Selective civility.

Dear Friends,
 
There have been many voices heard over the last week, in Arizona, and the time has come to set the record straight.
 
Senator Jon Kyl was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1994 after a distinguished career in the U.S. House of Representatives beginning in 1987.  He has served Arizona well, by introducing legislation to make permanent President Bush’s tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, by helping to pass a bill guaranteeing the rights of crime victims and serving as the driving force behind the Arizona Water Settlements Act.  He was instrumental in the confirmation of John Roberts and Sam Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court.  He serves on the Senate Republican Leadership Committee and is the Chair of the Republican Policy Committee.
 
In addition to the current border security and immigration debate, there are several extremely important policy issues that will be considered by the Senate over the next several years.  These include our national security, a possible appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court, many federal judgeships, Social Security, and health care.  Having a Senator with the integrity and character of Jon Kyl in a leadership role will allow Republican principles to be included in the formation of national policy.
 
Our continued support of Senator Kyl is extremely important because of the leadership role he plays in the United States Senate.  To ensure passage of legislation in the Senate, 60 votes are required.  In order to block bad legislation from becoming law, 40 votes are necessary.  Senator Kyl is providing the leadership necessary to keep 40 or more Republicans together on important issues to prevent the Democratic majority from enacting bad law. 
 
We are Republicans. We discuss and sometimes we disagree. That does not mean we have to be disagreeable.  We don’t always walk hand-in-hand down every road.  But, we should head in the same direction.  We respect civility and we will continue to work together to solve issues. 
 
Thank you.
 
Judi White
Chair
Pima County Republican Party

(Judi, Nice job defending Senator Kyl. Sorry that we missed your e-mail defending the good name of Randy Graf while Steve Huffman was trashing him and distorting his record.)


Comments

  1. Oro Valley Dad says

    The above comment is very close to being deleted but instead will add a simple disclaimer: We have no interest in getting into a debate about O.J. Simpson and do not support mentioning O.J in any relation to Senator Kyl.

  2. John,

    It has become very clear that the concept of statesmanship and the reality of a diverse political landscape completely escapes the minds of simple folk who would rather spew venom than ever actually be a part of the process beyond their computer desk.

    Such out of control rhetoric serves no good purpose other than to completely expose your complete lack of judgment and thought. Humor yourself, but it reeks of hate.

    OVD & DSW,
    To allow it only incites more of the same.

  3. Sonoran Alliance says

    The Administrator of this website reserves the right to delete comments.

  4. Ann,
    I’ll look through past posts on this and other blogs, but I don’t recall you calling for civility when the venom was directed at Randy Graf last year.

  5. I was not aware of this site until late in the election cycle and actually only started to “blog” then.

  6. Oro Valley Dad says

    Ann,

    Fact – McCain uses the F-word when a fellow senator objects to the bill.

    Fact – Chertoff lies when he goes on the Sean Hannity radio show and says that the S-1348 was not negotiated in secret.

    Fact – Kyl accused Pederson of supporting amnesty for advocating an immigration plan similar to the one that Kyl now supports and Kyl ran on a clear no amnesty platform

    Fact – President Bush goes on the attach against people who have every right and reason to object to S-1348, stating they “don’t want to do what’s right for America.”

    Fact – Supporters of a compromise on illegal immigration accuse critics of the bill of nativism and racism.

    Some of us believe this is a “while Rome burns” moment and a few people who oppose S.1348 say things that do not help further the debate – just like many of the supporters of this bill.

  7. Ann and Judi,

    The problem with terms like Unity and Civility is they are usually used for by those who have a history of causing Disunity and Incivility in the past.

    I have seen Rob Haney, Randy Graf, Randy Pullen, Don Goldwater, Russell Pearce, Jack Harper and many other conservatives be treated horribly by some of the very people now calling for civility.

    Actually, I agree with the call for civility, but it should not be used only when convenient. It does aggravate a lot of people when the people calling for it have refused to give it over the last two years.

    One last thing, being civil does not include giving up one’s right to disagree – even with a United States Senator – even if he has a good track record previously.

  8. GOP PK: Thats because all those you listed as ‘conservatives’ are a bunch of loons! You forgot Ron Gold and Collette whats-her-name. Thats entertainment for you!!

  9. Ed

    So is that being civil? You have just proven the point that it is acceptable for the liberals to name call, make personal attacks and denigrate conservative elected officials, while at the same time demanding civility for the liberals.

    This is the same thing that happens in the voting booth. The “Wishies and Squishies” end up voting for Janet, Gabby, Pesqueira, Saradnik, DeSimone, etc, while demanding that conservatives support Unity and vote for candidates who oppose multiple major planks of the Party Platform.

