Thursday, October 18th, 2007...7:59 am
Got Me Some Mail
So, this guy in know in Los Angeles writes a soccer blog and he has categories based on players he likes. For example, he has a category called “Cobi Freakin’ Jones” and one called “David Freakin’ Beckham.” Yes, he uses the word “Freakin’” rather than the alternative because he is concerned for the children.
I noted how in our parlance, the word “Freakin’” as a middle name indicates approval. However, moving the word “Freakin’” to the beginning of the name would indicate severe disatisfaction rather than approval. For example, an Arizona Diamondbacks fan may say “Freakin’ Yorvit Torrealba.”
So, only one thing to say after recieving yesterday’s mailer from Lori Oien’s campaign:
Freakin’ Jerry Anderson.
Anderson cut a pretty progressive profile during his one term on the council, so whatever policy reasons he has for this endorsement are unfathomable to me given some of Oien’s public statements. I asked around, and folks seem to chalk this up to his personal dislike of Rodney Glassman and Anderson’s friendship with Ray Carroll and his aide, Scott Egan. Please tell me he’s got better reasons than that.
Oh, the theme of the mailer? “Character Counts.” So, Lori and Jerry, please come out and say it, is this to imply that Glassman is without character? It seems that her way of showing character is by having her supporters make personal attacks on Glassman and his family (Exhibit A: yesterday’s letter in the Citizen refering to Glassman as a “trust fund dandy.” Given the e-mails that Oien’s campaign has been circulating, I can lay such insults at their feet.)
Oh, the mailer names Anderson as Chair of “Democrats for Oien.” There is no indication that this exalted group has more than one member.
Interestingly, the mailer has a picture of Oien with Janet Napolitano. She knows better than to say that Napolitano endorses her, but one has to wonder if she is hoping that voters infer such a thing. It’s funny, Napolitano is “Governor Veto” and some sort of disaster, until a Republican is desperate for crossover votes.
10 Comments
October 18th, 2007 at 8:49 am
I don’t see Oien beating Glassman or coming close. His campaign is as well organized as any I have seen, he is contacting voters, had a list of thousands of donors to start, has more money, and I have already seen about 3 mailers from the Democrats and his campaign. Not one yet from Oien.
The winner in total trips to my recycling bin, however, goes BIG to the anti-Prop 200 campaign. Glossies, papers, post-cards, I have had calls…these folk are in business (pardon the pun).
Remember, I am registered independent. I should be getting a lot of mail from both sides.
October 18th, 2007 at 11:15 am
That is a good observation and one you should really think about. The person with the most money wins. I would like to see the max a candidate can spend on the campaign equal to one years salary for the job he or she is running for.
Glassman bought a seat on the city council. It is a sad reflection on Tucson politics.
October 18th, 2007 at 6:51 pm
The amount a candidate can spend is set by the city. It’s the same for both Glassman and Oien. He got no more than $20 from anyone. She had fewer donors, but some wrote bigger checks.
October 18th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
It is nice to know that a fellow Democrat is as enraged about this mailer as I am. It would be one thing for Anderson to be supporting Lori privately by voting for her or even contributing to her campaign. However, to let her put his picture on a mailer and advertise to the voters is outrageous. So much for party loyalty huh?
October 19th, 2007 at 12:46 am
I was going to blog this, but wisely decided to check to see who else did first.
What stuck out to me is that nowhere on the mailer does it mention Oien’s party affiliation. In fact, the only mention of party in the entire piece is “Democrats for Oien”. Is she ashamed to publicly identify as a Republican? She certainly has plenty of reason to be. The lack of party identity can’t be entirely about attracting crossover votes. They’re hardly ‘crossovers’ if voters don’t realize (or the candidate attempts to mislead them into believing) that she is a member of the party they wouldn’t ordinarily vote for.
From what I can tell - and someone please correct me if I’m wrong - this mailer went only to registered Dems. I find the use of the picture of the Gov particularly craven - at best. The whole piece to me smacks of willful misrepresentation.
But I guess to many Republican office-seekers, misleading voters is a sign of good character.
October 19th, 2007 at 8:53 am
Party Loyalty? Please. Glassman is on the board of Desert Caucus PAC, a pro-Israel PAC. Who got the majority of their donations in 2004 and 2006? REPUBLICANS. So, please, don’t knock Anderson for Party Loyalty when Glassman was on the board of a group funding Republicans in two of the most important Congressional elections in the history of our nation.
October 19th, 2007 at 9:19 am
Glassman will likely win due to the Democratic voter edge in the City of Tucson and help from Rep. Grijalva’s “political machine.”
October 19th, 2007 at 11:16 am
First, Steve is right on. Thanks for bringing that up about Glassman’s campaign. When he first approached me about getting the max in $20 donors, I thought he was crazy. I was VERY wrong and I think this might be one of the most impressive parts of his campaign. He has reached out to about everyone…and convinced them to give a $20 check. That is a pretty big database of supporters…and soon to be voters as well. It shows his network…which is quite quite large and frankly…this is a plus, not a minus. What I fear most is small networks…and I think you all know what I mean.
I agree that Oien not mentioning her party affiliation is pretty shameful. What she is clearly saying by this is that she knows she has a registration disadvantage and this mailer is being used to pull the wool over peoples eyes. If you are such the republican, then trumpet it! It shows desperation and I am more than sure that she is going to lose this race and I now think by a lot.
Tom, Rodney is Jewish. So what if he is affiliated with the Desert Caucus. He is also active in campus Jewish groups that work with students as well as his synagogue. This may not have been your intention, but it appears a little like faith bashing to me.
October 19th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
Kral, thanks for informing Tom of the fact that Rodney is Jewish. While I am not a big fan of the fact that a lot of pro Israel PACs are supported by Republicans, I can understand why a Dem like Rodney would be on such a board. He is not on it for political reasons but for religious ones.
My point about party loyalty is this: If a person is elected to a public office such as city council under a certain party affiliation, then I believe from that point forward they should be loyal to that party. One of the few exceptions to this would be if a candidate or official from the party was surrounded in some sort of scandal or was bringing a bad name to the party. However, Rodney has done no such thing. If Anderson wants to support Lori, then fine, but as a former elected official from the Democratic party he should do this privately. If he wanted to do it publicly as he did on the mailer then he could have at least re-registered as an Independent first.
October 20th, 2007 at 9:00 am
Party affiliation should never inhibit freedom of speech or doing what you think is right. If everyone marches in lockstep, then the party is not open to change and the party will be dominated by the few, not the many.
The Republicans in Congress were certainly loyal to their party for the first six years of Bush/Cheney and look where that has gotten us.
Leave a Reply