Willet Creek Dam

Sotomayor hearings show why Arizona conservatives should appriciate Sen. Jon Kyl more

2009-07-14T14:00:00.012-07:00

Arizona’s Sen. Jon Kyl is a star of the Sotomayor confirmation hearings. It's amazing some self-described conservatives in Arizona question his conservative credentials. I decided to do a little research and to find out just how consistently conservative he has been in Congress. Results: wow. Jon Kyl has earned a 96.96% LIFETIME conservative rating from the American Conservative Union. Check out their ratings of every Member of Congress going back decades. It's a great way to lose a few hours. Here’s Jon Kyl’s voting record since 1987! A 100 score is a perfect conservative voting record on the key votes that legislative year.

1987: 96
1988: 100
1989: 96
1990: 92
1991: 100
1992: 92
1993: 96
1994: 90
1995: 100
1996: 100
1997: 96
1998: 96
1999: 100
2000: 100
2001: 100
2002: 100
2003: 90
2004: 100
2005: 100
2006: 92
2007: 100
2008: 96

(U.S. House: 1987-1994 – U.S. Senate: 1995- )

Judgment on Republican legislative majority still to be written

2009-05-16T18:32:00.008-07:00

I am quoted in a long cover story in this week's Arizona Capitol Times by Luige del Puerto detailing the political and legislative strategy of Arizona Democrats:

Farrell Quinlan, chairman of the GOP in Legislative District 20, said it remains to be seen whether Brewer’s clash with Republican legislative leaders on her proposal to temporarily raise taxes would help the minority party in the election in 2010.

Quinlan said no one remembers what happens before a budget is passed.

"If the scoreboard is a balanced budget and if a tax increase can be avoided, the Republican majority will have a very proud accomplishment to crow about," he said.

In a growing economy, criticisms against cuts to programs may prove effective, but Quinlan said the electorate in 2010 would have gone through a few years of belt-tightening at home. In a shrinking economy, voters might have lost jobs and might have to cut back on spending. Voters will view the budget cuts in this context, he said.

"A percentage cut in somebody’s budget will look a whole lot better than a 100 percent cut, which a lot of the voters will experience when it comes to their jobs or even their home situation," he said.

Click here to read the entire article.

Medical marijuana backers file notice of ballot effort

2009-05-15T18:48:00.003-07:00

By Christian Palmer
Arizona Capitol Times

Medical marijuana advocates have filed notice with the Arizona Secretary of State that they intend to gather signatures in an effort to place an initiative on the 2010 ballot to ask voters to legalize smoking pot by patients who get a recommendation from a doctor.

Under the proposal, Arizonans with certain medical conditions and symptoms would be permitted to qualify with the Arizona Department of Health Services to obtain limited amounts of marijuana for personal use from state-regulated dispensaries.

The Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project would protect patients, doctors and caregivers of patients that suffer from diseases such as cancer, AIDS, HIV, Alzheimer's, Hepatitis C and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis from prosecution under state and federal law.

Glaucoma patients and others ailing from diseases or medical treatments that cause severe and chronic pain, nausea, seizures, muscle spasms and severe loss of muscle mass also would be permitted to use marijuana with the recommendation of a doctor and department consent.

"This is a common-sense law that allows severely ill patients access to medication that they need, while providing strict controls to make sure this medicine is only available to qualified patients," campaign manager Andrew Myers stated in a press release. "Thousands of patients across Arizona are already using medical marijuana with their doctor's recommendation. These patients shouldn't have to risk arrest and jail just for following their doctor's advice."

With the approval of the Department of Health Services, patients would be permitted to possess up to two-and-a-half ounces of marijuana. The department also would have discretion to authorize individuals to grow their own marijuana for medical use.

The proposal would also permit "designated caregivers" to grow up to 12 marijuana plants to assist no more than five patients who have been approved by the department to use marijuana for medical purposes. Caregivers must be at least 21 years old and cannot have prior convictions for violent offenses or felony violations of federal drugs laws.

If passed, members of public also would be allowed to petition the department to add additional medical conditions to the initiative’s listed diseases and symptoms that could qualify an individual to legally use marijuana.

The proposal does not allow approved marijuana users to operate motor vehicles while under influence of the drug, and use is prohibited in preschools, primary schools, secondary schools and correctional facilities.

Arizona political consultant Farrell Quinlan said he believes the medical marijuana initiative still leaves plenty of unanswered questions. The initiative’s language takes up 34 pages, and Quinlan said he would like to assemble a coalition of neighborhood groups, employers and law enforcement officials to determine the initiative’s actual impact.

He said he already has grave concerns about the proposal’s impact on workplace safety, workers’ compensation, neighborhood zoning rights and the criminal justice system. Quinlan said he is also worried that Arizona’s existing Voter Protection Act would make altering the effects of the initiative almost impossible.

"What kind of straightjacket does that put on future lawmakers?" said Quinlan, a former [board] member of Drugs Don’t Work in Arizona, a federally funded organization that consulted employers interested in implementing anti-drug strategies in their workplaces.

The Voter Protection Act, passed in 1998, requires that legislators approve changes to existing laws passed by ballot initiative by a three-quarters majority vote. The act also specifies that any amendments must "further the purpose" of the pertaining initiative.

Myers said concerns about the proposal’s effects are misguided, as 13 states have adopted similar medical marijuana use laws that have been well-received by the public.

"There’s never been a serious effort to repeal any of them," said Myers, a former staffer for ex-Governor Janet Napolitano. "It’s a common-sense law."

Myers said the initiative has been drafted by election law attorney Lisa Hauser.

Backers of the proposal must submit at least 153,365 signatures of registered Arizona voters by July 1, 2010 to qualify the proposed law change for the 2010 November general election ballot.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: Rebooted “Star Trek” franchise to live long and prosper

2009-05-13T18:20:00.000-07:00

J.J. Abrams could have really laid an egg with his "Star Trek" reboot. Instead he triumphs. Abrams has refreshed and upgraded the characters from the original series that were burdened in prior movies under the limitations of its iconic cast. This new "Star Trek" is now a true movie franchise with true movie production values. No more charity work for marginal TV actors fortunate enough to score a gig on a failed 1960’s television series. The new Trek gets high marks for accentuating the importance of individual initiative on (imagined future) historical events. I also like some of the liberties Abrams took with some of the lesser characters from the series. I look forward to where he takes us in future sequels.

Look: 8

Story: 8

Acting: 8

Politics: 8

Goal: 10

Intangibles: 9

Overall: 9

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” is OK

2009-05-10T18:14:00.000-07:00

Why are comic books dominated by Leftist tropes? Again, we have an evil military industrial complex... blah, blah, blah… "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" is entertaining all the same.

Look: 7

Story: 6.5

Acting: 7

Politics: 4

Goal: 7

Intangibles: 8

Overall: 7

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: Who watches the “Watchmen”? Answer: Few

2009-05-06T18:08:00.000-07:00

BREAKING NEWS: Leftist ideology continues domination of comic book movies [save the Spider-Man and Batman franchises.]

"Watchmen" was supposed to be awesome. It was supposed to be THE comic book movie to put all others to shame. Instead, it’s a (loooong) swing and a miss. Nothing against the director and fine cast but the hype far outsized its silly story.

Look: 6.5

Story: 6.5

Acting: 7

Politics: 4

Goal: 5

Intangibles: 5

Overall: 6

Simcox bid will rely on GOP grassroots, but support might be thin

2009-04-21T20:34:00.002-07:00

By Matt Bunk
Arizona Capitol Times

A top advisor for Chris Simcox said the Minuteman founder will rely on ground-level support in his bid to knock off incumbent Sen. John McCain, but so far it's not clear whether Simcox will be able to rally the necessary support and financial assistance from Arizona's grassroots GOP.

Hours after news broke that Simcox is gearing up to take on McCain (http://www.azcapitoltimes.com/freestory.cfm?ID=11000), some Republican Party activists said a Simcox candidacy is good for Arizona and will provide voters with an option between McCain, who has shown a moderate streak on immigration, and Simcox, who started the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps and has aggressively pursued increased military presence along the border and the construction of a border wall to halt illegal immigration.

Eric Johnson, an acting advisor for the Simcox campaign and a former staffer for Don Goldwater's gubernatorial bid, said the plan is to target Republicans who feel disenfranchised and may have left the party in recent years.

"There are a lot of people who left Republicans and became independent because of McCain," he said.

Rob Haney, chairman of Maricopa County Republican Committee and one of McCain's most vocal detractors, told the Yellow Sheet Report he's glad Simcox is running.

"I think we need someone in there that represents the grassroots, and certainly John McCain does not," Haney said.

Others, though, flatly refused to consider Simcox over McCain.

Farrell Quinlan, a lobbyist who is also a Maricopa County Republican Party precinct committeeman from District 20, was skeptical of Simcox's ability to mount a viable campaign against such a strong incumbent.

"It looks like this is a vehicle to make a point on certain issues," Quinlan said. "I think McCain has strength in Arizona that has yet to be tapped... McCain will do a thorough job of defending his seat."

Some Republican leaders were circumspect about which candidate they would support.

Tom Husband, Executive Director of the Maricopa County Republican Committee, wouldn't say who he would vote for, but he acknowledged the need for change and speculated that the race would come down to one issue: border security.

"We'll have to see what they say for the future," Husband said. "We certainly have enough problems...a lot of discontent with where we've been and where we're headed."

Husband said Simcox would have a difficult time raising enough money to take on a candidate as entrenched as McCain.

"McCain has a tremendous machine," Husband said. "I certainly don't know where (Simcox's) funding will come from. We're going to have to wait and see."

Arizona Republican Party Chairman Randy Pullen was attending a meeting of the Republican National Committee and was unavailable for comment.

Haney, though, said Simcox has done an outstanding job running the Minuteman organization. "If it hadn't been for him, this issue would not have come to the forefront as far as what the grassroots are feeling as opposed to what's being dictated to us."

Anybody who is strong on border issues, strong about defending the Constitution and strong on national security gets attacked, Haney said.

"I'm glad that we do have an alternate opinion, an alternate candidate so I would support anybody's candidacy that's going to support our national security, as opposed to dissing our Constitution the way that John McCain has."

Attempts to reach Sen. John McCain's office April 21st were unsuccessful. McCain has said he plans to run for re-election in 2010.

Campaign adviser Johnson said Simcox's campaign will be about more than immigration.

"(Simcox) is a true conservative Republican. His platform is what it should be," Johnson said.

McCain has strayed from GOP principles numerous times over the years, Johnson said, including the McCain-Feingold campaign finance legislation and efforts to limit sales of firearms at gun shows. "He went after the First Amendment, then the Second," Johnson said.

However, illegal immigration does figure to play a major role because it is a common thread through many of the problems facing America now: health care, schools and prison overcrowding, in particular, Johnson said.

Robert Kiley, a California political consultant who will manage the Simcox campaign, said the candidate's national profile will allow him to raise the $10 million to $15 million needed to take on McCain, who has served in Congress for the past 28 years.

"We don't think there's going to be an issue raising money," Kiley said. "There's a lot of anger out there."

But for now, the campaign organization is minimal. Simcox reportedly told the -- Washington Times -- that "I have a Web site, SimcoxforSenate.com, two paid campaign staffers and a bank account of zero, so the American people will let me know if I'm the one they want to send to Washington."

Simcox will join state Rep. Carl Seel at a press conference at 11:30 a.m. April 23rd to urge elected officials to take a stronger stance against all forms of illegal immigration as border violence increases.

Simcox is expected to step down from the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps in order to focus on the campaign.

- Staff writers Jim Small, Tasya Peterson and Capitol Times intern Trevor Guyette contributed to this report.

If the Iraq War is won, who deserves the credit? George W. Bush of course

2009-04-06T22:35:00.003-07:00

Since the Obama Administration has ended the “Global War on Terrorism” in favor of something called “Overseas Contingency Operations Against Man-Made Disasters” can George W. Bush finally dust off the “Mission Accomplished” banner and get some credit for victory in Iraq?

Are tax hikes the “last resort” to balance the state’s finances?

2009-03-27T15:36:00.004-07:00

Adapted from a guest column by Farrell Quinlan provided to the six member chambers of the West Valley Chambers of Commerce Alliance in mid-March for publication in their April newsletters.

Arizona's deepening state budget crisis has revealed itself to be a black hole of dismal fiscal and political reality whose gravity is so overwhelming; normal political physics break down within it.

How else can we explain the once-unimaginable shift by new Governor Jan Brewer from champion of tax cuts to proponent of a billion dollar tax increase?

Everything about Gov. Brewer's 27-year political career screams opposition to tax hikes. Few Arizona political leaders have earned and have enjoyed such a firm anti-tax reputation. So what happened?

Gov. Brewer was sworn in as Arizona's twenty-second chief executive on January 21, 2009 after six-year incumbent Janet Napolitano resigned to become the nation's third Secretary of Homeland Security. Upon taking office, Gov. Brewer's lap had dropped into it a $1.6 billion current-year budget deficit. Without missing a beat, the veteran politico and her fellow Republicans in the Legislature remedied that shortfall with three roughly equal measures of program cuts, dedicated fund sweeps and federal assistance. They welcomed February with the uneasy belief that they had staunched the current-year bleeding and could turn their attention to surgery on next year’s budget. That wasn't to be.

State revenue collections continued their steady erosion necessitating the use of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal assistance funding assigned to next year's budget to finally(?) close this year's stubborn deficit. The bleeding truly hadn't stopped.

When Gov. Brewer delivered an address to a joint session of the Legislature on March 4th, next year's structural budget deficit stood at approximately $3.5 billion. That figure becomes even more alarming when you consider that the Arizona only expects to collect about $7.6 billion in revenues. Put more starkly, Arizona is due to spend 46 percent more than it takes in.

Why can't our political leaders simply cut state spending and institute across the board personnel layoffs and furloughs to balance the budget? The private sector makes drastic cuts along these lines, why not government too?

However much we'd like to view state government as just a really big business that can be run like a business, it turns out that it isn't and it can't.

What’s becoming very apparent is that balancing the budget solely through spending cuts is hamstrung by the Arizona Constitution (Prop. 105: The Voter Protection Act) and by an array of "strings" attached to federal funding.

Most of the billions in federal education, transportation and health care dollars that flow through state programs require a state match. In some cases it's a 3-to-1 match or even a 4-to-1 match. If the state zeroes-out a $25 million general fund expenditure tied to a 3-to-1 federal match, we are actually cutting $100 million in services to realize the $25 million general fund savings. That's not much gain when compared to the pain felt by legislators' constituents who use that heavily-subsidized program.

Exacerbating the meager fiscal payoff of such a slash-and-burn strategy are new requirements in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (popularly known as the Stimulus Bill.) Federal assistance (bailout) moneys will only be released to states that hold their health care and education spending to 2006 or 2008 levels. This "maintenance of effort" requirement effectively limits how deep legislators can cut from these programs even if we don't have the money to pay for them; and we don't. If we add in the state’s spending on corrections, more than 75 percent of the state budget may be effectively off limits to closing the gap. And the math only gets worse if Arizona decides to forgo the billions in federal assistance in order to avoid these conditions.

Does this mean we've objectively reached that mystical "last resort" point where spending-cutters become tax-increasers? Gov. Brewer clearly thinks so. In her March 4th address to the Legislature, Gov. Brewer laid out a five-point plan she styled a "path to prosperity" and program for "building a better Arizona":

Structural Budget Reform – strengthen the Rainy Day Fund, restrict fund sweeps and require honest revenue estimates for budgeting. (Much of this is an academic exercise until we have "extra" revenues to fill a future Rainy Day Fund.)
Weaken Prop. 105: The Voter Protection Act – allow the Legislature to cut voter-protected spending on education and health care programs during extraordinary times of crisis. (This constitutional reform requires passage of a ballot proposition.)
Spending Cuts – $1 billion in further cuts in state spending programs. (That means hundreds of millions in further education and health care cuts.)
Tax Reform and Modernization – structural changes beginning in 2012 to craft a more jobs-friendly tax code.
Temporary Tax Increase – $1 billion per year in temporary tax increases to bridge the gap in our massive budget shortfall. (Gov. Brewer would prefer to sign a tax increase sent to her by the Legislature but would settle for a special election later this summer to get voter approval for the tax increase.)

Initial legislative reaction to Gov. Brewer's tax increase proposal was, to be charitable, unenthusiastic. Lawmakers from her own party hold to the belief that the Legislature can and will balance the budget without raising taxes. Gov. Brewer wishes them luck in their quest and said she would sign such legislation. But one gets the feeling from legislators' body language that they too see themselves ultimately arriving at that same "last resort" space that Gov. Brewer landed on in her March 4th address.

Does this mean Arizonans are in store for higher taxes at precisely the worst time to raise taxes – during a recession? And will voters, if asked, agree to raise their own taxes and return spending flexibility to legislators so they can cut sacrosanct education and health care programs?

Regardless of the answers to these questions, rest assured, our permanent budget crisis will continue through 2009, past 2010 and out to as far as we can see.

No matter how much we resist, politics' impact unavoidable

2009-02-20T18:51:00.004-07:00

Adapted from a guest column by Farrell Quinlan provided to the Arizonan quarterly published by the Arizona Capitol Times for the Arizona Contractors Association.

One fact of life that the Panic of 2008 or the Great Financial Meltdown (or whatever historians end up calling it) has reminded us is that no matter how hard we might try to ignore it, sooner or later, the consequences of government policy impacts everyone.

“Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you,” commented Athenian statesman Pericles 2,500 years ago in the cradle of democracy.

Today, with trillions of dollars flowing from Washington in various bailout schemes and billions of dollars in red ink here in Arizona – for good of for ill – politics has decided to take an obsessive and maybe even oppressive interest in you.

Here’s were a lobbyist might come in handy.

Sure, we all have a general sense of what a lobbyist does. Lobbyists serve special interests and get things from government that the rest of “us” can’t – if it were only as easy as that.

First off, everyone is a member of a “special interest.” Often, we are special interests many times over. Small business owners, teachers, construction workers, taxpayers, Social Security recipients, youth sports coaches, gun owners, nurses, doctors, lawyers, firemen, dog catchers, morticians, circus performers and a thousand other designations are all special interests who have lobbyists dedicated to looking out for their concerns.

We tend to see our own lobbyists as virtuous knights fighting the good fight against the despicable forces of the special interests when, in all candor, we’re all equally virtuous and despicable when it comes to influencing public policy.

We call them “special interests” for a reason. Human nature dictates when it comes to our own circumstance, there really is a special case to be made for our interests.

Some of the most important but difficult to quantify benefits a trade association membership provides its members are public policy representation and advocacy – otherwise called special interest lobbying.

During the first four to six months of every year, the Arizona Legislature meets in regular session to consider hundreds of pieces of legislation as well as produce a state budget that conforms to the constitutional mandate of being balanced. A typical session sees more than 300 bills pass out of about 1,200 introduced.

Part of the job for a trade association’s public policy team is to know the issues confronting their industry and making sure that the Legislature takes appropriate action on them. That can take the form of drafting legislation to address an issue, recruiting a legislative sponsor and supporting the legislation through committee hearings, amendments, passage by both chambers and signing into law by the governor. It can also mean opposing bad measures and/or offering amendments to improve legislation sponsored by other interests, special or not.

