Secretary of State Ken Bennett panders to the Birthers-Birchers-Secessionists of the Tea Party
May 18, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Secretary of State Ken Bennett is not good at his job. Anyone who has tried to use the candidate committee filings online to keep track of who is running for office knows that Bennett has completely failed to present this information in any usable manner accessible to the public — the reason why it is posted online. Bennett is also slow to update bills that have been signed into law and to post them online.
Then there was his completely WRONG legal opinion in the Rep. Daniel Patterson matter in which LD 29 voters disenfranchised by Secretary of State Ken Bennett (Updated).
Earlier this week it was reported by the Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required) that Bennett created the online signature-gathering system "E-Qual" largely to benefit himself in his run for governor in 2014. Ken Bennett collecting signatures for potential gubernatorial run | Arizona Capitol Times:
Secretary of State Ken Bennett, who helped pioneer the state’s online signature-gathering system for political candidates, has started using the system for his potential gubernatorial race two years away.
Bennett, a former Senate president, has an exploratory committee for governor, which means he can legally collect money and gather signatures to measure the viability of a gubernatorial run. [This is the "Huppenthal Loophole" that eviscerated Arizona's resign-to-run law.]
“Yeah, I guess, you know, this puts me one step closer,” Bennett said today of his online signature-gathering efforts.
Nothing unseemly about using his office to benefit himself, nosiree. Nothing unethical to see here, move along.
But Secretary of State Ken Bennett really outdid himself at the end of this week when he went full "Birther," proving that he is unfit for his job. Arizona Secretary Of State Says It’s ‘Possible’ Obama Won’t Be On Ballot | TPMMuckraker:
The man in charge of running Arizona’s elections has gone to the birthers. Secretary of State Ken Bennett now says he’s not convinced Barack Obama was really born in the United States and so he is threatening to keep the president off the ballot in November.
A student’s words to her teacher
May 18, 2012
by
by David Safier h/t to Three Sonorans for reproducing this tribute to Curtis Acosta, one of the teachers in the now-dismantled MAS program, from student Julianna Leon. Even if you were never a teacher, try to put on your teacher eyes and teacher ears when you read this so you can appreciate it fully. There's … Read more
What I learned from the Ricketts/Jeremiah Wright story
May 18, 2012
by
by David Safier Am I surprised some billionaire wants to revive the Jeremiah Wright story this campaign? Not at all. Nor am I surprised his team put together a long "campaign playbook" that goes far beyond the video they planned to use to launch the assault. That's what Republican operatives do much better than Democrats. … Read more
TED conference: Nick Hanauer – Who are the job creators?
May 18, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Back in March at the TED (Technology, Entertainment and Design) Conference in Long Beach, California, Nick Hanauer, a venture capitalist and one of the founding investors of Amazon.com, gave a talk that cast quite a bit of doubt on Willard "Mittens" Romney's foundational argument for his campaign — his claim that as a super-rich vulture capitalist he was a "job creator." (Today Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler weighs in with a definitive piece that does a total demolition job on Romney’s entire argument).
Mittens is a true believer in the GOP religion of faith based supply-side "trickle down" economics, and has a Randian view of free market capitalism. In his talk, Nick Hanauer says supply-side "trickle down" economics "is dead wrong" and is damaging our society.
Nick Hanauer believes in textbook Economics 101 — consumer demand is what grows the economy and creates jobs. This is bottom-up, not "trickle down." As President John Kennedy once said, "a rising tide lifts all boats," meaning that improving the economic conditions for those at the bottom will also benefit those at the top. As President Kennedy also said, "For of those to whom much is given, much is required," paraphrasing the Book of Luke 12:48.
There was a bit of a controversy yesterday over whether the owners of the TED Conference series of lectures had censured this talk on "Who are the job creators?" because it was "too political" and the TED Conference wants to avoid any political controversy. Ezra Klein writes in Nick Hanauer’s TED talk on taxes:
Chris Anderson, head honcho at TED, has responded to Nick Hanauer’s claims that his TED talk was censored. TED, Anderson says, tries “to steer clear of talks that are bound to descend into the same dismal partisan head-butting people” and that Hanauer “framed the issue in a way that was explicitly partisan.” The upshot, though, is that he’s letting viewers decide for themselves.
To my ears, Hanauer framed the issue in a way that was explicitly nonpartisan. The only mention of either party comes at the beginning: “If taxes on the rich go up, job creation will go down,” Hanauer says. “This idea is an article of faith for Republicans, is seldom challenged by Democrats, and has indeed shaped much of the economic landscape. But sometimes the ideas we’re certain are true are dead wrong.”
