Conventional wisdom generally holds that the Phoenix metropolitan area is much more conservative than the Tucson metropolitan area, usually attributed to the voter registration numbers. When it comes to polling, you would expect Republicans to fare better in Phoenix than in Tucson and vice versa for Democrats. A look at the composition of the legislature validates those assumptions.

So what is up with the SurveyUSA numbers for the Senate race and Bush's approve/disapprove divide?

On Setember 19, SUSA published the tracking results of their latest statewide polls of the races for Governor and Senator, on behalf of KPNX-TV. Not surprisingly, Janet leads Munsil in all three regions ("Tucson & South AZ", "Phoenix Metro", "Rest of AZ"), but her largest lead - 19 points - is in the Phoenix Metro region. What is more confusing to me, and I've already commented on it here, is that Kyl leads Pederson in the Tucson & South AZ region by 16 points. They're statistically tied in the Phoenix Metro region, with Pederson actually up by two. We don't usually get to see these kinds of cross-tabs in most independent polls released to the general public, so these numbers are difficult to verify with other polling outfits.

I thought maybe these regional results were just a fluke, so I looked at SUSA's Arizona numbers for their monthly presidential approval poll for September. Bush is at 43%/55% approve/disapprove statewide. He is exactly tied 50%/50% in the Tucson and South AZ region and suffers his greatest deficit in the Phoenix Metro region, where 40% of respondents approved of the job he is doing as President and a whopping 58% disapprove.

Don't these numbers seem topsy-turvy to anyone else? Bush should have abysmal ratings in Tucson. Pederson should be trouncing Kyl here. Janet's lead should be bigger here than in Phoenix. Is the conventional wisdom wrong, or are these polls? Am I missing something? Am I reading too much into it? Please discuss in the comments. I'd really like to hear some plausible explanations, because I'm at a loss.

Here's an interesting tidbit from Women's E-News Cheers and Jeers of the Week:

Between 1991 and 2004, Arizona girls gave birth to more than 158,300 children, costing taxpayers $3.7 billion and at least $268 million a year, reported the Tucson Citizen Sept. 26, on data drawn from the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy. However, during that same period, teen births declined nationally by 23 percent. The state's annual funding for abstinence-until-marriage programs peaked at $4 million.

Arizona has one of the most restrictive and offensive laws in the nation. ARS 15-716, "Instruction on acquired immune deficiency syndrome; department assistance", spells out what school districts may and may not talk about. This is essentially what the sex education curriculum in Arizona schools may include. While the law does say that instruction should "be medically accurate", "discourage drug abuse", and "dispel myths regarding transmission of" HIV, the law also says instruction must "promote abstinence". Unfortunately, while not necessarily mutually exclusive, "medically accurate" and "promote[s] abstinence" do conflict in the ways current curriculum are currently implemented. And when that happens in Arizona, "medically accurate" generally loses. The "offensive" part of the law comes in paragraph C of the law. You can go to the statute page itself to read what I'm talking about. Needless to say, the philosophy is: if you don't have anything negative to say about LGBT people, say nothing at all.

There are many other problems with this law. That it addresses pregnancy in the context of AIDS education, that it does not address any other sexually transmitted infections, that it is profoundly homophobic, that it does not address sexual consent. According to Arizona education law, sex is something to be stigmatized and problematized. Teachers cannot talk about the healthy and fulfilling aspects of sexual activity. There is so much scientific evidence readily available to support a revision of this law, you have to wonder what's taking us so long to go on the offensive?

There is another statute, ARS 15-711, that mandates that sex education curricula include a component on sexual conduct with a minor for students in grades seven through twelve, which I can assure you is not happening in any substantive way. Sexual conduct with a minor, as defined in ARS 13-1405, is a class 2 felony if the minor is younger than 15 and a class 6 felony if 15 years old or older. Since most teenage girls who become pregnant were impregnated by adult men (usually in their early to mid-twenties), schools could be doing a much better job of teaching their students about sexual conduct with a minor, as they are mandated to do by law. I know this because in just about every classrooms in those grades that I've visited as an anti-sexual violence educator over the past four years, I was the first person to ever talk about age of consent and other related topics. The school districts are not fulfilling the requirements of that particular statute.

The current laws (or their implementation) are clearly failing Arizona's youth. How can they make informed decisions about their own health and well-being when they are receiving only a very limited amount of information from school. Coupled with omnipresent media that provides unhealthy and unrealistic models for gender and sexuality, it's no wonder Arizona's teen pregnancy rate rose exponentially between 1991 and 2004. It's time for a change to our state sex education laws and how they're implemented.

I was out of town and without internet access all day today presenting at a conference in Casa Grande, so I'm just catching up on the Rep. Foley resignation story now.

Let me get this out of the way from the start: child sexual abuse crosses all boundaries, including party lines. The fact that a grown man in his fifties, regardless of his political stripe, engages in sexually explicit internet dialogue with a 16-year-old boy is reprehensible. If I see one person try and claim that only Republicans are pedophiles, I will open up a can of whoopass on them so fast they'll wish THEY could resign.

If you have the stomach for it, ABC, which broke the story, has a link on this page to a full PDF transcript of a very graphic instant messenger exchange between former Representative Foley and the then-16-year-old former page. I won't link directly to the PDF, just to protect those of you who might click the link by accident.