Trade associations also promote their industries by providing opportunities for direct contact between their members and the policymakers that have considerable power over their member companies and jobs. Either through face-to-face interaction with politicians by the association’s membership or through political action committee efforts to support pro-industry lawmakers, the trade association’s public policy team’s advocacy continues long after the conclusion of any legislative session.

“Having knowledge but lacking the power to express it clearly is no better than never having any ideas at all,” to again quote the ancient Pericles. In this spirit, a trade association works to give its members the power to express the interests of their industry, especially the special ones.

Renewable Energy Manufacturing a Key to Revive, Diversify Arizona’s Ailing Economy

2009-02-20T18:10:00.007-07:00

Adapted from a guest column by Farrell Quinlan provided to the six member chambers of the West Valley Chambers of Commerce Alliance for publication in their newsletters.

First the bad news, it’s been a tough year.

It started with unprecedented high gasoline prices. Then followed the realization that the rising mortgage crisis wasn’t going to ebb or be contained. Instead, its “toxic assets” surged into a general credit and financial tsunami that engulfed the banks, crashed the stock market and plunged the nation and world into a deep recession.

Arizona, long the state on the leading edge of growth during the fat times, has been hit harder than most. Our economic fortune was tied to the mast of new home construction. The perfect storm of the mortgage and financial crises has exposed how narrowly dependent we have been on “growth” in general to support our economy.

Simply put, Arizona’s economy is not diversified enough. Our state spending appetite mirrored the unsustainable appreciation in our home values. We have a larger state budget deficit on a percentage basis than any other state, including the basket case of California.

Unemployment is rising. Arizonans are worried about their futures.

Something has to change to break this depressing cycle. We need to revitalize our economy, attract new capital investment and take advantage of our natural advantages to create jobs and diversify our portfolio.

The good news at the Arizona Capitol is a groundbreaking approach to incentivize the creation of new, high-paying manufacturing jobs throughout Arizona by attracting to our state one of the few remaining growth industries, renewable energy development and generation.

Sen. Barbara Leff’s SB 1403 would accomplish this through state income tax credits for renewable energy manufacturers that bring to the state new capital investment (plant, equipment, land and infrastructure) and job creation. It would also temporarily reclassify real and personal property for qualified projects with over $25 million in capital investment to help mitigate Arizona’s uncompetitively high and burdensome property tax on businesses.

And these aren’t just any jobs. A majority of jobs must meet or exceed 125 percent of the state’s median wage. Employers must provide health care coverage and pay at least 80 percent of employees’ premiums.

Haven’t we heard all these promises before?

Arizonans possess a well-earned skepticism for incentive programs to promote one industry or another. Many feel such programs over-promise and under-deliver. That’s why SB 1403 has been crafted to avoid past pitfalls and guarantees that not one dime of tax credit is realized until capital investments are made, jobs are created and the project is operational.

Taxpayer safeguards in SB 1403 abound. The total and annual amounts for the tax credit program are capped. It positions rural communities to be competitive in attracting new industries and high-wage, high-tech jobs. Companies must commit to at least ten years of operations and if a company tries to reverse course, SB 1403 includes tough “clawback” provisions that refund all incentives and credits to Arizona taxpayers.

Moreover, a detailed analysis by the eminent economist Elliott Pollack demonstrates that the program’s aggregate revenue impact is positive to the state General Fund. The bottom line, it’ll make the state money.

With all of these taxpayer safeguards and a solid “if you build it, only then will the tax credits come” requirement, SB 1403 establishes a new gold standard for economic development incentives that should serve as a model for any future incentive programs.

But the greatest benefit of SB 1403 is that is directly addresses Arizona’s stubborn lack of economic diversification by promoting the development of clean, sustainable, 21st Century technology industries.

There is a consensus that America must become more energy self-sufficient and wean ourselves off imported petroleum, especially from parts of the world where terrorists and dictators might enjoy a chokehold on our national security and economic well-being. Renewable energy generation is a key component of any energy independence policy.

The massive federal- and state-level support for renewable energy production that we’ve all read about means someone, somewhere has to make the billions of dollars in materials and equipment necessary to generate that renewable energy. Why not Arizona?

With SB 1403 on the books, Arizona will again be at the leading edge of job growth and have a more diversified and stable economy.

Say It Ain't So, [Another] Sad Day For Baseball

2009-02-09T19:38:00.004-07:00

I have been a fan of Alex Rodriguez since he was the the top draft pick who was a sure fire superstar like Ken Griffey, Jr. I never understood the hate that he drew from fans and some in the media. He was too perfect (re: insincere) in interviews and you just knew he wasn't being square with you. Or that was the knock against him. I never begrudged him his 10-year, $252 million contract. Many succumbed to ugly jealously and criticized him for the money and his prickly perfectionism. The glare and scrutiny increased exponentially when the Texas Rangers dumped his contract on the only team that could handle its size, the New York Yankees.

A-Rod has been the most talented and arguably best player in baseball for the last decade. Now we learn that his best just wasn't good enough. He admitted today to using performance enhancing drugs during the 2001, 2002 and 2003 seasons. A reason he gives was the stress brought on by The Contract.

I haven't yet fully processed the impact of this revelation. But the sadness and deep melancholy among the baseball press is palpable. In a few short years, A-Rod was to be "The One" who would cleanse the sport of its most egregious embarrassment, Barry Bonds' holding of the All-Time Home Run Crown.

That can't happen now.

Now all of us who love the game must come to grips with the fact that steroids, HGH and other performance enhancing drugs were not the exception but the rule in baseball since at least the early 1990's. Whatever innocence we thought an A-Rod assault on Barry Bonds' record could restore is gone forever.

Major League Baseball will never be the same to its fans. They're all suspect now. They're just like the rest of us. Flawed, prideful and all too human.

Arizona Cardinals will Shock the World in Super Bowl XLIII

2009-01-31T19:35:00.005-07:00

Prediction:

27 Cardinals

17 Steelers

Predicted MVP: Kurt Warner

Obama-Biden: A One-Term Wonder

2009-01-18T21:42:00.006-07:00

When Barack Obama takes the oath of office to become the 44th President of the United States of America, he will have the support and good will of a large majority of Americans including that of many conservatives and Republicans. We want our presidents to succeed and for the nation to prosper regardless of party.

Ideology ought to inform us as to the correct path, not be a blind faith that we follow like cultists. Conservatives believe liberal-left policies will lead to a poorer and weaker America. If Barack Obama leads the country in a leftward direction, our nation and his presidency will fail. However, throughout the transition, he has shown a remarkable ability to surprise on what direction he will lead us. But the brutish world and our fragile economy will be the great tests of his moderation and leadership. Moreover, it remains to be seen how centrist the Hard Left Congress will allow President Obama to be.

Unlike many in the Lefty blogesphere who reflexively denounced anything George W. Bush identified with, conservatives tend to have a higher “patriot quotient”. What do I mean by “patriot quotient”? Conservatives tend to be small “n” nationalists who care far less for the feelings and esteem that Europeans hold our nation in than liberals. We are America homers. We want the scoreboard to show an American victory, even if our quarterback, or pitcher, or point guard isn’t our first choice.

The Left proved throughout the Bush 43’s administration that they didn’t really want America to win if that meant George W. Bush would win too. Does that make conservatives more vulnerable to demagoguery and less able to answer the challenge that Leftists present? Perhaps, but that’s where our greater “patriot quotient” comes in. We’d rather lose an election than lose a war… where have I heard that before?

That being said, I truly hope that Joe Biden savors the pomp and celebration of the inaugural. Like day following night, a Vice President Biden will embarrass President Obama and the nation on a regular basis with his over-the-top pomposity and blowhardedness. I don’t believe he will be retained on the Obama ticket in 2012.

Therefore, January 21, 2009 begins the search for the Democrat’s 2012 vice presidential nominee. Keep an eye on Virginia’s Tim Kaine (believed to have been the choice of Obama’s heart for veep in 2008) and four-star Gen. David Petraeus, the Commander of U.S. Central Command and hero of the Iraq surge. An Obama-Petraeus 2012 ticket would be awfully tough to match for the Republicans. But that all assumes that President Obama maintains his apparent intention to have continuity in foreign and defense policy. If he tacks left on national security, all bets are off on the Petraeus pick… though Biden will still be a goner from the ticket.

One Last Whack at that Poor, Dead Horse

2009-01-06T15:49:00.013-07:00

At the risk of keeping this dust up alive for another day, I've got one last post concerning the Great STS-Quinlan Snarling Match between the Sonoran Alliance blog and the Willet Creek Dam blog.

Brett Mecum on staff at the state party sent me a nice note clarifying the situation surrounding the seven-page December 31, 2008 mailing from the state party on the state of the party and their record over the last two years. In the interest of putting this matter to rest with everyone getting a fair shot at making their best case, here is the note in total:

Farrell,

I hope that you and your family had Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. I’ve been watching the exchange between your blog and Sonoran Alliance with quite a bit of amusement. I’m willing to bet that you’ve been getting some pretty decent traffic hits today. While I agree with the axiom that a man’s blog is his castle and that you should be able blog whatever you would like (after all, it is free speech), you are mistaken on at least two counts:

The mailing we did was $0.59 not $0.95 (In fact, the entire cost of the mailing was $67.26, if you want to get technical);
The report in questions was a report to the Executive Committee, not the entire State Committee.
The Executive Committee consists of the officers, three members at-large from each congressional district, the chairman, 1st vice chair, and 2nd vice chair from each county. The chairmen of the legislative districts serve as ex-officio non-voting members.

The reality is that we sent that mailing to just over 100 people who serve on the AZGOP Executive Committee, not to the 1,018 State Committeemen. You should view the Executive Committee on the same level as a corporate board of directors. Being new to the internal workings of the Party, I can understand your confusion. The seven page mailing was designed as a year-end report to the Executive Committee and shouldn’t have been construed beyond that. We have done reports such as this in the past to update the committee with various operations of the State Party. And just as you [Note: Farrell Quinlan is chairman of LD20 Republicans] are allowed to communicate with your district PCs, the AZGOP should communicate with its Executive Committee.

In the interests of accuracy, I trust that you will correct these errors with your readership. In the future, you should know that you can call the office and talk to Chairman Pullen or myself on such matters for clarification before you decide to send them into the public sphere.

All the best,

Brett
____________________________
Brett Mecum
Political Director, Arizona Republican Party
3501 North 24th Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85016
bmecum@azgop.org

Fair enough. I stand by my concern that though arguably "OK" and technically defensible, the recent flurry of mail to state committeemen from the state party extolling Chairman Pullen's tenure was/is too much and borders on and might actually be an abuse of office. These relentless mailings implicitly seek to "make the case" for his re-election while hiding behind official communications from the party.

I hated that practice when Rick Romley, on his way out as county attorney and preparing to run for other elective office, published his die-cut hagiography on the taxpayer's dime.

I hate it now.

Brett and I just disagree.

Does this make Randy Pullen a bad guy who a Republican state committeeman should under no circumstances vote for? Not at all. They should vote their conscience on January 24th. I know I will.

My only regret in all this is that Sen. Jim Waring's outstanding legislation got lost in the imbroglio (or is that imbloglio?)

Lighten up, Francis

2009-01-05T02:16:00.008-07:00

When I read this post on Sonoran Alliance, I was reminded of the scene from the Bill Murray comedy "Stripes" where members of the platoon were sitting around telling stories about themselves, where they come from.

Psycho: The name's Francis Soyer, but everybody calls me Psycho. Any of you guys call me Francis, and I'll kill you.
Leon: Ooooooh.
Psycho: You just made the list, buddy. And I don't like nobody touching my stuff. So just keep your meat-hooks off. If I catch any of you guys in my stuff, I'll kill you. Also, I don't like nobody touching me. Now, any of you homos touch me, and I'll kill you.
Sergeant Hulka: Lighten up, Francis.

All I could say while reading the post, “Lighten up, STS.”

Who or what is STS and what did I ever do to him… her… them… ah… whatever? STS must be one of the Sonoran Alliance’s bloggers who doesn’t feel comfortable being “out-of-the-closet” yet (to use SA’s own formulation). All I know is that when someone posts a entry brazenly proclaiming “Policing the Blogosphere” as its title, I’d really appreciate the ability to face my accuser, or at least know them as a real flesh and blood human being. But who am I to judge the judge, right? Let’s put aside STS’s manifest cowardice… er, no… I mean… spunky use of a pseudonym and address some of the indictments in his/her/its 1,264 words of breathless, over-the-top caviling.

I’ll take them in order…

Correcting other blogs? Absolutely, but doesn’t everything STS then goes on to write about fall into the “disagreeing with other blogs” category rather than being placed in the correction pile?

Bias Disclosure? Again fair point for some blogs, but in what way precisely am I hiding my biases on Willet Creek Dam? It’s a personal blog that I use to comment on all manner of topics ranging from books to movie, from sports to politics. I’m confused how I’m false advertising.

Hardliner on Immigration? This is refreshing. Quinlan has “an extremely hardline position in favor of ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ and he is a consistent advocate for businesses being able to hire illegal aliens, essentially without consequences.” Interesting turn of phrasing. I’ll admit, I don’t wake up at 3 a.m. in a pool of sweat anxious about the Rise of Atzlan and how I’m going to get screwed exchanging my dollars for Ameros from our new North American Union overlords. If that makes me an apostate and not a REAL conservative in the eyes of some, I’ll live with that and be happy. I wholeheartedly support the 2008 Republican Platform plank on immigration as well as the 2004 Republican Platform plank on immigration. ‘Nuff said.

My State Political Contributions? No secrets, do a name search here. On the federal level, I gave money to Mitt Romney, John Shadegg, Jeff Flake, David Schweikert, Jim Ogsbury, Laura Knaperak, Mark Anderson, Tim Bee and McCain-Palin.

My Lobbying Clients? Click here.

Bogus Franking? STS goes to great lengths to defend Randy Pullen’s innocent one-page congratulations letter to state committeemen dated December 23, 2008. If that letter was what had caused me to suggest some abuse of official communications then STS would be correct to criticize me for being unfair to Mr. Pullen. But I wasn’t cheesed off about that mailing. It was bent about the indefensible seven-page “2007-2008 Report” mailed on December 31, 2008 at $0.95 a pop. Now that one really reeks of using Arizona Republican Party resources in a strategically-timed manner to aid in Randy Pullen’s re-election campaign. Since that’s what I was referring to, then much of STS’s hair-trigger defense of Randy Pullen is moot.

Political Agenda? My “self-serving… political agenda” is just that, self-serving because it’s mine. No mystery here or need for Surgeon General-level consumer warnings to the blogosphere that STS condescends to (“Quinlan’s complaint is clever to a casual reader, but…”). And where is STS’s evidence that my clients give fig about my blog posts? Really? The Arizona Landscape Contractors’ Association has not put me up to liking the movie Dark Knight or my disappointment with the U.S. Mint’s four reverse designs for the 2009 penny. Sometimes there really aren’t wheels within wheels and the world is as straightforward as it presents itself. Can’t I just believe that abusing official communications for campaign purposes is shabby without being a member of the Trilateral Commission or the Illuminati?

Quinlan Endorsement: Then STS really gets his Castroesque and Kim Jong-il-like cult of personality rant really into high gear making all kinds of assumptions and conclusions about which candidates I am supporting for various party positions. Here’s the deal, I’m a homer. I’m supporting Diane Ortiz-Parsons for Maricopa County Republican 1st Vice Chair and Mike Middleton for Maricopa County Republican 2nd Vice Chair. Why? Because they are LD20 folks and I know they will do a good job. Did I also endorse Jerry Brooks for Maricopa County Republican Chair? Sure. Why? Because Diane and Mike are running on a ticket with him and I trust their recommendation. I wouldn’t know Jerry Brooks or Rob Haney if they waved at me at Wal-mart. All I know is that Jerry is from Chandler and so am I. He’s already sent me two mailings (on his own dime!) asking for my support. I’ve got nothing from Haney and it being a week out, I’ve decided that Brooks is my man. (By the way, the West Valley Chambers of Commerce Alliance and the Arizona Contractors Association don’t really care and have released my from my feudal vassalage to make this decision on my own.)

Pot Calling the Kettle Black: Ah-hah! STS reveals that LD20 GOP Chairman Quinlan e-mailed his PCs with info about the upcoming county meeting and endorsed Brooks, et al… HYPOCRITE!!! Lighten up, Francis. My e-mail was from my personal account and wasn’t an official communication to anyone. The official communication came in the mail from the county party a couple days ago. And it didn"t have a list of candidates in it (only the announcement, resolutions and proxy form). Comrade STS, am I not allowed to communicate with the PCs in my district?

Finally, STS really begins to show the effects of oxygen deprivation when he concludes with soaring rhetoric about “the kind of Republican” I am and how I’ve “forfeit[ed] the mantle of integrity” and all that. Yikes. STS really has very thin skin about Dear Leader. Or maybe, STS has a hidden, integrity-diminishing agenda against Farrell Quinlan and all his ilk!

Whatever.

Blogging should be fun. That’s how I approach it. STS, good luck and be well.

Sen. Jim Waring Bill Seeks End of Officeholders' Abuse of Official Communications

2009-01-03T17:29:00.013-07:00

Bravo to Sen. Jim Waring on his new legislation that seeks to keep public officials from abusing the public trust to promote themselves. It really angers me when officeholders use their position to inappropriately insinuate themselves into official communications from their agencies in blatant attempts to gravy train off a government expenditure. Incumbency is powerful enough.

Now if we could only get Arizona Republican Party Chairman Randy Pullen to stop using official party communications with GOP state committeemen to push his accomplishments ahead of the January 24th election of the next state GOP chairman. In that race, Pullen is running for re-election in a rematch with Lisa James who Pullen bested by a slim 4-vote margin in 2006. Regardless of Pullen's case for a second term, it's a risky strategy to play so loose with his "franking" privileges with an electorate that is so proud of its conservative credentials. I guess we'll see on January 24th how ideologically consistent these state committeemen are.

Read this account from the Arizona Capitol Times of Sen. Waring’s legislation here:

Arizona Capitol Times

January 2, 2009

Bill curbs public funds for media announcements

By Luige del Puerto

luige.delpuerto@azcapitoltimes.com

Three years ago, Gov. Janet Napolitano was featured on a state-sponsored billboard to promote Arizona tourism and safe driving on the state’s highways. The move was lambasted by her Republican opponents as a way to grab free publicity as the 2006 election approached.

But she isn’t the only elected official who has used state money to promote a public cause – and to reap the residual benefits of name recognition.

In 2007, the office of Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall published a 56-page booklet that included several pictures of LaWall herself. One photo showed LaWall next to a toddler with a caption that read “Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall believes our children are our future.”

And last year, Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas followed suit with a 45-page handbook called “Roadmap to Crime Prevention” that included several references to Thomas and featured his smiling portrait.

This year, however, Sen. Jim Waring will try to end the practice of using public money on frivolous promotional material. The Phoenix Republican has sponsored legislation that would prohibit the use of public money for print or broadcast media announcements or Web site campaigns featuring elected officials or their employees.

The filing of SB 1002 on Dec. 9 represents Waring’s second try to get the bill passed. Last year, a similar Waring bill was not heard in the Senate.

SB 1002, though, includes new language to outline that the use of public funds for public announcements would be banned only when they refer to an official who is elected or appointed to elective office.

The bill also contains language effectively saying it should not be construed to prevent the official from “performing the duties” of his or her office, and it does not restrict an elected official’s right to communicate on “matters of public concern.”

