Framer|W|P|Damnit, I knew that Affirmative Action Moderator was going to be a problem. I tried to tell anyone who would listen that it was going to turn out like this.Don't blame me, I endorsed the other guy!
The New American Revolution will expose every lousy, bonehead that has helped put America on the downhill slide into a third world HELL HOLE! STOP THE MADNESS! STAND UP FOR AMERICA, OR LOSE IT! Know another Traitor? Contact us at: buffalorick@mac.com to report these slimy bastards!Wow, more calm reasoned rhetoric from the anti-immigration side. I can't imagine why anyone would think that this crowd has anything to do with the bizarre threats being e-mailed to Kyrsten Sinema's office. Anyway, you can order a coffee mug with the logo "Kyrsten Sinema: Product of a Failed Education System." Hmm, Sinema is a lawyer, legislator, community leader and talk show host. Yeah, her education certainly failed her. I guess if her parents had school vouchers or something, she could have gotten a career, I dunno, doing puerile comedy and badly performing Tex Ritter songs. Oh, you can also buy a shirt that says Goofy Gallardo. Really, this is no worse than what his friends call him. There is also a shirt that calls Alfredo Guitierrez a Nazi. Given some of the rhetoric the underside of the anti-immigration movement engages in, I'd be careful throwing the word "Nazi" around so easilly guys. And, of course, anti-Hillary Clinton shirts are available. -YAWN- Say, my brother signs on to these bills that Gallardo and Sinema write that seems to get the dander up of these folks. Where is the love? Or hate, or whatever it is.|W|P|116978154541355387|W|P|Wow, I Can't Come Up With a Clever Title At All|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
Zelph|W|P|This comment has been removed by a blog administrator. Zelph|W|P|Yeah, how come Tom never gets fan mail like this from the mouthbreathing Nazis?Where is the love?
Tedski|W|P|Zelph-Yeah, my very question. I noticed that Gallardo and Guitierrez are Latino, and Sinema is an outspoked woman and bisexual, but I'm sure that that has nothing to do with it.
I'm sure you noticed that the article you linked included the term "beaner." Of course, the author did not mean anything racial by this, I'm sure. There is no racism in the anti-immigration movement.
I'm just curious, did Cheney call any of the self-appointed moral guardians who pontificated on his daughter's situation "out of line"? Or is that sort of thing reserved for members of the press and Democratic Vice Presidential nominees?|W|P|116977818310587415|W|P|I'm Not Ashamed of My Lesbian Daughter, Just Don't Bring Her Up.|W|P|prezelski@aol.comQ: We're out of time, but a couple of issues I want to raise with you. Your daughter Mary, she's pregnant. All of us are happy. She's going to have a baby. You're going to have another grandchild. Some of the -- some critics, though, are suggesting, for example, a statement from someone representing Focus on the Family:
"Mary Cheney's pregnancy raises the question of what's best for children. Just because it's possible to conceive a child outside of the relationship of a married mother and father, doesn't mean it's best for the child."
Do you want to respond to that?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: No, I don't.
Q: She's obviously a good daughter --
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I'm delighted -- I'm delighted I'm about to have a sixth grandchild, Wolf, and obviously think the world of both of my daughters and all of my grandchildren.
And I think, frankly, you're out of line with that question.
Q: I think all of us appreciate --
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I think you're out of -- I think you're out of line with that question.
|W|P|Dang it, Ted. I jumped on your post from yesterday and editorialized about fascist tactics on the right and that isn't what it was.So I clipped your rebuttal here and pasted it (with due credit) along with a note to self not to editorialize until I get all the facts (which I have sometimes laid the wood on others for, so I need to do a better job myself.)
According to the folks over at Sonoran Alliance, the latest jab at Randy Pullen comes from former State Representative Laura Knaperek. Once again this goes back to the $100 contribution that Pullen gave to Harry Mitchell, then a candidate for State Senate.
If you buy into Knaperek's theory, that contribution to Mitchell led to a series of events that enabled Mitchell to defeat J. D. Hayworth and resulted in Republican legislative losses in the area this year. Given that Pullen gave a comparatively small contribution to Mitchell years and years ago, and that he hasn't done that since, I guess this must be the political equivalent of the "butterfly effect." Pullen's contribution led not only to Mitchell and David Schapira being elected, recent gains by the Canadian Liberal party in local elections and probably the current tension between Alexander Lukashenko and Vladimir Putin as well.
You may have noticed that Knaperek is a "former" representative, and apparently she is looking for someone else to blame for her loss. As Tempe became more Democratic, she continued to vote down the line with the leadership and refused to see what was coming. That's Pullen's fault though.
Knaperek seems to have developed a habit of blaming others for her political decisions.
The Pullen faithful are rightfully indignant about the attacks over a paltry $600 in contributions given nearly ten years ago before he was an active Republican. However, I think they have only themselves to blame for this. You've got people like Rob Haney and his "purer than thou" crew supporting Pullen. Heck, Haney doesn't even consider John McCain a real Republican for God's sake. As long as your folks are demanding ideological purity, you've got to expect the other side to ask for it from you too.|W|P|116965979497329155|W|P|Knaperek: It Wasn't Me, It Was All Pullen|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
I never follow Phoenix city council races, but a corresponent up there in the Valley of the Yakes sent me some information on a certain Michael Nowakowski who is running up there. I don't know much about him, but one thing is obvious:
He's a Polish-Mexican like me.
For once, I can engage in genuine ethnic solidarity!
Nowakowski has been general manager at Radio Campesina for a couple of years and had also done work for the Diocese of Phoenix. His website boasts of membership on a number of community boards.
He doesn't have an easy race. He will be running against Laura Pastor, who's father represents the area in Congress.
I've been told that he is a fan of the Guadalajara Chivas. I'll try not to hold that against him. So, that's the team for the Mexican part, what about the Polish part? ŁKS Łódź?
Powodzenia and buena suerte, Michael.
NB - This is more common than you might think: the attempt by the Mexican government to poplulate Texas and New Mexico in the early 19th Century didn't just recruit Americans, but emissaries were sent to areas like Bavaria, Bohemia and Poland (they wanted Catholics) to offer land to families that were willing to, in essence, "homestead" these areas. A book was released on the subject in the mid-1990's called Poles in the Southwest. Also, discrimination against Poles by their Russian overlords sent many of them packing to various nations, including Mexico.|W|P|116964899485769497|W|P|Papas con Kielbasa|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Tedski|W|P|Most of the sources of information I have found about the Mexican league are in Spanish.Chivas USA? Chivas USA? I think I heard they won a game last year, but that could be a rumor.
Math has never been my strong suit. And I have difficulty balancing my check book. But you don't have to be Stephen Hawking to figure out that A. Nancy Pelosi's outfit cost more than the average American paid for their first home and B. there is a pretty high degree of difficulty involved in balancing the federal budget yet the leader of the free world just told us, "We can do so without raising taxes." And half the people in the hall - Bush's half -stood and cheered.Point taken on balancing the budget, but why the swipe at Pelosi's dress? Apparently, producers at MSNBC thought that the dress comment was insightful enough for their "crawler" and ran it several times without the accompanying comment about balancing the budget. I'm not one to seek out sexism all the time, but this sounds dangerously like the porcine breed that was known back in the 70's as the "MCP" is rearing it's ugly head here. I suppose that Barnicle would have us believe that Dick Cheney, sitting next to Pelosi in his own expensive suit, bought his clothes with one of those vouchers they give homeless folks over at the Jackson Center. Jackass.|W|P|116961423721064010|W|P|More "Wisdom" From the Aptly Named Mike Barnicle|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
Of course, working literally next door to Lisa James and working with her (allegedly and not depending on the media account) on various campaigns and relying on fat contracts from the State Party might, just might, require some of us to question his motives.Da-ha-ha-ang! It is hard for me to judge from out here who is actually winning, although one Republican blog claims that they have a count showing Pullen slightly ahead. Please, guys, keep this up. And don't stop after Saturday either...|W|P|116960186384442246|W|P|An Elephantine Struggle: James v Pullen, Part IX|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
Tony GOPrano|W|P|Comrade Tedeski,Please continue in your feeble effort to get Randy Pullen elected. Love you see you dems endorsing Pullen. Please Comrade Ted, like another famous Republican once said "Make My Day" and publically endorse Pullen.
Thank You
TonyGOPrano
Conservative Republican
Tony GOPrano|W|P|Comrade Tedeski,Please continue in your feeble effort to get Randy Pullen elected. Love you see you dems endorsing Pullen. Please Comrade Ted, like another famous Republican once said "Make My Day" and publically endorse Pullen.
