Tucson Sammy

With all the talk of impact fees and trash taxes in this campaign for City Council, no one has mentioned the issue of civil rights; specifically, the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Now, I understand that some might feel uncomfortable in defining the umbrella of “Civil Rights” as to include anything other than oppression based on race. Fine. Gun control laws are rooted in racism. That’s right, most of the “gun control” laws on the books today are remnant “Jim Crow” laws. They were enacted to keep black people defenseless, in their place, and available for lynching. After the Civil War, Tennessee and Arkansas banned inexpensive handguns (sound familiar?) figuring that they were the only type poor black people could afford. The very term “Saturday Night Special” is a sanitized adaptation of the phrase “N—–town Saturday Night”.

The Civil Rights movement of the fifties and sixties led to the repeal of most of those despicable laws that targeted black people – most, but not the gun laws, which are now expanded to apply to everyone except politicians, rich lawyers, Hollywood celebrities, and criminals.

Not to be left out, the Federal Government passed into law the Gun Control Act of 1968. United States Senator Thomas Dodd (Chris Dodd’s father) participated in post World War II tribunals in Germany. He developed quite a collection of Nazi law. In fact, it was the Nazi Gun Control Act of 1938 that he sent to the Library of Congress for translation, and then introduced on the floor of the Senate as the U.S. Gun Control Law of 1968. A law that he felt was necessary after witnessing widespread rioting in mostly black neighborhoods after the assassination of Dr. King. This has been well documented by the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership.

Feel comfortable now?

There is an irresistible, though dishonest, template with which the anti-rights crowd attacks gun shows. Irresistible because attacking gun shows gives them a shot at gun ownership, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly all in one action – a threefer!

Our local example involves the McMann/Roadrunner Gun Show that for years has been held at the Civic Center downtown. The local anti-rights crowd, using the template, tried to shut it down. The National Rifle Association sued the City on behalf of McMann/Roadrunner and lost. The fight went from the courts to the council. Republicans Dunbar, Ronstadt, and Democrat Shirley Scott sided with preserving the right. The Democrats generally voted to infringe upon the right. The Democrats were joined by Republican Mayor Uncle Bob Walkup, who went to heroic lengths to kill the show – but that is a story for another election cycle.

Dunbar and Ronstadt have a pro-rights record. Records speak louder than words. We really need to hear from the Democrat challengers, Uhlich and Trasoff. In the unlikely event that they are pro-rights, I would like to hear it from them. Now, I know that not all Democrats are against gun rights, but last time I checked, Zell Miller was not running for Tucson City Council.

The question needs to be asked because it goes way beyond gun ownership. It goes to the heart of the relationship between the government and the citizenry, in our community and our country. A politician’s position on this issue reveals how he or she sees his or her constituents – as latent criminals waiting to happen or fellow citizens, as rabble in need of control or fellow Tucsonans proud to be responsible for themselves and their families.

If you get a chance between now to November eighth, ask the Democrat challengers where they stand on “gun control”. Their simple answer will tell us so much.

I was writing an email to a friend today in which I actually expressed sympathy for Democrat candidates Karin Uhlich and Nina Trasoff. Both women are running in City races for the first time. They are running against two incumbents – Republicans Kathleen Dunbar and Fred Ronstadt respectively.

The good news for Uhlich and Trasoff is that Tucson has far more registered Democrats than Republicans, and people tend to vote their party. The bad news is that the Republicans have good records, and no scandals. Obviously, the Republicans have been successful in earning more than a few crossover votes. When they speak in public, the Republicans trot out all their good works over the last four years, and the Democrats whine about the “direction” of Tucson, and unseen sinister forces.

Oddly, given all that, the races are pretty close. I can’t account for that, other than True-Believer Democrat hatred for Republicans. It’s an interesting phenomenon. They seem to live in an alternate universe of their own creation where Republicans are the bought dogs of big business and grind the poor under their boot heels in their spare time. I heard a Ward III resident who lives near Campbell and Grant complain that the use of Campbell Avenue as an expressway for foothills commuters was a problem that “our councilmember doesn’t seem to understand.” Yet it was Dunbar’s office that helped form the Campbell Avenue Merchants Association, and installed signalized crosswalks on that Campbell Avenue itself. Even stranger, in a letter to the editor, the author implied that both Barbara Bush and Fred Ronstadt were racists because the used the words “those people” on separate occasions. Gosh, I hope Fred’s family doesn’t find this out, those people will be shocked!

