Sonoran Alliance Tapped as Countervailing View to Liberal’s Picks on Ballot Propositions


Thanks to Rachel Alexander, I was interviewed by KJZZ (aka NPR) as a conservative counterpoint to Victor Aranow’s picks (Vic’s Picks) on the ballot propositions. Sonoran Alliance gets a mention in the piece, so, I’m sharing it here.  I wish the piece had been longer, but take a listen!

Link to NPR interview on ballot propositions

Also, Shane appeared on KJZZ today giving his views on the best run campaign, the biggest possible shocker race in Arizona, etc.  Hopefully Shane will share that piece with us soon.

And here it is featuring political journalists, consultants and pundits from across the spectrum.


Comments

  1. But you support Prop 112.

    Conservatives are voting NO on 112.

  2. Marcus Kelley says:

    Observe,
    At best, there’s a fracture among conservatives on support for Prop. 112. the Maricopa Party EGC, which has some pretty rabid conservatives on it, supports Prop. 112. I know Rachel Alexander, a conservative, also supports 112. On the other hand, Lynne Weaver, a conservative I respect, opposes Prop. 112.

    I support Prop. 112 because it gives those who wish to challenge petition signatures more time to verify the 230K signatures needed for citizen initiatives. I’m also not a fan of direct democracy and neither were our Founders…they gave us a Republic, a bi-cameral legislature, Senators chosen by state legislatures, longer terms in the Senate, an Electoral College, and they bowed to the states’ limited franchises. Arizonans have a HORRIBLE track record when it comes to voting on initiatives: Clean Elections, term limits, First Things First, Prop. 100, buying into the lies about the use of tobacco settlement money for education, budget overrides, voting for bonds, etc. I also support Prop. 112 because we know that liberal petition companies like Arizona Petition Partners LOVE to submit fraudulent petition signatures. Prop. 112 serves as a check on all the negative things I listed above. Hopefully, Lynne Weaver and the conservatives who may disagree with me won’t hold it against me if I respectfully disagree with them.

  3. Oberserve says:

    Marcus, cut the crap.

    Conservatives don’t give more power to the state and take constitutional power away from the citizens.

    You say it gives power to citizens to “challenge”. Bull.

    It sqarely puts the initiative power into the hands of those who can pay for it and away from true citizens initiatives.

    The CITIZEN initiative process is an important check and balance on the state legislature.

    EVERY SINGLE prop on the 2010 ballot was put on by the legislature this year except one which will not pass.

    You support that and want to continue that trend.

    Only big unions, lobbyists, special interests and professional politicians and their sycophants support 112.

  4. Mr. Marcus,
    That was good clip. Good job, great plug, and you provided a lot of information that listeners, if they so choose can look up and review at their leisure, unlike El Vic who was pulling opinions out of his ahh … er… hat.

    But, gah! NPR has been blithely running DNC talking points under the guise of uber vapid political “analysis” supposedly generated out of some “restaurant” and “fortune tellers” for TEN years? Seriously? And is there something about guys named “Vic” that they have to have that accent? Well …yes, if “Vic” is a ‘character’ not a real person, just a vehicle for the talking points, the narrative.

    Aanyway, the more people hear Conservative rhetoric, straight talk and facts, the more they will be more cognizant of the patent phoniness and manipulations of the Liberal Left narrative.

  5. Marcus Kelley says:

    @Wanumba
    Many thanks.

    @Observe
    There’s no crap to be cut. I disagree with you that CONSERVATIVES, who wish to PRESERVE the intent of our Founders, are ready proponents of direct democracy, aka mob-ocracy. Remember the analogy about the Senate being a “cooling saucer” to the passions of the people? Our Founders were VERY wary of passions and emotions controlling the votes of the masses and boy can’t we see that in the results of many of our ballot propositions in the past here in Arizona. For that matter, Plato had a cogent attack on democracy as well and reasoned that a republic, which is what we have and are GUARANTEED in the constitution, is the best possible form of government.

    True citizen initiatives…like the Pot proposition that’s sponsored by out-of-state individuals? Like Clean Elections which was sponsored by Californians? No thanks, Observe. I can do without non-Arizonans meddling in our initiative process or in our politics in general.

    As for initiatives truly sponsored by Arizona citizens, if something is popular, it will get the volunteers it needs to collect and verify signatures.

    As for signature verification, it’s an incredibly important part of the process. If someone like the Democrat-owned Arizona Petition Partners is forging signatures, then initiatives may get on the ballot that have no popular support, and they may be able to foist on the people initiatives that never should have seen the light of day.

    We have signature requirements for a reason. They keep crank candidates with no support or chance for success off the ballot. They cut down on the background noise in elections so we can focus on real candidates that have at least a snowball’s chance of winning.

    Important check on the state legislature? Like so tying the legislature’s hands on spending that they can’t balance the budget? No thanks, Observe. Who’s supposed to have the power of the purse, Observe? The legislative bodies? The executive branch? The judiciary? The electorate? The answer is the legislature, yet the voters have almost entirely stripped that power from the legislature. That’s perverse and it’s a fundamental betrayal of our Founders’ principles. If anyone needs to be checked, it’s the mob at the polls, just like our Founders understood.

    You have this anti-legislative bias, Observe, and I share that, but we come at it from different directions. You seek to utterly bypass the state legislature and have direct rule by the people on all issues. I have an anti-legislative bias because they’ve showed a lack of spine. They’ve failed to stand up to the Governor, past and present, on multiple occasions. They’ve spent WORSE than drunken sailors. Your solution? Direct Democracy. My solution? Elections to throw the bums out so we can replace them with conservatives that have the will to fight our Governors, moderate Republicans, and democrats. Who follows our generally accepted form of government and who’s out on a limb?

    You’re incorrect about who supports 112. I fall into exactly ZERO of the categories you’ve listed. Neither does Rachel Alexander or the Maricopa Party EGC. I’ve been a conservative that’s been entirely critical of moderate Republicans and Democrats for years on this blog. Anyone saying I’m anything less than rabidly conservative is patently and demonstrably wrong.

    I stand with the notions of the Founders. You stand with anarchists and those who believe in mob rule. You think the misguided passions of the people are good. I don’t. I think the people all too easily buy into false advertisement, like that fed to them about Clean Elections. You somehow find wisdom in the horrid votes by Arizonans.

    In short, Observe, I utterly reject any “points” you’ve made. I see no logical support for your assertions.

Speak Your Mind

*