Who is behind Gutless John Shadegg?

Someone set up a blog site attacking Shadegg for his new position in support of the Bailout “Rescue” Plan. The question arises was the site set up by a Democrat operative seeking to weaken GOP support for Shadegg or someone from the Bob Lord campaign. It is also possible that someone from the conservative base of the GOP had finally had enough. Shadegg slipped some with the base when he openly supported Fife Symington in the late 2007 attempt to unseat Rob Haney as Chairman of LD 11. There was no need for Shadegg to insert himself into an LD election but he got involved anyway. Since that time Shadegg has made other moves that have displeased certain conservative. Up until now Shadegg has always come through when votes were being counted in the House of Representative and has a very conservative record. Up until now.

All indications are the Shadegg will join the Democrats on Friday morning in voting for the bailout. If that will have any effect on his election in CD 3 we don’t know. Certainly it will diminish his conservative credentials a little more.

If the anti-Shadegg blog was put up by the Democrats it may backfire in CD 8, where it looks like Giffords is set to vote for the revised bailout. If the new Shadegg site is done by Republicans, especially if they are from CD 3, then his race may end up being closer than he would like it to be.

Vice Presidential Debate!

Be sure to watch the VIce-Presidential debate. The link to watch online is located here.

Check back afterwords and give us your thoughts and impressions.

Harry Mitchell Ad

Harry Mitchell Watch just release its first ad featuring none other than, Harry Mitchell himself. Special guest appearance by Nancy Pelosi.

YouTube Preview Image

Yes on 102 Releases Financial Reports

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 2, 2008

YESforMarriage.com Releases Financial Report
Says Prop 102’s simple and clear language is uniting Arizonans

YesForMarriage.com, the organization leading the Yes on Prop 102 campaign, today released its Post-Primary Election Report for the reporting period of August 14 to September 22. The report shows the following:

  • Total Cash Contributions to Date: $6,874,315.51
  • Total Cash Contributions for Reporting Period (8/14-9/22): $6,266,220.51
  • Percentage of Donors from Arizona: 98.65%

YesForMarriage.com spokesman Kelly Molique attributed the campaign’s success to Prop 102’s simple language saying, “Prop 102 is 20 simple and clear words that define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Arizonans of all ages, ethnicities, religions, and political parties are stepping forward to support Prop 102.”

Molique said she believes YesForMarriage.com’s fundraising success is the clearest indication yet of where Arizonans stand on the issue of marriage.

“Over 98% of Proposition 102’s donors are Arizonans. This outpouring of support is just more evidence Arizonans want to put Prop 102’s 20 simple and clear words in the Constitution to define marriage in our state once and for all — and keep the politicians and judges out of it,”Molique said.

The complete YesForMarriage.com financial report can be viewed at www.azsos.gov.

The “Green” Team

Arizona Democrats are fielding the most “green” team in Arizona history for the Corporation Commission: Sandra Kennedy, Paul Newman and Sam George. But we aren’t talking about saving the environment. This team is “green” because its nominees are famous for evading Border Patrol agents after allegedly smoking marijuana in county-owned vehicles and getting rich by promoting pro-dope ballot initiatives in Arizona.

The “Solar Team” TV ads were funded by Sam George’s personal wealth and matching Clean Elections funds (George has already pumped over $300,000 of his own money into the campaign). Sam Vagenas, formerly a professional smear merchant for Dick Mahoney, changed his name to “Sam George” in the hopes that voters wouldn’t discover who he really is. Even though “George” was one of the authors of the Clean Elections law, he has decided to game the system by running as a team with two other Democrats, boosting their chances with matching funds provided by his large infusions of cash. Incredibly, Arizona Democrats passed over the vastly more qualified and ethical Kara Kelty in favor of unpopular, far-left candidates who have been roundly criticized by the three most left-wing newspapers in Arizona: the Phoenix New Times, the Tucson Citizen and the Tucson Weekly.

