Friday, July 7th, 2006...8:04 am
They Are For All Those Average Joes Who Pay Estate Taxes and Make Six-Figure Salaries
Say what you will about Jim Pederson’s candidacy, but it has brought out a heretofore unseen brand of populism out in Arizona Republicans.
One may remember that last year, Pederson was involved in what turned out to be a minor dispute with the Carpenters Union and Republican Party Chairman Matt Salmon jumped on that one, claiming that Pederson was an anti-union limosine liberal. Salmon made a huge rhetorical boo-boo though, he failed to show a contrast and talk about how supportive the Republican party has been of the labor movement in this state. Oh yeah, they haven’t been, that’s why.
In a television appearance earlier this year, John Munger, an attorney who helps businesses get out of penalties for violating labor and immigration laws, said that he “had a problem” with a wealthy man like Pederson running for the Senate.
Now, I look over at Epresso Pundit and Greg Patterson (who loves me despite how badly I treat him) took issue with an interview with Pederson in The Hill. He noted that Pederson took credit for spending $3 million on the Democratic Party’s efforts in 2002 and alleges that Pederson and then Attorney General Janet Napolitano arranged for some sort of corrupt fundraising scheme before the campaign.
Well, Pederson was the Chairman of the Democratic party. It would have been unusual for someone that was the probable nominee not to meet with Pederson before the campaign started. I can’t imagine that Len Munsil or Don Goldwater never met with Salmon before they officially jumped in.
The other thing that is interesting is that Patterson seems to take issue with the fact that Democratic Party money combined with Napolitano’s money meant that he swamped that poor Matt Salmon, who only was able to spend a paltry $1 million. Interestingly, he fails to add any Republican money that was raised and spent that year. Their post-general election report for that year shows nearly $4 million spent by the State Republican party. If they couldn’t win with that, then Patterson and company ought to take issue with how that money got spent.
But, when did our state’s Republicans start having trouble with how much money gets spent on campaigns? This sudden Ralph Nader pose seems to have coincided with the appearance of Pederson in our political scene. They may also do well to remember that Pederson helped bankroll the Clean Elections initiative, that has reduced the cost of state elections. If they are so concerned about all of this money being spent, they are going to jump right on board with that one, right?
I didn’t think they would.
3 Comments
July 7th, 2006 at 8:49 am
I clicked on the link to Espresso Pundit and almost fell out of my chair laughing at Patterson’s post for today. Check it out. You can almost hear the panicked cries of the far right wing,
“The homos are coming! The homos are coming!”
They must feel so threatened at the thought of uniting bi-national gay couples, they’re on the verge of divorce.
July 8th, 2006 at 2:24 am
The thing that needs to be pointed out, and pointed out and pointed out is this (and unfortunately, Pederson would look bad if he came out and said it himself but everyone else should say it):
In this year of corruption scandals, and of Abramoff and DeLay and Duke Cunningham, and with Jon Kyl accepting millions of dollars over the past few years from special interests and corporations, who needed (and got) his vote– I mean heck, they gave Kyl over a million dollars six years ago when he had no Democratic opponent at all–
Kyl is a compromised creature. Not only because of his decades in Washington, or because of how thoroughly special interest and PAC donations have pervaded every corner of Washington and he’s been at ground zero soaking it all up for all that time, but because he owes. The people who make the big money donations have an agenda. And he’s taken their money and delivered on their agenda. And they’re giving him money again, and he will owe them, not us, the citizens of Arizona (where no one even really ever sees him except in election years.)
Jim Pederson is very rich. That means that unlike Duke Cunningham, he isn’t going to Washington to get rich. It means that unlike the people who took money from Jack Abramoff, he doesn’t need any money that has strings attached to it, so he’s not taking it. And unlike Jon Kyl, he hasn’t taken his positions on issues (and especially cast critical votes on them) because he owes anybody anything.
He may put it this way: Jim Pederson: I’ll be an independent Senator.
The Kyl campaign may forget that the word, ‘independent’ means ‘not being manipulated or controlled by others (particularly those who’ve given you money). They think it only means a political independent. They can be forgiven for forgetting the meaning though, because it’s the opposite of Jon Kyl.
But what us out here need to say is this:
Jim Pederson: Too rich to be bought.
Correct. Direct. Concise.
July 9th, 2006 at 1:47 pm
You gotta be freakin’ kidding me! Are you really that desperate, eli???
The great thing about this country is that the rich aren’t the ruling class. You apparently would prefer to return to the days of aristocracy.
American House of Lords, anyone?
Leave a Reply