Comments on: Will Haiti be Obama’s Katrina … or is Jan Brewer using a Straw Man?

By: Kenneth Toporek

Kenneth Toporek — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:59:17 +0000

Arthritis in canines can be a huge hassle that many people never even think of in older dogs.

By: Bobbie Dodd

Bobbie Dodd — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:40:45 +0000

Besides donating my own money to Haiti, I will continue to pray for them. Lifting everything up to Heaven for them.

By: Veritas Vincit

Veritas Vincit — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:10:06 +0000

Because you avoided my question the first time, we can understand the answer was “none”.

By: Veritas Vincit

Veritas Vincit — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:09:12 +0000

Basil, please explain how its “Big Government” money?

Who wrote a check to the Symington Group for $37,000 just 4 days before Christmas so he could know how to sell himself to the voters? Is that what you want for *your* elected governor?

You didn’t answer my original question, How many checks have you written to candidates over $250 each election cycle and how many tables at the GOP Dinner have you sponsored?

Put your money where your mouth is.

By: Basil St. John

Basil St. John — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 06:57:33 +0000

VV, you continue to prove my point: You are willing to take Big Government money when it benefits you. As long as the dollars are flowing your direction, socialism is fine by you. It’s fine, just don’t give us any more nonsense about your principles because the minute they cost you something, you throw them out the window. You have no more credibility as a true Conservative.

By: Veritas Vincit

Veritas Vincit — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:08:01 +0000

Check out fund raising figures by Democrats and Liberal groups and compare that to Republican and conservative causes… and when a Republican has some funding – like McCain in the Presidential race – they manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

The dollars tell the story of who funds and who talks.

By: Veritas Vincit

Veritas Vincit — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:04:56 +0000

Basil St. John and all those with the highbrow principles I have a simple question: How many tables have you sponsored at the GOP dinner this month?

How many $410 checks have you written this election cycle?

Why is Paxton raising funds and Jesse Kelly not? Is Paxton really the best man to take out Giffords? Tim Bee certainly didn’t measure up.

Oh, Paxton is being funded by special interests – does that mean his ideas are more marketable than Jesse Kelly?

Of course, Buz Mills is the more superior candidate for governor according to you logic because he can self-fund his race right?

Please, seriously those of you in this discussion to date, how many of you are office holders who’ve raised funds and how many of you have written checks over $500 on your OWN bank accounts? (PACs don’t count and neither does a corporation)

Anyone running for state office already knows that to receive support from the Az Chamber of Commerce they must support watering down employer sanction laws AND be supportive of employer rights over the employees right to self-protection.

Hey, agree and they have funds for you. Now what is that called again? Oh, being competitive in the market???

Ok, who’s in this game? How many tables are you sponsoring at the dinner this month?

By: citizen goofball

citizen goofball — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:12:26 +0000

Clean Elections is welfare. You can dress up the candidates who run under it any way you want, but they are still pigs at the trough. You can justify it all you want but these candidates are too incompetant to run under market forces so they get a government handout. A handout, by the way, that gave us Janet Napolitano and will probably give us Terry Goddard. I think Goldwater is acting under their own principles. What would Barry do? Would Barry take money from the government to run for office? No, he wouldn’t and neither should any republican or self-described conservative. If they cannot get elected in the marketplace of ideas and money then they have no business running anyway. We believe that under capitolism, don’t we? Running for office shouldn’t be any different.

Your principles, however, seem to be of the ends justifies the means variety. Conservatives don’t cut welfare for others and then take welfare for themselves. That means they believe in socialism but only for themselves and apparently you do too.

I’m amused that you brought up McCain, because, for the record, he supports clean elections. So, Veritas, he agrees with you on something.

This is precisely what is wrong with this country. People in Washington do things to benefit themselves that screw the country. Now we have conservatives in name only who believe in helping themselves to welfare.

By: Travis

Travis — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:45:16 +0000

Anyone who supports any part of Publicly Funded Campaigns has not participated in either end of the CCEC. It’s a nightmare for everyone, most importantly, the voters.

I think the scenario that VV puts forward is highly likely and one of the main reasons that this funding ploy is a giant sham.

By: Basil St. John

Basil St. John — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 21:54:34 +0000

Veritas, you just want to “balance the playing field” with government money because your candidates can’t compete in the free market. Admit it: You support government handouts to people who agree with you politically. That is not a GOP principle. You, sir, have sold your soul to socialism because it helps you prevail. That is unprincipled behavior.

By: Veritas Vincit

Veritas Vincit — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 21:23:50 +0000

Bill, I don’t like the idea of a career politician possibly gaming the system. CCEC was approved by the voters in order to balance the influence of folks like John McCain and his pals?

By: Veritas Vincit

Veritas Vincit — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 21:22:12 +0000

Basil St. John; Not at all. I simply think there must be a way to balance the playing field so that the voter is represented by the candidate.

Recall your history. Elections before the Civil War weren’t the media events they have devolved into today.

Here’s my thought; All elections in Arizona (except federal) shall be limited to 2x the annual salary of the office being run for. Election costs should be capped. There is no reason someone running for governor should be spending millions to baffle with bull sh*t voters in a run up to election day.

As for Haiti? Absolutely no connection intended other than to game the search engines.

The question is; Is Buz Mills a straw candidate for Jan Brewer to insure she receives matching funds – and is G.I. running opposition because they disapprove of Ms Brewer? Simple enough?

By: The Klute

The Klute — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:34:53 +0000

It’s a valiant attempt, DSW, I’ll give you that.

Also, why am I hearing about Shadegg’s retirement on HuffPo on not here?!?!?

By: DSW

DSW — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:52:33 +0000

Here’s my attempt to link the post to Obama and Haiti. Apparently, Obama has asked former President George W. Bush to lead the U.S. rescue effort in Haiti. What puzzles me (not about this post) is why would Obama ask Bush to head up the effort when Obama blamed Bush for the failure in Katrina?

Two posts for the price of one!

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:42:03 +0000

One of the more incoherent posts I’ve seen on SA. Setting aside the lack of a Katrina/Haita connection, Veritas makes it clear that he’s in favor of Clean Elections, unless a candidate he doesn’t like (i.e. Brewer) participates. Note: This IS her first attempt to run for Governor. You can at least atttempt to stay consistent within one post, VV!