Engaged indeed.

Saturn1.jpg     There is a new blog out there covering Gabby’s love life. Somehow I do not think this is part of her authorized biography.


  1. She’s a Democrat, which means she’s not going to lose any Democrat votes over this. If she were a Republican, then she would pay a price, but Democrats don’t care about this stuff.

  2. Just like some very rabid anti-Gabby Democrats before the primary, some of Randy’s supporters are starting to foam at the mouth as the reality of what will happen to their candidate on Election Day becomes more and more apparent. I am 100% certain that he would disdain this website because, even though I disagree with his views, I have always thought of Randy as a person of character and class.

    As for Gabby, she has distinguished herself since declaring her candidacy by the positive, issues-oriented manner in which she has conducted herself. In an election year rife with stories about ugly attack ads and under the radar rumormongering, Southern Arizonans can be proud that our next member of Congress did not say or do anything just to get elected.

    On the subject of that latter point and looking at a different race, it gave me great pleasure to read that Pete Hershberger referred to fellow Republican as an “extremist” in a recent article in the Northwest Explorer. The reporter said that Al has toned down his attacks on Pete since the primary made them part of the same ticket in a lame attempt to get ALL Republicans to support his reactionary views. Pete was having none of it and tagged Al Melvin for what he is, even as Al tries to redefine himself for the general election.

  3. She wouldn’t pay a price for this anyway, since they didn’t start dating until 2004 — after Kelly was divorced.

  4. Putting out into the public sphere unsubstantiated nasty rumors/speculations is slimy. And there has been plenty of that during this election cycle around the country. This is indicative of a lack of substantive objections to the candidates they opppose AND extremely low ethics.

  5. Rex-

    You said: “Southern Arizonans can be proud that our next member of Congress did not say or do anything just to get elected.” I’ll thank you on behalf of Randy, since I’m still confident that he will win, and he’s the only one who could be described by that statement. Let’s see, what has little Ms. Giffords said and done just to get elected. Well, she did a TV ad during the Primary which the Daily Star Ad Watch proved was a lie. Giffords currently has an Ad out on TV saying that Randy Graf opposes Stem-Cell research, also a lie. And Ms. Giffords just put out a Press Release on Friday saying that “Randy Graf Wants to Eliminate Medicare.” Also, a lie, so I believe that you must have been talking about Randy Graf, when you made that statement. Giffords has spent the entire campaign lying. She didn’t answer the questions during the debates. She even lied to the Democratic base in order to get the nomination by saying that she wanted to pull troops out of Iraq by the end of 2007. Now, she says, “Oh that was just a goal. We should all have goals.” Giffords has proved one thing for sure, she is such a liar that she belongs in Washington. I just hope that she doesn’t go there as our next Congressman, and I’m confident that the voters will have seen enough of her lying through her teeth that they will say “Sorry Gabby, Washington’s already got enough crooks!”

  6. As for RedNeckFreek or redcardphreek or whatever your name is:

    Wouldn’t placing blame on Randy for this thing coming up now be as bad as this whole rumor if its not true. I mean, from what Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion said, this was a rumor that was already floating around even during the Democratic Primary. Anybody, including a Dem who was upset at Gabby for some reason could have started this whole rumor.


    If you’re right that: “She wouldn’t pay a price for this anyway, since they didn’t start dating until 2004 — after Kelly was divorced” then this whole thing is a very below the belt charge against Gabby. I kind of would like to get a timeline though on the whole thing now, since it’s out there.

  7. 206-

    1. The ad during the primary told the truth. Senators and representatives who were there during the 2003 buget debacle refuted the story written by a cub reporter who did not do his homework. Giffords stopped a bad budget.

    2. Randy opposes embryonic stem cell research and his position with regard to adult stem cell lines being a plausible alternative for medical reserach into cures for serious diseases has been refuted by the National Institute of Health.

    3. Randy’s statements on Medicare speak for themselves. I realize you may not like it when your candidate’s words come back to haunt him, but they have on that issue big time.

    4. Graf has misstated Giffords’ position on immigration in his ads and that is a proven fact. “Amnesty” is a scary buzz word deisgned to incite a reaction, but that is not Gabby’s position. Hers is virtually the same as Bush and McCain’s. It is Randy who has isolated himself on that issue by offering unworkable ideas that would cost millions and not make us safer.

    5. Last, throwing the word “liar” around and referring to a 36-year old woman who has held office in both the Arizona House and Senate as “little Miss Giffords” reveals you to be nothing but a cheap shot artist with a five cent vocabulary.

  8. Rex,

    You are the one who has it WRONG!

    Randy does not oppose embryonic stem cell research; he is opposed to FEDERAL FUNDING of embryonic stem cell research. If there is such promise to this research why don’t we let Amgen and Genentech fund it instead of the taxpayers? Surly they are interested in a cure to all those diseases? What is wrong with letting the private sector fund this “promising new science?”