Consider this: Even the Tucson Citizen could bring itself to endorse only two Democrats in the ACC race, even though three seats are open. The Citizen wrote that Sandra Kennedy (who is also “green” because she places shamrocks on her signs even though she is not Irish) “showed a dearth of knowledge on ACC issues…We were unimpressed.” The Republic could not bring itself to endorse her, either. Kennedy is in favor of carbon taxes, which would mean a higher electric bill for all Arizonans – including seniors and those on fixed incomes.

The Citizen wrote it was “troubled that [George] changed his name in 2004 from Sam Vagenas…As Vagenas, he helped get two pro-marijuana ballot issues passed in Arizona, though the Legislature later gutted them. State investigators also linked him to fake ‘internal memos’ circulated during the 2002 gubernatorial race, falsely claiming Janet Napolitano, as attorney general, covered up the Colorado City polygamy crisis…Two years ago, when he lost election to the Central Arizona Water Conservation District Board, Sam George sued election officials and fellow candidates to demand a recount. The election tally didn’t change.”

In fact, Sam “George” Vagenas sued Sen. Bob Burns’s wife, and a host of others, in an effort to change the outcome of a race for the CAP Board – a race in which he placed dead last. The “Solar Team” tried unsuccessfully to knock Rep. Marian McClure and fellow Democrat Kara Kelty off the ballot earlier this year by trying to disenfranchise citizens who signed their petitions, hiring a small army of attorneys to do so. They also had flunkies make phony, intimidating calls to petition-signers from a non-existent “Signature Verification Department.”

Small wonder that the Tucson Weekly calls George/Vagenas “sleazy.” According to the New Times, George’s third pro-dope initiative “would have freed medical marijuana users to deal drugs to kids – and actually required the Department of Public Safety to give out pot, for free.”

The link to the front-page Phoenix New Times expose on Sam George is here: http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2008-07-31/news/corporation-commission-candidate-sam-george-is-sam-vagenas-with-a-new-name-and-old-tricks/

Sam George’s history of dirty tricks against Matt Salmon and Napolitano are documented here: http://www.childbrides.org/politics_pnt_dirty_tricks.html. “His commercials hurt us very badly,” Salmon said, referencing George’s sleazy tactics against him in the 2002 governor’s race, and George’s attempts to promote anti-Mormon sentiment.

As for Paul Newman, here is the story about his allegedly smoking pot while driving a county-owned vehicle, and his attempts to evade Border Patrol when a drug-sniffing dog discovered the dope: http://www.svherald.com/articles/2004/12/10/local_news/news1.prt

It is becoming increasingly clear to embarrassed Democrats that these three are entirely unfit to hold public office and do not reflect well on the Arizona Democratic Party. The Republicans in the race had better get ready for dirty tricks that would make even James Carville blush.

New Ad Attacks Dan Saban

YouTube Preview Image

The race for Maricopa County Sheriff just got real ugly.

Despite ads like this, some Republicans are still supporting Dan Saban.

First County Attorney debate on domestic violence: 24% more offenders jailed under Thomas


Thanks to the Thomas campaign for this photo, which was taken outside the Viad building downtown – click to enlarge

Last night the Maricopa County Attorney candidates squared off on domestic violence at the Men’s Anti-Violence Network forum. Prior to the debate, Democrat challenger ACLU Tim Nelson’s campaign held a rally with a few scraggly protesters outside the building, next to small side road where they went virtually unnoticed. A Thomas supporter stood with a huge Thomas sign next to them, dwarfing their tiny signs.

The debate began with opening statements. Andrew Thomas said that under his tenure, there has been a 24% increase in domestic violence convictions, and the filing rate is up as well. He noted that he’s the only candidate who has actually prosecuted domestic violence crimes. He fought for a spousal rape law in the legislature and said that a leader in the Sexual Assault area said that the law would not have passed if it hadn’t been for his intervention. Thomas took a jab at Nelson’s proposal to start domestic violence “therapeutic” courts, saying they would be akin to giving “group hugs.”

