A New Ironic Insipidity From Representative Gowan
January 28, 2012
Posted by Michael Bryan
The State House Committee on Military Affairs and Public Safety passed HCM2005, which expresses the august and considered judgment of the Arizona House that dismantling internal border patrol checkpoints and "relocating these agents from the streets and highways to the border fence, stationing them three hundred feet apart, and providing a constant patrol along the border fence will stop the crossing of illegal immigrants and result in little need for border patrol agents in the interior of this state."
You sure that 200 feet apart wouldn't be a better deterrent, guys? Come on. This sort of attempt to micro-manage Federal immigration policy and practices is just more political grandstanding by the anti-immigrant AZGOP.
The seeming unconcious hypocrisy of folks who complain about the intrusiveness of the border patrol's permanent internal checkpoints, but none-the-less support intruding on Latino-looking American citizens and residents using local police anywhere in the state, never ceases to amaze.
It's sometimes surprising what comes out of the mouths of our elected representatives on this topic. In the following clip you get to watch State Rep. David Gowan (R-LD30) bellyache about how he doesn't like the Federal government bugging folks like him (non-Hispanic-looking folks, presumably) about their immigration status inside our borders. Apparently, however, it's fine with Gowan for the State of Arizona to do so (as he is a proponent of the SB107), which is intrusive in EXACTLY this way.
Gowan says:
“We're talking the difference between the federal government and the State doing law-enforcement. There is a higher criteria that comes with the federal government. And that's the essence of this, is the federal government, what I was talking about earlier, asking about our citizenship inside America is what perturbs me.”
WTF? What higher criteria? I suspect that criteria is simply whether Gowan, and folks like him, feel that the "right people" are in charge of the law enforcement officers in question. If the officers are "properly" trained only to harass brown people — like Sheriff Joe's crew — it's OK. But if the officers are "improperly" trained not to racially profile — like the Border Patrol under the communist Kenyan Obama — then Gowan no likey.
See Gowan make an ass-hat of himself after the click… (h/t to Sarah Muench for pointing out the video)
Election Deadlines for the Giffords Seat
January 28, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie: There will be two congressional races overlapping one another for the Giffords seat — a special election and the general election. Here are the dates you need to know: SPECIAL ELECTION Candidate nomination petitions are due Monday, February 27, 2012 by 5:00 p.m. Legal challenges to candidate nomination petitions must be filed by … Read more
Too damn much to write about!
January 28, 2012
by
by David Safier I feel like I'm ten posts behind right now. These are interesting times, to paraphrase a Chinese proverb and curse.
Fukushima, bailing wire, duct tape and assurances everything is fine
January 28, 2012
by
by David Safier Since Atomic Al Melvin has put the nuke issue back on Arizona's legislative table, a few thoughts about the "perfectly safe" Fukushima nuclear power plant are in order. The Fukushima plant was deemed absolutely safe — indestructable — until the one-two punch of an earthquake-tsunami hit it. Then the danger was contained; … Read more
What Will Gabby Do?
January 28, 2012
Posted by Michael Bryan
Gabby Giffords finds herself in a fairly unique position: she is no longer a Member of Congress, but unquestionably has a vast reservoir of goodwill, respect, and love from her former constituents, regardless of party. To a far greater degree than any other resigning Member I can recall, Gabby has the power to influence the future political direction of her district. Arguably, should she choose to endorse a candidate for her former seat, that endorsement could have considerable, possibly dispositive, influence over who will take her place.
If her choice is well-considered, it could very well be determinative of the result of the upcoming elections in CD8, and it's successor CD2.
So, who will Gabby choose? I don't know.
Who could she choose? I have a few ideas.
Click through to keep reading…
The GOP war on the AIRC returns with a vengeance
January 27, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Just when you thought these Tea-Publican authoritarians had finally learned their lesson, the Tea-Publican tyranny is back, and they want to impose their authoritarian will on us again — the will of the voters be damned.
House Speaker Andy Tobin introduced several measures on Thursday that would set a special election so voters could decide whether to use legislative and congressional maps drawn by the Legislature instead of those approved last month by the constitutional Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission. The Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required) reports Tobin wants special election on new district maps:
Tobin, R-Paulden, introduced a handful of measures on Thursday that would put new maps drawn by the Legislature on the ballot for a May 15 special election. Another proposal would put a measure on the general election ballot in November to expand the membership of the IRC, among other changes.
HCR2052 and HCR2053 would call the special election so voters could decide on congressional and legislative maps approved by lawmakers. The proposals come as the IRC is preparing to send its own maps, approved in December, to the U.S. Department of Justice for approval.
Tobin said he and House staffer John Mills, who worked for the GOP-backed FAIR Trust and was a regular fixture at IRC meetings, already completed the congressional and legislative maps he wants to refer to the ballot. He said they began working on the maps about three weeks ago, using public input gleaned from seven days of hearings by a Joint Legislative Committee on Redistricting in October.
They did not speak with other lawmakers about the proposal, Tobin said.
