connecticut Born Yale and Harvard Alum Just a Regular Guy and Texas Cowboy."|W|P|116734697769481629|W|P|Darn That Edwards, Why Doesn't He Act Like a Good Millionaire?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
|W|P|They can rail against a rich Democrat running all they want (not that it hurt Franklin Roosevelt or the Kennedys to be rich-- some people would say its refreshing to see a rich guy willing to tax himself). Let's say for the sake or argument that he gets the nomination and ends up running against John McCain (also a multi-millionaire.)Edwards: earned his money.
McCain: married his money.
Let the Republicans say whatever they want in that case.
In case you need further proof that our system of justice works, even if it may take a time or two: Roy Warden was convicted yesterday of charges of assault, threats and intimidation stemming from an incident back in June when Warden pushed a teenaged camera operator.
So, here's what I don't get: the guy does this Mexican flag burning routine for publicity, then gets mad at the folks that are shooting pictures?
Until this week, Warden's obnoxiousness hadn't been found criminal by our local courts. There were the letters accusing a Star editor of being a "hairy chested lesbian" and his attempt to disrupt services at the Cathedral. Of course, these couldn't be prosecuted. He was indicted for doing something similar to the June incident during a rally at Armory Park, but he was acquitted in that case.
The sentencing is in January.
Say, I think I missed a tilde in the title...naw, can't be that important.|W|P|116732277435320652|W|P|Feliz Ano Nuevo, Señor Warden!|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Curtis Dutiel|W|P|Warden's flag burning doesn't bother me, just as other protests that burn US flags don't bother me. He was trying to make a point. One that I partially agree with. (I was very bothered b the protesters waving the flags of Mexico and other nations at the pro immigrant rallies)I don't like the man's stance on immigration and and his actions on other fronts (harrasing voters)are appalling. I do feel, however, that some of the counter protestors were overly confrontational to him.
|W|P|Given his erratic and overcharged behavior, my own sentencing suggestion would include a prescription for Lithium. Tedski|W|P|Wildcat-He wasn't charged with protesting or burning a flag, I'd have a problem with that. His legal problems stemmed from his actions when he actually assaulted people. He has threatened people on a number of occasions, even carrying a gun when he does his "protests." Do some of the people opposed to him go too far and confront him? Yeah, probably. That still doesn't give him an excuse.
|W|P|AZwildcat88, How do you feel when Irish-Americans wave the Irish flag on St Patrick’s Day? I am an Irish-American, is that ok? I know what counties my family comes from in the old country. I am very proud of the fact that the Irish built the modern Democratic Party. Please try to remember just because you don’t know where you come from don’t expect me to forget where I am from.
It really gets under my skin when people get bent about ethnic pride. I just have to ask, is is it all flags or just flags of non European Americans?
|W|P|"Many Many Americans have a problem with foreigners in this country demanding that they be given certain rights while they wave their native countries flag."Tell me why do you think all the people who had flags across the US were foreigners? If they were Irish, Italian or Polish would they look American??
John Edwards was hoping to put off his presidential announcement until tommorrow, but apparently today his website became hot for a while and then was taken down.
No matter, really. I mean, who thought he wasn't going to run?
He has made two excellent speeches in Tucson during the 2006 campaign. The speeches were not standard issue, "Ain't Tucson great, I love the Wildcats, vote for Mark Manoil" rhetorical drivel. These were definitely presidential campaign speeches. Not only that, they revolved almost entirely around the issues of poverty and the working class. These are the sorts of issues that Edwards hopes to highlight in the most powerfully symbolic way in his announcement tommorrow, which will be from New Orleans's Ninth Ward.
This will be the first announcement by a candidate who can actually get the Democratic nomination. Sorry Tom and Dennis.
Way back in 2002 (so long ago, eh?), a friend asked me what I thought of the then gelling presidential field. I went through the folks I thought I would run, and my friend said, "What about John Edwards?"
I said, "Nice haircut, but I don't see the heft there."
I didn't realize that she was close to some Edwards staffers. Big mistake.
At the time, I thought he was just a political climber. I see a lot more to him now that I've seen him speak on a number of occasions and seen the issues he's chosen to associate himself with. Heck, what standard issue politico would use precious media face time to talk about Uganda?
As for the political field: Edwards came to Arizona on a couple of occasions to campaign for candidates, and this may mean some organizational advantages here. Raúl Grijalva was worked heavilly by Edwards's campaign in 2004, but the issue of the war was foremost in his mind and he went for Howard Dean. The layout is a bit different now, and Grijalva has grown close to Edwards. Edwards campagned for Gabrielle Giffords along with other Democratic candidates, but another possible candidate, Bill Richardson, came out to campaign for Giffords as well.
Getting early commitments does not always lead to victory. In 2004, with our early primary, Joe Lieberman worked members of the legislature heavily. He got a pretty impressive slate of endorsements early on. Many of these unendorsed him as it became obvious that his campaign was going nowhere. The result? Lieberman dropped out the day of the Arizona primary before the polls had even closed.
I happened upon a Draft John Edwards site. The guy has essentially been running for president for four years now (even his Vice Presidential run could be seen as a dry run for an eventual try at the top job), doesn't he need to show some reluctance for there to be a draft movement? Yes, I was part of the effort to draft Wesley Clark a couple of years ago, but geez, at least he wasn't actually campaigning at the time.
NB - Yes, I know, as a dedicated Tar Heel fan, Edwards would never say "I love the Widcats." I was just illustrating. However, he did famously say "I hate Duke basketball," in the middle of his 2004 run (a common sentiment, but maybe that's why he didn't win his home state primary?), so I guess he roots for Lute and the boys when they are up against the Blue Devils.|W|P|116727547863169751|W|P|John Edwards to Announce Tommorrow...Oh, Wait, He Did? Wait, He Didn't.|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Liza|W|P|Tedski,Its interesting how you manage to connect the name of "Gabrielle Giffords" to a large number of your posts when there is obviously no reason to do so. Why don't you wait until she actually does something to write about her?
Tedski|W|P|Liza-Well...I mentioned her along with the other congressman from Southern Arizona. Just because you don't like her doesn't mean I should pretend that she doesn't exist and won't be a player in Southern Arizona Politics.
A while back, I wrote a post about the lame Time "Man of the Year" issue and you and Tuttle are the ones who brought Gabby's name up, not me, but this was given as more evidence of my supposed obsession (this came complete with a tasteful masturbation joke from Tuttle...classy, that.) This leads me to wonder who is the one obsessed.
Liza|W|P|Well, Tedski, I haven't much control over GT's jokes and I can assure you that I'm not obsessed with Ms. Giffords. I happen to think that where she went to high school and what she reads and whatever else you seem to inject in your posts about her tends to reduce the quality of some of your posts. However, its your blog, amigo, do what you want.
Chessman's agenda was to promote British culture in Canada. He would achieve this by installing the English public school system in Canada, mandatory philosophy education for law students, oh yeah, and the installation of a monarchy in Canada. His suggestion for Queen: Emma Thompson.
Oh, and he also wants more immigration from Eastern Europe. Checking his website, he seems to want this because he likes Ukranian women. Hey, he said it, check the website.
I have no idea why he thought that writing to members of the Arizona legislature would be helpful in this pursuit. Maybe he stopped when he found out that Arizona was not a Canadian province.|W|P|116723868633570560|W|P|A Dedicated Epistoler Leaves the Scene|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|Maybe he wrote to AZ legislators because he thought some of them are as loony as he is? |W|P|I do love the Young Ones photo...And to think, if it was not for that darn doughnut...
I know that carping liberals like me are supposed to hate the pardon, but I think his only mistake in that was not demanding that Richard Nixon make an appology in return.
