Blog For Arizona

Cutting education funding

by David Safier

It looks like funding for Arizona public education will be cut as part of budget balancing.

I'd say this is a race to the bottom, but Arizona is already there -- either 49th or 50th in per pupil school spending. Maybe we'll get lucky and state number 47 48 is in an even deeper budget hole and is even more short-sighted than we are. Then we might edge our way up a notch.

I'm sure we don't have the stupidest students in the country, though we may have the most undereducated. But it looks like we have the stupidest legislative majority (cough, Republicans, cough) anywhere.

Jdimytai Damour

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Jdimytai Damour. I thought you should know the name of the innocent victim. Remember him and his family in your prayers this holiday season. He gave his life for American consumerism, incessantly hyped by Madison Avenue advertisers and the corporate news media who sell these advertisers print space and air time for their ads (that's how the news media actually makes its money).

Mr. Damour worked as a temporary stocker at a Long Island, New York Wal-Mart. As reported by The New York Times:

The throng of Wal-Mart shoppers had been building all night, filling sidewalks and stretching across a vast parking lot at the Green Acres Mall in Valley Stream, N.Y. At 3:30 a.m., the Nassau County police had to be called in for crowd control, and an officer with a bullhorn pleaded for order.

Tension grew as the 5 a.m. opening neared. Someone taped up a crude poster: “Blitz Line Starts Here.”

By 4:55, with no police officers in sight, the crowd of more than 2,000 had become a rabble, and could be held back no longer. Fists banged and shoulders pressed on the sliding-glass double doors, which bowed in with the weight of the assault. Six to 10 workers inside tried to push back, but it was hopeless.

Suddenly, witnesses and the police said, the doors shattered, and the shrieking mob surged through in a blind rush for holiday bargains. One worker, Jdimytai Damour, 34, was thrown back onto the black linoleum tiles and trampled in the stampede that streamed over and around him. [YouTube video of the stampede]. Others who had stood alongside Mr. Damour trying to hold the doors were also hurled back and run over, witnesses said.

Some workers who saw what was happening fought their way through the surge to get to Mr. Damour, but he had been fatally injured, the police said. Emergency workers tried to revive Mr. Damour, a temporary worker hired for the holiday season, at the scene, but he was pronounced dead an hour later at Franklin Hospital Medical Center in Valley Stream.

Four other people, including a 28-year-old woman who was described as eight months pregnant, were treated at the hospital for minor injuries. [other reports say she miscarried]

Detective Lt. Michael Fleming, who is in charge of the investigation for the Nassau police, said the store lacked adequate security. He called the scene “utter chaos” and said the “crowd was out of control.” As for those who had run over the victim, criminal charges were possible, the lieutenant said. “I’ve heard other people call this an accident, but it is not,” he said. “Certainly it was a foreseeable act.”

But even with videos from the store’s surveillance cameras and the accounts of witnesses, Lieutenant Fleming and other officials acknowledged that it would be difficult to identify those responsible, let alone to prove culpability.

Some shoppers who had seen the stampede said they were shocked. One of them, Kimberly Cribbs of Queens, said the crowd had acted like “savages.” Shoppers behaved badly even as the store was being cleared, she recalled.

“When they were saying they had to leave, that an employee got killed, people were yelling, ‘I’ve been on line since yesterday morning,’ ” Ms. Cribbs told The Associated Press. “They kept shopping.”

A Wal-Mart spokesman, Dan Folgleman, called it a “tragic situation,” and said the victim had been hired from a temporary staffing agency and assigned to maintenance work. Wal-Mart, in a statement issued at its headquarters in Bentonville, Ark., said: “The safety and security of our customers and associates is our top priority. Our thoughts and prayers are with them and their families at this tragic time.”

Mr. Damour, who lived in Queens, went into the store sometime during the night to stock shelves and perform maintenance work.

On Friday night, Mr. Damour’s father, Ogera Charles, 67, said his son had spent Thursday evening having Thanksgiving dinner at a half sister’s house in Queens before going directly to work. Mr. Charles said his son, known as Jimmy, was raised in Queens by his mother and worked at various stores in the area after graduating from high school.

Mr. Charles said he had not seen his son in three months, and heard about his death about 7 a.m. Friday, when a friend of Mr. Damour’s called him at home. He arrived at Franklin Hospital Medical Center an hour later to identify the body. Mr. Charles said he was angry that no one from Wal-Mart had contacted him or had explained how his son had died. Maria Damour, Mr. Damour’s mother, was in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, but was on her way back to the United States.

As James Wolcott notes at his Vanity Fair blog, "Blitz Line Starts Here":

Whether or not this particular store was negligent in providing security and crowd control will be determined following an investigation, but it seems to be that local and cable news also bear partial responsibility for this man's death, for helping incite such trampling. For days preceding Black Friday the local and cable news outfits run item after item about "doorbuster sales," stoking the sense of anticipation and making it seem like family fun, reminiscent of that old game show where contestants raced through a store stocking their cart with anything they could pull from the shelves. Local news stations position reporters--usually bright, chipper young women who joke with the anchordesk about how cold it is or how late they often wait until the last minute to do their own shopping, har har--to interview the idiots in line. The next morning more reporters are stationed out in front of individual malls, with cameras positioned inside the show to capture the store opening from the store's perspective. One network had the camera sitting at a low angle for that thundering-hooves effect, and when the doors opened and the bodies piled through it did look like something out of Red River. The reporters later interview shoppers after they've snared their booty and it's all done with this air of frolic, even this year, when the anchors made so many nodding allusions to the "bad economy" you would have thought it was a meteorological condition, an oppressive damp fog that had blanketed the nation's midsection, impeding visibility.

What you don't see in these Black Friday updates are interviews with the people who work in these mall chains, who have to show up at even more ungodly hours than do the shoppers in order to stock the shelves and prepare for the store openings. Openings that get nearer to the Thanksgiving meal each year, with some stores opening at midnight on Thanksgiving day and others at 4 AM on Black Friday, forcing workers to cut short their own holiday plans and put in exhausting zombie hours. It's become an arms race between the major chains, and putting a stop to these excesses and exploitations is a stellar case for unionization. I see countless inane interviews with shoppers carrying bags full of booty, interviewer and interviewee competing to see who can be more effing cutesy, but nothing with the cashiers or shelvers after they've put in a long shift. How much does a security guard or greeter make at one of these malls? It never occurs to any reporter (or assignment editor) to ask; it would be a breach of journalistic etiquette to try anything that Studs Terkel. If nothing else, it would be nice if CNBC and the other cable networks would at least stop hyping Black Friday as if it were the Super Bowl, grinning and ruminating about it as if it were some durable and endearing national tradition. Quit treating shoppers loaded with merchandise dragging their fat butts across the parking lot as if they were some hardy breed of buffalo hunter heeding the call of the wild.

It's all fun and games for the news media to hype their advertisers -- until somebody gets killed. And then its back to what the shameless news media does best: if it bleeds, it leads.

In an ironic postscript there is this report from California Fatal shooting followed toy store brawl:

PALM DESERT, Calif. – The shooting occurred in a crowded toy store on the traditional start of the holiday shopping season, but authorities say it wasn't related to the bargain-hunting frenzy. Instead, two men pulled guns and killed each other after the women with them erupted into a bloody brawl, witnesses said.

* * *

Witnesses Scott and Joan Barrick said they were checking out of the store when the brawl began between two women, each with a man. The women were near the checkout area, but the Barricks did not think the women had purchases.

One woman suddenly started punching the other woman, who fought back as blood flowed from her nose, said Scott Barrick, 41. The man who was with the woman being punched pulled a gun halfway out of his pocket, then shoved it back in, he said.

* * *

The other man pulled a gun and pointed it at the first man but forgot to cock it, Scott Barrick said. The first man tried to run but was blocked by the line of people, then ran back toward the store's electronics section as the other man fired his gun, he said.

The first man reached a dead-end in electronics, turned around and ran toward an exit, pulling his gun and firing back, Scott Barrick said.

"He went up to the cash register, he went to put his hand on the thing and he just went phoomp," he said, indicating the man fell.

He said he did not see what happened to the other man.

Palm Desert Councilman Jim Ferguson said police told him two men with handguns shot and killed each other.

"I think the obvious question everyone has is who takes loaded weapons into a Toys "R" Us?" he said.

Perhaps now "Black Friday" will take on an entirely new connotation, a black mark on the conscience of Americans. Maybe now Americans will stop to think and ask "why are we doing this to ourselves? Who have we become?" Sadly, I doubt it.

Time for Arizonans to Reconsider an Old Idea?

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

There was an interesting poll conducted by Bruce Merrill reported in today's Arizona Daily Star. Survey Merrill found most Arizonans know little about the woman who would replace Governor Napolitano. He found 57 percent said they don't know enough about Secretary of State Jan Brewer to say how she is doing her current job.

Of those who felt comfortable rating Brewer, 6 percent said she is doing an excellent job, with another 29 percent rating her performance as good.

Jan Brewer has been a fixture in Arizona politics since she was first elected to office on 1982. She served in the Arizona House from 1982 to 1986, and in the Arizona Senate from 1986 to 1996. She was majority whip of the Senate for two terms, 1992-1996. Brewer then served on the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors from 1996 to 2002, and served a term as Chair of the Board. Brewer was elected Secretary of State in 2002, and reelected in 2006. Secretary Janice Kay 'Jan' Brewer - Biography

After 26 years in politics, 57 percent surveyed said they don't know enough about her to rate her job performance. I find this number shocking. How does a known quantity fly under the political radar and continue to get elected to offices when a large majority of voters admit they know little or nothing about her? Is this really the person Arizonans want to succeed Governor Janet Napolitano? These women are diametrically opposed politically.

Unfortunately, we are stuck with Jan Brewer. Arizona is one of only seven states (soon to be six) that do not provide for a lieutenant governor under the state constitution. In Arizona, the Secretary of State succeeds to the governorship (in most circumstances).

23 states elect a lieutenant governor on a joint ticket with the governor. 19 states hold a separate election, and in Tennessee, the state senate chooses the lieutenant governor. In most states, the governor and lieutenant governor are members of the same political party.

In recent years, Jan Brewer has supported bills (that failed) which would have renamed her office lieutenant governor. She has occasionally engaged in childish behavior by asserting her "acting governor" powers when Governor Napolitano has been out of the state or the country.