Libertarian Michael Kielsky emphasized the constitutional libertarian principles of focusing on prosecuting crimes that affect life, liberty or property, not things that consenting adults do. He noted that domestic violence prosecutions have been abused, unfortunately now the police come out and arrest everybody. He related an example of a client he had represented who called the police on her live-in boyfriend for domestic violence, and the police ended up arresting her.

For his opening statement, ACLU Tim said there was a woman in the audience whose boyfriend was killed by her ex-boyfriend. He said that it was the County Attorney’s fault for not bringing the charges for four months. He didn’t say why it took that long – whether there were problems getting statements, the police had delayed submitting the case, or some other reason. He accused Thomas of not lobbying for a bill that would make a second domestic violence offense a felony. Nelson admitted his only experience with domestic violence consisted of helping Governor Napolitano draft an executive order creating a Domestic Violence Commission. Then he rambled on about drafting executive orders for Napolitano sending the National Guard to the border to assist with supplies in a non-law enforcement role, and drafting an executive order about drop houses. Not sure what those had to do with domestic violence.

The first question asked of the candidates was what are the sources of domestic violence and how should they be addressed. Kielsky said domestic violence shouldn’t be treated as political football where everything is labeled domestic violence.

Nelson repeated what he said in his opening statement, said that the problem is that repeat occurrences haven’t been made a felony, which is Thomas’s fault for not lobbying for that bill in the legislature.

Thomas said that we need to send a clear tough message to offenders with a tough plea policy, which Nelson wants to repeal. Leaving sentencing up to individual prosecutors or the judges – many who were appointed by Nelson’s boss Napolitano and are soft on crime – doesn’t send a message to offenders that we are taking DV seriously. Under Thomas, the County Attorney’s Office has been forced to prosecute DV crimes as misdemeanors and take them to Justice Court instead of Superior Court, since Superior Court is so stacked with soft-on-crime Napolitano judicial appointees it’s almost impossible to get any jail sentences from them. This is why Mike Tyson, an accused rapist, received only 1 day in jail. Thomas ended the policy of allowing even the county attorney personally to negotiate sentences. Under Nelson, who has received a record number of campaign contributions from criminal defense attorneys, this practice would be back in place. Criminal defense attorneys would be calling him personally asking for sweetheart deals.

Next the candidates were asked how they would increase satisfaction for victims and prosecutors. Nelson repeated his story about the victim present whose ex-boyfriend killed her boyfriend, claiming it was because the County Attorney’s Office failed to bring charges speedily. He accused Thomas of missing meetings with the Governor’s Domestic Violence Council.

Thomas shot back that the Governor’s Office has also missed several meetings themselves – why didn’t Nelson attend for the Governor’s Office? He explained that the office’s representative had missed a few meetings due to the fact she was prosecuting the Goudeau rape/murder trial. Thomas pointed out that his two challengers have represented domestic violence batterers, they haven’t prosecuted them. In regards to the victim present, Thomas said that the office handles 40,000 cases per year and occasionally something may not be done perfectly. However, permitting individual plea deals is still a bad idea and would result in worse situations.

Kielsky said that prosecutors aren’t there to be happy, they’re there to do justice. If they’re not happy, they should find another job.

The candidates were asked whether they thought Arizona’s domestic violence law should include people who are just dating. Thomas went over his work lobbying the legislature the past years to toughen up laws on all crimes. If you’re a criminal it’s not a good time right now for you. Thomas responded to Nelson’s accusation that he hadn’t lobbied on the bill making a second DV offense a felony, saying that the County Attorney is the only law enforcement agency that bothers lobbying. DPS and the Governor’s Office don’t bother lobbying on these bills. Yet they’re given a free pass by the press. The Governor doesn’t take a position on a bill until it hits her desk and she’s forced to. That’s not leadership. Thomas on the other hand has the guts to stand up for a tough bill from the beginning, because we need to send offenders to prison the first time and teach them a lesson. His office lobbies on a lot of bills, and is not able to get to every single one.