Other than that, a decent, but not great president. He even admitted this himself ("I'm a Ford, not a Lincoln."). He was an admirable public servant who brought our nation through two difficult times, the humiliating fall of Saigon and the aftermath of Watergate.
I saw him once when Air Force 1 landed at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. He put on a sombrero and said "Hasta loo-ego." Lucky for him, Chevy Chase never saw that.
N.B. - I changed the picture after I found out that Wactivist used the same picture (curse you Wactivist!). This is also appropriate because just like Pelé, Ford was an excellent athlete who played his football without a helmet.|W|P|116723668392793328|W|P|Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr.|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|Boredinaz:Well, Reagan 'promoted' Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, so there are worse things.
My guess is that in a hundred years, Ford will be about as well known a President as, say, Chester A. Arthur.
|W|P|And Ted, speaking of 'Ford car' jokes, the one I remember is that we had, in fact, bought a used car from Richard M. Nixon, and it was a Ford (a play on the old campaign question that Nixon's opponents used to ask, seeking to capitalize on his reputation for questionable integrity-- 'Would you buy a used car from Richard Nixon'?) |W|P|President Ford was a good public servant. He served the public with honour, respect and did his best. He was one of the people that make being in politics worthwhile and he serves as a reminder to all that not all politicians are like Tom DeLay but hardworking and decent folks who want the best for their country.For everyone to say upon your passing that you were a good man is a rare and better accolade then any other.
Liza|W|P|I suppose it is possible that Gerald Ford believed that Nixon's pardon was in the best interest of the nation as a way to put Watergate behind us. However, at the time, it seemed as though tricky Dick was given a pass and was allowed to skate out of his just punishment. All it did was remind decent, hardworking, honest Americans that powerful people are above the law, more often than not. Of course, this was back in the days when people actually cared whether or not the president was a liar.
And, in the spirit of eccumenism, a belated Salaam Aleekum to Virgil Goode and Dennis Prager for the Eid holiday, Happy Hanukkah to Judith Reagan and Mel Gibson and Happy Kwanzaa to George Allen.
Oh, and Season's Greetings to Bill O'Reilly.|W|P|116693434356507548|W|P|From the R Cubed Family to Yours, Feliz Navidad, Wesołych Świąt|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Tedski|W|P|Wow...I thought it was last month.It's good that I'm not Muslim then, I'd make a very poor one.
|W|P|Some Favorite Christmas carols this year:We Three Kings-- George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Alberto Gonzalez.
Oh Come, Let Us Adore Him-- What the Bush administration tried to replace 'Hail To the Chief' with as the official Presidential music.
Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Fire-- Karl Rove's realization of what the GOP Congress was as the election loomed.
Silent Night-- hundreds of GOP house parties on Nov. 7, 2006
Joy To the World-- Democrats, on Nov. 8.
The Little Drummer Boy-- Mark Foley
Hark! The Herald (angels) sing-- The Press, announcing the Foley scandal.
We Bring him Gifts-- Jack Abramoff
Oh, Little Town of Bethlehem-- a place where Santorum lost.
The Nutcracker-- is between Ted Haggard and the prostute he hired.
I'll be home for Christmas-- 30 GOP members of the 109th Congress. And some of them even left voluntarily.
Dashing through the snow-- 2008 Presidential candidates already at work in Iowa and New Hampshire (There is very little snow in Vegas).
I'm dreaming of a White Christmas-- George Allen.
I just got an e-mail from Evan Bayh's All America PAC. It started "Dear Geoff..."
Maybe he decided to put those presidential ambitions on hold until he gets his lists cleaned up.|W|P|116683833676167580|W|P|Senator, the Name is Spelled T...E...D|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|What do you call a Presidential primary debate?-- A Senate committee hearing.
A recent East Valley Tribune featured a story about Frank Alvarez, a Hispanic who supports Russell Pearce's tough stand on immigration. I'm not going to doubt that there are many more like him, because I've met plenty of them. The relations between native born Hispanics and new arrivals is complicated (at best). What I do have a problem with is that it almost seems like the press is playing into Pearce's hands here by agreeing with his notion that Pearce is only being derided as a racist only for his position on illegal immigration.
Yes, a large part of the opposition to Pearce is about immigration. But, there are plenty of people in the legislature who share his views on immigration but are not undergoing the firestorm he is. Why is that? Well, his public and private statements lead some to believe that his views don't come entirely from just some notion about securing the borders and protecting jobs. When he casually throws around words like "wetback" and forwards white supremacist emails to supporters, it really makes people like me wonder if this is about race rather than the law. Having a couple of Hispanic friends for convienience's sake doesn't convince me otherwise.
His problems are also a matter of his own style. His heavy handed, bombastic manner with which he ran the appropriations committee last session was so bad that it was difficult for House leaders to find enough of Pearce's fellow Republicans to serve on the committee with him. That has nothing to do with folks attacking him for his stance on immigration, no matter how much he tries to say otherwise.|W|P|116681392583138768|W|P|Some of Pearce's Best Friends...|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|OK, time to answer this by mentioning my own family.My ancestors on my father's side include a guy who was a ship's chandler in Southampton and rented the Mayflower to the Pilgrims (bad deal, they didn't return the ship, in fact they later made a barn out of it). He himself came over ten years later, in 1630. My favorite cousin (who is on my father's side so she has the same ancestor) is married to a man from Latin America (he is a legal resident). Her kids (my kids' second cousins) are native-born U.S. citizens and the eldest will register to vote next year when she turns 18. My cousin's husband has family back home (who they go to visit every year or two), family in America (I don't know if they are all here legally or not, in fact I have no interest in knowing that though I'm sure she would tell me if I asked) and family planning to come (who will be here legally if there is way they can be).
What I have learned from this is that it is about la familia. Conservatives often make the mistake of supposing that there is one group of Hispanics who are Americans and another who are Latin Americans and that they are two seperate groups. So they are surprised at the negative reaction they get when they propose idiotic solutions like building a wall on the border or making being here without documents a felony with a prison term attached to it. But to me it is not surprising. When you start messing with someone's family, you've lost their vote. I am sure there are many families that include both family members who are U.S. citizens who are voters and family members who are either here illegally or who at least would be hurt by some of these laws.
This picture is from Rudy Giuliani's website. Flags are flying both to the right, and to the left...hmm. It just depends which way the wind blows. Maybe John McCain can borrow the picture too.
Also interesting, his campaign bio omits any mention of Andrew and Caroline, his two children with former wife and occasional Law and Order guest star Donna Hannover. Given Andrew's behavior at his first inauguration, I can totally understand.|W|P|116663851267378262|W|P|Some Things Are Just Beyond Parody|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Zelph|W|P|lajamesgop.com is now active. And wingnuts are scolded by the James camp:http://www.lajamesgop.com/press/20061205_thinkright.htm
"For those of you out there in conspiracy land, take the aluminum foil off of your head.Things are not being scripted by the underworld."
That should make Lisa a lot of friends among grassroots Republicans. I thought she was a PR expert. Sheesh!
|W|P|Can it properly be called "re-election" since he was appointed, not elected, in the first place?Any word on his chances?
Tedski|W|P|David Waid was elected by the full state committee back in the Spring. Often, a vice chair can act as a temporary party chair, but full time chairs must be elected. Jane Arizona|W|P|Bryan, would you consider Randy Camacho? Raul Grijalva is backing him. Eli Blake|W|P|I'm not sure yet.I do think that Waid did a good job this year, leading the state party to a pickup of two U.S. House seats and six legislative seats. At the same time, Bryan's comment is disheartening (though I was not there so I don't know exactly what was said and would want to know what Waid's take on it was.)
On the other hand, I've always been impressed with Randy Camacho, through his two runs for Congress, as a guy who works hard and doesn't quit.
