Thursday, May 25th, 2006...3:38 pm
I Don’t Know Albert, We Don’t Know Anyone Named Ann Onymous
I guess we have ourselves a trend. You may remember that last week a letter anonymously went out from a couple of brave souls trashing Councilmember José Ibarra. This week, some other group of oh so brave souls are trashing Senator Gabrielle Giffords.
Oh, but they aren’t anonymous…they have a name, “Real Democrats for Real Democrats.”
See, their premise is that Gabrielle Giffords isn’t a “Real Democrat.” Their evidence is that Giffords was registered as a Republican back when she lived in New York. Never mind that she wasn’t an active Republican, and not even a very good one if her views then resemble her votes as a state legislator.
Question for you: does this mean that Republicans who leave the party to join the Democrats are not welcome in our party now? Slade Mead, go home!
The challenge I have issued to supporters of other candidates when they say this is to find a vote where she sold out Democratic issues. To date, none of them have been able to find one. Why would so many progressive people and groups support her if she ever did? Are they all ignorant?
These folks dug in to her record and found her “sell-out” vote, and I was shocked.
She voted for a resolution creating a day honoring Ronald Reagan.
Is that the best you can do?
By the way, Democrats Victor Soltero, Harry Mitchell and Albert Hale voted for the resolution as well. Sell-outs one and all, right?
(Marsha Arzberger voted for it too, she does tend to be a conservative Democrat though. I wouldn’t recommend sending out anonymous letters about her, she packs. And her husband could still kick your ass no matter how old he is now.)
(And another “by the way,” Ken Cheuvront voted against it, and most progressive activists can’t stand him. My point is that this isn’t much of a litmus test, is it?)
Once again, they dig up the phony issue about Giffords’s choice of campaign chairs. Giffords’s original chairs were Dorothy Finley and Eddie Basha. When she first picked Basha, I heard grousing that he was anti-labor. Then, she dropped Basha. The complaint was then that she was selling out to that gawdawful special interest, organized labor.
I have heard these complaints from the exact same people. Heck, the letter has both complaints in it. Is she anti-labor, or is she too pro-labor? Make up your minds.
By the way, if she is anti-labor, why have so many unions thrown in with her? I know, I know, weak-kneed sell outs, right? Given that she’s been endorsed by the teamsters, the machinists and the carpenters, I wouldn’t recommend saying that to their face.
By the way, her Republican support is supposed to be evidence that she’s not a good Democrat, so does the number of progressive supporters make her progressive? Why not?
They also go after Dorothy Finley. Yes, Finley is a Republican. Yes, she gives money to Republicans, but she also gives money to Democrats. She gave money to Paul Babbitt, which hardly anyone did. She also gave money to Raúl Grijalva, another sell-out for sure, right? She also gave money to my brother’s last campaign, when many supposedly “good” Democratic donors wouldn’t even return his phone calls. If you wish to call my brother a crypto-Republican sell-out, I suggest we take it up in person.
But, of course, you chose not to take it up in person, did you?
Here’s what galls me the most about the letter: the complaint that many progressive activists have with our elected officials is that they cringe too much, that they don’t seem to have the courage of their convictions to stand up for our values against big conservative money or conservative sniping in the media. You are right, and I share that frustration. How does one argue this point, but send out an anonymous hit on someone?
I have my doubts that a campaign sent this out. It seems more likely that this is the supporter of one of the other candidates who thinks that this will actually be helpful. You aren’t helping. If it was sent by a campaign, it is highly unethical and, frankly, illegal.
Is this the sort of thing we are going to be treated to over the next few months?
NB - I haven’t gotten a chance to put this up, but it seems related. A few months back, I spoke to a supporter of Patty Weiss, who told me that Giffords was not “progressive” enough. I told him, but she’s got a record that is very progressive. Then he said, that is the problem, because the Republicans are going to rip her up for that, and it’s better to nominate someone with no record. So, she’s not progressive enough, but her progressiveness is a problem. Hrm.
47 Comments
May 25th, 2006 at 4:40 pm
Remind me what it was you said about John Verkamp a couple of weeks ago.
