Tuesday, June 27, 2006

CD 8 Note

The following comment landed in the Data Port's mail box with a date of June 27, 2006. It seems to have been tied to a very much earier post, why I don't know. At any rate what the writer ...wearetribal... says seems spot on so I am posting it here.


I see lots of attacks here...all of them lacking the ring of truth. Not a single one tells us where they found this or that evidence against Gabby.


Look, Gabby is just 35 years old. Sure, there may be some person out there who is 35 and has a better resume. But they are not running in District 8. No one who is running has a better resume, regardless of age.

Who is this anonymous and why are they anonymous? Clearly they are with one of the other campaigns, posting the same smears all over the blogosphere, and clearly they are dishonest. Gabby only went to private schools? She graduated from the same high school I did, and our family of six lived on less than $10,000 a year. Pretty sure I was never at a private school. By the way, that high school was University High where you have to test as top 3% just to get in. So she is actually known to be "one of the brightest on the block." Her older sister, a friend of mine in high school , is plenty bright also.

So, she is great at making connections and anonymous thinks that is a bad thing? That is one of the main skills she needs to get things done when she is elected. Clearly she has more of that crucial skill than her opponents.

And please folks, remember that there is a general election. I am not suggesting that you vote for the candidate that "can win." I have never believed in crystal balls myself. I am noting that a wise candidate who is planning ahead might very well avoid saying things that alienate the slightly more than 50% Republicans in the district. Maybe that is why Gabby is avoiding extreme statements.

I am a Green Party member and a volunteer for Gabby. I am a lifelong activist and a supporter of Gabby. I co-founded Students Against the Gulf War, owned the store Peace Works on 4th Ave, and I presented an academic paper at the Symposium on the Psychology of War despite not having a college degree (I was too busy doing activist work in college to finish). Gabby has read my paper. I could list twenty more examples of my progressive credentials...free clinics for migrant farm workers, a new neighborhood park, the bike racks on 4th Ave...etc.

I do not just support a candidate on a whim. I volunteered for Wellstone in '88 and Harkin in '92, as well as Nader in 2000. Now I volunteer for Gabby. If you think Gabby is not "progressive" enough for you...well are you more progressive than me? Really?

Think for yourself, always, but please ask yourself why this anonymous has to come here and lie to you. Get your own facts and then decide.

--

45 comments:

anonymous said...

Finally a mainstream Green Party activist comes to Gabby's defense.

I was wondering when someone other than Indies and Rs would rally here.

Where is all of the private school accusation? I have yet to find it on these blogs.

Luke said...

Outstanding letter and thanks for posting it.

I remain baffled by the naysayers of this incredibly hard working individual who has produced, is producing, and will continue to produce extraordinary results.

Anyone with an open mind that looks at what her campaign is doing (think results!) compared to what other compaigns are doing, sees that she is someone who gets the job done.

Gabrielle Giffords is a force to be reckoned with and she is on our side!!

Pardon my enthusiasm, but I am reminded of 1992 with Clinton, when I found myself thinking, "Oh my god! Here's a a democrat that actually knows how to win!"

anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
anonymous said...

I hope she is on our side, and that she can win.

"I am noting that a wise candidate who is planning ahead might very well avoid saying things that alienate the slightly more than 50% Republicans in the district. Maybe that is why Gabby is avoiding extreme statements."

Gabby will not make an extreme statement for universal healthcare, preferring the less extreme 'access' to healthcare.

Gabby is friendly, and very smart. Her campaign avoids looking friendly or very smart. Usually the problem for most candidates is getting off message.

For Gabby, it might be beneficial to get off message and let some more positive traits and issues shine through.

A lot of her trouble is self inflicted, like never coming out and explaining her votes for or against Walmart and AHCCCS.

She leaves it to others to burnish lots of dissonance into her message, while appearing to be above the fray. She would do well to answer any claims and charges, rather than leave it to lesser informed bloggers.

I would believe Gabby, before her apologists.

AZYouLikeIt said...

Umm... Where has anonymous lied?

