Blog For Arizona

Populism Consuming Representative Democracy

By Michael Bryan

Tucson's ballot initiative to peg the ratio of emergency personnel to population seems to me to be the latest iteration of populist discontent being cynically used to snatch at political power while denigrating and disempowering representative democracy.

Too frequently over the past few decades we have seen progressive institutions such as the ballot initiative used to tie the hands of representative government. There are many examples of extremely unwise, but politically facile policy created using populist sentiments: the Prop 13 property tax freeze in California and the disastrous Taxpayer's Bill of Rights arbitrarily limiting the growth of government expenditures in Colorado being chief among them.

In each case, what seems like an easy fix for the difficult and messy business of governance is sold as patent medicine for what ails the body politic. Only later does it become apparent the snake oil contains toxic waste.

There are no easy answers or simple formulas for good governance. Wise policy requires democratic debate and tough deliberation over alternatives, not simplistic slogans and expedient but static 'fixes'.

Every time that the populists tout their latest gee-wiz gew-gaw, they chip away at the power and accountability of representative democracy. By taking the power to make policy and actually govern out of the hands of our elected representatives, we only assure that the accountability and esteem of our elected representatives will further decline.

This latest iteration of this populist disease is the Public Safety First! initiative. By arbitrarily requiring a particular ratio of emergency personnel to population, the representative system by which public preferences for such matters ought to be expressed is bypassed. The fact that all the Republican challengers support this attempt to remove public safety decisions from the very democratically elected body they are seeking to become members of should tell you something about their opinion of the institution, and their philosophy of government.

What gets lost in all the rhetoric about crime in Tucson is that Arizona's communities already spend the most per capita of any state in the nation on crime control, save Nevada. Our communities already struggle under a high financial burden, yet those supporting Prop 200 would have us spend even more in vain.

Reductions in crime will not come from more police and more courts and more prisons. Effective crime control will come from better education, more economic opportunity, a vital civic community, and strong families. Prop 200 does nothing to pursue those goals; indeed, it only assures that less resources are available for those priorities.

The last thing we should do is hand representative political power to those who do not value or respect it, or worse, advocate to strip our democratic institutions of their powers. We cannot fix complex social problems with the blunt instruments of funding formulas and populist slogans. 

It is the American way to solve our problems by confronting them as a free and democratic society, served by those among us who are genuinely interested in coming together to debate and negotiate the best solutions possible. Representative democracy is a wonderful and powerful institution, we mustn't allow rank populist rage to bleed it of its vitality.

Arizona's Own Death Panels

by Michael Bryan

You would think that the idea of condemning people to death by withholding medical treatment would be pretty abhorrent to just about everyone. That is certainly what conservatives are banking on with their invocation of mythical 'death panels' that was supposedly a feature of the health reform legislation before Congress.

You would think, then, that they would be rather sensitive of anything that smacks of euthanasia here at home. You would be wrong. Here in Arizona it is perfectly legal to let a person who cannot care for himself die by withholding medical care - as long as you pray for them to be miraculously healed.

Many states have statutes that make it a crime to allow a vulnerable adult or child to come to harm through neglect, including withholding needed medical care. A vulnerable adult is mentally or physically impaired person who cannot protect himself from neglect, abuse, or exploitation, such as a person who is gravely ill. Here in Arizona that statute is the Child and Vulnerable Adult Abuse Act.

However, there are some exceptions to criminal liability for allowing harm to come to vulnerable adults. One is, sensibly, medical providers who are withholding care pursuant to the patient's own refusal or an advance health care directive.

The second is quite extraordinary:

"E. This section does not apply to:

...

2. A vulnerable adult who is being furnished spiritual treatment through prayer alone and who would not otherwise be considered to be abused, neglected or endangered if medical treatment were being furnished."

So, in Arizona, you can withhold needed medical care that would save a person's life, even if they don't consent, so long as you pray for them.

Maybe health insurance companies should set up prayer groups to pray for the recovery of the folks they deny treatment through pre-existing rulings and rescission of their policies. We could call those prayer groups 'death panels' with a straight face.

To me, this exception is outrageous. Are Christian Scientists such a powerful lobby in Arizona that their wacky beliefs about medicine merit an exception in our criminal code? Note that this exception doesn't apply to children, just vulnerable adults. It's not OK to let your children die by denying them medical care, but grandma is fair game, apparently. Or were Arizona's conservatives looking ahead to day when insurance companies needed a cheap way to get away with the moral equivalent of murder?

"Yeah, we denied that life-saving procedure and the patient died, but we prayed for him to get better!"

I wonder how many conservatives will jump to the defense of Arizona's own 'death panels' of the prayerful in the comments?

Democrats' Citizenship Will Be Tested - oh, and Mike Returns

by Michael Bryan

The Obama Administration will test Democrats' in ways that being the loyal opposition during the lost Bush years never could.

We were righteous. We were powerless. We were vindicated. We were innocent. Now, with Obama in the Oval and Democrats in utter control of Congress, we are none of those things. Suddenly, the Democratic Party and its elected officials can shape the world; the question now arises, what happens when what is created is not to our liking?

We knew what to do when the detested Bush and his party of greed and hypocrisy were in charge: march, organize, shout, condemn, etc. But what shall Democrats do when they disagree whole-heartedly with what the Democratic caucus and President Obama are up to?

The temptation is to become apologists for their actions. Research has shown clearly that partisans, confronted with facts that demonstrate hypocrisy by one of their own, will rationalize it away - smooth it over mentally to make it more comfortable. It is much harder to remain open-minded, cleave to your values, and condemn those actions.

Rationalizing away uncomfortable facts is what partisans and politicians do. Making compromises, seeing the other side, achieving what seems possible: this is the role of politicians.

Following your conscience, articulating marginalized (i.e., rationalized away) views, and demanding what you believe is right - even if what is right seems impossible: this is the role of a citizen. Many of us who believed naively that everything would be fine once Democrats were in charge are now going to have our ability to put our citizenship ahead of our partisanship severely tested.

AfPak, detainees, torture prosecutions, Abu photos, Congressional investigations, mountaintop removal, etc.: there is fault out there to find.

There are many very difficult problems that have been left for our creaky and balky political system to deal with. And like it or not, fair or not, Democrats have been left with the responsibility and duty to try to address these many complex and intractable problems. I believe that, within the constraints of their roles, our representatives in Congress and our President will attempt in good faith to resolve these many problems - and frequently they will get it dead wrong. What to do?

I believe that those of who have the interest and inclination to follow public affairs should react as citizens, not just as partisans. We should not rationalize and defend. We should oppose, and explain why.

I write this defense of citizenship because, obviously, I find myself frequently in disagreement with the decisions taken by the elected representatives of my party, including my President. That doesn't mean I don't support my party, or that I wish others to take power instead; it means that as a citizen, I feel it my duty to explain why I think they are wrong, and not to rationalize away my discomfort at finding myself at odds with my faction.

With this ideal of citizenship foremost on my mind, I once again take up my pen. Some of you might have noticed that I have written infrequently on this blog over the past several months. The reason is that I discovered, in the rudest, most abrupt fashion, that I have a heart condition. I needed all my energy to heal, return to normal life, and adjust to managing the problem. Even now, daily life frequently takes everything I have, leaving nothing for this forum. But I hope that as I recover and gain momentum, I will more frequently be a contributor to this forum, rather than mainly an enthusiastic and grateful reader.

David Safier and Arizona Blue Meanie, along with the occasional contributions of a few others, have exceeded my wildest expectations. They have more than filled in, they have transformed and enriched this blog. My most heart-felt thanks to them. Readership is higher than it has ever been while not in the thick of an election cycle. If fact, I imagine that, to many readers, they are the blog - not I. And that's wonderful.