So to be honest, I'm one of those fence-sitters on this one. I'm loathe to fire a guy who was successful, but I've always liked Randy Camacho.
|W|P|I haven't heard from him recently, but Tucson's Mark Osterloh of Clean Elections and Health Care Arizona fame had also been talking about running. Jeff Latas decided not to run for chair, but to run for a vice chair slot. He and Randy both campaigned before the caucus in December.Randy seemed nice enough, and we down here in Tucson don't know him at all (I had never heard of him and neither had anyone I talked to). In his talk he mostly told about elected officals who support him and did not seem to have the vision for building the party from the grassroots up that we were hoping for.
The rumor down here in Tucson is that David Waid would run and then give the spot to Fred Duval who can't run because he isn't a PC.
David did promise he would not run again, both in a private meeting in his office with AZDPC leadership, and in a public caucus meeting with over 100 people. We were meeting with him because there was a great deal of anger amongst the rank and file that the ED and SC jobs were being merged. He said he only wanted to stay through the campaign, because Janet had asked him not to bring in new leadershp in the middle of the campaign, and he absolutely would promise not to run in January. He talked about having small children at home and definitely wanting out at the end of the campoaign.
If we are going to pay a state chair David's kind of salary, we ought to let it be known welll before having this election - and the interest in the job might pick up considerably.There are a lot of well qualified people who can't afford to take the job.
He did a great job as ED, it is true, but he told me earlier this month he wants to open a private political consulting business, if he were to leave the ED post. I think it would be a conflict of interest to do start that business while running the Democratic party.
|W|P|As far as I'm concerned there is no race for Chair, David Wade is a shoe-in. Few people know that Mr. Wade was brought in by his New York college buddy Noah Kroloff, who is Janet's right hand man.The real question is, will the E.D. make the same 100k salary that Wade made?
|W|P|Waid did promise not to run, and in private talks he has stated his desire to return to New York. I suppose he could 'promise' to complete his term if elected, but based on past experience .... (get the K-Y ready)Waid's leadership was less than 'the perfect storm' it's being promoted as by supplicants. Renzi could have been knocked out with a little effort and response to the Renzi/RNC propaganda lies aired. Six legislative seats is hardly a triumph with Janet rolling up 65% of the vote - no coattails whatsoever. Coordinated campaign was dismal, as usual, quite evident for anyone visiting 2910 after elections, much down ballot material not distributed remained afterwards. 2910 has been at best marginally functional - staff is a mess.
Nice honest guys finish last? What's up with Randy being a push-over? What's that based on: his teaching career? He ran two campaigns for Congress without a sliver of Party help, hardly the basis for a push-over determination.
Without forward home-based leadership of the state party, Arizona is destine to remain the backwater perserve of DC cabalists.
Do we really want a strawman for Chair that will turnover the leadership to an unelected person that does not even share the Democratic principles of the Party in running in his own District for PC?
This chair election could well fracture the state Party.
|W|P|David Waid has done a great job as state chair and we'd be lucky to have him again. Randy Camacho just doesn't have it in him. He's a lightweight. And Snowbrdr, the Coordinated Campaign wasn't not "dismal". In past years, they have been. Not this year. Their numbers don't lie. And you should have volunteered more of your time to getting dems elected. You did nothing. I know who you are. |W|P|As the actual person who stood up and asked and received from David Waid a public promise that David would not run for re-election in January 2007, I want the record very clear.David Waid is evidently now saying that the gist of his promise to the Arizona Democratic Progressive Caucus in May 2006 was that in January 2006 he would not hold both the unpaid State Chair job and the paid/employee Executive Director job.
I myself was the person who stood up at that meeting in May 2006 and specifically asked him if he was going to seek to be re-elected in January 2006. I asked for a public promise that he not run.
The question David was asked was most definitely NOT about whether he would hold the two jobs, but whether he would run for re-electoin as State Chair. David Waid gave an unequivocal and clear promise not to seek re-election as State Chair.
I just want the record clear about what he was asked and what he said. David is personally an honest man and I can understand (since his holding the two jobs was one of the concerns about his election in May 2006 -- not the only one, but a main concern expressed by many) that he has now, in his own mind, changed his promise from the actual promise he made into the promise he now wishes he had made.
Violating his promise is not enough, standing alone, to deny David Waid the State Chair, but it would be nice if (a) he admitted the strentgh and clarity of his actual promise, (b) explained why he was breaking that promise, and (c) even apologized or at least contacted the Arizona Democratic Progressive Caucus before he carried through with breaking his promise.
Many progressives in Arizona are not at all surprised by the fact that David has not only ignored his promise to Arizona's progressives, but also acted as if that promise made no difference. After all, David's support does not in any way depend upon Arizona's progressives.
The Powers That Be, from the Governor down through the rich contributors and the supporters of the present way the Coordinated Campaign system works, are David's source of power in this job.
Does anyone believe that David Waid would be a credible candidate for the State Chair if the Governor and the other Powers That Be did not want David as "their man over at the Party"? Does anyone believe that David has any viable power base in the Arizona Democratic Party independent of the Governor's wishes? Of course not.
If David Waid is elected, it will be because the Governor and the other Powers That Be want him as "their man in the Party."
Should he be supported? To answer that question you have to ask yourself whether the Democratic Party needs someone who will do to Israel Torres and Herb Payne what was done to them in the last electon cycle.
Israel Torres was a victory that could have happened, with enough support, resources and effort.
national office -- probably taking over McCain's Senate Seat in 2008 while McCain seeks the presidency -- Arizona will be left in the hands of Jan Brewer -- and it could have been Israel Torres.
But the Governor and the Powers That Be are not all that uncomfortable with the likes of Jan Brewer, so they did not devote the kind of resources, attention and effort to Israel Torres' campaign to make him the Governor's replacement when the Governor goes to Washington!
So the question we need to ask ourselves is whether we need, in the State Chair of the Arizona Democratic Party, a man who will answer to people who are not really all that uncomfortable with Jan Brewer as Governor of Arizona.
Steve McClure
|W|P|(a) I just noticed that I cannot tell the difference between January 2006 (incorrect) and January 2007 (correct) == Oh, well, 64 years old has its effects.Secondly, I noticed that part of my posting got lost.
I was referring near the end of my comment to the fact that evidently Janet wants to go on to higher office -- during her term, so that Jan Brewer will take over as Governor when she leaves.
Please understand that I fully support Janet Napolitano taking over McCain's seat -- it would increase Democratic stability in the Senate and I think she will make a better Senator than she has a Governor.
I am just appalled by the notion that she is evidently quite comfortable with Jan Brewer taking over as Governor.
I believe that Israel Torres could have beaten Brewer in 2006 (done right, she was an incredibly vulnerable candidate) -- and I believe the reason he did not beat her is because Janet Napolitano was not concerned that Brewer would take over when she left.
That fact alone tells me a whole lot about the Powers That Be who back David Waid for State Chair.
Another note. I notice the fact of David Waid's private assurances and comments in closed meetings made it onto this blog, a fact that does not make me particularly happy since we did not tell David ahead of time that this would occur.
That being said, I was also present at those meetings, and their content was accurately described. In those meetings, it was quite clear that the quid pro quo for Arizona progressives not fighting David's candidacy for State Chair in May 2006 was precisely and explicitly his promise not to seek re-election in January 2007. That was always very clear between us.
When I went up to David prior to the public part of the AZDPC meeting and asked him if he would make the public pledge not to run in January 2007 on the open floor, he specifically suggested that I ask him that question in the AZDPC meeting so that he could make a public pledge. He wanted to "assure" people that he was running for State Chair in May 2006 only to keep the momentum going in the 2006 campaign (i.e., don't change horses in midstream, or whatever metaphor you want), and he wanted to "assure" everyone that he would not run in January 2007.