May 25th, 2006 at 4:49 pm
I’ll do better than that, here is the link.
I never trashed Verkamp for being a party switcher, but some of my readers did.
May 25th, 2006 at 5:00 pm
If we start saying that former Republicans can’t be a part of our team … we are in BIG TROUBLE.
See folks, there are these things called “Elections” where “voters” who tend to be registered as either a “Democrat”, a “Republican”, or as “party not declared” vote for those who will “lead us”.
More often then not, the voters will stick with their party. This is BAD NEWS for whoever is in the party with LESS REGISTRANTS … yup, we are talking about the “Democrats” in Arizona.
In order for Democrats to win, independents and republicans have to vote for us. And in order for the victories we get to become long term and for this state to become “Democratic” or as some of you would like to say “Blue” it requires some of those Independents and Republicans to see where they were wrong and join our party.
In other words GET OVER IT … if things keep up the way they are now, there are going to be way more republicans coming over to our side. Let’s welcome them with open arms, help their ideological transformation along the way through education and “nurturing” and watch the “guns in bars” crowd start to whither away.
ORRRRRRR we could just rest on our laurels, not want any new people, and be content with ideological self importance and selfishness.
< /rant >
May 25th, 2006 at 5:13 pm
Gabby’s opponents:
- “yeah gabby votes the right way, that’s the problem”
- “yeah gabby has raised more money, that’s the problem.”
- “yeah gabby has more endorsements, that’s the problem.”
- “yeah gabby appeals to both democrats and republicans, that’s the problem.”
May 25th, 2006 at 5:36 pm
Thanks for this revealing post Ted!
I had been responding to similar attacks all spring on these blogs. At the time, many of them had come from Latas supporters and then when they backed off, it appeared that they were coming from Weiss supporters.
Who knows though, this could be coming from Republicans who are very worried about the fact that Gabby appeals to progressives, liberals, business types, moderates…and by golly even a few Republicans. In addition, she has the most organized and funded campaign of all who are running (including Republicans). I risk saying this because I know that someone will undoubtably attack her for being “too liberal”…or OH…gosh…”she appeals to business” OR…”wow…she can’t be one of us if a Republican would vote for her”.
The truth, from my experience these past months, no matter WHAT Gabrielle Giffords does right, people are laying into her. I would think about that as you see how poised she has been in this campaign and as you consider who would make the best new Rep. for our district.
May 25th, 2006 at 5:39 pm
Rats…Union Guy stole my thunder again! Well said. I would add these charges from her opponents:
“union endorsements mean nothing because this is a right to work state”
“she is too conservative”
“She can’t win because some super secret internal poll says she is losing right now”
All of it is just total non-sense and as Art Jacobson says…”sour grapes”
May 25th, 2006 at 5:55 pm
It really is amazing. Democrats should be ecstatic to have a progressive (pro-environment, pro-gay, pro-education, pro-union, and pro-choice) candidate who manages to stand up for all of those values and still gain the support of the business community. No, far better to trash that candidate as being too.. no, wait, not enough… or, what we mean is she used to be a… well, no, not recently but, um…
Seriously.
May 25th, 2006 at 5:58 pm
Oh…since I have quit pulling punches (grin)…here is what some have been saying about Gabrielle…some of the Latas supporters. Enjoy!
http://gilamonsterville.blogspot.com
May 25th, 2006 at 9:20 pm
As a former Republican AND a proud Giffords supporter, I encourage my fellow Democrats to welcome our redemption…and not blast us for the original sin.
Primaries allow parties to better define themselves while also sorting out the question of who should carry the party standard into November. However, the “more Democrat than thou” rhetoric spewing forth from some of the anti-Gabby folks is both condescending and self-defeating. It serves no purpose but to bring smiles to Republican faces.
I’m planning to vote Giffords in September and vote Democrat in November. I hope Gabby is our nominee, but if she isn’t, I want to support a strong nominee who isn’t scarred from an ugly primary replete with fabrications, anonymous cheap shots and endless refernces to boogeymen in either the DLC or the corner Basha’s grocery.