I see him/her pointing out flaws and inconsistencies in Gabby's record... but I haven't seen any of her/his facts or assertions proven wrong.

You may disagree with some of the conclusions s/he's drawn about Gabby, but that makes her/his opinion different -- it doesn't make him/her a liar.

To start labeling those with different opinions as liars is nearly as bad as the right-wingers who accuse progressives of treason.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Rex Scott said...

Gabby doesn't need to attack Patty or anyone else because she is the only person in the race with a record to run on, leads in fundraising, turned in the most signatures and is wrapping up all the major endorsements from all segments of the Democratic Party with the exception of the far left.

Front-runners get attacked. Patty has name ID because of years on the tube, but everything noted above is going against her, so she has to do what she can to hike the negatives for Giffords. The theme of her offensive will be that Gabby is some kind of closet Republican or DLC puppet because that is the best way in this climate to arouse primary voters.

The others are fighting for third place. I think that the Latas people are good at raising their voices loud enough to create the illusion that there are more of them than actually exist, but this is a two-person race.

I am a Democrat and a PC, but confess that I was once in the GOP. So the hell what? Are we going to grow as a party without converts from the Republicans or from the ranks of independents? The reason independents are the fastest growing segment of the electorate is because the two parties are increasingly seen as co-opted by shrill partisans who favor political expediency over the common good.

Gabby won me over because she is principled, non-ideological, results-oriented, down to earth, humane and reasonable. My hunch is that the voters are weary of the two parties selecting nominees from their fringes.

This is what the Republicans are headed for when they pick Graf, which they will. The Aiken thing has already blown over, Graf's supporters are diehard and the others in the GOP race serve merely to split the anti-Graf vote.

This is still a district where the Republicans lead in voter registration, but we have a rare shot at picking up the seat because of Graf's likely nomination. Giffords is the sort of common sense Democrat who has won elections around this country (Napolitano, Kaine in Virginia, etc.) in recent years and she can win CD8 because of those qualities. The only arguments I have heard raised against her have been either of the "more Democrat than thou" variety, or hyperbolic analyses of certain votes she cast in Phoenix.

Primaries are "family fights." We will doubtless come together on September 13th behind our nominee. I don't begrudge anyone their right to employ the tactics they need to use to win, but we need to be honest and factual in our politics because the other side is listening carefully. Don't forget, it was Al Gore who first used Willie Horton against Mike Dukakis during the '88 primaries!

George Tuttle said...

Can anyone point out the lies?



Just wonderin'

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
George Tuttle said...

Still waiting....

"yawn.."

Roger don't try to rationalize, just tell me when someone has lied about her record. Is it that hard to understand what I said?

Geeez, another Team Giffords apologist.

Liza said...

Kralmajales,

There is something about your analogy that bothers me, but I can’t quite verbalize it, so let’s move on.

First of all, I think that the CD8 Democratic primary is still a three way race. I know that the Giffords Fans and some of the Weiss Fans think Jeff Latas is out, but I do not agree. I strongly suspect that Giffords and Weiss count him in as well. So, here’s my point. Latas, Giffords, and Weiss are in this race to win. I think we can all agree that some candidates stay in a race knowing they cannot win, but may influence public policy by showing they have support. In this race, Latas, Giffords, and Weiss are in it to win.

The real race is just starting. That is because most eligible voters have paid very little attention to anything related to these candidates or this race. This may be very hard for Giffords Fans to accept, but 7,000 petition signatures and however many endorsements have not even made a blip on the screen for the majority of eligible voters, most of whom will not even vote in the primary.

Now, how do you suppose either Latas, Giffords, or Weiss can differentiate himself/herself from the other two candidates to the extent that the average Joe Blow disengaged member of the dumbed down electorate will drag his sorry ass to the polls and vote for him/her?