It looks like Republican House leadership knew about Foley's at-best-inappropriate behavior for at least ten months and did nothing to discipline him or otherwise address his behavior. It is clear from the IM transcript that what Foley did was sexually predatory.

Though I am tempted to repeat rumor and innuendo, I will refrain from naming names here because I have no hard evidence to justify the claims I could very reasonably make based on the sources I have. I will say this: there needs to be some more digging throughout the House and Senate. I do not believe this is an isolated incident. Pedophiles generally cluster and find each other one way or another. And knowing now how the Republican leadership either ignored this or tried to cover it up, it does beg the question, who else might they be covering for? Sexual predation has no place in the United States Congress or anywhere else for that matter.

It's a good bet I'll have plenty more to say about this as more details unfold and I process the implications a bit more. I fully expect that Foley's conservative former allies will now use his actions as ammunition against the LGBT community, even though he has never previously openly identified as gay. This is the #1 myth about people who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual - that we're all sexual predators just waiting for an opportunity to convert your children. I already got my toaster, thanks, I'll pass on the sex-with-children.

So let me be clear: I don't know whether Mark Foley self-identifies as gay or straight. His actions were reprehensible and he should be held accountable. Foley's predatory behavior had nothing to do with his actual or perceived sexual orientation (that's his business, not ours). Nothing. Sexual violence is not about sex. It's about power and control. In this case, you have a Member of Congress more than three times the age of his target communicating in an immature manner clearly below his position and receiving sexual gratification from that dynamic.

That said, Foley was one of only a handful of Republicans in the House to vote against the Federal Marriage Amendment earlier this year. The FMA failed to garner the necessary two-thirds majority it needed to move forward toward ratification, but just barely. Foley's vote did actually make a huge difference. Not a very politically smart move in a district that has a PVI of R +2.4. It's irrelevant at this point, but one does wonder about what his motivation might have been.

It's late, I've had a long day. I'm sure I'll have something more lucid and coherent to say during the weekend.

Yesterday I posted sample language for an Iraq accountability ad. Today the Pederson campaign unveiled their latest ad. It's on Iraq accountability (or lack thereof in Jon Kyl's case). Thank you Pederson campaign for hitting the nail on the head!

Here's the ad. Hits the major points fairly hard:


(And yes, I really do enjoy embedding videos in this here blog. It makes me feel very fancy-schmancy!)

All 16 U.S. spy agencies say no. Since Jon Kyl's last election, the United States has become less safe. Senator Kyl's job is to keep the President in check. Instead, he's written the President one blank check after another and we're paying the price. No accountability. No safety. No way we can afford six more years of Jon Kyl's support for failed policies that are making the world a more dangerous place. Arizonans deserve safety, and we're not getting it with Jon Kyl.

...that's the kind of ad I would like to see on Arizona television sets for the next five weeks.

I responded to a comment in the thread immediately below this one, but I also wanted to front page my response and add a little.

Michael from Blog for Arizona (great site, go check it out) expressed concern that the Vote Vets ad could backfire on us because it's allegedly not true according to a report by the website factcheck.org. In fact, Media Matters refutes the FactCheck report, finding it inaccurate and misleading.

From Media Matters:

Summary: In defending Sen. George Allen against a new television advertisement criticizing his 2003 vote on a Democratic amendment that would have increased National Guard funding for body armor, The Arizona Republic falsely suggested -- and the website FactCheck.org falsely asserted -- that Allen and his Republican colleagues have never voted against supplemental funding for body armor.

Essentially the FactCheck argument is that because Senator Mary Landrieu didn't use the specific words "body armor" in her amendment (that Jon Kyl and George Allen and others voted against), the Vote Vets ad is misleading.

Of course, in her remarks introducing her amendment, Landrieu did state that body armor was among those items intended for the military to purchase with the additional approximately $1 billion. Senator Carl Levin, the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, also backed her up.

In essence, FactCheck was mincing and twisting words. If it was deliberate, it was because they wanted to be able to say "both sides do it". I hope it was accidental.

Let's be clear: Jon Kyl voted against giving our troops the resources they need to stay alive. He may talk a tough game, but his votes - including not holding the administration accountable for making worldwide terrorism worse - are a real threat to the safety and security of this state and this nation.

TimO over at AZNetroots has just let us know that Vote Vets has produced their great ad targeting Jon Kyl. I first posted about it here. I think this will be a real map-changer in the Arizona Senate race. Let's see Kyl try to worm his way out of this one.

Now without further ado, the ad:


Now go thank Vote Vets for airing the ad in Arizona and also send some love Pederson's way. Also, the ads were all produced by Arizona-based marketing firm The Media Guys. They really do top-notch work (this ad has been called "the best ad this cycle" by none other than Kos).

This headline over at msnbc.com is a great example of one of George Lakoff's first rules of political rhetoric, that negating a frame only reinforces it.

The full headline is: Intel report: Iraq a ‘cause célèbre’ for extremists; President says NIE leak was political, denies war has worsened terrorism

By denying that the war has worsened terrorism, the President repeated the "Iraq war makes terrorism worse" frame. The net effect is that the denial falls away from the public consciousness and people only internalize the "Iraq war makes terrorism worse" frame.