    Double standards Ed are common with your folks, so I am sure you are very comfortable at your dinner parties.

  10. mad_as_hell says

    Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice…Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue. – Barry Goldwater

    Pardon my extremism while George *deleted by the editors.*

  11. Hey, what happened to my post? Geesh… Some thin skins here…

    *John, SA has one of the most liberal comment policies but we ask that you stick to logic and reason and avoid name calling.*

  12. So somebody posted something that offended Ann, she said it was hateful and threatened “more of the same” if it was allowed, and so you deleted it?

    Wow… Now I really want to see it!

  13. Ya’ll must be intimidated by Ann, the way you carry on. That post needed to be deleted, just because you are a good football does not mean you have character and integrity. Many professional athletes lack both.

  14. Confused here Lynn, mostly because they took down the post so we have no idea what we’re debating…

    Sounds like, from what you’re saying, John was arguing that because OJ was a good football [player] he had both character and integrity?

    What a wierd thing for him to say. What did that have to do with Kyl and Immigration?

  15. Oro Valley Dad says

    We deleted the post because it contained personal attacks and added little to the debate. It had nothing to do with Ann.

    Please read our mission statement “dedicated to … promoting conservative thought.”

  16. Rob Haney says

    The Republican base was not responsible for having squandered the political dominance we achieved in 2000. That credit goes to the Republican elected elites. The Republican base is not required to follow meekly and with civility this elite class as they take us into permanent minority status.

    We have an obligation to loudly object. Concern about civility is misplaced when the survival of our Country and Party is at stake. Emphasizing lack of civility is a misdirection strategy that comprehensive amnesty legislation proponents use to distract from the real issue of loss of sovereignty and country.

    I suppose we are to go to the graves of those Marines who died on Iwo Jimo and say, “We spoke softly and respectfully to Senators Kyl and McCain, but they wouldn’t listen to us. They would neither listen to the vast majority of our citizens who cried ‘Prove you will keep your word and enforce the border first.’ I’m sorry, the country you died to save for us is now ending. I spoke as respectfully and with all the civility I could muster, but to no avail.”

    There are a number of politician’s voices I reflexively mute because truth would be hard to find. They use to be all Democrats … Clintons, Leahy, Dodd, Kennedy, Biden. Now I find myself using the mute on Republicans for the same reason…McCain, Hagel, Graham, Specter, and now, sadly, Kyl.

    Senator Kyl has refused to recognize me for a question in a couple of his forums. I sense this is because the leadership of Dist 11 had the uncivility to be openly critical of many of Lord McCain’s votes, and to withstand the $20K campaign Kyl mounted to defeat us last November. I guess he fails to realize he is not only dissing me, but those who elected me. Quite uncivil, I would call that.

    I have tempered my emotion to argue with him because I have come to realize the response I would have heard would have been a misdirected sound bite anyway …”you can’t deport 12 million illegals, this is not amnesty, we will have triggers and border enforcement” etc.

    And we are supposed to be civil to this bunk? Oh, if only those Iwo Marines could rise from their graves to confront Kyl, et al. I wonder how civil they would be in defense of their country?

  17. Who did I personally attack? It was critical of Judi White’s double standard, nothing more, and it did so with parody, a form of comedy that has been used since the Roman Empire in political matters.

    I note your own little p.s. at the bottom of Judi’s letter where you write “(Judi, Nice job defending Senator Kyl. Sorry that we missed your e-mail defending the good name of Randy Graf while Steve Huffman was trashing him and distorting his record.)”

    So you can mock Judi and attack her with sarcasm, but parody? Out of the question.

    Are you prepared to now delete yourself? Somehow I doubt it…

    Too bad too, because it really was a clever post and the debate that would have followed would have been very interesting.

    Of course, we wouldn’t want THAT now, would we…

    You’ve burned me out OVD. I would have figured some leftie would have eventually worn me down. The same lesson keeps cropping up over and over again though doesn’t it. Its the friendly fire that kills you. You don’t expect bullets in the back.

    Peace out folks. I’m leaving the arena for awhile. Think I’ll go back to calling Kyl’s office. At least they listen before they hang up on me. Have fun y’all!

  18. OVD,

    First of all, I’ve been pretty straight forward on my personal preferences for President and Sen. McCain isn’t it. But, I will not speak poorly of him in such a way as to bring discredit to the party. Now, if he acts in such a way as to discredit himself, if he cannot disagree without resorting to name calling and obscenities then Sen. McCain will reap the fruit of his planting; whatever you sew you will reap. To be a name calling, anger riddled, reactionary will only expose him to receive a greater crop of the same. One seed produces much fruit and he may responsible for the action of planting a bumper crop. While I have no doubt the use of such vulgarity is commonplace, this particular time and place leave some questions about judgment.