If this nonsense is coming from the Latas or the Weiss camp, they should grow up, shut their mouths and repeat the two words that ought to frighten and unify us-CONGRESSMAN GRAF!
May 26th, 2006 at 1:01 am
Gabby is unknown and more anonymous in CD 8 than her supporters will admit.
This inconvenient fact trumps her other negatives and makes her unelectable in November and September.
She needs more than a warchest of money and endorsements to change this.
She could use a clear platform devoid of eastern seaboard platitudes and more of a humane policy that places people before business.
May 26th, 2006 at 6:39 am
Great reading. Please nominate Weiss. The Republican have been studying her proposal to colonize Mars before the Chinese. If she wins the nomination the GOP will unveil a plan to send Patrick Stewart and a team of undocumented workers on a journey to Jupiter before the Chileans get there, thus trumping one of Patty’s best proposals and taking the momentum out of her campaign.
May 26th, 2006 at 7:33 am
Ahhhhh the fabled “anonymous” is BACK! (smile). He/she always fires me up and often gets me to write another check out of my small bank account for Gabby Giffords.
Let me say this. She is very well known in the district…especially among Democrat primary voters. During the primary she will increase her name recognition outside Tucson by what she is already doing. Attending events, campaigning, and meeting people. Then will come the ads. After the primary, the winner will become annointed…as they almost always do…unless scarred by these baseless attacks. After that…I think she wins.
May 26th, 2006 at 8:01 am
I appreciate what you folks are saying, and especially what Mr. T and Rex commented.
After being a life-long Republican, then having a few years of serious and growing concerns, I finally switched to the Democratic party in late March.
Let’s just say that my “welcome into the fold” hasn’t been inordinately enthusiastic.
I find I’m at least AS informed about the issues, and FAR more knowledgeable about the “opposition”, than most of the other Dems I talk to. I’m voting Dem, championing Dem and have been pretty vocal about my affiliation in various online forums. At times, it seems I’m the only Dem in Arizona willing to wade into the swamp of AZ Republic’s “Plugged In” on any given issue.
I’d love to get more involved and help out. But there does seem to be something of a reluctance, though, which I guess is understandable.
Maybe after a few more months, or maybe a few more elections, of proving myself, I can be “one of us”.
Patience, grasshopper.
May 26th, 2006 at 8:02 am
Oh, and I support Giffords.
May 26th, 2006 at 9:23 am
Thanks for the link, tedski. I couldn’t recall who invoked the ideological purity test, but that refreshed my recollection. I see Eli hasn’t posted on this one yet.
May 26th, 2006 at 9:30 am
geo,
I’ve seen your posts on Plugged In and you acquit yourself quite well, whatever your political affiliation. Unfortunatly, as you no doubt know, rational commenters on that site are few and far between.
Don’t worry about ‘fitting in’ to the party. I doubt it has much to do with your GOP past so much as it is just cliquish reluctance to let the new boy into their special club. You know, we never really leave junior high.
May 26th, 2006 at 10:36 am
I thought the letter was factually true. Was there anything that was false?
May 26th, 2006 at 11:17 am
Boohoo,
Haven’t seen the letter yet. From what Tedski posts, it all looks factually true. As with most things political, it’s all in how you spin it.
As an example on a more global concern — recently their have been a pair of advertisements put out by conservative-backed organizarions questioning the science behind global warming. Both cite a report in which it was concluded the ice layer in Antartica is actually thickening. So both are factually true.
What both _fail_ to note is the thickening of the Antartic ice cap is actually _predicted_ by global warming. I.e., both ads are taking a fact which supports global warming and, by selectively ommiting certain context, making it appear it challenges global warming.
It’s a similar thing here … people are taking certain facts (Giffords has received money from Republicans, or Giffords is supported by Basha) and selectively using them outside of the overall context to make Giffords appear, say, anti-labor, when, in fact, her voting record very clearly indicates otherwise.
Just because all the presented facts are true doesn’t mean the conclusion drawn is.
May 26th, 2006 at 12:07 pm
I guess your somewhat right, but I did see the letter and I didn’t see much spin at all, just factually statements.