Video below the fold.
A Note to the Green Party on CD 8 Candidate Manolakis
May 17, 2012
By Michael Bryan AZGP's political strategy is as good as this movie… Just a few quick thoughts on Charlie Manolakis, who is running in the CD 8 Special as the Green Party candidate. I didn't mention Mr. Manolakis in my discussion of the first CD 8 debate. There was a reason for that. I respect … Read more
Barber vs. Kelly, First Round: Hits and a Miss
May 17, 2012
By Michael Bryan
Last night Ron Barber and Jesse Kelly debated for the first time face to face. The result was a missed opportunity, and some palpable hits, by Barber.
In every race there are a few key issues that will decide which way persuadable voters will break. In this race, both campaigns and their proxies seem to be signaling that there are two major arguments that will decide this race: entitlements and jobs. Barber missed his opportunity to set the record straight on the former, and scored a solid hit on the latter.
Barber's campaign is also focusing on a character theme against Kelly: he's inconsistent. He's a radical who is now trying to moderate his positions. Barber did a generally good job of making that case, with one significant misjudgment.
See video and details after the click…
Extreme Makeover: The media villagers give Jesse Kelly 2.0 a pass
May 17, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
As I posted previously in Extreme Makeover: Jesse Kelly 2.0, "Blog for Arizona is going to go back through our posts from 2010 and repost some of them to demonstrate the "extreme makeover" the RNCC is doing to make Jesse Kelly 2.0 appear more palatable to voters in 2012."
Michael Bryan did a post on Every Republican Congressional Challenger in Arizona Supports a Flat Tax or National Sales Tax that contained this link to the Arizona Voter Guide with Jesse Kelly's 2010 Survey from the Center for Arizona Policy aka the Christian Taliban. http://www.azvoterguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/kellyj.pdf.
Some interesting highlights from Jesse Kelly:
Supports:
Q1. Replacing the current federal tax code with a flat tax or national sales tax.
Q5. Amending the United States Constitution to define marriage as between only one man and one woman.
Q12. Prohibitng abortion except when it is necessary to prevent the death of the mother [only].
Q13. Passing state laws that authorize local law enforcement officials to enforce federal immigration laws [i.e., SB 1070 type laws].
Opposes:
Q6. Setting a government cap on carbon emissions, requiring companies to buy emissions credits, and allowing them to trade any leftover credits (called "cap amd trade') [supported by John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008 presidential campaign].
Q10. Adding "sexual orientation,' "gender identity," or "gender expression" to the protected classes of race, religion, age, sex and ancestry in discrimination law [The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) currently before Congress] [Related: the Violence Against Women Act amendments currently before Congress].
Q14. Repealing the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which states that marriage is the union of one man and one woman and declares states do not have to recognize same-sex marriage from oher states.
Fact Checking the KUAT Forum
May 17, 2012
by
by David Safier
Today's Star article covering last night's debate/forum reports the events accurately. If all you want is a "He said/He said" to tell you what went on, the article pretty much does the job.
But many points raised by the candidates which are discussed in the article can be fact checked. Since the Star didn't see fit to do that, I've listed every checkable fact I could find in the article and looked at whether they can be judged true or false.
My conclusion based on the evidence below: Barber's statements are far more accurate than Kelly's. It creates a false equivalence to simply say they attacked each other during the debate without fact checking the accuracy of their claims.
- "Barber painted Kelly as a man who has a pattern of telling lies and changing his stance on issues." True.
Since "lying" is in the eye of the beholder, that's a difficult charge to rate, so that's not really a checkable fact. But it's definitely true Kelly has changed his stance on a number of issues, most specifically his strong stands on privatizing and phasing out Social Security and Medicare, which he recently has tried to soften and/or deny. - "Kelly painted Barber as man whom President Obama and the Democrats are trying to buy as another "reliable far-left vote" and who has spent the campaign mischaracterizing Kelly's past comments." False
The "buying another reliable far-left vote" is in the eye of the beholder, so, like "lying," it is not a checkable fact. However, Barber has used Kelly's own words to characterize his past comments, and the context of the quotes doesn't change the meaning. The one exception is Barber's use of Kelly's "oil is a renewable resource" statement. More on that below. - Kelly said Barber "has run his entire campaign based on attempting to scare seniors into voting a certain way." False.
Kelly's main argument against Barber is that the $500 billion reduction in spending on Medicare will reduce senior's benefits, which has been proven false, so it is Kelly who's using a false allegation to try and scare seniors out of voting for Barber. The accurate use of Kelly's own words to depict how he will deal with Social Security and Medicare is the use of factual information, not a scare tactic.