    As to your other points; I did not hear Chertoff and have only read excerpts of the president’s statement. I worked on the Kyl campaign and know the immigration ad very well, however I believe in the process and giving it time to work. I have expressed my deep concern and areas of disagreement to Sen. Kyl and will continue to do so. Remember I am not a supporter of this bill but I am a Republican who does not want to see the actions of a faction of the party, in response to this bill, played out in the same way as Sen. McCain’s actions when he found something objectionable.

    GOP PK,

    I agree that civility should not be selectively entertained only to be disregarded when it is politically expedient. I am afraid that attack dog mentality has become to often the first choice of action rather than any sort of attempt to understand. I could cite occasions were actions of those in leadership have been offensive to me or my guests during campaigns. I could tell anecdotal accounts of intimidating actions by other “party leaders”. It serves no good purpose, but that it happened frames my perspective. If you have not had these experiences, then you may not be able to understand, but that does not make my reality any less valid.

    In case you are wondering, I have never been “squishy” and NEVER voted for any of those you listed. I will confess to having voted once (in over 30 years) for a Democrat….I won’t say who or when…. but it was along time ago!

  19. Oro Valley Dad says

    John,

    My comment at the end of Judi’s letter dealt with fact. Huffman ran a smear campaign against Graf and Judi was publicly silent. I know it sounded sarcastic but Judi actually wrote an excellent defense of Kyl and I was honestly sorry that she never held Huffman publicly accountable.

    Am I prepared to delete myself? Sorry, there are some perks to being one of the contributors of this blog. I am sorry that I have burned you out but I still think this is the most openly run conservative blog in Arizona.

    Ann,

    Sorry you missed Chertoff saying on the Hannity radio show that S.1348 was not worked out in secret. Please see the note above from John. Both sides are unhappy with this blog. It looks like Sonoran Alliance cannot even reach a compromise on how to moderate the discussion of this issue.

  20. Joe Baby says

    Chertoff, from his May 17 appearance on CNN’s “The Situation Room”:

    MICHAEL CHERTOFF, HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: You know, Wolf, first, I understand there’s some people who expect anything other than capital punishment is an amnesty. The reality is the proposal here requires people who came in illegally who want to stay to pay a penalty. Like a fine. That’s a punishment. That’s not an amnesty.

    Pres. Bush, today:

    Those determined to find fault with this bill will always be able to look at a narrow slice of it and find something they don’t like. If you want to kill the bill, if you don’t want to do what’s right for America, you can pick one little aspect out of it, you can use it to frighten people. Or you can show leadership and solve this problem once and for all, so the people who wear the uniform in this crowd can do the job we expect them to do.

    By the way, it’s worth reading all of the President’s statement today. It is an artful speech, which is the most civil thing I can say about it.

  21. OVD,

    You have made every attempt to express your discontent with this bill and those who would support it in a very logical and direct manner. The fact based evidence and objective evaluation has been very informative. You have not expressed yourself in anyway other than to expose the inadequacies and possible outcomes, any personal comments have been absolutely within the political parameters of commentary. You are to be commended.

    Did you read Fred Barnes commentary in the Weekly Standard? He speaks of Kyl and McCain as if they led the way for conservatives by removing some very damaging areas and including more restrictions. He holds that if the libs make the changes that Obama wants, Kyl will walk and the rest of the conservatives will follow.

    As to the removed post…This is a venue for personal commentary. That is what makes it interesting. If we all agreed it would be short lived and long forgotten. I would hope for reflection on the comments, recognition that this parody was not in the correct vein to be considered relevant, and that the analogy was past the point of reason. There is a lot to be said for the anonymity of this format; but to go beyond what is within the scope of the venue leaves the moderator no choice. I did express my concern. The timing of my reading your originating post made me the next person in line; I am sure others would have objected, too. I just happened to come across the scene first. It is not necessarily a poor reflection on the writer, sometimes a different set of eyes sees things in a whole different light.

  22. Ann,

    You said, “First of all, I’ve been pretty straight forward on my personal preferences for President and Sen. McCain isn’t it. But, I will not speak poorly of him in such a way as to bring discredit to the party.”

    I just want you and Judi to know that Reagan’s 11th Commandment as well as any shared desire for civility is NOT a suicide pact. We’re talking about the survival of our nation and its betrayal by a ruling elite. If some of the betrayers happen to be members of my own political party, I am NOT going to hold my fire when attacking the betrayal in which they are participating nor will I refrain from attacking them personally for participating in that betrayal.