On the basis of that specific promise, given before that morning and in public in that public meeting that morning, we progressives did not make a floor fight out of David's election to State Chair that afternoon.
That is the record. Again, I like David. I respect what he has done. I have some criticism of his performance in both jobs, but that alone is not, to my mind, enough to deny him re-election.
What is at issue in his election is whether we progressives are once again to be supine and mere supplicants, or are we going to stand up in the Party and say that we want a Party where all Democrats are heard and all are valued and all are supported.
If I were going to get involved in any upcoming fight, and if I had a battle cry (and possibly someone will tell me why this is not a good battle cry), I would say: "Remember Israel Torres!"
If and when the queen of ballot vulnerability becomes Governor, remember what the Coordinated Campaign did to Israel Torres!
Steve McClure
|W|P|I'm curious, Steve; What more could the Coordinated have done for Israel Torres? |W|P|Point #1"Israel Torres was a victory that could have happened, with enough support, resources and effort... ?"
I know I was on the other side of the world but even I could see that Issie [although a great candidate] was not going to pull it out. The only thing Issie had going for him was a backlash of voters against the GOP this yr, which would hardly translate to votes in the SOS slot.
There was a more realistic chance for Chris Cummiskey to win, running for an open seat and the 2002 Coordinated effort to include extensive resources put into the SOS race. Both (D) SOS Candidates had the same problem, a Janet Napolitano who drew out moderate GOP women which translated into votes for Jan Brewer, not knowing that Jan is anything but moderate and since most people dont pay attn or care about the SOS, they voted for Brewer.
Point #2
"the fact that evidently Janet wants to go on to higher office -- during her term, so that Jan Brewer will take over as Governor when she leaves. Please understand that I fully support Janet Napolitano taking over McCain's seat -- it would increase Democratic stability in the Senate and I think she will make a better Senator than she has a Governor.
I am just appalled by the notion that she is evidently quite comfortable with Jan Brewer taking over as Governor."
1st, should Senator McCain leave his Senate post - does the Governor have to appoint someone from his/her same party [similiar to state/local candidates] to take his place? If that was the case, should would not qualify for the position, thus debunking this conspiracy theory.
However if she was able to appoint herself, why in the heck would she put Arizona in that position when she could appoint someone else, making a deal with this particular individual, only serve out the term and not run for re-election - giving her an opportunity to run for an open seat.
Sceniro #1: GOP Replacement... Grant Woods, Jane Dee Hull, something along those lines
Sceniro #2: Dm Replacement... Jim Pederson, Fred Duvall, something along those lines
|W|P|JusticeLeague, obviously you know very little, and you certainly do not know me. The comment that I did nothing during the past election cycle is so far from factual to be as moronic and cartoonish as your 'handle'. You can try to make a silk purse out of a pig's ear, but only a Party supplicant will believe it. The 2006 Coordinated campaign was dismal. The Governor's impressive win was overshadowed by the lack of any coattails - a serious lack of coordination by any standards.
JusticeLeague stick with your comics, reality may be a bit of a reach.
union guy|W|P|Ted,Don't know if this helps, but it's the people down at the capitol that vote for the best of... And we know that most of them have a different political persuasion then you do.
|W|P|Clearly the best AZ political blogs are from the political heart of Arizona -- Tucson.More Phoenix bias. :>)
Liza|W|P|The possibility of either Hillary Clinton or John McCain being the next president is enough to make me cry out in despair. I would imagine that everyone in the Mideast feels pretty much the same way.I think that the only person who can save us from Hillary is Al Gore. He's the only Democrat who could even come close to being able to compete with her fundraising and campaigning capabilities. I think that either Barack Obama or General Wesley Clark would be outstanding to share the ticket with Gore as the vice presidential candidate. If Barack Obama were the vice president for eight years, he would have a good shot at running for president and he would still be young enough.
Liza|W|P|Correction. I should say that every person in the Mideast who is not an Israeli probably feels the same as I do about Hillary and John. |W|P|Obama and Clinton both support occupying Iraq for a long time. I would campaign actively against either one of them as would everyone I know, despite the fact it would be wonderful to elect a woman or a black man, that can't be all they have going for them.
I haven't written about SEIU's organizing efforts among Pima County workers in a while.
Back in late October, Attorney General Terry Goddard issued an opinion that county workers were entitled to a vote on "meet and confer" status. Goddard's opinion all but overruled a self-interested opinion issued by Barbara LaWall's office (many of her own dissatisfied workers want SEIU representation).
LaWall has relented, and a Board of Supervisors vote is scheduled tommorrow to place an item on the January 9th agenda authorizing county employees to vote on representation by a union.
Tommorrow's motion has, in all likelyhood, four votes: those of the three Democrats plus Republican Ray Carroll. This vote is the best of all possible worlds for Carroll: it is his chance to do the right thing, and his chance to take a shot at County Administrator Chuck Huckleberry.
Huckleberry is opposed to any union, but got to where he is at because he knows how to count to three (which, as we have all learned from former Supervisor Dan Eckstrom, is the most important skill in Pima County politics). He sees that the writing is on the wall here, and will grudgingly accept that county workers will organize. However, observers wonder what sort of language he will try to slip into the enabling ordinance.
Those details aside, this is great news for the labor movement.|W|P|116650043206981123|W|P|SEIU Update|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Jane Arizona|W|P|And the reason we're Person of the Year -- MySpace and YouTube.I am frightened and confused.
Curtis Dutiel|W|P|Jane, the whole reason behind the YOU bit goes beyond YOUTUBE and MYSPACE, but includes Web 2.0, such as Wikis, blogs, et al. It represents the involvement and the impact that the individual has on news, communication. These things are changing how we learn , communicate, and get our news. They are not saying that it is all for the better, Time is just acknowledging the reality of it.Time has honored controversial figures before, and this is no different
|W|P|Wow, wildcat. Our synapses have some common threads.Web 2.0 is a big deal. In fact, I don't think "we" or You even get it yet. As Mr. Spock would say, "Fascinating."
My daughter will not grant me access to her Facebook material. Yes, Jane, frightening.
Former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr has announced that he has quit the Republican party and joined the Libertarian party.
Barr has been a vocal administration critic on matters of privacy and a critic of the outgoing congressoinal majority. He is no liberal, however. His show has featured interviews with Ann Coulter and his website lavishes praise on John Bolton. He was also one of the main figures in the Monica-Whitewater witch hunt.
Does this augur for anything more substantial? Possibly, but probably not so much a mass defection of small "l" libertarians becoming big "L" ones. The last former congressman that I can remember that bolted to the Libertarians was a one-term Texas congressman, Ron Paul. Paul later got the Libertarian nomination for president in 1988. Paul was again elected to congress in 1996...as a Republican.|W|P|116646164935480722|W|P|Bob Barr Bolts|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|I find Barr's becoming a big-"L" rather curious. If memory serves, besides being a House Impeachment Manager, he was also the architect behind the federal Defense of Marriage Act. How does he reconcile his newfound belief in government not interfering in the personal lives of citizens with his track record of doing just that?
Okay, is this the lamest "Person of the Year" ever? This is even lamer than the 1966 "Man of the Year" given to the boomers (Gawd, don't even get me started).
Wow, could these guys be more lazy? Heaven forbid they choose an acutal mover and shaker, a newsmaker. God knows, nothing happened this year, right?
I have the right to gripe about this, after all, I am a man of the year.|W|P|116638321727113434|W|P|What a Cop Out|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|That is lame...Asking the media to have a spine is not working. |W|P|Well, Tedski, here is an area where we see things completely differently.I really liked the article and just posted my own story about it using the same picture you posted.
I think "Web 2.0" is a huge historical development. Granted, maybe discussing Web 2.0 through their person of the year is a cop out.