It occurred to me that all this foam-at-the-mouth parallel universe stuff was primarily ginned up at the national level. Maybe there is some other tactic up there – at the national level – that our underprivileged Democrat candidates might use. Then it hit me! Barbara LaWall is a Democrat! Get her to indict ‘em! All of ‘em! Staff, family, and pets too! Progressive majority, here we come!

Having attended four candidate debates, I’m beginning to detect patterns. My heart truly goes out to Democrats Uhlich and Trasoff. They have their work cut out for them in trying to find fault with Republicans Dunbar and Ronstadt. Their complaints end up being either petty or false. The rest of the time they make vague assertions about “powerful interests”, “leadership”, “values”, and “losing our sense of place.”

The Trasoff campaign in particular seems to be depending on undifferentiated Democrat hatred toward Republicans. She has little understanding of how the Tucson City government works, and seldom fails to provide Ronstadt with proof of that fact. She is also devoid of any positive plan, goal, or scheme. The least she could do is borrow something from another Democrat; you know, like Jimmy Carter’s plan to give every man, woman, and child a thousand dollars to stimulate the economy. If all the voters saw all the forums, Ronstadt would win in a landslide.

If nothing else, Uhlich is a class act. She is always calm and thoughtful in her speech. Quite stoic in an Austrian sort of way. She should probably have waited four more years to run. Tucson has had quite a bargain in the indefatigable Dunbar who puts in more than full time hours in the technically part time job of councilman. Rumor has it that Uhlich will keep her day job. Speaking of which, can Uhlich make the switch from special interest advocate to councilman after decades in that field? The Democrats accuse the Republicans of being divisive, but no one has united more people – including former political enemies – behind her than Dunbar. Uhlich and Dunbar are two strong, capable, and dynamic women. I’m going to hate to see one loose.

Councilman-for-life Steve Leal added some color to a recent forum when he called the state legislators “cretins” because the didn’t want to “register” Sudafed consumers. He suggested that Tucson should tell those pesky lawmakers to go have sex with themselves and start our own municipal registration program and “let them sue us.” He made no suggestion as to how the eighty-some-odd per cent of the meth that is imported to Tucson be controlled. Hey! I have an idea! Maybe Steve should get in touch with the Department of Homeland Security! I mean, we’re already conditioned to accept warrantless searches at airports, federal spying on our financial transactions, federal bans on political speech, and host of other stuff. It’s not much of a stretch to register Sudafed consumers – hell, he could probably get federal funding for it! From there, the program could be expanded to include the registering of consumers of adult beverages, fast food, tobacco products, sexually oriented products and literature, and readers of blogs! Man, he could make bad behavior come to a grinding halt! Steve also complained that the bus shelters have advertising, which means that bus shelters are only being built where people want to advertise, not where the bus riders are….surprisingly, I was the only one who laughed.

On Sunday, October 16, the Arizona Daily Red Star delivered its endorsements for the City Council contests. I’ll cut to the punchline; they endorsed Kathleen Dunbar and Nina Trasoff.

I was a little leery (no, not the Timothy kind) at first when they opened up by saying the following:

“All four agree on one thing, though, labeling themselves not as members of any party but as transcendent ‘progressives.’”

Please, there is very little “transcendent” about political campaigns. Perhaps the South Park Avenue commissars are trying to protect us from the harsh realities. The term “progressive” is code for “commie/socialist”. Now, few people will vote for a commie or a socialist, but they just might vote for a progressive if he gave them free medicine and warehoused their children for them.

The candidacy of George McGovern in 1972 is considered by many to mark the point at which the Leftists finally seized control of the Democrat Party. McGovern was a member of the Progressive Party before joining the Democrats.

When Trasoff stated publicly that the Democrats want to create a “progressive majority” on the council, she did not have any Republicans in mind.

Fred Ronstadt, Trasoff’s opponent, understood that, given the five to three voter registration advantage the Democrats have in our fair city, he could not allow her to use codewords to rally her base; so, he’s been using “progressive majority” to refer to the current makeup of the council. Right on Fred! Two points for Team Ronstadt!

Anyway, the point is that all the candidates are excruciatingly aware of party affiliation. It’s the Blue County reality that is giving the Democrats hope and motivating their get-out-the-vote efforts, and keeping the Republicans speaking in terms of individuals.