It is perhaps the most satisfying thing about any endeavor to see it grow beyond you. This blog is no longer just about me; it is a forum that has found purpose beyond merely serving as a conduit for my own opinions. I welcome and embrace that. Of course, my opinion will still appear here, but I hope that so will those of others who are deeply concerned about public policy and have a desire to reach out to Arizona progressive community.

A Matter of Honor - Taking Care of Veterans

by John Adams

The rest of the country is finally learning what Arizonans have known for 26 years: John McCain can’t be trusted.

At the September 26 Presidential Debate, McCain claimed, “The veterans know I’ll take care of them.” Americans stand together in honoring John McCain as a veteran himself, but his negligent record in the US Senate reveals that McCain doesn’t stand with veterans. In fact, McCain’s legislative record of taking care of veterans is abysmal. The non-partisan Disabled American Veterans (DAV) gives McCain a 20% rating of his performance on veterans’ issues in the Senate (Barack Obama earns a DAV score of 80%...here's the DAV website to check the details for yourself:  http://capwiz.com/dav/keyvotes.xc/?lvl=C).

What can veterans expect from would-be President McCain? His Senate record displays his lack of trustworthiness.

Barack Obama, on the other hand, has consistently and powerfully represented veterans – both as an Illinois legislator as well as United States Senator. As evidenced by his legislative record, Obama keeps faith with our veterans.

Here are just a few of the candidates’ votes on key veterans’ issues, contrasting the two candidates’ trustworthiness on veterans’ issues:

- Obama was one of 57 co-sponsors (along with Joe Biden) of the Webb GI Bill, signed into law this past June 30. In contrast, McCain not only failed to support the bill, claiming that it was too generous; he didn’t even show up in the Senate to vote on it.

- Obama introduced a bill in April 2007 to provide housing for low-income veterans (Homes for Heroes Act). Again, McCain didn’t show up for the vote. This version of the Homes for Heroes Act died, though a similar follow-up bill fortunately awaits a new vote in the Senate.

- In 2006, Obama voted for two amendments to increase funds for veterans’ medical care by $1.5 billion and expand funding for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) outpatient treatment by $450 million. McCain voted no on both; the veterans’ medical care amendment died; the outpatient treatment amendment passed.

- In 2005, Obama voted for an amendment to increase funding for veterans medical care by $2.8 billion in 2006, and setting aside $10 million for veterans counseling services. Again, McCain voted no; this amendment died.

McCain’s claims that he’ll take care of veterans are contradicted by his record as a Senator. We need a President who will honor our veterans, not someone who glibly double-talks on the campaign trail.

Those who risk their lives to defend our country deserve Americans’ support when they come home. Barack Obama’s record shows that he is someone who consistently supports veterans’ issues, but most important, Obama has kept a bond of trust with veterans to honor their service.

And after all, isn’t trust that the most important criterion for us to consider as we select our next President?

James E. Lamb, Jr.: What I Learned Running Ephraim Cruz's LD 29 Campaign

Editor: I asked James to reflect on his experience running a local legislative race, this is the report he filed.

By James E. Lamb, Jr.

Make no mistake – Tucson Democrats rejected my candidate, Ephraim Cruz. Out of seven candidates, Mr. Cruz won sixth place, only ahead of the nonexistent campaign of Gil Guerra. Yet our campaign visited over five thousand households in District 29, spent $21,875.00 in campaign funds, and mobilized volunteers throughout the blistering summer months to contact voters directly about Ephraim Cruz’s message for change in Southern Arizona. Our mechanics proved effective; voters heard our radio advertisements, saw our television commercial, received our mailing, read our flyers, noticed our door hangers, and spoke with our campaign volunteers, often on multiple occasions.  None of it worked.

For five months this year, I served as Ephraim Cruz’s Campaign Manager, and devised and executed Cruz for District 29’s strategy and ground operations during the District 29 Democratic Party primary. Since September 2nd, I’ve grappled with one major question: what does the outcome of the District 29 Democratic Party State Representative primary say about local politics? I fear that Ephraim Cruz’s sobering loss in the September 2nd Democratic Party primary speaks to our community’s failures to forge and maintain an open and diverse Pima County Democratic Party, where local progressives, liberals and moderate Democrats band together to solve our community’s problems, including abysmal state spending on public education, disheartening unemployment and underemployment concerns, and serious misuse of our state’s finite natural resources.

Yes, the Democratic Party’s foremost interest involves electing Democrats to public office, but each and every one of us should scrutinize our electoral candidates to ensure that the Democrats we elect are the Democrats we need. I supported Ephraim Cruz because Ephraim Cruz is a Democrat who fought for those without power and privilege under our system, who suffered loss of income, influence and reputation to respect the human and civil rights of those less fortunate. Ephraim Cruz is a good man, but good men often make terrible candidates for higher office. None of us desire the Democrat who simply parrots liberal talking points before liberal audiences like a patronizing Pinocchio jerkily animated by a low-budget James Carville wannabe in Geppetto drag.

Bottom line: a local campaign revolves around using political action to help one’s neighbors. Most political candidates sound inauthentic, flat, and bored with their own dogma because candidates begin their unlikely sojourn in local politics filled with immense ambition and little else. Certainly Democratic candidates are decent folk who want clean air, low health insurance premiums for all and microwavable chicken dinners in every refrigerator, but most begin their campaigns with a benign abstractness about the entire deal, outside of their pet projects. Then they can’t shut up.

If you haven't seen the debate (streaming video), you should: one candidate pontificates like he’s the world’s foremost expert on immigration policy, another waxes philosophical on legislative minutia. One candidate pleases every special interest group in attendance, a sycophant to both the AFL-CIO and Greenpeace, and another reiterates his credentials and signature issue every two seconds like a skipping Celine Dion compact disc.

Pet projects alone do not imply a sensible, community-focused grasp of local public policy. Attending that debate was like watching cable television with an eleven year old Halo aficionado raised on Pop Tarts and Pop Rocks, all sugar rush and no staying power. One second Jorge Ramos debates militarized borders with Lou Dobbs, the next Luca and Abby fight to save their newborn baby on a syndicated episode of ER. It was ridiculous. Candidates talked past each other and their intended audience, with dissonant white noise the only discernible sound. The debate was a comically insane and wholly typical exchange of domestic Southern Arizona policy proscriptions, all the more laughable because only the barest fraction of the candidate’s proposals had anything to do with the residents of District 29.

Want to know what I learned? Our elected officials should reflect who we are and where we live. Anyone who purports to represent your interests should be able to logically and succinctly discuss those interests in public, and not himself ad nauseam. Local elections, in my opinion, are the largest contributor to voter apathy, because here the orthodox political commentary monopoly respects only pathetic micro-targeting and closed-circuit networking campaigns when candidates win friends and influence voters. Nothing more.

Average voters are not seriously asked to participate – not by their local media, and not by their local political parties. It’s not hard to get people interested: talk about what they care about, not what the Sierra Club or Planned Parenthood or the Arizona Education Association wants you to care about. In District 29, no one cares about the food you grow at home or the hybrid car you drive – especially when a collegiate student body president is shot a few blocks from where you live. Don’t tell me about the bed and breakfast statutes you’ve changed during your time in office when Tucsonans are laid off from their jobs all over.

Frankly, it became too simple to ignore the interests of the residents of District 29 in the mad dash to appeal to the small subset of plugged-in, Establishment Democratic voters in District 29 – invariably elderly, White voters who enjoy the leisure of middle-class retirement. You can learn all manner of useful information about a place just by walking around the neighborhood, and I learned that much of South and Southeast Tucson is filled with neglected neighborhoods, where people fend for themselves and nothing ever really changes.