Well, the Giffords handlers are promoting her as the experienced legislator, the one with the war chest and “broad support”, the one who can win a tough race against a Republican. Not a bad strategy. Remember, this can’t be too complex or it won’t work. However, EXPECT IT TO BE CHALLENGED BY THE OTHER TWO CANDIDATES WHO ALSO WANT TO WIN. Therefore, Gifford’s legislative background, a major selling point for her, will be scrutinized by the challengers and seeming irregularities (such as the clean elections issue) will be brought to the attention of the electorate. I just can’t make the leap that you do and call this “dirty politics.” Giffords has ample opportunity and resources to defend her previous legislative decisions.

There is a huge distance between challenging a candidate in a legitimate and ethical manner and playing dirty politics. Quite frankly, I sincerely doubt that any of these candidates will cross the line. They are all very decent people.

Art Jacobson said...

Liza...

Good comments. The Data Port political junkies have been focusing on the Weiss/Giffords campaign.

Latas has his supporters, I know, but what has happened to his campaign? His web site seems static, and there are no recent blog entries.

Has Latas decided to fly under the radar, or has he landed someplace?

Some very strange things may yet happen in the campaign.

Art

sirocco said...

Liza,

Absolutely a good post. As you note, the race is really only just starting (in fact, I still don't think it's really started yet ... I would guess nect week things would really kick off).

As you say, there's nothing wrong whatsoever with Weiss and Latas bringing up Giffords' record of not running under Clean Elections laws. If they feel it's something they want to highlight and ask questions about, they need to do it.

No, my sole issue with it is when people don't ask questions but draw unwarrented conclusions. I.e., "She didn't run under clean elections, therefore she doesn't support clean elections." Is my "favorite' 'one right now. They are trying to define "support" in a specific way that then allows them to say Giffords' doesn't meet that criteria.

However, there typically is more than a single way to show support for anything, and Giffords' voting record clearly indicates her support for the clean elections act. No one, not Weiss nor any blog commentator has bothered to dispute that fact. They simply prefer to ignore it, try to squeeze it outside their definition of what qualifies as "support".

Art Jacobson said...

George..

No apologies needed. Have you noted Giffords's two latest endorsements? AFSCME and the Arizona AFL-CIO?

You're a Latas guy, so let me ask the same question I asked Liza. His campaign has been very quiet, is he still in the race? I imagine so but I haven't seen any new material on his blog or web site.

Have I missed a press release?

An enquiring mind wants to know.

Art

Art Jacobson said...

George..

No apologies needed. Have you noted Giffords's two latest endorsements? AFSCME and the Arizona AFL-CIO?

You're a Latas guy, so let me ask the same question I asked Liza. His campaign has been very quiet, is he still in the race? I imagine so but I haven't seen any new material on his blog or web site.

Have I missed a press release?

An enquiring mind wants to know.

Art

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Liza said...

Art,
I've noticed the same things that you have about Latas. The website has been pretty static except for "events" and he hasn't posted a story on Kos since April, I think. So, I've asked around because I know several of his die hard supporters. His campaign is alive and well and I'm wondering if "quiet" is partially by design. One thing we all know for sure is that he has to run lean and mean so that means volunteers and freebies. I really miss him on Kos and I wish he would post but he probably just hasn't got the time right now.

I've certainly noticed that on this and a couple of other blogs that Latas is starting to disappear from the discussions. I'm not so sure that's a bad thing, for the time being.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
George Tuttle said...

I don't think you guys want to use the word "quiet" when describing Latas' campaign. I don't know if you have read about the party at the Boondocks, the numerous house parties and the walking.

I don't think he would have to issue a press release touting a poll or an endorsement to make it seem that his campaign is alive. Although I just did get ahold of his media coordinator's phone number. I can give him a call if you want me to.

You know the press will not cover that fact that Latas signed a pledge not to take oil industry money or challenged the other candidates to do so. Not sexy or controversial enough for the readers. Although you can argue strongly that it just reinforces the point that he talks the talk and walks the walk when it comes to getting us off the foreign oil.

I have yet to see the others do the same on other issues.

Liza said...

Sirocco,
I read some of what Patty Weiss had to say about this clean elections issue and it was all on the level, as I recall. You know, we have to stay close to what the candidates themselves are saying because their unofficial supporters can say absolutely anything. And, of course, we aren't doing math or science here so everything is subject to individual interpretation. That's just the way it is.