To her credit, however, Jan Brewer did have the foresight to support Prop. 100 on the ballot in 1994. This proposition would have amended the state constitution to create the office of lieutenant governor for the purpose of succession in the case of a vacancy in the office of governor, and to act as governor during a temporary absence. The propostion would have required that the lieutenant governor be from the same political party as the governor and that they would run for office together on a joint ticket.

Prop. 100 was defeated almost 2-1 that year. As I recall, the principle objection was to the acting governor powers during a "temporary absence" provision. At the time, the abuse of such powers by lieutenant governors in other states was not an infrequent occurence and was fresh in the minds of voters.

How ironic it is that Jan Brewer stands to benefit from the defeat of a constitutional amendment that she has championed for many years. It may be time for Arizonans to reconsider this old idea, with a few changes.

Eliminate the "temporary absence" provision under the Arizona Constitution and limit the acting powers, similar to the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to a written declaration from the governor that he or she is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office due to some (usually temporary) incapacity. When the governor transmits a written declaration to the leadership of the legislature that no incapacity exists, the governor may resume the powers and the duties of the office.

The lieutenant governor should also be assigned administrative duties so that the office is not a do nothing position. Transfer the Secretary of State duties for filing Arizona administrative rules; record keeping for corporations, partnerships, trade names and trademarks, and charitable organizations; and administering the Uniform Commercial Code, for example.

The Secretary of State is the chief election officer responsible for overseeing elections, a task which is becoming more complex and time consuming. The Secretary would retain such traditional duties as custodian of the state seal, apostilles, legislative filings and intergovernmental agreements, notaries public, and oaths of office, for example.

There are enough administrative oversight duties to be divided between the two constitutional officers. The legislature should consider putting a constitutional amendment creating the office of lieutenant governor to the voters again with these recommended changes. Jan Brewer may be in a position to encourage this to happen.

This is not a matter of idle speculation in Arizona. We have had a history of successions to the governorship from Secretary of State since 1977. However, this is the first time since Rose Mofford, a Democrat, succeeded Governor Evan Mecham, a Republican, that the Secretary of State was not from the same political party.

Our youth are woefully ignorant?

by David Safier

Yesterday I wrote about an online, 33 question Civics Quiz you can take to see how much you know about general U.S. civics and history.

Today I saw a breakdown of scores by age on Kevin Drum's blog.

I don't want to read too much into this. It's not a good random sample by any stretch of the imagination. But if you notice, the 18 to 24 year olds got more-or-less the same scores as everyone else.

Young people have one advantage: their schooling is still fresh in their minds, so there's more chance they'll remember what they learned. But older people have the far greater advantage of the opportunity to see the world, including government, in action over years of adulthood and learning from what they've seen.

It looks like our youth aren't as ignorant as many people claim. Or maybe the bulk of our population is woefully ignorant about the functionings of government and the details of our history, including the youth. Either way, the perpetual moaning about "these kids nowadays" isn't backed up by these results.

Note: Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, who I've given a lot of positive attention to lately, chimes in on this quiz in today's column. I'm afraid, the election over, she's back to her old ways. First, she calls people "stupid" for their lack of civics knowledge. No, they may be ignorant and uninformed, but a civics test is not an intelligence test. People aren't smarter because they know stuff. She also blames the low scores for the lack of Civics courses in today's schools. She obviously hasn't looked at the age breakdown above. People 45 and up most probably took Civics in high school, and it didn't seem to make much difference. Parker is looking for easy answers to complex problems.

Newest members of Obama's team of rivals

by David Safier

Andy Borowitz, who writes on Huffington Post, is a clever guy. I wrote about his post lambasting Obama for using too many complete sentences. Now this:

Continuing in his quest to assemble a so-called "team of rivals," President-elect Barack Obama today announced that he would name Angelina Jolie and Jennifer Aniston to key Cabinet positions.

[snip]

...in his weekly Internet address, the President-elect explained his rationale for choosing the sworn enemies to his Cabinet: "I chose Jennifer and Angelina for the same reason I have chosen every other Cabinet member: they clearly despise each other with a passion."

[snip]

Doris Kearns Goodwin, historian and author of the book Team of Rivals, said that she was "thrilled" by the selection of the two actresses to Mr. Obama's Cabinet.

"Every time someone says 'team of rivals,' I sell another book on Amazon," she said. "Team of rivals, team of rivals, team of rivals."

A renaissance woman?

by David Safier

The headline may overstate things a bit, but allow this retired high school English teacher a little license. I love stories like this.

Twenty year old Noelle Lopez, Tucson native and Salpointe grad, has won a Rhodes Scholarship and will study at Oxford.

The best part for me are the other qualities Lopez possesses beyond her scholarly achievement, which is more than enough to earn her praise. 

Lopez was named Girls Cross Country Runner of the Year by the Arizona Daily Star in 2004.

As a high school teacher, my experience with cross country runners was that they were almost all academic achievers. The average GPA of the team tended to be well over 3.5. There must be something about the grit and endurance it takes to pound out mile after mile that's equivalent to the perseverance it takes to excel in school.

And she volunteered at Habitat for Humanity and the Casa Maria soup kitchen when she was at Salpointe.

And she plans to study Philosophy at Oxford, "focusing on virtue ethics."

But wait, it gets better for this old English teacher.

She discovered her enthusiasm for philosophy in her literature courses with teacher Kerry Demers at Salpointe, she said.

[snip]

"I thought about all of the amazing teachers that I've had and how they've influenced me, . . . and I realized that education is very powerful in actually effecting change in the world," she said.

We should be proud of our native daughter. Best of luck, Noelle.

Civics quiz

by David Safier

If you think taking tests is fun (when your future doesn't depend on it), here's a good one: a Civics Quiz. Thirty-three questions about our government and to some extent our history.

Like all these things, it puts more stock in pure memory than I would like, and I found a few of the economics-based questions to be ambiguous, if not biased -- but maybe that's because I got some of them wrong. But I think most readers of this site will be pleased with their scores compared to the average of a random sample of test takers: 49% for the entire group and 55% for college "educators" [That's what it says on the site. I wonder if it means college "educated."] According to an AFP article,

US elected officials scored abysmally on a test measuring their civic knowledge, with an average grade of just 44 percent.

Let's hear it for our elected officials! (Thanks to Daily Kos)

Business CEOs could learn something here

by David Safier

University Presidents don't make megabucks, but they do pretty well. Median salary is about $425,000 for presidents of public universities. A few make as much as a million dollars. Not a bad wage.

It seems like some of the higher paid presidents are voluntarily giving back part of their salaries or refusing raises.

Pat Callan, president of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, said he had never heard of such a wave of givebacks.

“When you see a cluster like this,” he said, “it seems like sort of belated recognition that this presidential pay thing has gotten out of hand. People are getting tuition increases, some faculty are facing layoffs, it just doesn’t look too good for presidents, no matter how capable they are, to be getting so much money. Americans have had a touching faith in higher education; it’s losing its good image with the public.”

What a strange notion, refusing money which, according to today's business mores, you have every right to because someone offered it to you. Hell, the size of your salary is a nothing more than an indicator of what you're worth.

It looks like the voluntary salary cuts range from 10-15%. What would that amount to for Richard Adkerson, the CEO of Freeport McMoran Copper & Gold, which is laying off about 600 people from the corporation's Arizona mines? He makes about $65 million a year. That means he'd give back somewhere between six-and-a-half and ten million dollars.

That wouldn't hurt much, Richard, now would it? Your painless sacrifice could save at least a hundred jobs. Imagine how good and noble that would make you feel.

Until your fellow CEOs called you a chump, that is. Do-gooder! Wealth spreader! They'd probably take away your key to the club bathroom and make you golf alone.

One definition of obscenity

by David Safier

According to a Star article this morning:

Nearly 600 people at four of Freeport's Arizona mines were left jobless less than two years after breaking ground on the Safford mine — the first major new U.S. copper mine in more than 30 years.

Copper prices have dropped dramatically this year after reaching a peak price of $4.26 a pound on May 5. On Friday, the spot price for copper was $1.57 a pound.

The layoffs make sense in the boom-and-bust world of mining. If copper has lost almost two-thirds of its value recently, the need to pull the ore out of the ground has lessened.

This, however, makes no sense:

Freeport CEO Richard Adkerson is one of the highest-paid executives in the United States, with a base salary of $2,083,333 in 2007, Securities and Exchange Commission filings show. With stock options and other compensation added, his annual earnings are worth more than $65 million.

CEO Richard Adkerson makes $65 million, and the company is laying workers off right and left.

Imagine we cut Adkerson's compensation to the bone, say to the just-above-poverty level of $5 million. I know that would cause pain and suffering for his family, but hell, times is hard.

If we take the $60 million left and divide it into $60,000 chunks, figuring that's a salary-plus-extras package for a worker (it's probably less than that, but it's a nice round figure), it would keep 1,000 people employed without costing the company a penny.

Hamlet said, "The time is out of joint." See, English teachers have been right all along when we said Shakespeare is still modern.

The Wasilla Hillbillies: Thanksgiving Special

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Sarah Palin stars in the situation comedy hit of the new television season, The Wasilla Hillbillies. This week, the show presents its Thanksgiving Special (episode 13).

In this episode, Sarah decides that if she can't be president she can still pretend to be one by pardoning a turkey for Thanksgiving. Only Sarah is clueless about presidential stagecraft. You see, the president pardons turkeys with the White House as his backdrop.

But Sarah pardons her turkey with the Triple D Farm & Hatchery in Wasilla as her backdrop, and comedy ensues. Sarah decides to give a television interview while "Joe the Turkey killer" goes about his business killing turkeys behind Sarah, who is clueless about the situation. "Joe the turkey killer" appears to enjoy his job just a little too much as he looks back at clueless Sarah with bemusement while killing his turkeys. The only thing missing from this episode is the "Dueling Banjos" soundtrack from the movie Deliverance. The episode is certain to become an instant holiday classic.

Critics have praised Sarah Palin as a comic genius. Said the show's writers, "this show just writes itself. Sarah Palin is the gift to comedy writers that just keeps on giving."

I saw this interview covered live on MSNBC (why?) Whoever does the breaking news captions at MSNBC was having way too much fun with the captions. (click the image to see a larger version). h/t to John Aravosis at Americablog.com.

All of this reminded me of the comedy classic "turkey drop" episode of WKRP in Cincinnati in which Mr. Carlson decides to do a station promotion at a supermarket by dropping live turkeys from a hellicopter. "I swear, I thought turkeys could fly," says a shaken Carlson. Ace reporter Les Nessman covers the ensuing tragedy live (below).

