Funny

First, Rob Haney is a good man and has done as much for conservatism as any other volunteer in the state. That you insult him tells me you are about power, not conservative principles. Why are you even bringing Haney up?

As far as my problem with Andrew Thomas, it is threefold:

1. Andrew Thomas professes to be a conservative when it helps to win elections, but his actions indicate otherwise (e.g., endorsing McCain, hiring liberals like Barnett Lotstien to help run his office, etc.).

2. I agree with Bob that Andrew Thomas lacks the ethics to serve as county attorney. Thomas hasn’t even been through one term, and we already have scandals in his office like the New Times witch hunt and a judge ruling that Thomas’s office mislead a grand jury to score high-profile indictments. Thomas will do anything to preserve and expand his political power, and that’s unacceptable to any true conservative.

3. Thomas’s unethical conduct has damaged the reputation of Republicans.

P.S. I never worked for Thomas, but I did work my tail off to get him elected. Trust me, I won’t ever make that mistake again.

Who are you? Rob Haney? The guy who likes to slam conservatives who don’t agree with him on only .001% of the issues – gradually destroying the party? What do you have against Andrew Thomas, one of the most conservative politicians in the state? Republicans finally elect a very conservative politician to a major office in Arizona, and all you can do is rip him up? Obviously you’re someone with an agenda against Mr. Thomas, you have some issue with him that you’re not disclosing, because his conservative credentials are more impeccable than probably any other major Republican politician in the state. I’ve exchanged emails with “Timothy” for awhile now, and I know what he does for a living, and he does not work for Mr. Thomas. (although even if he did, I don’t see why it should matter – and aren’t you the one who said you used to work for Mr. Thomas to help put him in office)

There were yet more articles on the lack of professionalism and ethics in Andrew Thomas’s office yesterday in the Republic. One indicated that a judge ruled that Thomas’s office intentionally mislead a grand jury. In another, another judge ruled that the office left out required documents in the New Times grand jury file and scheduled a hearing–yet another negative twist on a very disturbing story about Thomas’s office.

The problem here is that not only is Thomas not really a principled conservative, but he also does not meet the professional standard to be a county attorney.

Timothy: “uh, hey moderators, CA is attributing another’s comments to me…”

Okay, let’s go through this.

First Timothy expressed disbelieve that Andrew Thomas endorsed McCain, when he wrote:

“Where is the Thomas endorsement of McCain? For President? ”

In response, I wrote, “At first you tried to question that Thomas endorsed McCain.”

Then Timothy responded that he was merely asking “*where* the endorsement was.”

But then later in the same post, Timothy again expresses doubt whether Thomas indeed endorsed McCain: “And someone anonymously saying ‘I saw the endorsement several months ago’ does not confirm anything, to me.”

You know about that lawyer who argued that his client doesn’t have a dog and that the dog he owns didn’t bite anyone? That’s what you remind me of. Whether or not you work in Thomas’s office, you sure act like a dishonest lawyer.

What kills me is that you asked the moderators to intervene.

Anonymity has its place not just in blogs but in many historical institutions, some quite useful: Grand juries. The ballot box. Silent Witness. Deep Throat. Focus groups. American Idol. And until recently, campaign finance.

Not a fan. He’s a wack-job.

You seemed to be a critic of anonymity.

And someone anonymously saying “I saw the endorsement several months ago” does not confirm anything, to me.

As far as who I am or where I work, well that’s just inviting ad hominem attacks, now isn’t it? So I guess I’ll sacrifice some of my conservatism to preserve my self-interest.

If someone misquotes you then correct them. This is a free-speech forum and we try to moderate for physical threats, profanity, and other items that rise to that level.

As I’ve written on this site before, Andy Thomas billed himself as a reliable conservative, but now those of us who worked in overdrive to get him elected realize he deceived us. I agree with the others on this thread that Thomas is not about conservatism, but rather about himself. Appointing his close political associate as a special prosecutor to persecute (yes, persecute, not prosecute) the New Times? What does Thomas do in other areas when we don’t have the benefit of publicity?

Being a conservative is one thing, being a solid one is another, and being an activist is still another. It must be tough to keep them all straight.

Just out of curiosity, do you work in the county attorney’s office, Timothy?