This is one of the benefits of playing offense. It's much easier to deny an allegation (especially when it's true) than to re-frame the dialogue. So I say let the President try to deny the obvious as much as he wants. He will not only continue to lose credibility, but he will only reinforce something that the majority of Americans already knew on some level.

And besides, who are you going to believe: intelligence experts who study and actually fight terrorism or a dishonest politician who mislead the country into a quagmire in Iraq with no foreseeable exit strategy?

A nice bit of fantasy for a balmy Arizona autumn Monday evening...

...someone did something about this. The horror!

According to the just-released SurveyUSA poll of the AZ Senate race, Jim Pederson is now well within striking distance of Jon Kyl. The poll, of likely voters, puts Kyl at 48% and Pederson at 43%. What I find most interesting is that Pederson has a slight lead in the Phoenix metro area, while Kyl leads in Tucson and the rest of the state. This runs counter to the conventional wisdom about the way this state's politics work.

Pederson's "nobody's Senator but ours" tagline to portray him as an independent seems to be paying off, with him leading among independents by a 5 to 3 margin. Pederson needs to do a better job of tapping into voter discontent with the Bush administration and Kyl's rubber stamp of that administration in Congress. While 83% of Bush approvers support Kyl, only 70% of Bush disapprovers support Pederson. He clearly needs to throw a few more punches that hit Kyl square on the jaw while catching Bush in the backswing.

This is incredible news. Pederson's well within striking distance. And Kyl is below 50%, which is exactly where we need him to be at this point. His lying pork ads clearly didn't click the same way Pederson's ads have been.

Oh, and the margin of error was 4.6%, which is slightly high, but Pederson has clearly made a lot of progress. Trend lines aren't available, because the last SUSA poll on the race back in July only measured registered voters.

Also released today was the poll of the Governor's race. Janet's up 16 points and is well above 50%. What I found most telling in the SUSA analysis was this part (emphasis mine):

Today, 7 weeks to the 11/7/06 election, Napolitano leads by 16 points, 56% to 40%. Napolitano is up by 27 points among women and by 5 points among men. 91% of Democrats and 70% of Independents support Napolitano. 23% of Republicans cross over to vote for the Democrat. Munsil leads 3:1 among Arizona's Conservatives, who make up 35% of the electorate.

Munsil's base makes up 35% of the electorate in Arizona. They are among the most likely to vote in any election, and the poll was of likely voters. And Munsil is only at 40%. He clearly hasn't extended his appeal beyond his base, and he shows no ability to do so. Janet, on the other hand, leads every other demographic group and in every region of the state. Munsil's a scary guy, but we're in very little danger of him actually becoming anything more than a laughingstock.

Ms. Magazine has an I Had an Abortion Petition, similar to one they did in the 1970's, to emphasize that abortion is a viable, healthy option for many women.

This is one petition I obviously can't sign, but I encourage any women who have made the decision to have an abortion to click the link above and add her name to the list. It's harder for the anti-choice forces to bluster and blubber when they have actual people who have had abortions - and for whom it was the right choice - looking them right back in the face.

So I wanted to check in on the Congressional race in the district I grew up in in New Jersey. Paul Aronsohn is the Democrat running against crazy right-wing Republican incumbent Scott Garrett. Garrett defeated incumbent moderate Republican Marge Roukema in a primary in 2002. Roukema was no walk in the park, but Garrett is an absolute nightmare.

Aronsohn is definitely part of the Jersey Democratic political machine. He held positions in the Clinton White House and was Governor McGreevey's Communications Director and Spokesman. He has an impressive resume, which will hopefully resonate with the residents of NJ-05. His direct mail pieces also look pretty good; I hope enough carefully targeted households are receiving them.

I haven't been following the race all that closely. Aronsohn had a contested primary, which he won easily (a case of the machine paying off). This is not an easy district for a Democrat to win; the Republicans hold a sizeable voter registration margin in this district, which caps the northern part of the state from New York City to the Delaware River.

The district is a wide mix of urban, suburban and rural communities. The population centers of the district are certainly in its eastern part, closer to NYC, where Aronsohn is from and where his largest base is. But there are plenty of votes to be had in more rural Sussex and Warren (my native) counties. Aronsohn on his website has a page called "Walk the Walk Tour" that tracks using Google maps technology where his campaign has been knocking on doors. Notice anything a little off about that map?

The Aronsohn campaign is totally ignoring the western part of the district, which is admitedly much more conservative and much more likely to vote for Garrett. That doesn't mean you cede it though. It means you have to fight harder in that part of the district to win it. It looks like the campaign will soon be venturing into a couple of towns in Sussex County, but Warren County is still being totally written off. I'm not saying the reception in Hackettstown or Belvedere or Alamuchy or Liberty is going to be warm and friendly, but that's even more reason to go to those places - they need to hear a strong argument against the crazy conservative currently claiming to represent them in Congress.

This district isn't on any map of possible Dem takeovers. It could get closer if Aronsohn wouldn't cede entire counties to the opposition. Tough decisions have to be made in campaigns about the use of available resources. Garrett has raised twice as much money as Aronsohn and has close to five times as much cash on hand. I respect that Aronsohn is being frugle with the money he has left. This is an expensive district for media (New Jersey has no major TV stations, so all advertising in the state must be done on either New York City or Philadelphia stations, which are two of the most expensive markets in the country). But there are surely a large base of committed volunteers who can walk precincts in Warren and Sussex Counties, even if the official campaign can't afford to make that trek (a pitiful excuse).