After examining and interviewing Trasoff, the South Park Avenue folks compiled all of her talents, insights, and solutions to Tucson’s problems that voters would find compelling, and stated the following:

“We believe Democrat Nina Trasoff is right for the job, too, as a candidate who can bring fresh perspective to the council and a capacity to balance the competing interests of a diverse and growing city”

Uh…O.K. She’s a Democrat. Is that what you meant to say? From there, they went on to list he shortcomings.

As you might imagine, they found plenty wrong with Ronstadt – wrong from their perspective that is. For example:

“Ronstadt continues his pattern of driving a wedge between the governments of Tucson and Pima County at a time when a new spirit of cooperation is emerging between these two local governments.”

Last time I checked, Ronstadt supported the Regional Transportation Authority, so he is hip to the new spirit; and if blowing the whistle on the theft of money by the County for road improvements (22nd Street) is “driving a wedge”, well, give him a bigger mallet.

“Last week, in an interview with the Star editorial board, he reiterated his opposition to an ultimately successful county bond package in May 2004, which provided money for projects including an emergency communications system and the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan.

Ronstadt objected to the process, he said, and complained that too little was allocated for emergency communications. He stood virtually alone among community leaders in his opposition to the bonds, demonstrating a troubling inability to compromise on such a historic step forward.”

Well, one man’s “inability to compromise” is another man’s standing on principle and conviction amidst a wave of “progressive” insanity.

It’s difficult to adequately describe the achievements of Kathleen Dunbar. Let me just point out that she has won over most of the neighborhood leaders who campaigned passionately against her four years ago – including Vicki Hart, and the late Judi Stern to name a couple. Take a few minutes to contemplate all the implications of that achievement alone.

Other than being a leftist, I can find nothing wrong with Karin Unlich. In fact, I admire her for the decades of work that she has performed in service to our community. She has chosen a tough candidate to oppose. She really appears to be grasping at straws as she tries to find problems with Dunbar. Even the South Park Editorial Board, in one sentence, seems to acknowledge both her Leftism, and her desperation to find something with which to criticize Dunbar.

“She also goes overboard on Dunbar’s ties with the business community, speaking in ominous tones of any alliance with this vital segment of the Tucson community.”

So there you have it. One right, one wrong. Better than I expected.

By the way, in an effort to accentuate the positive, I wish to congratulate Steve Leal for changing his mind and not using his matching funds tax money as soft money after all.

More to come!

The Tucson Citizen – Tucson’s quaint little afternoon newspaper – published their endorsements for the current City Council race. Ho-hum. I noticed that they endorsed Karin Uhlich over incumbent Kathleen Dunbar. My curiosity piqued, I read the column. Frankly, they are tripping to hard.

First let me say that I agree with their assessment of Mrs. Dunbar:

“Republican Kathleen Dunbar is the constituent service champion, with a record of achievement in infrastructure improvement, the fight against urban blight and responsiveness to businesses in the North Side ward during her four-year term.”

So far, so good. Then I read this sort of Timothy Leary description Ms. Uhlich:

“Challenger Karin Uhlich, a Democrat, demonstrates big-picture thinking and a record of accomplishment in the realm of service for Tucson’s downtrodden. She talks of a vision of improvement for a city badly in need of unifying political leadership.”

Now, it is certainly true that Ms. Ulich has distinguished herself in her service to the poor at both the Primavera Foundation, and the Southwest Center for Economic Integrity. I just don’t get the leap from narrow special interest advocate to political unifier and visionary.

Both Ms. Uhlich and Mrs. Trasoff do share a short term vision of unifying the city’s political leadership under the jackboot of a “progressive majority”. Perhaps that is the type of unifying the Citizen staff has in mind as they gaze through the window pane.

How about the following:

“Her call for making city government responsive to and inclusive of residents. For example, Uhlich says, residents would have had a say under her in implementing a garbage collection fee reasonably.”

You know, I haven’t done acid in thirty years … or is it the lack of punctuation? Maybe it reads better outside in the yellow sunshine.

Anyway, speaking of jackboots, check this out:

“Dunbar is a Johnny-come-lately to the anti-meth effort. While her help in cleaning up 300 drug houses in her ward is laudable, she missed the boat on meth controls, kowtowing to the retail lobby and weakly linking the registration of Sudafed purchasers to potential identity theft.”