I also know about many other things about her record not in the letter that are pro big business and have heard her say things very much against environmental organizations stances. I’d be glad to elaborate, but I’d look very anti Gabriotic.
May 26th, 2006 at 1:24 pm
Didn’t Giffords recently get the endorsement of the Sierra Club? I know she received an award as the environmental legislator of the year when in the Senate. You can’t get more pro environment than that.
May 26th, 2006 at 2:16 pm
Vetdem, does her stance on oil refineries stand up to what the Sierra Club wants??
The last answer she gave certainly flew in the face of the Sierra Club.
Oh well, next week we’ll see a different answer–depending upon the crowd she speaks to.
May 26th, 2006 at 2:49 pm
Sierra Club voted her Most Valuable Player of the Year. Go to their website yourself where you can see the ratings of elected officials. She got A+ while Huffman got a D.
I have posted elsewhere about facts vs. bizarre assertions. I chased one allegation (Walmart supports her) to a Phx consultant who “possibly helped Walmart” and donated $300 to Giffords campaign last December. Please!
The refinery thing is also over at kos but I can’t get facts about that either (George?), and now something about nukes??
So, I either see falsehoods (Walmart supports her) or facts that don’t matter, at least to me (Finley is a republican and supports republicans). Haven’t seen the letter yet, but sounds like a lot of the latter.
Finally, consider that those “Real Democrats” are not democrats at all. R’s care about this primary, and have heard they will be involved (although did not hear how).
Know at least one that said the big R’s fear Giffords the most, for simple reasons like $$, endorsements, volunteers, and what doesn’t get mentioned too often, the quality of her staff.
May 26th, 2006 at 4:47 pm
George,
First it’s the unions don’t know what they’re doing…
Now it’s the Sierra Club doesn’t know what it’s doing…
How many progressive endorsements will it take to convince you that Gabby is beloved by almost all of the progressive organizations?
May 26th, 2006 at 4:48 pm
Well that makes the Sierra Club look pretty bad doesn’t it. Hope thay haven’t endorsed yet, at least until they pin down that refinery and nuke issue. Hope they get to the bottom of that pretty quickly.
I would suggest that the unions take a look at her record a little closer before any more endorsments, too. It could be kinda embarrasing.
May 26th, 2006 at 5:05 pm
Thought I’d look into this a litle. I know some folks out there who are connected to these issues. Sounds like the environmental statements were made at two different events.
Giffords backs building refineries and said at a forum nukes are needed. I don’t know the exact words but I confirmed with four people that these were firm statements.
Once again, if anyone is a Sierra Club member, you should be made aware of this.
I also have the voting record and for anyone that is wondering why the Giffords campaign hasn’t posted it on her site, I know why. You union types, you should fire your leadership that endorsed her.
May 26th, 2006 at 8:50 pm
boohoo,
Actions speak louder then words.
Gabby has a 100% League of Conservation Voters record.
Gabby has an A+ voting record with the Sierra Club.
Gabby has a perfect labor voting record.
She is a progressive, she has demonstrated it for years.
And she appeals to Republicans.
The DCCC couldn’t have manufactured a better candidate.
Naysayers don’t build a movement.
May 26th, 2006 at 8:53 pm
I don’t get this refinery statement. Don’t we all drive cars? Don’t we like our homes cool in the summer and warm in the winter? How do you think oil is turned into fuel? I’m not sure what the refinery statement was but refineries are needed to support our economy and our way of life. If we need another refinery in New Jersey, what do we care? Wake up people! This sounds like the Latas or Weiss camp standing by with the pencil to see what they can take out of context. Say something good about your candidate. They do have something to offer.
May 26th, 2006 at 11:17 pm
Ted:
To clarify your 16:49 post, I didn’t jump on Verkamp for being a former Republican, I jumped on him for remaining loyal to them even when it meant he had to give up on retaining his Senate seat, and suddenly having an apparently radical shift. I questioned his sincerity, and I still question it. Mead has clearly made the transition, after being publically ‘helped’ out the door by the GOP in a legislative primary.