The bill raises a couple of questions: How do you determine whether a print or broadcast media announcement is relating a matter of public concern? When is it in line with executing the duties of an elective office?

For instance, Thomas has vigorously defended publication of the handbook, saying it was an effective way to distribute public safety information.

The money used to pay for LaWall’s report came directly from funds seized in connection to criminal activity in the county.

And Napolitano has defended the decision to put up the billboards, saying she was just doing her job. At the time, she also pointed out that there were similar billboards featuring political figures all across the nation.

The legislation has a new sense of urgency, given the tough budget climate the state faces, Waring said.

“We do not have money to waste,” he said.

The Phoenix lawmaker said some of the ads or public announcements he has seen these past few years were neither efficient nor effective use of public money.

“The worst are the billboards with the governor’s picture — totally pointless,” he said.

Waring admitted that the bill is open-ended, but emphasized he needed a place to start, given that his previous bill did not go anywhere this past session.

“I am going to tighten it up and make it so it is clear, with no potential loopholes or ambiguities or it is not going to go,” he said.

Last session’s bill was assigned to the Senate Government Committee, chaired by Sen. Jack Harper, a Republican from Surprise. Harper did not hear the bill in committee.

Harper said there were complaints about the rigid language of last year’s bill. He said he hasn’t read the new version yet but added he supports its intent.

“It’s a great concept. I think it’s very taxpayer-friendly,” Harper said.

Jeff Kros, legislative director of the League of Arizona Cities and Towns, said his group’s concern over the previous bill was that its language was “probably too broad” and “too restrictive.”

“I think we have the same concerns as everybody else in that a lot of our elected officials have to use the media to do their jobs, and this seemed to be really restrictive,” Kros said.

Waring introduced his bill last year after Thomas’ handbooks had unleashed a firestorm across the state, with Maricopa County supervisors questioning the wisdom of using public money to produce them.

Waring, though, has said the bill was not intended to target any particular official.

Theoretically, under SB 1002, Thomas’ handbooks still could be produced — but minus the county attorney’s name and picture.

1,000th Anniversary of the Adherents of the Religion of Peace’s destruction of Jerusalem’s Church of the Holy Sepulchre

2009-01-02T02:47:00.005-07:00

This year is the 1,000th anniversary of the destruction of The Church of the Holy Sepulchre by Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, the Islamic Fatimid ruler based in Egypt. Though not the immediate cause of Western (Christian) military reaction, it is interesting to note that this provocation by Muslims against Christians occurs 86 years before the first papal call for a Crusade in 1095.

Constructed in A.D. 326 on the orders of Roman Emperor Constantine the Great, the church is where the New Testament says that Jesus was crucified and is said to also contain the place where Jesus was buried (the sepulchre). It passed from the control of the Christian Eastern Romans (or Byzantines) to the Muslin Arabs in A.D. 638. On October 18, 1009, Caliph Al-Hakim’s orders for the complete destruction of the church were carried out. It is believed that Al-Hakim was aggrieved by the scale of the annual Easter pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Though not the immediate casus belli for the Crusades, the Muslim destruction of the Church in 1009 serves as a clear refutation of the claim that the later Crusades were an unprovoked and imperialistic adventure perpetrated by the bad Europeans against innocent and peaceable Muslims.

September 11th, 2,000 years ago: "Quintilie Vare, legiones redde!"

2009-01-02T01:22:00.018-07:00

Two-thousand-nine is the 2,000th anniversary of one of the most important battles in European history. September 11, A.D. 9 saw the conclusion the three-day Battle of the Teutoburg Forest between the Roman legions of Augustus Caesar under the command of Publius Quinctilius Varus and the Germanic tribes under the leadership of the Roman-trained Arminius or Hermann the German. Caught over extended and, more importantly, over confident, Varus was ambushed in a heavily wooded area and cut down along with three legions and auxiliary troops, about 20,000 troops in all.

According to the Roman historian Suetonius in his Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Augustus was so traumatized by the defeat that until his death in A.D. 14 at the age of 77, he would often cry out Quintili Vare, legiones redde! ('Quintilius Varus, give me back my legions!'). Moreover, to place an unmistakable exclamation point on the taboo associated with the shameful defeat, the three legionary numbers (XVII, XVIII and XIX) were never used again by the Romans for any of their armies, unlike other legions that were restructured — a case unique in Roman history.

The great loss caused Augustus to abandon his goal of establishing the Elbe River as the empire’s permanent frontier and withdrew to the Rhine River to mark the boundary between the Latin and German speaking worlds. Ever since, the French and Germans have been disputing Augustus’ settlement to the detriment of Europeans and the whole world for almost two millennia.

For the Romans, the Rhine border was defensible and held for 400 years until New Year’s Eve A.D. 406. On that momentous night, the Rhine froze over solid allowing a motley group of Vandals, Alans and Suebians to simply walk across at Mainz, initiation the beginning of the end for the Roman Empire in the West. Within three years, the Visigoths sack Rome itself accelerating a decline that ends in A.D. 476 with the cessation of the use of the title “Emperor of the Romans” in the West until the Frank Charlemagne revives the office in the year 800.

2009: Anniversary of Some Dubious as well as Distinguished Events

2009-01-01T17:55:00.005-07:00

Today is the 100th Anniversary of the birth of Arizona icon Sen. Barry Goldwater who was born on New Year’s Day 1909 in Territorial Arizona. The Year A.D. 2009 will also see the 200th anniversaries of the births of Abraham Lincoln and British naturalist Charles Darwin who were born on the same day, February 14, 1809.

Aside from Barrack Obama’s relentless efforts to associate himself with the 16th U.S. President, Lincoln is set to get a well-deserved though probably over-the-top attention from our media this year. This includes a generally uninspiring commemorative redesign of the reverse side of the penny with four depictions of scenes from Honest Abe’s life.

The log cabin and rail-splitter designs are nice and appropriate. But the last two, outside the Illinois Capitol building and the inexplicable construction view of the U.S. Capitol Dome, are mistakes. The final two designs should have depicted something to do with freeing of the slaves and the Emancipation Proclamation or perhaps the Lincoln-Douglas Debates on the topic of slavery. The final design should have focused on the universal values embodied in the Gettysburg Address and the Second Inaugural. Maybe a depiction of attention-starved Lincoln Administration domestic policy achievements like the railroads and creation of land grant colleges could have been featured instead of the Capitol scaffolding.

This year also sees the sad anniversaries of the Castro Bros. Communist Dictatorship on Cuba (50th, 1959) and Hugo Chávez’s socialist paradise in Venezuela (10th, 1999).

It’s the twentieth anniversary of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s fatwa calling on adherents to the “Religion of Peace” to murder “The Satanic Verses” author Salman Rushdie (which has yet to be successfully carried out.) It’s also the 20th anniversary of .the Tiananmen Square massacre in Beijing. Pete Rose’s lifetime ban from baseball for gambling on the sport also began in 1989.

But 1989 should not be remembered for those dreary events. Instead, the iconic scene of Germans dancing on the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989 signaled the end of the Cold War with the West’s victory over Soviet Communism. What was so remarkable about the collapse was how peacefully it was accomplished. The notable exception to the bloodless revolutions toppling communism was in Romania where Christmas 1989 saw the lynching of dictator Nicolae Ceauşescu.

As a native Vermonter, I cannot let pass the 400th anniversary of explorer Samuel de Champlain’s “discovery” and claiming the Lake Champlain area of Vermont for France in 1609.

June 11th will see the 500th anniversary of the ill-fated marriage of Henry VIII of England to Catherine of Aragon. Seven-hundred years ago saw the beginning of the “Babylonian captivity” (1309–77) of the papacy in Avignon by the French crown.

I’ll stop here. My next post will take a closer look at a pair of historic events, one 1,000 years ago and the other 2,000 years ago, that have define today’s world.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “The Day the Earth Stood Still” wondering why Hollywood can’t entertain anymore

2008-12-22T15:43:00.006-07:00

The remake of the 1951 nuclear-weapons-dreading “The Day the Earth Stood Still” into a post-Stone-Age-human-dreading bore is yet another example of how pervasive the global warming… er… climate change faith has enveloped Hollywood. I usually grade science fiction movies on a pretty gentile curve, especially if they deliver the computer generated effects. But this tired, preachy and uninspired film really makes me wonder what has happened to Hollywood’s ability to simply entertain. Apparently entertainment is not a core value in Tinseltown anymore. Watching it I was dogged by so many questions, here are a few:

Keanu Reaves has finally found the perfect role for his acting range… an emotionless alien who takes human form to communicate in short declarative sentences. Whoa.
No matter how “reality-based” the Leftists in Hollywood claim to be, ultimately, it’s because of an emotional exchange that our Rational Betters finally reconsider exterminating mankind… er… the human pestilence gripping the planet.
Does every depiction of the military have to be a cartoon characterization of cavemen in khaki?
Let me get this right, an omnipotent supernatural/extraterrestrial force lowers itself to our level by becoming human in order to communicate a transcendent message to the humanity only to be rejected… who said there was no originality in Hollywood?
And now for something completely different… our new priestly class is affirmed when John Cleese’s character is presented as a legitimate leader of Earthlings based solely on the fact that he was awarded the Nobel Prize. After all, Yasser Arafat was not available.
We never do find out what precisely we’re doing to hurt The Planet (and it should be capitalized as any deity worthy of worship deserves.) Is it global warming, ozone depletion, species extinction, MTV’s The Hills?
One question kept going through my mind throughout the movie and even still, a couple of days after seeing this movie… would someone please toss Jennifer Connelly a blueberry muffin or ham sandwich? This formally bright, cheery and pleasure-to-see-on-screen actress has morphed in the last decade into a depressing, brooding and heroin-chic waif who is no longer the knockout girl next door but the skeevy junkie from the alley.

If you’re looking for the latest bedwettery from the Luddite, anti-capitalist, anti-human faith currently all the rage among our social betters then “The Day the Earth Stood Still” is just the film for you. Otherwise, “The Dark Night” was recently released on DVD. Buy or rent it to see the best movie of 2008.

Look: 6
Story: 4
Acting: 4
Politics: 3
Goal: 5
Intangibles: 3
Overall: 4

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “Bolt” a Pixar-like Success

2008-12-15T15:11:00.004-07:00

I saw “Bolt” in all its 3-D IMAX glory and liked the movie a lot. As a dog lover, it’s irresistible. The quest/journey/self-discovery plot is predictable but that’s not why you go see these Disney animated films. It was fun and less dark than most other Disney classics. Rhino the hamster-in-a-clear-plastic-ball is an instant classic character.

“LET IT BEGIN!!!!!”

The movie wasn’t done by Pixar. Instead, it was a thoroughly Disney production. I’m not sure what that fact holds for the future of a sequel franchise but I trust the expected profits will cause the powers that be to work through any sticky Pixar/Disney issues. I hope they find a good story to continue the adventures of this promising new Disney character.

Look: 8.5
Story: 7
Acting: 7
Goal: 9
Intangibles: 9
Overall: 8.5

"FaITH in America" Plan: Let's try a Federal Income Tax Holiday instead of bailouts

2008-11-24T14:21:00.009-07:00

Here’s a radical idea… since we are dealing with such astronomically ginormous numbers in the ongoing rolling bailout … why not simply declare an individual and corporate federal income tax holiday for the 2009 tax year?

According the U.S. Census’ 2008 Statistical Abstract, individual income taxpayers paid about $1.1688 trillion in 2007 while corporations paid about $342.1 billion… that means annual federal income tax receipts are in the neighborhood of $1.5 trillion.

Instead of building enormous new bureaucracies and trusting our betters to allocate all of the taxpayer’s bailout money in the most efficient ways, let’s not collect the tax in the first place and let the bailout/stimulus package be a $1.5 billion tax holiday? If we are going to “put it on a credit card” anyway, why not keep future federal spending in a somewhat recognizable state so the taxpayer can better track it and judge its worthiness?

Just let us keep our own money instead of picking winners and losers and expanding the size and scope of federal government power. Maybe include a capital gains tax moratorium too?

Would all the economic activity spurred by a Federal Income Tax Holiday in America (“FaITH in America”) plan be enough to end the recession/depression and get our economy moving again? I don’t know. I’m a liberal arts guy and not an economist. But if it could be "sold" as good economics to the financial markets, it would be easy for us regular folks to understand and embrace.

If the “FaITH in America” plan doesn’t work, at least we will not be saddled with exotic new bureaucracies with far-reaching powers eager to double down on their failed prescriptions. At worst, the taxpayer keeps their own money while increasing the collective public debt rather than paying their full tax bill and still increasing the collective public debt. It’s easy to administer and we won’t have to turn over (more of) our economy to the central planners.

Though I’m half kidding about my “FaITH in America” plan, in some respects I’m not. I wish one of our leaders would encourage the Washington political and New York financial crowds to go through the intellectual exercise of how such a plan might actually work before we sign over another $300 billion guarantee to a bank “to big to fail.”

Imagine the popular outpouring of approval (and career advancing love) for the first politician to propose a workable “FaITH in America” plan.

Who knows, maybe we’re ready for radical ideas like a federal income tax holiday. We won’t know until someone asks.

Unions ready to recruit Hispanic workers if Obama changes organizing rules

2008-11-16T00:58:00.005-07:00

Phoenix Business Journal – by Mike Sunnucks

Labor unions are poised to go after Hispanic workers in states like Arizona and sectors such as services and health care if new union rules are put in place by the Barack Obama administration and Democratic Congress next year.

Unions and pro-union Democrats want Congress and Obama to pass card-check legislation. The plan would allow unions to organize in workplaces if they get a majority of workers to sign cards supporting unionization. It would scrap 73-year-old unionization laws that require secret ballots for workers to decide whether they want their work forces represented by a trade union.

Card-check legislation is a top goal of unions such as the Service Employees International Union and AFL-CIO, who were top Obama backers.

Such plans have been blocked by President Bush, and the Republicans have enough votes to impede card-check in the U.S. Senate.In January, Obama takes the Oval Office and Democrats have more votes in the U.S. Senate.

Nate Niemuth, a partner and employment law expert with Phoenix law firm Ryley Carlock & Applewhite PA, said unions would like to sign up more Hispanic workers and unionize health care and service industries that are somewhat new to labor organizations.

“If passed, it will have a very dramatic impact,” said Niemuth.

Union members account for 12 percent of the U.S. work force, according to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The lowest level of unionization is among Hispanics, who have only 9.8 percent of Latino workers in unions and only 9.6 percent of Hispanic women.

Unionized workers also tend to be Democrats, and the card-check measure could help the party align more with Latinos. Hispanics largely supported Obama in this month’s election over U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., helping the Illinois lawmaker carry states such as New Mexico, Colorado and Nevada. The focus on the economy and Republican tendencies to take hard-right stances on immigration hurt McCain with Latino voters this cycle after George W. Bush made inroads with Hispanics in 2004.

Business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Arizona Chamber of Commerce & Industry, worry about the card-check bill becoming law.

Unions and advocacy groups called American Rights at Work are lobbying Congress to move on the card-check legislation quickly next year. The American Rights group is a coalition that includes the AFL-CIO, National Council of La Raza, NAACP and former senator John Edwards.

Its chair is former Michigan congressman David Bonior. Bonior is said to be on Obama’s short-list along with pro-labor former Missouri Congressman Richard Gephardt for U.S. Labor Secretary.

Jon Pettibone, partner with the law firm Quarles & Brady LLP, said card-check critics worry that union organizers will pressure rank-and-file workers to sign cards. He also said the card-check bill would impose tougher penalties on businesses caught committing unfair labor practices.

Card-check advocates counter that businesses also pressured workers not to unionize in the run-up to secret ballot elections.The issue could create some political quandaries for Obama and Democratic lawmakers in states like Arizona.

“A key test issue for President Obama and an emboldened Democratic Congress is whether to risk an early party split over union-backed check-card legislation. Democrats in Arizona’s congressional delegation and many in ‘red’ districts across the nation may not want to be forced to choose between their constituents’ interests and those of big labor,” said Farrell Quinlan, president of In the Arena Public Affairs, a Phoenix-based lobbying and consulting firm.

U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell, Ann Kirkpatrick and Gabrielle Giffords, are Democrats headed into their first or second terms in districts previously held by Republicans. The trio was backed by labor unions in the 2008 campaign, though Mitchell has taken some pro-business stances such as opposing increased capital gains and dividends taxes.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: "Quantum of Solace" a true Bond sequel

2008-11-16T00:45:00.004-07:00

The 22nd Bond film is very dependent on the prior Daniel Craig Bond film "Casino Royale". I wish I knew that it completed that story so I could have reacquainted myself with the intricacies of its plot on DVD. This edition is a worthy chapter in the new Bond incarnation.

Look: 7

Story: 6

Acting: 6

Goal: 6.5

Intangibles: 7

Overall: 6.5

McCain fails to win Latino support

2008-11-06T11:08:00.003-07:00

Phoenix Business Journal - by Mike Sunnucks

Arizona Sen. John McCain was hammered by the Latino vote, hurting him in battleground states of Florida, Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico as he lost his presidential bid to Barack Obama.

Obama took two-thirds of the overall Hispanic vote and McCain got 32 percent, according to exit polls conducted by NBC News. George Bush got 44 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2004.

McCain also didn’t fare well among younger and working-class voters and did not do as well as Bush with whites, middle-class and older voters.

Some say Republicans’ tough stance on immigration issues, including workplace crackdowns, border fences and opposition to amnesty programs, turned off Latino voters. McCain and Bush favor a guest worker program and path for undocumented workers in the U.S. to obtain legal status, while conservatives emphasize border walls, tough penalties for illegal workers and their employers and varying levels of deportations.

Immigration was not a big issue during the campaign, but both McCain and Obama ran Spanish-language radio and television ads in battleground markets, such as Denver, Albuquerque, Las Vegas and Miami. Obama’s ad hit at right-wing Republicans tough immigration policies.

Other analysts say the economy and $850 billion Wall Street bailout is what nailed McCain’s White House hopes.

“Latino voters are no different than non-Latino voters,” said Farrell Quinlan, president of In the Arena Public Affairs Inc., a Phoenix-based consulting firm. “John McCain’s campaign was fatally wounded by the financial meltdown that took an essentially tied race in mid-September to a decisive Obama victory on election day. Without the financial crisis, I believe John McCain would have equaled or exceeded George W. Bush’s 2004 support of two out of five Latino voters.”

God Bless Dick Cheney (Not That the Presidential Candidates Care)

2008-10-15T23:40:00.004-07:00

At the first presidential debate in September, John McCain sent well-wishes to Democratic lion Ted Kennedy who had gone into the hospital earlier that day. It was a classy move. But tonight, John McCain called out Nancy Reagan for her recent injury but completely ignored Vice President Richard Cheney’s health scare earlier in the day. I immediately remarked to the Captivating Mrs. Quinlan that he chickened out and deserves no “class” points for the Nancy Reagan sentiment. Then I feared that Barack Obama would seize the enormous opportunity left him by McCain to burnish his bipartisan bona fides by mentioning Mr. Cheney’s emergency heart procedure at the George Washington University Hospital. Luckily for McCain, Obama didn’t exhibit that minimum level of class. No doubt the MoveOn-crowd would have been outraged not only at Obama’s gentlemanliness but for Cheney’s continued existence. But neither McCain nor Obama was man enough to honor a fine public servant... priceless.

