Sinema is still ignoring me, by the way, apparently hoping I prove to be irrelevant. After all, I don't have big bucks to throw around to entice her. Maybe her hope will bear out, maybe not.
But there sure was a lot of interest in my last blog post. Please note that I had and have no illusion that my criticism of the freshman Congresswoman will at all hinder her quest for re-election. She's not been graced with a primary election opponent. And both Republicans vying for the GOP nomination to oppose Sinema, Wendy Rogers and Andrew Walter, appear to be very weak opponents.
My concern in the post was and is with a guy that has no business running for a seat in the Arizona House as a Democrat. It's all well and good for any voter to register with whichever party (or no party) as they see fit. That's not what bothers me. I'm concerned with Bauer's entire approach to civic responsibility and how his professional affiliations reveal what those voters can reasonably expect from him in the event LD24 voters buy his bullshit.
Another important caveat I must mention: in general, I favor unions. Working people have and should continue to have the right to organize -- as illustrated by this cartoon which I modified a few months ago when we were dealing with SB1062.
No, my concern at this time about Richard Bauer relates to his associations. I'll give you an example I believe is problematic.
Friends of Arizona sent out a mailer supporting Richard Bauer over his opponent, Ken Clark.
It's a nice positive campaign piece. The first problem however, is that it's not necessarily true or factual when it implies that Richard Bauer is "real people with real experience in the real world..."
Richard Bauer worked for the government. That's not the real world of needing to figure out how to create jobs, which the other side of the mailer says will be Bauer's top priority. But he has ZERO experience in anything that could suggest he has any personal insight on how to promote job growth. What he DOES have, however, is long time affiliation with an organization that vigorously courts Arizona legislative Republicans for mutual back scratching (not limited to rational Republicans)*.
We know that Republicans believe job growth comes from cutting taxes and eliminating regulation. They completely overlook the fact that without customers, businesses, especially small businesses, cannot expand and take on new workers. So, it's very reasonable to figure an elected Richard Bauer would be voting solidly with the Republicans on anything they claim is good for the economy. Except that it won't be good for most Arizonans.
Bauer also is emphatically NOT a leader who has demonstrated willingness to "fight for all the people, the working class and the middle class..."
Richard Bauer failed, for many years, to fight the fight that matters for Phoenix voters. Democrats have, for years in Arizona lost elections because low efficacy voters like Bauer couldn't find one half hour of one day out of a month available to vote early or on election day. Bauer did not vote in some elections in which City of Phoenix ballot measures on fiscal issues were at stake.
Yet, he and his Dark Money advocate want you to believe that he knows how and has never failed to fight for you. Their claims are just not true.
By the way, WHO IS/ARE the Friends of Arizona? A great idea for a group to aggregate money to focus on electing Democrats, right? Maybe. If the organization advocates for easily bought candidates at the expense of experienced, principled candidates, that's not necessarily good.
Again, WHO IS/ARE the Friends of Arizona? It is an organization incorporated by Mario E Diaz.
By the way, Mario says,
Friends of Arizona believes strongly that protecting every Arizonan’s right to vote is the absolute cornerstone of our state. Protecting this right means not only maintaining current voting participation, but also expanding access to the polls for residents of every background. Besides expanding access to the voting booth to as many people as possible, we believe a better-informed community produces a better functioning and more transparent state government.Except that by pushing Bauer, Mario advocates for someone who has let his right-to-vote atrophy for lack of exercise.
In this case, we know that Mario Diaz also boasts endorsement (testimonial) from former Republican state Sen. Robert Blendu. Blendu was a key player in the proposal to build a trash burning facility in the West Valley so that Mohave County could get credit for renewable energy. Diaz was also an advocate for the Payday Loan industry, supporting Prop 200 in 2008. Voters saw through the predatory lending industry and defeated Prop 200 by a margin of 40.4 to 59.6 percent of the vote.
Ken Clark was an outspoken advocate of defeating the payday loan industry. For Mario, there seems to be evidence this is a personal battle. After my previous blog post, other readers suggested that Sinema might also have some personal animosity toward Clark. I don't have any evidence of that, but it's certainly possible.
My last point tonight is that Diaz and his Friends of Arizona last month sent a mailer out touting Catherine Miranda in the primary election over Aaron Marquez for the LD27 state senate seat. We already know that Arizona Public Service has its hooks in Miranda.
For me, the bottom line is that organized people beat organized money (see the cartoon, above). But we have to be highly determined and persistent.
* On the Firefighters' website, the list of endorsements includes several irrational legislative Republicans, including Andy Biggshot, Rusty Bowers (a former lawmaker running again after several terms not serving), Sonny Borelli, Steve Yarbrough (who is nothing but a Cathi Herrod tool who likes to skim taxpayer funds for himself), Paul Boyer, Debbie Lesko (state chair for ALEC), etc.
Apparently trying to signal they don't intend to be intimidated by a pipsqueak blogger, both Mario Diaz and Sean Noble retweeted my tweet last night (7-27-14) announcing my other blog post on this Dark Money situation. Both Diaz and Noble, after all, are alpha males, or believe themselves to be anyway.
Even more notable is that I received an email from Creators Syndicate today complaining about my use of Mike Luckovich's political cartoon. Gee, I wonder who tipped them off to that. Anyway, the note I received was a typical cease and desist demand that I remove the cartoon or face the threat of legal action. Ooooh. I'm shaking in my boots. (NOT).
So, I replied asserting the Fair Use Doctrine. The subsequent reply (from Creators Syndicate) to my assertion said:
If you are claiming fair use you cannot alter the original cartoon. Please replace the one you currently have posted with the original cartoon or it needs to be removed.So, in the spirit of FAIRness, I now present you with what I understand to be the unaltered version of Lukovich's cartoon.
You can see that the version I put up when I first published this blog post remains true in essence and character to Luckovich's original. Since the Fair Use Doctrine permits use for criticism and comment,
Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair. (emphasis mine)I decline to remove the original, retaining it for criticism and comment purposes to show comparison and contrast between the two. As you can see, there is negligible difference. Primarily, I include Cathi Herrod as the stand-in for the GOP. Herrod is widely known and understood at the Arizona Capitol to exert outsized influence on lawmaking here. She is known to dominate the GOP caucuses in the legislature. I also tweaked the labeling of the group of fish organized for defense. I believe my adaptation retains the essential meaning of Luckovich's original.
- The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
- The nature of the copyrighted work
- The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
- The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work
So, nice try Mario and/or Sean and/or your surrogates. You have done a fine job of connecting yourselves together for purposes of informing Arizona voters. But you fail to intimidate me into silence.
Power to Arizona voters -- to make properly informed decisions -- rather than being hoodwinked by Dark Money operators -- about for whom to cast their votes!