May 27th, 2006 at 12:19 am
TEDSKI–
I thought you disallowed “ANONYMOUS” postings months ago?
I received the anonymous anti-Ibarra letter, saw it was anonymous, and trashed it immediately. [I’m not an Ibarra fan but I too don’t like “anonymous” negative letters/flyers. Rove used these against Ann Richards in Texas.]
May moderate Republicans who support the constitution, fiscal responsibility, and anti-aggression foreign policy join the Democrats!
May 27th, 2006 at 6:44 am
No, Gabby is a Dem. You should have seen the liberal floor amendments that she had drafted, but never offered. She had one to take “God” out of the preamble to our state constitution. On Tibshrany’s bill to remove laws found unconstitutional, she was going amend to include abortion-restriction laws. You will not find these on her voting record because she had them drafted and distributed, but not voted on.
May 27th, 2006 at 6:44 am
No, Gabby is a Dem. You should have seen the liberal floor amendments that she had drafted, but never offered. She had one to take “God” out of the preamble to our state constitution. On Tibshrany’s bill to remove laws found unconstitutional, she was going amend to include abortion-restriction laws. You will not find these on her voting record because she had them drafted and distributed, but not voted on.
May 27th, 2006 at 10:59 pm
Are Giffords supporters really that uninformed or are you all just playing dumb?
As bloggers, surely you have read the most popular (600,000+ daily reads) political blog out there. And still you want to claim the Sierra Club has not sold out?
Sierra Club lies and manipulates and
Diary2
This is probably why not too many voters have faith in endorsements.
At least the smart ones.
Wait, are there any in Arizona?
The leaders of the unions and various orgs manipulate and cherry pick what they want to use to justify their endorsements. No wonder Giffords has 8!
May 27th, 2006 at 11:17 pm
Conservative majority (?), submitted floor amendments are a matter of record. Could you cite the specific ones you are referring to? I have a friend who is a researcher there and can pull any submitted ones whether to committee or full house and whether approved or not. Name the legislative session number, bill and amendment and I can get the detail of it.
Giffords isn’t any more progressive than any of the rest there and she certainly is much less when it comes to kissing up to the corporations. She has been proud to run as a centrist, as numerous newspaper articles will attest to. Of course, that won’t win her the liberal base so she has to change her message. I would really rather vote for Graf. At least he can pick an issue and stick with it. Giffords reeks of the Hillary syndrome. She is trying so hard to pander she can’t take a stand on anything.
If the Latas and Weiss campaigns were smart, they would start publishing some of the votes she hasn’t exactly been touting. Weiss is taking the high road, which won’t help her, and Latas’ supporters spend too much time focused on stupid stuff on Giffords instead of her record. At best, Giffords was a very mediocre legislator, which is why we don’t get a heck of a lot accomplished in our state House and Senate. Carpool for hybrids is what she touts as her progressive bill? Yeah, we have SOOO many carpool lanes in Tucson. Had she had a brain in her head and really wanted to appease environmentalists she would have sponsored a $5000 rebate, not a fricken ‘carpool privilege’ bill. Oh, and of course, numerous committees to ‘study’ things. Bureacracy at it’s best worst. That is pretty much typical of her legislative skill. All fluff and no substance.
I am not a fan of any of the candidates, as they all seem out of touch with the reality of what impacts most people’s lives. Since Gffords has anointed herself the front-runner, I will just choose to pick on her the most. Plus she makes it so much fun each time she opens her mouth.
May 27th, 2006 at 11:25 pm
vetdem said…
“I know she received an award as the environmental legislator of the year when in the Senate. You can’t get more pro environment than that.”
Now I am peeing my pants! Arizona, with endless sunshine and we cannot even get basic solar power, sustainable and renewable energy plans - yet Giffords who proposed carpool priorities for hybrids gets the environmentalist award? This is exactly why Arizona ranks the dumbest state in the nation.
I assume Giffords actually drives a hybrid, right? At least Latas can claim that.
May 28th, 2006 at 8:34 am
This post has been removed by the author.
May 28th, 2006 at 8:53 am
Well…there you have it, we are all idjits and the candidates all suck (Latas doesn’t suck so much because he has a hybrid.) Why do you even bother posting, then?