Just curious, if you were picking person of the year, who would you pick? Hmmm. Right now, quite frankly, I'm not particularly fond of anyone.
Tedski|W|P|I'm not going to pick a person of the year...I'm going to leave that to...well...You.
|W|P|HA! HA! HuWaaaagh!!That's great!!
Actually, You did select of the Word of the Year for 2006: Truthiness.
Maybe next year, You will indeed select the Person of the Year.
Hmmm. What do you think? Will You choose You????
Liza|W|P|The choice for Tedski is painfully obvious - GABRIELLE GIFFORDS. |W|P|To be honest, what did Gabby do that was extraordinary and completely unexpected?Now the Freshman Class of Congresscritters...Or maybe George Allan for screwing up sooooooooooo amazingly!
A national laugh would be good.
Liza|W|P|Make that PERSON of the year. |W|P|Good catch, Liza.And Tom is a politician! He should know better!
It's us bitterly divorced cigar smoking scotch drinking fellas that can say "Man of the Year."
Heard through the grapevine that she finally sold the house x4mr bought for her.
I miss those dogs, especially Lucky, the one I picked out.
Liza|W|P|mrmaps,Should have been "asses of failure."
Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva will host a Holiday Open House and Toy Drive at his Tucson office, 810 East 22nd Street, on Wednesday, December 20th from 5:30pm - 7:00pm. During the open house, there will also be a toy drive for the families of the International Association of Machinists Local 933, who remain on strike against Raytheon Missile Systems.|W|P|116628058937594208|W|P|Grijalva Open House and Toy Drive|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
- Senate: 27 Democrats, 1 Republican
- House: 55 Democrats, 25 Republicans
- Senate: 24 Democrats, 4 Republicans
- House: 52 Democrats, 28 Republicans
- Senate: 24 Democrats, 4 Republicans
- House: 48 Democrats, 32 Republicans
- Senate: 26 Democrats, 2 Republicans
- House: 45 Democrats, 35 Republicans
These are anarchists who continue to attack me because of my sincere effort to secure our borders, enforce our laws and I put God, country and family first.Anarchists? Exacly what decade is this guy living in? Didn't all that die with Emma Goldman? Or maybe Sid Vicious? Maybe he's right. Sometimes, when they don't know I'm listening, I hear Pearce's detractors plotting the assasination of King Umberto and William McKinley.|W|P|116620729824919480|W|P|He Says That Because I Don't Know What I Want, But I Know How To Get It|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
I spoke to a Republican activist up in Phoenix and he seemed to feel that Lisa James had some momentum in the chairmanship race. His take: despite whatever problems the activists have with the consultants and the hierarchy, Randy Pullen is being seen in some quarters as someone who is looking at the chairmanship as a stepping stone to something else rather than someone who wants to build the party. Also, the more pragmatic activists are wondering if the "RINO-Hunting" direction that Pullen's supporters are promising is a winning strategy.
I have my doubts. The only hard evidence I have to go on (for obvious reasons, I have nothing resembling a hard-count of Republican State Committee voters) was the District 11 race up in Phoenix, which was seen by Pullen supporters as a proxy war between them and the Republican establishment. Rob Haney, a Pullen supporter, won that race overwhelmingly.
(Another upshot of that race: Haney has a great deal of control over his district's proxies. Unlike in the Democratic party, Maricopa and Pima County district chairs can get away with carrying as many proxies as they wish at state meetings.)
I suppose it is possible that the state committee members in that District are an outlier, or that they resented the ham-fisted pressure from folks like John McCain and took it out on his candidate.
On the Democratic side, there still hasn't been official word from David Waid about whether or not he will run again. Given this race is a less public affair, he can probably wait a couple of weeks to say either way. The talk is that Janet Napolitano's operatives would like him to stay, but there is some grumbling about his leadership from Democratic Cardinals. Napolitano's folks are definitely not fans of the two announced alternatives, Jeff Latas and Randy Camacho. There are other names being floated as alternatives, but far be it from me to engage in rumor and innuendo.|W|P|116619077471383957|W|P|I Knew a Guy Once That Had a Cat Named Chairman|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Tedski|W|P|Okay...news to me. Last conversation I had with him it sounded like a go.The speaker is going to do the right thing and stick with the person who shepherded through two compromise budgets.I find this interesting because the budgets that were actually passed and signed by Governor Napolitano were negotiated by House and Senate leadership and the Governor. The "compromise budgets" (passed without any Democratic votes, so how much of a compromise were they?) that made it through Pearce's committee were vetoed. So, what did Pearce, with all of his bluster, actually accomplish? And why is he being rewarded for it?|W|P|116612260244386361|W|P|Sound and Fury...Signifying Not Much At All, Really|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
Framer|W|P|Jerks in the comments section is hardly the exclusive domain of consrvatives, spent much time commenting at AZ Congress Watch lately? Its almost 50/50 good to trash with the majority of trash coming from the left. I hate to see that happening to the boutique blogs.On the other hand, the Star hasn't become the comments section of yahoo news. That is beyond being able to read.
Eli Blake|W|P|Well, yeah, what did you expect? In politics, people treat each other with the perfect portrait of civility and respect, at least when compared to soccer.And there is no first amendment right that prevents me from deleting your post if I think it's unnecessarily derogatory towards me, towards another poster or towards someone else. The first amendment only allows you the right to write it in the first place, not to have any expectation that it will never be erased.
Liza|W|P|I'm not a regular Star reader, but I very much approve of their removing comments from some articles. In fact, they can do us all a favor and eliminate the comments entirely. News is about news, or should be, and editorials and letters to the editor are opinions. I think its fine to open the editorials up to discussion but it makes very little sense to treat news articles the same way. I've only looked at these comments a few times and I was surprised that the Star would provide an online forum for vitriolic morons to have word hemorrages.The best system is to have one party govern and the other party watch. - Speaker Thomas Bracket Reed
It seems that the Republican leadership at the legislature is already being punitive toward Democratic members. There has already been talk that their offices may be moved from the third floor of the capitol, where most of them had offices last session, to a lower floor. Many of them are seeing this as more symbolic of how they will be treated by the majority party rather than anything substantive. Insulting, but it won't effect the job that they do. The more substantive complaint regards the make up of committees. In the last session, committees were 5-3. In this session, where the ratio of the whole house went from 39-21 to 33-27, the ratio will still be 5-3. Incoming Democratic Whip Steve Gallardo has been publicly demanding a 5-4 ratio on the committees, saying that he will "go to war" otherwise. Steve, you know that the Speaker will make sure that any war resolution gets assigned to a committee where it will go down 5-3. Even optimistic Republicans who point to the victory of Jon Kyl and some conservative-minded initiatives must, at the very least, say that the results for them were mixed given their loss of legislative seats and the wide margin for Janet Naoplitano and Terry Goddard. Shouldn't the organization of the legislature reflect that? It looks like we are in for an escalation of what we saw last session: ignore the Democratic members, ignore the Governor, pass things that you know will get vetoed, gripe when they get vetoed, then pass them again and be shocked when they get vetoed again. Oh, and when it is all over, blame the Democrats for being either ineffective or obstructionist. And these guys wonder why they didn't get that pay hike?
NB - A reader wrote taking issue with some of my assertions in this post. I addressed these in a subsequent post.|W|P|116602129126291679|W|P|A New Era of Bipartisan Cooperation...Wait, Never Mind|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
I can tell that Barack Obama must be scaring the Republicans, because they have already made a couple of butt-stupid attacks on him over the last couple of weeks.
Most of you already heard the one about Obama's middle name being Hussein. So effin' what? Other than the bozo that said it, it doesn't seem to have gotten too far. But, we have, what, six hundred and some odd days to go before the 2008 elections.