I can't wait for the Wasilla Hillbillies Christmas Special. The episode is still in writing, but word has leaked out that Sarah "accidentally" shoots Santa's reindeer during a practice flight mistaking them for "flying caribou" (huh?), but Todd Palin saves Christmas and his clueless wife by offering to take Santa on his snow machine (with the help of Santa's magic) to deliver toys to all the good girls and boys around the world. In a heart-touching conclusion, Santa forgives Sarah for killing his reindeer in the spirit of Christmas.

So who are you speaking for exactly?

by David Safier

Bob Jones University has taken the bold step of apologizing for its past racism.

Bob Jones University is apologizing for racist policies that included a one-time ban on interracial dating and its unwillingness to admit black students until 1971. 

In a statement posted Thursday on its Web site, the fundamentalist Christian school founded in 1927 in northwestern South Carolina says its rules on race were shaped by culture instead of the Bible. 

[snip]

"[In our policies regarding race] we failed to accurately represent the Lord and to fulfill the commandment to love others as ourselves. For these failures we are profoundly sorry."

This brings up a question I've often wondered about. Churches sometimes change their stances on issues. At one time, Southern Baptist preachers told their followers, "God wants the races should be kept separate. It's right here in the Bible." Later they said, "Oops, our bad. God's OK with integration, interracial dating and marriage." (By the way, BJU, you're a little late to the party.)

It's good churches are willing to admit when they're wrong, but doesn't that put everything they say in God's name in question? "God wants marriage to be between a man and a woman." "God teaches abortion is murder." Are churches who tell that to their followers going to apologize for those statements somewhere down the line as well?

If I make a statement about gay marriage or abortion in my name and change my mind, that's just me. I'm fallible, I'm the first to admit it. When a church issues a pronouncement in God's name, then apologizes for its error, that's a whole different order of magnitude.

Whenever a weak, frail vessel -- as are we all -- claims to speak for an omniscient, infallible creator, somethings bound to get lost in translation.

Remind me, don't most religions teach humility?

Complete sentences

by David Safier

Apparently Barack Obama has stepped over the line by speaking in complete sentences:

In the first two weeks since the election, President-elect Barack Obama has broken with a tradition established over the past eight years through his controversial use of complete sentences, political observers say.

Millions of Americans who watched Mr. Obama's appearance on CBS' "Sixty Minutes" on Sunday witnessed the president-elect's unorthodox verbal tic, which had Mr. Obama employing grammatically correct sentences virtually every time he opened his mouth.

But Mr. Obama's decision to use complete sentences in his public pronouncements carries with it certain risks, since after the last eight years many Americans may find his odd speaking style jarring.

[snip]

The historian said that if Mr. Obama insists on using complete sentences in his speeches, the public may find itself saying, "Okay, subject, predicate, subject predicate - we get it, stop showing off."

Short note to the current Guv

by David Safier

Um, Janet, about two weeks before the election, you said at a rally that our Republican state legislators want to cut 40% from the higher education budget.

You were exaggerating for effect, right? Right?

Because I know you wouldn't leave us in their hands, defenseless, veto-less, if that were really true.

Would you?

Arizona overtaxed? Hardly.

by David Safier (TASL)

It seems tax-and-spend liberals are coming out of hiding these days. The latest voice is the Citizen in an editorial, The case for higher taxes. 

The subhead says it all: "Study finds cuts -- not spending increases -- to be the major cause of state budget deficit."

Who woulda thunk that when you cut taxes to the bone, you can't afford to pay for stuff.

Just two years ago, Arizona legislators passed some of the largest tax cuts in state history. That year, the state had a $1.5 billion surplus, and lawmakers foolishly didn't think the good times would ever end.

In 2006, the Legislature proposed - and Gov. Janet Napolitano agreed to - 5 percent income tax cuts in each of the next two years. Arizona's income tax already was among the nation's lowest, and effects of the cut on individuals were minimal.

A cut in the state property tax was handled in a much wiser manner. The tax was to be suspended for three years, then scheduled to automatically resume unless legislators and the governor agreed to extend the suspension.

That property tax suspension will probably be made permanent if Brewer is our governor.

Here's a list of Arizona's tax ranking in a number of categories. Note that our tax bite is low in every category but cigarettes and sales tax, both of which tend to hit the poorest Arizonans hardest.

Alcoholic beverage taxes: 30th
Cigarette excise taxes: 12th
Gasoline taxes: 32nd
Income tax rate: 39th
Property tax rate: 42nd
Sales tax rate: 3rd
Vehicle tax rate: 19th
Maximum state corporate income tax rate: 27th
State tax burden for retirees: 35th
Total state & local tax burden in largest city: 43rd
State & local tax burden as a percent of income: 32nd

[Source: The Taxpayers Network]

Steve Benson and David Fitzsimmons weigh in on Jan Brewer

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

An ill wind is BREWERing in Arizona

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Many of you have heard by now that Governor Janet Napolitano has been tapped by the Obama transition team to become the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Napolitano may be Homeland Security pick It is only a matter of official confirmation.

Napolitano would be a vast improvement over Michael Chertoff whose dysfunctional response to Hurricane Katrina bordered on criminal negligence. He should have been forced to resign along with Michael "heckuva job" Brown.

Congratulations to Janet Napolitano. But her good fortune will put the rest of us here in Arizona in a lurch. Under the Arizona Constitution, Secretary of State Jan Brewer (right) will succeed to the Governor's office.

[Yes, I know this is a photo of the Borg Queen from Star Trek: Next Generation, but it is no more falsely misleading than the retouched air-brushed photo Jan Brewer uses on her web site and on official Secretary of State materials. C'mon Jan, who do you think you're fooling? Embrace who you are!]

Jan Brewer was one of the right-wing nutters in the Arizona Legislature (always good for a crazy quote in the local newspapers) before she was able to fool enough Arizona voters outside of her district, voters who had no idea who she was when she first ran for Secretary of State in 1992, that she was a moderate Republican. You can fool some of the people all of the time, or so the saying goes. Brewer did not have serious competition for reelection in 2006, so here we are. Maybe next time the Arizona Democratic Party will take seriously state offices other than the governorship.

The right-wing nutter crowd in the Republican Party has been able to weed out other moderate Republicans whom they derided as RINOS (Republicans in name only) in GOP primaries over the last three election cycles. And they expanded their majority in both chambers of the Legislature in the recent election. The Arizona Republican Party has moved even further to the right and is much more partisan as a result. Now one of their own is about to succeed to the Governor's Office to lead them.

An ill wind is BREWERing in Arizona. Things are going to get ugly over the next two years. This is a crowd that believes in Grover Norquist's dream of shrinking the size of government down to the size "where we can drown it in the bathtub." As the national economy falters under the weight of the failure of the supply-side, trickle-down tax cuts for the rich, no government regulations, anything goes because "greed is good" voo-doo Reaganomics, this crowd believes the answer is to double down and give us more of the same failure. State government is not going to be there to lend a hand up when its citizens are most in need.

I am curious to see how this all will play out. I am sure that Jan Brewer believes this good fortune will give her nearly a two year head start to run as an incumbent for Governor in 2010, and that this will freeze out the primary opponents she anticipated facing had Napolitano completed her term. I don't think so. Tom Horne, John Munger, and a host of past and current elected officials who were exploring running for Governor may still do so.

Should Brewer revert to form and behave as she did when she was a member of the Legislature, she is certain to make political enemies even within her own party. She tends towards totalitarianism. And if she starts going off on crazy rants again, the news media will turn on her.

And who will Jan Brewer appoint to succeed her as Secretary of State? Certainly not anyone she views as a potential rival in the GOP primary for governor. I have heard speculation about several names already mentioned to me, but none of these rumors are confirmed. Everyone is waiting on Napolitano's next move.

Kathleen Parker again

by David Safier

God bless Kathleen Parker. The columnist was one of the first conservatives to reject Sarah Palin in print  and came as close to saying she was voting for Obama as you can come without saying it. Since then, she's been on a tear in her columns.

Today's topic is the way the vocal, belligerent and outrageous Christian right wing has damaged the GOP.

To be more specific, the evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP is what ails the erstwhile conservative party and will continue to afflict and marginalize its constituents if reckoning doesn't soon cometh.

Simply put: Armband religion is killing the Republican Party. And, the truth -- as long as we're setting ourselves free -- is that if one were to eavesdrop on private conversations among the party intelligentsia, one would hear precisely that.

[snip]

the Grand Old Party . . . has become increasingly beholden to an element that used to be relegated to wooden crates on street corners.

[snip]

Meanwhile, it isn't necessary to evict the Creator from the public square, surrender Judeo-Christian values or diminish the value of faith in America. Belief in something greater than oneself has much to recommend it, including most of the world's architectural treasures, our universities and even our founding documents.

But, like it or not, we are a diverse nation, no longer predominantly white and Christian. The change Barack Obama promised has already occurred, which is why he won.
Among Jewish voters, 78 percent went for Obama. Sixty-six percent of under-30 voters did likewise. Forty-five percent of voters ages 18-29 are Democrats compared to just 26 percent Republican; in 2000, party affiliation was split almost evenly.

Parker's recent columns have tripped so easily and joyfully from her tongue that it's clear she's harbored these feelings for a long, long time, as have other thoughtful conservatives. They kept their council in the interest of party unity, but when Sarah Palin came along, the dam burst.

Where should you do your [Christmas] [Holiday] shopping?

by David Safier

It's important to know which stores are Christmas-friendly, Christmas-negligent and Christmas-offensive when you go shopping. So we owe James Dobson's Focus on the Family a vote of thanks for telling us which is which.

Just so you know what each category means:

• "Christmas-friendly" retailers — prominent acknowledgment of "Christmas"
• "Christmas-negligent" retailers — marginalized use of "Christmas"
• "Christmas-offensive" retailers — apparent abandonment of "Christmas"

The friendliest stores include Crate&Barrel, Eddie Bauer, L.L.Bean, Lowe's, Home Depot and Nordstrom. The negligents include Barnes & Noble, Bed, Bath & Beyond, Best Buy, GAP and Toys "R" Us. And among those who get a lump of coal in their stockings are Banana Republic, Bloomingdale's and Old Navy.

Hope you keep those names in mind.

Sad News for Some Department: It is with great sorrow hope that I report, Focus on the Family is cutting 202 jobs "because of a weak economy and cash-strapped donors." My schadenfreude isn't directed at those losing their jobs, but at an organization so ridiculous and toxic that it never should have risen to national prominence or been taken seriously. Buh bye, Bushies.