Here's something I find even more depressing: my hometown made the top 10 ZIP Codes list for contributions to Garrett. And I bet I know exactly which family this came from (I used to work for them).

I guess my bottom line is that there are actually Democrats in the western part of this district who are dying for a candidate to give them an alternative to the misrepresentation they currently have in D.C. These voters need to be motivated and engaged. Aronsohn should leave no voter behind. I hope he's at least targeting these voters with some direct mail.

I just received the evite to my 10-year high school reunion back in New Jersey.

I was actually a little worried that they had it and didn't invite me. The reunion is the day after Thanksgiving. I don't know how I'll be able to afford to go, but I'm going to try. I think it'll be trippy to see all those people ten years later. I've changed a lot in that time and I'm sure so have many of my former classmates.

I was voted most likely to succeed and most likely to make a difference. That's a lot more pressure than you might think. I like to believe that I'm living up to those expectations, but I'm still nervous about showing my face after not seeing any of them in so long.

So yeah, reunion. Weird.

The Wingspan annual dinner tonight was a huge success yet again. Congratulations to all the volunteers and especially my friend Miriam who put it all together. It was a huge success and hopefully raised a ton of money for a great cause!

Also thanks to the elected officials and candidates who attended this year. This is a community that does not forget your support at the polls.

And an extra big congratulations to the speakers whose speeches I edited and who I helped coach in the weeks leading up to the big night. You all sounded fantastic, were bright and engaging, and should be very proud of yourselves for speaking before of a ballroom full of 1,100 people.

From Our Bodies Our Blog (See? Already paying off):

Richards' family requests that memorial gifts be made to the Ann Richards School for Young Women Leaders through the Austin Community Foundation, P.O. Box 5159, Austin, Texas 78763, 512-472-4483, or http://www.austincommunityfoundation.org. The school is scheduled to open in 2007.

That's in addition to my suggestion below of making a donation to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, which Governor Richardson's daughter Cecile now leads.

The Boston Women's Health Collective, authors of the decades-old, content-rich and frequently-updated bible of women's health "Our Bodies, Ourselves", has gone 21st century, with a new website, Our Bodies Our Blog.

Good stuff.

Despite the marginal gains, Republicans still risk losing their grip on Congress.

They've already lost their grip on reality...Congress ought to be next.

Ha ha.

The gay media really reaches sometimes, and this too is one of those cases, but it's still funny. The Advocate is extrapolating information from an AP/Ipsos poll conducted Monday through Wednesday of this week.

According to the poll, the number of people who disapprove of President Bush are greater than the number of people who said that gay marriage is extremely or very important.

Total apples and oranges (if the poll had asked if people approve or disapprove of same-sex marriage, then we could talk), but a pretty funny way of looking at the numbers. That has to have Karl Rove piddling in his pants a little.

Come to think of it though, given the recent polls about the strong opposition to Prop 107 here in Arizona and the national polls about the high levels of support for giving same-sex couples some form of legal recognition, the assessment may not be that far off.

Pretty good web ad from the DCCC. Check it out. Isn't it funny how words can come back to haunt you?

Especially in Tucson. And one just did. To me.

I was on my way home from the downtown area on Broadway Boulevard and was on the receiving end of a three-car accident. I'm a little sore right now (which will likely be a lot sore by tomorrow). It looks like the only damage to my car is on the rear bumper. The people in the middle car banged their heads pretty good from both impacts. The driver in the rear car was rightfully cited.

When I got hit, I channeled my mother and literally screeched, "YOU HIT MY NEW CAR!" while my body shook slightly.

We waited well over an hour for an officer to arrive and take a report. It probably would have taken longer if not for the Tucson Department of Transportation employee who drove by and called the Tucson Fire Department to come out and evaluate everyone for injuries.

TFD was great. They were there in a matter of minutes. They checked in with everyone and tried to facilitate TPD showing up so we could all get on with our days. Unfortunately, TFD got called to the scene of another accident about a block away at Broadway and Campbell. Just before we left, the woman from the business whose parking lot TFD moved a couple of the vehicles into came out of the building and told the TFD guys that the cars couldn't stay where they were, that she ran a business, and that even though she watched the accident happen, she still couldn't allow the cars to stay there, as they made her business look bad. In short, she was a bi-atch.

Do not ever shop at Water Ways Decorative Plumbing and Hardware on Broadway in Tucson. The employees (I hope she wasn't the manager or owner) are rude and not compassionate.

I'm obviously upset that this happened, especially because my car is less than a year old. But it's certainly not the worst that could happen, and I can get it fixed up like new in no time - with no cost to me. So I'm really doing pretty well, all things considered.

Of course, I'm happy to accept gifts and well wishes. In lieu of get well gifts, actually, just make a donation to the cause of your choice. Causes I like include the Southern Arizona Center Against Sexual Assault, Wingspan, the Pima County/Tucson Women's Commission, Vote Vets, or any number of candidates who will need our help to make our community a better place come November.

In thinking about the post just below, and in the context of Kyl's ridiculous, lying ad about Pederson's support for "pork", I have an idea for an ad.

Pederson could bring up the vote against this appropriation and then say something like, "if spending money to protect our troops and give them the tools they need is pork, then you're damn right I support it. Too bad Jon Kyl doesn't feel the same way about keeping our troops safe. He hasn't delivered for Arizona and he hasn't delivered for our men and women in uniform."

You know, just a thought.

I just checked the roll call vote about body armor that Vote Vets made an ad about. The ad disappeared from YouTube briefly, but it's back up (and embedded below). I wanted to verify that I was correct in advocating for the ad to be used in Arizona against Senator Kyl.

(Incidentally, Saint McCain also voted against giving our troops the armor they needed to be safe)

The motion was to table an amendment to the Iraq appropriations bill in 2003 to provide about a billion dollars for the National Guard and Reserves. Kyl voted yea on the motion, effectively killing the amendment and, not ironically, many many of our troops in Iraq.

I've never been a fan of defense appropriations, but this should have been a no-brainer. The no-accountability Congress got the troops in this mess; the least they should have done (or should now be doing) is give them the resources they need to survive.

Jim Pederson needs to get vocal on this issue. Even supporters of the war can understand the importance of giving the soldiers the tools they need to survive and the stupidity of refusing them those tools. The Pederson campaign can't coordinate with Vote Vets, but he should be talking about this vote, which was a real failure of leadership.

Go to Vote Vets and give some money and tell them to air the ad in Arizona against Kyl. Let's hold him accountable for the deaths of American soldiers abroad, which he could have helped prevent.

Former Texas Governor Ann Richards has died at the age of 73.

From the linked article:

"I did not want my tombstone to read, 'She kept a really clean house.' I think I'd like them to remember me by saying, 'She opened government to everyone,' " Richards told an interviewer shortly before leaving office in January 1995.

Richards of course was beaten by George W. Bush in 1994.

I remember the Doritos commercials she and former New York Governor Mario Cuomo starred in shortly after both were defeated in their re-election campaigns (Cuomo lost to George Pataki, who will soon be replaced by dynamo Dem Elliot Spitzer). It showed that both deposed Democrats had a lot of grace and humor, even in defeat.

Ann Richard's daughter is Cecile Richards, the new President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Since there are no instructions in the linked post about what to send in lieu of flowers, I suggest sending PPFA some love.

And then lets go out and win in November for Ann.

I noted this item on DailyKos this morning, which called it "the best ad this cycle". It's really very good:



I've learned since that the ad was created by an Arizona firm. Apparently you can go to the Vote Vets website and if you contribute money, you get to vote on where it will be aired. Since it was an Arizona media company who made this, the best ad this cycle, wouldn't it be appropriate to help Vote Vets run the ad here against Jon Kyl?

Yes, it would. He deserves it.

Go to Vote Vets and give money and vote for Arizona to be the next state to learn the truth about the disgusting failure that is Jon Kyl's record.

If you haven't seen this yet, it should be all the reason you need to vote for Gabrielle Giffords on November 7th.

I knew more than a year ago that the push for a state Constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage had nothing at all to do with marriage. It was to be a craven attempt at turning out the righty base to help build a veto-proof legislature.

But the results of yesterday's Republican primary for Governor adds another layer to that story, one of blatant ambition. Len Munsil, the winner of yesterday's primary, resigned from his job to run for Governor. His job? Founder and Executive Director of the benignly-named Center for Arizona Policy, which developed the language and is the primary proponent of what is now Proposition 107.

It is now clear that the primary purpose of this proposition drive is to advance Munsil's personal political aspirations. Prop 107 certainly has nothing to do with actually protecting marriages or defending marriages. Nobody's marriage is threatened now, except through domestic violence or divorce. If Munsil really cared about marriage, he'd work on strengthening the state's below-par domestic violence laws and practices.

As a member of the LGBT community, I'm in the minority when I say that I don't support same-sex marriage. I have no interest in assimilating and being just like straight people. I'm a whole, legitimate person without mimicking different-sex relationships. But I also can't abide withholding rights from people for senseless reasons.

And Prop 107 makes no sense.

If two consenting adults in a loving, committed relationship want to call that relationship marriage, there's no rational reason to deny them that right. And what's worse, Prop 107 would take away rights and benefits that counties and municipalities have already given their residents in same-sex and different-sex domestic partnerships. Prop 107 will hurt a lot of people, gay and straight, and could potentially weaken existing domestic violence laws (as happened in Ohio when they passed a state Constitutional amendment with nearly identical language).

Prop 107 WILL destroy families, NOT protect them.

So Munsil masterminded a divisive wedge proposition to "protect marriage", knowing it would energize a mouth-foaming base, because he planned all along to run for Governor. He's never done anything else for marriage, but he's done plenty for partisan politics. This guy is selfish, craven and deserves to be crushed come November - much like his destructive ballot proposition.

I really ought to get to bed, but it's just postapalooza tonight!

In looking at the results in the stunning upset for Toni Hellon in the LD26 Senate race, it's clear that although Melvin beat her by a narrow margin in Pima County with about 92% of precincts here reporting, he beat her by more than a 3 to 1 margin in the two Pinal County precincts.

Pesquiera has a real shot at the seat now, but her GOTV effort will be absolutely critical in the more moderate Pima County precincts of the district. She should focus on mail-in ballots for all Dems in-district. She should also tactfully heap praise on outgoing Senator Hellon. This is a Republican-favored but moderate district. Toni had a pretty good handle on the moderates and is a real champion for health and human service issues. It's doubtful that Toni will endorse either Melvin (a real wacko) or Pesquiera. But the classy thing for Pesquiera to do now, which could also win over some of Hellon's disaffected base, would be to thank Senator Hellon for her years of dedicated service on behalf of all her constituents in LD 26.

Patty Weiss just rubbed me the wrong way throughout most of the campaign, but I've got to hand it to her. She showed a lot of class and grace not only by conceding early but by actually heading to the Giffords party to congratulate Gabby and show party unity. I know it must have been a hard pill for Patty to swallow, but the report (by righty hack Scarpinato, no less) really gave me a new level of respect for the former anchor. Credit where it's due.

Secretary of State's website has a voter turnout breakdown by county. These are total voters per county, not broken down by party.

The State of Maricopa, Arizona's most populus county and the one with the most contested races, had the third-lowest turnout of all 15 Arizona counties (16.4%, ahead of Apache County's 14.8% and Navajo County's 14.5%). No wonder the wingnuts tend to reign supreme up there - they're apparently the only ones who actually exercise their civic duty. I kid; I know there are a great many progressive activists up there in Maricopa. It's those damn moderates who sit on their asses during the primary and don't pay attention to the actions of the officials their apathy helped elect.

Pima County was more or less toward the middle, with a whopping 24.6% turnout (Pima County Elections says voter turnout was 33.66% - not sure which is more current). I'm trying to figure out how the Pima County Recorder is figuring out turnout by party. If I'm reading this correctly (and who knows if I am), they're breaking it down not only by party but by district. I'm not sure what "Times Counted" means, but it's followed by a "Reg. Voters" stat, which I'm assuming is the number of qualified registered electors in that district and party primary race. It would be nice if F. Ann would publish some kind of key to all this.

Anyway, those turnout numbers are pretty abysmal if you asked me (which you didn't). Get out the vote has come to mean little more than "get out the base", which, I suppose, is the point of an election. It's such a shame though. Primaries are for everyone, not just those of us who love the red meat. I mean, I'm pretty damn partisan, but what pisses me off even more than the radical right-wing regressives highjacking the government is people not participating in democracy. The right to vote is really the most sacred of all our Constitutional rights. It's a cornerstone or representative democracy. Kind of necessary to the system actually working. I will never understand how anyone can claim to be too busy or disinterested.

All right, enough of my preaching to the choir for one night. I should try and get some shut-eye.

I don't want to burst anybody's bubble after a largely very positive election night, but victory in CD08 is not a foregone conclusion now that it looks like it'll be a Giffords vs. Graf match up for sure.

Turnout in the GOP primary was higher than in the Democratic primary, 51,435 to 50,317 as of this writing with 89.9% of precincts reporting on both sides.

Now don't get me wrong: the fact that those numbers are so close when Democrats are outnumbered by Republicans by a wider margin is good news. As is the fact that Giffords won by a much larger margin with more opponents than Graf.

But as I've been saying since Kolbe announced his retirement last November, this race will not be the cakewalk a lot of people are making it out to be. Our chances are very very good given the candidates who have emerged from the primary, but we can't rest on our laurels. Graf has a sizeable, energized base and his party has a registration advantage in the district. He also has the advantage of having run a district-wide race before.

Of course, given what I've seen of Giffords' operation, all my worrying is probably for naught. They probably don't need the reminder, but nobody should take the prospect of Congresswoman Giffords for granted.

With about 95% of precincts reporting, it looks like Paula Aboud will remain my state Senator by a vote margin of about 1,100 votes, 54% to 46%.

Now who wants to wager that Ted will try and pull a Lieberman and decide to run a write-in campaign as independent? You know, because clearly the will of the voters is immaterial and poor Ted's a victim (unlike those "lying" rape victims that he voted against last year).

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

As of this writing, more Democrats have voted for Bill Johnson than Francine Shacter in the CD08 race, according to the Secretary of State's primary returns page on the CD08 Democratic race. That's with about three-quarters of Pima, all of Pinal and Santa Cruz and NONE of Cochise reporting.

If who the primary voters vote for is an indication of the political temperature of a district, I find the fact that a racist xenophobe could bring in more votes than a passionate progressive - in the Democratic primary - quite alarming indeed.

Found this interesting on the Secretary of State's primary results page for the Republican primary in CD08.

With just 54.6% of total precincts reporting, Graf is leading Huffman by the narrowest of margins, 40.6% to 39% as of this writing. That seems like too close for comfort, until you look at who has reported so far...

All precincts in the district in Pinal and Santa Cruz Counties have reported in, as have about two-thirds of the Pima County precincts. NONE of the Cochise County precincts are recorded yet. If Graf maintains even close to the margin he has in Pima County in the remaining precincts here, we can all breath a sigh of relief. Cochise County is a Graf stronghold and was the source of the surprisingly close race he ran against Kolbe two years ago.

Cochise will deliver big for Graf, which will in turn deliver a big reward to southern Arizona: a Democrat representing us in the U.S. House of Representatives!