    I voted for George Bush twice, I’ve always cast my vote for Senator Jon Kyl, and I’ve stood my ground to defend both of them from some pretty nasty attacks. In fact, I’ve personally stood with a small band of President Bush’s defenders in front of the White House in the face of thousands of hostile anti-war/anti-American protestors from groups like Code Pink, World Can’t Wait, ANSWER, etc.

    But this betrayal and sell out of America can’t be defended. It can’t be tolerated or condoned. I can’t remain silent nor even “civil” in my opposition to the betrayal he is perpetrating. And when Kyl now conspires with Kennedy and that whole bunch of socialist wretches, how else am I or anyone else who is paying attention and who know what is at stake supposed to react?

    Our only hope right now is that, like the Meiers debacle and the Dubai ports deal, we can make enough noise again to force President Bush to pay attention and back down. Any damage this does to any particular person or party is a natural consequence of that person or representatives of that party for associating themselves with this betrayal. If Kyl took a principled stand against this current amnesty plan, as he promised to, he would be aided when we bring it down. That he has thrown himself in front of the rhetorical bullets we’re firing at the legislation is his own fault.

  23. nightcrawler says

    Rob Haney has raised some valid points in his posts. Whether or not you like his delivery and/or passion is a matter of taste. I completely agree with him that the immigration crisis we all face will shape the future of this great nation for generations to come. The truth is that regardless of the outcome of this bill, twelve million undocumented people are already here and are having plenty of babies. It is just a matter of time before the majority becomes a minority and the very policies we now argue about equality and representation will be used on us. White flags are being flown in capitulation of principle and acknowledgement of defeat in the name of teamwork. There are two major and very separate issues at play. First secure the border. Second, what do we do with the people who are here ? There is absolutely no reason to debate the second until the first is implemented. Everything else is theatre. For those who remain and want a piece of this great nation they must be willing to atone for their trespass and transgression by either paying a financial debt and/or enlisting in our military. If you want to become a citizen you must renounce the citizenship of your country of origin. That is part of the deal. Where others see nothing but lemons, I see lemonade (not Kool-Aide). The people who have come across our southern border are indeed able-bodied and capable by the very virtue of surviving the heat, coyotes and other human predators. They are entrepreneurs and industrial. Most don’t come across to get on the dole, rather they come to work. Let us find a way to help ourselves by helping them. We are getting older, fatter and our military numbers are declining. Social security coffers could use a bit of a boost. Let’s put our minds together and figure this out. Again, after we SECURE the borders. The volume and spirit of the debate is not the issue, it is the outcome we must live with for generations to come. This is the issue of our lifetimes.

  24. h@x0r,

    You are absolutely correct and should not feel the need to defend what is your responsibility. My concern is not that Americans voice their positions to electeds who in turn are supposed to represent us; but in the party leadership taking a tone or putting into motion actions that are not only uncivil but derogatory and inflammatory. Your passionate belief in what is right has been demonstrated by your past actions; it should be expected to have the same passion when you feel the country has been let down, or our security at risk, especially by those you worked hard to put into office.

    If Joe average citizen wants to send letters with the most ardent feelings and words, as long as they don’t violate the law, is not only our right but sometimes our responsibility. If he takes a sign and marches around the front of every building Jon Kyl, John McCain, President Bush, or anyone else is in or has connections to, fine. Write letters to the editor, blog, send faxes, phone calls, you name it….go for it. Isn’t that what our country is about?

    I see a difference in those who chose to accept a position to be a representative of an organization and all of its members, and to encourage and support those we elect from within the party. Should the state leadership be the conduit for the feelings of the membership and advise the electeds of the “back home” furor; absolutely! Should they allow their ED to send emails encouraging someone to “please mobilize” & “many thanks for all you do” in respect to protests against Senator Kyl? The same activists who would be seen cutting up her membership card on television, after being made a person to watch by our party? Interestingly, her membership card was as an independent. That story never made the big screen but her antics aimed at Senator Kyl did. Should things like calling him the same as a pedophile be not only supported but encouraged by the state party? Should they choose a letter with the now infamous “middle finger” as the illustration of the public sentiment to hold up in front of the press? Should party leaders march in the same group as those with a large sign of Jon Kyl giving the “finger” and calling for resignations? NO! They are not free agents once they accept that position, their particular interests are not diminished but the manner in which they can be presented is not the same as the average citizen. The public persona of these individuals changes when they put on the hat of party leaders; they are no longer just Joe and Jane Smith, now they are LD 98 Chair Joe/Jane Smith, Republican activist John Doe becomes Republican Party Chair John Doe…they become the face and voice of ALL Republicans. Remember, an obligation they sought.