Thanks to Salon's War Room for the Christmas list and Washington Monthly's Political Animal for the job cutting info.

Conservatives Jumping Ship: David Frum

by David Safier

The "Conservatives Jumping Ship" series was supposed to end at the election, but here's another one: David Frum, former speech writer for Bush and now an author trying to figure out the shape of a new conservatism. First he said less than complementary things about Sarah Palin. Now he's leaving the National Review.

“I am really and truly frightened by the collapse of support for the Republican Party by the young and the educated,” he said.

Who's the next to leave?

Not Newt Gingrich, who said on The O'Reilly Factor,

I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it.

Good ol' Newt. Nice to have you back. Not really.

Thanks to Steve Benen at The Political Animal for both items.

The Electoral Map Does Not Tell The Whole Story

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Most of you by now have seen the electoral map depiction of the 2008 election (h/t fivethirtyeight.com).

But simply using the map of the United States creates a visual distortion of election results in that the map is based upon land mass and is not weighted for population or other factors. Western states have large land mass but sparse populations. "Objects in the rearview mirror may appear larger than they are," to paraphrase.

Many of you by now have also seen this fascinating county-by-county map published by the New York Times after Election Day depicting how Obama and McCain faired in comparison to Kerry and Bush in 2004.

^{chart from NY Times}

John McCain faired better than George Bush only in Appalachia and the interior South (loosely referred to as the Bible Belt), areas of the Gulf Coast devastated by hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005 (resulting in the relocation of large numbers of African-Americans who have mostly not returned), and the home states of the GOP nominees - Arizona and Alaska, which could prove to be a unique anomally for this one election.

But even this map does not tell the whole story. Cartographers have developed "cartograms" weighted for factors like population, electoral votes, and percentages of the vote. (h/t Election maps Click on image to view/enlarge).

Here are the 2008 presidential election results on a population cartogram of this type:

As you can see, the states have been stretched and squashed, some of them substantially, to give them the appropriate sizes, though it's done in such a way as to preserve the general appearance of the map, so far as that's possible. On this map there is now clearly more blue than red.

We can represent the effects of the electoral college by scaling the sizes of states to be proportional to their number of electoral votes, which gives a map that looks like this:

This cartogram looks similar to the one above it, but it's not identical. The areas of red and blue on the cartogram are now proportional to the actual numbers of electoral votes won by each candidate. Thus this map shows at a glance both which states went to which candidate and which candidate won more electoral college votes – something that you cannot tell easily from the normal election-night red and blue map.

With all of the fancy electronic gadgetry that the networks employed in their election coverage this year, you would think they could use these cartograms to display a more accurate depiction of election results.

One way to improve on the map and reveal more nuance in the vote is to use not just two colors, red and blue, but to use red, blue, and shades of purple in between to indicate percentages of votes. Here is what the normal map would look like if you do this:

And here is what the cartogram looks like:

As this map makes clear, large portions of the country are quite evenly divided, appearing in various shades of purple, although a number of strongly Democratic (blue) areas are visible too, mostly in the larger cities. There are also some strongly Republican areas, but most of them have relatively small populations and hence appear quite small on this map.

Many political analysts now argue that the Republican Party is fast becoming a regional party with its base in the interior South, and several sparsely populated states in the Great Plains and the Mormon Mountain West (Utah, Idaho, Wyoming).

Democratic strategists are already working on a strategy to strengthen the Democratic party in Texas to turn that state into a swing state in 2012; expand upon party gains in the "New South" (Virginia and North Carolina in 2008) to Georgia in 2012; add Arizona to the successful 2008 "Western Strategy" in 2012; and Missouri, which was decided by a razor-thin margin, should also be in play again in 2012.

The 2012 strategy does not have an official title yet, so I would like to propose one of my own: "TAG 'eM" (Texas, Arizona, Georgia and Missouri). These states have the largest population base and, after redistricting, the largest number of electoral votes in 2012 of the states that voted Republican in 2008. (Recent Democratic gains in the Northern Plains states of Montana and North Dakota should also put these states in play.)

By holding onto the states Obama won in 2008 and taking away one or more of these TAG 'eM states from the Republicans in 2012, Democrats can reduce the GOP to a regional party largely concentrated in the Bible Belt and the Mormon Mountain West, reflecting the effects of the social conservative take-over of the Republican Party from the economic conservatives and Republican moderates, which has alienated large portions of Republican-leaning voters and much of the rest of the country.

Let S. AZ be S. AZ

by David Safier

The Phoenix-based Arizona Democratic Party needs to show more respect for Democrats in Southern Arizona during elections. We've developed some savvy pols down here who understand the lay of the land and have some good ideas about how to win elections, but the state party continues to treat us like slightly dim-witted younger siblings. If we want to gain seats in the State Legislature, the folks in Maricopa need to give us our seat at the table.

It may be that the weak showing of Southern Arizona Democrats in state elections was in the cards. My post earlier this morning talks about the lower Democratic voting numbers in states that went for McCain. But if the state party thinks it's worthwhile to put time and money into picking up seats in Southern Arizona and it wants better results in 2010 than in 2008, it needs to figure out how to do it right.

Here are a few things to think about.

• SOUTHERN ARIZONA IS NOT MARICOPA COUNTY! I'm sorry, was I shouting? Let me try that again.
• Southern. Arizona. Is. Not. Maricopa. County. Just because we're in the same state doesn't mean what makes sense in Maricopa County also makes sense in Pima County -- or Cochise County, or the other counties down here.
• Southern Arizonans don't like Maricopa County. Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but it's true. It's one of the few things we can all agree on. We think you're bullies who make decisions for the entire state and suck up too much of the financial and environmental oxygen. We think we're underrepresented in political and legislative decisions.
• We're as smart as you are. When you pretend to listen to our ideas, pat us on the heads, then go ahead and do what you were planning to do before you talked to us, we take offense.
• We know Southern Arizona better than you do. We live here. We read the papers every day. We talk to people every day.
• Because we're as smart as you are and know Southern Arizona better than you do, we probably have some very good ideas about what people care about, district by district and precinct by precinct, that could very well win us the extra hundreds of votes we need to defeat Republican candidates.

You might consider some of this when you begin mapping your Arizona's electoral strategy strategies for 2010.
  

Update: So how did we do in this election?

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I have been busy with post-election debriefings from candidates and consulting with colleagues in the election integrity community about the close elections still undecided and that appear headed for a recount.

Before the election I predicted that Democrats would net 20-25 House seats in Congress. In fact, Democrats won 24 seats but lost only 3, for a net gain of 21 seats to date. There are still two House races being counted and possibly headed for a recount. There is also a run-off election in Louisiana in December for a final House seat.

Congratulations to Ann Kirkpatrick who picked up a House seat in AZ-1. The Arizona congressional delegation is now 5-3 Democratic.

In the Senate I predicted that Democrats would win six seats and the only question was whether they could win nine seats to get to the "mythical" filibuster-proof 60 seat majority. (I say mythical because Democrats rarely vote as a unified party, and at the moment we are still counting Joe Lieberman in our caucus). Democrats have won six Senate seats so far.

In Georgia, Saxby Chambliss (R-I) and Jim Martin (D) are headed for a December run-off election. Run-off elections come down to base turnout and I would have to give Chambliss the edge here, even though he is one of the biggest pricks ever to run for political office. The 2002 campaign that this chickenhawk coward (five student deferments and one medical deferment) ran against Max Cleland, a true American hero who left three limbs on the battlefield in Vietnam, earned him my personal enmity for a lifetime. Even John McCain said at the time "Putting pictures of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden next to a picture of a man who left three limbs on the battlefield -- it's worse than disgraceful, it's reprehensible." Now McCain is campaigning for Chambliss - worse than disgraceful, it is reprehensible. McCain has no honor left. John McCain is not a man of honor

Chambliss has "voted repeatedly against the new GI Bill as well as funding for necessary armor and equipment for our troops and other measures meant to help out our men and women fighting overseas. In fact, Chambliss voted against our troops at least 23 times in his short tenure in the Senate. The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America rated Chambliss as a D- in 2006." If anyone deserves to be defeated, it is Saxby Chambliss.

In Alaska, Mark Begich (D) appears headed for a narrow victory over convicted felon Ted Stevens (R-I). The last of the ballots are to be counted on Tuesday. The remaining ballots come from precincts in Alaska that mostly went for Begich. The margin of victory is likely to be within the one-half of one percent margin that will trigger an automatic recount under state law. Both sides are lawyering up for a recount.

The problem in Alaska is that if Ted Stevens wins, the Republican Caucus will have no choice but to open an ethics investigation and to kick him out of their Caucus, if not remove him from the Senate (convicted felons are disqualified from public office). Some strategists have suggested that Stevens should be allowed to stay until he exhausts the appeals process, but this would appear to be coddling a criminal at a time when the GOP badly needs to shed its well-deserved image of being a culture of corruption, for which the Alaskan Republican Party is its poster child.

The "Alaska Disasta" Fan Club on the other hand has been fantasizing that should Ted Stevens be declared the winner and is then thrown under the bus by his Republican colleagues, that Governor Sarah Palin would win the Special Election that would have to be held to fill the vacant Senate seat. This suppostion is pretty presumptuous in light of the fact that Mark Begich is very popular in Alaska and is certain to run again in any Special Election. There is also the little problem of an ongoing ethics investigation hanging over the head of Governor Palin. Republicans in Alaska whom the "reformer" ran against to get elected governor may see this as their opportunity for political payback.

Hopefully Begich will be declared the winner on Tuesday and after the recount. This would be God's message to Sarah Palin that he is slamming the door shut on this political opportunist who wanted to charge through that door of political opportunism. Better satisfy yourself with just being governor.

In Minnesota, Norm Coleman (R-I) and Al Franken (DFL) are separated by 206 votes, less than one-half of one percent, triggering the automatic recount under state law. Minnesota law has long provided for a hand count of the ballots to determine "voter intent" (this process has been done in past elections). It would not be unusual to pick up a couple hundred votes out of over 3 million votes cast. Both candidates, however, are likely to pick up votes. But provisional ballots tend to favor Democratic candidates. Whatever the final outcome in this race, it is likely to be a razor-thin margin of victory.

