Thursday, October 29, 2009
Monday, October 26, 2009
- Gila Courier lies about Rep. Giffords
- Gila Courier pooches important numbers on a poll because, well, they had already written the headline and couldn't explain the facts away.
- Gila Courier knowingly misrepresents crime statistics to support Tucson's Prop. 200 (and when called out on it, do it again.)
Dear Mr. Dranias,
There seems to be some confusion here in the "Old Pueblo" as to your Prop. 200 op-ed in this morning's Arizona Daily Star. The first hint we received was last Thursday when Jim Nintzel of the Tucson Weekly posted something on their blog "The Range." This was the headline:
More Opposition to Public Safety First Initiative: Goldwater Institute Says Prop 200 "Won’t Put Public Safety First, It Will Just Bloat City Government"
That made it read as if the Goldwater Institute had taken a position on Prop. 200. Today's op-ed uses your Goldwater Institute email for replies, just like your previously published op-ed the "Star" on the topic of Mr. Goodman's attempt to redevelop some of his property. Ironically, Mr. Goodman is one of the deeper pockets funding the pass Prop. 200 campaign.
The text of your op-ed was sent out this morning as the "daily email" from the Goldwater Institute and appears on the Goldwater Institute website.
No where in today's op-ed do you claim the piece is your opinion solely and in fact, one could easily claim the piece IS the position of the Goldwater Institute.
The piece is reprinted in whole on the conservative blog "Sonoran Alliance" as "Posted by Goldwater Institute."
My question is simple, does today's op-ed represent only your opinion? If so, how do you explain the observations above?
Thanking you in advance of your reply.
"The strongest democracies flourish from frequent and lively debate, but they endure when people of every background and belief find a way to set aside smaller differences in service of a greater purpose."
Friday, October 23, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Example: The Yellow Sheet (subscription required) shares that Rep. Barnes, while praising fellow premature-electorator Sen. John Huppenthal, took it upon himself to distinguish Huppenthal from other people, women particularly. Barnes sees Huppenthal as "logical" which he finds as a praiseworthy quality, while disliking parts of our politics that have become "emotional." Just what has become too "emotional" in our politics? Women, he said, are too emotional and not enough like men. I'm sure it was quite a punch in the gut for Barnes to be asked to clarify
his comments about women in politics. That's when he coughed up this
I don’t think it’s sexist. I married a woman because she’s a woman, not a man.
One would think that a "tell-it-like-it-is" moment like that might leave Barnes hanging out there on his own, but no, Constantine Querard (CQ) came to the rescue on a Facebook thread by writing,
“Anyone who has been successfully married that long must have figured out a few things!”
We all know how little Constantine's campaign work has been built on "emotion." Hell, Constantine only agreed with Barnes because of his own Vulcan-like logical mind as displayed here on his twitter account:
WNBA Finals crowd: Testosterone? Lots. Men in the crowd? Not so many!7:32 AM Sep 30th from web
These guys know what they like in a woman! Mainly, that they ARE women because, you know, those women who aren't women ARE DEFINITELY NOT what they are looking for in a woman. It's a choice, you know, the amount of womanly attributes one must find in a mate so one can show the world the person one chose is a woman!
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Former WH Press Secretary Describes Treatment of FOX as "...what dictators do..." What She did Was TOTALLY DIFFERENT!
Of course the word "dictator" must have been invented sometime after January 20, 2009.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Monday, October 19, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Friday, October 16, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
In late September I wrote about a blog in Southern Arizona who chose to misquote Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in an attempt to smear her. I call that lying. They never retracted the untruthful tweet. They never addressed their lie on the blog. Some moronic fellow-travelers retweeted the lie, one even admitted to spreading the lie knowingly.
This particular outfit likes to take shots at "liberal" newspapers (while free linking when it suits them) and bemoans the role of public education in society. Know this, if the anonymous coward who tweeted that lie did so while in the employ of a newspaper he would be fired. If a college student wrote a quote like that into a paper they could be expelled. You'd think one would pause when it becomes apparent two of your biggest targets have more stringent standards then yourself but we are talking about right-wing idealogues. Not very thorough hacks at that.
How do they top themselves? Well, selective and misleading use of statistical information would be a start!
The folks at Gila Courier posted a piece on “evidence” supporting the need for passage of Prop. 200. Up to their usual standards, the Gila Courier provides no evidence at all, just a clear view of their agenda.