  9. OVD,

    You are correct Graf opposes Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Of course, federal funding is THE major source of biology research money, so this is a big hit.

    Further, the reasoning he gives is simply wrong from a scientific standpoint. I’d have a lot more respect for his views if he just came out and said “I oppose this research on religious grounds”. I’d still disagree with him, but at least he wouldn’t be misleading people (intentionally or not) about the state of the scientific research in in the field.

    Given the reasons he DOES give for his position, he is either:

    a. Unaware of the actual science involved in this important field, or

    b. Intentionally making misleading statements about the state of science in the field.

    Either is bad.

  10. You still did not answer my question. If the potential is so promising why doesn’t the private sector want to develop all these miracle cures? Please answer the question.

  11. Rex-

    1. The ad during the primary did not tell the truth. In fact, it was an out-and-out lie. Senators and representatives who defended her were obviously trying to defend their presumptive Democratic nominee, and they too were lying. Anyone else there, would have been there to witness her missing the vote on the actual bill. This means that her not voting actually caused the bill to pass. The whole reason why she made the commercial in the first place is because she has a record of ZERO accomplishments for which she can be proud. Also, proof that the ad was a lie is the fact that she pulled the ad shortly after the Daily Star Ad Watch ran. Giffords did not stop a bad budget. The Republican budget still went through.

    2. You’re right that Randy opposes embryonic stem cell research, but he’d only vote against the federal funding for embryonic and would leave it up to the states and the people to ban the practice outright. You’re wrong that cures from adult stem cell lines and cord blood stem cell lines have been refuted as plausible alternatives by the NIH. What is irrefutable is that we become savages the moment that we start producing human life solely for the purpose of destroying that life for the benefit of someone else. That doesn’t take a religion to realize. I mean, who’s to say that you deserve your lungs or heart more than some other person with more money or more fame or that we can’t just use poor human adults or children for spare parts. Maybe, we’ll just take those things from these people that aren’t necessary to live like arms or legs. But where does it stop? Liberals are truly sick if they really want to create humans for the purpose of spare parts or to kill them in order to make someone else more comfortable or cure someone else’s ailment or disease. Do liberals even understand what the word ethics means?

    3. Randy’s statements on Medicare were absolutely taken out of context by a sloppy reporter from the Red Star. Even the quotes that were taken out of context don’t make sense in the context of getting rid or Medicare. But they do make sense in the context that was intended, which was to reform Medicare.

    4. Graf has not misstated Giffords’ position on immigration in his ads. Gabby supports “Amnesty.” The debate over whether “amnesty” is a good thing is one thing, but she can’t say that she does not support amnesty. You say that Gabby’s position “is virtually the same as Bush and McCain’s.” Once again, AMNESTY! Bush and McCain’s support of amnesty is one of the reasons that the conservative Republican base of the Party is so pissed at Republicans in general this year. Randy may have isolated himself on the immigration issue from those immigration clowns, but not from reality. Randy seems to be the only one who understands the problem in the first place. The rest, including lil Miss Giffords, are still in denial that a problem exists in the first place.

    5. Last, throwing the word “liar” around and referring to a 36-year old woman who has held office in both the Arizona House and Senate as “little Miss Giffords” reveals you to be nothing but a cheap shot artist with a five cent vocabulary. [To this I say, I just called her “lil” Miss Giffords instead, does that now give me a three cent vocabulary?]

  12. As the former Executive Director of Arizona Right to Life, I will tell you that Embryonic Stem Cell Research has produced absolutely NO cures for any disease. (http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/treatments.htm) Why in the world would we pour our tax dollars into something that does NOT work. (Graf is smart enough to know this.) Why can’t you ESCR supporters do your homework and come to realize that ESCR is a terrible investment and a breach of ethics?

  13. Wow, revisionist history, junk science and self-delusion all in one post, 206. I love it! The only point I will cede is that you are right about Prop 206. I voted against it, too. 🙂

    The GOP budget most assuredly did not pass in 2003. Slade Mead and Linda Binder defied their caucus and a budget Janet could sign was crafted and passed. Gabby helped to ensure that outcome by her parliamentary maneuvering. By the way, I love how you call our local paper the Daily Star when they help to make your “case,” but the RED Star when you’re upset with how they cover Graf.

    The embryos you strive so hard to defend are frequently thrown away by fertility clinics. No one is talking about creating them and then using them for research; rather, the goal is to utlize embryos that are otherwise destroyed. I don’t get the objection, no matter when you think life begins. This is a matter of conscience and urgency as the medical community has strongly asserted. Federal funding is the main source of research money into what could be a source for cures to several horrible diseases. Shane’s “homework” asks us to refer to biased sources that seek to substitute ideology for science. Moreover, many Republicans (more reasons to throw the epithet RINO around and further alienate once-loyal Republicans, I guess) support the use of embryonic stem cells and all the rest (Randy included) are falling over themselves trying to straddle the fence on this issue so they don’t piss off the base and the independents they need to win the general election.