What I find most disturbing is the attempt by Norm Coleman's campaign, the RNC and the right-wing media to suggest improprieties in the election in Minnesota to cast doubt on the results should Al Franken eventually be declared the winner. The "car ballot" anecdote has become the tent pole for Republicans and allies raising doubts about the recount’s fairness. The "car ballot" story emerged Saturday from the mouth of Coleman lawyer Fritz Knaak. It was a falsehood for which he later had to back off. MinnPost - David Brauer: Minneapolis election director speaks: 'Ballots in my car' story false

Still, the lie that won’t die is being repeated by the purveyors of propaganda at Fox News, The Wall Street Journal and even the New York Times published a Coleman press release without checking out the facts. The personal attacks on Minnesota's Secretary of State are most unfair. By law the Secretary of State has appointed a bipartisan panel of "judges" for the recount who are acceptable to all political parties in Minnesota. These judges will determine the fate of any questionable ballots, not the Secretary of State. The recount process is eminently fair.

Finally, I predicted that Barack Obama would win an electoral landslide in the mid-300s range. That he did. Obama won 365 electoral votes to McCain's 173, with 52.3% of the popular vote (to date). This is the best performance by any Democrat since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. (For you Clintonistas, Bill won in a three-way contest in which Ross Perot captured a significant portion of the popular vote, and Bill only received a plurality of the popular vote despite his larger electoral vote margin). Barack Obama has a mandate backed by Democratic gains in the House and Senate over the last two election cycles. When a Democrat wins perennial GOP strongholds Indiana, Ohio, Virgina and North Carolina, that spells M-A-N-D-A-T-E.

I will examine Arizona election results in a later post.

The South losing political influence

by David Safier

Here's a short piece from Kevin Drum on his Mother Jones blog (He used to do the Political Animal blog for Washington Monthly) about the south's diminishing political clout. I hope he's got this right.

For many years, the Democratic Party controlled the agenda of American politics and Southerners controlled much of the Democratic Party. So the South had enormous political influence.

Later, most Southerners switched to the Republican Party, but by then it was Republicans who controlled the agenda of American politics. So the South still had enormous political influence.

As of January 20th, however, the Democratic Party will control the American political agenda once again. But Southerners are still Republicans, which means that their political influence will be nearly nonexistent. 

In other words, for the first time since Reconstruction, the South will be almost completely shut out of national power. There are still a few liberal Southerners who belong to the Democratic Party, of course, but the reactionary, traditionalist South is, for the time being, nearly powerless. They will not control anything, their caucus is a discredited rump, and their influence will be negligible. There is no reason to fear them or to care what they think. Their power to filibuster, itself guttering and only barely alive following the 2008 election, will be all they have left. 

This is the first time this will be true in well over a century. So say it again: The South will have essentially no influence over the course of American politics for the next eight years. We live in momentous times.

Voter turnout

by David Safier

A very interesting analysis of voter turnout nationally. Generally, the number of Democratic voters increased while Republicans decreased. But in states that went for McCain . . . 

Here are a few excerpts. The entire article is worth a read.

Turnout in last week's election increased from four years ago but fell far short of some forecasts largely because many Republican voters either stayed home or left blank the presidential section of their ballots.

In states won by President-elect Barack Obama, turnout was more than five percentage points higher than in states won by Republican John McCain, according to a Globe analysis of data compiled by a pair of researchers who study voting patterns in US elections.

[snip]

States that experienced a large drop-off in turnout included McCain's home state of Arizona, which he won; heavily Republican Utah; and Ohio, another GOP-leaning state that fell into the Obama column.

Can some good come out of this?

by David Safier

I tend to scoff at people who talk about good coming out of evil. ("Doesn't it gladden your heart to know that some Germans put their lives at risk to hide Jews in their homes during World War II?" No, it doesn't, when I balance it against the vast majority who condoned the rounding up of Jews.)

But I'm hoping -- because hope is big during these post-November 4 days -- that something good will come out of the horrific rise in racist incidents since Obama's election.

Cross burnings. Schoolchildren chanting, "Assassinate Obama." Black figures hanging from nooses. Racial epithets scrawled on homes and cars.

Incidents around the country referring to President-elect Barack Obama are dampening the postelection glow of racial progress and harmony, highlighting the stubborn racism that remains in America.

[snip]

There have been "hundreds" of incidents since the election, many more than usual, said Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate crimes.

When we hear about incidents like these, they're usually isolated actions directed at someone we've never heard of. They tend to seem random,which makes them feel less important. But we all know Barack Obama by now,and his approval rating is at an amazing 65-70%. So racism directed against him by children and college students and adults may have a larger impact on our collective psyche than the garden variety hate crimes we hear about and forget.

Maybe some people who have said, "Get over it, racism is dead," will be taken aback, horrified that this level of racial hatred can be directed against a man who clearly has done nothing to deserve it -- other than having the gall to think he has the right to run for president and win. Maybe they will be outraged that this level of hatred can spew forth at this moment in history when we have proven we can look at a person's qualifications, not his race, when choosing someone to fill the highest office in the land.

Maybe some people who usually shrug their shoulders will say, "This cannot be tolerated."

That would be a step forward.

Social promotion is not the Great Satan

by David Safier

Kudos to Rhonda Bodfield for the series of investigative articles she wrote in the Star awhile back about social promotion. It's a topic worth looking into.

But in today's article, which slams local school districts for not taking action on her findings, she gets a little carried away with herself. Actually, she gets a lot carried away with herself. The clear implication of the article is: Social promotion is bad. You should end it now. You haven't. Shame on you!

Bodfield is falling prey to the conservative standards-and-accountability argument that believes we can fix what ails our schools if we give lots of high stakes tests, analyze the results, then exercise a little tough love on students and staff. 

Conservatives love this kind of simplistic, formulaic answer. Things are good or bad, right or wrong. People are patriots or traitors. Either you support invading Iraq or you love Saddam Hussein.

Either students are ready to be promoted, or you hold them back.

It would be so much easier if the world were so black and white. But it isn't. And Bodfield, who does not strike me as a conservative in her political or educational leanings, is accepting the Arizona Department of Education "wisdom" that the way to make our schools better is to hammer away at the basics and test students until they're blind.

Either that or she's fallen in love with her investigation and is writing a pat-myself-on-the-back follow-up.

[Note: I know I'm being unfair. As usual, Bodfield has written a long, nuanced article that presents the issue from many sides. But the touches of nuance come in the second half. The article is front-loaded with get-rid-of-social-promotion dogma. Only professional educators will get far enough to read the caveats in the second half.]

This sentence set my teeth on edge:

Experts say the solution rests in more rigid promotion policies, better use of standardized tests, early intervention and more accountability for teachers and administrators.

Experts say? How about, "Some experts say." In fact, the word "expert" shouldn't be used at all when it comes to education. There are no experts in education any more than there are in economics. What you have is a bunch of well informed, highly educated people who use data and theory to come up with very different conclusions. Anyone who uses phrases like "experts say" and "studies show" is suspect in my book.

Bodfield allows Arizona Ed Supe Tom Horne to pontificate on social promotion, like he has some credibility in the field of educational theory -- which he doesn't. She cites "Jay Greene, an expert . . ." I'd never heard of him before, so I googled him. He wrote a book saying that studies show we don't need more money in education, and lowering class sizes isn't important. Uh huh. That's pure conservative educational theory, not objective "expertise."

Wanna bet Horne was the one who suggested Greene to Bodfield?

Tucson's new Supe, Elizabeth Celania-Fagen, doesn't buy into Bodfield's thesis. Good for her. I'm still giving the new Supe the benefit of the doubt. She seems to have her priorities straight.

Meanwhile, Ms. Bodfield, a reminder. We live in a conservative-run state, with a half-crazed conservative State Superintendent of Education backed by a more-than-half-crazed group of Republican legislators. Just because they're very powerful doesn't make them right.

J the P tries to stretch his 15 minutes

by David Safier

Tedski over at Rum, Romanism and Rebellion noted that Samuel J. Wurzelbacher, aka J the P, now has a website, secureourdream.com. Yes, that Samuel J. Wurzelbacher.

I 

I had to follow up. It seems Samuel (Can I call you Sam? Thanks.) . . . Sam believes he has something to share with the world. A book's worth of something. Joe the Plumber: Fighting for the American Dream will be on sale at the beginning of December. I can't really say, "in a bookstore near you," because I don't know if you'll find it in your neighborhood bookstore.

The book will be published by PearlGate Publishing. If you haven't heard of the publisher, it's not your fault, since it's only published one book before this, Things Forgotten, by Thomas Tabback. (Note to Tom: if your book will soon be forgotten and you don't want people to make fun of you, choose a different title.) Tom is the owner of PearlGate Publishing.

Tom is ghosting Sam's book. PearlGate Publishing owns Sam's website. Sam, I imagine, will be going on a book tour soon, and I'm sure lots of local TV and radio shows will be delighted to book him. If I had a show, I would. What fun to ask him questions!

But will that sell his book? I see two possible options. One is that conservatives push the book hard, and it sells (or they buy lots of copies and give them away), and he makes some money. The other is that Sam and Tom spend lots of money in travel expenses, and the only things they have at the end of the day are a pile of unsold books and DVDs filled with interviews to put in their virtual scrap books. And Sam, out of work and in debt, has to go to the government to collect unemployment money, food stamps and maybe welfare.

Time will tell.

For your further reading pleasure, here are some excerpts from an article on foxnews.com, published a day before the election:

Joe the Plumber is short on cash and unemployed but that's not stopping him from opening a new charitable foundation and penning a book on American values.
"I got no financial offers. I am broke," Joe Wurzelbacher said Monday, explaining that he's got a few ideas on how to spread the wealth to himself and others following bogus reports of a professional management deal and potential country music career.
"I am starting a charity up, it's called 'Secure Our Dream.' It's just about people, neighbors in the community," Wurzelbacher told FOXNews.com.
[snip]
"Obviously I gotta keep out there to a degree. That way this can take off and some real help can happen," he said. "The federal government is really not going to be able to affect, really, people on a community level, whereas the Joe the Plumber persona, which is hard to even relate to that because I don't know it doesn't feel like me, but if (it) can bring money to people and you know help out" then it will have been useful. 
[snip]
"Everyone came at me to write a book. They had dollar signs in their eyes. '101 Things Joe the Plumber Knows' or some stupid s--- like that. Excuse me, I am sorry," he said. "You know I will get behind something solid, but I won't get behind fluff. I won't cash in, and when people do read the book they will figure out that I didn't cash in. At least I hope they figure that out."
[snip]
"I am not going to a conglomerate that way we actually can get the economy jump started. Like there is five publishing companies in Michigan. There's a couple down in Texas. They are small ones that can handle like 10 or 15,000 copies. I can go to a big one that could handle a million or two. But they don't need the help. They are already rich. So that's spreading the wealth to me," he said. 