I’ll never forget: one Saturday my girlfriend and I canvassed Democrats in a South Tucson neighborhood filled with Richard Elias & Ramon Valadez signs, pit bulls, iron barred windows, liquor stores, and eight foot tall wire and iron fencing around every home. Every single home. You can’t canvass folk you can’t reach, and the dogs and fences obstructed more than we would have liked. Throughout that day, however, the Unisource Energy Tower, the tallest office building I’ve seen in Tucson, home to the New York Life Insurance Company, thrust itself above these lower middle class homes, a mocking portrait of glass and steel opulence, Southern Arizona’s answer to Mount Olympus.

That’s the most galling part of this story. We Democrats know the local problems, and how to fix them. When schools suffer from anemic public funding and nonexistent public interest, we Democrats know who is hurt, and who is hurt most abundantly. We Democrats know who is most affected by rising gas prices and urban sprawl. We Democrats know who has health insurance, and who needs AHCCCS. We Democrats know that in Tucson, statistically speaking, the darker one’s skin, the smaller one’s opportunity.

But we steadfastly refuse to discuss these issues during election season, to inform our fellow citizens of the reasons economic calamities befall them, and what they can do about it. We allow our elections to revolve around the simple and the mundane, the meaningless and the comical, the prurient and the personal. We cheapen the suffrage too many fight and bleed and die for when our politics devolves into the childish bickering and underdeveloped thinking that usually characterize local politics throughout our tortured and resilient county.

All the election integrity advocates in Pima County have it wrong. I do not doubt their sincerity when they push for clean and fair and auditable elections, but the most glaring and serious threat to local democracy in Pima County is voter apathy. People do not care about voting in Tucson. What Brad Nelson and Chuck Huckleberry do with the vote after its cast isn’t really relevant when the vote itself approaches numerical insignificance. All the suppression in the world isn’t as strong as a voter’s conviction that his vote does not matter enough to change anything.

In District 29, 31,588 citizens are registered Democrats, yet only 8,797 voted in the September 2nd primary, with seven candidates. I toured polling places throughout District 29 on election day, only to find that with only a few hours left at some of the largest districts, barely fifty or sixty people total showed up to vote all day long. Really, if a voter didn’t already personally know a candidate, or have some connection to the local Democratic Party or a local special interest group, chances are they didn’t even know that September 2nd was Election Day.

Senator Barack Obama famously ripped author Alice Walker in a recent speech when he pronounced “We are the change we’ve been waiting for!” Maybe that’s true. But we are also the problem we’ve been avoiding. Public outreach to increase both registered Democrats and voter turnout could provide the majorities we need in Phoenix to actually fix the public education and health care access issues that so plague this state. Get involved.

Bush Abetted Subprime Predators, Spitzer Political Assassination Retaliation for Whistleblowing

I take everything on Brasscheck with a bovine salt lick, but this is a straight-ahead report on Spitzer's accusation of the Bush Office of the Comptroller of the Currency's interference with States' efforts to combat predatory lending and Spitzer's eventual demise by leak of secret Grand Jury evidence. Incidentally, it brings up a key component in the institutional failure of regulations that allowed the whole financial meltdown to get rolling and places blame exactly where it belongs: on Bush and the GOP.

From Brasscheck TV:

Tucson's Sheila Tobias on What if Sara Palin Became President?

One of Tucson's treasures, Sheila Tobias, gives her view of the prospect of Sara Palin as President of the United States:

Duelling Conventions Answer Key Questions

by John Adams

We have seen the past two weeks the best presentation of our Party’s message in Denver, contrasted with the best presentation the Republicans could muster in St. Paul. The results are starkly impressive.

Let’s consider some of the questions posed about our two Campaigns just a few short weeks ago...and answered so well by the duelling Conventions.

Can our Democratic Party unite?  Honestly, can anyone who watched the collective leadership of our Party speak at Denver seriously question whether we are united today?

Does our Party have the national security credentials to keep America safe in this dangerous world?  Not only did we put national security issues -- and endorsements of veterans, military leaders, and national security policymakers -- front-and-center last week in Denver, but it’s clear once again from McCain’s bellicose and feckless rhetoric on Georgia these past weeks that he has neither the temperament nor the strategic sense to deal with the critical questions of war and peace.

Barack Obama’s national security message at Denver was three-fold, highlighting his judgment, competence, and most of all trustworthiness in addressing American national security.  Barack knows that American national security is related to both the strength and intelligence with which America addresses complex challenges of this century.  And Barack knows we need to muster all elements of our national power, including a strong, ready military, but reserving it for the last resort, after we’ve tried diplomacy and all the other tools at our disposal.  For their part, veterans know, as is obvious from the numerous powerful endorsements in Denver, that they can trust Barack Obama to honor their service when they come home. Growing thousands of national security experts, veterans and family members, many of whom were out front in Denver, are adding their enthusiastic endorsement of Barack as our next Commander-in-Chief.

Contrast this with the central message of John McCain…that the belligerent and reckless strategy of the Bush Administration over the past eight years should not only be continued, but that it was too timid. If you listened to McCain pop off in Fall 2001, we should have attacked Iraq, Iran and Syria in response to 9-11. If you listened to McCain in 2003, our adversaries included France and Germany in addition to Iraq. John McCain wants to keep American troops in Iraq for as much as 100 years. And John McCain actually jokes publicly about bombing Iran. Simply speaking, John McCain lacks strategic sense, and lacks the temperament befitting a Commander-in-Chief.

And what about McCain’s allegations these past months that Barack lacks experience? Well, John McCain must have had a senior moment last Friday when he settled on Sarah Palin’s resume.

Again, nothing is more important for a President than the decisions on war and peace…and for this reason alone, McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin is alarming. Yes, as the renowned Fox News scholar Steve Doucy has said, she is the governor of Alaska which is next to Russia. Some recommendation.

Palin is truly a foreign policy blank slate, ripe for neocon engraving.

Actuarial tables and American history tell us that Palin has a nearly even chance of acceding to the Presidency…in McCain’s first term. In selecting Palin, John McCain confirmed once again that his judgment is seriously impaired.

So truly, we Democrats had a great Convention…full of substance and full of energy. We are fired up and ready to go!

We have a powerful, compelling message for the American people and the world, that addresses the real challenges Americans face at home and abroad. We have brilliant, convincing nominees in Barack Obama and Joe Biden…and they’re out front in the polls as well as in the electoral vote forecasts.

We’re going to coast to victory in November, right?

Unfortunately, assuming victory at this stage is absolute lunacy.

Not only are the stakes far too high to take anything for granted, but we can expect the Republicans to do whatever they have to do to retain the White House. They will pull out all the stops.

And the greatest enemy we face is not the Republicans, but voter apathy.

The real lesson of the duelling Conventions, for this first-time Delegate, is that now more than ever, it’s important to take the energy, the enthusiasm, the issues, and the facts back home to our neighborhoods here in Arizona. The work that good Democrats do every day, the canvassing, the phone-banking, the discussions with your friends and neighbors…that hard work is what will get us to victory in November.

Our hard work will bring John McCain “home”, wherever that is, because we must not let him occupy the White House.

And only our hard work will elect Barack Obama the next President of the United States.

We will win this election, not because the polls and pundits say we will, but because of the hard work of everyone in the Party, pulling together these next few weeks. For my part, I’m looking forward to marching with you, to our battle with the Republicans, and to our victory in November.

"It's Not About Me, It's About You"

by John Adams

Dateline Denver...the inspiration of Day 4 was matched only by the determination, shared among tens of thousands at Invesco, and tens of millions who watched, to work for the change we deserve, and the change we need.  We know it's up to all of us, together, to make the difference on November 4.  We know we must ensure we awake on November 5 to the promise of a new dawn.

Speech after speech, message after message, motivated the audience...yes, it was a celebration, but more than that, a call to action.  This was a working convention.