Anyway, they have a new one: he dresses like the enemy.
But, in the case of Obama, he may be walking around with a sartorial time bomb. Ask yourself, is there any other major public figure who dresses the way he does? Why, yes. It is Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who, unlike most of his predecessors, seems to have skipped through enough copies of "GQ" to find the jacket-and-no-tie look agreeable.Greenfield isn't so much a moron as to accuse Obama of copying Ahmadinejad, but he makes the silly statement that somehow he will remind people of Ahmadinejad because he wears an open collared shirt with no tie. No, Jeff, silly pundits think of Ahmadinejad, actual people will just see a younger-than-average Senator dressing down a bit.
Yeah...that no tie thing. It was invented by the Mullahs. No one else big has ever done that.
-sigh-
Is this the best they can do? Not that I should be helping out the conservatives on anything, but this guy is fairly liberal. Can't you attack him on, I dunno, his record or something?
A few weeks ago, Obama was on NPR's Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me, apologizing to a reporter for ruining this guy's pick up of an intern. You can get the audio of the apology here. Sample line:
I want to apologize publicly for messing up your game.Perhaps it is this sort of natural easy going way that they are worried about. The guy is young, friendly, attractive. Someone like John Kerry, Al Gore and Mike Dukakis were cyphers to the American people when they ran. This guy, he's already building up a relationship with people. It's a lot easier to trash an unknown rather that someone people feel like they already know and like. Those of you that know me know that I dislike football. Maybe "dislike" is too mild. Anyway, I did not watch Monday Night Football last night, but Obama was on there making an "important announcement."
Liza|W|P|I like the tieless, open collar and untucked shirt with a suit jacket look. However, Tedski, your male readers should understand that you need a flat stomach to pull this off. If you're overweight, stay with the more forgiving tucked shirt, tie, and jacket. They cover these important issues on TLC's "What Not to Wear." Maybe Jeff Greenfield should tune in. Tedski|W|P|Futbol, fussball, votebal...those are all okay. Football...the kind with the pointy ball...nah.Pearce's antics have been so offensive, a railbird told our reporter yesterday, that House Republican Leaders are having difficulty filling out the Appropriations Committee roster--expected to be between 15 and 18 members--because a number of members are unwilling to sit on a committee he chairs.Ouch! How bad does it have to be that a legislator won't sit on appropriatons? Isn't that what lawmakers dream of at night?|W|P|116594890883087561|W|P|Pearce Controversey Makes Yellow Sheet|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
Today is the day we celebrate the appearance of the Blessed Virgin to a poor young native named Juan Diego at a place called Tepeyac. Many of us see comfort in the story, since She appeared not to the rich or the powerful or the oppressor, but rather the most humble.|W|P|116594762166042331|W|P|El Día de Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe|W|P|prezelski@aol.comEveryone already assumes bloggers are unemployed losers... thanks for reinforcing that stereotype...|W|P|116593149351550539|W|P|Barnicle and DeLay Play Wiffleball|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
Liza|W|P|sirocco,I think it makes us a sort of cult following to unemployed losers.
|W|P|Jarts? Why are they called jarts or do I have to actually copy and paste the link you have not learned to html yet?This report doesn't meet our needs, because it was written by people from outside, people who live in a normal environment, not this environment.Hmm. Who said that? One of our generals? Maybe a freedom loving Iraqi leader? Nope...it was from a spokesman for Muqtada al-Sadr. (I didn't mess up the quote this time, you can find it here.) So, for the last few years, war opponents, heck, anyone that opposed even the tiniest part of administration policy, was compared to Osama bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein. How do the "stay the course" talkmeisters like being lumped in with al-Sadr?|W|P|116584838465881454|W|P|ISG Opponents Find New Ally|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
Liza|W|P|What is significant about the quote from Abu Mojtaba, spokesman for the Sadrist movement, is the statement that follows:"His group is resistant to any change that might loosen Shiite control of the government."
This is not about siding with those who wish to "stay the course" or those who want to continue to occupy Iraq until the oil has been used up.
Tedski|W|P|Liza-I realize that...just as those of us who were opponents of the war were not for a continuation of Saddam Hussein's regime.
It gives me a chance to do to them what they have done to us the last couple of years, why let nuance and fact spoil it?
Liza|W|P|Yeah, I need to learn to do that. Eli Blake|W|P|I wrote a guest post on Belle of the Brawl about two months ago (the post is linked here)in which I wrote (in part),
. A fighter is only as good as his or her heart. So let’s look at the heart of conservatism in terms of the fight against radical Islam. Consider that in fact these Islamicists have much the same social agenda as conservatism: A theological outlook in which morality is the foundation for society, in which schools and other social institutions are based on a religious underpinning, and in which such perceived immorality as abortion, pornography, pre-marital or extra-marital sex and homosexuality is elevated to the level of a serious crime, sometimes even punishable by death. Islamicists also espouse a society in which government is fundamentally weak and real decisions are made by a council of Clerics, and religious institutions also oversee and decide on the distribution of social welfare. Prayers are offered in every classroom, scriptural doctrine including creationism is taught masquerading as science, women are expected to remain virginal and pure until marriage and then be subservient to their husbands, and political campaigns are conducted through mosques. True, the name of God is different, but the basic structure is very much the same as what some social conservatives would like America to be like. The Islamicists are fighting against having a secular government, so why would Americans who are against having a secular government put much of their heart into the fight?
Some conservatives hate it when you put it that way, probably because it hits too close to home.
But you are right, after decades of red-baiting, they have brought it on themselves.
I think it's very, very important for Republicans to pick people who can win in the general. I have lots of respect for the candidates who ran. But Jim Kolbe represented (District 8) for years and years and years, and I believe someone who was more in touch with his ideology would have been better.So, is Salmon admiting that maybe Graf and was too conservative for the district? That maybe Republicans need to nominate more moderate candidates that are more in line with their constituency? Has anyone told the Republican activists this yet?|W|P|116577473968371148|W|P|Wait, Did Matt Say That?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
Liza|W|P|Tedski,That quote is from Matt Salmon, amigo. Here's the quote:
"I think it's very, very important for Republicans to pick people who can win in the general," Salmon said. "I have lots of respect for the candidates who ran. But Jim Kolbe represented (District 8) for years and years and years, and I believe someone who was more in touch with his ideology would have been better."
Why would Randy say such a thing? Think about it.
Tedski|W|P|You got me...this is what happens when I blog too early on a Sunday morning.Geez.
I fixed it. Kinda lacks the impact now.
Liza|W|P|Yeah, really. Who cares what Matt Salmon says?
Cardinal Józef Glemp, Primate of Poland, submitted his resignation to Pope Benedict XVI, who accepted it.
Glemp spent his youth in a Nazi slave labor camp and later went on to be the spiritual leader of the Solidarność movement, using the pulpit to call for civil disobedience during Gen. Wojciech Jaruzelski's imposition of marshall law. Actions such as this prevented Jaruzelski from consolidating his authority over Poland and helped show the weakness of the totalitarian system.
Glemp used the church as an instrument to empower the people over the powerful. Maybe some religious leaders here can learn from that example.|W|P|116577338509992331|W|P|Glemp Resigns|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
For some time now, I've been linking to my brother's State House page. I don't know if you've seen the urls for the House and Senate pages, but they end in a number. Tom's used to end in 47.
Turns out #47 has now been changed...check out who has #47 now. I don't know whether to count this as coincidence, irony or serendipity. Maybe it really isn't interesting enough to be any of those.
Tom's page is now #46. Luckily, it didn't take me long to find it.
It looks like they do this to keep the alphabetical order of the pages. It seems like an awful lot of work for something that most people will never pay much attention to, ie the URL. For some reason, the text on all those pages is the same, but the pictures have all been taken down.