Sam has trouble relating to Joe the Plumber because it doesn't feel like him. I love that. To John McCain, Joe the Plumber represents real America. J the P is McCain's role model. But the real Sam doesn't feel like Joe the Plumber is really him. You can't make this stuff up.

The latest right wing meme: What school for Obama's children?

by David Safier

If one conservative pundit writes a column about the hypocrisy of Obama sending his kids to private school, it's just a column. When the next day another conservative pundit writes that, to be consistent, Obama should send his kids to public school, we're seeing the creation of a new talking point from the school voucher advocates.

Watch soon for a longer post about The Vast Right Wing Educational Conspiracy. Right now, let's address this specific issue directly.

The basic concept is, the Obamas are hypocrites for sending their kids to private schools while they say they're against vouchers. Why is it OK for these Democratic elitists to want the best education for their kids but insist that other children don't have the same option?

The argument breaks down pretty quickly if it's taken beyond the sound-bite level. The Obamas are looking at three private schools. Their yearly tuitions range from $25,000 to $30,000. And that's based on serving children who have every advantage at home and probably don't need the special services that cost public schools so much money. If these schools were to accept a random sample of D.C. public school students, they would have to add $5-10,000 to their tuition.

Anyone want to figure out how much it would cost to supply vouchers to those schools for anyone who wants them? Tell me, conservatives, do you want to raise taxes to cover the bill?

Add to that the simple fact that there aren't many private schools, and of those, something like 70% of them are religious schools. (Conservatives don't talk much about the fact that they want tax dollars to fund religious education, but that's one of their goals.) The funny thing is, students at religious private schools do no better on standardized tests than the equivalent public school students. In fact, one category of private school does worse than public schools: fundamentalist Christian schools.

So simply sending public school students to various private schools, even assuming there could ever be a supply to match the demand, doesn't solve the problems of improving educational quality.

But this doesn't directly address the central question: why should the Obamas send their kids to private schools when they say they support public education?

Here's the closest analogy I can come up with. Imagine you're a legislator -- or the President -- who believes in making public hospitals as good as they can possibly be. You've devoted your life to improving their funding and the quality of doctors who work there, with some, but not much, success. Then your child gets seriously ill. Would anyone seriously expect you to take your child to a public hospital where that child may get inferior care rather than the best private hospital you can find?

Of course you want those public hospitals to be better than they are, but at the same time, you're going to do what's best for your own children.

I certainly hope President Obama will work hard to improve public education, including increasing the quantity and quality of pre-K education and working to make charter schools increasingly viable. But asking him to put his children into one of the troubled D.C. schools to demonstrate his devotion to public education is ridiculous.

Expect to hear this right wing red herring for the next four years.

Pay for grades?

by David Safier (TASL)

I find this encouraging. Freshmen in the Sunnyside School District will get free laptops if they keep a 2.5 or better GPA and have a 95% attendance record.

Will this change behavior or just reward the students who are already doing well?

Single-period absences for freshmen at Desert View High School have decreased from 4,270 in the first part of last year to 1,617 this year. At Sunnyside High, they went from 5,515 last year to 1,245 this year.

The number of students failing a class is also decreasing - at Sunnyside those figures are down 40 percent; at Desert View, 24.8 percent.

Those are serious numbers. Teachers are excited about the number of students coming to class regularly and their increased willingness to work. Even parents' attitudes are changing. They're calling the teachers to find out how their children are doing, instead of the teachers calling them.

People really want those laptops.

I have nothing against this kind of "grade/attendance bribery." Parents who can afford it do it all the time. It seems to me it can be even more effective with students who aren't used to having extras.

Students learn more when they have some kind of motivation to learn. The best motivation, of course, is internal. But a little external boost to give them a jump start sounds like a good idea to me.

Star says No to college tuition tax

by David Safier

The Star agrees with what I wrote in an earlier post that the state shouldn't take tuition funds to shore up Arizona's budget problems:

We understand the financial straits facing the state. But taking students' money from universities demonstrates the backward tendencies of lawmakers who refuse to accept that Arizona can't grow economically by starving its public educational system.

I was in college in California when Reagan was governor. He hated the University of California system. It was part anti-intellectualism, part dislike of all those liberal folks who made his life difficult. So the "starve the educational beast" attitude from conservatives is nothing new.

Let's call it what it is: Taxation Without Education. We're not tea drinkers here and we don't have harbors, but we need a Tucson Tea Party of some kind to let these right wingers know that we're ready to take our country back.

State to tax college tuition?

by David Safier

Looks like Russell Pearce wants to increase state revenues by taxing Arizona college tuition. He doesn't call it a tax, but that's what his proposal amounts to:

Lawmakers are eyeing an extra $56.7 million collected in tuition by the three public universities, possibly to help balance the state budget.

See, the universities raised tuition between 7 to 8 percent. And now Pearce wants that to go, not to education, but into the state coffers. That's a 7 to 8 percent tuition tax, no matter how you slice it. 

Aren't these guys supposed to be anti-tax?

Either use the money for the universities as was intended, or refund it to the students. Those are the only reasonable options. (Actually, the most reasonable option is to furnish more state funding for higher education and cut tuition to reasonable levels. But that would mean more taxes, and these folks say they don't like taxes.)

Arizona's right wing hates public education, and I think they hate higher education the most.

Sometimes it takes genius to see the obvious

by David Safier

Obama will deliver his weekly radio address this weekend. No one will listen, though a few news shows might pull out a sound bite or two.

For the first time, the address will also be videotaped and put on YouTube. If anything's worth seeing, people can view it any time they want. And if there's an especially good part, the blogs will say, "Pay attention at 2:38 into the speech."

How obvious is that? But did you think of it? Neither did I.

I love these guys around Obama. They're thinking 21st century.

Dr. Word tries to analyze Sarah's syntax

by David Safier

From the first time I heard Sarah Palin speak off script, I was perplexed by the strange way she mangled the language. It didn't sound like Bush-speak, or like any other public official I remembered.

A lot of Republican governors have really good ideas for our nation because we’re the ones there on the front lines being held accountable every single day in service to the people whom have hired us in our own states and the planks in our platform are strong and they are good for America. It’s all about free enterprise and respecting the ...

It's a matter of throwing in unnecessary words, using words that are slightly out of kilter in the context she puts them, stringing together disparate thoughts with connectors, abandoning a thought in mid stream to pick up another.

It was a collaborative effort there in deciding how do we start bringing up some of the associations that perhaps would be impacting on an administration, on the future of America.

But why? I'm sure she can put together perfectly reasonable sentences when she's just talking with friends and family, and I'll bet she didn't sound like this when she was talking to the press as mayor or governor.

And then I remembered where I had heard this type of garbled, faux lofty speech. In my English classroom, during oral presentations in my non-college prep classes, when students were trying to "talk like an English teacher." They thought, "If I try to talk like the teacher, I'll sound more intelligent." I sat and listened, trying not to smirk.

This kind of thing happens in beauty pageants when contestants are asked questions on a political topic. It sometimes happens when reporters stick cameras in front of attendees at political rallies. They want to sound intelligent and important, so they try to elevate their speech, and the result is unconscious parody.

So far as I can tell, what comes out of Palin's mouth when she's off script is her attempt at Washington-speak. Throw in a few big words that almost fit. Make something sound important by adding an extra adjective and a verb or two. When you realize something you're saying is going nowhere, abandon it and go somewhere else.

Sitting here in these chairs that I’m going to be proposing but in working with these governors who again on the front lines are forced to and it’s our privileged obligation to find solutions to the challenges facing our own states every day being held accountable, not being just one of many just casting votes or voting present every once in a while, we don’t get away with that.

No wonder Tina Fey stuck to Palin's words so often on SNL. Why try to create parody when it's right there in front of you?

These are all actual Palin quotes from the last two days, by the way. I can't make this stuff up.

A golden educational opportunity we're sure to pass up

by David Safier (TASL)

Here's what we should do right now, while we're in the midst of a financial meltdown, to improve education over the next decade:

• Raise teacher salaries significantly.
• Raise salaries even more in underperforming and rural schools.
• Offer loan forgiveness programs to new teachers -- 10%-20% off their college loans for every year they teach, with the highest level of forgiveness if they teach in underperforming and rural schools.
• Increase the number of teachers so we can lower class size. 
• Create  prep-school-within-a-school mini-academies in underperforming schools where students who have the ability and are willing to work their tails off get educations at the level offered by the best schools in the country, even if there are only ten students in a class.
• Advertise all the above in every college and university in the country.

Right now, college students are terrified there will be no jobs out there, as well they should be, and they'll be stuck with $50,000 worth of loans they can't pay. Teaching with its job security is going to start looking pretty good to them, and it will look even better if teachers are guaranteed a reasonable wage/benefits package and teachable class sizes.

An economic downturn creates opportunities for the public sector, and this is one of those opportunities. We can increase the number of the best and brightest college grads who consider careers in teaching, and thereby increase the chances for our students to get first class educations.

But we won't do it, because it costs money. We'll cut our education budgets even further than they've been cut already, increase class sizes, cut back on supplies, . . . In other words, we'll do all the wrong things, because we're anti-tax, anti-big-government fools who can't see a golden opportunity that's staring us in the face.

Spaceman

by David Safier

This from Sean McCaffrey, executive director of the Arizona Republican Party. He says, while Tim Bee can claim a long list of accomplishments, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' accomplishments are so thin, "you'd have to include marrying a spaceman."

Spaceman. I think that's the first time I've heard that term used to describe an astronaut.

Republicans sit up nights thinking of demeaning titles to give Democrats, their supporters and their spouses. Really, they do, in "think tanks" (read "spin tanks") across the nation. If Gabby married a General, they'd call him G.I. Joe.

Then they "How Dare You!" every time a Democrat is unpatriotic enough to be critical of someone who we're supposed to respect because of his/her rank or position.

Maybe, just maybe, the Republicans have finally reduced themselves to an absurdity in the last elections with their negative tactics. Maybe people will laugh at them instead of thinking, "What if they're right? Just in case, I really can't vote for that scary Democrat."

We can always hope.