First I would like to point out the graphs published by Gila Courier are uncredited. Further, it appears the numbers used for the graphs come from the Wikipedia page United States cities by crime rate. The data used is for 2007, not 2008 as stated by Gila Courier. Additionally, Gila Courier supplies a link to the actual FBI page that uses 2008 data. This is misleading. Why graph data for a different year and source but supply a much better looking link? How very awkward!
Gila Courier intentionally selects two metropolitan areas with lower rates on violent crime for their comparison. By doing so, they avoid being complete, ethical and truthful by omitting: Albuquerque, Anchorage, Atlanta, Buffalo, Corpus Christi, Long Beach, Oklahoma City, Sacramento, Stockton, Tampa, Toledo, Tulsa, Wichita. These are examples of statistical areas with smaller populations but higher rates of violent crime. Of course, this comparison is from the Wiki page since that is the data they graphed. Glendale has half the population but almost as many violent crimes. Are they graphed? Heck no! There are similar examples for the other graphs supplied by Gila Courier. This not an ethical use of data. Gila Courier published something designed to mislead voters and benefit the Prop. 200 campaign.
One more point about the FBI link, data and page. If Gila Courier had actually used the FBI page they link to they would have to read past this admonishment on the FBI page:
Caution Against Ranking
Each year when Crime in the United States is published, some entities use reported figures to compile rankings of cities and counties. These rough rankings provide no insight into the numerous variables that mold crime in a particular town, city, county, state, or region. Consequently, they lead to simplistic and/or incomplete analyses that often create misleading perceptions adversely affecting communities and their residents. Valid assessments are possible only with careful study and analysis of the range of unique conditions affecting each local law enforcement jurisdiction. The data user is, therefore, cautioned against comparing statistical data of individual reporting units from cities, metropolitan areas, states, or colleges or universities solely on the basis of their population coverage or student enrollment.
How very curious! The very thing Gila Courier attempts to do is something the FBI shows shouldn't be done with their data. So did they read that FBI page or not? Oh, Gila Courier didn't really use the data from that source! Got it!
Given that the Gila Courier has a track record of writing just about anything on behalf of whatever partisan cause they feel called to support, I have just one question; when will the folks behind Proposition 200 disavow or accept responsibility for this statistical charade?
Falsified data, lies, misleading graphs...Gila Courier, it's a crime what they do to Tucson.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Image by cobalt123 via Flickr
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has stripped Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio of his authority to arrest suspected illegal immigrants based solely on their immigration status.
Full article here.
“It’s all politics,” Arpaio said.
Truer words were never crafted for maximum media impact!
Everything that is contempo-conservative is aligned with Jesus. Everything bad in the world is secular and liberal. Subtle.
Here's the kicker; a soldier is named "King" in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Dr. King was a pacifist. To paint him as a soldier is historically ignorant and insulting to his memory. BTW, among the dozens of personages only three are of color. The artist went through alot of "flesh" colored paint to get this hum-dinger done.
The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office is using money earmarked for fighting crime on vehicles for Sheriff Joe Arpaio, top commanders and select deputies to drive back and forth to work, recordsobtained by The Arizona Republic show.
The Sheriff's department responds to the article with a rhetorical version of "three card monty" that could qualify the department for metaphoric prosecution under the RICO statue mentioned in the Republic piece.
It is well known by observing Mr. Arpaio's behavior that he suffers from a compulsion to seek attention and adoration. Mr. Arpaio should resign from office and seek appropriate medical care before his already long life comes to and end. He's ruined the department, maybe he can redeem his life.
And although his tone towards me was that thought of me as a kibitzer, he did refer to me as "Kenala," which is sweet because it reminded me of a surrogate mother I had during a production of "Torch Song Trilogy" who called me "Kenala." It's like I'm his boychick. I'm sure he meant nothing by it, kine-ahora.
Good times, good food.
Well in honor of my friend Bruce Ash, the alter-cocker, here is a patriotic video just for you!
Bruce, in case you are a little fertummelt, the performer is a faygala!
Zie Ga Zink!
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Friday, October 2, 2009
Almost a month ago I posted on this blog a comment originally published on Sonoran Alliance. I didn't write the words of that comment, but the name appearing with that comment caused me pause. Bruce Ash. It struck me as a vile little work certainly beneath Mr. Ash. Sadly, I may be mistaken.
When another post, this time at Ted Prezelski's Rum, Romanism and Rebellion received a comment from someone calling themselves Bruce Ash I thought I should seize the opportunity. I asked if that Mr. Ash was aware of some of the words attributed to the other Mr. Ash. Then I wrote something snarky, but seriously, by my standards it was mild. And I love my readers, all of you, but let's face it, we could all fit around just about any table available at Sam Levitz. So I went where the eyes are and....