[UPDATE 9-13-06 1:39 AM] Looks like I was right. With the Cochise County precincts reporting, Graf extended his lead to a decisive victory - even though Huffman wouldn't concede. Seriously man, just suck it up and deal.

The Pederson campaign just launched a new website called Jon Kyl's Double-Talk Express. It's a great use of the internet to bring accurate information about an incumbent's hypocricy to the voters. I highly recommend the web video, "Who is Jon Kyl?"

Seriously, kudos to the Pederson camp for staying on the offensive and launching a new front. If they keep this up, they could come out on the other side of the margin of error.

Now if they could only fix the bug that sent me four copies of the e-mail announcing this new site...

Have you voted yet? I'm looking at you.

This is obviously a very somber day packed with all kinds of meaning. I've been reading posts throughout the blogosphere and the traditional media about how the Bush administration is exploiting what should be a day of national unity for partisan gain. I'd like my own post to be a bit more personal. I'm going to write about my own memory of that day.

Unlike most of my friends and colleagues in Tucson, I actually lived in New York State five years ago today. Not in the city, mind you. Ithaca is about a four and a half hour drive from the city (we just call it "the city" back east). I grew up about an hour from the city. While I never lived there, it was still a big presence - and popular destination - in all our lives. It's a familiar and oddly comforting place.

I was working for the local rape crisis center in Ithaca. It was a Tuesday morning, and I got into the office around 9, even though our hours were 8:30 to 4:30 (some things never change). Shortly after I arrived, one of my co-workers, Kathy, received a phone call from her husband Mike that a plane had just crashed into the World Trade Center. Details were sketchy, but I guess the oddity of the situation is what prompted him to call. We all just assumed it was one of those small twin engine planes or something.

I hopped online (we only had dial-up, and only because I was a home subscriber) to try and find more information. The CNN.com page started to load and then stopped. I couldn't understand why at first, until I realized it was the overload of traffic to the site, coupled with our slow connection. I tried a few other news sites, but it was the same across the board. Kathy had turned her radio on (she was our therapist, and I guess she didn't have any clients that morning) and soon we were hearing reports about the second plane hitting the WTC.

By this point, we all knew something was very much awry. Kathy's dad worked for the government on some kind of water use project (I think) and our boss Kate's dad was in Washington, DC on a vacation trip of some sort. They were both understandably concerned for their fathers. Our receptionist Tina was married to an EMT. She and I drove over to their headquarters a few blocks away to watch some of the news coverage on their large screen TV and report back to our co-workers. What we saw horrified us. There, clear as day and repeated in a seemingly endless loop, was footage of the second plane crashing. It was while we were standing there transfixed (I don't know why we never say down) that the towers began to collapse.

That was all Tina or I could take at that point. We drove back to the office and updated our co-workers on what happened (we were a staff of 6). Kate decided that we should cancel any remaining appointments for the day and close down. I had a lot of friends from college who moved to the city after graduation about a year and a half earlier. They were clearly at the forefront of my mind.

After closing up shop, we all went over to Kathy's house to watch more news coverage. Kate and Kathy were of course numb with concern about their family members. I too was having a very hard time processing what might have become of all the talented, decent friends who were now more or less in the eye of the storm. We also learned about the attack on the Pentagon (which didn't help Kathy's or Kate's angst any) and the crash in a Pennsylvania field. The whole day just seemed so surreal. People were talking, but it was all such a fog. We were traumatized.

The days and weeks following the attack are also still vivid for me. I remember moments. I remember Congress singing the national anthem on the steps of the Capitol. I remember thinking to myself, "how is Bush going to exploit this?" I don't know if I should be proud or not to say that I was among the 8%-10% of Americans who did NOT approve of the President in the immediate aftermath. He just seemed so smarmy and duplicitous. My friend Jay was positive that these attacks would be used to justify a war with Iraq. Jay is one smart cookie.

I remember my friend Tara trying to organize a candlelight vigil at the pond behind the chapel on campus (she was still a student). She, her girlfriend at the time and I were the only ones there, but it was a comforting and tender moment, an opportunity for the three of us at least to share our grief and concern. I remember mourning.

Thankfully, all my friends who had moved to the city came out unscathed. My friend Leon was working across the Hudson in New Jersey and saw everything from his office window. My friend Dara lived or worked in lower Manhattan and things changed drastically for her after that. My parents had airline tickets to go visit one of my siblings a few weeks after the attacks. I was petrified about them flying, but they were so resolute (at least to me). I was kind of impressed by that.

Having had crisis intervention training and being certified as rape crisis counselors, my colleagues and I were informed by the New York State Coalition Against Sexual Assault that we might be called upon to travel to the city to provide crisis counseling for the survivors. Tina's husband Eric, the EMT, was very nearly dispatched in the immediate aftermath to help with the search and rescue operation at ground zero. They had two young daughters and she was beside herself with worry that he would have to leave them and potentially put his life on the line.

The Red Cross blood banks were desperate for blood. Not so desperate apparently that they wouldn't lift their archaic ban on donations from gay men. It appears that even in a time of national crisis, bigotry and discrimination still reigned supreme.

Slowly life returned, if not to normal, at least to a daily routine. The world kept spinning. The bombs would soon start falling in Afghanistan, the beat of the war drums could soon be heard in Iraq, but in Ithaca and throughout New York State, life went on in any way we could muster. We knew - we still know - that even killing 3,000 of our countrymen and women will not change our way of life. We refuse to live in fear. We refuse to blindly follow dishonest leaders who would sow and exploit such fear.