Tobin has a laugh out loud lack of self-awareness and sense of irony with this statement:
“I think it’s clear that there should be an alternative to the IRC maps. And I think the voters should see a clear and distinct alternative,” Tobin said. “The politics that drew the IRC maps through the back door with the lights turned down is not going to stand. I think the voters know when they see deception.”
You mean like you and John Mills drawing up maps together? And the highly secretive GOP redistricting organization FAIR Trust operating in the shadows actively seeking to undermine the AIRC for over a year? This guy is a major tool!
Senate panel votes to give the Governor a state militia for the border
January 27, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The Birthers-Birchers-Secessionists of our Tea-Publican legislature are at it again. A Senate panel has approved a proposal to create an armed militia that could be deployed to the Mexican border under the direction of the Governor. The bill, SB 1083, is backed by "states’ rights" advocates and anti-immigration zealots. What could possibly go wrong? (Jan Brewer and her teabaggers are recklessly irresponsible enough to create an international incident or start a war).
The Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required) reports Senate panel OKs bill to create state militia for border security, disasters:
[The bill] would set aside $500,000 in one-time funding and $1.4 million annually for the new state militia.
As envisioned, the Arizona State Guard would have its own command structure apart from the Arizona National Guard.
It would be under the direct control of the governor, who could deploy it to respond to disasters and interdict those who engage in “cross-border criminal activity.”
The militia would also have arrest, detention and property seizure powers.
Ah, so what they are really saying is that Jan Brewer will have her own private armed militia that she can use to abuse the rights of citizens and non-citizens alike with the power of arrest, detention and property seizure.
Maj. Gen. Hugo Salazar, the head of the Arizona National Guard, candidly expressed his reservations during a hearing by the Senate Border Security, Federalism and States’ Sovereignty Committee.
Salazar said he believes he would ultimately be responsible for the new force because current state law gives him responsibility over military organizations in the state. He also said he has concerns about allowing militia volunteers carry weapons, noting that National Guard members go through extensive training before they are armed.
“I’m not saying that weapons cannot be carried, but there’s a lot of things that have to occur before I would be comfortable putting a weapon in a volunteer’s hand,” he said.
Salazar’s remarks prompted Sen. Sylvia Allen, the bill’s sponsor and the committee’s chairwoman, to ask: “How do we fight a war without weapons?”
Salazar said his soldiers that are deployed to the border there are “not fighting the war.”
Rather, he said their mission is to support federal law enforcement. Salazar also said the border issue is a law enforcement and policy problem — not a military one.
“The problem or concern I have is that you cannot solve what I believe is a law enforcement and policy problem with a military solution,” he said.
Maj. Gen. Hugo Salazar is a wise man.
American Library Association condemns closure of MAS program, removal of texts
January 27, 2012
by
by David Safier
The banning of the use of texts by former Mexican-American Studies teachers infuriates the English teacher in me. I understand, there are some good reasons why some books should not be in schools, but the ideas contained in them is not one of those good reasons.
But if you want to see a group of people rise up against unreasonable banning of books, look no further than librarians. They may seem like a demure group of folks, always speaking in whispers and shushing people in their libraries. But they are fierce defenders of access to books of all kinds.
The American Library Association released a resolution Tuesday condemning both the decision to get rid of the MAS program and the decision to prohibit the use of texts by former MAS teachers. You can read the whole resolution with all the WHEREASes after the jump, but here's the actual resolution:
RESOLVED, That the American Library Association:
1) Condemns the suppression of open inquiry and free expression caused by closure of ethnic and cultural studies programs on the basis of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.
2) Condemns the restriction of access to educational materials associated with ethnic and cultural studies programs.
3) Urges the Arizona legislature to pass HB 2654, “An Act Repealing Sections 15-111 and 15-112, Arizona Revised Statutes; Relating to School Curriculum.”
Here's a list of the Library groups supporting the resolution:
[T]he ALA Committee on Diversity, ALA Committee on Legislation, American Association of School Librarians, American Indian Library Association, Asian Pacific American Librarians Association, Black Caucus of the American Library Association, Chinese American Library Association, Intellectual Freedom Round Table, REFORMA: The National Association to Promote Library & Information Services to Latinos and the Spanish Speaking, Social Responsibilities Round Table, and the Young Adult Library Services Association.
My advice: Kiss your local librarian — but be sure to ask first. These people are defenders of our freedom and strong advocates for literacy. (You might ask a librarian how they responded when, during the Bush administration, they were told they had to release lists of books patrons had borrowed if the government asked.)
A MAJOR HAT TIP: Jeff Biggers just keeps writing about the MAS story, on Huffington Post, on Salon, wherever he finds a national outlet. He puts the links on Facebook, then sends them to me and others. I got the link to the ALA resolution from his article Arizona Unbound: National Actions on Mexican American Studies Banishment. (And a literary hat tip if I'm correct in assuming Jeff took his title from Prometheus Unbound, with versions written centuries apart by Aeschylus and Shelley). He sent me links to another group of articles I haven't had time to read yet. I'll post about them when I do.
Read the entire ALA resolution after the jump.