    I contend these actions are not just wrong but in dereliction of their duties to the members, not just the electeds. There will be a day after this bill; there will be another election and we will be facing a well organized and united opposition party with more money. A different approach would have presented Sen. Kyl with momentum for a stronger effort for the changes called for, improved the position of the party leadership, and provided the membership with a solid support system while sending the message of discontent. Our state party leadership could have handled this in a manner where all interests were given the attention and effort necessary; that did not happen.

  25. Excellent post, Ann. Great points, and I agree with you 100%.

  26. Ann,

    I think that every State GOP Chairman before Randy Pullen were the ones who were derelict in their duties. They were all puppets of the congressional delegation and didn’t care at all what grassroots, rank and file Republicans wanted. Randy Pullen was elected by the grassroots and he is doing a wonderful job in representing our wants and desires in the party. Your slanderous and baseless accusations against him notwithstanding, he is doing a wonderful job. He’s doing precisely what most people who voted for him put him there to do. For too long the elitist party leadership has ignored us or bullied us into submission of so many issues. The tide has turned and Randy Pullen is one indicator of that.

    You’ve been telling quite a few fibs about Randy Pullen’s actions. I, for one, am sick of it. For the record, I’m going to list below the lies and mischaracterizations that just came from your last post. They’re just an example of the many lies you’ve been telling on this blog and others. If anyone’s behavior and actions in response to Kyl and McCain’s support of this Senate bill need to be condemned it would be yours and Sproul’s. You’ve both been tag-teaming – Sproul lies in his local and national news appearances and statements and you lie in the political blogs.

    Your lies and mischaracterizations from just one, single post:

    1. ” but in the party leadership taking a tone or putting into motion actions that are not only uncivil but derogatory and inflammatory.”

    There was nothing wrong with Randy Pullen’s tone. He put into motion no actions which were uncivil, derogatory, or inflammatory. He, consistant with recent resolutions, expressed opposition to the Kennedy-written Senate bill and asked for Republicans to call ALL Senators – singling none out.

    2. “Should they allow their ED to send emails encouraging someone to “please mobilize” & “many thanks for all you do” in respect to protests against Senator Kyl?”

    The emails from the AZ GOP did not mobilize any protests against Sen. Kyl. It was a general call for opposition to the Senate bill and it had a list of ALL Senators’ phone numbers.

    3. “The same activists who would be seen cutting up her membership card on television, after being made a person to watch by our party? Interestingly, her membership card was as an independent.”

    Unless Michelle Delacrocce, to whom I believe you are referring, is a Republican, then she didn’t get the Randy Pullen email from the AZ GOP. You say that she was registered Independent. You can’t have it both ways. Further, Pullen did NOT ask anyone to go onto national TV or cut up their party membership cards. He simply asked that they call ALL Senators and express opposition to the Kennedy-written Senate bill.

    4. “Should things like calling him the same as a pedophile be not only supported but encouraged by the state party?”

    The State Party has never supported nor encouraged anyone to call Senator Kyl anything, let along calling him the same as a pedophile.

    5. “Should party leaders march in the same group as those with a large sign of Jon Kyl giving the “finger” and calling for resignations?”

    None of the Arizona Republican Party leaders have marked in those groups, as far as I know. Anyway, LD and PC leaders are free to do whatever they want as long as they they’re not doing so as an official representative of the party or their particular party sub-organization.

    6. “Our state party leadership could have handled this in a manner where all interests were given the attention and effort necessary; that did not happen.”

    If Randy Pullen was not the State Party Chairman, then state party leadership would have been puppeting President Bush’s attacks against Republican opponents to the bill. They would have turned a deaf ear to any of our complaints against McCain and Kyl’s complicity in promoting the Kennedy-written amnesty scam. This kind of fight is precisely why and the rest of the people who support Randy Pullen voted for him for National Committeeman and supported him as Party Chair. He’s doing exactly what we put him for and his position and behavior have been consistant with the party platform and traditional Republican principles. I applaud Randy Pullen and his principled stand on this issue in the face of hysterical criticism and attacks from the Sproulite wing of the party

  27. h@x0r,

    I will overlook your personal attacks and merely stick to the point: As to your issues listed:

    1. That is a point of personal perspective and not an objective comment. It was clearly viewed by many to be an act intended to showcase a level of discontent with Senator Kyl as represented with an obscene gesture, hence painting the picture of making that gesture to Senator Kyl. Only my opinion, which by the way is just as allowable and just important as yours.
    2. An email(s) went to Michelle Delacrocce from the ED with the statements I quoted. It was not the blast that went out to all members on the email list serve. It was specific and directed to her and her ability to organize a concerted effort. This had been reported on other sites, AZ 8th has details.
    3. I have addressed the email already. As for the position of attention she garnered during the initial days, the encouragement from the AZ GOP ED certainly helped her along. Her notoriety was indeed escalated; beyond that the actual lengths to which the ED went to make her seen is unknown. It is known that he encouraged her and was aware of her antics.
    4. Again, see items 2 and 3. Same issue.
    5. “None of the Arizona Republican Party leaders have marched (sic) in those groups, as far as I know. Anyway, LD and PC leaders are free to do whatever they want as long as they they’re not doing so as an official representative of the party or their particular party sub-organization.” Your perspective; however I disagree with Rob Haney in the press carrying a sign that says “Deport McCain” in the same group as the “finger” poster. He chose to be a representative of the party, from that point on all he does is categorized according to his position. You want to be a free agent, fine…don’t run for a party position. What about the PC’s that went on the Janet for Gov site? According to your statement did they have the right to do so? Haney would so, NO! Goose and gander in action.
    6. Leadership is not about being the loudest just the most effective. Your supposition that to do other than Pullen did would be acting as a puppet expresses a limit on the ability to think beyond the obvious.

    Once again, despite what you think is my Nathan Sproul connection; I assure I am not representing anything other than my own ideas and opinions. I may have met Nathan, I can’t really remember for sure. I know we have been in the same place at the same time and I was told who he was. But, I have not ever had a conversation with him, did not listen in on his conference call, and am not a proxy for him in anyway. I find it interesting that you would limit the free thoughts of others in opposition to yours as only possible if associated with someone for which you have little regard.

  28. Ann said: “An email(s) went to Michelle Delacrocce from the ED with the statements I quoted. It was not the blast that went out to all members on the email list serve. It was specific and directed to her and her ability to organize a concerted effort. This had been reported on other sites, AZ 8th has details.

    I read the blogs and I have not seen this stuff that you’re claiming. I searched Arizona 8th, ThinkRightAZ, HotAZItGets, PoliticoMafioso, Espresso Pundit, etc. and there’s not a single mention of Michelle Dalacrocce and this alleged email from the AZ GOP Executive Director that I can find. I scoured Arizona 8th and see nothing of the sort of thing that you claim. Maybe you made it up. Maybe you did read it somewhere. This wouldn’t be the first time you’ve posted rumors and falsehoods as if they were true. Provide a link or something and we can discuss the credibility of that report.

  29. I apologize, the site was “ThinkRight”

    “Monday, May 28, 2007
    Lisa James Letter in Support of Jon Kyl
    In regards to Lisa James’ recent letter…

    A different blog, Hot AZ it Gets states that the letter’s claim that the state party is encouraging those to rise up against Kyl is a lie is simply not true. I have received the emails that Lisa describes. One email (not from the state party but from a vocal anti-illegal immigration activist) calls for a recall and likens Senator Kyl to a pedophile priest. An email was sent out from the AZ GOP Exec Director to that same activist, stating “please mobilize” & “many thanks for all you do” the next day. Encouraging those to recall our great Senator or that compare him to a pedophile is fine if you are an activist and that’s is how you feel; but, the state party must support our elected officials, not openly rail against them….”

  30. Ann and others continue to beat this dead horse, trying to make these things real.

    The fact is that the Party has continued to stay focused on registering voters (several registration drives took place last weekend) raising money and growing the party.

    You all can keep living in the past and trying to throw darts to damage the party, but the rest of us are moving forward, without you. Not a surprise there.

    By the way Ann, how many voters did you register this week?

  31. Hey Tim,

    How much money did the party raise in April?

  32. How would I know?

  33. So when I reply to a request for information or respond to a statement that is accusatory without ground on a thread that is also being fed by others in oppositon to my stance, I am beating a dead horse. And, if it hits too close to home just switch the focus and make a personal jab. Now, that’s clever and so original!

    Tim, I actually keep a supply of voter registration forms in my office and register voters on an ongoing basis.

  34. Ann! The blogs that you mention simply posted Lisa James’ divisive letter continuing the baseless Sproulite attacks against our State Party Chairman. They say nothing about the MAIA/Dallacroce letters that you claim. You’ve proven nothing except that you’re willing to continue your campaign to undermine our State Party Chairman with your exaggerations and smears.