Thank You
TonyGOPrano
Conservative Republican
|W|P|Hey Tony,Guys like you think anyone to the left of Attila the Hun is a red. Where did you go to High School Adolf Hitler HS?
Keep your smart ass comments to your self. How do you say Conservative Republican in FARSI (the language of Afghanistan?)
TALIBAN
Please print the attached contribution form that you also need to complete and mail to me. If you have a spouse, partner or friends that you feel might also participate please share this email with anyone you would like (please forward this email with your own special note and get involved in this campaign). You may also visit our campaign website at www.rodneyglassman.com (which should be launched by the end of the week). Rodney will not let us down and so I hope you will consider joining me in helping him win election! We are trying to raise money as quickly as possible so please send your contribution today! Thanks in advance and Happy New Year!Lori Oien's campaign sent out an e-mail to her supporters on January 16th. It was a typical fundraising e-mail with some biographical details plus a "why Lori will win" bit. Then, it ended with:
Please print the attached contribution form, complete it and mail it with your check. If you know of anyone else, that would like to participate in this election, please forward this e-mail to them, with a word of encouragement for Lori's Campaign. You may also visit her campaign website at www.lorioiencitycouncil07.com, (which should be launched soon). Lori has always been, "A Can Do Person," so I hope you will consider joining me in helping her with the Ward 2 seat! We are trying to raise funds quickly so please mail your contribution today.Not the worst case of plagiarism ever, I'll admit. Think about this for a second though: Glassman's e-mail was blasted to his friends that he's gotten through his charitable work, which means a lot of big name Republicans. So, these guys got an e-mail from Glassman, then a similar looking e-mail from Oien a week or so later. You can bet that more than a few of them would have noticed that.|W|P|116956227413456518|W|P|Lori Oien Demonstrating the Creativity and New Ideas That We Need On the City Council|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
I wanted to correct an earlier post. A correspondent wrote to me and stated that Jonathan Paton is not, in fact, in the Green Zone, but a camp outside of Baghdad and isn't, according to the correspondent, "even allowed to look in the direction of the Green Zone."
I hope that no one thought I was implying that Paton was somehow in a "safe" part of Iraq. I've got enough friends that have been over there to know that there is no such thing.|W|P|116951176205142607|W|P|Correction|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|Hey, it was nice to have Ken and Barb move up here. And the best thing about Ken is that he knows he represents the whole state and he is willing to go anywhere to help Democrats move forward.To be honest (and I came to the meeting with an open mind on the Waid/Camacho race), and you are right that his speech was full of platitudes and short (make that absent) on specifics, but the one line in Camacho's speech that really lost me was when he talked about how we should dare to push back against the tide. To be honest, that made me wonder whether he thought it was 1995 or 2007. Right now I like the way the tide is going, and it's the Republicans who want to push it back.
|W|P|Van Taylor was a Republican war vet, who ran against Democratic Congressman Chet Edwards last year in a district that ironically includes President Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas.The voters in the district may have respected Taylor's military service, but they disagreed with him (and Bush) about whether we should continue to fight a fruitless war in Iraq. So Taylor got trounced.
Rex Scott|W|P|Ted, why do you think Sugar Ray might run in two years? He didn't run this time because he said he wanted to stay in Tucson while his kids are young; a noble reason if there ever was one. His three young 'uns won't be much older in '08! Carroll won't run for that reason and because he can hang on to his safe seat until he decides to take on another race after his kids are older. My money is on him seeking a statewide job rather than trying to go to DC because he just doesn't strike me as a Washington type...and I mean that as a compliment!Tim Bee would put Cochise County and eastern Pima County in play big time. He is calm, poised and not prone to gaffes. Money would not be an issue, either.
However, he is almost as conservative as Graf on all issues outside of support for public schools. Gabby could tag him as a stealth version of Randy, which would be accurate and ultimately the clincher for her. My only worry for Gabby in two years is, to be candid, having to run on a ticket headed by Hillary, who will NOT play well in this district.
If she wasn't considered to be too moderate by the right-wingers calling the tune in today's GOP, Jennifer Burns would be someone to reckon with face to face with Gabby. Don't count out Mike Hellon, either. Last, I know there are some on the right who see Frank Antenori as the Sam Brownback of Southern Arizona.
Liza|W|P|Are any of you Giffords fans at all concerned about the fact that she has not taken a strong position against the occupation of Iraq and her remarks about Iraq so far (as our representative in Congress) sound as though she knows just as little about the invasion and occupation as she did a year ago in Patagonia? I ask this question because so many of you have claimed to be against the occupation.That Tucson Citizen article about the troop surge was intended to embarrass Giffords, I dare say, especially the part where she said that she would visit Iraq herself and see what needs to be done.
Why do her handlers think that it is not safe for her to take a strong position against the war at this point?
If the Democrats continue to bankroll the war, and they will, they may not be as popular in 2008 as they were in 2006. Voters know that Congress has more options than non-binding resolutions and I think that a lot of people expect the Democrats to actually do something about the war. That sentiment will grow over the next two years as this Bush presidency plays itself out and the debacle in Iraq continues to get worse, which it will. On the other hand, I think we can be sure that Bush will take his party down about as far as it can go by 2008. So, the Democrats may still be the lesser of two evils, but they need to get off their collective arse and do something about Iraq. Otherwise, some of these more local races such as a Giffords/Bee contest may very well go back to the party that has a demographic advantage. It's way to early to try to predict anything, but I have to commend the Republicans for picking Tim Bee. He represents my legislative district and I can assure you that he's well liked here.
Liza|W|P|This is an open letter from James Jordan to Representative Giffords. I received this from the Sonora Progressives a couple of days ago and I think its an excellent letter. If you wish to sign the letter, send email to progalliance@yahoogroups.com.Here's the text of the letter:
Dear Rep. Giffords,
On Martin Luther King Day, at Reid Park, and today, on
KUAZ, I heard you make the same assertion, that the US
military had gone into Iraq for the purpose of
"removing a horrible dictator", and that "our troops
performed heroically", but that we "then went in to
remove weapons of mass destruction", but there were no
such weapons. In each case, you went on to express
concerns about the escalation proposed by the
President, and to suggest that there were other,
better ways to deal with this war, although it was
never clear what those ways were. One thing you did
not talk about was the need to withdraw US troops as
quickly as possible from this quagmire. Instead, you
talked about things like bringing more nations on
board (as if they should be brought into a quagmire
that they recognized as such before the war began,
which is why they didn't get on board in the first
place), having better strategies and defineable goals
and such.
I would like to point out a couple of things. First
of all, when the US military invaded Iraq, the
initial, not the subsequent, reasons given for this
war were the fallacious and much discredited lies that
Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that it
somehow had something to do with the attacks of
9/11/2001. Our invasion was based on the dangerous,
untenable, and unethical idea that we had the right to
launch a preemptive first strike against an imagined
threat.
So this war was NEVER justified, including the
justification you give it, that we went in to remove a
horrible dictator. Many of us do not believe that the
United States should be, nor deserves the right to be,
the policeman of the world. The fact that someone is
a horrible dictator has never been enough for us to go
in and remove them. If that were true, we would have
removed Pinochet, Suharto, Somoza, Battista, and
countless others--so many examples--if it were not for
the fact that they were all "horrible dictators" who
the US either installed or propped up in power to
serve its own interests--or rather, the interest of
the US power elite (it certainly didn't serve the
interests of poor and working people in the US or
anywhere).
In regards to the "horrible dictator" Saddam Hussein,
it would be good for you to review your history of the
situation. Saddam Hussein rose to power and was
consolidated in that power on the basis of tremendous
US support. When the US supported Hussein, they knew
he was ruthless, cruel, murderous, and a "horrible
dictator". But he served US interests by jailing,
torturing, and killing, en masse, the leaders of the
single largest secular democratic movement in the Arab
world. Unfortunately, the democratic will of the
Iraqi people would not have pleased US corporate
leaders, because it was not the will of the people to
turn all their oil, water, and other resources over to
private, US development.
Furthermore, when Iraq did have chemical weapons and
other capabilities for mass destruction, these were
sold and supplied by US government officials. For
instance, Donald Rumsfeld brokered such deals on
behalf of the Reagan/Bush administration. So if we
really wanted to see justice done regarding this
"horrible dictator's" crimes, we might also want to
indict his co-conspirators. There's plenty of them
there at your new job site in Washington DC.