We know what change is, and that Barack is singularly prepared to lead this country.  He has the judgment, the experience, and the character to be our President, and our Commander-in-Chief.

And we know what change isn't, and that John McCain has abetted George Bush's destructive presidency.  McCain has shown by his reckless and dangerous foreign policy blunders, and his disregard for the plight of the American people, that he deserves to be out to pasture.

A few observations from others with whom I spoke at Senator Barack Obama's Acceptance of the Nomination for President:

US Representative Joe Sestak, Seventh Congressional District, Pennsylvania:  "Many have said that Barack Obama needs to introduce himself to the American people.  He's certainly done so.  But this election will be won by the candidate that can demonstrate to the American people that he knows them."

US Representative Patrick Murphy, Eighth Congressional District, Pennsylvania:  "As an Iraq US Army combat veteran myself, I want a Commander-in-Chief who knows how to take care of troops, while they're in combat, and when they come home.  Barack Obama takes care of troops; he's there for them.  We trust him on foreign policy and on veterans' issues."

General Wesley Clark, US Army (Retired), former Supreme Allied Commander Europe and Commander-in-Chief, US European Command:  "We can expect almost anything from the Republicans, to try and divert attention from the achievements of this convention, and to distract from the issues."

General Merrill "Tony" McPeak, US Air Force (Retired), former Chief of Staff of the Air Force:  "I'm feeling great about where this campaign is.  After this convention, and these past months of campaigning, I don't think there are many Americans who don't know who Barack Obama is.  I think the issues that will resonate this election will be 49 percent economic; the rest will be national security.  We need a hard focus on the economic issues, because that's what the American people expect.  The national security debate is hugely important, but Americans are looking for a President that understands how to fix the economy, and can do the job.  Barack's A-Game is just getting started...just you wait!"

Dan Abrams, Chief Legal Correspondent, MSNBC:  "This convention has an energy I've never seen before."

Lorin Dealey, Assistant Communications Director, Obama-Biden Campaign:  "Barack's first challenge is to restore the faith of the American people in our government, in trust.  We have a government that knows everything about us, but about which we know very little.  They read our emails, but we don't know what goes on behind their closed doors.  I trust Barack Obama to restore our faith in our own government."

To follow-up on Joe Sestak's observation, the great success of this Convention has been to give the American people that sense that Barack Obama knows them, and that they can trust him.  That's going to make the difference in November in our battle for the White House.

And as Barack has said so many times, this movement is not about him, it's about us.  This is our Time.

The Southern Arizona Team is Fired Up and Ready to Go!

We're All Fired Up and Ready to Go!!!

It's Official -- We Are Family

by John Adams

Dateline Denver...this really is a family affair, from the Kennedys to the Clintons to the Bidens to the Obamas -- to the Democratic Party.

The theme for the Convention week is drawing a stark contrast between the More of the Same offered by McCain, and the Change We Need offered by Barack.  However, I'd say at least as important this week and especially tonight is the feeling of Convention participants that they are part of a family, with consequent family responsibilities, family pride, and a family's sense of what needs to be done to bind together in adversity.

As Joe Biden said tonight, "Americans have been knocked down by the Bush Administration; now we have to pick ourselves up."

Everyone in the Convention Hall eagerly anticipated Bill Clinton's speech tonight, and we weren't disappointed.  It was as if he had a conversation with each of us in the audience...inspiring us to work together for victory in November.  He's powerful and at the same time ingeniously witty.  At one point, in what had to be an unscripted response to the mass cheers of "Yes We Can" he remarked, "We've got to elect Barack Obama first."  He is the rhetorical master of turn-of-phrase, to wit:  "We must lead by the power of our example, rather than by the example of our power."  Bill Clinton's going to be a huge asset to Barack Obama this Fall, and we'll all need his wisdom and talents as we heal the destruction brought to our country by the Bush Administration.  We will incur incalculable damage if we allow this Administration to rule America for four more years.

In his acceptance speech, Joe Biden emphasized that we have a choice between the failed policies represented by John McCain and the prospect of positive change represented by Barack Obama.  The choices for the American people are stark -- whether we're considering foreign policy, the economy, energy independence, or the state of our educational system.  In all these areas, the Republicans -- with John McCain as Bush's sidekick -- have failed the American people. 

It's time to pick ourselves back up and seize the opportunity for change represented by Barack Obama.

Tomorrow night is Barack's acceptance speech -- I can't wait!

On the Attack

by John Adams

Dateline Denver...on Tuesday evening the Party launched a blistering attack on John McCain...if Monday was about who we are as Democrats, Tuesday was about taking the offensive -- together -- to defeat John McCain and the Republicans this Fall.

As an Arizona Delegate, I couldn't have been more proud of our Governor who delivered one of the sharpest, most direct attacks of the evening against John McCain.  Granted, we in Arizona have the misfortune of hosting his "home state offices" (though of course, he's as absent from business on the part of his constituency as he is from the Senate floor).  But as Janet Napolitano said last night, we're not sure what home he'll return to in Arizona, but we know we can't let McCain take up residence at the White House.

Her speech, followed by several other eloquent, rousing attacks against John McCain, culminated in a magnificent call to action by Hillary Clinton...I heard many remark after the speech that if she had spoken that powerfully during the primaries, the results might have been different.  But no question about it, her speech and her inspiration pulled in the entire Convention Hall last night, leaving no-one in any doubt about the imperative to drive the Republicans out of the White House, send John McCain out to pasture, and elect Barack Obama as our Commander-in-Chief.

Being a gathering of elected officials, party activists, politico's, and just-plain-interested from across the country and around the world, you can imagine the number of off-site gatherings in Denver.  Of particular interest to me as a Veteran are the number of national security events in and around the Convention.  Yesterday was a treasure...the opportunity to participate in a small group discussion with Barack Obama's chief foreign policy advisor, Dr. Susan Rice, on the issue of the Georgia-Russia conflict; to attend a seminar discussion with former Secretary of Defense William Perry, former Secretary of the Navy (and national security advisor to Barack Obama) Richard Danzig, and to participate in the formal Veterans and Military Family Members Caucus at the Convention.  I can tell you that two themes dominated all our discussions:  1) our need to elect Barack Obama as our President, a Commander-in-Chief who understands the 21st Century challenges facing our country, and 2) our need to prevent John McCain, a man whose only consistencies are his reckless and dangerous policies, from entering the White House.

A couple of impressions from participants and observers of the Convention:

- Omar Adams, Delegate from Minnesota:  "Just being here is a family event...it helps that my mother is here as a Delegate too.  But after last night's speech by Michelle, and the gathering of the Kennedy, Clinton, and Obama families, we're all feeling a sense of family unity as we get ready for the next two months."

- A friend of more than 30 years who currently works in the Office of the Secretary of Defense in the Pentagon:  "Great to see the Party go on the attack on Day 2.  We've got to keep Mad John from getting to the White House.  As bad as the current policies are for the United States, he'll make our situation much worse.  After the blow-up in Georgia, we in the Pentagon are dealing with the aftermath of his bellicose and useless rhetoric about Russia, when we need to focus on how best to deal with a serious challenge.  But that's McCain shooting from the hip as usual."

- Yane Kone, immigrant from Mali, met outside the Pepsi Center: "I'm excited about Barack Obama.  My family and I came from Mali six years ago, I've got a job, and we're just getting by in Denver.  We know Barack Obama would be good for this country and good for the world.  But I'm concerned that there may be some people who say they'll vote for Barack Obama but will not do so in the end.  I want to believe that America can elect an African-American, but I hope I won't be disappointed."

Kone reminded me that what we're doing here, celebratory though it is, has absolutely serious global impact.  We are here in Denver as part of a larger struggle for those who are doing their best just to make it day-to-day, perhaps not even able to participate in our political process, but who place their faith in us, the voting citizens of the United States, to actually follow through on our pledge to seize change.