By the way, Steve Farley (and I know you are reading this...), your page is #21. His seat mate, Dave Bradley, has page #9. As we all know, this is a very important number as it is usually assigned to either an attacking or central mid-fielder. This was Joe-Max Moore's number and it was the number of Alan Shearer and Mexican legend Hugo Sanchez. 21...21 is cool too. That's Shalrie Joseph's and Landon Donovan's national team number, and is also the number of the up and coming Brazillian player Fred.
Yes, his name is just Fred. He can do that because he's cooler than you.|W|P|116571173794429139|W|P|Linkin' Blogs|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|You know, I have just noticed that you never post photos of Tom. You are the only person I can believe will never get a photo of him mixed up with yours. Tedski|W|P|#10 is...Jack Brown. Appropriate since he is assistant minority leader.This also makes #1 (Goalkeeper) Mark Anderson.
Tedski|W|P|Actually...I did turn a picture of myself here. Tedski|W|P|It is really "I am not a number, I am a person," on the television show The Prisoner. I think that the line "I am not a number, I am a free man" is from the Iron Maiden song, The Prisoner. |W|P|Yes Ted but while as adorable your back may be, that does not count since it is not your face. And you have yet to post a photo of Tom for anything. Have I thanked you for that yet? Just kidding Tom.
The House ethics committee has released its official report into the Mark Foley matter. National media attention has focused on the involvement of outgoing Speaker Dennis Hastert, but local media has focused on the involvement of long time Southeast Arizona Congressman Jim Kolbe.
The committee's findings on Kolbe's involvement can be found on pages 27-32 of the report (PDF here). The committee's conclusions about Kolbe's conduct in the matter can be found on pages 77-78 and 81-82. The panel says that Kolbe, as a retiring member, will soon be out of their jurisdiction. They leave it unclear whether they would have taken action if he had been continuing as a member. The committee recommended no action against Dennis Hastert or John Boehner, who are still going to be members after January.
The report has ginned up more speculation about the "real" reasons for Kolbe's retirement. Kolbe doesn't look particuarly spectacular here: he denies any knowledge about how bad the e-mails were despite a staffer telling him so, he seems to be satisfied with a promise from Foley not to write this particular page again and then seems to tell the page to stay quiet about the incident. I don't think that this thing had much to do with Kolbe's retirement though.
Foley had evidently been doing this sort of thing for years, and there was no reason for Kolbe or anyone else to think back last November that it would break open this year. Given the lack of any action from the leadership on this matter (judging from the report, nothing happened until ABC broke the story), what reason would anyone have had to think there would have been consequences anyhow?
Kolbe had been in congress for a long time (his replacement was a ninth grader* when he was sworn in), he probably just saw this as time to go. Also, he had been in for this long with no big leadership posts and only a subcommittee chairmanship to show for it. I don't know what was keeping him out of higher positions: his homosexuality or his relative moderation. He may have just realized that he had hit a celing.
The Grand Canyon trip that came under press scrutiny about a month ago was not a subject for the ethics committee. I have all kinds of thoughts about this one, but I'll save them for later.
CORRECTION: My original post refered to Kolbe's successor, Gabrielle Giffords, attending University High School as a freshman. An anal retentive nitpicker who had nothing better to do (my brother) called me to tell me that Giffords did not attend UHS in her freshman year. I called Giffords's sister, Melissa, and she told me that Giffords attended Emily Gray Middle School. As a middle school, it was 7th, 8th and 9th grades. Students were then given the option of attending other Pima County high schools, since Tanque Verde School District did not have a high school. Giffords finished her high school career at UHS. Tanque Verde has since built a high school and Emily Gray is now a junior high.
R Cubed regrets the error.|W|P|116568102548544304|W|P|Kolbe in Foley Report|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Liza|W|P|Interesting questions about Kolbe, Tedski.The whole thing with Foley reminds me somewhat of what happened in the Catholic Church. For decades, a relatively small number of priests molest children, the heads of the Church are aware of it, the priests are transferred, counseled, etc... but most people never even knew it was happening. There was, in effect, a conspiracy of silence because the Church leaders decided that the institution would be irreparably harmed if it was revealed that children were molested by priests. And, the Church's could moral authority could not be compromised. Also, the Church leaders believed that the bad priests could be cured by sincerely and devoutly praying to God for a cure.
This worked, as we know, until the times changed and society developed support systems for victims of sexual abuse. And so ended the conspiracy of silence that protected the great institution of the Catholic Church.
I can definitely see where Kolbe might have seen the writing on the wall. This Foley scandal was bound to break sooner or later. There were just too many people aware of it and sooner or later a victim will come forward.
Who knows? It may have been that and it also may be that Kolbe wanted to retire for the same reasons as everyone else. Only he can tell you.
I stood on a picket line with members of the International Association of Machinists Local 933 yesterday. They got a great many signs of support from the cars driving by, even the from some of the salaried employees leaving the Raytheon plant.
The company itself has reported a 41% increase in earnings per share, but despite this they are asking workers to agree to an 87% increase in medical costs and block some workers' eligibility for a pay increase. With the increase in medical costs, this would result in a net decrease in take home pay for some workers.
There is also a dispute over the pension, which is more than adequately funded. It is blatantly unfair to promise workers a pension then take that away from them when it becomes convienient, especially when they make those pension payments in lieu of take home pay.
Although there have been formerly striking workers who have crossed the line (140, according to the AP), but the union reports between 170-180 non-union employees who are supporting the strike, and believe there will be more as the strike continues and the workplace conditions become worse.
One of the things that has helped the union hold is that they have been running a job bank. Many local retailers have been hiring the striking workers as temporary holiday labor. The big irony for those of us that have been following the labor movement: one employer that has offered themselves up to hire strikers is Wal-Mart. I'll leave the ironies to you, but one worker I talked to thought that part of their motivation may have been to burnish their labor image. She thought it was funny that they showed her the anti-labor video that they show all new hires.
The other ace that the union has is that these are highly skilled jobs. It has been difficult for Raytheon to maintain its production by moving management and salaried employees into jobs they aren't adequately trained for. They are claiming that their production levels are at 103%, but this may be because of overtime production that occurred at the end of the summer, and the excess stock being rolled out now. There are reports that one production line has been shut down, and reports that two Tomohawk missles were dropped (and ruined, that's a couple of million dollars right there) when replacement workers were operating a forklift. It is difficult to believe company reports that they are maintaining prodution levels with somewhere around 1,200 workers walking pickets.
As I stood with the strikers, there was a small tent about a quarter mile up the road staffed with the security firm that the company has hired during the strike. Occasionally, these guys would get in a car and drive by us. Funny how the company can hire these guys to basically do nothing, but can't afford to give some of its long time employees raises.|W|P|116566858436259516|W|P|Raytheon Strike|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Eli Blake|W|P|He is wily though. He knows darn well that there is no way in heck that we will ever send more troops to Iraq, so by pushing for it, he will be in a position to say, as soon as Iraq melts all the way down (which will very likely happen no matter what we do), "See, now if you'd done it my way..."I guess there is no way we can go back to 2003 and listen to Jacques Chirac.
Zelph|W|P|Mormon might support an evangelical candidate like Munsil, but most evangelicals WILL NOT support a Mormon. Many evangelicals regard Mormonism as a suspect cult and not a form of Christianity at all. Witness the number of evangelical Republicans who refused to support Matt Salmon for governor a while back. Tedski|W|P|Geez...how the heck did I make that mistake?I'll fix it.
|W|P|phx kid - I'm not sure, and Tedski will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's because the new-elected members of the state committee are responsible for electing the new chair, and the new members won't take office until January.
This meeting was just the wrap-up meeting of the old state comm.
