In which I try to convince Bill Campana to vote for Dr. Richard Carmona.
So, this is going to be an interesting post. I hope parties involved will take any snark in the spirit intended, and not see this as condescending, or if it seems condescending, know that it's coming from a friendly place.
So earlier today, Bill voiced his opposition to Dr. Richard Carmona for Arizona Senator. I'm pretty sure this doesn't translate into support for the Republican opponent, but in an election as close as this one's going to be, not voting for Carmona will have the same effect as voting FOR Jeff Flake. The reason for this opposition, boils down to this ad:
Bill feels that this ad plays the Arizona voter for a sucker, in that the two current *Republican* Arizona Senators would never endorse the Democrat for Senate, and the ad is deceptively edited to make it seem as if they are doing just that.
First off, I'm going to disagree with that. Here are some stills of the add with my emphasis:
This quite clearly gives the context that Kyl is not talking about recommending Carmona for Senator, but for Surgeon General, under Bush the Lesser in 2002.
Throughout the ad, this appears as each of the Senators is speaking about Richard Carmona's credentials during the Surgeon General confirmation hearing. Again, throughout the ad, these are there to remind the viewer that this about Carmona as Surgeon General, NOT for as Senator. It even gives the date of "2002".
It is not meant to mislead, and in fact, the only way this could be construed as support for Carmona as Senator by McCain and Kyl is if you are not watching, but only listening to the ad (or have really bad eyesight, I suppose, but then, that's not Carmona's problem - he's not Surgeon General anymore).
Which brings me to my second point. The confirmation hearing for Carmona was held in 2002. In 2002, Bush the Lesser was President. The Senate majority was Republican. There was a 0% chance of Carmona's nomination NOT being accepted. So this is as unguarded a moment that you're going to get in the public face of American politics these days. Carmona had this ad produced for one simple reason: to try to show to the Arizona that the personal attacks against Carmona are bullshit politics. Carmona's been portrayed as a bully to women on his staff, a gladhander trying to secure perks if he ran for office (that one by Kyl himself), an unthinking "rubber stamp" for Obama, etc. This ad *specifically* counters that perception by showing that before Boy Wonder Flake decided he wanted to be Senator, McCain and Kyl were actual human beings with actual feelings about Dr. Carmona. And they were positive.
This isn't California or Vermont or some other liberal enclacve - if Carmona wants to win as a Democrat, he's got to show to the half of Republicans who haven't given themselves over to the "Baracky Bin Al-Hussein Sotero Shabazz NObama" faction of the Republican Party that he's could actually work with them.
Which takes me to my last point about the ad, if I'm wrong and it is indeed deceitful, your comment about how we shouldn't be like the other guys to win. Well, let me paraphrase Patrick Hare here:
Save it for the drum circle, hippie.
This is a high stakes election where control of the Senate is in play. Yeah, the Democrats will probably keep it, what with McCaskill, Donnelly, Warren, Nelson, Murphy, King, and Stabenow probably going to win, but nothing's assured, and going into the next legislative session, where Obamacare's surivival, immigration reform, climate change legislation, etc. are all going to be on the dock. I'd rather go into that fight having to pick off three or four Republicans to break a filibuster than 5 or 6. It's going to be a rough fucking fight, and if we have to play dirty to win (and I don't even think this qualifies as that dirty, if you're right), so be it.
We could be like the late George McGovern and be nice lose to Nixon, or we can be like LBJ and beat Goldwater to death with this:
If we had an ad like that against Flake, and I was Alexis Tameron, I would run that ad and not stop airing it.
So, why should you vote for Carmona on the issues? There's a shit-ton of retail political issues I could bring up (abortion, immigration, economic policy), negative attacks on Flake which you've heard (Flake supports uranium mining in/near the Grand Canyon, supports holding disaster relief funds contingent on cutting spending elsewhere BEFORE the funds are disseminated - hell, fucking Jeff Flake was against legislation to outlaw dog fighting, for Christ's sake), or just outright smears (the famous "I lied" comment about his support for term-limits or using taxpayer funds to go on vacation), but as all American politics revolve around it, let's just go with this:
Obamacare.
Carmona publicly supports it, in Arizona, and he's running for statewide office. This isn't Grivalja or Schwiekert running in their safe little districts with for or against positions already written in stone in the vox populi - he's supporting Obamacare in a state which elects Jan Brewer on a regular basis. That takes some stones, and it shows he's a man of integrity, placing principle before policy. And before anyone pipes in with "Yeah, well, he thinks it could be tweaked..." Yeah, yeah, blah blah blah. I also think it could be tweaked for the better, but he still supports it, so do I, and that's why he's getting my vote.