You were elected to Congress, just like so many
freshman Democratic officials, because of widespread
dissatisfaction and anger regarding this unjust war,
and the thousands upon thousands of US and civilian
Iraqi casualties. Are the deaths and the maimings our
troops have suffered worth the prosecution of this war
based on lies? No, they are not, and I urge you to
recognize this.
Indeed, you, and all the Democrats, indeed, every
politician in Washington DC has been given a mandate:
End this sham of a war and bring our daughters and
sons and mothers and fathers and sisters and brothers
home before even one more of them dies for these lies,
these political games...before one more of them dies
so Halliburton and this and that oil company can make
more KILLER profits.
Rep. Giffords--we have faith in you to represent us,
and that's why you were elected. But enough of this
double speak, enough of these unclear messages, enough
of trying to say things that you think will appeal
both to war supporters and war opponents. This war
was not about removing a "horrible dictator", nor was
it about weapons of mass destruction. This war was
and is about securing profits for a handful of
wealthy, powerful, and corrupt few who simply want to
continue carving up the world and its resources so
that their power and wealth may increase, with no
concern about real democracy, and no concern about the
needs of the rest of us. They think nothing of
sending in 20,000 more trooops, nor of wasting
thousands of more lives for their impure aims..
Rep. Giffords--you are among those that we sent to
Washington DC for an overwhelming purpose: to speak
truth to power, to work to bring our troops home and
to end this murderous war. We must stop this war now.
We must bring our troops home now. We must not
continue to uphold and support this War of Lies.
Sincerely,
James Jordan
|W|P|Liza, You are correct. You need reinvent the Green party. People like you should not be held down by working and middle class Americans who are patriots. I love how this “expert” total twists history. The Baath Party and Hussein rose to power how? According to your expert…“Saddam Hussein rose to power and was consolidated in that power on the basis of tremendous
US support. When the US supported Hussein, they knew
he was ruthless, cruel, murderous, and a "horrible
dictator". But he served US interests by jailing,
torturing, and killing, en masse, the leaders of the
single largest secular democratic movement in the Arab
world.”
This is a bigger lie than the one the President told to get us into the current crises. Where do you on the uniformed left get the facts? From Wikipedia.
You can toss around clichés like “…the US military invaded Iraq” and the drivel quoted above.
The only thing you and your Sheehan, Kucinich and professional protester pals will ever accomplish is to turn the “middle" against the Democrats. (I loved Cindi’s little stunt prior to the Democrats taking power in the Congress)
Your arrogance is staggering, you really believe that you and your uninformed left pals won the elections for the Party? Please, the moderate conservative voters who turned to the Democrats tipped the balance. You and your type of left needs to realize they did not/will not ensure anything for the Dems, except defeat.
I am offended by your United States hating, Anglophile clichés and trash talk about OUR Armed Forces.
AS one who dislikes rep. cream-puff you completely missed the point. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, hippy.
Even a bad Democrat is better that ANY GOPer
|W|P|All I have to say about Giffords is this:I have a ten year old daughter who went to the state party meeting with me in Phoenix Saturday.
After Giffords spoke she talked for awhile with my daughter. She listened to what my daughter had to say and was very courteous and respectful towards her.
That is in contrast to a lot of politicians who think kids are good for a quick exchange and move on to an adult.
Class Act.
Liza|W|P|Blue Dog,You might be very surprised by how many sources of information I have. I choose not to respond to you any further because 95% of what you have to say is just an attack on people who do not agree with you. You are the kind of person who should never venture outside your own circle of whatever it is you are because you are so vitriolic.
Anyhow, just to clear up one thing for you. The situation in Iraq is dire and will get worse. Whatever one's political position, be it Green, Blue Dog, Republican, Leiberman worhsipper, or whatever, we need to end the occupation of Iraq and assure the global community that we are not going to remain there to plunder the oil, which is what we intend to do, by the way.
Also, you may not have noticed, but I didn't write that letter, but I think that the author has some good points. I certainly agree with the spirit of the letter which is intended to motivate his representative in Congress. And, I also agree with his First Amendment rights to express his opinion. I have no idea whether or not he used Wikipedia for his source.
BTW, I'm not a hippie and never was. I don't smoke either.
Have a good day.
Liza|W|P|Eli Blake,Class act notwithstanding, Iraq can't wait.
This is not about being classy. Congress will not act without a mighty shove from below. That is my only point.
You know, 2007 will be the most brutal year in the Mideast without the intervention of the American people.
Americans have turned against the war for different reasons. Whatever your reason, write your representatives in Congress. The sum total of what we all believe may be enough to convince Congress that a populist movement is underway and we are, as a nation, converging on the belief that the military occupation of Iraq must end this year.
|W|P|Liza, Here is a thought. Wish those serving in the uniform of our Republic a nice day. Better yet save the disingenuous platitudes spend some time with the men and women who have been maimed protecting all of our rights. Pick a VA here in the Valley or in Tucson
Your history is revisionist; your posting was insulting in view of the fact that our Service men and women were killed in large numbers today.
Have a great day honey
Rex Scott|W|P|Liza, I always enjoy your posts because they are thoughtful and well-written. If you read Gabby's comments in the Star yesterday, I think you'll be pleased. She may not be as unequivocal as you are, but she is looking at all aspects of the issue, including cutting funds, and is slamming Bush for how ill-considered his overall policies are. My guess is that you and our new member of Congress are closer than you might think on Iraq. My own position is similar to John Edwards' and I hope we see the party as a whole moving in that direction. Liza|W|P|Blue Dog,This one's for you....
My husband is a disabled veteran from the Vietnam era. Let's see now, there have been about ten or eleven surgeries, I've lost count. There have been forty years of pain. He is proud to have been a Marine and to have served his country. He thinks that it changed his whole life for the better. He has managed his disability extremely well. He knows that his sacrifice has been very small compared to what others have sacrificed.
I have immense respect and gratitude for those who put their lives on the line to serve this nation.
What I think is sad is the way that you so viciously attack people you do not even know. You make such outrageous assumptions about their beliefs and then attack them as though you and you alone speak objective truth.
Geez, man, get some Paxil. Do you really think that hating people accomplishes anything?
|W|P|Liza,Using your husbands service is beneath contempt
Liza|W|P|Hi, Rex,I read the interview, and I think that Giffords is still very weak with her "public" position on Iraq. However, you make a really good point. She is definitely someone who is worth writing to and worth persuading to take a strong position. I fully understand that anyone in Congress who wants to be re-elected is very reluctant to take strong positions that may be a problem for them in the next election. That is precisely why we, the people, need to continuously apply pressure. I would like to see "lively discussion" on the local blogs about Iraq because the situation is so dire and time is running out. Can Iraq endure this occupation until 2009 or 2010 and, worse yet, will Cheney get his war with Iran?
The local blogs seem to have really diminished since the November election judging from the number of comments. I would hope that they could become an integral part of local politics and provide a forum for all of the voices.
Blue Dog, of course, doesn't get it, but others do. Anyhow, thanks for reading me, Rex. I enjoy your comments as well.
Liza|W|P|Blue Dog,Leave me alone. You do not know sh** from Shinola. Seriously, I will not respond to you ever again and I'm sure that everyone else who reads here will be glad of it.
EVERYONE, I promise not to respond to him ever again.
|W|P|Lisa,Being a human I must respect your opinion and your views on the war in Iraq. But being a vet of the first desert storm "Conflict" I will disagree with you on a few points. I'm not sure if you believe the stuff that you posted but if we leave Iraq in the mess it is in we will be a true villain in the eyes of the world. We left the Kurds to fend for them selves after the first desert storm and the republican guard squished them like a bug! Kind of like the Bay of Pigs. Now we have a newly "elected" Iraq gov. begging us to stay and help. So should we just grab all our stuff and leave the entire nation of Iraq to take on the responsibility of fending for them selves? That would be bad. There are already groves of Iraqi innocents being butchered as we speak every day. If we just leave it will be genocide of the Sunni’s or what ever Muslim group that is in the minority.. Now if we would acknowledge that we just don't care about the Iraqi's and only care about oil we should just come out and say it! If we were there for the oil only there would be less Deaths! We would create martial law zones and then harvest the oil in mass. The insurgents would have a harder time killing troops and Civilians because everyone would have badges to enter certain zones. But since we as a nation would never conquer and then pillage the resources we instead instill de-Mock-racy in the hope that they will want to be like America. Silly aint it? Anyway my point is that we made a mess of Iraq because we were not honest of our intentions. The military is a pawn that can only function when given marching orders. So let’s not blame the military for being the big, nasty mean, and evil creature that it is meant to be. It is what it is. Tolerance is a must Lisa.