Kielsky disagreed with including dating in the domestic violence law, saying a couple must be living together. Nelson dodged the question, saying the devil is in the details. He responded to Thomas, saying no one should be criticizing the leadership of Napolitano on domestic violence, and brought up the Domestic Violence Council she created again (and has apparently missed attending a few times). He couldn’t come up with anything else she has done on domestic violence. He then launched into a tirade about the 40,000 unserved felony warrants in the county and blamed Thomas for them.

The candidates were asked how they would create better accountability. Kielsky said we need to stop putting fancy labels on things. Nelson repeated for the third time that the problem is delay in prosecution (even though he could not name any instance involving delay other then the one involving woman present at the debate). He talked about creating his therapeutic domestic violence felony courts, and how he would set up a system to charge DV offenders higher fines to pay for Orders of Protection to be served faster. He accused Thomas of wasting time going to trial with prosecutors unable to obtain convictions because of his plead to the lead policy.

Thomas said that wasn’t true, his conviction rate is 93%, which has remained the same while he’s been in office. Thomas noted that Nelson hasn’t done anything in the area of domestic violence until now, other than a couple of small things for the governor. As for the unserved felony warrants, he said that the office has 45 detectives – they can’t possibly be responsible for serving all of them, although they are trying to help the police agencies with them. Thomas said it is hard to listen to sermons on domestic violence from someone who misrepresented his record on defending Jose Cerjas on death row, a murderer who threatened his wife from death row. Someone like that is the last person we want in the County Attorney’s Office.

Next the candidates were asked about what they would do for victims. Nelson said he would start attending the Domestic Violence Council meetings. (Thomas pointed at Nelson as he said this and said YOU! implying that Nelson also hasn’t been attending the meetings) Nelson tried to deflect the accusation that he’d represented Cejas, saying he only represented him the last two weeks before his execution, and didn’t do any oral argument or write any briefs. It gave him a “richer understanding” of the death penalty. Claimed he does think the death penalty is warranted in certain circumstances.

Thomas said he would help victims by increasing awareness, such as through public service announcements, which his opponent criticizes and says he’d end. Thomas currently runs public service announcements on drugs, drinking and driving, and drophouses, paid for by RICO funds (money seized from criminal profiteering), not tax dollars. Thomas accused Nelson of misrepresenting his role representing Cejas again, pointing out that Nelson had said in a press release recently that he DID write a brief in the Cejas case, unlike his assertion tonight. Thomas said that unlike Nelson, his principles aren’t for sale in order to reach partner, he wouldn’t sign his name on a brief to attain that status.

Kielsky said, “Thank goodness I’m here in the middle or there would be a bloodbath.” He said he supports the death penalty theoretically, but practically it would probably be a very exceptional case.

The candidates ended with closing statements. Nelson said it’s all about giving good advice, and blamed Thomas for the Sheriff’s Office arresting the New Times editors. He also blamed Thomas for a report that just came out saying the jails are risking being discredited for not providing high levels of healthcare to inmates. (not real clear what the correlation is between the County Attorney’s Office and jails, which are not under the County Attorney’s jurisdiction) He attacked Thomas for using outside counsel to handle certain cases. He said that he’d been a partner when he handled the Cejas case, implying that when he worked for a big firm, he made partner unlike Thomas who was only an associate.

In his closing statement, Thomas noted that Nelson had just told another lie, saying that he was a partner now, when he’d previously said he was only an associate when he handled the Cejas case. We don’t need a soft on crime ACLU liberal in the County Attorney’s Office. And we need the death penalty for murderers who really need it, not just wait for some terrorists to strike and then it will be appropriate.

Kielsky ended by saying “Thanks for letting me go last, now we can bring down the tension in the room. Or I could let these two really go at it and I would end up being the County Attorney!”