At Least Herbert Hoover Was a Dog Lover

2008-09-29T22:49:00.007-07:00

Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives customarily knock each other over and then crawl over their colleagues’ bodies to be identified with their self-proclaimed political godfather, Ronald Wilson Reagan. But on Monday, September 29, 2008 those same “Reagan” Republicans abandoned their affinity for one Republican president in favor of another who usually never gets mentioned in the GOP Presidential Pantheon of Greatness. Today they emulated Herbert Clark Hoover by rejecting the financial rescue plan.

It doesn’t really matter if the real culprits were Nancy Pelosi and her Democrats. It doesn’t matter that Barack Obama has offered inspired leadership the equivalent to a “present” vote. Republicans will be blamed for this neo-Hooverism, lack of leadership and failure to take control of the hemorrhaging on Wall Street. What good was all the handwringing about the potential costs of the “bailout” reaching as high as $700 billion when there’s an actual one-day evaporation of over $1 trillion in market value right after the bill goes down? John McCain’s courageous gambit last week now looks meek and enfeebled.

Will we look back this week as the week Barack Obama won the presidency? The conventional wisdom has been, like with Reagan in 1980, Obama has to reassure America that he is ready to be president and that he is not too risky to be given the power of the presidency. Who knew that the Republicans would deliver that verdict to Obama by default through their own demonstrated lack of seriousness and statesmanship?

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: American Catholics in the Public Square Explained in Denver Archbishop’s “Render unto Caesar"

2008-09-29T16:49:00.004-07:00

Archbishop of Denver Charles J. Chaput has done a great service to Catholics and non-Catholics alike in his important and very readable “Render unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living Our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life.” Archbishop Chaput does a great job of explaining the Catholic worldview and how Catholics are expected to live their faith. As a Catholic, I appriciated the clear, comprehensive discussion of the true meaning of Vatican II. For non-Catholics, this short book will give them a better understanding of the 2,000 year-old tradition of the Church and its interaction with the state from Constantine's conversion to today's abortion debate.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “Case Against Barack Obama” Fair, Necessary Counterbalance to Fawning Press Coverage

2008-09-20T16:06:00.002-07:00

“The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate” by the National Review’s David Freddoso is a valuable critical examination of Barack Obama’s thin public record and habit of questionable associations. Freddoso does a laudable job in making his points without degenerating into the paranoid conspiracy theory fever swamps of the full-mooners on the Right. What comes out in this book is a deep suspicion and profound worry about the kind of leader Barack Obama will be if elected president. However, it’s not a breathless screed that places the Democratic nominee somewhere between Caligula and Josef Stalin in its estimation of Barack's character and judgment. It is critical (it’s titled “The Case Against Barack Obama…” after all) but not unfair or hyperbolic. I recommend it to anyone who wants to balance out the gushing crush coverage Obama has been afforded by our “objective” mainstream press.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: William Rosen’s “Justinian's Flea: The First Great Plague and the End of the Roman Empire” valuable to understanding our history

2008-09-02T11:09:00.005-07:00

William Rosen’s “Justinian's Flea: The First Great Plague and the End of the Roman Empire” is a very interesting and ambitious effort to explain how the outbreak of plague in the 6th Century was the historical pivot which turned the story of the West toward the creation of the Europe we recognize today. A sprawling narrative detailing such diverse topics as politics, military conquest, biology, architecture, religion, trade, demography, evolution and genetics, Rosen does a fair job of weaving all of these developments into a compelling story of what happened and why it might have happened to create our world.

In a nutshell, Rosen's thesis is the AD 542 outbreak of plague in the Roman Empire of Justinian (reign 527-565) and the wider world of Late Antiquity so weakened the West/Rome that it allowed for the destruction of the ancient empire of Persia and pruning of the Roman Empire by the Arabs a century later. The depopulation of Justinian's Mediterranean empire and the Sassanid Persians left them open to conquest by the Arabs who dodged the plague. Justinian's dream of a re-established Roman Empire centered on the Mediterranean Sea failed after wave after wave of plague every 15 years wiped out about half of the empire's population over the 6th Century. The corresponding weakening of military and economic strength of Rome freed the fledgling barbarian kingdoms in western Europe to establish their staying power free of Roman authority and orientation. Europe's axis of power and culture moved north to the Frankish empire that found its fruition in the reign of Charlemange and his establishment of the Holy Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire bore the brunt of Arab attacks losing its rich North African, Egyptian and Syrian provinces to the new faith of Islam. Though continuing to call themselves "Roman", the Constantinople regime became more and more Greek and within two generations of Justinian's reign, they were fighting for their very existence. The world empire of Rome had become a regional power later called the Byzantine Empire by historians. The Frank, Goth and Saxon barbarian tribes solidified into the European nation-states we see today.

The plague's depopulation also set off an agricultural revolution in Europe that set the stage for the population explosion of the High Middle Ages.

Rosen's book is a easy read though the author sometimes assumes his readers might know more than the do about all of the different subjects he discusses. For instance, the geometry of the architectural sections on the Hagia Sophia lost me. But I'm not a math guy.

Overall, this book will give the reader a good bridge in the story of the West from the Classical Age to the Middle Ages. The so-called "Dark Ages" were not so dark and deserve more study and understanding. Justinian's Flea is a good place to start for the average reader of history.

Palin pick desperate or inspired?

2008-08-29T15:21:00.003-07:00

At first blush, I thought the pick had a whiff of desperation. It seemed so unnecessary. Romney or Pawlenty would have been safe and logical. Normal, even. But John McCain proved that his Maverick sobriquet is not just an empty marketing concoction. Gov. Sarah Palin is practically unknown to me. When I saw her presentation and speech on Friday morning, it was the first time I'd ever seen her move or speak. After hearing her I was very impressed and saw the many pluses that caused McCain to pick her. When I heard the Obama-Biden campaign's immediate reaction to it, I was heartened by their poorly-disguised panic. This pick might just end up being inspired.

Joe Biden means war - Thank you, Barack

2008-08-22T23:33:00.004-07:00

Joe Biden is the Republican's dream pick for Obama's vice presidential running mate. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Hugh Hewitt and the entire right-wing blog universe will be whistling while they work for weeks picking through the rich vein of Biden pomposity, gaffes and blowhardedness. Thank you, Barack. Thank you for ensuring that this election will be clear choice and not some namby-pamby rush to the mushy middle.

Biden means war. Biden is so sarcastic and full of himself, the entertainment factor is going to be the highest in many elections.

Willet Creek Dam has long been on the record favoring Mitt Romney first as the GOP nominee for president and then for vice president. I pray John McCain picks Romney so America can have the great pleasure of seeing the debate between Biden and Mitt.

I believe the Biden choice will make a Romney pick even more likely. Tim Pawlenty has never been tested nationally in a pure partisan, bare-knuckle fight that the Biden candidacy will be. Like him or not, McCain will want Romney's brilliance, relentlessness and presidential baring to take the fight right to the heart of the Obama-Biden ticket.

Veep Predictions: The "Should" and "Will" Picks or the "Rise of the Tims"

2008-08-18T18:15:00.010-07:00

Like the Oscars where the announced winner is often different from the one who should have won, picking Obama’s and McCain’s running mate falls into a “who he should pick” and “who he will pick” dichotomy. Here are Willet Creek Dam’s picks for vice president for the Republicans and Democrats:

Obama Should Pick

Indiana Senator Evan Bayh

McCain Should Pick

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney

Obama Will Pick

Virginia Governor Tim Kaine

McCain Will Pick

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor” is More Fun, Less Filling

2008-08-15T18:55:00.006-07:00

“The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor” is a fun but hollow experience that suffers from never really making you feel any of the danger threatening our heroes. It feels formulaic in the most uninspired way… and I like formulaic movies that celebrate archetypes and mythology. The fourth Indiana Jones movie had a “son of Indy” plotline so does the fourth Mummy (I count the Scorpion King). The Imhotep bad guy of the first two editions had real gravitas. You could feel the evil and menace when he growled in his ancient Egyptian tongue. The Dragon Emperor in the latest movie only really becomes scary when he transforms into an actual dragon or an angry fu dog. The coolest creature in the movie turns out to be the Yeti (AKA: the Abominable Snowman). Maria Bello is fine as replacement for the newly high-falutin' Rachel Weisz. The Chinese setting was OK but I never really felt like I was in 1947 China… no Communist-Kuomintang Civil War or any allusion to the looming Communist takeover. It is a good-looking movie that benefits from being seen on the big screen. If you can, see it in a theater though waiting for high-def DVD will probably make you feel better that you decided to see Dark Knight again rather than seeing on the big screen.

Look: 8
Story: 5
Acting: 5
Goal: 6
Intangibles: 5
Overall: 6

"We are all Georgians."

2008-08-13T16:24:00.005-07:00

The national flag of the Republic of Georgia

John McCain at a town hall in York, Pennsylvania on August 12, 2008:

"As you know, over the past several days, we have seen that international aggression is, tragically, not a thing of the past. We thought we'd put a lot of that behind us at the end of the twentieth-century. But now we find it's rearing its ugly head in the twenty-first. The small nation of Georgia has been subject to Russian attacks that threaten its very existence.

"Some Americans, when they read this news, may wonder where Georgia is or why we should care about the conflict between Georgians and the Russian army. It's after all a small, remote and obscure place. But history is often made in remote, obscure places. And it's being made in Georgia today.

"Georgia itself, my friends, has a long and remarkable history. It was a fourth-century convert to Christianity, one of the first nations on Earth to convert to Christianity -- if you go to Georgia, as I have several times, you'll see churches that go back to the fourth- and fifth-century -- and it's been a part of the grand sweep that comprises Western civilization. But because of their location, their history hasn't been easy. Through the centuries, they have seen invasions and attacks from Mongols, Russians, Turks and Persians. And through it all, they maintain their language, their cultural identity, and their national pride. And as you know, they were part of the Soviet Union and were able to achieve their independence when the Soviet Union disintegrated. And they're facing terrible trials today, but they'll get through this, too.

"And, my friends, and I'll talk about this more in a minute -- but they're at a strategic crossroads. There's a pipeline, an oil pipeline, Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan, which brings oil from the Caspian to points west and traverses Georgia -- that's the very pipeline that the Russians tried to bomb. And I don't have to tell you about the price of oil and disruption of oil supplies.

"In this country -- it's that little country, a country whose territorial integrity, independence and sovereignty NATO countries reaffirmed at their summit in April -- terrible violence has occurred. Now let me just remind you exactly what has taken place here.

"On Friday, Russian tanks and troops moved through the Roki Tunnel, across an internationally-recognized border, and into the Georgian province of South Ossetia. Two years ago, I traveled to South Ossetia, my friends, and we went through this barricade, and as soon as we got into this place, which the Russians are maintaining hundreds and now thousands of troops, there's this huge billboard and it said, 'Vladimir Putin, Our President.' Have no doubt about Russian ambitions in this area.

"The Russian government stated it was acting only to protect Ossetians, and yet, on Saturday, its bombing campaign encompassed the whole of Georgia. Hundreds of innocent civilians have been wounded and killed -- possibly thousands. Military bases, apartment buildings, and other infrastructure all came under Russian fire. And the Russian Black Sea Fleet began concentrating off of the Georgian coast.

"Before the weekend ended, Russian troops drove the Georgians out of South Ossetia and stepped up their offensive in the region of Abkhazia -- Abkhazia is another area that the Russians have controlled in violation of Georgian territorial integrity. And Georgia asked for a ceasefire, and Russia responded by bombing the Tbilisi Airport.

"Yesterday, Russian troops advanced on one city after another. Gori, Senaki, Poti, and other cities were attacked. In 2006, I visited Senaki and reviewed the Georgian troops who had served with honor beside American soldiers in Iraq -- 2,000 of them served beside American soldiers in Iraq, and we're proud of that.

"President Medvedev stated that he has halted the offensive, but reports indicate that Russian military forces have continued attacks in some areas and the situation remains fluid and dangerous. Foreign Minister Flavor announced that Russia seeks regime change in Georgia, and that it's democratically-elected president 'better go.'

"In the face of this threat, the leaders of Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Ukraine and Latvia -- you know there's a common thread there amongst them, they all suffered under Soviet domination -- they've all announced that they'll travel to the region, and the French president is in Moscow in an attempt to help resolve the crisis. They understand that it's a responsibility of the leading nations of the world to ensure that history continues to record reform and make progress toward respecting the values and security of all free people.

"This is the situation in Georgia as we meet here this morning. The impact of Russian actions goes beyond their threat to a democratic Georgia. Russia has used violence against Georgia to send a signal to any country that chooses to associate with the West and aspire to our shared political and economic values.

"My friends, we learned at great cost the price of allowing aggression against free nations to go unchecked. With our allies, we must stand in united purpose to persuade the Russian government to withdraw its troops from Georgia. There must be an independent, international peacekeeping force in the separatist regions. And we should ensure that humanitarian aid can be airlifted to Georgia's capital, and stand ready to help our Georgian partners put their country back together. And we must make clear to Russia's leaders that the benefits they enjoy from being part of the civilized world require their respect for the values, stability, and piece of that world.

"My friends, today the killing goes on and aggression goes on. Yet, I know from speaking this morning to the President of Georgia, Misha Saakashvili, who I've known for many years, that he knows that the thoughts and the prayers and support of the American people are with that brave little nation as they struggle today for their freedom and independence. And he wanted me to say thank you to you, to give you his heartfelt thanks for the support of the American people for this tiny little democracy far away from the United States of America. And I told him that I know I speak for every American when I say to him, today, we are all Georgians."

Watch John McCain's Remarks

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: "The X-Files: I Want to Believe" Only an Average TV Episode

2008-08-12T16:21:00.006-07:00

“The X Files: I Want to Believe,” the second X-Files movie in 10(!) years, feels too much like an average weekly installment of the popular 1993-2002 FOX television series. The new movie’s hardly worth the trouble of getting everybody together for a 202^nd episode. I’m a fan of the X-Files and wanted this movie to succeed. The story was just so small. I know they were avoiding the alien abduction mythology but I can name a half dozen creatures and “wow” moments from the series that didn’t involve the aliens. Where was the cool shot of something you might expect from an X-Files movie? What Chris Carter has produced is not going to re-launch the franchise. Wait for the DVD if you liked the series. If not, there’s no need to expose yourself to these complex characters and there twisted back-story.

Look: 7

Story: 5.5

Acting: 7

Goal: 5

Intangibles: 6.5

Overall: 6.5

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: Ben Shapiro’s “Project President: Bad Hair and Botox on the Road to the White House”

2008-08-05T21:02:00.003-07:00

Ben Shapiro’s “Project President: Bad Hair and Botox on the Road to the White House” is a good little book about all of the important things that go into choosing out greatest leaders. You know, the legnth of their hair, someone's height and whether you'd want to have a beer with them, the really important qualities.

[More to come]

CAMPAIGN 2008 MAIL CALL: 4 Days Worth of Mail

2008-08-05T20:55:00.010-07:00

I’ve gotten a little behind in my survey of campaign literature from my mailbox. This report will encompass multiple days. I think the haul includes Thursday, July 31st through August 4th. Regardless, I still haven’t received my early ballot in the mail. So, in no particular order:

Mark Anderson, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – The Anderson postcard on national security again highlights a quote from Arizona House Speaker Jim Weiers. The “Capture of Osama bin Laden and Defeat Al-Qaeda” gets only 20% of the attention on the back along with “Secure the Border,” “Support Second Amendment Rights,” and “Take Care of Veterans”. Those are all laudable stances but I wish real national security issues would get more attention in the CD5 race. Relative to his opponents, its good to see even this inadequate treatment of foreign affairs. Iran, anyone? I know it’s not popular to be a foreign policy hawk these days but if one of the Republican candidates was one, I don’t know it. Grade: B-

Jeff Dial, Republican for the Arizona House of Representatives from LD20 – Jeff’s latest mailing gets extra credit because it includes the words “Lower Gas Prices” which is a nice recognition of the voters’ number one economic concern right now. I’m sure these pieces were designed months ago, perhaps even in 2007. At least someone in the Dial campaign had the presence on mind to update the message with a nod toward fuel prices. Nice catch. Again, Jeff has stuck with his theme and design from his prior mailings and signs. Grade: A-

Andy Swann, Republican for the Arizona House of Representatives from LD20 – Andy’s first mailer stresses his impressive list of endorsements ranging from a long list of law enforcement groups to the Tempe Chamber of Commerce to the Arizona Republic. Not bad for a first time politician. The look and feel of his mail piece is consistent with other elements of his campaign (signs, website) which is something I appreciate when grading. Grade: B+

John McComish, Republican for the Arizona House of Representatives from LD20 – John McComish is the lone incumbent in the primary for LD20 House. His first piece to hit my mailbox has a nice photo of the candidate and what looks like a version of his signs in red and yellow on the address-block side. I’ve seen a few of these signs out on the roadways but in much lower frequency than his opponents (Dial, Swann and Schmuck). On the other side the McComish campaign highlights his business community leadership. All in all, a nice start. I realize he’s the incumbent, but in this volatile political year, I expected a more vigorous campaign from the only non-publicly funded candidate in the race. But maybe he’s got a “shock and awe” strategy that’s forthcoming. We’ll see. Grade: B+

Susan Bitter Smith, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – “Stopping Illegal Immigration must be a top priority,” says Susan Bitter Smith in her latest 8 by 12 inch piece. Again Sheriff Arpaio’s endorsement is featured. Well, perhaps an all-illegal-immigration-all-the-time campaign will work for the primary. The problem is, former Congressman J.D. Hayworth tried it in his failed re-election bid in 2006 and got smoked. And he was the incumbent with a 17-point voter registration advantage. I’m eager to see what the Bitter Smith campaign has to say about other issues. Maybe she has something to say about Iran… maybe? Grade: B-

David Schweikert, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – My wife (not the “household” as is common) got a hand-addressed envelope with a typical (non-political) return address sticker with a pink ribbon (breast cancer? – I lost track years ago what all the different colors mean) from “Joyce Schweikert”. It also has a regular first class stamp on it and looks like something a friend would send. Inside is a two-page letter “from the desk of Joyce Schweikert” written in a handwritingesque font plus a sharp glossy photo of David and the misses with a quasi-handwritten Post-It note stuck on it. There are also a couple of reply postcards to endorse and sign up for yard signs and the like. I think this is the best “political mailing of the year” so far. It’s creative, nicely packaged and powerful. Grade: A

Mark Anderson, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – The Anderson campaign’s next piece has the candidate’s portrait picture over a nice scene of a mountain and a field of yellow flowers. Nice image but the better shot would have been to have Mark in that field, maybe with his family, instead of just employing stock photos. Before opening it up, I assumed this piece was about his commitment to the environment or something like that. However, it’s a tri-fold brochure with lots and lots of text. It has a few nice postage-stamp-sized photos of Mark with John McCain, Mitt Romney, a serviceman and Ken Bennett and Jim Weiers. These should have been much larger. It wouldn’t be a Mark Anderson mail piece without a glowing quote from Speaker Jim Weiers and this one is no different. I see the Anderson campaign working hard. They clearly have a strategy to hit high propensity voters in their mailbox over and over again. All this is great. But knowing this, I wish they would have broken up his message into 3-5 topics and have a mailer concentrating on each one in short, easy to remember language. Instead, I think each of these mailings try to cover all of the bases as if it’s the only mail piece a voter is going to see. They are making sure that’s not the case by their strategy. Honestly, I’m not reading them all and I’m paying attention. Grade: C-