Obama's pleasantly boring press conference, radio address

by David Safier

I tuned into Obama's press conference Friday with a post-election calm. For the first time since Obama came on the scene, I wasn't terrified he'd screw up and blow everything. He never did, which just made me more terrified the next time.

Except for a few quips, the presser was pleasantly boring. It was wonky and somewhat informative, with all the ideas presented in complete, well phrased sentences -- what you'd hope to hear from a president, but haven't heard in a long, long time.

Today's radio address is a snoozer too. I got through 30 seconds, yawned and turned it off.

I can't remember when I enjoyed boredom this much.

Kyl: No Empathetic Justices!

by David Safier

Our own Jon Kyl takes a bold stand against empathy.

Jon Kyl, the second-ranking Republican in the U.S. Senate, warned president-elect Barack Obama that he would filibuster U.S. Supreme Court appointments if those nominees were too liberal.
Kyl, Arizona’s junior senator, expects Obama to appoint judges in the mold of U.S Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and Stephen Breyer. Those justices take a liberal view on cases related to social, law and order and business issues, Kyl said.
“He believes in justices that have empathy,” said Kyl, speaking at a Federalist Society meeting in Phoenix. The attorneys group promotes conservative legal principles.
Kyl said if Obama goes with empathetic judges who do not base their decisions on the rule of law and legal precedents but instead the factors in each case, he would try to block those picks via filibuster.

That's pretty frightening, the thought that we'll have a Supreme Court stacked with Justices like Ginsburg, Souter and Breyer.

Except, the most likely retirees will be Stevens, Ginsburg and Souter, with Breyer thrown in for good measure. So if Obama nominates people like them, we'll have, basically, the same Supreme Court we have now. The real fear was, if McCain won, he'd create a lopsided conservative Court that could last for decades.

Steve Benen at the Washington Monthly blog, Political Animal, notes a touch of hypocrisy in Kyl's "Filibuster the liberal bastards!" stance:

I'd add, by the way, that Kyl was one of the conservative Republicans who, in 2005, supported the "nuclear option," which would have declared that filibustering a judicial nominee was against congressional rules. That, of course, was when Bush nominees were in jeopardy.

Up or down vote, Jon, remember? Up or down vote.

Colin Powell: Obama "also happens to be African American"

by David Safier

Colin Powell was less than one of my favorite people during the Bush administration -- the fact is, he drove me crazy -- but I never questioned his intelligence or his humanity. I was infuriated that he was weak enough to allow himself to be manipulated by the Bush administration. Over and over, they used him to justify the actions leading up to the Iraq War, since he was perceived as an honorable man, unlike, oh, say, Cheney. Or Rumsfeld. Or Bush. So untruths that came from his mouth transformed into truths, and those seeming truths sold the American people on the war.

But when he endorsed Obama, Powell was eloquent, and his words obviously came from the heart. I saw the Colin Powell who I wished I had seen years earlier, when he could have used his moral bully pulpit to help avert the Iraq disaster he helped create.

I saw that better version of the man again this morning when he was interviewed on CNN about Obama's win. His voice was filled with emotion, and he choked up at times. He said how important it was to him that an African American was elected president, but he emphasized that Obama kept his ethnic background secondary during the campaign.

Powell called Obama "a new American President who also happens to be African American."

I wrote about the importance of this phraseology during the primaries in April, talking about the significance of the Democratic nomination coming down to two people, one of whom was a woman and the other an African American. The English teacher in me heard echoes of Emerson's essay, "The American Scholar" where he says we separate ourselves from our connection with all of humanity by describing ourselves by our professions rather than by our human-ness. In the case of Clinton and Obama, the separateness was gender and ethnicity rather than profession, but it amounted to the same thing. If they were defined solely by these characteristics, they were separated from the humanity that flows through all of us.

I ended the post by asking,

Are we ready to see these two candidates as People first, as Emerson suggests we should? It is a genuine, and troubling question that, once this election is over, will continue to be discussed for decades.

I'm going to say, in the spirit of Hope that has come out of this election, the answer is yes. We elected Obama as the person most ready to lead the country, a person who happens to have a black father from Kenya and a white mother from the U.S. His parents are relevant, but if they were the primary considerations, Obama would not be President Elect. And I think Hillary Clinton has transcended the de-humanizing position of having the label "woman" be the primary descriptor for who she is. Now, Clinton is thought of as a formidable, capable, highly intelligent person who ran a fine campaign, then overcame her feelings of bitter disappointment to do whatever she could to help Obama win. And, yes, she's a woman, that's important too. They are both of them People first now, and we are a better nation -- or maybe I should say a more evolved nation -- for it.

Oh What a Beautiful Day

by Marlene H. Phillips

Tucson, Arizona was one big party last night.

Most of the election night action centered around the University of Arizona campus. Democrats held their main party in the ballroom of the University Marriott, and when the ballroom filled to capacity it spilled out into the lobby. The lobby soon filled to capacity, so it spilled out onto the streets in the university area. People were laughing and dancing, shouting encouragement to the many cars driving slowly up and down the streets, hands on horn, windows rolled down, folks leaning out car windows shouting O-BA-MA to anyone they saw. One woman turned to me and said, "I feel like the whole country just won the Super Bowl!"

As returns began to be broadcast on the giant screens inside the ballroom, the early mood was optimistic, but with a sense emotions being held in check; there was anxiousness, as people waited for the news to become official. When West Coast polls finally closed and the giant screens showed Barack Obama as the new president, nobody held back anything. Screams and shouts of pure unabashed exhilaration filled the packed room. Most people around me were laughing and crying simultaneously, and everyone seemed in motion; jumping up and down, turning to find their friends and family in the throng, high fiving strangers, and screaming, screaming, screaming at the top of their lungs. Nobody stood alone -everyone was hugging someone. It was bedlam - a loud, raucous, insanely happy scene.

Then the crowd turned quiet as Arizona's own senator, John McCain, appeared on the screen to give his concession speech. The giant crowd applauded often. Over the last few months I've interviewed a lot of Arizonans who had voted for McCain in the past but kept repeating to me the same words; "this isn't the man I voted for. I won't vote for him now- I don't know who he is." From the respect shown by the celebrating crowd, it seemed the man speaking on the screen was the John McCain this state had elected. More than one person turned to me during the speech and said, simply, "Where has this guy been for the last four months?" The only time the crowd booed was when McCain's vice presidential candidate appeared on the screen. Sarah Palin has not been, and will probably never be a popular person here in the Grand Canyon State.

As anticipation grew for Obama's acceptance speech, even more people crowded their way into the ballroom. It was wall-to-wall people, moving around grew almost impossible. When our president elect appeared on the screen the room erupted, the chant of Yes We Can was thunderous. As they listened to his eloquent and gracious speech those who had kept their composure gave in to the waves of emotion. I saw an older black woman put her face in her hands and weep, while her friend put his arms around her shaking shoulders. Two volunteers I recognized from the Northwest Democratic headquarters stood hand in hand, tears streaming unabashedly down their faces.

And I cried too. I cried for all we've been through these last eight years. I cried for the grief and anguish of the Gold Star families who shared their stories of loss and heartache with me. I cried for the prisoners in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, for the thousands of Americans and Iraqis whose lives were lost or forever altered, for the people in our own country who have been made to feel as if they did not count. And I cried for my father, who fought for working people his whole life, who worked tirelessly for equality and justice, and who had raised me to never, never give up. How he would have loved this night. I cried for joy, for my two sons who's future looked brighter this day, a new day, a new beginning.

I cried because I felt something I'd almost given up on, the sweet gentle feeling of hope.

Nearly 400 years in the making: it's morning in America

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

(Sunrise in Washington D.C.)

The first Africans brought to the English colonies in North America came on a Dutch privateer that landed at Jamestown, Virginia, in August 1619. African American History - MSN Encarta. By 1750 there were nearly 240,000 people of African descent in British North America, fully 20 percent of the population, mostly concentrated in Southern colonies, but present in all colonies.

By the time of the drafting of the U.S. Constitution in 1787, slavery had become an institution in America. And slavery was institutionalized in the U.S. Constitution, relegating Africans to chattel property of their owners. Three-fifths of slaves were counted as a "person" only for determining the population of a state for purposes of reapportionment of congressional districts with each dicennial census.

The nation was ripped apart by five years of Civil War motivated primarily by an Abolitionist movement to end the institution of slavery. It was the deadliest war in American history, pitting brother against brother and father against son,leaving a deep and lasting scar on the American soul. With the adoption of the Thirteenth, Fourtheenth and Fifteenth Amendments at the end of the Civil War, slavery was ended and former slaves were given personhood and citizenship. But this did not result in "equality" under the law for these former slaves.

With the end of federal protection after the Reconstruction era came the rise of Jim Crow laws in the South, which spread to other states under Black Codes. Segregation of African-Americans replaced slavery as an institution in America. Life was litte better than before for many African-Americans.

Segregation finally began to unravel in post World War II America from the federal courts and far-sighted politicians, and even from America's favorite pasttime, baseball. But pernicious racism maintained the sanction of law until the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, one hundred years after the end of the Civil War.

When President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he is purported to have told his aid, Bill Moyers, that "we have lost the South for a generation." (Of course, it was not limited to the South, but included Appalachia and the "white flight" from Northern cities to the suburbs in places like Boston, Detroit and Chicago as well).

Richard Nixon devised the "Southern Strategy" to appeal to these disaffected "Dixiecrat" Southern white voters based upon coded appeals to their racial animus and prejudice to turn the Democrats' "solid South" into a Republican "solid South." That strategy finally came to fruition with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 (with only a minor deviation for Bill Clinton, a son of the South, for president in 1992 and 1996).

This political tactic to divide Americans along the fault lines of racial animus and prejudice has continued to this very day, including this 2008 campaign. That pernicious racism continues is shameful and despicable. Despite all the progress we have made as a nation, there are still those who continue to preach hatred, fear and suspicion to divide Americans along the ancient fault lines of racial prejudice and bigotry for purely political gain. From Patrick Buchanan (Nixon) to Lee Atwater (Reagan/Bush) to Karl Rove and his minions (Bush/McCain), these hate mongers should now be forced back into the muck under the rock from which they crawled. Let us hope that the final curtain has fallen on their time on the political stage.

After nearly 400 years of living with the original sin of slavery and institutionalized segregation and racism, Americans have elected their first African-American president of the United States. The skinny Black kid with the funny sounding name, Barack Obama, the son of an African immigrant and a white American woman from Kansas, is president-elect. My God what a great country we live in! Nowhere else on earth is this story even imaginable.

