Wednesday, January 9th, 2008...6:12 am
Never Mind That New Hampshire Primary, What Is Up With Those Project White House Folks?
Now that the New Hampshire Primary is over, we can focus our attention on what is truly important: The Tucson Weekly’s Project White House.
Jim Nintzel tells me that there is a candidate forum planned for these guys, in the meantime you can follow their goings on on the Project White House blog.
We already have one candidate among these dropping out. Richard Grayson says that he is dropping out to concentrate on his long-shot race against Jeff Flake, but I think his real reason is to concentrate on his leadership of the Teen Titans.
We also have the first attack. These candidates are struggling to get out of their Nth tier status (Nth tier, ’cause do you think any of them will out poll Mike Gravel?), so this was inevitable. The first attack comes from Republican candidate and former River Roses bassist Sean Murphy. (Murphy did not play on their demi-hit, “Phoenix 99″; that was Caitlin Von Schmidt.)
The eye-patch is vestigal, a tribute to Jack Williams. I suppose it would be tasteless to wonder what a tribute to Sidney Osborn would have looked like. I don’t know what the “CF” stands for.
NB - Since Murphy actually was in a band of some note, can I really call the reference “Gratuitious”?
16 Comments
January 9th, 2008 at 9:32 am
The Project White House joke wasn’t ever very funny to begin with.
January 9th, 2008 at 10:10 am
Seems real enough. Check with the AZ Atty Generals office and ask for the names that will appear on the ballot this February. Seems to me, if you’re on the ballot, you’re in the race. Sure, sure, these cats haven’t raised the $100 million needed to bid for the office these days, but they’re participating in the process and making a statement about the politics game altogether.
Talk about jokes? Take a look at the front runners. Take a look at the joke in the office now. Anyone can immediately dismiss any candidate by calling them a joke, but that’s an argument of a child might make. Sure, my post is a joke too.
Everyone wants to say they called the whole race after a couple of tiny Primaries. Pundits can be so tiresome. Lighten-up buttercup!
Re-direct your frustrations with politics by engaging Americas true grass-roots candidates. While the media tries to figure out why their speculation and guess-work doesn’t yield results, Arizona is quietly making a bold political statement.
Which candidate cut a hole in the America flag while illegal aliens cross our border in the background?
Which candidate wears an eye-patch like a pirate?
And, did you know there are two women in Arizona’s Primary ballot?
http://projectwhitehouse.wordpress.com/
January 9th, 2008 at 10:33 am
Well, this is one “buttercup” who would perhaps give a gracious nod to this attempt at grass roots political involvement..if it weren’t being pushed by the Weekly. Give me a break. The nesting ground of all birds sarcastic and negative is not going to breed a watershed for a caring readership and public. And, Nitzel, who would sooner reveal private and embarrassing non-issue related nuggets about our already-established community leaders, laced with sophomoric pettyness, is not a ringleader I would follow into this ‘experiment’. As Liza said earlier, it is indeed a non funny joke.
January 9th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Excuse me, Kiva, I meant you, not Liza..although Liza is a good commentator on this site as well.
January 9th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
I’ve read and reread Indy’s comment and to be honest it kinda makes my head hurt. I guess your objection to the whole Project White House thing comes down to Jim Nintzel is mean to people you like so some how that means Project White House is bad. A=B and B=C so A=C. Nice. Aristotle would be proud, Indy.
Unfortunately, your liking somebody and their methods has nothing to do with being funny. Watching a grown woman prance around in the desert with an American flag blathering new age nostrums might not be amusing to you, but it is to me.
I don’t agree with a lot of what Jim Nintzel writes about, but here’s what I do like: he’s snarky. I put Tedski in the same category which why I read this blog when it stands against many of the things I really believe in. We don’t have enough snark in Southern Arizona politics. What we have is a bunch of fatuous, self-important gasbags. I agree with Tortillas: most of the front runners are jokes. Obama and Romney proved yesterday that the media puffs up annoited front-runners, but they are just a pinprick away from being deflated. Apparently, the voters of New Hampshire did not get the memo that Hillary was supposed to lose to Obama last night (BTW I say this as a person who would rather wash my eyes in lye that see her as president).
There is value in what the Weekly is doing. The president is the son of another president. Hillary is Bill Clinton’s wife. Obama was basically just a state senator who gave a really good speech a few years ago. Why do we pay attention to them and not to, say, Doctress Neutopia or one of these other characters? We have millions of people — some of whom are veritable geniuses (no, I’m not putting the good Doctress in that category), but despite two hundred years of being a representative republic much of our election process comes down to nepotism, money, luck, how the media chooses to write their master narrative and a general popularity contest. What Nintzel has been able to expose not only through this project but through some of the other things he’s written (like the 10 commandments for candidates) is the actual machinery of how we as a society decide someone is relevant or not. That’s often not pleasant for the idealistic amongst us to watch (John Kromko supporters we’re looking your way).