Kevin Hartke, Candidate for the nonpartisan Chandler City Council – Hartke is running for re-election to the city council and his postcard mailer has a long and impressive list of endorsements. It looks nice and matches the signs I’ve seen around town which is a big plus with me. Grade: B

RNC Victory 2008 – A letter from the RNC’s Victory 2008 committee is “from” John McCain and has a “membership statement” in it like I’m continuing my magazine subscription. Ho-hum. Grade: D

John McComish, Republican for the Arizona House of Representatives from LD20 – John McComish’s second mail piece boldly proclaims “The Authority on Education” which is what the state legislature spends most of its time and our money on. It has four bullet points detailing his views and accomplishments on education and an invitation to get more information on his website (www.jmccomish.com). It’s a clear and direct message that doesn’t feel like it needs to download everything to the voter all in one postcard. Good piece. Grade: B

David Schweikert, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – The Schweikert campaign sent a postcard pushing his conservative credentials and highlighting his endorsement by the Club for Growth and by Arizona Right to Life. It’s nice but nothing special. Grade: B-

John Huppenthal, Republican for the Arizona Senate from LD20 – We got two identical letters from John Huppenthal’s campaign instead of the “household” mailing. That’s OK but the campaign could have saved the postage if they sent only one to the both of us. However, this is a very different kind of political mailing. My wife and I gave $5 contributions to John Huppenthal for his Clean Elections funding. These letters were “thank you’s” and a further call for $5 contributions. A Clean Elections form is enclosed and a stamped self-addressed envelope too. So a total of $1.68 in postage was dedicated to this mailing to us! Yikes. Huppenthal does not have any primary opponent so his tardiness in collecting his Clean Elections funding is not fatal. But in a down year for Republicans, he really needs to check this Clean Elections box as soon as he can so he can hit the campaign trail hard after the primary. I don’t really see any Huppenthal signs up yet either. Grade: D-

Susan Bitter Smith, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – “Stop Illegal Immigration, Signed the ‘No New Taxes’ Pledge and Drill for Oil in ANWR and Offshore” is the theme of this brighter 8 by 12 inch piece which is an improvement over earlier, darker mailers. That Arpaio dude is prominently featured again. Grade: B

Jim Ogsbury, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – The Ogsbury campaign sends a nice postcard with the “front” side claiming Jim’s the “Real Conservative for Congress” and listing his top four priorities, securing the border, cutting federal spending, cutting taxes and lowering energy prices. These are all laudable goals. What I really like is the address-block side where he has three photos with the following headers: “Energy prices skyrocket: And Congress takes a vacation” then “The economy slows: And Congress keeps spending” and finally “Our borders are open: And Congress looks the other way”. This is perfect messaging on domestic affairs. Still, no real discussion of foreign and national security policy (come on, illegal immigration is not the kind on national security problem I referring too.) Grade: A-

Jack Sellers, Candidate for the nonpartisan Chandler City Council – Sellers sends a magazine-like mailer that’s a carbon copy of his yard signs (good) on the cover but rather wordy on the inside. But assuming he doesn’t have a huge war chest, I’ll give him a break on that this time. He’s endorsed by current Chandler mayor Boyd Dunn and former mayors Jerry Brooks and Jay Tibshraeny. But his endorsements don’t end there. He lists in fine print on the back page a list of equally impressive endorsements including Secretary of State Jan Brewer, the Chandler Chamber of Commerce, County Supervisor Fulton Brock and the Chandler Law Enforcement Association to name a few. He really should highlight those folks more than he does in this piece. Also, it’s not often a candidate puts his actual age on his mail pieces. Sellers does (he’s 65). I guess the seniors vote will be decisive in the Sellers campaign’s estimate. But there’s no chance these older voters will ever be able to read the tiny-lettered endorsement list. Grade: C+

John McCain, Republican for President of the United States – The McCain campaign sent a fundraising appeal with a nice photo of John and Cindy McCain. Grade: B+

Laura Knaperek, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – I thought I was getting a coupon from Kellogg's for its Special K cereal but instead it’s a Laura Knaperek mailer… “because it will take a Special Congresswoman to get Washington on a Diet of Change”. The entire piece takes elements from the cereal box and transforms them into campaign appeals. Even a mock UPC barcode is shown with VOTE 09.02.08 underneath. This appeal is clearly aimed at women and is clever. But is it to flippant? Is it serious enough for these serious times? It seems like a single shot mailer that (I hope) is not part of an overall theme. Grade: C-

Sorry for the mailbox dump all at once. I’ll try and make future reports shorter and more frequent.

CAMPAIGN 2008 MAIL CALL: A Lonely Day #2

2008-07-31T13:11:00.005-07:00

I’m struck by the (low) amount of campaign literature in Wednesday’s mailbox. I suspect the other campaigns are timing their pieces for the same day early ballots arrive or are just asleep at the switch. We’ll see. He’s may take on today’s haul:

Jeff Dial, Republican for the Arizona House of Representatives from LD20 – Jeff’s campaign sent me another stylistically and thematically consistent postcard titled “IMPROVING EDUCATION”. K-12 education is after all the top issue for voters in legislative races and the top spending priority of the state. Another good piece that builds on yesterday’s. Grade: B+

Frank Schmuck, Republican for the Arizona House of Representatives from LD20 – Frank’s campaign today sent an envelope with a longish letter, a wordy tri-fold brochure and a palm card with (you’ve guessed it) a dense block of text on it’s reverse. I have a biased toward less-being-more in campaign literature. I suspect few primary voters will settle down to read all of the material. I do like the campaign’s play on his last name (SCHMUCK… That’s Right! Frank Schmuck). It shows the candidate’s maturity and good humor. It also has the effect of relieving voters’ anxiety about his last name. I’m sure it’s a great icebreaker and gets voters off the hook for any embarrassment for their involuntary pause after first hearing it. Today’s mail piece has a distinct low-tech feel, especially in contrast with Jeff Dial’s professional and glossy offerings. Could this be valuable and effective counter-marketing? Does it save enough money to allow for more “touches” by the campaign on primary voters? Maybe. But a four-piece mailing is labor intensive and may not be a money-saver compared to a post card. Also, the voter must do something to see your campaign’s message (open a letter). If this is the only envelope mailing in a series of mailings utilizing various formats then it very well might be effective. However, if future mail pieces employ this cumbersome format, I think Team Schmuck is making a costly mistake. Grade: C-

Jim Ogsbury, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – I got an invitation to an Ogsbury fundraiser at a private residence next week. The event’s theme… Hawaiian Luau. Whatever works I guess. I doubt this is a general campaign mailing to CD5 Republican voters so I won’t be grading it.

Mark Anderson, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – I got a nice phone call from Rep. Mark Anderson yesterday regarding a fundraiser and he mentioned my comments about his last mailer on Willet Creek Dam. It’s nice to see that the candidate reads the blogs and took my criticism in stride. (Hi, Mark if your reading this now.) We talked about his eclectic sign strategy. As my prior comments demonstrate, I appreciate consistency of design and the value of a simple, powerful messaging to boost a campaign. He suggested that his unorthodox sign strategy might be the secret weapon in his campaign’s slow-but-steady approach. We’ll see. Back to today’s mailer… a postcard with testimonials from the famous and the not-so-famous on why Mark Anderson’s the best Republican to challenge Harry Mitchell. House Speaker Jim Weiers is used again along with House Majority Leader Tom Boone to good effect. A national parent of the year and local business leader are shown too. More impressively is a nice quote by Mitt Romney and an effusive endorsement by the American Conservative Union’s David Keene. My suggestion, pump up the Keene and Romney bits and consider building an entire piece around the Keene quote in an effort to deflate David Schweikert’s Club for Growth love. Grade: B

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “The Dark Knight” is the best superhero movie of all-time, best movie of 2008 so far

2008-07-30T14:39:00.003-07:00

Wow. “The Dark Knight” is an outstanding movie. [More soon]

Look: 9.5

Story: 10

Acting: 9

Goal: 10

Intangibles: 9.5

Overall: 9.5

CAMPAIGN 2008 MAIL CALL: Early Primary Voting Season Has Begun

2008-07-29T17:18:00.005-07:00

I’ll be blogging on the campaign literature I receive in my mailbox as the primary and general election seasons unfold. I’m a Republican who has voted in every state and federal election since I moved to Arizona in 1994. I do miss the odd local election but I’m what the professionals call a high propensity voter. Moreover, I’m a precinct committeeman for the Republican Party and 2nd Vice Chairman of Legislative District 20 Republicans. So, my mailbox should be hit hard over the next few weeks and months.

Without further delay, here’s what I got today:

Jeff Dial, Republican for the Arizona House of Representatives from LD20 – Jeff’s postcard is very well done and carries through with the design theme that his signs have through the district’s roadways. His sign design is the best in the race. It’s benefited by the ease at which one can display his 4-lettered name. He realizes that his first name is much less important than his last and his simple, clean design exudes competence and sobriety. Back to the mail piece… His top issues are "fighting illegal immigration," "improving education" and "strengthening our economy." He emphasizes his "conservative values" and has nice smiling photos of himself. The part I like the most is the big tagline: THE CHANGE ARIZONA NEEDS. It could easily be viewed as cynical or sarcastic. Either way, it shows a fearlessness uncommon in most cookie-cutter candidates. Grade: B+

Susan Bitter Smith, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – I’m confused. Is Joe Arpaio running for this congressional seat? If I wanted Sheriff Joe as my congressman, I’d vote for him. But he’s not on the ballot. The Bitter Smith campaign sent a (roughly) 8/10 landscape-oriented fold-over booklet that tries to tie the candidate to two far more popular politicians, Arpaio and Ronald Reagan. Does it work? Speaking as someone unmoved by Joe Arpaio’s smoldering sexuality and Capraesque good cheer, I’m unimpressed. Grade: C-

David Schweikert, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – The Schweikert campaign sent an 8/11 magazine-style 4-page mailer that boldly announces the candidate in word and picture on the "cover" (which is suitable for autographing and framing… sign right there David on the flag’s white strip to the left of your elbow…) The inside is less engaging. Too many words. The Bitter Smith piece had the right amount or fewer words than necessary. If you err on this count, err on the side of less rather than more. Your website is for details… which was nicely promoted on the excellent cover by the way. Take the "stuff" crammed on the back page and move it to the centerfold. Grade: B-

Mark Anderson, Republican for the United States House of Representatives from CD5 – "Representative" Mark Anderson has "a proven record of improving education" on his 6/11 glossy tri-fold brochure that is heavy on K-12 education. I see a nice blue-white-yellow banner in the inside that would have made a fine sign for the intersections of our district. Sadly, the drivers in CD5 are aesthetically assaulted by the Anderson campaign with a motley amalgam of conflicting sign designs. It’s one thing to recycle legislative signs from one election to the next but pick a theme and color scheme and stick to it. When you run for Congress, kitsch is goofy not frugal. The mail piece… wonderful if he were running for state legislature but not Congress. No one really cares what Arizona Speaker of the House Jim Weiers thinks of Mark Anderson. In fact, Jim Weiers’ name ID in CD5 must be in the single digits… even among Republicans. As for "Education Committee Vice Chairman" Rep. Andy Tobin’s endorsement… Grade: D

Proposition 200: Reform AZ Payday Loans – Wow, it’s July. Why am I getting a nice glossy 8/11 fold-over from my friends from the payday loan industry 98 days before the general election? Since the piece doesn’t show "Proposition 200" on it I doubt the average, or well-above average voter will long remember this mailer. It looks like it was printed weeks if not month ago. Its language has a clear defensive tone when it talks about "real" reform as if there’s another option. There was when this was printed apparently, but the anti-industry rival initiative failed weeks ago in its signature gathering effort. Grade: C

That’s it. With my early ballot due at the end of the week, I suspect I’ll be seeing many more specimens tomorrow.

East Valley Tribune: "Group takes aim at Pearce's state Senate bid"

2008-07-25T11:59:00.005-07:00

By Sonu Munshi
Tribune

Rep. Russell Pearce is the target of a new political committee that aims to block the Mesa Republican's bid for a state Senate seat.

Pearce said the organizers of the group, Judgment Matters, are people with ties to the business community who are upset with his staunch support of laws that make it tougher for employers to hire illegal immigrants.

Farrell Quinlan, a lobbyist and former executive with the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said only that his group is raising money to "inform" voters about Pearce's record as a legislator. Quinlan did not link the effort specifically to Pearce's sponsorship of legislation that makes it tougher for illegal immigrants to live and work in Arizona. Quinlan did say that the first priority of Judgment Matters is to prevent Pearce from winning the Senate seat in District 18, which includes central and west Mesa.

"We hope to show District 18 Republican primary voters a more complete picture of his public record and show that some of his positions may not represent their interests or views," Quinlan said.

Quinlan did not divulge how many people had pledged support or how much money has been raised thus far.

But voters can expect some "information" to hit their mailboxes around the same time as early ballots arrive at the end of the month.

Pearce, who is being challenged in the Republican Senate primary by Kevin Gibbons, said business groups are going after him because of his support for measures like Proposition 200, the 2004 ballot initiative that barred illegal migrants from receiving state benefits.

Pearce also led the drive for a law that went into effect this year that allows prosecutors to shut down businesses that knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

"It's all being done by the open borders, fast food, cheap labor crowd," Pearce said. "These people fought me on Prop. 200, sued me over (the) employer sanctions law and now they're coming at me with a vengeance."

As an independent committee, Judgment Matters cannot coordinate its efforts with Gibbons, but can raise and spend money urging voters not to vote for Pearce.

Pearce said backers of Judgment Matters are the same people who support the Stop Illegal Hiring Act, which he said would "gut" the new employer sanctions law if it is passed by voters in November.

Quinlan is a former vice president of the state chamber of commerce's policy development and communications department. Mark Ogden, a labor lawyer and chairman of Judgment Matters, could not be reached for comment.

Pearce said he believes another newly formed committee, Mesa Deserves Better, is also targeting his campaign. Nathan Sproul, chairman of Mesa Deserves Better, did not disclose the reason behind the group. Sproul is the former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party.

But Pearce isn't too rattled by these committees. He said he has enough Republican support to win the Sept. 2 primary. "I'm the most Republican representative in the Legislature, yet they're trying to take me out because I'm for the rule of law?" Pearce said.

Visit the East Valley Tribune

PolitickerAZ.com: "Independent group hoping to be a factor in LD18"

2008-07-25T11:54:00.005-07:00

By Evan Brown
PolitickerAZ.com Political Reporter

There is a newcomer to the Legislative District 18 senate race, and it’s not a candidate. Judgment Matters, a new political action committee, is trying to raise funds for a “primary voter education and mobilization effort in Arizona Legislative District 18” - one that opposes the Arizona Senate candidacy of state Rep. Russell Pearce (R-Mesa).

The group is urging donations so that it can mount “independent expenditures” - usually advertising - against Pearce in his primary fight with Kevin Gibbons.

“A surgically-timed contribution from you and others can help excise Russell Pearce and his strain of politics from Arizona’s legislature,” read the Judgment Matters pitch.

Farrell Quinlan, the Chandler political consultant and former vice president of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry who is heading the group, told PolitickerAZ.com it is “not partisan-based.”

“There are a lot of Republicans, Democrats and independents who don’t like Russell Pearce’s style of politics,” said Quinlan.

“From the very beginning there are a lot of folks in the crowd that are anti-Russell,” responded Paul Bentz, a political consultant with HighGround AZ who is working on Pearce’s campaign. “I think it’s been very clear and articulated who they are. They’re going after him on being fiscally conservative and a national leader on immigration.”
Bentz said it was primarily “open borders” advocates who were aligned with Judgment Matters. Farrell Quinlan was part of the No on 200 campaign, aimed at defeating Proposition 200, which toughens identification requirements when voting or applying for state benefits as a way to stop illegal immigrations from taking advantage.
Quinlan said he and his group are looking at other races to get involved with, but it will be a “function of resources” whether they engage in those contests or not.

“We’re not in position now of discussing those,” said Quinlan. “Right now we’re focusing on this effort, then we’ll see what happens.”

Kevin Gibbons, Pearce’s opponent, is welcoming the group’s help.

“Our campaign is based upon changing the tone and principle at the legislature and we welcome anyone who would like to contribute to our cause,” wrote Gibbons in an email to PolitickerAZ.com. “Of course, we cannot and have not coordinated in any way with this group, but welcome their support and anyone else that shares our vision.”

Visit PolitickerAZ.com

Arizona Capitol Times: "Pair of committees set out to ‘excise’ Pearce from Legislature"

2008-07-25T11:50:00.003-07:00

By Jim Small

A pair of committees backed by businesses and other opponents of the employer sanctions law appears to be aiming to defeat the law’s architect this fall in his bid for reelection to the state Senate.

One of the independent expenditure committees will target Mesa Republican Rep. Russell Pearce in this September’s primary election. Farrell Quinlan, a volunteer political consultant for the Judgment Matters committee, said the committee likely will spend money in several races, but the District 18 Senate race between Pearce and Kevin Gibbons is its top priority.

“Rep. Pearce has been a leader of a certain brand of policies, and many people in the business side of the argument have decided to come together,” Quinlan said.

He declined to say who had contributed to the committee or how much had been raised, other than to note there were “a lot of verbal commitments” from the business community.

A letter Quinlan wrote and e-mailed to potential donors asks for “surgically-timed” contributions to “help excise Russell Pearce and his strain of politics from Arizona’s legislature.”

The other committee, Mesa Deserves Better, was created by the chief supporters of an employer sanctions ballot measure that would relax hiring restrictions on businesses. However, committee Chairman Nathan Sproul declined to elaborate on the group’s intent and strategy. “Mesa Deserves Better is an independent expenditure committee. That is all we are publicly disclosing right now,” Sproul said.

Pearce said he expects both groups will oppose him and characterized their supporters as being opposed to the rule of law.

“They have no respect for the public,” he said. “It’s profits over patriotism.”

Although Sproul would not say whether Mesa Deserves Better would work to defeat Pearce, his involvement indicates that likely will be the committee’s purpose. Through the end of May, Sproul’s two consulting businesses — Sproul & Associates and Lincoln Strategy Group — were paid more than $500,000 to run the campaign for the employer sanctions ballot proposition.

Sproul also has been directly involved with Wake Up Arizona!, a coalition of businesses that formed last summer to oppose the employer sanctions law.

At that time, the group said it planned to work to defeat legislators it viewed as responsible for the law.

Pearce said he was not surprised that opponents of the sanctions law were lining up to defeat him in his bid to replace the retiring Karen Johnson in the Senate. The additional attacks thrown his way won’t change his campaign, or his eventual victory, he said.

“Let them do whatever they’re going to do. I stand solid behind the U.S. Constitution,” he said.

Visit the Arizona Capitol Times

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: "Hellboy II: The Golden Army"

2008-07-25T00:29:00.004-07:00

Hellboy II: The Golden Army"

Look: 8.5
Story: 5
Acting: 6.5
Goal: 6.5
Intangibles: 7
Overall: 6.5

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: "Hancock" A Little Fun, Forgettable

2008-07-25T00:18:00.005-07:00

"Hancock"

Look: 7
Story: 6
Acting: 7

Goal: 6.5
Intangibles: 6
Overall: 6.5

Toe-Sucker Morris: “Powell, Rice, Lieberman, Huckabee — but not Romney!”