    Please continue to be upset with your president and senior senator and the business community over immigration. I am sure the Minutemen and Tom Tancredo will provide you with the answers you seek to a complex problem that defies simple solutions. Graf has gone from calling for mass deportations to asserting that people will self-deport if we make things hard enough on them. He hits hard on this issue because he calculates that it will get him votes, but his ideas are nonsensical and immature.

    Last, it does my heart good to see the GOP break into these internecine feuds over stem cell research, immigration, the deficit and a host of other issues. Those on the hard right have decided they have the responsibility to define what it means to be a loyal member of one of America’s two major parties for everyone else. You are making your party a marginalized, exclusive, intolerant and shrinking clan. It’s no wonder that Janet and Gabby are attracting so much support from disgruntled GOP voters in this state and that independents are backing Democrats 2 to 1 across the country. The optimism and inclusiveness of Reagan and the first Bush (BOTH OF WHOM I VOTED FOR!) has been cast aside in favor of the poltics of fear, division and arrogance.


    When someone is forgiven for a crime, ANY CRIME, it is an amnesty.

    Giffords IS a liar..a sequential, in your face liar. She looks and acts like Daddy’s little girl and apparently expects to get away with anything…Oh, isn’t that cute? Well it is past time to grow up…at 36.

  15. prop206iscancer..

    it is redcardphreek, the ability to read is a beautiful thing is it not?

    Too bad you lack it.

  16. I’m pretty sure that I read correctly. I’m sorry that you didn’t catch the humor. Sometimes people give themselves online names that sound similar to things that might be more appropriate. Since I’m sure that you think that the Republican Party is “the Party of the Rich,” I only find it appropriate to assume that most rednecks must be Democrats. No offense. Cheers! 😀

  17. It took Edison over 1,000 tries to invent the light bulb – who’s to say that embryonic stem cell research won’t be useful.

    Oh – but apparently, one embronic stem cell is more important than 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians according to pro-lifers like Shane.

  18. I need to check these boards more often to reply to posts, I guess.

    Pinkiris, from an Oct. 2, 2006 story in Salon about the CD8 campaign:

    Graf is now emphasizing an array of perils he says are rising from the south. In an interview with Salon, Graf said his campaign is “about securing this border to stop the drugs, terrorism, the human tragedy of people dying in the desert, and the influx of three or four or five million illegal aliens a year who are just walking across the border.”

    Graf scoffs at any proposal to grant legal status to illegal immigrants already working inside the country. He says he wants the border sealed shut and that he would deport the estimated 12 million illegals now living and working in America.

    So as recently as a month ago, Graf was advocating mass deportation of illegals.

    Also within the last month, after AZ Rep. Russell Pearce made statements in favor of mass deportation, Graf explicitly said he shared Pearce’s views regarding border control.


    You can’t rely on private funding for such matters, as provate firms are primarily motivated by profit. If a firm had to sink in all the up front costs, it’s possible they wouldn’t see profit at all, or if they did it would take too long.

    Many studies have shown this effect of profit concerns as related to even promising research possibilities. Public funding alleviates this, as the public good counts for more than simple profit.


    What you don’t mention is that serious funding for ESCR has only been about for a little over five years (and that research has been hamstrung by limits the Bush administration put in effect).

    By the time the base research is done, some clinical animal trials done and published, then approval for human tests, then some limited human tests, followed by publication and analysis of _those_ papers, you’re talking about a 10-12 year process at best.

    Of course, given your former position you are well aware of this … you’re just trying to be intentionally misleading and hoping no one knows enough to call you on it.

  19. Scott,

    Welcome aboard, again. It’s nasty duty, but someone has to do.

    Facts don’t make much difference in the world of the Sonoran Alliance, nor do logic and reason. And while there are a lot of Christian poseurs hereabout, the Gospels and Epistles don’t carry much water, either.

    Villany, villification, and vituperation; rumor and innuendo; a kind of perverse sexuality obsessed with sniffing the privates of strangers; the transmission of unsubstantiated gossip (some might call it bearing false witness); regardless of the parable of the good Samaritan an unremitting hostility to the “other”;

    and, as you point out in the case of pinkris, OVD, and Shane, a complete disregard for truth, as though John 8:31-32 had never been said; or ignoring that, and this I believe to be at the heart of their lying for secular advantage, as if freedom wasn’t a Christian value.

    But they’re swell people, and give them power and they’ll make sure all the rest of us are just as good as they are.

  20. prop206iscancer,

    Oh, I caught the humor, but smart ass remarks are not beneath me.

    I am a registered Democrat, but as shocking as this may seem, in the past I have probably voted more Republican then Democrat. Not this year though, probably will be a straight Democratic ticket with one or two exceptions.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *