Saturday, March 17, 2007

Republicans in Denial, Part Infinity

The East Valley Tribune had a letter today's paper from some guy named Robert Lux in Scottsdale who thinks the world needs more Ann Coulters and Rush Limbaughs and that the Republicans are the party of small government.

Sure it is.

Had Mr. Lux been listening to the facts instead of the radio he would know the GOP is the “Big Government” party. The proof is the record-high federal budget deficit because President Bush did not veto a single GOP spending bill in his first six years in office. He would know that people are less supportive of the war in Iraq because the president and the GOP lied to us in the first place and allows things like Walter Reed Hospital to happen to wounded soldiers the GOP claims to support.

Had he been paying attention to the state capitol he would know the Arizona GOP controls the budget process, so his criticism should be aimed at Republicans, not Democrats. He would know that at a time when a growing state needs more prisons, roads, schools and support for its National Guard, the Arizona GOP wants to cut revenues. He would know it is the Arizona GOP that wanted to raid the state's Rainy Day Fund, the Arizona GOP that wants to take away citizen’s right to set legislator's pay, and the Arizona GOP that wants to limit the citizen's initiatives rights.

As your president says Mr. Lux, “Fool me once, shame, shame on me...Fool me twice...well, you don't get fooled again."

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Tax Cuts Promote Illegal Immigration

A different take on Republican tax policy and immigration.

It’s fairly clear that the Republicans have begun the 2008 election cycle. Randy Pullen’s comments about the “Governor and her Democrat pals,” the Arizona Federation of Taxpayers holding “Taxpayer Day” at the legislature, and the political posturing on taxes and immigration should hold more than enough proof. I’ve thought about this and I think we Democrats need to start loudly with our campaigns as well, and so I have an idea on how to start shooting holes in the Republican key issues of taxation and immigration by linking the two in one very clear ways. How can we do this? Here’s how.

As I mentioned, the Republicans and the Arizona Federation of Taxpayers are holding a confab at the capitol next week (March 15) to trot out one of their two issues: tax cuts. If you look at the flyer for the event, it lists as the first item “Passing income tax cuts to stimulate economic growth.” Apparently being the fastest growing state in the nation is insufficient economic growth for them, so they feel the need to push down the gas pedal even further to create new jobs, build more home developments, build more shopping centers, plant more trees, cut more lawns, etc. Think about that last sentence a moment. There are some significant impacts by having more economic growth. Especially in the creation of jobs in the construction and maintenance trades. Who do Republicans claim are taking all of these jobs?

Illegal immigrants.

So, the same policies that stimulate growth are the same ones that encourage workers to sneak into the United States to take those jobs. Put another way, tax cuts encourage illegal immigration.

Isn't that interesting. I wonder how many fire-breathing Republicans would do without tax cuts if it meant fewer illegal immigrants?

But then Republicans would not have any issues to run on.

Sunday, March 04, 2007

Clueless Conservatives

Have you seen or heard these statements lately? Are any of them true?

• "If we don't support the surge, the terrorists will win."

• "If we don't hunt down the illegal immigrants, our country will be taken over by Mexicans and we'll lose our sovereignty."

• "Teachers are polluting the minds of our young people."

• "Global warming is a con-job being perpetrated by liberals."

If you haven't, you need to get out more. These and other absurd statements are being treated as fact in the Arizona conservative community and the din of people repeating them in all media has increased greatly since the last election. There is nothing good about this and the Democrats need to get off their Asses and do something about countering these and other statements that damage our country and our state.

There's a new book by conservative talk show host Neal Boortz, who makes the declaration that he should not have to care about the poor, the national debt and other issues because "I am an individual." Apparently this is a county not "By the people and for the people," but "by the people and for the individual." This is common thinking in Arizona both on the extreme conservative side and the more crazed Libertarians. I've said it before and I'll continue to say it, the Republicans in the legislature are not Republicans in the Reagan sense. They are Libertarians in Republican clothing and they need to be exposed as such and we should not be bashful about it.

Democrats need to bombard the newspapers in Arizona with letters that expose these conservative beliefs as the misleading statements and lies they are. The party offices need to get people out in the public to vocally challenge each and every one of these statements and the legislators who spout them. For example, Thayer Verschoor, Karen Johnson, Russell Pearce, Jim Wieres, and others needs to have Democrats at each and every public meeting they attend to challenge their statements and to speak with moderates who will be there to disagree.

The 2008 election has begun. We need to register Democrats. We need to register Latinos as Democrats and those who are Republicans; we need to get them to change parties. If we don't get out there now, we stand a good chance of losing seats again. If that happens, shame on us.

Friday, March 02, 2007

SB1542: Verschoor's Opus to Ignorance

In the AZ blogs, Arizona Republic editorial writer Bob Schuster says that while he doesn't like Verschoor's bill, he supports the notion that too many liberals "use their podiums as bully pulpits to impose their left-wing orthodoxy on their impressionable captive audience." Sorry Bob, but I don't buy into your or Verschoor's argument. It's as if the teacher is in front of the class with a swaying pocket watch saying "You are going to be Democrats. You are going to be Democrats." Uh huh.

I was a middle and high school student in Ohio during the height of the Vietnam War. We talked about the war in social science class every week when we discussed current events. I don't recall any teacher at any point in time talking about being against the war. They knew we should form our own opinions and often took different sides on an issue just to make sure we knew the world wasn't black and white (or right and left like it is here).

We also lived 12 miles from Kent State, so the smell of teargas in our back yard and the fact that our teachers were prohibited by the National Guard from going to their homes in Kent (I wonder how Arizonans would feel about THAT) lent a slightly different perspective that, still, not a single one of our teachers spoke out against in class. This and other facts were not lost on us students.

As a precursor and effect of that event, we had popular songs on the radio like "War," "Ohio" and others that were allowed to be on the radio that told the story from a young person's perspective, unlike now when such songs would be considered "unpatriotic" regardless of the facts of the message. My, what a long way we've come...

I was in college during the Reagan years studying political science and I don't recall one professor who was a "crazy liberal" who was forcing their views on anyone. So I question whether the blanket assumption so many people make around here make that all college professors are "liberals" who are all "trying to impact elections" is purely anecdotal and has no significant basis in fact.

Can someone explain how a high school teacher can impact an election? Aren’t most high school students too young to vote? Apparently Verschoor thinks kids are going to go home and indoctrinate their parents, which to me indicates greater problems with the parents than the teacher. But passing laws based on hypothetical situations or some obscure example of one teacher says one thing to one class is overreacting--something Thayer Verschoor seems to do a lot.