2008-07-24T16:35:00.007-07:00

After reading this Dick Morris op-ed more closely, I think it deserves more than just a flip “toe-sucker” ad hominem comment.

First, let's establish a few undeniable facts. Morris is not a conservative. He's not particularly “principled” in a political way which is proven by his ‘bipartisan’ clientele over the years (Bill “Slick Willie” Clinton and Trent “Go Dixicrats in '48” Lott). And Morris is by no means a socialist. He's as rapacious a capitalist as you'll find.

I truly believe Dick Morris was privately pulling for a Hillary Clinton nomination victory and then a Clinton Restoration despite protestations to the contrary. Why? How many more quasi-insider books would a Hillary win have been worth? Morris has been milking the Clinton cow for decades now, he doesn’t want to stop now!

Regardless of his preferences on the Democratic side, Morris was an early and oft critic of Mitt Romney's campaign for president. I remember numerous columns throughout the first nine months of 2007 and before where Morris would discuss the GOP presidential field either without mentioning Romney or simply dismissing him.

Morris' case against Romney as made in the recent column is so stale that the best a major league spin-meister like Morris could do to dress it up is to label it “vintage” or “old school.”

Romney's change of position on gay rights and abortion were so well vetted during his presidential campaign, I dare not try to expand on it here. What I will say though is that Romney did flip but he didn't flop on these issues.

He made “liberal” policy statements as a candidate (in 1994 and 2002) before achieving election that he later 'betrayed' as a public official. That's a flip. A flop would be a return to the old position.

The folks that deserve to be angry at these flips in my opinion are the one's betrayed – the pro-choicers and gay marrriage advocates. I've never understood the conventional wisdom that moving to the conservative position on these and other issues ought to be greeted with suspicion by conservatives, pro-lifers and advocates of the sanctity of marriage. These constituencies ought to be emboldened by such 'evolution' and not be bullied by the mainstream media and non-conservatives like Morris into being aloof from such people. Don’t we want to persuade people on the other side of these issues to move in our direction? If not, why bother engaging in the debate?

Moreover, when it counted, when he was in power and able to do something about conservative social policy, Romney did the right, and Right, thing at the most important time. Judge him by his pro-life and pro-marriage deeds as Governor rather than prior statements as a candidate. Those campaign positions have been specifically repudiated and Romney has clearly stated he was wrong in taking them. Conservatives must welcome converts, not shun them.

So, I contend social liberals rather than social conservatives should be Romney's greatest detractors on the “flip-flop” issue. And morally-challenged Dick Morris' thinly veiled hate-Romney attitude proves this out.

Conservatives decided to support Romney too late in the 2008 cycle to allow him to capitalize on his fundraising and personal wealth advantages over his better known rivals. The John Connally in 1980 swipe makes no sense and is ahistorical especially in light of the 2008 campaign itself.

Rudy Giuliani's 2008 campaign easily bested Romney's in ineffectiveness and profligate spending vis-à-vis delegate totals. Phil Gramm's 1996 bid too was much worse in regard. John Connally? Jeez, what's next? Dusting off some arcane nugget about Bob Taft against Ike in 1952? Let's stay in the here and now.

Is Morris right in essentially calling Romney a loser?

Consider, Romney was (perhaps is) largely unknown to voters outside the Bay State. He was running as a conservative in a conservative Republican presidential contest against no fewer than three rivals with near universal name recognition (John McCain, Giuliani and Fred Thompson). He had to counter their long (decades in many cases of) exposure to voters by spending lots and lots of money to jump start his campaign and introduce himself.

He ended up beating two of these three. Not bad when you consider he was the target of all of the other campaigns because they feared him the most as a rival.

I contend that Romney's failed presidential campaign can be viewed as a qualified success in the sense that he clearly defined himself as an articulate, tough and hardworking leader for conservatives for years to come. After all, Reagan lost his first (1968) and second (1976) runs for the Republican presidential nomination. That's my kind of loser.

As I mentioned, conservatives finally did unite (somewhat) when other candidates withdrew and embrace Romney as their candidate. But it was too late to reverse the outcome of a GOP nominating process rigged with mostly winner-take-all contests.

Also, Mike Huckabee's stalking-horse campaign to split the social conservative vote from the economic and national security conservative blocks doomed Romney's ability to get a one-on-one contest with McCain.

Back to Morris.

His points against Romney on policy (not an authentic conservative) and politics (the money/delegates thing) are lame. Besides, those arguments are designed to sour conservatives and Republicans on Romney. What do they mean to the general election voter? Not much.

Who does the conservatives' best friend (Morris) suggest John McCain pick for a vice presidential running mate? He first offers (pro-choice) Colin Powell then (blank slate on social and economic issues) Condi Rice then (pro-choice and Democrat) Joe Lieberman as veeps. Finally, he pushes former client and the Republican's modern day imitation of three-time loser William Jennings Bryan – Mike Huckabee.

Puh-lez! A McCain/Huckabee ticket could lose 40 states.

What do we take from this column by Morris?

First, he has an unnatural antipathy for Mitt Romney that defies rational explanation. It's got an oddly emotional, personal and deep-seeded quality that begs closer examination. Did Mitt run over Morris' cat or lose him a bunch of money in the market when Morris was short on a company Romney resurrected? Or does he have a problem with a man that doesn't drink alcohol and cheat on his wife?

Could it be that Romney represents the kind of man that Morris and the cynical Beltway political class just don't “get”? Aren't all politicians personal reprobates like Morris? Would the success of the milk-drinking Romney undermine their vision of a corrupt America? Or is he just an anti-Mormon bigot? I don't necessarily see evidence of that but remain open to convincing.

I do think Mitt Romney frustrates and complicates the worldview of the cool kids from the 1960's. And what's so bad about that? I welcome it.

In conclusion, Mitt Romney is not the second coming of Ronald Reagan let alone Jesus Christ (Barack Obama has that shtick working right now.). But he's objectively a rising conservative star who has a bright future in a McCain Administration whether as vice president, secretary of the treasury, chairman of the RNC or whatever.

If McCain fails in November, Mitt Romney will be a strong voice in conservative opposition to the Obama/Pelosi/Hillary regime. He will be a leading candidate for the 2012 Republican nomination and Dick Morris will be free to write more hysterical columns dismissing him.

Keep it up Mitt, if Morris is vexed, you must be doing something right (and Right.)

McCain-Romney Ticket Best for GOP in 2008

2008-07-23T15:24:00.003-07:00

The web is all aflutter about John McCain’s pick for vice presidential running mate. Speculation has centered on two leading candidates (unless we are all victims of a giant head-fake which is easily possible.)

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and current Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty are who pundits identify as the likely pair of finalists.

Both come from “blue” states with only Pawlenty holding out any promise of carrying his home state.

Both are Washington outsiders.

Both are much younger than the septuagenarian John McCain.

Both lay claim to representing the Republican Party’s conservative base.

Both are pro-life.

But these similarities only hint at the true benefits of the two.

Despite today’s CNN report boosting the prospects of a McCain-Pawlenty ticket, the GOP nominee ought to go with the “safe” pick and tap his former rival Mitt Romney as his veep. That conclusion shouldn’t surprise readers of Willet Creek Dam since I supported Romney during the primaries. But this is not just an exercise in accepting half-a-loaf since my guy lost the presidential nomination.

Romney actually compliments McCain’s profile nicely. He’s inarguably an economic expert that can authoritatively counter the relentless gloom and doom messages about the economy coming from the media and Democrats. He’s proven his job creation skills in the private sector and his fiscal accountability credentials by his rescue of the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics.

He’s a relentless champion of conservative causes from the sanctity of marriage to pro-growth tax policy.

Moreover, he’s vetted. We all know how disciplined and sharp Romney is on the stump and in debates. And most important, he literally drinks milk. There are no personal skeletons in his closet that threaten to burst forth and embarrass the ticket.

John McCain should take advantage of Mitt Romney’s undeniable assets as a candidate, fundraiser and campaigner. I believe a McCain-Romney ticket would bolt out of the gate with an excellent chance to win the election in 15 short weeks. Conversely, I fear a McCain-Pawlenty ticket could become bogged down in our collective learning about the Number Two candidate and finding out if that man is up to the challenge.

Mitt Romney might be the safe pick. But in this case, “safe” is just another name for the smart choice.

Obama/Gore 2008!!! Too Weird? Not Really

2008-07-18T17:10:00.011-07:00

There's a movement to make former Vice President Al Gore the running mate of Barack Obama.

Seems a little crazy… a little weird too?

On the contrary, it wouldn't be the first time of double duty as vice president or as veep nominee.

There are actually three instances of something like this in our history.

New Yorker George Clinton (no relation to the 42^nd president) served as the fourth vice president of the United States, first under Thomas Jefferson from 1805 to 1809, and then (without interruption) under James Madison from 1809 until his death of a heart attack in 1812, becoming the first vice president to die in office. Jefferson and Madison were close political allies and Clinton did not seek to succeed Jefferson as president. He was happy to continue to serve in the subservient role to the Virginians.

But there is another more interesting example of a vice president for two different presidents.

Calhoun Strandles Adams/Jackson Fued

John C. Calhoun of South Carolina was both the cranky John Quincy Adams' and the volcanic Andrew Jackson's vice president (1825 to 1832) through a quirk in the way we elect our top two executives.

The 1824 election of Adams is the only presidential election to be decided by the House of Representatives when no candidate received a majority in the Electoral College.

At that time, there were no clearly defined parties that nominated a ticket for president and vice president. The "Democratic-Republicans" had four presidential contestants who received various forms of "nomination" ranging from congressional caucus to state legislatures. In the presidential race, Tennessean Andrew Jackson received 99 of 261 electoral votes or 38% – 32 votes short of the number needed to win the presidency. Massachusetts’ John Quincy Adams came in second with 84 electoral votes, former

Georgia

senator and then-Secretary of the Treasury William Crawford got 41 votes and House Speaker Henry Clay from Kentucky scored 37 votes.

The Constitution requires the top three vote-getters to be considered by the House of Representatives in the event of the Electoral College fails to elect a president. The House elects the president by one vote per state delegation rather than each member getting a vote. As the fourth-place finisher in the Electoral College, Henry Clay was dropped off the ballot. However, he was the Speaker of the House and at the least, had great influence over the House vote. When the state delegations’ votes were counted, Adams had 13 state delegations, Jackson won seven and Crawford four.

Adams became president through what Jackson supporters called a "corrupt bargin" that was revealed, so goes the conspiracy theory, when Adams asked Clay to be his to Secretary of State.

[Note: The 1824 election represented the third presidency in a row where the winner was the serving Secretary of State (James Madison, James Monroe and then John Quincy Adams.) Back then, the Secretary of State post was viewed as the clearest path to the presidency.]

Back to Calhoun… so, the 1824 Electoral College struckout on settling on someone for the top job but was able to decide on a vice president. Calhoun wanted to be in the mix for president in 1824 but failed to secure his home state's nomination. Instead he ran for the second job and won in a landslide to become the seventh Vice President of the

United States

.

Vice President Calhoun was not party to any "corrupt bargain" and was politically allied to Andrew Jackson throughout the Adams Administration. He was rewarded for his loyalty by being retained as the Jacksonian vice presidential nominee for the election of 1828. The Jackson/Calhoun trounced Adams and a new political party was born, the Democrats.

The first Democratic administration's honeymoon didn’t last long. Calhoun identified himself more as a South Carolinian than as an American. His sectional biases created explosive friction between himself and the unionist Jackson. Calhoun decided after the Nullification Crisis of 1832 that he could best protect the interests of South Carolina as its senator and resigned as vice president.

The Last Bearded Vice President

The other double vice presidential precedent is Charles Fairbanks. He’s the only person to secure the bottom of the ticket nomination from his party for two different presidential nominees in non-consecutive elections.

The Indiana senator was added to Theodore Roosevelt’s ticket in 1904 to fill the vacant vice presidency (VP TR had succeeded the assassinated William McKinley in 1901.) But when the Rough Rider promised not to run for a “third” term in 1908, his loyal veep was passed over for the presidential nomination in favor Teddy’s handpicked-successor, Secretary of War William Howard Taft of Ohio. But Fairbanks wasn’t through with vice presidential politics. He was the Republican Party’s 1916 nominee under Charles Evans Hughes.

And he was that close to achieving the office again. A flip of 1,887 votes in California from Woodrow Wilson to Hughes would have made Fairbanks the VP again after an eight year hiatus.

I’m not sure what to make of this trivia but an Obama-Gore ticket would clearly not be unique.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “Constantine the Great: The Man and his Times” by Michael Grant

2008-07-01T23:22:00.006-07:00

“Constantine the Great: The Man and his Times” by Michael Grant is another entry in my “Year of Rome” theme. I have not been able to find a good biography of Constantine so this one had to do.

The author is truly a subject expert but not a very elegant writer. His work suffers in comparison to Anthony Everitt's who wrote two prior “Year of Rome” books I recently read, one on Cicero and the other on Augustus.

Grant does his best to breakdown the various biased accounts of Constantine’s life and times to portray the truth as he discerns it. He succeeds in only the barest sense. I finished the book without really knowing Constantine’s motivations. Where the coherent narrative of a flesh and blood person? Grant is so focused on revealing an unbiased account of the facts culled from Christian hagiography and pagan polemics, we lose the man.

A great case can be made that Constantine the Great was one of the ten most influential humans ever to walk the planet. Grant’s work is valuable but I still await a deeper study of the man.

Sen. Jake Flake, R.I.P

2008-06-09T13:20:00.002-07:00

A great friend at the Arizona Legislature passed away over the weekend, Sen. Jake Flake. You can review and add your own thoughts and prayers about this great man at the Flake Family Guestbook.

Sen. Jake Flake was one of the “good guys” at the Legislature. You never heard an unkind word about the dignified, humble and immeasurably honorable rancher from Snowflake. I don’t know what word means “patriotic” when it’s applied to one’s state rather than to one’s country. Whatever that word is, Jake Flake embodied that spirit of love for Arizona that includes rare statesmanship and a profound respect for the people and natural heritage of Arizona. I can’t help but think that a precious, unappreciated era is slipping away with his passing. He will be sorely missed. God bless you, Jake Flake and thank you for sharing your light with the people of Arizona.

Official Arizona Quarter Commemorative Folio

2008-06-03T17:06:00.012-07:00

You can own the Official Arizona Quarter Commemorative Folio celebrating the Arizona’s Quarter from the United States Mint’s 50 State Quarters® Program. This gorgeous limited edition collectible includes an uncirculated-quality Arizona Quarter protected by a crystal clear case to ensure your piece of historical art remains in pristine condition.

The actual image of the Grand Canyon and saguaro cactus from the Arizona Quarter’s reverse design is embossed on the front in luxurious copper foil. The inside tells the story of Arizona’s quarter with beautiful images and an educational description of the design.

Made possible by the generous underwriting of Wells Fargo and Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold and designed by PRfect Media, this commemorative folio is a perfect gift or collectible for all Arizonans of any age.

The commemorative can be purchased online at the University of Arizona Bookstore and in person at the Arizona Capitol Museum Gift Shop for $10. The gift shop is also the exclusive dealer of 2012 individually numbered folios priced at $20 that feature the Arizona Quarter produced at the Philadelphia Mint with the distinctive "P" mint mark on the front of the quarter. The Arizona market is served by the Denver Mint. All new quarters sent to Arizona are from Denver and have the "D" mint mark on the front of the quarter. Non-numbered folios contain the Denver quarter.

UPDATE: To purchase the numbered folios, contact the Arizona Capitol Museum Gift Shop directly. I'm not sure if sell through their site (probably not) but I'm sure they'll take an order over the phone with a credit card.

The Official Arizona Quarter Commemorative Folio was released to the public on June 2, 2008 at the Official Arizona Quarter Launch Ceremony at the State Capitol in Phoenix, Arizona and quantities are strictly limited to a single press run of 25,000 with 2012 of these numbered 1 through 2012. Once we are sold out, these will no longer be available.

100% of the proceeds from this commemorative will benefit the official celebration of Arizona’s Centennial through the Arizona Historical Advisory Commission.

US Mint releases Arizona quarter with Grand Canyon, Saguaro cactus featured in design

2008-06-03T16:42:00.008-07:00

By Paul Davenport Associated Press

PHOENIX – The U.S. Mint has released the Arizona state quarter, with Mint and state officials staging a ceremony at the State Capitol that drew thousands of people to get some of the first coins publicly available.

“It’s awesome. It represents Arizona, definitely,” said Chandler barber Douglas Morales.

Gov. Janet Napolitano and Mint Director Ed Moy gave free quarters to children, while many adults purchased rolls of quarters and special commemorative packages, some of which Wells Fargo transported to the Capitol via stagecoach.

“It’s a big day with the issuance of the new quarter and we do collect them. We’ve got to add to our collection,” said Ed Phillips, a meteorologist who was at the Capitol with his wife and two sons.

The Arizona quarter is the 48th in the 10-year series featuring all 50 states. The coins are issued in order of statehood, and quarters for Alaska and Hawaii will complete the series later this year.

Moy said the design of the tail’s side featuring the Grand Canyon and a Saguaro cactus should be instantly recognizable as representing Arizona and popular with collectors and others because of the nature features.

“It’s beautiful,” said Julie Collums, a high school history teacher from Mesa. “I like that it captures the whole essence of Arizona and not just a part of it.”

Collums, waiting to purchase quarters for friends of her mother, was near the head of a line that grew to include more than 1,000 people.

Capitol Police estimated that 5,000 people attended the event, with 2,500 or so there at any one time, said Sgt. Hollis Korey.

“It’s a great endorsement of the design that we have,” said public relations consultant Farrell Quinlan, a former Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry official who served on the state’s quarter commission.

Napolitano picked the design from among five finalists recommended by the commission, which sifted through 4,200 of written ideas submitted by state residents. Mint artists converted the ideas into visual representations, and Moy on Monday presented Napolitano with the artwork for the chosen design.

The combination design was the overall favorite on 112,830 entries submitted to an online poll conducted by Napolitano’s office.

Moy said 500,000 Arizona quarters will be produced. Production for previous quarters have ranged from 416,000 (Oklahoma) to nearly 1.6 million (Virginia), according to the Mint’s Web site.

The other designs considered for the Arizona quarter showed just the Grand Canyon, 19th Century explorer John Wesley Powell boating down the Colorado River through the canyon, a Saguaro-dominated desert scene and Navajo Indian “codetalkers” serving in the U.S. Marine Corps during World War II.

Officials said rolls of quarters would be available at Wells Fargo banks - the bank was a sponsor for the quarter’s launch - starting Monday and at other locations in coming weeks.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" Out of the World

2008-05-31T20:19:00.005-07:00

"Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull"

Look: 7

Story: 7

Acting: 7.5

Goal: 9

Intangibles: 8.5

Overall: 7.5

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “Iron Man" Fun Franchise Launched

2008-05-31T20:11:00.007-07:00

“Iron Man”

Look: 7.5

Story: 7.5

Acting: 7.5

Goal: 8

Intangibles: 6.5

Overall: 7.5

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian” Worthy Sequel

2008-05-18T20:29:00.003-07:00

“The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian”

Look: 9
Story: 8
Acting: 7.5
Goal: 9
Intangibles: 8.5
Overall: 8.5

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “Augustus: The Life of Rome's First Emperor” by Anthony Everitt

2008-04-27T00:58:00.002-07:00

Book Finished and Review Coming Soon.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: “World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism” by Norman Podhoretz

2008-04-27T00:49:00.005-07:00

Book Finished and Review Coming Soon.

If John McCain Steps Down... Could It Be Sen. Jan Brewer?

2008-02-18T18:42:00.009-07:00

There has been some speculation about Sen. John McCain vacating his U.S. Senate seat once he secures the GOP presidential nomination in order to concentrate all his effort on winning the White House and remove the inevitable gamesmanship by the Democratic majority in the Senate (pointing out missed votes, etc.) Sort of replaying Bob Dole's decision in 1996!

Regardless of this rumor's accuracy, if he does win in November, Sen. McCain would need to resign his seat before inauguration day. Either way, Arizona’s Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano would have to appoint a Republican to fill the remaining two-years of his term.

Napolitano has long eyed that Senate seat for herself. Speculation has assumed that John McCain would not run for another term in 2010, especially after he achieves one of his remaining two goals: the first, securing the GOP nomination for president seems assured; the second, winning the presidency is to be decided.

What to do, what to do? Napolitano must be asking herself.

She’s a very smart political operative. She’ll think about all the angles before making her decision on any senatorial opening.

Does she go for an ideological match in order to impact policy? Does she place a chair-warmer in the seat who would not or could not pose a significant challenge to her likely 2010 run for the seat?

There are many ways to go but I suspect that Gov. Napolitano’s best political play for her own career would be appointing Arizona’s highest ranking Republican statewide officeholder. That’s right, Secretary of State Jan Brewer for replacement senator, especially if the move necessitates a 2008 special election.

Here's my reasoning... in sending Jan Brewer to DC as senator, it in no way disabuses the half-dozen-plus Republicans that have been eying that seat for more than a decade from running in a contested primary. They will be running hard (and dirty?) for the GOP nomination regardless of Sen. Jan Brewer keeping the seat warm. This serves Napolitano’s interests by weakening the eventual nominee and exposing huge riffs within the Arizona Republican Party.

The real beauty of this scenario for Napolitano is that it necessitates at least one other appointment, Jan Brewer’s replacement for the big office on the 7th Floor. This person too would have to be a Republican but he or she would be removed from the succession because of their appointment rather than election to the office. Remember, then-Attorney General Bruce Babbitt became governor when Governor and former-Secretary of State Wesley Bolin died in office and his appointed successor at State (Rose Mofford) couldn’t take the big chair (in that instance, she would a decade later).

Appointing Brewer to the U.S. Senate puts current Democrat Attorney General Terry Goddard one heartbeat away from the big office on the 9th Floor.

If McCain resigns early and loses the presidency, this scenario continues to serve Napolitano’s interests. If it’s Barack Obama winning over McCain, there is a good chance the new president-elect takes her to Washington with him as Attorney General, Secretary of Homeland Security, etc. The gubernatorial succession issue (handing over the office to a Republican) is gone as the office falls to the elected Attorney General rather than the appointed Secretary of State.

Come 2010, incumbent Gov. Terry Goddard runs for re-election… er… election for a full term in his own right!

Moreover, Gov. Goddard will most likely have appointed a strong candidate to succeed him (say, Napolitano's Chief of Staff Dennis Burke) and the Democratic ascendancy in Arizona politics continues.

Think about it.

It could happen.

I’m an elected Republican precinct committeeman, state committeeman, and 2nd Vice Chairman of the Legislative District 20 Republican Party. I don’t relish the prospect of a continued strong Democratic Party effort up and down the Arizona ballot. But we Arizona Republicans have to come to terms with the fact that the days of pushover contests are over.

Arizona Congressman John Shadegg to Retire

2008-02-11T18:19:00.000-07:00

Shocking news today from Arizona Congressman John Shadegg, he's not running for re-election this fall.

John Shadegg has been a stalwart champion of conservative public policy for seven terms in Congress. He has tackled complicated issues like health care reform and remained true to free market principles. His leadership will be greatly missed and difficult, if not impossible, to replace. His retirement is a real loss for Arizona and the nation.

Here is the press release:

Congressman John Shadegg Opts Not To Seek Re-Election

“It is time to seek a new challenge in a different venue.”

Washington, DC~ Congressman John Shadegg (R-AZ) issued the following statement today regarding the election this fall:

Serving Arizona in the United States Congress is the single greatest privilege in my professional life. It was a dream I had for years before my election in 1994, and I still get goose bumps when I look up at the Capitol dome as I walk to a vote.

I grew up in the shadow of Senator Barry Goldwater's home (Be-Nun-I-Kin). My father, Stephen Shadegg, was Senator Goldwater's speechwriter and campaign manager. I inherited his passion for freedom and his deep and abiding faith in the goodness of people. Like Senator Goldwater, I believe in the ability of individual Americans, regardless of their position, circumstances, or status in life, to make decisions for themselves and to manage and control their own destiny better than any government bureaucrat, agency, or politician.

For almost 14 years, I have enjoyed the great honor of fighting for freedom and individual responsibility in the U.S. House of Representatives - the peoples’ House.

I was elected at an exciting point in our nation's history as a part of the '94 Revolution. And, incredibly, I have pretty much seen it all. (In fact, over the years as events have unfolded, every time I would think I had seen it all, something stunning and unexpected would happen).

All in all, it was never my intention to be a professional politician. I have tried to do my best for the people of America, Arizona, and my district. And I believe I have accomplished a great deal as a Member of the U.S. House.

I have served in the Majority and the Minority. I’ve seen a balanced budget and deep deficits. I’ve served when we had a Democrat President and a Republican President. I’ve witnessed a government shutdown and an Impeachment. I’ve been in Congress when we were at war and at peace. I watched an ineffective strategy in Iraq; now we’re seeing real progress.

In 1994, I was excited to sign the Contract with America which promised to restore "the bonds of trust between the American people and the U.S. Congress." And, I have watched as the institution has protected and defended corrupt members and corrupt practices.

I fought to shrink the size and scope of the federal government and have it tax less, spend less, and interfere in our lives less. I've watched as excess spending spiraled breathtakingly out of control. We have piled ever more debt on our children and grandchildren, borrowing obscene amounts from China, Saudi Arabia, and others.

It has been a tremendous privilege to serve and a lot of fun! In Congress, if you want to get ahead, you need to go along and get along. Do what you're told; vote how you're told. I've spent 14 years breaking that rule.

I started my congressional career confronting our elected party leaders on behalf of my class, the freshmen class of 1994. We were elected to Congress to change "the way Washington works." While the leaders of the new Majority were happy to finally be in the majority, they weren't so keen on all this change stuff… so we fought. And, I was one of the lead trouble makers.

I've fought my party’s leadership, and been elected to leadership, and fought my party’s leadership again.

After deep reflection and consultation with my family, I have decided I will not be a candidate for re-election this fall.

As is the case anytime a politician decides to step aside, many will try to "read the tea leaves" and speculate as to "why." Obviously, the Arizona Democrat Party will gin up its partisan spin machine, consistent with its baseless attacks launched over the past few months. So I will answer the obvious questions.

My health is great; I have not felt better in years, and I expect to be involved in our nation's political discourse for decades to come.

I just came off the most successful fundraising year of my career. I raised more than $1 million last year, more since the beginning of this year, and I haven't begun to tap the financial support I could get if I needed it. Recently I have seen polling data that shows I would beat my Democrat opponent by more than 31 points.

It also shows a generic Republican beating a generic Democrat and it shows that on issue after issue the voters of this district support conservative, Republican positions. There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the Republican nominee for this seat will win in November. This district will stay Republican.

The bottom line is that this is a personal decision between my family and me, about our dreams, goals, and ambitions, and we have concluded that it is time for me to seek a new challenge in a different venue to advance the cause of freedom.

I want to thank the people of my Congressional District for the tremendous privilege they have given me. Shirley and I owe a deep debt of gratitude to all who placed their trust in me, first electing me in 1994 and then re-electing me six times. We are forever indebted to them for giving me this privilege and for their friendship and support. I am also very grateful to the people who have donated to my campaigns. Without their generous support, none of this would have been possible.

I know I will at times deeply miss this job. It has been a privilege and an honor and an incredibly rewarding experience.

Our nation is facing huge challenges, and my passion for the cause of freedom is as strong as ever.

I believe we face the greatest threat to civilization in human history in the form of radical Islam, which seeks by violence, infiltration, or a combination of both, to destroy every thing we value and hold dear. Radical Islam opposes equality and equal rights for women and minorities, freedom, and even democracy itself.

And, I have no intention of letting up in the fight for my beliefs. I simply believe it is time for me to do so in some other capacity.

I will continue to work hard to the end of my term in January, and look forward to doing everything in my power to preserve and extend democracy, economic prosperity, human rights, personal freedom and individual responsibility.

###

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: Second “National Treasure” Flick Enjoyable Until You Realize Its Plot Will Likely Crowd Out Real History for All Kids Who See It

2008-02-11T18:18:00.001-07:00

National Treasure: Book of Secrets is an enjoyable movie along the line of the first National Treasure flick and “Night at the Museum.” I really hope these movie spark interest in real history because they have very little of that quality in them.

Look: 8.5

Story: 5

Acting: 7

Goal: 9

Intangibles: 7

Overall: 7

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: Daniel Day-Lewis Retires Best Oscar Award for Best Actor with "There Will Be Blood" Performance

2008-02-11T18:17:00.002-07:00

Oscar contender “There Will Be Blood” is a very good movie with an outstanding lead actor performance by Daniel Day-Lewis that probably should be placed in the top 10 of all time. The movie does rank that high. It is plodding, in a good way, and despite the title, is not a start-to-finish gorefest. Though there is blood. You learn a lot about the era and the early oil industry. Definitely see this movie on DVD if you missed it in the theaters.

Look: 9

Story: 8

Acting: 10

Goal: 9

Intangibles: 7

Overall: 8

Finally, a Two-Man Race

2008-01-29T20:16:00.000-07:00

After Florida, it's a two-man race even though Mike Huckabee will stay in to hold social conservative voters from moving to Mitt Romney.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, I think this will actually work to Romney's advantage. Conservatives will move toward him while the latently and blatantly anti-Mormon primary voters will stay with Huckabee. This only serves to disperse the anti-Romney vote, thereby robbing McCain of possible wins in the South.

Now we’ll get to see if Sen. McCain has any more new “hits” in him.

THE MCCAIN WAY: ATTACK REPUBLICANS

A Top 10 List…

Defending His Amnesty Bill, Sen. McCain Lost His Temper And “Screamed, ‘F*ck You!’ At Texas Sen. John Cornyn” (R-TX). “Presidential hopeful John McCain - who has been dogged for years by questions about his volcanic temper - erupted in an angry, profanity-laced tirade at a fellow Republican senator, sources told The Post yesterday. In a heated dispute over immigration-law overhaul, McCain screamed, ‘F— you!’ at Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who had been raising concerns about the legislation. ‘This is chickens—stuff,’ McCain snapped at Cornyn, according to several people in the room off the Senate floor Thursday. ‘You’ve always been against this bill, and you’re just trying to derail it.’” (Charles Hurt, “Raising McCain,” New York Post, 5/19/07)
In 2000, Sen. McCain Ran An Attack Ad Comparing Then-Gov. George W. Bush To Bill Clinton. SEN. MCCAIN: “I guess it was bound to happen. Governor Bush’s campaign is getting desperate, with a negative ad about me. The fact is, I’ll use the surplus money to fix Social Security, cut your taxes and pay down the debt. Governor Bush uses all of the surplus for tax cuts, with not one new penny for Social Security or the debt. His ad twists the truth like Clinton. We’re all pretty tired of that. As president, I’ll be conservative and always tell you the truth. No matter what.” (McCain 2000, Campaign Ad, 2/9/00; www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHoXkCprdL4)
Sen. McCain Repeatedly Called Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) An “A**hole”, Causing A Fellow GOP Senator To Say, “I Didn’t Want This Guy Anywhere Near A Trigger.” “Why can’t McCain win the votes of his own colleagues? To explain, a Republican senator tells this story: at a GOP meeting last fall, McCain erupted out of the blue at the respected Budget Committee chairman, Pete Domenici, saying, ‘Only an a–hole would put together a budget like this.’ Offended, Domenici stood up and gave a dignified, restrained speech about how in all his years in the Senate, through many heated debates, no one had ever called him that. Another senator might have taken the moment to check his temper. But McCain went on: ‘I wouldn’t call you an a–hole unless you really were an a–hole.’ The Republican senator witnessing the scene had considered supporting McCain for president, but changed his mind. ‘I decided,’ the senator told Newsweek, ‘I didn’t want this guy anywhere near a trigger.’” (Evan Thomas, et al., “Senator Hothead,” Newsweek, 2/21/00)
Sen. McCain Had A Heated Exchange With Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) And Called Him A “F*cking Jerk.” “Senators are not used to having their intelligence or integrity challenged by another senator. ‘Are you calling me stupid?’ Sen. Chuck Grassley once inquired during a debate with McCain over the fate of the Vietnam MIAs, according to a source who was present. ‘No,’ replied McCain, ‘I’m calling you a f—ing jerk!’ (Grassley and McCain had no comment.)” (Evan Thomas, et al., “Senator Hothead,” Newsweek, 2/21/00)
In 1995, Sen. McCain Had A “Scuffle” With 92-Year-Old Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC) On The Senate Floor. “In January 1995, McCain was midway through an opening statement at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing when chairman Strom Thurmond asked, ‘Is the senator about through?’ McCain glared at Thurmond, thanked him for his ‘courtesy’ (translation: buzz off), and continued on. McCain later confronted Thurmond on the Senate floor. A scuffle ensued, and the two didn’t part friends.” (Harry Jaffe, “Senator Hothead,” The Washingtonian, 2/97)
Sen. McCain Accused Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) Of The “Most Egregious Incident” Of Corruption He Had Seen In The Senate. “It escalated when McCain reiterated the charges Oct. 10 in a cross-examination, calling McConnell’s actions the ‘most egregious incident’ demonstrating the appearance of corruption he has ever seen in his Senate career.” (Amy Keller, “Attacks Escalate In Depositions,” Roll Call, 10/21/02)
Sen. McCain Attacked Christian Leaders And Republicans In A Blistering Speech During The 2000 Campaign. MCCAIN: “Unfortunately, Governor Bush is a Pat Robertson Republican who will lose to Al Gore. … The political tactics of division and slander are not our values… They are corrupting influences on religion and politics, and those who practice them in the name of religion or in the name of the Republican Party or in the name of America shame our faith, our party and our country. Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right.” (Sen. John McCain, Remarks, Virginia Beach, VA, 2/28/00)
Sen. McCain Attacked Vice President Cheney. MCCAIN: “The president listened too much to the Vice President . . . Of course, the president bears the ultimate responsibility, but he was very badly served by both the Vice President and, most of all, the Secretary of Defense.” (Roger Simon, “McCain Bashes Cheney Over Iraq Policy,” The Politico, 1/24/07)
Celebrating His First Senate Election In 1986, Sen. McCain Screamed At And Harassed A Young Republican Volunteer. “It was election night 1986, and John McCain had just been elected to the U.S. Senate for the first time. Even so, he was not in a good mood. McCain was yelling at the top of his lungs and poking the chest of a young Republican volunteer who had set up a lectern that was too tall for the 5-foot-9 politician to be seen to advantage, according to a witness to the outburst. ‘Here this poor guy is thinking he has done a good job, and he gets a new butt ripped because McCain didn’t look good on television,’ Jon Hinz told a reporter Thursday. At the time, Hinz was executive director of the Arizona Republican Party. … Hinz said McCain’s treatment of the young campaign worker in 1986 troubled him for years. ‘There were an awful lot of people in the room,’ Hinz recalled. ‘You’d have to stick cotton in your ears not to hear it. He (McCain) was screaming at him, and he was red in the face. It wasn’t right, and I was very upset at him.’” (Kris Mayes and Charles Kelly, “Stories Surface On Senator’s Demeanor,” The Arizona Republic, 11/5/99)
Sen. McCain “Publicly Abused” Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL). “[McCain] noted his propensity for passion but insisted that he doesn’t ‘insult anybody or fly off the handle or anything like that.’ This is, quite simply, hogwash. McCain often insults people and flies off the handle…. There have been the many times McCain has called reporters ‘liars’ and ‘idiots’ when they have had the audacity to ask him unpleasant, but pertinent, questions. McCain once… publicly abused Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama.” (Editorial, “There’s Something About McCain,” The Austin American-Statesman, 1/24/07)

My Question for the Republican Presidential Candidates Debate on January 30th

2008-01-29T16:35:00.000-07:00

Take a look at Politico.com's site to submit a question for the Wednesday, January 30, 2008 Republican Debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California. I offered the following question to be asked of Sen. John McCain:

You have labeled Gov. Romney a flip-flopper. It's true that Gov. Romney was effectively pro-choice until a few years ago while you have a perfect pro-life voting record in Congress. Gov. Romney has specifically repudiated his prior abortion position and has characterized his position as “wrong” and detailed why he has moved to the pro-life side. On the issues that you have flip-flopped on, namely the Bush Tax Cuts, the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill and forswearing vicious negative attacks on your opponent, in what ways were you wrong?

ENDORSEMENT: Vote Mitt Romney in GOP Primaries and Caucuses

2008-01-28T12:23:00.000-07:00

I’ve gone and done it. I dropped my vote-by-mail ballot in the mailbox along with my wife’s ballot. In the Arizona Republican Presidential Preference Primary set for Tuesday, February 5, 2008, my ballot was proudly marked for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

The reasons I voted for Mitt Romney are many:

National Security is the #1 vote-determining issue for me and Mitt Romney takes the jihadist threat seriously. I trust him to take command of the War on Terror from President Bush. He “gets” the threat from Iran and I believe he will ensure that the necessary support for democracy and free market development in the Middle East (and around the world) continues.
Economics is my secondary concern when deciding who to vote for. Mitt Romney knows the economy and knows how jobs and wealth are created. We’ve often hear about “running government like a business” from citizens frustrated by the waste, fraud and abuse that is endemic to big government. Instead of headline-grabbing opposition to $2-million-Museum-of-Fudge-type earmarks, Mitt Romney is the kind of serious financial expert that can tackle our runaway entitlements. We need to fix Social Security and Mitt Romney has the “turnaround” experience to accomplish what President Bush could only raise as an issue.
Culture of Life issues are very important to the future of this country and the Republican Party. Regardless of his prior stance on abortion, Mitt Romney has governed as a pro-life leader. He has not only changed his position to pro-life, he has a powerful testimony of how his evolution on this issue occurred. Pro-lifers need to recognize that in order to "win" on this issue, we are going to have to attract converts. Who better to lead as president on this effort than someone who has made that move and is willing to intelligently talk about his views on life issues. He has also been a leader on marriage and his personal story is a textbook case of "walking the talk" on family values (unlike many members of the GOP leadership over the years).
Mitt Romney is probably one of the most intelligent people to have ever run for the office. In Massachusetts parlance, he’s “"WikidSmaht” earning an MBA and JD simultaneously from Harvard. He saved the scandal-plagued 2002 Winter Olympics Games, turning a $379 million deficit into a $56 million surplus. Unlike some who were born into wealth or married it, Mitt Romney used his keen intellect to build businesses and save enterprises. He was rightfully well-paid for these extraordinary feats. God bless him for his success and any good free market conservative would have absolutely no problem with the size of his fortune. To the contrary, his earned wealth should work to his favor as evidence that he is someone you can trust with the awesome power of the federal government has over our economy.
During the campaign to date, he has also proven himself a superb candidate able to engage in tight debate argument and has the real skill of being well-grounded in all aspects of domestic and foreign policy with the ability to communicate his message.
Lastly, I believe 2008 will be an election remembered as one reflecting a mood of change. A Washington politician will not be successful in presenting a winning “change” option to voters this fall. Mitt Romney is not of Washington and is not captive of Washington-think.