Liza|W|P|drive,I didn't write the letter I posted, but I do not believe that the author was blaming the military. The military is not responsible for foreign policy. The foreign policy we suffer with today was hatched by Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John Bolton, and several other former members of the Project for the New American Century who went on to become decision makers in the Bush Administration, as we all know.
Other than that, you've identified many of the exact problems that Mideast scholars, military experts, and others warned about prior to the invasion of Iraq. There is no resolution at this time given who is controlling this war, nor are there answers to your questions. The Bush Administration is at odds with the growing public sentiment against the war and the new Democratic Congress, yet they choose to rigidly adhere to a failed agenda. That is where we are.
But, yes, I do believe we need to end the military occupation. It is not sustainable. We will leave, we always do, the questions are when and how.
Many of you have probaly read about Virginia Delegate Frank D. Hargrove Sr., who told an African American who was supporting a resolution apologizing for slavery to "get over it."
I hear this sort of thing from many white southerners when people bring up the past. In one of Ed Bradley's final stories, he travelled to Mississippi to talk about the reopening of the Emmett Till case. Over and over again, he encountered whites who kept saying, "That's the past, and there is no need to open up old wounds."
Okay, I can see where people would get frustrated when they keep hearing about issues that seem to have been settled years or even generations ago. I understand the desire to move on. But, I'd be more willing to entertain pleas from white southerners that their black neighbors move on, if they themselves had moved on.
Take a look at Hargrove's own state. Up until 1997, the state song was "Carry Me Back to Old Virginia," a song where the narrator, a newly freed slave, is nostalgic for his days of bondage. The move by the legislature to ditch the song (Hargrove himself was there at the time; I don't know how he voted) is still controversial today. You can't have a candidate debate, particularly in a Republican primary, without a question about the display of the Confederate battle emblem. Former Governor and Senator George Allen felt the need to surround himself with all sorts of Confederate nostalgia as if his great-grandaddy fought at Antietam, despite the fact that his father was from Union state Michigan and Allen grew up in California.
Southern blacks watch as symbols of the segregationist and even slave past of their region are innocently celebrated as "heritage" on a regular basis. Not that I am in any position to make deals on the part of the African-American community, but I'd bet that they will "get over" their past as soon as a majority of the Southern white community gets over theirs.|W|P|116921742551044153|W|P|Something I've Been Meaning to Write About|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
Political humorist Art Buchwald has died. Last year, he decided to forgo dialysis and his doctors gave him only five weeks to live. Well, he hung on for much longer and was able to even tape his own eulogy (the first line is quoted above). He had been asked if there was anything that he was sorry he was going to miss. His answer: he was jealous that the rest of us will get to enjoy global warming.|W|P|116921339566893862|W|P|"I'm Art Buchwald, and I Just Died"|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
One of the things you'll hear from the conservative activists that support Randy Pullen is that their man is a more "pure" conservative, more Republican in every thought, deed and external organ than that Lisa James and that "RINO" John McCain. Pullen's detractors have been labeling him an opporitunist who only recently donned the cloak of a "true Republican."
Well, the boys over at Politico Mafioso have found something interesting. Back in 1998, Pullen gave to Democrats Paul Johnson and Harry Mitchell. Pullen has come up with the lame excuse that his employer made him give. His employer: Pullen and Co.
The funny thing was, these were the only contributions that Mr. Republican gave to Arizona candidates that year.
I suppose that such a thing could understood since this happened nine years ago and before Pullen was an active Republican, but this guy represents the "litmus test" wing of the party. Had this been any one else, he and his supporters would be screaming "RINO" before the ink dried on the checks. If this burries his candidacy, he has his own rhetoric to blame.
I love this stuff. Keep it up guys.|W|P|116921247790358389|W|P|More Fun in the Race for Republican Chair|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
The Weekly ran an item in yesterday's Skinny that named Adelita Grijalva as a possible candidate to run in Ward 1.
One of the publishers of the old New England Revolution fanzine Pictures of Chairman Mao had a word for such things:
Rumpswab.
I decided not to call Grijalva herself, since she just had a baby and is probably a wee bit busy, doncha think? Definitely too busy to be running for City Council. But I talked to several people close to her and the consensus was that she'd be a great candidate and a great councilmember, but she ain't running. Not even considering it.
One of the things that has ginned up speculation is that no one has pulled packets to run in Ward 1. No Democrat, no Republican, no Libertarian. Even the old Anti-Masonic party hasn't thrown in. No candidate has pulled a packet, including incumbent José Ibarra. We political observers abhor a vacuum, and any sign, no matter how weak, that there may be one leads all of us to make up all sorts of things.
Let's see, who else lives in that ward? Paul Eckerstrom? Peter Hormel? Odie Mae Elliot? Oh yeah: Al Perry...|W|P|116917709130277712|W|P|No or Something|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|I'd bet you still have time to move into the ward and file, dude. is it really carpetbagging if no one's running? Tedski|W|P|Funny thing: the rules for residency for running for the Tucson City Council are pretty tight. I live in Ward 6...and I would have had to "reside" in Ward 1 for a year before I could run.Besides, I still think Jose is going to run, and I don't want to run against him.
|W|P|Camacho had previously listed endorsements from Pastor and Grijalva on his website. |W|P|Oops, didn't read down far enough to see that you already mentioned that. Tedski|W|P|Given how many people will be attending their first convention Saturday, I figured you are "long time."Besides, why are you complaining...this is the first time you have rated a mention. :)
|W|P|Actually those of us outside of Maricopa county got the same email listing the endorsements of Maricopa county website. |W|P|Yeah Aaron, I have had like five mentions and Ted does not even like me!(Ms. GIFFORDS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.) Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak for the very first time in this distinguished Chamber representing the Eighth District of Arizona. Mr. Speaker, we have made some major accomplishments this week, but one area that particularly pertains to my district and to the State of Arizona has not been addressed, and that is the crisis in illegal immigration. For too long, Congress and Washington have failed to act. We must secure the border now. My district and the State of Arizona have paid a heavy price for this burden. We know it in our schools, our hospitals and our law enforcement agencies. We must move this year with a sense of urgency to pass a comprehensive immigration reform package that is tough, effective, and practical. We need to increase border security using modern-era technology, radar, drones, electronic surveillance. There must be more Border Patrol agents and more support for those Border Patrol agents. We also need tough employer sanctions for those employers who are knowingly hiring people illegally, and a guest worker program, so that people can come in and work legally, safely, and return back to their home countries. Working to pass such measures will be my priority in this 110th Congress, and I look forward to working with Members on both sides of the aisle on this important issue.As I noted before, the Arizona Democratic Party posted Harry Mitchell's coming out on YouTube. This one still hasn't been posted. Come on guys, where is the love for us Bajados?|W|P|116912647143376366|W|P|Giffords's Debut Speech|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
|W|P|Frankly, I have such a total lack of respect for Gabby that I probably shouldn't say anything. But what the heck.We need a "sense of urgency" huh? Need to work with the other side huh? Wow.
I guess it's easier than thinking. Or doing. Neither of which have ever been her strong suit.
How the hell did this happen? I still can't say Congressman Giffords without feeling slightly ill.
Liza|W|P|rob f,You're worse than I am. I was thinking of making some smart alecky remark like, "now we can all sleep better at night knowing that our newly elected representative is all over this immigration problem."
I guess that whoever the handlers are in what one blogger called the "incumbent protection program" decided that paying attention to the immigration issue will convince AZ CD8 voters in 2008 that Giffords has done well for them. Maybe they're right, who knows?
At least I know now that I could actually be represented in Congress if I move to Rep. Grijalva's district. His recent statement about Iraq is a very profound example of what I would like to hear from every Democrat in Congress.
Liza|W|P|Well, gee, I have to apologize for my previous post. I just read the article in the Tucson Citizen where Rep. Giffords does have an opinion about the troop surge in Iraq. To quote the article, "Giffords said she is skeptical of the president's plan because it does not include benchmarks for success or represent a new strategy." And this, "Giffords also said she will likely visit troops in Iraq and see for herself what needs to be done."This is great. What we need here is a fresh pair of eyes. Hang in there, Baghdad, help is on the way.
|W|P|The anti gay stuff is a smoke screen. The Guv wants her people in place to assist her Senatorial campaign.
Think back to the Maricopa County Attorneys race. Warshaw was totally unfit to be the County Attorney, The Guv and Jim did not want Harris, so they sandbagged him. It was bad enough that the party got involved in a primary, but to let P. Gordon endorse Thomas was sickening. As a result We (Phx) got stuck with Andy Thomas. I knew Harris was a flawed candidate but Thomas is a fascist, and he will run for hirer office. All because the Guv State Chair, County Chair and Chief of Staff (Guv) did not like the Democrat who won the primary.
