Christian Science Monitor: "Voters on immigration: Action, please"

My comments in an October 26, 2006 Christian Science Monitor article on how the immigration issue has impacted Arizona politics this election season.

"Arizona is a microcosm of the nation when it comes to views on this issue. We're ground zero for the debate," says Farrell Quinlan, a spokesman for the Arizona Chamber of Commerce in Phoenix. "Our economy is growing, and a lot of industries have grown to rely on that source of labor."

Click here to read the entire article.

Arizona Republic "My Turn" Column -- "Voter Rewards Act: NO"

Published in the October 27, 2006 edition of the Arizona Republic.

Have the proponents of Proposition 200 got a deal for you! For your vote this election, they're offering a 2,000,000-to-1 chance at a bribe worth $1 million.

The Voter Reward Act seeks to increase the civic virtue of voting by appealing to our basest, greediest and most corrupt impulses. Simply put, freedom and democracy and all that rot just aren't attractive enough anymore.

In Proposition 200's cynical view of Arizona voters, the minute chance at cold, hard cash is what we need to get us to cast our ballots.

In a truly brazen attempt at vote buying, drafters of Proposition 200 make their law effective retroactively so someone who votes in this year's primary and/or general election could score a million-dollar payday by voting "yes."

So, if you voted in the September primary, you may already be a winner!

Ironically, the cash bounty will be paid out of unclaimed lottery funds. If lottery winners who actually "invested" their own money in a lottery ticket can't be persuaded to show up and claim their winnings, how successful will the Voter Reward Act be in bribing voters to show up at the polls on primary day and Election Day?

Proposition 200 is not about increasing turnout and getting more people interested in the public policy questions of the day.

USA Today characterized Proposition 200 as "tawdry" while the New York Times points out that an Arizona voter would have a greater chance (one in 55,928) over a lifetime of being killed by lightning than winning the voter lottery.

Proposition 200 insults Arizona voters. It says that no longer will we value the opinions of conscientious, informed and patriotic voters who care enough about their voting rights to participate.

Instead, we will actively seek out uninterested, uninformed and apathetic individuals who require the chance at a $1 million jackpot to take advantage of the franchise that so many have sacrificed for, even died for, to secure.

Arizona voters should reject the embarrassing and cynical Proposition 200.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: "The Prestige"

I liked "The Prestige". It is a good movie. Is it a great, ground-breaking cinematic triumph?

No.

If you like mysteries with a period piece flavor then this movie is for you.

The acting is very, very good. Christian Bale is always great. Hugh Jackman and Michael Caine are fine but unremarkable. Scarlett Johansson is her usual. It is great to see David Bowie working in movies. He does an outstanding job as famed scientist Nikola Tesla. Andy Serkis is great as Tesla’s assistant but I expected him to bust out in a fit of "Precious, my Precious!!!". He may never shake the Gollum character even though he never actually showed up on screen as the despicable character from the "Lord of the Rings" saga.

Look: 7
Story: 7
Acting: 9
Goal: 7
Intangibles: 6.5
Overall: 7
___________________________

The above scores are based on a 10-point scale.

• Look has to do with the visual artistry of the film.
• Story rates the how compelling the film’s plot is.
• Acting rates the overall performances of the actors.
• Goal measures the success of the film at accomplishing its goal… does a comedy make you laugh, does a thriller cause goose bumps.
• Intangibles score any special circumstances or accomplishments the movie deserves to be recognized for.
• Overall rating is not an average of the other categories, just this reviewer’s impression of the entire work and how I would rate the film to a friend.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: "The Departed"

Go see Martin Scorsese's The Departed. It is an excellent movie and should score many Oscar nominations.

Look: 8
Story: 8
Acting: 9
Goal: 9
Intangibles: 9
Overall: 8.5
___________________________

The above scores are based on a 10-point scale.

• Look has to do with the visual artistry of the film.
• Story rates the how compelling the film’s plot is.
• Acting rates the overall performances of the actors.
• Goal measures the success of the film at accomplishing its goal… does a comedy make you laugh, does a thriller cause goose bumps.
• Intangibles score any special circumstances or accomplishments the movie deserves to be recognized for.
• Overall rating is not an average of the other categories, just this reviewer’s impression of the entire work and how I would rate the film to a friend.

Vote Vets Slander to Hit Arizona's Jon Kyl Soon

Word around Phoenix-area newsrooms today centered on the next phase in a disgusting effort to defeat Republican Senators running for re-election.

It looks like the Left is about to slime Arizona Senator Jon Kyl with a vicious lie about his voting record concerning our troops. The same lie has already been spread about Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum and Virginia Senator George Allen earlier this election cycle. The ad is produced by an organization called VoteVets.org.

The text of the George Allen version of the VoteVets "Armor" Ad:

Pete Granato, an Army reservist and Iraq veteran: AK-47, the rifle of choice for terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is a vest left over from the Vietnam War. It's the protection we were given when we deployed to Iraq.
(Granato shoots AK-47 at vest)
Granato: This is modern body armor, made for today's weapons.
(Granato shoots AK-47 at vest)
Granato: The difference is life or death.
(Mannequins underneath show that modern vest stops bullets but Vietnam-era vest does not.)
Granato: Senator George Allen voted against giving our troops this. Now it's time for us to vote against him.
On Screen: Source: Vote #116, 108th Congress, 1st Session.
Announcer: Vote Vets is responsible for the content of this advertisement.

Click here to watch the Santorum version of this ad.

The ad makes the slanderous charge that Santorum (and Allen and soon Kyl) voted against giving our troops effective body armor in Iraq and Afghanistan. Annenberg Political Fact Check or Factcheck.org, a nonpartisan, nonprofit, "consumer advocate" for voters at the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania, has done a great job pointing out the falsehoods and lies in the ad.

The real question is if Arizona Democratic Senatorial nominee Jim Pederson will denounce, disavow and declare this ad out of bounds in Arizona.

I have real hope that Mr. Pedrson will do this.

But my cynical side thinks he will defend, deflect and declare his shock at Jon Kyl’s (inaccurately depicted) atrocious voting record on body armor for our troops.

Things are getting real ugly out there.

Click here to read a recent Arizona Daily Star article about this ad.