May 28th, 2006 at 9:14 am
To FedUp: No, I do not have time to research the bills. You researcher should be able to find them as well as I can.
May 28th, 2006 at 7:42 pm
I’ve seen them and it’s not all rosy for the money candidate. I predict that all those high dollar contributions will be wasted before to long. If they only knew the record.
PS The Sierra Club should be more careful on who they give there awards to, same with the unions. One of the candidates will come out when the time is right.
May 29th, 2006 at 12:00 am
This will all be decided in September.
May 29th, 2006 at 7:35 am
What just kills me about the rhetorical hullabaloo by some regarding Gabby is that it consists entirely of disingenuous, unsubstantiated accusations, which often verge on being just plain silly.
Can anyone tell me why I, or other pragmatic Democrat, should consider voting for anyone else without mentioning Giffords? And I ask the question sincerely!
If you cannot make the case why anyone should support Weiss or Latas without throwing rocks at Giffords, then I would suggest your thinking is flawed and your positions are ill considered. If you can, that would make for a meaningful point of departure for ‘real’ dialogue on the subject.
May 29th, 2006 at 2:45 pm
Dogma,
Part of the problem is this is a Gabby supported site, right Ted?
Ted only has Giffords site linked, none others. This is why this is a gg target.
I’d be glad to tell you who I support without you know who, but I don’t think this would do much good. Besides, it sure is fun pointing to all the Gabriots how they are so flawed.
May 29th, 2006 at 5:42 pm
This is not a “Gabby supported site,” it is a site that supports Gabrielle Giffords. Despite what has been alleged, I am not paid by the Giffords campaign. I realize that it is hard for some supporters of other candidates to believe that anyone would support someone they don’t like without being bribed.
Also, the name “Gabby” is reserved for friends of hers. It’s Gabrielle to you, pal.
May 30th, 2006 at 6:01 am
OK Pal,
I hope you pay the same respect to the other candidateshas well as your readers. So I expect those not close to refer to the real leaders of this race as Mrs. Weiss and Lt Col (perhaps Col.) Latas. He did earn this title after retiring from the AF.
By the way, Miss. Griffords just might be a friend so your assumption of our friendship is less then justified. I just know that she isn’t what I want in Washington representing me.
May 30th, 2006 at 7:41 pm
Even though I support Gabby, I know Patty as well. Is it ok for me to still call her Patty, or do I have to call her Mrs. Weiss? What are teh rules here?
I don’t know Jeff at all, so I guess it’s Mr. Latas for him.
May 30th, 2006 at 8:06 pm
Sirocco-
I was just trying to be an ass.
June 1st, 2006 at 6:45 am
By the way, Arizona Congress Watch reports that Gabrielle Giffords has received the endorsement of the Sierra Club.
For those out there that are concerned about her being “too close to business” note her endorsements by many of our nation’s largest unions, environmental groups, and most every police and fire group in the valley. Yes, she also has worked with business, but not to the exclusion of the needs of our environment and labor.
To the detractors…find all the picky little compromises she has made that you want. You can try to make as much of it as you want, but the truth is that her record and support has attracted the support of important groups across the spectrum. These endorsements are not going to the other candidates…they are going to Giffords.
I just want to end by saying that the attacks look more and more desperate and untenable as her successes mount…and no one has started punching at Weiss or Latas…yet.
Oh…and my yet prediction is this: There are only so many primary votes to go around (traditional primary voters)…Latas and Weiss are now still in the race and are fighting it out as the alternative to Giffords. This is clear. How long before they start fighting each other?
Roger
June 3rd, 2006 at 11:02 am
So far, the only people fighting Jeff & Patty are the people who support Gabby. All this talk of endorsements and characterizations (mischaracterizations) of Jeff’s & Patty’s supporters is completely disingenuous. Why not look at the issues?
I am not supporting Giffords because she is out of step with the electorate. Anyone who feels that we should keep our troops in Iraq “…as long as necessary…” is not going to get my vote. Let her waffle around that!
Leave a Reply