Talk about putting their needs (political careers) over the needs of the Party!!!
|W|P|This is exactly why we are fighting and why we are happy Randy Camacho has taken up the populist banner. He is well qualified to provide the leadership we need, and we believe open debate and contested races strengthen the party. This is the democratic wing of the democratic party speaking up for fairness and grassroots control of the party.
The governor called Grijalvva and Pastor and asked them to withdraw their endorsements. Sadly, they caved.
David Waid is a good executive director, and I am sorry he wants to quit in that role. He is worth every penny he earns as ED. As a private political consultant, i think he will have a conflict of interest at the same time running the party. We don't need even the appearance of corruption.
And as party chair he allowed the party to snub, fail to support, or even eliminate Democrats the governor did not favor. Think Jason Williams Think Larry King. Think Herb Paine and John Thrasher. Think Mike Cacioppoli. And that's just the few I know about. Why is Israel Torres not Secretary of State? because the state party did not go after Jan Brewer.
We have seen over and over that the governor works behind the scenes to silence honest debate, as she is doing now, to snub or even eliiminate candidates she does not favor.
Many of us believe we need to build a sustainable party that is independent of any elected official, one that fairly supports all Democrats willing to give their time and effort to run for public office.
To be fair, David Waid has helped progressives with election integrity, and we are thankful. He has put staff in places there was no staff previously, which helped to build the party, and invested in training for candidates and their staff, which we support. What makes the governor think Randy would put a stop to those good things?
Please support Randy Camacho, or at the very least speak up about the governor working behind the scenes to influence another election.
|W|P|Amen RevGerry, Left right or center this Guv has done nothing to help anyone, except her elect few. If a progressive is willing to step up and tell the elite they are not the Party this Blue Dog will support him/her (with time and $) . I am really sick of hearing “….but Janet has to be viable for the next election”
Is it the Democratic Party of Arizona or the Democratic Party for Janet Napolitano, Terry Goddard, Jim Pederson (RIP) & cronies?
|W|P|I say this, still not knowing who I will in the end vote for between David Waid and Randy Camacho on Saturday:Do you have any evidence that the Governor told Reps. Grijalva and Pastor to withdraw their endorsements? Because this is the first time I've heard that, and frankly I don't see them as 'caving' in to anybody. To be honest, I've been immensely happy with the job our Governor has done in running circles around a hostile legislature. I want to see what she does now with a less-hostile one.
Also, I don't buy that stuff about the party not supporting the candidates you mention. Williams ran a strong race against an incumbent, and it was in the end his choice to try and raise money privately (i.e. not run as a clean elections candidate). That IMO did him in-- he wasn't able to raise enough of it. But he's only 30-- and I believe he will be back if he wants to be.
Larry King? He could have continued running if he wanted to but then again do you honestly believe, that starting with more people thinking of the TV host, he'd have been able to squeak by J.D. (as Mitchell did?) And I used to be 'represented' by J.D. and I am eternally grateful to have him gone.
Cacciopoli? I in the end supported him and endorsed him because I liked his bluntness about Iraq, immigration and other issues, and felt he was the most charismatic candidate. The reason it took me so long was because I was waiting for him to say publically that he would support the nominee, which he eventually did. But let's be honest-- he finished fourth in a field of five, so it's hard to argue that what the state party did or did not do had much effect on his congressional ambitions.
I'll probably listen very intently to what both Waid and Camacho say on Saturday, but I don't believe that leveling baseless attacks against the Governor or our other elected officials is a way to convince me to support anyone. And I'm sure I'm not the only 'neither part of the establishment nor a member of PDA' Democrat who is still mulling this decision over but is 100% a supporter of the Governor (who is not, incidentally, on the ballot Saturday.)
|W|P|Let me get this right,Harris won because:
1 The old people voted for him? You have a prob with that?
2 Warshaw was too nice? A nice Mesa cop?
3 Because of his name? (that has to take the cake)
If the election is between a nut and a Fascist who do you vote for…
RevGerry has a valid point, we should elect Democrats, even nuts they are better that Nazis
|W|P|I'm not going to say that Harris was perfect, but between him and Warshaw, at least Harris had tried a felony. Warshaw was an absolute joke. Democratic voters weren't quite stupid enough not to realize it and they didn't vote for him. The Democratic party completely abdicated his campaign in favor of an absolute lunatic named Andrew Thomas. Thomas, were he to to get the kind of press he so desperately craves, would be a national embarrassment. I would have far greater interest in this race if I had any, repeat any faith remaining in the people who have given us such absolute zeroes as Gabby "I married an astronaut" Giffords and Jim "I'm rich, so I should be Senator" Petersen. Why do Republicans continually win races in this state? Bad Democratic candidates and a total lack of support for any one who doesn't absolutely toe the party line. We're a joke. But not the funny, ha ha kind.
Jane Arizona|W|P|The endorsements were not pulled because of anything Randy said or did. And the rumor that Randy is anti-gay is completely ridiculous, but I'd love to know who planted it. |W|P|Jonathon Warshaw is a friend of mine and I'd appreciate it if people didn't malign him with second hand and false information. |W|P|You pegged it revgerry.And I'm as curious as you jane arizona.
|W|P|To clarify:ALL of Arizona's DFA and PDA groups were represented at the meeting where Camacho was endorsed unanimously. Sonoran Pregessives were represented by Jeff Latas and another gentleman whose name I didn't get.
If she chose an appointee from among her Republican supporters as some insiders speculate, it's possible this individual could be drafted from her cabinet, if not the group of well-known Republicans who endorsed her 2006 re-election bid. Among them are former Arizona Attorney General Grant Woods (R) and Jack Jewett (R), a Tucson businessman and longtime member of the state Board of Regents. Current elected officials who backed Napolitano last year include Flagstaff Mayor Joe Donaldson (R) and Phoenix City Councilman Tom Simplot (R). If Napolitano turned to her cabinet to replace McCain, she'd have 13 choices, including Bill Bell, director of the state administration department; Susan Gerard, director of the state Health Services Department; Don Butler, director of the state Agriculture Department; Pat Chorpenning, director of the state Veterans' Services Department; and Gale Garriott, director of the state Revenue Department.The supposition has always been that Napolitano herself wanted to run for Senate in 2010. To make this happen, she would have to appoint someone who would be willing to step aside in 2010, something appointees have done in other states. Here is the funny part of the article (besides the soon-to-be-unemployed-under-a-Pullen-chairmanship Garrick Taylor using it as another reason to paint Napolitano as an out of touch extremist. That's why she won, I guess): the close of the article names possible other candidates should Napolitano not make a go of it:
If she doesn't run, Democratic Reps. Gabrielle Giffords and Raúl Grijalva, and state Attorney General Terry Goddard (D) could be candidates.My God, Gabby just got there! Give the gal a break. For some reason, Ed Pastor isn't mentioned. With all due respect to Giffords and Grijalva, the direction of politics and demographics here doesn't bode too well for a candidate from Tucson, but nice to see our folks mentioned. Actually, all three of these pols are Tucson born.|W|P|116904600796618483|W|P|S.P.Q.U.S.A.|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
|W|P|Tommy just registered as a Dem. "I am a Socialist defense attorney who represent murders" Sinema just loves it. If we Dems don't put up a strong candidate (not her fellow green Campbell) We need to throw in the towel. Great commentary on Some Phoenix Blog
http://somephoenixguy.blogspot.com/
Zelph|W|P|She's sick of all you fat white guys without a sense of humor too. |W|P|Don't forget balding |W|P|I would have thought Napolitano would have appointed Barry Wong-- former Republican state Senator and the guy she appointed to fill out that unexpired Corp Comm term-- since she's already put him on something and he's been low-key about it.The trick is, a special election would have to be held within a year, making it damn awkward for both whoever Janet appointed and for herself.
Other than that, Simplot is now a Dem, although I've heard Peggy Neely's name thrown around as a Republican for Janet, and other Dem activists might not like it but I've always thought Phil Gordon would be a good candidate for Senate.
And actually, I wouldn't call it great commentary, more like half-accurate and sometimes true stuff I'd rather post somewhere than bore people in conversation with.
|W|P|Phx guy,I liked the Pinto Dems post, don't be too hard on your self. Your stuff is good. Plus it is about the real AZ, Phx, GO DEVILS
|W|P|I don't want to sound rude or anything, but, what would Randy Camacho do more of or better than what Waid's done? |W|P|Actually I just got a correspondence both from Camacho supporters and then from Camacho.Interesting I haven't gotten deluged more, since I'm still not sure which of them I'm planning to vote for-- that may be a 'game day' decision. I like both of them, I'm impressed by Waid's record but I've also always liked Camacho.