Blue in AZ said...

Art,

It seems like Latas' Web site is updated pretty much daily. I receive regular updates from the campaign. They were out in force at the MoveOn demonstration yesterday. They are out twice a week canvassing. Jeff Latas has appeared at about 50 house parties and other functions, etc.

There's a good independent account of an event that he held last week here:

http://buildpeace.blogspot.com/2006/06/jeff-latas-running-for-us-house-seat_22.html

If you are looking at candidate blog postings as evidence of candidate viability, then by your logic, Giffords' campaign is completely dead, as I've never seen a blog post by her.

Finally, Jeff Latas has a few assets that few other candidate have, namely, a job and a family. His son got out of the hospital last month after a bone marrow transplant, and I can't imagine what it's like to take care of him and continue working on the campaign and work for a living.

And speaking of working for a living, did you hear that JetBlue is coming to Tucson???? Woo hoo! Jeff Latas is the only JetBlue employee in southern Arizona. Our future congressman is already working for us!

Liza said...

Kralmajales.
I'm laughing at your last post because I've been thinking that a good ol' slugfest between Giffords and Weiss would be great for Latas. However, these women have too much class for that so I'm not counting on it.

Your point about name recognition is absolutely spot on. Latas needs it and he needs it soon. That is most definitely his biggest challenge, in my opinion. I do believe that his military record will distinguish him from the other two candidates, but not until people hear about it.

x4mr said...

Liza,

You may indeed see a good ol' slugfest between Giffords and Weiss.

No doubt you all know about "Gabby, Gabby, Gabby" in Willcox.

OK, fine, but what happened in Willcox wasn't enough for Patty, so next day she published a story at kos blasting Giffords, then issued a statement on her website which was replicated at Congress Watch claiming Giffords challenged her to a debate, and then delivered a hardcopy letter to the Giffords HQ "accepting" the "invitation."

Then Patty has her new Communications Director post the video of the Willcox exchange.

Not sure what others think, but videotaping people and posting it online like that.....eeewwwhhhh!

If, and I repeat, IF, this is a preview of coming attractions, every tiny fiber of Giffords record, statements, background, eye color, boyfriends, wardrobe, car she drives (already happened), house, is going to be scrutinized and spun.

It may have been Kral that said this only makes her stronger for the general. Hmmmm. Very plausible, but there is the counter that it gives goodies to the Republicans. Al Gore sparked the Willie Horton against Dukasis.

Sorry, Liza, I think Latas campaign is all but finished, but folks are being "kind" because he is a good guy. The next round of FEC reports will be most telling.

anonymous said...

Can you believe that someone actually posted Gabby and Patty saying things about the issues?

Did Gabby sound confident and self assured?

Did Gabby claim Patty was being negative?

Did Patty drive home her convictions?

Did Gabby's recovery involve calling for a debate in the future?

We know all of this because of the magic of the video, and it certainly trumps the blogs for truthful content.

X4mr is a bit squimish. Remember how Frank Costanzo must have been fired because he is on vacation? Remember how Patty was merely a teleprompter reader, instead of the hardbiting campaigner in Willcox? How about the claims of carpetbagging, or changing her legal name to reflect her professional name? Or Gabby's supporters deathwatch on the Patty campaign, based on the superior bragging numbers of the Gabby Money Machine? Or discovering an unpaid intern who must be a spy because she worked in the White House? Someone has a deficit regarding intelligence and intelligence gathering that is ruining what little credibility Gabby still has as a serious contender to take on her Republican colleagues for the legislature.

The answers, my friends, are streaming on the web:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OL2hDffM7TM

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
sirocco said...

Liza,

Yeah, I have no real issue with Patty or her post on kos. It's her job to portray things in a manner which favors her and hurts Giffords. Really, all she's been doing is presenting a slice of the facts and letting listeners/readers draw an incorrect conclusion, one which isn't justified by the full set of data.

Now, I don't really see that as deceitful, that's just spin, and it's expected.