So. There we are. I welcome any feedback or debate on this, but I hope I've made the case for both Carmona and the ad.
Vote Quimby.
So earlier today, Bill voiced his opposition to Dr. Richard Carmona for Arizona Senator. I'm pretty sure this doesn't translate into support for the Republican opponent, but in an election as close as this one's going to be, not voting for Carmona will have the same effect as voting FOR Jeff Flake. The reason for this opposition, boils down to this ad:
Click to viewBill feels that this ad plays the Arizona voter for a sucker, in that the two current *Republican* Arizona Senators would never endorse the Democrat for Senate, and the ad is deceptively edited to make it seem as if they are doing just that.
First off, I'm going to disagree with that. Here are some stills of the add with my emphasis:
This quite clearly gives the context that Kyl is not talking about recommending Carmona for Senator, but for Surgeon General, under Bush the Lesser in 2002.
Throughout the ad, this appears as each of the Senators is speaking about Richard Carmona's credentials during the Surgeon General confirmation hearing. Again, throughout the ad, these are there to remind the viewer that this about Carmona as Surgeon General, NOT for as Senator. It even gives the date of "2002".
It is not meant to mislead, and in fact, the only way this could be construed as support for Carmona as Senator by McCain and Kyl is if you are not watching, but only listening to the ad (or have really bad eyesight, I suppose, but then, that's not Carmona's problem - he's not Surgeon General anymore).
Which brings me to my second point. The confirmation hearing for Carmona was held in 2002. In 2002, Bush the Lesser was President. The Senate majority was Republican. There was a 0% chance of Carmona's nomination NOT being accepted. So this is as unguarded a moment that you're going to get in the public face of American politics these days. Carmona had this ad produced for one simple reason: to try to show to the Arizona that the personal attacks against Carmona are bullshit politics. Carmona's been portrayed as a bully to women on his staff, a gladhander trying to secure perks if he ran for office (that one by Kyl himself), an unthinking "rubber stamp" for Obama, etc. This ad *specifically* counters that perception by showing that before Boy Wonder Flake decided he wanted to be Senator, McCain and Kyl were actual human beings with actual feelings about Dr. Carmona. And they were positive.
This isn't California or Vermont or some other liberal enclacve - if Carmona wants to win as a Democrat, he's got to show to the half of Republicans who haven't given themselves over to the "Baracky Bin Al-Hussein Sotero Shabazz NObama" faction of the Republican Party that he's could actually work with them.
Which takes me to my last point about the ad, if I'm wrong and it is indeed deceitful, your comment about how we shouldn't be like the other guys to win. Well, let me paraphrase Patrick Hare here:
Save it for the drum circle, hippie.
This is a high stakes election where control of the Senate is in play. Yeah, the Democrats will probably keep it, what with McCaskill, Donnelly, Warren, Nelson, Murphy, King, and Stabenow probably going to win, but nothing's assured, and going into the next legislative session, where Obamacare's surivival, immigration reform, climate change legislation, etc. are all going to be on the dock. I'd rather go into that fight having to pick off three or four Republicans to break a filibuster than 5 or 6. It's going to be a rough fucking fight, and if we have to play dirty to win (and I don't even think this qualifies as that dirty, if you're right), so be it.
We could be like the late George McGovern and be nice lose to Nixon, or we can be like LBJ and beat Goldwater to death with this:
If we had an ad like that against Flake, and I was Alexis Tameron, I would run that ad and not stop airing it.
So, why should you vote for Carmona on the issues? There's a shit-ton of retail political issues I could bring up (abortion, immigration, economic policy), negative attacks on Flake which you've heard (Flake supports uranium mining in/near the Grand Canyon, supports holding disaster relief funds contingent on cutting spending elsewhere BEFORE the funds are disseminated - hell, fucking Jeff Flake was against legislation to outlaw dog fighting, for Christ's sake), or just outright smears (the famous "I lied" comment about his support for term-limits or using taxpayer funds to go on vacation), but as all American politics revolve around it, let's just go with this:
Obamacare.
Carmona publicly supports it, in Arizona, and he's running for statewide office. This isn't Grivalja or Schwiekert running in their safe little districts with for or against positions already written in stone in the vox populi - he's supporting Obamacare in a state which elects Jan Brewer on a regular basis. That takes some stones, and it shows he's a man of integrity, placing principle before policy. And before anyone pipes in with "Yeah, well, he thinks it could be tweaked..." Yeah, yeah, blah blah blah. I also think it could be tweaked for the better, but he still supports it, so do I, and that's why he's getting my vote.
So. There we are. I welcome any feedback or debate on this, but I hope I've made the case for both Carmona and the ad.
Vote Quimby.