In any case, I've been too busy following the vice chair's race-- my county chair, Ken Smith is running and I've been very impressed with how he's been able to unify and grow our county party.
|W|P|Happy Birthday to Ted and Tom! Oh and to Carmen, she is the best! See you on Saturday!My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettoes of the North over the last three years -- especially the last three summers. As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they ask -- and rightly so -- what about Vietnam? They ask if our own nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today -- my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent. For those who ask the question, "Aren't you a civil rights leader?" and thereby mean to exclude me from the movement for peace, I have this further answer. In 1957 when a group of us formed the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, we chose as our motto: "To save the soul of America." We were convinced that we could not limit our vision to certain rights for black people, but instead affirmed the conviction that America would never be free or saved from itself until the descendants of its slaves were loosed completely from the shackles they still wear. In a way we were agreeing with Langston Hughes, that black bard of Harlem, who had written earlier: O, yes, I say it plain, America never was America to me, And yet I swear this oath -- America will be! Now, it should be incandescently clear that no one who has any concern for the integrity and life of America today can ignore the present war. If America's soul becomes totally poisoned, part of the autopsy must read: Vietnam. It can never be saved so long as it destroys the deepest hopes of men the world over. So it is that those of us who are yet determined that America will be are led down the path of protest and dissent, working for the health of our land.|W|P|116887347023069629|W|P|One Year Before|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
|W|P|I've never been able to forgive Leiberman for running for Senate while he was running for Veep. Like he didn't really think he'd be busy. Besides, his head is freakishly large.
I've had a couple of people ask me, "Hey, you're a soccer fan, why haven't you said anything about David Beckham on your blog?"
Well, the fact is, I have. I have two posts on Beckham playing for the Galaxy (a team I dislike that will now be even more fun to root against) over on my other blog. I try to keep this blog to politics and occasionally religion. Over at the Polish-Mexican page, I can talk about soccer, music, roller derby and what ever else I want to complain about.|W|P|116873667973732004|W|P|The No Beckham Zone|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|"I try to keep this blog to politics and occasionally religion."You mean that soccer *isn't* a religion?? LOL
Rep. Russell Pearce has another brilliant idea that will stop all of these darned illegal aliens from crossing the border.
He's got a bill, HB 2063, which would only allow the registration of a vehicle if, as the bill says, "the owner is legally present in this state."
This is a good thing. I have a friend who just got back from Caborca, where there are dozens if not hundreds of pobres just waiting to cross the line and register their Hummers. Such legislation will surely keep them on their side of the line, or at least make them go to Texas.
We are better off if those undocumented workers that can afford vehicles once they get here drive unregistered vehicles. Our streets are safer that way.|W|P|116869900350131343|W|P|That'll Show 'Em|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|Does that mean that every time Hertz rent-a-car wants to add a vehicle to their fleet at Sky Harbor, the CEO of the company will have to fly to Phoenix so he can stand in line at the Arizona Department of Transportation and fill out the paperwork? Or would it have to technically be a group of stockholders who control at least 51% of the stock?For that matter, there are many entities that have vehicle fleets, some of which may be registered in Arizona but the entity is not from Arizona.
And if a major league baseball player who lives in the valley needs a new car and asks his financial manager to go buy it for him, does that mean he will have to take a game off so he can fly here and stand in line at ADOT?
I wonder if the bill addresses these situations?
Word is out that Tom Stauffer is leaving the Arizona Daily Star to become a food writer at the Tucson Citizen.
When I first saw Stauffer's byline at the Star, I was a bit taken aback. I thought, "hey, is that the same Tom Stauffer that is in the Drakes with Gene Ruley?" I found out that yes, it was.
Stauffer was also leader of a band called Bull Horn, an excellent but criminally unremembered Baja Arizona band in the early 1990's that released one single for a song called "Hell Mountain."
(Bull Horn also featured on bass a redheaded woman named Cheri Taylor. No really good reason to mention her 'cept it gives me an excuse to remember her. Back to your regularly scheduled blog.)
Interestingly, when C. J. Karamargin left the star, he became a food writer at the Citizen too. Then, he moved on to work as a press aide to Gabrielle Giffords. So, the next natural step would be to work for a member of congress. Not much chance of an opening soon though.|W|P|116864232970773070|W|P|You've Got to Change Your Pace, I Did That|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|Next race is in 2008 though so there is a teeny chance it could happen. But so could a major earthquake taking out St. Louis.
Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd announced his candidacy for president earlier this week. He already has a website up. I know that all of you are anxious to sign up for his campaign.
Interestingly, Dodd's page boasts of links to Flikr, MySpace, FaceBook and YouTube (what, no Tribe.net?). We'll probably see more of this from the other candidates since this seems to be the lazy man's way to get to Generation Y voters. No one loves us Gen Xers any more.
Another interesting thing on the page is the "DoddPod." It is a list of songs that Dodd has on his iPod and you can suggest songs. I suppose this is one way to show that Dodd is wired and hip, but does anyone under the age of fifty listen to Jackson Browne?
(And I bet most of those fans, under fifty or no, spell Mr. Browne's name correctly.)
There is a way for us visitors from the internet to suggest songs for his iPod. It is a good way to capture data for a e-mail list, but man, that is just asking for trouble. I mean, how many of you when you saw that feature were trying to figure out an offensive band name or song name to send him?
You know that every second-rate indie band will send their songs in hopes of some modicum of recognition. It'll work out well, Dodd hasn't heard of them, and they haven't heard of Dodd.
If any of you post anything on the DoddPod, tell us about it here.|W|P|116861184431985435|W|P|The "DoddPod"|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Curtis Dutiel|W|P|I told him he needed some heavy Metal.I suggested Twisted Sister's "We're not gonna take it"
I suspect the message behind my suggestion will be lost on a Washington Insider
Rob F|W|P|I said he should listen to See How We Are by X. |W|P|Good choice Rob. Hey Ted, you know, a lot of those websites were built by gen-Xers. Flickr is one of the best photo tools out there. It is nice to see folks using more than just blogs. |W|P|Another Senator...running.... for President.Hit the snooze alarm.
Raúl Grijalva submitted this statement to the Congressional Record today:
Madam Speaker, I believe this Congress has a mandate from the voters, to start bringing our troops home now. This is not an option to pursue at our leisure, this is a solemn obligation of absolute urgency. As we speak, preparations are being made to send more of our nation's sons and daughters to Iraq, with or without our consent, and some are already there. A headline in today's Financial Times states our predicament: "Congress is helpless only out of choice." The Constitution gives this Congress, gives this new majority, if it chooses to exercise it, the power of the federal purse. No signing statement or political calculation can erase this hard fact, and if we choose to deny that we do have this power, we do a disservice to our Constitution, our constituents, and to this body. If this new Congress does not heed the voice of the people who elected this new majority it will be a failure of our democracy, and I think the people will be appropriately discouraged by this. To ignore this mandate is to risk not just a majority, but even worse, to heighten the cynicism of our country with regard to whether we truly have a democratic, responsive government. The escalation in Iraq announced by President Bush last night will only deepen our involvement in this debacle. Ultimately, this escalation is about keeping this nation tied down in Iraq beyond 2008, because once those troops go to Iraq, the horse is out of the barn. Members of Congress that are serious about representing the will of the American people should make every effort to block this move, to pre-empt the President. The president's speech last night was disheartening and disappointing. This President is utterly indifferent to the will of the people, the Congress, or even the very same generals whose authority he has exploited to cover his own mistakes. Congress must demand a better approach that is realistic and solution based. Someone should tell the President that the dire consequences he predicts for Iraq if we should withdraw are already with us, as a consequence of his own decisions. President Bush's war of choice has created a sanctuary for terrorists. President Bush's war of choice has empowered Iran in the region. President Bush's war of choice has put American targets in front of Al-Qaeda and made their ranks overflow with new recruits. President Bush's war of choice has decimated American influence and credibility in the region and the world. Only once we have gotten our troops out of harm's way, and once we have demonstrated a commitment to make right with diplomacy and reconstruction what this President has torn asunder, can we attempt to implement the political solution among Iraqis that this crisis calls for. President Bush mentioned Iran last night in a very alarming context. In one breath he accused Iran of material participation in attacks against US soldiers, and in the next he announced the positioning of assets in the region which would enable the air strike on Iran that frightens the entire world and, I fear, seems increasingly likely. If we are serious about extricating this great nation from the regional quagmire that this President has created and that he seeks to enlarge, it seems that the time has come that we need to speak out. We need to get out of Iraq, and we need to stay out of Iran. Madam Speaker, this war is a financial, strategic and moral disaster for this nation. The military victory the President speaks of is a fantasy, but the costs to our nation and the violence in the region are real, and will only increase the longer our men and women remain in Iraq. We need to bring this sad misadventure to an end, and start bringing our troops home now. It pains me to recall that more than half the combat deaths in Vietnam came after it was already clear that the United States could not succeed. These soldiers died because the leaders of their country lacked the political courage to face reality, feared losing face, and feared admitting their mistakes. This is one of the great tragedies of our history, and we risk repeating this moral error by keeping our troops in Iraq. The American people clearly expressed their view on Iraq in the last election, and the policy still has not changed. But I still believe that the people of this country have the will and the spirit to restore true democracy to our foreign policy. I hope they will keep up this fight, because the lives of our men and women in uniform depend on it. Thank you. Madam Speaker.|W|P|116856262503704534|W|P|Grijalva Reaction to Bush's "Augmentation"|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
|W|P|Well said Congressman. Liza|W|P|Let's hope that Rep. Grijalva and a few of the other Democratic Congress members who have had the courage to come forward and make statements like this set an example for most of the others who have yet to find their spines.Non-binding "resolutions" just don't cut it.