That’s right, they’re criticizing her for having reservations concerning the registration of Sudafed purchasers! Hey, back in the 1960’s they used to say “Register communists, not allergy sufferers!” … or something like that; and please, the notion that the first person to hold a Town Hall on the “meth problem” is a “Johnny-come-lately” is absurd.

The guys down at the Citizen ought to forget the blotter, play a few tracks from “Wake of the Flood,” drink some orange juice, and revisit this thing later.

Karin Uhlich has done a stellar job as an advocate. Kathleen Dunbar has done a stellar job as a councilman. May they both continue to do so.

Last week, one of my agents attended a Southern Arizona Lodging and Resort Association (SALARA) luncheon. Instead of the usual guest speaker, they hosted a candidate forum. Kathleen Dunbar, Fred Ronstadt, Nina Trasoff, and Karin Uhlich attended. Steve Leal did not attend. Two Democrats and two Republicans, at least it would be a fair fight.

Now, there was no fighting actually, and no feathers flew, but there were definitely two enemy camps present that day. The event was at a conference room at the Doubletree Inn on South Alvernon Way. About thirty people attended. Except for the candidates, the audience was almost exclusively from the Hotel/Lodging industry. The first candidates to arrive were Trasoff and Uhlich, who sat together at one of the five circular tables. Ronstadt and Dunbar arrived separately, and ended up sitting together at a different table. Both groups were close enough to each other to launch attacks with small arms – including bladed weapons.

The poor MC clearly had now prior experience with politicians. She actually said, “Each candidate will have five or ten minutes to speak.” Now, this is like saying to a junkie, “I’m going to give you five or ten grams of heroine…” at which point the junkie grabs the speaker by the collar and screams, “Which is it!? Five or ten!?! I need to know now!”

Continuing on, the MC invited Trasoff to speak first. The perky Trasoff smiled and started rummaging through her briefcase. She paused, and started rummaging some more. She mumbled, “I can’t find my notes; I left my notes on my desk,” then, addressing the MC, she explained that she did not have her notes, and perhaps someone else should go first. The MC, sounding as if she knew that she was out of her depth, tentatively invited Dunbar to start. Dunbar, apparently sensing some sort of sneaky Democrat trick, declined and remain glued to her chair. There was a protracted awkward silence, then, perhaps in desperation, the MC asked Uhlich if she would like to start. Uhlich smiled, popped out of her seat, and saved the day.

The short speeches were predictable. The Republican incumbents told of the great job they were doing and cited examples. The Democrat challengers told of their respective backgrounds, and of the stinky job the Republicans were doing – also citing examples. All the candidates included some form of the phrase “…and I don’t have to tell you how important that is to your industry!” No real fights ensued, though Ronstadt did use the phrase “That’s a lie, and I have the documents on the table to prove it.”

Trasoff waved around a old pamphlet that was used to sell the Rio Nuevo project to the voters, and complained that the current plan resembles little the concept-plan that they approved. She should really avoid doing that, it makes her appear terribly naïve. Speaking of predictable, Trasoff uttered the usual “respect”, and “multiculturalism” buzz words, and accused the Republicans of trying to balance the budget “on the backs of children and families,” blah, blah, blah.

Interestingly, Ronstadt used the term “Progressive Majority” no fewer than three times when referring to the Republicans and others on the City Council. Now, we all know that “progressive” is a code word for “commie”, so what was Ronstadt smoking? Ahh! But wait, this phrase, “Progressive Majority” has been used by Trasoff to describe the goal of the Democrats regarding the makeup of the new City Council after the Democrats are elected. Could Ronstadt be commandeering the phrase, taking it from Trasoff? My agent asked Nina if she thought this might be the case, and she just looked at him as if he were the naïve one.

Uhlich is amazing. She is always “on”, always cool, never flustered, and she misses nothing. She spoke of “The link between quality of life and the economy.” We agree that increased prosperity can be a heap big factor in the “quality of life” – particularly for those at the lower income levels. We find it strange, however, that the Southwest Center for Economic Integrity – for whom Uhlrich is the Executive Director – advocates “minimum wage” and “living wage” laws that hurt entry level workers by pricing them out of the labor market. Surely she understands this; after all, she has been working with homeless and low-income people for decades – both at the Southwest Center for Economic Integrity, and at the Primavera Foundation. I’ll make a note to ask her about that one.

More to come!