....the Mr. Ash who responded on Tedski's blog really let me have it! Boy. Ouch.
He didn't, however, address any of my questions. Now, in the rough-and-tumble world of partisan politics one could, perhaps should, assume the non-response is a, "yes." In fact one of my favorite commentators, Eli_Blake, did just that and then shared what I found to be a sensible and heartfelt reason why Nazi and fascist comparisons shouldn't be tossed around casually by anyone...it cheapens the suffering.
I remember my first visit to Drinking Liberally, when a left-wing nut job tossed out a, "he's a nazi" at some Republican like it was a sneeze. I winced, you would have, too. And then I spoke the first words I ever spoke at DL. I don't remember the actual words but I basically stated that those comparisons are out of line for anyone, the description is a term of art. My Grandfather did not spend all those years in North Africa and Europe fighting people with whom he had a political disagreement, so don't cheapen his sacrifice.
So, this whole "Nazi and/or fascist" attack on our President REALLY FUCKING PISSES ME OFF.
Back to the comment posted at Sonoran Alliance; it all began with a video of celebrities and such taking a pledge to help our newly elected President by taking personal responsibility for something said celebrity could control. Why am I explaining this? Roll tape:
Yeah, I don't know why she did that to her hair either. All of them. But back to the pledges. I don't see what the big deal is, yeah it's wordy, but most of these star type peoples get script approval so whatta ya gonna do? And it looks like Ashton was directing because it had that edgy 'Punk'd' feel to it, good luck with that. But that's all it is, some adults who get way too much attention for too little reason.
It seems to me, Mr. Ash, you were offended by a sense of fealty in the video. Me? Not so much, but I can see how someone else might. I mean, what if they tried to make children in school listen to President Obama talk about personal responsibility? That might make people really freak out! Yes, I'm still working on an ironic voice for my writing. Maybe you and I can agree on this video, you see it goes one step further by making small....oh, I forgot....roll tape!
Dude, seriously? We put up with that shit? Oh, now I remember. If we didn't put up with that...uh, stuff, we got called un-american and people tried to ruin other people's career (Dixie Chicks, Valerie Plame, a slew of US attorney's).
Back to you, Mr. Ash. You are a big deal. You are a member of the Republican National Committee! I know that because it says so on your blog, Ash for Arizona, just beneath your name emblazoned over an homage to our state flag. I know it's not a reproduction of our state flag because that would be tacky and it's stretched out so Senator Kyl's head can fit on your banner.
Anyway, YOU, Mr. Ash are a big deal. Here's a secret, I have always felt that those like you, who rise to responsibility within our political party's not only have ability but a sense of duty to our country. I mean why else would you donate almost $40,000 to Republicans in the last five years? It's your ability and patriotism that allowed you to rise to leadership within your party. And the $40,000 ish is really just for the years 2004-2008, but still! As a leader of your party you must sometimes deal with those who, although a part of your "coalition" you may not have much anything else in common but because you are a leader you appeal to the "better angels of their nature," or something like that.
That's what leaders do, and barring that, people who have websites that sound like campaign slogans can do that too!
You are right my friend, there are a bunch of angry folks out there who want their country back, but just between you and me, Mr. Ash, do you think they want you and me in it?
Image by Rep. Virginia Foxx via FlickrThe folks dispensing petro-dollars to Tom Jenney and Shane Wikfors to whip up despair and misinformation on health care reform here in Arizona (just wait for the Energy bill!) were having a little conference in Virginia (very un-DC) when news of America's Olympic bid broke. Here's what those teabagging patriots did in reaction:
Next time a teabagger tells you she is fighting to get her country back ask her, 'which country?' It's almost as if they have seceded from the United States in their mind.
When the other side is eating its' own my rule is to get out of the way but I have another rule that overrides in just such a case. My, "if a Republican uses the words 'CASE CLOSED' in capital letters there's probably more 'splaining to do, rule.
This is what I think; the documents supplied by Mr. Jensen (via that obnoxious blog) do not prove he was out of town on the days corresponding to the "Desert Divas" list. They prove his credit card was out-of-town but not necessarily Mr. Jensen. Mr. Jensen would do well to supply boarding passes that show he checked in for his flights or better, a copy of his frequent flier account statement that proves his non-prostitute needing body was on those flights and not, perhaps, "ordering in." One other question, do any of the "Desert Divas" records show the use of Pay-Pal for services rendered?