January 9th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Here’s what is a turn off to most progressive activtists-both on the streets and in the public arena: snarkiness. It is so 1990s, so done, so boring. You know what is captivating? Positivity, proactivenss, coorporation, and compassion. This is where the Weekly and Nitzel are leaving many folks behind and wanting something more substantial. This is why this whole project white house thing is flat: why would folks be bothered to get involved let alone give a rat’s behind when the whole stature of the Weekly machine is based on negativity immaturity.
Why did you mention the flag burning woman? I thought her act a stunning act of bravery and beauty. But she alone cannot carry this experiment in politics to a point where it means anything more than a publicity stunt for the Weekly. Yeah, Nitzel wrote that piece on what to do if running. And, your point is? That he alone knows this stuff? That when and if that inspires anyone to make a serious run for office that Nitzel isn’t lurking and licking his chops for a chance to pounce and make that person look foolish? Attacking people like he does is good for democracy for what reason, exactly?
The value of a populist campaign for leadership is long overdue. The Weekly is not the venue to make that a viable strong movement.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Speaking of Jim Nintzel, he has moved with John C. Scott and a cadre of other pontificaters like Mark Kimble, Jeff Smith and Dave Sitton (and somebody in my house) to KVOI, 690-AM from 7 to 8 a.m. weekdays. That’s the same station Emil Franzi and Tom Danehy — and a pretty liberal guy named Bob Ellis — broadcast their talk shows each Saturday.
January 9th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Indy: I can’t express how disappointed I am in your cynical attitude. It’s just like you to simply dismiss the efforts to the fine men and women involved in Project White House without bothering to learn a thing about them. I just came from the first Project White House Happy Hour, where I met eight of our candidates, and I found them to be fine and sincere people with very valid concerns about our country. I think you owe them an apology for your utterly negative assessment of them. Shame on you!
January 9th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
A few points for Indy:
Snarkiness going out of style? Someone needs to tell Colbert or Jon Stewart. Apparently their viewers haven’t got the memo. Sorry, but cruel wit was not invented in the 90s–neither was reality.
Act of bravery and beauty? I don’t know if you are a progressive, a Stalinist or should be put in the humorless gasbag category, but the good Doctress looks silly. Nintzel doesn’t need to make anyone look foolish because they do a perfectly good job of it on their own.
Attacking people? That’s not how I would put it. Good journalists like Nintzel hold people accountable for what they say and do. Our press is not supposed to be the lap dog of the left, right or anyone else. It is supposed to ask tough questions. It is supposed to expose hypocrisy. It is supposed to make those who would presume to lead us put their credibility on the line and defend what they believe in. Some times they play it straight, some times with humor. Those that do it with humor and satire expose truths that playing it straight may leave covered (see Colbert and Stewart again).
You talked about a populist campaign for leadership. I don’t really know what the hell that means (although I suspect that it would involve taxes, taking away my guns and regulating me to death) but your next statement is even more bizarre: “The Weekly is not the venue to make that a viable strong movement.” Why should the Weekly be responsible for some whackadoodle movement? The Weekly’s job is to inform its readers (and maybe even make a buck while doing it), not to be the propaganda organ for a bunch of delusional progressive losers.
BTW if you think Nintzel only attacks your peeps, ask Randy Pullen and leading Republicans if he’s skewered them lately too.
January 9th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
I find it this way: The More well known candidates are like talking heads which say nothing but catch phrases and sound bites. This is not what are nation needs to assure our strategic future.
It is good to be aware of alternatives and good to be able to shop around.
For Presidential Election 2008, it is critical that the voter learns what choices are really available. We can go with the flow, but when our future is at risk, thats like being in a barrel going over a water fall.
I for one will distribute blogs across the net, Youtube Videos, and post where important, as not like the talking head with campaign budgets of $90 Million to do nothing with except to dis another candidate, at least on the net one can publish their solutions , and hopefully responsible ones for the present day events that burden our nation.
In this way, if the only way, I ask to be judged as the Presidential Candidate for the people.
Sincerely Yours,
Orion Karl Daley
Presidential Candidate for 2008
for the Strategic Future of our nation
Author - The New Deal ISBN: 1419670948
Balanced Party http://unity2008.org
New York, NY, USA -
January 10th, 2008 at 4:28 am
Billy mentioned Stephen Colbert. Do you recall his well-publicized effort to get in the South Carolina Democratic presidential primary? Why didn’t Colbert simply sign the silly little paper Arizona asked of candidates in its primary if he truly wanted to run a joke campaign in a state?
For that matter, I’m sure Colbert could have afforded the filing fee in New Hampshire, whose presidential primary ballot featured 43 candidates? (And I have yet to see the results from New Hampshire’s unique vice presidential primary, which had several names on the ballot.)
Arizona needs to follow the lead of other states, which at least get some revenue the way New Hampshire does by charging for ballot access or use a nonpartisan or bipartisan commission to determine who are serious candidates. There are other, more objective, rules for separating serious and nonserious candidates.