On this, the fifth anniversary of that fateful day, it is important to remember the terrible violence that we suffered. But we should never, NEVER let the actions of those 19 cowards convince us to live in fear or sacrifice our liberties (which, I'm told, is why they hate us so much - though I'm skeptical) for some small measure of security.

I don't believe we lost our national innocence that day (see: assassinations, Lincoln and Kennedy; see also: Watergate). I do believe we lost the illusion that we are the most beloved nation in the world. The truth can hurt, but it's often necessary to learn and grow.

In closing, a note about comments. My faithful readers (both of you) haven't really discovered the comment feature on the blog. Just click on the "# Comments" link below this post and leave a comment for me or talk about your own memories of the day. One of the points of a blog is to share information, so rather than e-mailing me (as several of you have done), leave a comment! You don't have to register or anything.

Part of the paid work I just did for the annual Wingspan dinner included this full-page ad in the Weekly Observer (Tucson's weekly LGBT newspaper). I worked with the four graphic motifs for the dinner already created by the 'Span's previous graphic design team, but made them fit together and in black and white. It comes out a little splotchy in the scanned image, but I'm pretty satisfied with the final product.

I'm very proud to report that I just completed my first m²powered paying gig for Wingspan, southern Arizona's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community center. I helped out with some graphic design for their upcoming annual dinner on September 16 (which I also volunteer stage manage) and designed a logo for their new Reel Pride film series at the Loft Cinema in Tucson.

I've also implemented a wiki to provide better services on collaborative projects (you won't be able to access it without the password, which is for me, my staff, and customers only). If you're unfamiliar with what a wiki is, it's basically an open source collaborative online environment that allows multiple users to view and edit the same documents. The most well-known wiki is the Wikipedia, the world's largest encyclopedia. I set up my wiki through PBWiki.

Jim Pederson has finally started coming out swinging in a series of new ads about Jon Kyl's atrocious record.

The ads are still too timid for my taste, but I suppose the target audience for these ads wouldn't appreciate a hard-line approach against the Bush regime. The ads are effective, though. They've forced the Kyl campaign into playing defense rather than creating more misleading feel-good ads or attack ads against Pederson.

That's how a challenger wins: play offense and point out the horrible, terrible, very bad record of the entrenched incumbent. If the Pederson campaign keeps this up, I will be making my first contribution after the primary next week.

Today is my fourth anniversary at my full-time gig. I really can't believe I've stayed here this long, through a probably mentally ill and definitely abusive supervisor, in an organizational structure that often wasn't prepared for my skills or experience, through a string of 12 (yes, 12!) changes in supervisors. But I'm committed to the mission and believe in the work that I and my colleagues do here. I believe very deeply that we are making the world a better place.

So happy anniversary to me. I'm taking the rest of the week off.

This is important.

Once again, the right wing is using a national tragedy for political gain. Less than two months before election day, ABC is set to air a "docudrama" that it alleges is based on the 9/11 Commission Report. The only problem is that this mockumentary blatantly distorts and lies about the findings of that report. The extremely fictionalized TV movie was written by two arch-conservatives, one of whom is Rush Limbaugh's personal stooge. Right-wing media and blogs received advanced copies, while mainstream and liberal media received bupkiss.

Not surprisingly, the movie attempts to blame everything (and we mean EVERYTHING) on Bill Clinton and vindicate George W. Bush. This is classic Republican strategy: when you and your guy are utter failures, blame Clinton. Heck, when their alarm clocks don't go off in the morning, they blame Clinton.

There is something you can do, though. I'm not generally a fan of petitions and letter drives, mainly because I think they're largely a waste of resources. But in this case, I think it could be effective. And lucky for us, Think Progress has an online tool you can use to send a personalized message to Disney (the parent company of ABC) President and CEO Bob Iger. I really like this action particularly because Bob Iger is a fellow Ithaca College alumnus. I know he won't read my message personally, but I still like adding the personal touch so, on the off chance someone does read it, they'll know I'm a bit more in touch than most of their letter writers.

So click the Think Progress link above and take action RIGHT NOW. Who knows? Maybe ABC will come to its senses and present some sorely missing balance in our right-dominated traditional media.

I've been whining for a long time about the Pederson campaign's anemic fighting spirit. I'm pleased to see the latest "Kyl's gone Washington" ad, but it's going to take a lot more than that to unseat this incumbent. As I've been saying, Kyl's voting record is ripe for the pickin'.

For example, last year Kyl voted AGAINST bankruptcy protections for military servicemembers. The Orwellian-named "Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005" was bad enough (and doesn't protect consumers a whit), but this amendment would have at least afforded servicemembers some protections not available to the rest of us. With all the sacrifices that they and their families make in the name of protecting and serving this country, and all the financial hits they take to do so, these protections (sponsored by Assistant Democratic Leader Dick Durbin of Illinois) would have been the least Congress could do to protect and thank those servicemembers.

But Kyl, in his own rubber-stamp way, voted against protecting our service men and women and for giving more windfall profits to the credit card companies and banks. Why should we expect anything else from the Senator who always puts profits before people?

Hat tip to Sirotablog.