For my part, I assured Mr. Kone that the energy and enthusiasm I and so many other Americans is real -- that Barack Obama is the best leader we have seen in decades and we really mean it when we say we want change.  But I also know, especially after the adversity that Mr. Kone has encountered in his own journey, that he's still wary. 

We must not disappoint Yane Kone, nor ourselves.  As Hillary Clinton so eloquently charged us last night, it's up to us to follow-through, to work to elect Barack Obama as our next President.

The world is counting on us to do our duty.

Who We Are

by John Adams

Dateline Denver...first night of the DNC.  Tonight was all about who we are as Democrats, and about who we nominate to lead this country out of the night of the past eight years.  We were treated to numerous moving, powerful, evocative speeches and images.

Not least of which was the beautifully planned marriage proposal -- on the Convention floor -- by Arizona Delegate Ruben Gallego to his now-fiancee, Kate Widman.  Perfectly timed to correspond with the other events of the evening, Ruben (who also serves as our Delegation whip -- he who orchestrates Delegation floor activities, including cheering and sign-waving) did us all proud -- and touched us -- in sharing this hugely important event!  Kate said yes...congratulations by all followed!

There were other wonderful, more public, moments...my favorite was when Ted Kennedy made his appearance, to the joy and universal respect of the Convention Hall.  And that after a beautiful speech by Caroline Kennedy...all of us shared the privilege just to witness this beautiful and touching moment in the history of the Kennedy family, and in the history of modern American politics.

And Michelle Obama's speech was magnificent...powerfully delivered, eloquent, and convincing.  We'll be fortunate to have a First Lady who understands and inspires the American people...as well as the President.

A few other Delegates' perceptions during the evening:

John Rayson, Florida:  "The Convention is our preparation for taking on the Republicans this Fall, and one of our challenges is to more fully introduce Barack Obama to the American people.  That's what tonight is about.  The Convention is also about building teamwork among the party leadership, harnessing the efforts toward the goal of winning the election."

David Hageman, North Carolina:  "My father's a US Navy officer, and used to be a strong supporter of John McCain.  He's still a Republican.  I'm not sure whether he'll vote for Obama this Fall, but he's thinking a lot about it, and he seems to understand why I'm so committed to Obama and to the change he represents."

Carolyn Wagner, Arizona:  "One of Obama's strengths will be that he'll encourage cooperation with our international partners, particularly the European Union, on a wide range of global issues."

As an aside, several of our concerned Delegates have created a website, http://www.FreeCindyMcCain.com to address the need to bring relief to the long-suffering wife of our senior Senator...visit if you get a chance before the Republicans trot the unfortunate pair out next week at the Republican Convention.

This first evening of our Convention was about telling the story of our heritage as a Party -- and about passing the torch to a new generation, as Ted Kennedy said, to Barack Obama and the movement for change he has ignited.  Tonight was both educational and inspirational...a great start for what promises to be an excellent staging ground for our battle to take our country back this Fall.

Now we need to take the offensive, to get on to Who They Are -- to provide the stark contrast between our Party's leadership and the destructive prospects of four more years of Republican disaster.

Real Heroes

by John Adams

Dateline Denver...the gavel goes down tomorrow afternoon in the Pepsi Center. 

Already there's huge energy building.  A rousing speech by National Chair Howard Dean welcomed the Delegates, honoring those who have suffered so much under the Bush Administration, and motivating us Delegates throughout all fifty states -- yes, especially Arizona! -- to work for victory this Fall, to take our country back.

A few brief observations:

- Great hospitality...everyone I met in the city was friendly and welcoming.  Denver's red carpet is out.

- Lots of security, everywhere.  Police from throughout Colorado are in Denver to keep the peace.  I like that just fine.

- Cool architecture downtown.  Like downtown Bisbee only bigger.

- Great spirit within the Arizona Delegation...forward-looking, ready to battle with the Republicans.

As I took the measure of the Convention scene today, the most moving experience I had was meeting Laura Dempsey, the Founder and Co-Chair of an organization of military spouses who support Barack for President, Blue Star Families for Obama.

Blue Star Families for Obama is a grass-roots organization of military spouses and family members.  Like the troops themselves, military families have sacrificed much these past years.  Like our troops, they have done their duty...steadfastly supporting their husbands, wives, parents, and children who serve us all so well.

No one can impugn the courage and dedication of our military.  They serve our Constitution with honor, determined to do their duty to the best of their ability.  And they have performed magnificently. 

Our troops are not responsible for the wrong-headed ideology that led us into the misadventures in Iraq.  On the contrary, our troops deserve immense credit for their heroism and their devotion to the Constitution.

And our troops' families serve as well, supporting, upholding, and sacrificing their own lives, families, and well-being for the cause of defending our national security.  Our troops' families know the costs of a war that should never have been fought.  They also know that we need a strong military, a military that can preserve our national security.  They want their sacrifices to be honored, and certainly not taken for granted.

Laura Dempsey and the hundreds of members of Blue Star Families for Obama are dedicated to electing a president who honors their sacrifices, who understands that we need a strong military, who will respect our troops, and who will guard our national security.

Our troops' family members are real heroes, as are our troops.  Meeting Laura Dempsey, and seeing the dedication of Blue Star Families for Obama, inspired me today as our Convention begins.

This week in Denver, the Democratic National Convention will honor our troops and their families, conveying respect and appreciation for all they have done.  The Convention will feature several events to highlight Barack Obama's plan to restore American security after the destruction of the Bush Administration.  And central to restoring our security is honoring the sacrifices of our troops and their family members.  Indeed, we must honor the sacrifices of those who serve our country...and in contrast to John McCain's casual disregard for our veterans and our national security, Barack Obama will keep faith with our military and their families. 

Barack Obama will restore our national security.

Blue Star Families for Obama is growing by the day...as more and more family members of our military realize that America's national security has been squandered by the wrong-headed Bush strategy, and that the Bush Administration has not only mortgaged American national security, but disrespected our military as well.  And John McCain promises more of the same. 

Our troops and their families yearn for the change that Barack Obama will give as our Commander-in-Chief...he will privilege America's security first, and he will honor the sacrifices of those who defend our country.

As for me, I'm moved by the dedication of these young military spouses of the Blue Star Families for Obama, forging a grass-roots movement on their own dime, and doing wonderful outreach to other military families to accelerate our movement for change.  Blue Star Families for Obama members are my heroes.

If you're a military family member, please join Star Families for Obama and join this growing movement for change, and for respect for our military.  Their website is:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/BlueStarsForObama

...It's Sunday, the day before the DNC gavel goes down...we're just getting started with staging our assault on the Republicans who have wrought such carnage on the American people.  With Barack Obama as our next President, we are going to take our country back. 

Arizona Week in Review

Some of you might have noticed that my posting has been rather slow of late. I hope that some of my fellow bloggers have been able to keep you informed and entertained, but I realize that Arizona political news and opinion has been rather too thin on the ground around here.

When I think about all the great stories in Arizona politics that deserve coverage and/or comment, I shrivel at the thought of all the posts that need to be written in so little time. And I end up not writing them.

So I'm going to take some of the pressure off by not demanding of myself that I write about everything in a separate post, but instead, throw everything that's been buzzing in my bonnet into a single weekly bout of blogorrhea. Sounds delightful, no? Well, then, here we go.

Bee Flees the Hive:

Perhaps the most fun of late is the on-going saga of how Bee is throwing his affiliation with the GOP under the bus: he tried not be photographed with Bush (though everyone knows he's using Bush to fund-raise, so, really, why bother? I guess the same reason we're not allowed to see pictures of dead American troops... some realities are just too harsh for mere citizens).