Just got word from a DNC member that Denver will be the site of the next Democratic National Convention.
Steve Farley will be happy to know that they have excellent transit.|W|P|116853509995286828|W|P|Rocky Mountain High, Or Is It Oysters?|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|I think it is reflective of Democrat's new focus on the intermountain west and the midwest. Denver is on the border between both, and the growth of Democratic power throughout the region represents a major threat to the GOP. We will see if what has transpired in the West over the past couple of election cycles continues into the future, as I think it will, but to turn what had been a solidly GOP region of the country into a solidly competitive one could represent the biggest reshaping of the political landscape since white southern Democrats switched to the GOP starting in 1964 following the passage of the voting rights act.
Word to C-SPAN junkies: Harry Mitchell will be making his first speech before congress today. I don't have an exact time, but it should be sometime over the next few hours. He will be speaking on funding stem cell research.|W|P|116853205854193435|W|P|Mitchell's Rookie Debut|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Curtis Dutiel|W|P|GIVE 'EM HELL HARRY!!! |W|P|Is he in the Blue dogs or just looking |W|P|And he looked great! |W|P|Google Harry Mitchell Blue dog and read for your self
You read this right, this bill would mandate drug tests for legislative candidates. You ever heard anyone tell you that you would have to be high to want to run for legislature? Well...
The bill's prime sponsors are Senators Jack Harper, Linda Gray and Representative Russell Pearce. Other sponsors are Senators Ron Gould, Karen Johnson, Jim Waring and Representative Ray Barnes.
In case of a gubernatorial veto of this crucial bit of legislation, the sponsors have also signed on to SCR 1005, which would be a constitutional amendment mandating a drug test that would avoid the governor's desk and go to the voters.
Way back in the 80's during our first wave of drug test fever, Senator Fritz Hollings's opponent demanded that Hollings take a drug test. This happened during a debate, so Hollings turned to him and said, "I'll take a drug test if he takes an IQ test."
In that spirit, let's expand this idea: maybe we can mandate that candidates take the AIMS test, maybe the new citizenship test?|W|P|116852060223469396|W|P|Finally, a Way to Keep Tommy Chong Out of the Legislature|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Curtis Dutiel|W|P|Make them take the AIMS test!! Many of my fellow teachers have been wanting them to do that for years!! |W|P|I highly doubt that the Normans are any threat whatsoever unless of course they have bows.
I'm hearing more about 2008 than I'm hearing about 2007. What is up with that?
I'm hearing a new bunch of murmurs. I don't entirely buy this one for reasons that I'll give you in a second. The talk is that Ann Day will run for re-election to the Board of Supervisors. She's represented District 1, which takes in the central part of the Catalina Foothills and manuevers around the Catalinas to take in Oro Valley and a big chunk of Marana's vilayets, since being elected in 1996 after a series of short-timers (Iris Dewhirst, Greg Lunn, Mike Boyd).
There was speculation about Day retiring shortly after her sister stepped down from the Supreme Court. Seemed silly actually, since their circumstances are very different.
Now, on to the wild speculation that I don't entirely buy: Day will get a primary challenge from Al Melvin.
I can see where Melvin's wing of the party would be disatisfied with Day. Heck, just the fact that she can sit so close to Richard Elías on a regular basis and not get charged with battery would be enough to make some of them unhappy. Day is the classic, for lack of a better term, "Country Club Republican," exactly the sort that boils the blood of conservative activists.
Even with this though, I don't see Melvin as the sort to want to run for supervisor. What I saw was a guy who was animated by grand ideological battles. Yes, they happen on the board too, but only as occasional breaks in between long stretches of more practical day-to-day county buisiness. I can't see Melvin as someone that would get excited about decisions like who gets a sewer contract in Avra Valley or who to hire to run the libraries. I could be wrong though, and I often am.
Hasn't Melvin already told some supporters that he wants to make another go at the Senate?
This isn't to say that social conservatives aren't interested in the nuts and bolts of local government here, it's just that they don't seem to run for positions in it. This isn't true in other parts of the state (Randy Pullen, popular with conservative activists, has made a run for mayor of Phoenix, for example). In both Pima County and Tucson City government, the Republicans we have elected have tended to be moderates, even liberal when it comes to social issues. You may remember that the person that took the lead on the fight over continuing to fund the Boy Scouts despite their anti-gay policies wasn't a Democrat, it was Fred Ronstadt. Despite this, I can't remember any Republican council member or supervisor weathering a primary over such things. Ray Carroll, the Baja Arizona answer to Nelson Rockefeller, has never had a primary at all.
The only staunch conservative I can remember serving on the Board of Supervisors was Paul Marsh, who served one turbulent term more than a decade ago. It bears remembering that he was taken out of office in the Republican primary.|W|P|116844096457304562|W|P|Ann This Day|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Tedski|W|P|I realize that, but it hasn't stopped the folks I talk to from speculating about this. I don't think he'll run for Supervisor either. Tedski|W|P|This comment has been removed by a blog administrator. |W|P|Just for the record: Ray Carroll did have a primary battle the first time he ran for the District 4 Supervisor's seat, almost ten years ago. It was against Brenda Even, a formitable candidate who was an elected School Board member and also the widow of John Even, who died while serving as the District 4 Supervisor before Ray. Ray has not had a primary challange since however.Scott Egan
Executive Assistant to Ray Carroll
(since day one).
PS: As for my (humble) opinion, Ann Day could chew up and spit out Cap't Al for lunch faster than he could scream "Save Me Chewy!"
|W|P|Ted isn't THAT far from the truth here. The Repubs with which I can have a conversation, have started murmuring the name Capt. Al and Supervisor in the same sentence. Apparently, from the talk I have had with some at the gym, they are not exactly happy with Ann Day and want to see a more conservative voice on the board. This leads little ol' me to believe that if they can't find anyone more palatable than Capt. Al to run against Supervisor Day, then this could be a pretty quick primary with Day out pacing Capt. Al at the polls.
But then again we all thought that Toni Hellon would drop him like fifth hour spanish. Perhaps the Democrats better have a back-up plan if some mouth breathing conservative were to challenge Ann Day.
Any takers?
Rex Scott|W|P|Yo, Rat! What's wrong with fifth hour Spanish? I always thought it was the core classes no one wanted late in the day!Seriously, it is preposterous that ANYone would take a Melvin candidacy for ANYthing seriously ANYmore. After he lost the Senate seat, he became nothing but a shrill voice that will surface every now and then on talk radio and at LD26 meetings. I can't believe that the Republicans would risk losing a safe supe seat after Al lost a safe Senate seat.
It is a moot point anyway. Ann Day is a pretty shrewd campaigner and isn't likely to take any opponent for granted. She would wax Al in a primary and I must admit that I will be surprised if she draws a prominent Democratic opponent.
Tedski|W|P|Chris-Wasn't aware of Al's residency, and evidently the people spreading this talk weren't either. Of course, Al could easily hop the line.
I was also trying to make a broader point about social conservatives running for County and City offices. I don't even see them doing it in safe Republican districts like Ann's.