  35. OK, let’s try this again. This is the WHOLE post on ThinkRight… if you want to keep up with your denials, go ahead it doesn’t make it so. Perhaps you only read the heading and didn’t actually READ the post. Which has proven nothing but your continual jumping to conclusions and inserting your own version of reality without giving any substance to the possibilty that others may also have value, followed by your personal attacks and distortions. To help you out, I have changed to caps the part I referenced:

    Monday, May 28, 2007
    Lisa James Letter in Support of Jon Kyl
    In regards to Lisa James’ recent letter…

    A different blog, Hot AZ it Gets states that the letter’s claim that the state party is encouraging those to rise up against Kyl is a lie is simply not true. I HAVE RECEIVED THE EMAILS THAT LISA DESCRIBES. ONE EMAIL (NOT FROM THE STATE PARTY BUT FROM A VOCAL ANTI-ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION ACTIVIST) CALLS FOR A RECALL AND LIKENS SENATOR KYL TO A PEDOPHILE PRIEST. AN EMAIL WAS SENT OUT FROM THE AZ GOP EXEC DIRECTOR TO THAT SAME ACTIVIST, STATING “PLEASE MOBILIZE” & “MANY THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO” THE NEXT DAY. ENCOURAGING THOSE TO RECALL OUR GREAT SENATOR OR THAT COMPARE HIM TO A PEDOPHILE IS FINE IF YOU ARE AN ACTIVIST AND THAT’S IS HOW YOU FEEL; BUT, THE STATE PARTY MUST SUPPORT OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS, NOT OPENLY RAIL AGAINST THEM. (emphasis added) The state party should not be spending it’s resources attacking our good Senator. If the folks at the state party level want to be anti-illegal immigration activists ahead of being Republican activists, that is fine, resign from their positions and become anti-illegal immigration activists. As leaders of the AZ GOP, they must put the party first and be vocal supporters of our elected Senators Kyl & McCain. Putting the party first means supporting those Republicans that are already elected, raising money and growing the grass roots.

    I speak with folks that aren’t like me everyday in the business world and right now they can’t believe our tone against Senator Kyl. I’d urge the AZ GOP to focus on the real issue- that Democrats hold majorities in the House & in the Senate and we’ll get bad legislation unless we get control back. That means focus on building strong relationships with our elected officials, help to make them more influential, raise money and get the grass roots growing. People want to be involved with folks that are pleasant to each other, especially in disagreement.

    Another quick note to all: this is not your father’s Arizona. With the changing Demographics, people moving here from CA, OR, & WA, we must be careful. Those new Arizonans are used to electing Democrats and this state can easily turn Blue in 2008. If they see angry mobs burning their party’s great senators in effigy, they will not take us seriously or want to have anything to do with us.

    Here’s Lisa letter:

    Dear Friend,

    Senator Jon Kyl, our U.S. Senator, is under attack for doing the very job we sent him to Washington to do. We did not send him to be a placeholder until Republicans regain control of the Senate. We sent him to represent us to the best of his ability and to make sure conservatives have a seat at the table. He has done an exceptional job for us over the past 20 years just as he has with his work on the proposed immigration legislation.

    Unfortunately, the Arizona Republican Party is doing nothing to stop hateful, personal attacks. In fact, the Party is actually encouraging this divisive and reprehensible behavior. Rather than promoting our Party they are busy holding press conferences displaying obscene pictures. Rather than defending someone who is attempting to make something good from something terrible, they encourage the bad behavior of those calling for a recall and accusing Senator Kyl of treason.

    In fact, they have gone beyond Arizona to national television to make their point. I note, with much disappointment, that there were no AZ GOP alerts to respond to Janet Napolitano’s Op Ed in the Republic–only alerts to promote Chairman Pullen and his reaction to Jon Kyl and the bill itself.

    Setting aside the content of the bill – and how many of us have even read this document from cover to cover? – Jon Kyl is a fine man, a statesman. We are fortunate to have such a voice representing us in the U.S. Senate. In fact, I know that you joined me in working hard toward his landslide victory just this past November. (http://www2.nationalreview.com/dest/2007/05/19/immigrationdraft051807.pdf )

    At the very least, if our Chairman doesn’t support the bill, and he has every right not to do so, he should remain publicly neutral. He should demonstrate leadership by denouncing those slinging personal attacks on a Senator with 96.9 percent lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union and publicly state his personal support for Jon Kyl.

    Here is what we believe as Republicans, as articulated in our Party Platform:

    “As Republicans, we know who we are and what we believe. As the Party of the open door, while steadfast in our commitment to our ideals, we respect and accept that members of our Party can have deeply held and sometimes differing views . This diversity is a source of strength, not a sign of weakness, and so we welcome into our ranks all who may hold differing positions. We commit to resolve our differences with civility, trust, and mutual respect, and to affirm the common goals and beliefs that unite us.” (Republican Party Platform, 2004, page 83, emphasis added)

    The most emotional debate we have had in the party within my lifetime has been the debate over abortion. As someone completely committed to life, I have worked for pro-life candidates since my time as a delegate with Phyllis Schlafly for Jack Kemp in 1988. As a Party, we have had a great history of debating issues internally in primaries and at conventions, but once we have a nominee or an office-holder, we unite to work to elect and support them.