Furthering the story line is Bee's ads. Two of them so far and neither contains the words "GOP" or "Republican," instead using the line "Independence for a Change." Timmy, that seems rather derivative of and responsive to Giffords' tag "Because Change Can't Wait." Wow, with even conservatives wanting to run as change agents, and eshewing their party's label, it can't be more clear how utterly the GOP has fucked up.

Bee Stings Busy-Bodies:

Bee nixed the idea of an independent bi-partisan look into rule violations by Sen. Jack Harper to stop debate in the Arizona Senate so that the Gay Marriage Referendum could be considered. Standing in the breach to protect members of his caucus from accountability for dir1ty tricks isn't exactly the sort of co-operative, bi-partisan consensus building image that Bee is trying to sell to voters. Looks a lot more like "my party right or wrong" to me.

Endorse This:

It really grates on me to see elected officials taking sides in party primaries. The most irritating are Congressional primaries where Representatives from other districts endorse in a contested primary. Ann Kirkpatrick announced an endorsement from Harry Mitchell, adding to those she's already gotten from Governor Napolitano and Gabby Giffords.

It would annoy my immensely to have these folks stepping in to tell me who should represent my district if I lived in CD 1. It would annoy me were I supporter of another primary candidate. And it strikes me as an overbearing use of political influence on the part of the endorsers to try to determine the outcome of party primaries. Party officials can't be partial in this manner, why should far more visible and influential party members, our officer-holders, be allowed to play this divisive game? It's merely vanity and ambition, and I condemn it.

DiSimone Hits the Road:

Following an arrest on domestic violence, State Representative Mark DiSimone resigned from his office. I keep asking myself, "If Mark were a Republican, would I expect him to resign because of an allegation of domestic violence?" Just an allegation and arrest aren't really enough, in my opinion. A conviction would certainly do the trick. However, if you are a Republican, even a conviction for something as sordid as a DUI apparently isn't enough for Republicans to demand your resignation.

Mark maintains he didn't hit anyone, so why did he resign? Probably he's thinking of the good the Party and that his constituents should have the most effective advocate possible. Just another contrast between the way Democrats and Republicans approach politics and personal responsibility; and another chance for GOPers to demonstrate their double standards - one for us, and one for them.

Buddy, Can You Spare a TIME?:

Jim Nintzel has helped clarify this issue immensely for me by making sure to ask all and sundry for their positions on the TIME initiaitive, which adds a 1 cent sales tax to the state rate to pay for infrastructure. Having heard some of the most informed Democrats in the state express opinions on this, I feel I finally have a position on the matter.

I read the initiative (PDF) a few months ago (which is more than most will do) and my immediate reaction was "Great! But why a sales tax?" In Arizona we already have a high sales tax rate and are overly dependent on this cyclical revenue sources, which is why we have state revenue booms and busts that we try to even out with an inadequately-sized rainy-day fund (thank the GOP for cutting the fund's size). So, making our infrastructural development even more dependent on such a cyclical source strikes me as bad planning, and the regressive nature of sales taxes makes it bad policy, in my opinion.

Of course, I recognize the political constraints that shaped the TIME, but I don't think supporting something because their isn't currently a better option is politically useful: better to work to create better options than moot the issue by putting into place something that while useful, if unfair and far less than optimal. That's why I'm an idealist and critic, and not a politician. I don't get paid to compromise.

Those Democrats who support TIME (and only RINOs support it, because, you know, it's a tax!) make the bold claim that if you oppose it for the reasons I've given, you have to propose where we're going to get billions for infrastructure. No I don't. That's bullshit.

How about this: Democrats take over the State Legislature and pass some indexed gas taxes, some reasonable property taxes and impact fee allowances, and get rid of a whole bunch of corporate welfare, and we use that money to fund our infrastructure? Why isn't that a good plan? It's certainly a better plan that continuing to put the cost of government and investments for our future on the backs of the poorest and middle-class Arizonans.

The TIME would probably accomplish some good by addressing Arizona's worst infrastructural deficits (which Republicans have allowed to accumulate with their mania against taxes) but only at the cost of making Arizona's financial situation far more inequitable, and locking that inequity into the system for another generation. Better to fight to take back the government and fund infrastructure equitably, than just give up and allow the GOP to screw another generation with their misguided and plutocratic ideology. Politics isn't just the art of the possible, at it's best, it's also the art of the improbable. TIME is well intentioned, but it accepts the merely probable by playing by a set of political rules and constraints that are anti-theatrical to progressive governance. I can't support that.

Obamazona?:

Could Arizona become a battleground state in the Presidential election? With some polling putting Obama within single digits to McBush in the state, with a rich vein of independents and undecideds remaining to court, it is not outside the realm of possibility. With so much money being available to Obama, a few million to go on the air in Arizona and potentially embarrass McBush seems like a bargain. We will almost certainly get a few field organizers on the ground in AZ; maybe we'll even get a few events on a candidate swing through the state. With lots of new registrations and the Obama camapign energizing low-efficacy voters throughout the primary season, it seems that the traditional presidential campaign map may be changing. The very strong popularity of Obama in the Hispanic community (66% Obama, 23% McBush, 11% Undecided) could be a factor in pushing several Southwestern states, including AZ, into the blue this season.

Poor Joe:

Pity poor Maricopa County SheriffJoe Arpiao. Beaten in pinata-effigy by protesters at a book signing, his head came off and with carried about a bit by Pima County Legal Defender Isabel Garcia (full disclosure: Isabel used to be my boss). The rightwing rant radio and usual bug-eating-crazy suspects, got a hold of that and had a field day: calling for Isabel's firing by the Pima County Board, bar discipline, actual beheading... whatev.

Isabel and her pals have a perfect right to peacefully protest any way they like. What stikes me is 1) the Right's hypocritcal attack on free speech, and 2) the Right's quick retreat into victimhood.

The Right loves free speech: they hide their worst hate-speech behind it constantly. But let a liberal step out of line and express a controversial view and suddenly they boycott, and contact your boss to try to get you fired. No consequence they can possibly try to inflict, including a good beating, is out of bounds when a liberal says something the right doesn't like. Remember the Dixie Chicks? The digital brownshirts are on patrol. Don't ever forget which side of the political spectrum is constantly attacking that bulwark of the First Amendment, the ACLU.

The one area where I think Isabel and her friends made a mistake was providing an opportunity for Joe and his ractist buddies and supporters to play the victim. Reading the right wing coverage, if you didn't know the story intimately, you might think that Isabel's young friends had taken a stick to Sheriff Joe's very own carcass. Isabel and her krewe didn't attack Joe, they hit a pinata. But in making this symbolic gesture, they allowed Joe and the racists who stand with him to play the victim. There is nothing the Right adores more than the opportunity to play the victim.

It's inherent in the conservative psyche that they are constantly under attack and withstanding seige by the forces of chaos and corruption, i.e. everyone else. They thrive on their embattlement. They are always the victim, relatiating against the aggressors in their own minds: never attacking or acting as the oppressor, but merely the downtrodden defending themselves against outrageous and unjustified attacks. Even the shock-jock who promoted this story heavily, Jon Justice, is now taking the posture of victim in defense of his jack-ass antics.

This is why it is always a mistake to play into the Right's favorite narrative. Give them the slightest pretext to cast themselves and victims and martyrs, and they will riff on that theme for all they are worth. In the end, Isabel's protest probably generated a lot more sympathy and solidarity among Joe's supporters than awareness of Joe's abuses of the community he's supposed to protect. As such, it may have stregthened Joe's political support rather than undermined it, contrary to the protest's intent.

Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas Fighting to Keep His License Abetted By His Merry Band of Fools

Link: Thomas to high court: Make Bar back off.

Thomas is in deep poop. Poop deposited with his own shovel, it should be pointed out. He's going on the offensive against seven bar complaints filed against him stemming from his office's miserable handling of the New Times affair and his unprecedented and irresponsible attempt to have the chief of the Maricopa bench disqualified from hearing any criminal cases.