No, my beef is with some of the bloggers who then come around and explcitly use that as a basis to say "Giffords doesn't support public elections", which is demonstrably untrue.

Re: Latas, I was just having this same conversation with some friends last night as well ... things have seemed awfully quiet of late.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
anonymous said...

Where is Costanzo in that video?

It looks like its 100% Gabby and Patty. Gabby's got a million more like this.

Gaffes, not money.

anonymous said...

Roger, the video is more truthful than you are.

x4mr said...

A bit squeamish?

Perhaps. Folks have told me I am "too nice." I suppose these video posts are part of the new reality and I am betraying my age a little. When I first saw the thing, my ethics meter twanged, in particular when I think about how they can edit and show this piece or that.

I was actually rather neutral until this debate thing, where Weiss camp infuriated me. I am convinced they deliberately and intentionally twist data. If the Giffords campaign is doing this also, I haven't seen it at all.

Howard Dean last night pretty much said what some of us are thinking, referring to Kolbe's replacement as "Congresswoman." Then he said, "Ooops."

As promised still support Patty on 9/13 if she prevails, but recent events have soiled my enthusiasm.

Through a business associate heard that Giffords is filming ads, apparently at some interesting desert locations.

The real race is only beginning.

anonymous said...

A complete video is available of the debate at Patty's HQ. Should it be put out on DVD, or directly posted to the web?

There is even more on the video. Jeff Latas attacked Gabby's hypocrisy before Patty's turn. The entire video is not good for Gabby, but it would sure help out Jeff, Patty and Frank Atenori!

Self Appointed Opinion Leader said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Self Appointed Opinion Leader said...

Twanging ethics meters
Three minute long soundbites
Gabby in the desert

It all seems so unfair... but its not.

Where is the deliberate twisting of data?

Mr. Magoo can see the twists and distortions documented for all eternity by Tedski and Art Jacobson.

The video is fact based, Gabby's bloggers are 90+% opinion and damage control.

outlander said...

I'm glad the Green Party activists, the Independents like Art and Roger, and all of the Republicans that support Gabby here seem to want her to win the primary.

They don't vote for Democrats (except if the independents choose primary ballots.)

Maybe Gabby is the consensus candidate of Greens, Indies, and Rs.

She is not the consensus candidate for progressives, and this blog in particular is not a pro-Democrat place. But they support Gabby, so they must be supporting the Democratic Party. Right? Wrong?

Art Jacobson said...

Outlander...

Since you are a newcomer, perhaps you have not noticed the Yellow Dog Democrat
symbol. Ain't no one more Democratic than a Yellow Dog Democrat.

Art

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
x4mr said...

Will concede that this posting of edited videos is now "fair game" and we're likely to see more of it.

But I don't have to like it.

And what's good for the goose.....

The twisting and spinning is blatent. The fabricated "invitation" REEKS of it.

I also struggle regarding when to respond to what. Does responding give credibility? Does failing to respond allow bullshit to gain traction?

outlander said...

Patty, Jeff, Alex, and Francine have all done more for the party and progressives in this district than Rogers likes.

That is why he has a fake Pepsi challenge comparing what they have done for the district to Gabby's tarnished record.

Fabrication implies constructs of truth. The video is not untruthful, nor does it twist, spin, or have a snappy beat you can dance to.

Yellow dogs, blue dogs, and pinto democrats are pretty much the problem since before 1965 in Arizona.

I vote for the animal house in November, but not September.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
anonymous said...

This just in:

Latas has a poll where he is winning by a landslide.

It came from Art, so it must be the big turn-around Gabby's people have said was happening.

Liza said...

Here's what Latas sent out in email:

"Of 1,692 likely primary voters canvassed at their doors or on the phone, a full 32% are supporting Jeff, 8% are supporting other candidates, and 59% are undecided."

anonymous said...

Poor Jeff. His sample of the electorate makes no sense, and it is easy to refute. I wish him well, but it was stupid and desperate to email this.

Yo Se Quien Soy said...

I agree with anonymous, Latas' sample and press release do NOT make sense. Maybe he should use one of Celinda Lake's memos as a template???