Month: February 2014

The Arizona Republic: Sen. Gail Griffin is targeting Mexican gray wolves

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

When Tea-Publicans aren't targeting actual Mexicans with anti-immigrant legislation, they are targeting Mexican gray wolves for extinction. The Arizona Republic in a editorial opinion writes today, Stop targeting wolves, senator:

LobomexicanoPause for a moment and savor this: The population of endangered Mexican gray wolves in Arizona and New Mexico grew from 75 to 83 last year. That’s nearly double the 2009 count.

It’s a victory for our shared national values, which are expressed in the Endangered Species Act.

OK. Enough savoring. Now, back to a reality.

Lobos remain perilously close to extinction’s cliff, and Arizona’s Legislature is poised to give them a shove over the edge.

The Senate Government and Environment Committee approved three measures this week aimed at wolf reintroduction like a bullet to the brain.

SB 1211 would allow the Arizona Department of Agriculture or ranchers to kill wolves suspected of eating beef without fear of federal prosecution — an amnesty from federal law that Arizona lacks the authority to grant.

SB 1212 appropriates $250,000 from the general fund “for litigation expenses.” That’ll come in handy.

A resolution, SCR 1006, calls for shifting management of this endangered species from federal to state control and focusing reintroduction efforts on the mountains of Mexico. Because, of course, Arizona can dictate to the governments of two nations.

These measures are championed by Republican Sen. Gail Griffin. All passed the committee on party-line votes.

Sen. Gail Griffin wants a piece of Pima County for Rosemont Mine

by

Posted by AzblueMeanie:

On Tuesday, the Pima County Board of Supervisors voted to oppose the Rosemont Mine in Pima County. Supervisors OK formal objection to Rosemont Mine. "The Pima County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 Tuesday to send the Forest Service a formal objection to the agency’s tentative approval of the mine and its final environmental impact statement. The letter is expected to compel the federal agency to respond to Pima County’s long list of concerns over the planned copper mine in the Santa Rita Mountains."

Screenshot from 2014-02-05 14:30:31So Rosemont Mine and its supporters have proposed a novel idea: they will seize part of Pima County and give it to to Santa Cruz County, where they apparently believe people are more amenable to being bought off with Canadian "loonie" to approve their mine. This is some in-your-face corruption.

The Green Valley News reports, Griffin introduces bill to move Santa Cruz County line north:

State Sen. Gail Griffin on Tuesday breathed life into a bid to bring Green Valley, Sahuarita and the mines into Santa Cruz County, though the idea hasn't proven popular locally.

* * *

Griffin said she introduced the bill at the request of constituents, doesn't expect to have trouble getting it through the Legislature, and wants to hear “about any possible unintended consequences” it may bring about.

Griffin, a Republican whose District 14 skirts the eastern edge of Green Valley, introduced SB 1357, which would put a boundary change to a vote in Santa Cruz County and to those affected in southern Pima County.

That "constituent" is Emmit McGloughlin, " a former Tucson City Council member who now lives in Sonoita, and formed the Santa Cruz County Committee for Quality Jobs more than a year ago to explore moving the county line from Amado to Pima Mine Road, which is where Griffin's bill would put it."

Virginia is for Lovers: federal judge promises a decision ‘soon’

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

On Tuesday, Virginia Solicitor General Stuart A. Raphael compared his state's constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages to the commonwealth’s previous defense of segregation, a ban on interracial marriage and resistance to admitting women to VMI — all decisions overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. Quick ruling pledged on Va. gay marriage ban:

Equal“We are not going to make the mistakes our predecessors made,” Raphael told U.S. District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen.

Wright Allen did not ask a question of any of the five lawyers who addressed her during the nearly two hours of arguments but said she will rule quickly on an issue that all agreed will ultimately be settled by the Supreme Court.

“You’ll be hearing from me soon,” she said, emphasizing the last word.

At issue is a question the Supreme Court justices left unanswered in June in their first consideration of same-sex marriage: Does a state’s traditional role in defining marriage mean it may ban same-sex unions without violating the equal protection and due process rights of gay men and lesbians?

The case in Wright Allen’s courtroom marked the first time such a challenge has advanced so far in a state that was part of the Old South.

New Virginia Attorney General Mark R. Herring (D) infuriated Republicans and conservatives in the state when he decided soon after taking office last month that he would not defend the ban.

The Arizona Republic: One step forward, two steps back on religious bigotry

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Arizona Republic's E.J. Montini addresses a point today that I have made many times over the years about the FAUXification of the news with their "fair and balanced" bullshit. O'Reilly unfair? Yes. But it shouldn't matter.

Fairness is a fallacy.

In politics, there is no such thing as fair.

* * *

Unfair questions can still get at the truth.

Fairness isn’t our problem.

Our problem, on a much larger scale, is willful ignorance.

Humans come with a built-in ability to disregard or disbelieve facts because they’ve been presented by people with whom we disagree philosophically, as if anything that contradicts our preconceived notions of a person or situation or issue cannot be true.

The media used to fight such notions. Now, some of us encourage it.

If there is a danger in the media these days it is not that we are unfair, it’s that rather than challenge a reader’s or viewer’s willful ignorance we embolden it. We treat the news, which changes daily, like a religion, which is based on longstanding consistent unshakeable beliefs.

* * *

Our problem isn’t fairness.

Our problem is that too many people in the media are allowing, even urging, audiences to turn a blind eye to unpleasant facts.

And, worse, doing so ourselves.

Too bad the editorial page editors of the Republic ignored Mr. Montini.

Religious Bigotry Bills Advance in House

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Arizona Daily Star's creative headline writer strikes again today. The headline in the Star reads Bill enhancing religious defense advances in Arizona Legislature. That's some spin there. These bills are about giving religious bigots a "get out of jail free" card to discriminate against anyone with whom they disagree supposedly based upon their "sincerely held religious beliefs" — the new code word for "haters gotta hate."

I do believe that Howard Fischer intended the factually correct headline which appears in the East Valley Tribune. Bill to allow businesses to bar service based on 'sincerely held' religious belief moves forward in House. It's time for the Daily Star to reprimand or to fire the biased copy editor responsible for these politically biased creative headlines. Howard Fischer reports:

[A] House panel voted 5-2 Tuesday to give individuals and the businesses they own more rights to refuse to provide services based on their religious beliefs.

The vote by the Government Committee came despite comments from several individuals that the measure would allow anyone to claim a “sincerely held” religious belief as an defense in discrimination lawsuits.

“This bill allows anyone who should normally comply with state or local laws that are neutral to claim that those laws burden their religious beliefs,” said Rep. Martin Quezada, D-Phoenix.

But Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert, sponsor of HB 2153, said it protects business owners from being forced to do anything that would violate their faith, and Farnsworth lashed out at foes of the legislation for being intolerant of the religious views of others.

“This is pretty remarkable and ironic the screaming and yelling about tolerance apparently flows only one way,” he said. “They want the (religious) tolerance simply to be I'm going to tolerate their opinion and my opinion counts for nothing.”

Yes, people should tolerate "Fast Eddie's" religious bigotry, because "haters gotta hate."