Couldn't happen to a more deserving fellow.

But the reason I felt a need to comment on Andy's on-going humiliation and long-past-due comeuppance is the way the media has framed the bar complaints, and the response it has drawn from some of our esteemed legislators.

The Media Framing:

Repeatedly I'm seeing the media note that there were 10 complaints pending against Andy and that 3 have already been dismissed. That's true, but it creates an impression that the complaints share a factual under-pinning, and thus it's inevitable that the remaining 7 will also be dismissed in short order.

That is manifestly not the case. The dismissed charges are completely unrelated to the shameful selective and retaliatory prosecution of the New Times and Andy's irresponsible ideologically-motivated attack on the Maricopa bench. The merits of the remaining 7 complaints are not in any way related to the dismissed 3. The only commonality among the 10 charges is that Thomas has run his office in a manner that draws Bar complaints like flies to... well, you know.

The Merry Band:

In an interesting turn of special pleading for their ideological brethren, the ideo-savants of our state legislature have endorsed the idea of turning over professional discipline to "an idependent agency" or the courts. I'll guarantee the courts don't want primary responsibility for bar discipline, and they already oversee it in an appellate capacity. The alternative is... you guessed it... bureaucrats. Probably politically-appointed, pointy-headed ones.

Funny how free-marketers seem always to turn to government in a pinch. They yowl about how industry should police itself at every turn, but when an industry does (with a great deal of effectiveness, and with a long track-record of success, I might add), they want to abolish it because they don't like the outcome for their fair-haired boy, Andy.

I think this about as good an idea of turning over professional oversight of doctors to insurance companies or some politically-motivated and unaccountable government agency. Real professionals involved in the delivery of professional services should preside over issues of professional responsibility and discipline. Only other practitioners, disciplined by election and oversight by their colleagues should be entrusted with the livlihoods and reputations of their fellow professionals.

The suggestion by the dolts in the legislature that it should be otherwise is an inexplicable rejection of time-tested good sense and the wisdom of tradition and experience that clearly indicates that these jokers are not any sort of conservatives, but societal vandals intent on only getting their own way and protecting their political allies at any cost. Real conservatives should be outraged and utterly disgusted by the venality and recklessness of this group of revolutionaries.

In case you are curious who these fools are, here's a list:

Sen. Robert Blendu
Sen. Bob Burns
Sen. Ron Gould
Sen. Chuck Gray (former police officer)
Sen. Linda Gray
Sen. Jack Harper
Sen. Karen Johnson (worked for a Sheriff)
Rep. Andy Biggs (attorney)
Rep. Judy Burges
Rep. Doug Clark
Rep. Eddie Farnsworth (attorney?)
Rep. John Kavanagh (doctorate, criminal justice)
Rep. Warde Nichols 
Rep. Russell Pearce (former police officer)
Rep. Steve Yarbrough (attorney)

These folks just lost the right to call themselves conservatives with a straight face.

My particular contempt and derision is reserved for those who, due to their background and training, should understand the importance and deep tradition of the self-regulation of the Bar. Those who are attorneys, yet blithely advocate that hundreds of years of tradition should be thrown over for the convenience of a little schmuck like Andy are deserving of particular scorn.

Those without legal or law enforcement training could possibly plead ignorance of the role which the self-regulation of the legal profession has played in preserving our freedoms and vindicating our rights as free citizens: they are merely ignorant fools, easily led into folly. Those who have been police officers, or are attorneys have no such excuse for their perfidy. They are simply contemptible, and wear the name "conservative" as a mask for their true natures as politicians without any discernible principles.

Memorial Day and Politics

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel"
-Samuel Johnson

"It is unpleasing to represent our affairs to our own disadvantage; yet it is necessary to shew the evils which we desire to be removed."
-Samuel Johnson

Men who disdained military service themselves asked American soldiers to die for a mission that shifts like the sand, but which objectively results in massive profits for a small number of politically-connected corporations.

Those who note this very salient fact on this day to honor those fallen are charged with politicizing a solemn day. But what honor is there without truth?

But it would be hypocrisy itself to commemorate the sacrifice of our service men and women, and not consider the profiteering and basely political purposes that cut short their lives.

Silence serves only the desire of the powerful that the people might not to notice that their sons and daughters are dying to line the pockets of a few. Those who complain of politicizing the inherently political act of warfare would surely want the people to remain respectfully silent about the politics that took our countrymen's lives. For what defense to such perfidies is there, except to attempt to shame those with the temerity to speak of the crimes of the powerful?

Indeed, such feigned umbrage at the mere mention of politics on this solemn day reeks of hypocrisy and stinks of the fear of discovery. Only those who wish us to ignore the scandalous profiteering that lies behind the occupation of Iraq would complain so loudly when one who has himself experienced the loss of a family member to this travesty points out that it was not duty solely his loved one died for, but also for Haliburton's quarterly profits.

It is those who stand by respectfully mute as this Administration defiles the sacrifice of so many who are failing to properly honor the dead. It is those who rush to silence the dissenters with cries of "For shame!" who dishonor those who sacrificed everything for that very freedom.

We will not be silent about crimes as base as these. Those who have given their all no longer have voices to protest. It is the duty of those left behind in this veil of tears to demand justice, and tell their truth. For the truth is the finest memorial we could give these honored dead.

Blue Tsunami

by Michael Bryan

The pundocracy is widely acknowledging that the 2008 election cycle is not likely to be kind to the GOP. In fact, most folks are expecting something of a perfect storm. I'm expecting a generational re-alignment. Not only will Obama win, he'll win huge: Reagan vs. Mondale huge. Not only will Democrats defend their Congressional majority, they will extend it by at least 30 more seats in the House (maybe as many as 60) and by 5 or more in the Senate.

What this means in Arizona is that Democrats will make pick-ups in AZ-1 and AZ-3 and successfully, even handily, defend recent gains in AZ-5 and AZ-8. AZ-2 and AZ-6 will be the last GOP hold-outs in the Arizona House delegation, mainly because the Democrats haven't chosen to put those districts in play. Obama may not win Arizona, but McCain won't have any coat-tails here. McCain certainly won't turn Arizona into a safe place to be a Republican, as many Republicans hope and pray.

We've already seen, through bye-elections in some very red districts, that McCain isn't having any positive effect on GOP chances nationally and linking Congressional Democrats to Obama in your messaging is the best favor you can do for your Democratic opponent.

The GOP 'brand' has been too profoundly damaged by the last 7 years of misrule to be easily restored. In fact, The very reason McCain is the nominee is because the GOP 'brand' simply isn't selling, so the Republicans nominated their 'maverick' to try to distance their 2008 campaign from the wreckage. Unfortunately for them, McCain was forced to make obeisance to so many core constituencies during the primary that he thereby severely damaged his credibility as a reformer - now he just looks like another GOP party hack who is just a bit more of a hypocrite than most.

I also expect new Democratic majorities in state houses across the country, including Arizona. We are only 4 seats away from taking the Arizona House, and I see a clear path to picking up more seats than we need just here in Southern Arizona, let alone pickup opportunities around the state. Phil Lopes will be our new Speaker of the House come 2009.

What dooms the GOP is the insistence of their base to hold fast to some of the least productive aspects of their discredited brand, even as their candidates are getting trounced by Dems for running on those very themes.

I see highly qualified and competent GOP candidates here locally who would have the most electoral appeal to Independents and moderate Dems having to tack strongly to the right on issues like taxes, guns, gays, and immigration just to stay afloat in primary contests. The very candidates who have the credibility and new ideas to rebuild the GOP brand at the grassroots level are being weeded out by their own party in pursuit of ideological purity. I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry. In the short term, the self-destructive behavior of Republicans benefits my own party electorally, but in the long-run it impoverishes our politics and deranges the national dialog.