This is one of the most historic days in our nation's history. May it mark the beginning of our redemption as a nation before the eyes of God. And may it mark the beginning of a time when this nation lives out the true meaning of its creed that "all men are created equal." "Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!" May race, color, creed or sex never again divide us in our politics.

Let us come together and begin the Great Reconciliation. Let us come together and begin to build a more perfect Union.

It's morning in America! May God bless the United States of America.

Election Day: AZ Dems Enthusiastic, Excited

by Marlene H. Phillips

At the Northwest Tucson Democratic Headquarters, nobody slept in late this morning. Volunteers were at their polling places with water and candidate information or out canvassing long before the rise of the warm Arizona sun.

Val was at her voting place at 6 a.m. "It was a happy line! Voters were overwhelmingly optimistic," she said. The early birds were particularly happy to face only a twenty minute wait. "We were encouraging people to join the line. We told them 'the wait is shorter than the express line at the grocery store.'"

Thomas was out canvassing at 5 a.m., he wanted to do his part before he went to work for the day.

Mary Jane went to her polling place at 5:30 a.m., thinking she'd be first in line. She found nearly 40 people already there, waiting patiently in the dark. They all smiled at her when she joined them.

The office has been humming since the early morning. Three lawyers are assisting anyone turned away or reporting problems with voting; so far the calls have mostly involved confusion as to where to vote and what to bring. With every available phone in use, volunteers are plunking down on the floor with a list and their cell phone, determined to encourage every single voter to make it the polls. Callers had many stories to tell; one volunteer called an elderly voter who assured her she was definitely going to vote. "My son is coming to get me," she reported proudly. "He's a doctor!" Another said one woman told a volunteer she'd voted early, because she had to have a bone marrow transplant, "and I had to get it in before I got too sick to vote."

Robo-calls and election tricks were still being made last night. One gentleman got a call telling him to vote on Wed. "They told me that the lines were going to be too long on Tuesday so voting was being extended until Wed." He paused and smiled. "I told him he was barking up the wrong tree, because I had already voted."

Cheryl Cage, Democratic candidate for Arizona State Senate, just came in the office, tired but happy. "Actually, I'm ecstatic," the candidate said with a big smile. "The energy of the volunteers is exhilarating." She paused and looked around at the crowded office. "No matter what happens, I know we did everything we could possibly do. I have no regrets."

One volunteer related to me what he called 'his most memorable call.' When he asked the voter if she'd voted, he said she paused for a minute before replying. "First, she asked if she could bring her young children with her to the polls. I told her, yes, absolutely. Then she told me her husband was serving in Iraq." The volunteer who told me this story was visibly moved as he finished the story. "She said she was white, her husband was black, and she wanted her children to see her vote because she wanted them to always, always remember this day."

Hour long line at Catalina Foothills HS

by David Safier

This is something you just don't see. I was at Catalina Foothills High School passing out literature from 6-8am. When I arrived, the polls hadn't opened, and the line was a good 100 feet long. When I left at 8am, the line had gotten a little shorter, but not much. Those who had voted with an hour wait had been replaced by more voters. But fewer people were arriving, so I expect in an hour or so, the line will be gone.

I've never seen lines at that polling location. Maybe those predictions of an 80-90% vote rate are correct. It's gonna take awhile to count all the votes.

ELECTION DAY - VOTE!

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

If you have not already voted early, today is Election Day - go vote now!

Take your family members, friends and neighbors with you. If someone needs a ride, offer to drive them. If someone needs a babysitter to watch their children, offer to babysit.

For those of you going to the polls, long lines are expected in some locations. Throw some lawn chairs in the trunk of your car and pick up some bottled water and snack food to take with you to share with your neighbors waiting in line. Let's make this historic election a pleasant experience for all.

And please be kind to your poll workers who are likely to be harried and overwhelmed. Many are putting in a 16 hour day. Offer to make a food run for them or bring something with you. Take good care of your poll workers.

If you have any problems with voting or know anyone who does, contact Voter Protection immediately: by phone at 1-877-US-4-OBAMA (1-877-874-6226) or via the Obama campaign website.

 

A Triumphal Whisper for All Democrats

by Michael Bryan

In ancient Rome, when a victorious general would parade triumphantly through the streets atop his chariot, displaying the booty and enemies he had captured in a successful campaign, all the citizens hailing him as "Imperator," a little slave child would perch behind him whispering continually in his ear, "You are still a mortal man." Thus did the Romans seek to remind even the most exalted that he was still just a normal person: no magical powers had been won with his great victory.

I'm going to be that little slave boy for a minute while we've still got everyone's attention here. That may be a bit of a turd in the punch bowl on what is almost certain to be a triumphal day, but so be it. I presume, with plenty of good evidence, that Democrats are going to sweep to an overwhelming victory today.

Democrats will take the Presidency and larger majorities in Congress, and there will be a temptation to think that this means that "we the people" win, and everything will be better at least for the next few years. There will be a feeling that all our problems will now be solved and we can relax and let our elected officials get down to the business of fixing what Bush and the GOP have broken.

Nothing could be further from the truth: this election is only the beginning of the work to save the American way of life from the folly and greed of the Bush era. Obama may be a transformational leader, but he is still just a man in a difficult political environment who needs tremendous support from us to get anything done.

Our political system simply doesn't work very well. It is hostage to special interests, riddled with institutionalized corruption, and designed for inertia and gridlock. Even with one party in command of two branches and a fresh popular mandate, the people cannot rest assured that reform will come. It never has without motivated and well-organized mass social organizations demanding change, rattling the castle gates, and working for reform from outside the government.

Every great wave of reform in this nation has been the direct result of sustained social movements first and foremost, not the election of a particular politician or party. Elections ratify what social movements achieve, elections don't make social movements unnecessary.

Today is a day to pat yourselves on the back. Hoist a few. Feel good that we have some folks with the public interest at heart in office. And then get back to work tomorrow.

Join social organizations working for causes you believe in. Contribute money and time and sweat to local and national citizen-based groups. Pay less attention to mere partisan politics and champion specific issues. Hold your representatives' feet to the fire. Stay involved. Stay engaged. Work as citizens for those changes you believe are best for this society. If you don't, then our 18th century political system will tell Obama, "no, we can't." And that we cannot afford.

Conservatives Jumping Ship: Gators for McCain Chairman

by David Safier

This isn't in the Colin Powell/Christopher Buckley category in the growing McCain Mutiny. Josh Simmons is a college student at University of Florida and Chairman of Gators for John McCain, apparently one of the nation's largest pro-McCain student groups. He was at a rally for Joe Biden when this exchange took place:

“I wanted to see the next vice president of the United States,” said Josh Simmons, Gators for McCain chairman.

Simmons said he voted for Obama about two weeks ago.

“I’ve seen a different John McCain than the one I signed up to work for,” he said.

Simmons said he submitted his resignation Sunday night and will no longer be chairman for the group, which has more than 1,000 members.

“I expect them to be incredibly pissed off,” he said.

Obama Has "Negative Flakeage Rate" Among Volunteers

by David Safier

I was just listening to a video interview with Jon Carson, the national field director for the Obama campaign.

He said things were going well in the key battleground states. In fact he said the offices were experiencing a "negative flakeage rate" among volunteers. Instead of people promising to show up and flaking out, they were showing up and bringing friends with them.

Negative flakeage rate. Great term. I was just at the Pima County Dems' Headquarters, and they must be having the same situation. Nary a phone was free. And Howard Dean was in the house for a pep talk.

Dean is going around the country pumping up volunteers. He's not going everywhere, he said, only to states where Obama has a good chance of winning.

Two weeks ago, who expected that was possible?

Takin' It Back With Barack, Jack! (For Swing Voters!!!)

by David Safier

Any 40s jazz/swing fans out there? This can carry you all the way to Wednesday morning.

LD-26: Model Ground Game

by David Safier

If you want to see how to maximize your chances of beating the odds, go to the Northwest Dem HQ at Ina and Shannon and watch how Arizona's 26th gets it done.

For weeks, dozens of people have been walking every Saturday, knocking on doors of Independents and Democrats who aren't guaranteed voters and phoning all week to remind people to sign up for Vote by Mail, then to vote for our candidates -- and from now through Tuesday, to go to the polls.

This Saturday at 9am, 50-75 people showed up to walk, so many they ran out of walking packets. They scrambled to get enough packets ready for the 1pm walk, when another big crowd came in.

The same thing Sunday morning. Every walking packet was gone, then another crowd poured into the office at 1pm to pick up more hastily prepared walking packets. The afternoon crowd included 5 students from Mountain View High. They had put in some time earlier to get credit for an assignment in their Government Class. This time they were there, no credit, just because they wanted to pitch in. It gladdened this old high school teacher's heart.

Next door, there must have been 15-20 people with their ears to the phone all day, working in 3 hour shifts. And there were two other locations filled with phoners, probably 8-10 phones each, also packed.

LD-26 is hungry not only to keep the two seats it picked up in 2006 (they were all Republican legislators before that) but to add the third seat to complete the win. It's a Republican district, but we have four things going for us: unbelievably good candidates, Cheryl Cage, Nancy Young Wright and Don Jorgensen; weak opposition, with two extreme right wingers and one semi-credible "Tell me what you want to hear" moderate-conservative; the Independent voters, who tend to be moderate and can trend Democratic; and an incredible ground game that to get out as many voters as possible and remind them to vote for our candidates, including both Dems running for the House.

The fifth thing we have going for us, which can't be ignored: Adam and Ashley, two paid coordinators who have kept the place lively and fun for the last few months. I get "When are you coming in again?" calls from them on a regular basis, and whenever I sign up for a shift, I get a call reminding me to get there. They always make me and everyone else feel like the most important people in the place. They've spent weeks going down lists of possible supporters to line up the walkers and phoners for the final push. Volunteers can't do that. You need paid staff. Young, dedicated, smart paid staff.

We'll know Wednesday how well it all worked. But I don't think the Democratic ground game could have gone much better.

McCain Ranch: Presented Without Comment

by David Safier

From Americablog

An American Tune

Posted  by AzBlueMeanie:

From American Tune, Words & music by Paul Simon

And I don't know a soul who's not been battered
I don't have a friend who feels at ease
I don't know a dream that's not been shattered
or driven to its knees
but it's all right, it's all right
for we lived so well so long
Still, when I think of the
road we're traveling on
I wonder what's gone wrong
I can't help it, I wonder what's gone wrong