Tedski - thanks for the write up; since I'm not a member, I wouldn't have gone anyway, but it's great to hear about what went on.
|W|P|I was at the AzDPC meeting where both Randy Commaco and Jeff Latas spoke. Randy went first and is very eloquent. I could see that the crowd was impressed. I didn't think would have been in the same league, but wow. I from Maricopa and had heard about Latas because of my progressiveness. I thought his delivery was amazing. No notes and very, very powerful. There is no doubt in my mind that the leadership qualities shown by both are high but Latas is by far the more indepth leader and most sincere.
I would like to hear what other people thought that were there.
|W|P|Must be the cold meds..What I meant to say was:
I didn't think Jeff could have made it into the same league, but wow!
I think that sentence makes a little more since.
|W|P|I have read Hawking's book, and it's not TOO tekkie, but agree with you about Feynman.Sure must be nice being Giffords. Wish I could fly with my fiance to England to hang out with Hawkings.
Wish I had a fiance. Had one of those once--it was marvelous.
Then I married her.
Screwed up everything.
Liza|W|P|condem,It's good to hear positive feedback about Jeff Latas from someone who was not vested in this CD8 election.
x4mr,
Still whining about the ex-wife, huh? Reminds me of that slogan they put on T-shirts a few years back, "Life is a B*tch and then you marry one."
My first ex and I just had our 25th wedding anniversary except, of course, we didn't have it. We missed it by 21 years and he's dead now, anyhow. However, he looked me up a couple of years ago and told me I was, without a doubt, the best of his three wives and he really screwed up. Maybe you'll have a similar experience, x4mr. Give it time.
|W|P|The only physicist I ever read is David Deutsch who writes about alternative universes and has interesting theories on childrearing.The interesting thing about him is he has been working at Oxford about a quantum computer and apparently they are within sight of having one. According to his last post on his blog anyway.
|W|P|The image of Randy Graf having a conversation with Stephen Hawkings is a real gut buster."STILL whining", Liza? I think I have shown remarkable restraint. She got everything including the dogs.
Really miss those dogs.
Not to digress too far, but the physics stuff is running into consciousness stuff, things like Penrose "Emperor's New Mind" and the "What the Bleep" flick.
I hope Jeff Latas finds the angle where his views and his voice can make a difference.
Liza|W|P|x4mr,I got off light, I guess, because I paid for his college education. Besides, greed wasn't one of his faults.
BTW, is anyone out there besides me tired of reading about Giffords on these blogs? Does anyone really care who she talks to for two hours?
Johnson, who will head the Senate Education Committee this coming session...Yes, that's right, despite some folks reading the reticence of Flake and Renzi as some sort of "shunning" by Republican leaders, apparently, the ones in the legislature think enough of her that she should head up the education committee. This would have to mean that Tim Bee, who was supported by the AEA with more enthusiasm than was given to some Democrats, thought this woman (and this sort of statement isn't new for Johnson) should be shepherding school policy through the legislature. Karen Johnson appeared in an unaired Randy Graf ad this cycle with Rep. Russell Pearce, who will again chair the Appropriations committee. In addition, Sen. Ron Gould will chair Transportation. This begs the question: just loopy and intollerant does one have to be before people say, "hey, wait a sec?" Do they have to actually bring the gas to a cross-burning? Hand out copies of the Turner Diaries? Dress like Mussolini?|W|P|116508175248044420|W|P|Here is the Funny Part|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
shrimplate|W|P|I thought Johnson already dressed like Mussolini. Curtis Dutiel|W|P|TimBee has long been a supporter of Education and has had the support of the AEA for a long time. I can't recall what Tim does for a living, but His father was the printshop teacher @ Palo verde HS for ages.
Their enthusiasm for him this cycle is they liked the idea of a pro education republican in charge of the Senate.
I do wonder about this chice to head the education committee...
|W|P|The Republican primary this year seemed to me like a bad joke. I am not a Republican but couldn't make any sense of where the candidates were on the issues, ith the exception of making the immigration problem terribly volatile. 2008 will not be a repeat, believe me. I believe Gabby will do a good job - personally, I hope she champions causes that benefit people such as passing a minimum wage, lowering student tuition, affordable health care (although I prefer universal health care) - reforms for the credit card industry - aligning herself with the concerns and needs of people who work for a living in an often hostile world. She received massive endorsement from union groups and this makes me feel she is and will be responsive to the needs of everywoman and everyman. This will certainly strengthen her position in 2008.
Zelph|W|P|One of my Republican buddies also mentioned Carolyn Allen as someone who might run against Harry in 2008. |W|P|If the rumored reintroduction of the Out of Iraq resolution, with a little more enforcement, (lite version passed last August at the Flagstaff Democratic State Convention) at tomorrow's Tucson Democratic State Convention is opposed by Harry, Gabby and David Waid (as the current word in the backrooms suggest) Gabby and Harry will be lucky if they are able to run unopposed in the 2008 primary.Tomorrow's lame duck session of the out-going Democratic State Committee may turnout to be a blood bath and the most interesting news of the day.
|W|P|The GOP will need a candidate who can keep the base in tow while appealing to the Independents who went overwhelmingly for Mitchell last month. Hayworth, Allen Knaperek, and Huppenthal don't pass that test. But how about Michele Reagan or Hugh Hallman? See http://bloggerforphoenix.blogspot.com/ for more analysis on who's likely to run and what Mitchell needs to do to win. Tedski|W|P|Snowbrdr-Great, these two have not even been sworn in yet, and you are already talking about a primary challenge?
|W|P|Tedski, if the shoe fits they get to wear it. Annointment is not a requirement before one may be subject to accountability.
As it turns out there was not a quorum, (Gabby stuck in an weather-delayed airport, didn't even make the convention) so for today they get a pass.
If we can't expect a higher standard from our own, why bother with elections at all?
Eli Blake|W|P|Ted:I think they may just know something about CD 1. If you caught the comment at the meeting Saturday, you know what I mean. Anyway, I've already engaged in enough idle speculation about it to last for awhile.
Samuel Rutherford|W|P|I would have to agree with your assessment on CD5 and CD8. Harry will get bumped in 2008 but CD5 is Gabby's to lose. My guess is that Gabby will hold that seat for some time. Tucson has continued to move in the liberal direction for some time meaning any Republican who runs will have to be from the Kolbe wing of the party. Framer|W|P|You said:"I am also wondering if Latas is over estimating his support in Phoenix."
Not to snark, but I wonder if Latas is overestimating his support down south as well. It's not like his grassroots lit the sky on fire during the primary.
Latas sounds like the only way he can run is to run angry. Not sure if that is the ticket to the state chairmanship at this point.
AZ Gringo|W|P|Up north we're holding out for the return of Jim Pederson. Everybody else is just a pretender to The Chair. |W|P|"political pros were saying 2 years ago that Napolitano was a 1 term fluke ..." What political pros -- Republicans?? Eleven months ago Janet was a shoe-in and the Repugs were consulting Dex !As far as "special recognition (from the Gov) to David Waid", she gave special recognition to Michael Frais also and the only recognition either really deserve is blowing the Coordinated Campaign to pad Janet's margin.
Word is Frias is looking for a new job after knocking down $120K to destroy the Coordinated Campaign, Hopefully, he'll find it in another undeserving state.
|W|P|Let me see if I understand this: Jeff Latas, who did not express his support for the winner of the primary in AZ 8, which he did not win (sounds better than to say he lost) now wants to be State chair. I always thought the State chair supported Democratic candidates - no? Framer|W|P|You mean the same Jim Pederson that didn't place any "Democrat" label on any of his signs or advertising. "Nobody's senator but yours?"I would have thought that Democratic support would have brought him down judging by the campaign he ran. Hard to blame the state Democrats for his failure, they seemed to pull through for almost everyone else.