    Clearly, the immigration issue is the new inter-party challenge we face. We don’t all agree on how to solve the problem, and we all have a duty to voice our opinion to elected officials. The process with the current immigration bill is far from over and there will be much discussion about all aspects of the legislation. However, personal attacks that question Senator Kyl’s integrity, and call for his resignation or recall are completely contrary to the principles of our great party.

    Please join me in writing letters, making phone calls and sending emails to your lists to encourage the Arizona GOP to unite, rather than divide, registered Republicans. We can have a healthy debate about the issue, but attacking Senator Kyl only hurts our Party.

    Thank you for your time and your action.

    Respectfully,
    Lisa James

    Posted by thinkright at 11:50 PM

  36. Oro Valley Dad says

    Ann,

    We love having you as a reader and appreciate your comments. Please remember the whole point of the Internet and HTML is to use links. An example is below.

    http://thinkrightaz.blogspot.com/2007/05/lisa-james-letter-in-support-of-jon-kyl.html

  37. Except Ann still hasn’t produced the email from the state party HQ employee. She is repeating heresay and claiming it as fact.

    The fact that you heard from somebody who heard from somebody who read somewhere that somebody read somewhere isn’t proof of anything. You were asked to produce the email or real evidence of it.

    A rumor from one blog being used to support an attack in another blog isn’t exactly rock-solid.

    Lastly, while playing the victim might work in the real world, depending on your circumstances and the gullibility of your friends, anyone here can re-read my post and see that it certainly doesn’t qualify as a “personal attack”, no matter how thin your skin might be.

    My point, which you did not respond to, was that you’re still arguing old news, and that the Party HQ has already moved on and is engaged in doing its entire job. You’re welcome to come along and chip in, or you can stay here and argue about issues that are nearly two weeks old. You seem to have decided to keep banging away.

    I’m not judging or attacking you, just pointing it out. If your actions paint an unflattering portrait of you, don’t blame the artist. I just paint what we all see.

  38. Ann,

    The post says nothing about Dallacroce, as you claimed. It doesn’t include the alleged email, as you claimed. And it attempts some bizarre guilt by association tactic that is like playing Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon. A blogger claims to have seen an email from an unnamed person who compares Sen. Kyl to a pedophile priest. That blogger also claims to have seen a completely separate email from the same or another person that was sent THE NEXT DAY from the GOP Executive Director (no mention of whether that email came from his AZGOP account or if it was a private correspondence) that was to the unnamed sender of the original email (the one that had the pedophile priest comment). And that somehow this email, received by the unnamed recipient and encouraging more phone calls and opposition to the Kennedy-written amnesty bill reflects poorly upon Randy Pullen who sent none of the emails that you or the blogger mentions.

    If anything is making the party look bad and is dividing the party it is the rumors and lies being spread by the sore loser opposition to Randy Pullen. This is a Nathanista plan to undermine Pullen to take back over the state party leadership. You’re either a witting participant or a useful idiot as you help spread Sproul’s rumors on several blogs.

    And your insinuation of some sort of alliance between Dallacroce and the AZ GOP leadership is ludicrous. I suggest that you read the recent scathing attacks from Dallacroce against Pullen and the AZ GOP leadership for NOT attacking Kyl.

  39. Oh boy, where to start? How about this, it appears that no matter what or how it is presented this is one of those times when it is better to just let it go. The choice of who can be believed, who has the right to an opinion, the selective acceptance of facts leaves me with no other option than to say…so long to this thread. The original post with Judi White’s letter asking for a stop to the name calling as a part of the disagreement was on Tuesday the 29th, this is Thursday the 31st. I agree, this has gone on too long.

  40. Ann,

    Yes…the rumors, lies, and distortions from you, the James’, and Nathan Sproul have gone on far too long.

    You all are dead set on hurting Randy Pullen and it appears that no amount of truth or reason will stop your jihad against him.

    Namecalling? I don’t know if you’ve actually called Pullen any names, but I do know that you’ve tried to associate him with Dallacroce and her “pedophile priest” comment. That’s worse than calling him a bad name, it is smearing his good name.

  41. Eyes on West Washington says

    I want to see the OJ post! lol…

    Do you know how long this thread could have been if we were actually talking about something?

    Bring back the OJ post! Long live the first amendment!

  42. ThinkRight says

    thanks for talking about my post. I do have the emails I posted about and may post them in the future. But, for now, let’s give the state party a fair shot to lead the entire party, not just one portion of it.
    Cheers!

Leave a Reply