The result of this chest-beating by Republican candidates for their discredited and deeply unpopular "movement conservative" constituents will be that the GOP's nominees will be way off message for the coming general elections, or their primaries will simply produce candidates who don't even realize how deeply their own party has been wounded. Such insular ideologues who never speak to anyone outside their party will be absolutely decimated in the current political environment.

Candidates who should be busy recreating the GOP brand around issues average people actually care about, are instead forced to chain themselves to the very cultural hot-button positions and consistently failed policy nostrums that voters are throwing overboard as economic hard times toss the ship of state. The result will be an electoral Armageddon for the GOP and the beginning of 40 years in the wilderness they so desperately need to purge their ranks of the fascists, racists, and kooks who have taken over and encouraged Republicans to worship false idols.

Those who say that the Democrats aren't winning this elections so much as the GOP is losing it are absolutely right. It won't matter much when the votes are counted: either way it's a bloodbath.

But there is much bad news in such a victory for Democrats. Many will learn the wrong lessons from it.

When an experimental animal is randomly rewarded it will associate completely random, even harmful behaviors with the reward and start repeating those behaviors obsessively in hopes of reward. Democrats are going to get a huge reward for engaging in the most politically useless and harmful behaviors. The result will be utter irrationality by my own party.

The lessons that our appartchikis will glean will be that Democrats won by staying on message and talking about the laundry list of programs and policies that "Americans care about", when the truth is that we will have won in spite of their nattering along about our list of legislative "accomplishments".

We could have run the current GOP coalition out of American political life permanently. We would have forced their remaining electorally-viable remnants to join with the Libertarians to rebuild something resembling a viable opposition party.  Had we rammed home just how terribly the GOP has screwed up our country through investigations of the manifold criminal enterprises of this Administration and a slew of impeachment hearings, we could have broken the GOP as thoroughly as the Whigs or the Mafia. But our leaders don't understood where the political jugular lies. Instead, we have folks like Nancy Pelosi to whom the political death sentence that the GOP so richly deserves is simply off the table.

Al Melvin Throws Down in Pima County

"It's like Hitler just invaded France," said a source in the moderate wing of the Pima County Republican Party of Joe Higgin's likely primary challenge of Ann Day for Supervisor in District 1.

That's not just Godwin's law in effect; my source only meant that a war that everyone knew was coming, and that many have been reluctant to fight, had finally arrived.

The war analogies kept coming, "what has been a cold war in the Party just went hot," said my deep throat.

As my source sees it, Al Melvin has just declared war on the establishment, pro-business, moderate Republicans with Higgin's entry into the race. Higgin is understood among Republican circles to be merely a stalking horse for Melvin with no hope of actually winning, but plenty of potential to make some joyful noise.

The newly declared war is for control of the Republican Party in Pima County. The establishment has been suffering the guerrilla attacks of the uber-conservatives for years now—taunting RINO hunts, primary challenges, a burgeoning far-right blog swarm, Graf's campaign against Kolbe and eventual nomination upon his retirement (and Kolbe's and the RNC's refusal to support that GOP nominee against a Democrat)—have all been skirmishes in the smoldering range war for the soul of the GOP in Pima and Arizona, more broadly.

Melvin's recruiting a movement conservative to challenge a GOP institution like Day was the last straw—or, more aptly, the assassin's bullet that set off a total war.

But perhaps Melvin has finally overplayed his hand. While Melvin is obviously hoping that a primary contest in the overlapping Supervisory District 1 will help stir his own base in his primary fight for Arizona Senate in LD 26 against moderate Republican Pete Hershberger, it could also finally prompt the establishment into a full scale counter-assault that could undermine Republican efforts to retake lost ground in LD 26.

If the GOP's civil war starts getting major press coverage, which a primary against Day is almost certain to attract, it could make what has been a quiet internal vendetta into a fully-fledged public feud. That could possibly distract or disgruntle voters in unrelated races where there is no primary challenge, like Bee's bid to retake CD 8 for the GOP.

Back to the military analogies: it's hard to take your objective without strategic unity of force. The Republican party nationally, state-wide, and now locally, is more divided against itself than it has been in recent memory as the cresting force of movement conservatism smashes into an establishment that has been willing to tolerate them only so long as they were winning elections.

And the movement conservatives haven't been winning, prompting movement conservatives to attack moderates even more vociferously in a zealous attempt at ritual purification of the Party to bring back the favor of the electoral gods. In reality, America is just fed up with the discredited anti-government politics of the far Right, even as anti-government dogma has become unquestionable in the GOP.

Voters' disgust plus a bewildering and vicious civil war in the Republican Party adds up to strategic advantage for Democrats at all levels. Most especially, Melvin's sneak attack on Ann Day (and by proxy the establishment of the Pima GOP) bodes well for the merry band of Democrats seeking to hold gains in LD 26.

I'm still on about flag pins...

OK, so I'm still on boil about this whole flag pin flap.

I'm not trying to demean George Stephanopoulos, who obviously feels passionately that one of the most pressing concerns of the day is understanding why Obama doesn't wear a flag pin, and what that means... What does he mean, what does it mean?  Does George have a flag pin?  He wasn't wearing one at the debate last night.  Neither was Hillary...WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT MEANS?

Alright, so maybe I am trying to demean him and all of ABC just a little.  But, seriously, if that is the most pressing issue they think we're facing today, can I just say, huh?  I've got bills to pay, a car to fill-up with gas I can't afford, and my check book looks like it's been in the hands of the Bush administration.

So, here's what I think we should do with flag pins.  (No, not that.)  I think we should have all of our politicians auction them off on E-Bay, with all proceeds going to say our schools?  Veterans? Affordable health care? Mortgage assistance for families? A balanced budget?

It'd be so patriotic, really.  A little capitalism, self-sacrifice, and service to our country, all in one.  Heck, it might even help stimulate economic growth.  Besides, if we don't do something now about this pressing issue, in four years, it'll be all about how "mine is bigger, than yours," and we don't want that.  We really, really don't want that.

Fact Checking John Munger

Posted by: AZBlueMeanie

How many readers actually watch the monthly "Face Off" segment between John Munger and Vince Rabago on Arizona Illustrated on KUAT?  Yeah, that's what I thought.  Just a handful of political junkies.  In case you missed the April segment, you can catch it on line at http://tv.azpm.org/kuat/segments/2008/4/14/kuat-the-face-off/

I feel oddly compelled to watch Arizona Illustrated just to see how my tax dollars are at work at PBS.  I am also curious to see what the legendary host Bill Buckmaster deems to be the most important political topics of the day.  I am often disappointed.

It has become difficult to watch the "Face Off" segment because of the disingenuous responses of John Munger and the physically hyperactive antics he engages in while ticking off the GOP talking points of the day that he has barely memorized well enough to do the segment.  Sometimes it looks as if his head is going to explode when he really gets agitated.  Calm down and take a deep breath, John.  You are demonstrating to the viewers that you lack the right temperament and emotional stability to serve as our next governor.

Munger habitually ticks off the GOP talking points of the day and self-proclaims them to be "just the facts."  Since no one knows in advance what wild-eyed craziness Munger is going to say before he actually says it, both Bill Buckmaster and Vince Rabago are at a disadvantage to challenge him on his alleged "facts" in real time. Munger's antics have undermined the intended purpose of the "Face Off" segment, i.e., a thoughtful and intelligent discussion of the political issues of the day.  The viewers are left misled or confused by the bogus "facts" cited in the disingenuous responses of Munger.

So as a public service to the political junkies who actually watch the "Face Off" segment, I will endeavor to provide you with a fact check of John Munger after each monthly segment.

Let's go to the video...