There are many other reasons to support Romney (e.g., appointment of judges/justices, ANWR drilling, pro-growth tax policy, health care reform, etc.) but the above should give any conservative Republican more than enough reason to support him.

When I first started thinking about the 2008 race a couple years back, Mitt Romney was my second choice behind former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. Since Jeb Bush announced he wouldn’t run, I easily gravitated toward Romney back in 2006. Since then he has done nothing to cause me to regret supporting him, including my support financially.

If you are voting in Florida on Tuesday, on Super Tuesday on February 5^th or later, I urge you to visit Mitt Romney’s website and find out why the conservative choice in GOP primaries and caucuses is Mitt Romney.

YEAR OF ROME: Sketches of 92 That "Wore the Purple" A Great Value

2008-01-25T16:25:00.000-07:00

“The Roman Emperors: A Biographical Guide to the Rulers of Imperial Rome, 31 B.C. - A.D. 476” by Michael Grant is a treasure trove of information about the scores of men that held the “office” of Roman emperor. What’s fascinating about reading the 500-to-2,500-word biographical sketches is the dismal survival rates of these poor schlubs. The vast majority of them suffered unnatural deaths, most murdered by their own troops or family members! The variety of the ways Roman Emperors died is exhaustive including one that very well might have been struck by lightning (Carus in A.D. 283.) The most remarkable period for such happenings was the middle of the 3^rd Century when rival emperors, secessionists and usurpers abound. Practically all ended up the victim of his successors.

It’s not all death and intrigue in Grant’s indispensable reference book, but a lot of it is. This book is ending up to be a key resource for my “Year of Rome”. Grant’s book can be found in the bargain shelves at most Barnes and Noble booksellers. If you want an inexpensive and authoritative look at these important man nearly lost to history pick this one up.

2008 Arizona Republican Presidential Primary Ballot

2008-01-16T23:39:00.000-07:00

I just recieved my 2008 Arizona Republican Presidential Primary Ballot in the mail today. Take a look at it here (click on it for a larger image):

For the record, here is how I have voted in past presidntial primaries and general elections:

2004 Presidential Election: George W. Bush (Arizona)

2004 Presidential Primary: No Arizona Primary

2000 Presidential Election: George W. Bush (Arizona)

2000 Presidential Primary: George W. Bush (Arizona)

1996 Presidential Election: Robert Dole (Arizona)

1996 Presidential Primary: Steve Forbes (Arizona)

1992 Presidential Election: George H. W. Bush (Virginia)

1992 Presidential Primary: George H. W. Bush (Virginia)

1988 Presidential Election: George H. W. Bush (Vermont)

1988 Presidential Primary: Jack Kemp (Vermont)

This year, I'm sending in my primary ballot with Mitt Romney's name selected as my vote.

Michigan Delivers! On to Nevada (O.K., South Carolina, too)!

2008-01-15T22:13:00.000-07:00

Maybe Mitt Romney should really start thinking about dropping out of the race now! No gloating. Nevada is his next "golden" opportunity. He's got shot at a bronze in South Carolina, maybe even a silver is possible. There is only one ticket out of South Carolina among McCain, Huckabee and Thompson. The winner there challenges Mitt and Rudy in Florida and maybe on Super Duper Tuesday.

Michigan Republicans Support Mitt Romney, Liberals Support McCain

2008-01-14T18:01:00.000-07:00

My prognostication skills have proven uneven at best. I’m still a Romney booster. If fact, the more I learn about Huckabee’s politics and the more I’m reminded of McCain’s record, the more I’m committed to supporting Mitt Romney. I have warmed up considerably to Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani as candidates.

The only prediction I will make about the Michigan Primary is that Mitt Romney will soundly defeat McCain among Republican primary voters. McCain will win the liberal vote and depending on how many of them vote in the GOP primary, he may end up “winning” the Republican primary. Why that result would force Romney out of the race escapes me. This is a Republican nominating process, isn’t it? We should not allow liberal mischief force good conservative candidates out of the race while they raise non-conservative candidates to the top.

Go Mitt.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: "Cicero: The Life and Times of Rome's Greatest Politician" by Anthony Everitt

2008-01-13T14:08:00.000-07:00

2008 is the “Year of Rome” on Willet Creek Dam. I’m focusing a lot of my personal reading and free time getting to know more about the ancient Roman world. The first installment of the “Year of Rome” is a short review of “Cicero: The Life and Times of Rome's Greatest Politician” by Anthony Everitt.

Marcus Tullius Cicero is a special case among famous Romans, especially during the chaotic Civil War period that saw the end of the Roman Republic in the 1st Century B.C. He was an influential politician who at times was considered powerful, even though he was never considered a military man and did not have legions backing up his efforts like every other significant Roman leader of the age.

As you can imagine, such a toothless portfolio doomed Cicero to eventual defeat and an early death. But his unique run of success was long and eventful. Because he made his mark mostly as an advocate in the Roman Forum and in the Senate, he was often put in the position of debating the key issues of the day. He was so accomplished at his oratorical and writing skills that even though he was not a “victor,” he did in many ways write the history of the era that saw Julius Caesar put the Republic down and Octavian raise up the Empire.

Everitt’s book is a well-written account that is accessible to the novice Roman history reader like me. I recommend his book to anyone who would like a quick and easy introduction to this era of Roman history.

Romney's Still the Man to Beat in GOP Race

2008-01-08T22:02:00.000-07:00

Wow, the Obama Tsunami dissipated short of the New Hampshire shore. The Clinton machine will now endeavor to burn him down. It won't be pretty.

On the Republican side, what would you call the candidate that has won the highest number of delegates and the highest number of votes to date among the Republican presidential candidates? A sure loser, of course!

According to CNN’s analysis, here is how the delegate count looks after New Hampshire:

30 - Mitt Romney (24 pledged and 6 RNC)
21 - Mike Huckabee (18 pledged and 3 RNC)
10 - John McCain (10 pledged and 0 RNC)
6 - Fred Thompson (6 pledged and 0 RNC)
2 - Ron Paul (2 pledged and 0 RNC)
1 - Rudy Giuliani (0 pledged and 1 RNC)
1 - Duncan Hunter (1 pledged and 0 RNC)

All the pundits, the same that predicted a big Obama New Hampshire win, keep saying Romney is done if he doesn’t win this race or another and keeps coming in second. That would be true in a Gore-vs.-Bradley-2000-like campaign. In that race, it was a zero-sum game. One candidate would “win” and the other would “lose.” But a round-robin series of anti-Romney candidates “winning” only allows the only truly national candidate to continue to keep his lead in overall primary and caucus votes and more importantly, delegate counts.

Say Mitt comes in second in Michigan. Who will be the delegate leader after that race? Romney still.

The pundits should drop the “Romney must win all early contests to beat Giuliani in Florida and on Super Tuesday” path to victory meme? They refuse to rethink the campaign and continue to call Romney a loser. But he’s still in the best position to win the nomination. Who’s in a better position organizationally, financially and politically? Aren’t the pundits implicitly saying Rudy’s strategy is still working by holding Romney to his initial early contest plan? If not, what is the new theory of the campaign?

I’ll say it again, Romney can hijack Rudy’s strategy, especially in a compressed contest calendar where campaigns can’t score and spend significant cash infusions in time to move the neddle. The self-financed Romney can compete nationally, the others (McCain and Huckabee) can’t.

On to Michigan. Romney’s birthplace. Let’s see how a week of Rush Limbaugh teeing off on John McCain can do to the Straight Talker.

CRYSTAL BALL: Obama Tsunami Upends Hillary, Mitt & McCain Neck & Neck

2008-01-07T18:47:00.000-07:00

How big will Obama's New Hampshire win over Hillary be? I say, at least 20%.

I'll use a little history to help handicap the 2008 New Hampshire Primaries. First, let’s look at the Obama-Clinton race.

The conventional wisdom says Obama beats Hillary with the only question being by how much. A good way to determine how badly Hillary can lose and still recover is to look at the 1984 Democratic primary between establishment candidate former Vice President Walter Mondale and upstart Sen. Gary Hart. Hart road a wave of “New Ideas” to a 37.3% to 27.9% win over the eventual nominee, a 9.4% margin. In more recent memory, the 2000 Republican contest had upstart Sen. John McCain’s “Straight Talk Express” rolling up a 48.5% to 30.4% drubbing of establishment favorite Texas Gov. George W. Bush, the eventual nominee. That’s an 18.1% margin. This history proves that a big loss in the Granite State is not fatal to an establishment candidate. If Hillary can keep Obama’s victory to within that 9% to 18% range, she can recover. However, a 20% spanking or even a monumental blowout of 25% or more may make the 3^rd Clinton Term Project all over except for the crying ;-).

The Republican contest is between the 2000 N.H. primary winner Sen. John McCain and the former governor of neighboring Massachusetts Mitt Romney. Romney led in New Hampshire from May through December 2007, polling between 27% and 32% most of the time. However, though Romney has held his support level, he’s behind in the late pre-primary polls because of Rudy Giuliani’s collapse and Fred Thompson’s evaporation. Their supporters have coalesced around the McCain campaign enough to vault him into the top spot. A close second place showing by Romney is not fatal much like Bob Dole’s loss to Pat Buchanan (27.2% to 26.2%) didn’t mean he wouldn’t eventually capture of the 1996 nomination.

The “x” factor in both Republican and Democratic primaries is the level of Independents voting in their primary. In 2000, according to CNN exit polls, 41% of all voters in the Republican primary were Independents. McCain creamed Bush at a better than 3-to-1 clip, 62% to 19%, with Independents. The 4% of GOP primary voters that were Democrats passing on the Gore/Bradley yawner broke for McCain by a ridiculous 6-to-1 margin, 78% to Bush’s 13%. Bush actually did win among the 53% of Republicans voting in the GOP primary, 41% to McCain’s 38%. Will a similar 45% of 2008 GOP primary voters be Independents and Democrats? I suspect many of these voters won’t pass up the chance to vote for the charismatic and history-making campaign of Barack Obama.

PREDICTION: Independents come out big for the Democratic primary and for Obama. Hillary comes in second to Obama by more than 20%. Edwards will finish much closer to Hillary than Hillary to Obama. McCain and Romney will be in a close battle that’ll be decided by the number of non-Republicans that vote in the Republican primary. My heart says Mitt beats McCain in a close contest, my head says he losses by 3% or less and lives to fight another day (actually, in next Tuesday’s Michigan Primary on January 15th.) That clown Ron Paul again beats Rudy Giuliani and in doing so, ensures that Romney remains half of the mythical two-man race. The only question will be if McCain, rather than Rudy, can be the other half of that tandem. It’s crisis time for Team Rudy and the media will begin to focus on his demise rather than Romney’s.

First Blush Analysis of the Iowa Results

2008-01-04T00:31:00.000-07:00

I seem to be a better prognosticator of Democratic politics than of the GOP’s. I’m too close the Republican passions I suspect. Here’s my early take on tonight’s results:

The Democrats

OBAMA: Barack Obama’s for real. FOX News’ Juan Williams is right: Obama’s victory is historic. He clearly won the white vote in monochrome Iowa and looks to rack up overwhelming African-American majorities in future primaries. I see him winning New Hampshire because 5 days is not enough time for Hillary’s goons to effectively smear him. It will be interesting to see how the press handles this victory. Do they go after him because he’s the new frontrunner? Do they try to finish off Hillary first? A lot rides on the answer to those questions.

Obama’s speech tonight was great and inspirational. He really is following a Reagan approach to this campaign. While his opponents seem like venal politicians, he’s above the fray, majestic, a man of destiny. Not bad if you can pull it off. The speech was to the nation not just Democrats or Iowans and perfect pitch. He looked very presidential, however, minus the experience and a little more gray hair.

I believe when Obama got into this race he figured he wouldn’t get the presidential nomination, maybe veep. It’d be a shakedown cruise to build an organization for many future campaigns. After all, he’s got 5 or 6 more presidential cycles to run in. Any fair measure of his resume in 2008 reveals that his experience is light in areas. I figured he’d be practically unstoppable in 2012 or 2016 with a couple Senate terms under his belt and some legislative achievements, maybe a high profile Cabinet post or governorship. Surprisingly, it looks like he just might win the nomination this go around.

However, a 2008 nomination might be too early in his career for general election success. The inexperience factor makes him more beatable by the Republicans this year. Interestingly, he looks like a candidate that could come up short in 2008, hold the party leadership after his defeat and get re-nominated in 2012. Unless Condoleezza Rice beats him to it, Obama will be the first African-American president or vice president.

CLINTON: Now we get to see if Hillary Clinton is a bleeder. She has never had to demonstrate the kind of resilience, toughness and adaptability that’ll be necessary to stage a comeback. We’ll see if she has it in her character to recover. I suspect she’ll lash out at the media, voters, campaign workers, Bill, Obama, you name it. If Buddy the focus-grouped dog were still around, she’d kick him tonight. Her campaign infighting and finger-pointing will be interesting to watch too. Chances are that she will recover and win the nomination but the inevitability talk is over.

EDWARDS: Edwards gets to hang around and menace the two frontrunners for a few more weeks. The big question is how will Edwards approach his opponents going forward? Will he pile on Hillary in order to knee-cap her and end the Clinton presidential dynasty? Or does he still see himself as fighting Obama to be the un-Hillary alternative? Obama really would love to see the Edwards shark take a bite out of hemorrhaging Hillary. If he does, the nomination will likely go to Obama. Maybe an Obama-Edwards ticket?

ALSO-RAN DEMOCRATS: None of the other Democratic candidates are of any consequence outside of endorsing one of the surviving three. And that only matters if Obama is able to run the table on the endorsements and embarrass Hillary.

The Republicans

HUCKABEE: The more I listen to Huckabee speak the more envy-laden, statist and un-Republican class warfare rhetoric I hear. Don’t get me started on his Carteresque foreign policy tripe. The Iowa caucus-goer was the perfect audience for his message and likely represents his high water mark of support. The media will continue to promote him for the chaos he creates hoping the longer he’s viable, the deeper and more permanent the divisions become within the Reagan coalition. Moreover, he’s an easier candidate for the Democrats to defeat in November if, against all odds, he actually ends up winning the GOP nomination. He has no future as a winning presidential candidate and should drop out of the race in time (March 10th, I think) to file for the U.S. Senate seat that is very winnable in his home state.

ROMNEY: Romney came in 2nd in Iowa and underperformed expectations. Traditionally, such a setback means fundraising dries up and candidates seriously start thinking about exit strategies. But this scenario isn’t an easy fit for Romney’s campaign. If he’s willing to continue to spend his own enormous personal fortune on the race, he can push through this rough spot. After all, it’s not like there is a real frontrunner waiting to put the race away. When all this is concluded, we may see Romney even try to adopt a modified version of Giuliani’s February 5th strategy. He has the resources. The Democrats and their allies in the media fear Romney’s Bush-free curriculum vitae, razor-sharp intellect and potential to unify the Reagan coalition. I suspect Romney will be savaged by the media and all of the other candidates over the next month. If he can withstand the onslaught, he will emerge stronger and be ready to win in November. Regardless, even with a New Hampshire loss (a close one, well under 10 points, not a blowout), I still see this as a 2-man race: Romney vs. Giuliani or McCain.

THOMPSON: If Thompson holds onto a 3rd place showing in Iowa, good for him (though he’ll remain a footnote in the history of the 2008 campaign.) He could have the most impact on the nomination by bowing out now in favor of his buddy McCain. The problem with this scenario is that New Hampshire is only 5 days away. Fred probably won’t see himself as a hopeless loser just yet. McCain will have to earn a New Hampshire victory without an assist from a Fred endorsement. Like Edwards, the question is who does Thompson attack Rudy, Huckabee, McCain or Romney?

MCCAIN: It was a good night for the Arizona Straight-Talker. If he would have only bested Thompson by a few points maybe he could have wrung an endorsement out of a dejected Tennessean in time to help beat Romney in New Hampshire. It doesn’t look like that’s going to happen, Fred dropping out before NH. He must win NH to continue his campaign. McCain has the opposite money situation as Romney. He’s already in debt and recently took out a $3 million loan. He can’t even entertain holding on through February 5th without some major success soon. The question for McCain is how nasty do his attacks on Romney get over the next few days? Does he look like a mean old man in doing it?

GIULIANI: The wait-for-the-big-states gambit will probably prove to be a loser for Giuliani. Huckabee’s win helps the strategy on paper but a weak 6th place finish in Iowa is very alarming. Romney has born the brunt of the negative horserace commentary over the last month because Huckabee and McCain have come on strong and bumped Mitt from the top spot in their cherry-picked states. But Rudy is the one in real trouble. His other-than-Romney opponents have benefited from his implosion. Consider, Mitt won 25% of Iowa and has held that percentage in Iowa polls since May. Basically we learned that Romney hit his Iowa ceiling and stayed there. Romney’s been in the 20’s in New Hampshire since April and will score at least in the 20’s on primary day. Maybe he has a ceiling there too. In contrast, Rudy is in free-fall and needs to find a support level before he crashes through the floor. He needs to show up in New Hampshire or the story will shift from Romney’s second-time second-place woes to Rudy’s second-time single-digit catastrophe. Florida is a long way away.

PAUL: Yippee, 10% in Iowa. Good thing none of his campaign literature says the word “Republican” on it. He can continue to use it when he accepts the Libertarian Party’s nomination. He did it in 1988 and will do it again in 2008.

HUNTER: He should withdraw on Friday and endorse Romney like Tancredo did a week or so ago. He could be a future Secretary of Defense if he handles his exit with class and dignity.

CRITIQUE & REVIEW: Kona the Star of "I Am Legend"

2008-01-03T18:08:00.000-07:00

I liked I Am Legend more than the critics did. It takes a difficult and somewhat silly premise and does a good job of portraying the loneliness of “the last man on Earth.” I guess you might call it “a thinking man’s” zombie flick. Will Smith is good but the star of the film is Sam, played with depth and subtly by Kona, a very cute 4-year-old German Shepherd.

Look: 9

Story: 7

Acting: 7.5

Goal: 9

Intangibles: 8

Overall: 8

CRYSTAL BALL: Romney, Obama My Predictions for Iowa Winners

2008-01-03T13:20:00.000-07:00

With the caveat that I’m an announced Mitt Romney supporter, here are my predictions for tonight’s Iowa Caucuses:

Democrats:

Obama (by a surprisingly comfortable margin)
Edwards (lives to fight – and inevitably die – another day)
Clinton (crisis in Camp Clinton, wait for the finger-pointing, it’ll get ugly)

Republicans:

Romney (narrow, kissing-your-sister-like “win”)
Huckabee (high water mark, thank you for playing)
Thompson (see Edwards comment above)
McCain (could be 3rd over Thompson, they’ll be neck and neck for 3-4)
Paul (juggernaut rolls on to Libertarian Party nomination)
Giuliani (wow, taking on water, needs to over-perform in New Hampshire)