On Tuesday, January 9th, the Pima County Board of Supervisors became the first county in Arizona to allow its workers the freedom to vote to form an authorized union. “Now we want a vigorous debate among county workers about what kind of employee organization they want,” said Dave Mitchell, President of the Pima County Chapter of SEIU Arizona. “SEIU believes that better workplaces and better services go together. If employees choose SEIU, they choose not only better working conditions, but an opportunity to sit down with management and brainstorm ways to make Pima County an even better place to work and live.” The ordinance allows employees to vote in an election to choose whether or not they want an authorized union and, if they vote for a union, allows them to meet with the county and confer on wages, health care, improving services, and other issues. “All of the employees want to congratulate Board Chairman Richard Elias and County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry for working with us to make this historic step a reality,” said Mitchell. “Now we look forward to working together with the county on ways to improve the services that we provide to county residents.”The item was passed 5-0.|W|P|116837581810070394|W|P|Victory, and I Don't Mean a Movie Staring Sylvester Stallone, Michael Caine and Pelé|W|P|prezelski@aol.com
|W|P|Do you know if the county employees have civil service rules? |W|P|Victory? , SEIU is poaching from CWA and AFSCME. How do you call that a victory? As a former UFCW member I find Unions like SEIU objectionable. When a Union poaches (attempts to de-certify or grab members from another Union or two) the Labor Movement is hurt and divided. Why in the world would you not even mention that the County and City have two Unions, CWA and AFSCME, with members already?
I would love to see what their (CWA & AFSCME) leadership & rank and file thinks of SEIU. Is SEIU even a part of the AFL-CIO or did they “bolt the AFL-CIO”?
Why can SEIU leave and you make no comments but you write “Those of you that followed the Senate election in Connecticut may remember that Joe Lieberman, when bolting the Democratic Party…”
Joe leaves the Dems and he hurts the Dem cause, SEIU leaves the AFL-CIO and it is a victory.
Am I missing something or is there a disconnect?
|W|P|It is not poaching when the unions don't have bargaining rights, even under the AFL-CIO rules. AFSCME has been there forever and never managed to expand the membership or get recognition. We need a strong union presence in Pima. I hope SEIU, AFSCME and CWA compete like hell and sign up every worker available. I hope that the best union wins... Anyway you look at it, progressives win. |W|P|Lamedem, You are wrong, CWA and AFSCME bargains (wages) for the employees in Pima and the City.
as for competition, If I understood the post only one Union will emerge from this. So SEIU, instead of looking for a new (workers)organizing campaign attacks the base of CWA and AFSCME.
How do the progressives win ?
Tedski|W|P|I haven't heard of the complaints from CWA, but AFSCME had only managed to sign up two hundred members out of the 6000 member work force. SEIU had in less than a year signed up many times that. At what point is it no longer "poaching"?AFSCME had no bargaining rights, CWA has some recognition by the city and TUSD, but not by Pima County.
SEIU bolted the national union, but has a "solidarity agreement" with the local AFL-CIO.
|W|P|I think it is really simple; poaching is when one Union runs a campaign where another Union has members. SEIU knew CWA and AFSCME had members, thus they are poaching. If SEIU had an understanding with the AFL-CIO (Local or National) they would not have moved in on another Unions turf. Have you spoken to Ms. Walker (AFSCME) or Mr. Dean (CWA)? I am sure they would love to get the equal time you gave Mr. Mitchell.
union guy|W|P|The ordinance allows employees to vote to choose which union they want, as it says in Ted's post. Why is AFSCME opposed to employees voting to choose an authorized union? And ordinance doesn't apply to the city, so CWA isn't affected. |W|P|I think the question is why is SEIU running campaign in a place that has a Union (no matter what shape) unions are work place democracy in action if the workers need a union join AFSCME. Why spend the $ ?
As for what AFCSME wants I don't know I am not, or ever have been a member.
SEIU has this type of rep all over
|W|P|Mr. T, Sorry I thought that this is exactly the place to debate “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” This is a place where weirdo’s (like me) can get as wonky as I want. It is not like I can go the George and Dragon and debate the finer points of Trade Unionism.
I am from a Union family and we used to fight like hell until a republican came around. The Democrats used to have some really good conventions (blood on the floor) until the TV fluff we have now.
Like the Spanish Civil War we Democrats. (I am not a progressive or Liberal. I am a old fashion anti communist, pro Union Democrat) fight until a republican comes around. It is the debate that sharpens my rhetorical skills.
|W|P|Mr. T, Have you ever been in a union? If you are, (god help the local you are with) have you ever done anything except shoot off your mouth? I do not give a tinkers damn what you think the point is and I really don’t care what you see as valuable. I will respond to what you wrote
1 Stop with the caps, who in the hell do you think you are? That shit bird you style your self as?
2 Since you like caps, how is this PROGRESSIVES is spelled with a r after the g you insufferable jerk (try the F7 button)
3 “The real question is what is the PURPOSE of organizing these workers.”
You were as wrong on this as everything else.
The purpose of a union is to gain POWER, tool
So now post away, I am done with you
I was unaware that Randy Camacho has a website up for his race for chair. Check it out. He lists Raúl Grijalva and Ed Pastor as supporters, as well as former Rep. John Laredo.|W|P|116835246843492165|W|P|Camacho on the Web|W|P|prezelski@aol.com Jane Arizona|W|P|This just in: Randy has been endorsed by PDA and DFA...
I just finished up Steve Neal's Happy Days Are Here Again: The 1932 Democratic Convention, the Emergence of FDR - and How America Was Changed Forever. The book was published in 2004, shortly after Neal's death.
One of the things that people don't realize about that convention was that Franklin D. Roosevelt nearly wasn't the nominee. He swept all but two of the primaries he entered and secured a majority of the delegates that were attending the convention. However, the Democratic party had a 2/3 rule, first put in place by Andrew Jackson. As many of the figures in the book constantly liked to note, both Champ Clark and William McAdoo walked into their conventions with majorities.
I think the fact that most of you haven't heard of either Clark or McAdoo gives you a clue. Suffice it to say, the 2/3 rule saved us from being led into World War I by a president named "Champ." Roosevelt and his allies ditched the 2/3 rule shortly after he became president.
The objections to Roosevelt were many. Supporters of Al Smith, a sentimental favorite of Catholics, wanted him to have another shot at the presidency. The city bosses, especially those in his own state, disliked him. Conservatives in the party, who had a lot of sway because of the 2/3 rule, distrusted him as a radical. But one that came up over and over again was Roosevelt's health. The history that we all know is that the press kept his disability a secret, but most party leaders were well aware of the state of his health.
The irony, noted by Neal in the epilogue, is that Roosevelt outlived just about every one of the rivals from that convention. Two of them, former Secretary of War Newton Baker and Maryland Governor Albert Ritchie, didn't even live through Roosevelt's first term.
The convention was dominated by many larger than life figures of the era: House Speaker "Cactus Jack" Garner, Louisiana Gov. Huey Long, New York Mayor and lover of chorus girls Jimmy Walker and Will Rogers as well as some colorful characters that have largely been forgotten, like the cigar chomping populist Oklahoma Governor "Alfafa Bill" Murray.
The book captures the drama of the old conventions and a little bit of why the current stage managed conventions are no fun to watch anymore. Granted, there was a lot of shenanigans that we just probably wouldn't put up with anymore, such as Boston Mayor James Curley's heading up a pro-Roosevelt sham Puerto Rico delegation (in a glaring oversight, Neal never explains how this came to be) after Roosevelt was crushed by Smith in the Massachusetts primary. In another bit of chicanery, Anton Cermak, Mayor of the host city, Chicago, arranged to have McAdoo's limosine run out of gas while he was on the way to a crucial vote. These sorts of things don't happen any more because they really wouldn't effect the outcome.
The outcome is determined by the primaries now, in fact, largely determined by the time that voters in less than a half-dozen states have made their voices heard. For all of the trouble with the "smoke filled rooms" and arcane procedural fights, I wonder sometimes if the current process is all that much more democratic. It certainly has been rendered less fun.|W|P|116826775343284563|W|P|Happy Days Are Here Again|W|P|prezelski@aol.com |W|P|Glad to see you blog about the FDR Democrats. Some who read and post to your blog could use some schooling about the people and demographics that built and ensure our majority. |W|P|Tom, the window I am using does not show the entire link. Can you HTML it?And I liked that book...I also liked the Bonus Army, stuff that is not well known such as the nomination of FDR (who was the first candidate to fly to his nomination and accept in person) or what happened to the Bonus Marchers of the 1930s AFTER the First Lady visited. Especially the part about the pressure to not deficit spend on FDR by himself and others.