One of my points in filing is that it is much, much easier to get on the presidential preference primary ballot than in filing to run for Congress (or, indeed, for the legislature).
Right now I haven’t the resources to collect the petitions needed to get my name on the Democratic primary ballot in the Sixth Congressional District. Arizona does allow, however, candidates to file as write-in candidates and provided they get the same number of write-in votes in the primary as the number of signatures needed to get on the primary ballot, they become the party’s nominee in November.
Does anyone know if a write-in candidate in a primary has ever been able to win the nomination this way?
The alternative for me would be to file as a write-in candidate in November against Jeff Flake. I could not do this, however, if I ran as a write-in candidate in the primary.
I have never seen the Tucson Weekly or even heard of it before I learned about Project White House, so your comments about the paper go over my head.
I last qualified for a leadership office in the Teen Titans during the Johnson administration. I was 13 when I got the issue of The Brave and the Bold in July 1964 in which the Titans first appeared.
In that race, I support Speedy.
January 10th, 2008 at 6:35 am
While we are deep in the dregs of cynicism, here is something pasted from ABCNews.com about Hillary’s show of “emotion:”
However, the woman who sparked the emotional response from Clinton admitted Wednesday that she voted for Obama.
“I went to see Hillary. I was undecided, and I was moved by her response to me,” Marianne Pernold Young, 64, a freelance photographer from Portsmouth, told ABC News in a telephone interview.
“We saw 10 seconds of Hillary, the caring woman,” she said. “But then when she turned away from me, I noticed that she stiffened up and took on that political posture again,” she said. “And the woman that I noticed for 10 seconds was gone.”
Sure, she “feels our pain.” However, the quote I’m turning to as a safe harbor from the Clintons (appropriate on a site with its many musical references) is from The Who: “We won’t get fooled again!” GO OBAMA!!!
January 10th, 2008 at 11:11 am
Nitzle, either you didn’t read my comments or you are in denial. I absolutely did not attack any of the candidates for the weekly’s publicity stunt. In fact, I stated that I admired the flag burning chick. I attacked you, mister. And cobert and Stewart snarky? Ahem, no. I am from the northeast, like stewart, and we call what he doe sarcarsm and wittiness. He’s funny as hell. nitzle is not. Exploring questionable actions of politicians and civic leaders in a responsible way is more gratifying and helpful than being the combination of class clown and play ground bully. Stick to the facts, Nitz, and leave the name calling for after school detention.
January 10th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Indy: I think it’s clear from this exchange who the Negative Nelly (and poor speller) is. You can keep up your mudslinging and name-calling all you want, but you should know that sticks and stones may break my bones but your venomous attack machine will never hurt me.
Besides, I have more positive things to do with my time. Project White House has less than four weeks now to change America.
And to that point: I’d like to confirm the story that Tedski broke in this post yesterday: There will indeed be a Tucson Weekly/Access Tucson/Project White House/YouTube* televised debate on Wednesday, Jan. 23. (*Please note that YouTube is NOT an actual sponsor.)
Details? www.projectwhitehouse.com.
January 10th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Indy,
I haven’t read so much congnitive dissonance since that Jeff Chiminea droog whacked his gal pal and quibbled whether it was a two X four or two X two.
Here in the Southwest we might not be big-city funnymen clowns but at least we know how to spell sarcasm. But you know, Indy, in your own way you’re a lot funnier than Jon Stewart is.
BTW when did the flag lady burn the flag? Did you watch the freaking video? She cut a hole in it, which is why CF baked a apple pie to plug the hole.
I’m disturbed by all of this left-wing sloppiness–all of these spelling problems and lack of attention to detail shows you could have benefited from vouchers. If you pinko libs would’ve gotten your shit together, GW would never have stolen the election in Florida in the first place and we wouldn’t be in this crazy war.
January 11th, 2008 at 8:00 am
You want juvenile? How about the way the entire pundit establishment called the race in NH for Barack Oh-bummer long before a single vote was cast. “It’s over”, “She’s done”, “The end of an era”. I’ve had children, and I assure you, jumping to conclusions prematurely and then over-dramatizing the point is just what being a juvenile is about.
How many times did I hear my daughter say “That’s soooo yesterday!”? It was a childish way of dismissing any point a grown up tried to make. Give it a try next time you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Project White House08 is soooooo yesteryear!
Nintzel is sooooooo 1990s!
See how easy that is?
http://www.projectwhitehouse08.com
Don’t let this discourage you. There is something wrong with the “experiment”. Sophomoric pettyness is part of the message here, not its problem.
Oh, am I the only on that feels that a motivational speaker is pretty much an actor on stage? Why do we continue to be swayed by actors? Isn’t their profession based on fooling you into thinking they’re someone else?
Recapture you youth! Feel like a kid again!
Vote!
Leave a Reply