Thursday, June 14, 2007

Pullen Pulling or Pulled? Web 2.0

The influence of Web 2.0 on the political landscape is increasing. Readership is growing, perhaps exponentially, and posted material exerts influence by virtue of its readership, its quality, and its authority. The Chairman of the Arizona GOP has a blog. Whether he posts brilliant material or nonsense, his blog matters. He will get instant readership and influence because of the authority his position yields.

Web 2.0 supports the forces of democracy by allowing nobodies like me to respond either in comments or by posting our own stories. Randy made some allegations yesterday that, well, failed to impress. Let’s start with the idea of the "historic vote" for the largest tax increase in the history of the country. Which bill was this?

Let’s examine the math. Frankly, I would support the largest tax increase in the history of this country given the Bush administration's tax cuts for the apex of the affluent combined with the greatest financial bloodletting in the history not just of the country, but of the planet. How are we going to pay for this folly based on lies? Is Pullen advocating we sink the country $15 TRILLION into debt?

Let’s leave the tax increase, whatever it was, and move to the next part of Pullen’s June 13 blog post, the secret fund. Giffords has set up a secret fund? What vote was this? Actually, the language is slightly different, reading Democrats like Giffords have set up a secret fund. Which ones?

White men with gray hair are screwing 12 year old boys in Cambodia. Pullen is white and has gray hair. When was his last trip to Cambodia?

What secret fund? What earmarks? "Where’s the fence?"

Exactly what money did Congresswoman Giffords earmark for whom? You do understand that the GOP earmarks of the last six years are fair game to note in response? I can just stick to 2006. Given what has occurred in the last six years under the Bush Administration, the notion of the GOP throwing the earmark/pork stone at a Democrat occurs like someone on a pile of gun powder flicking their Bic at someone sitting on a newspaper. Giffords has been in office six months.

Not beating it to death, but the assertions are another case of taking a general macro-level event (the whole earmark thing) and trying to create a specific image that does not apply.

Do folks remember that Pullen took the committee slot from Mike Hellon by 5 votes in 2004? The GOP, conducting its own investigation (no democrats involved), found evidence of voter fraud. Hellon didn’t pursue.

In this last race, Pullen won by how many? Just curious, does he know where Tim Bee stands on the immigration debate? Maybe that’s a secret.


Anonymous the doctor said...

How long did it take you to make that image?

I like the flagged caskets leading from Rove to the flag behind Pullen. I also like Pullen's image resting on top of Hellon and Lisa James.

You show the caskets dead center and the border in a corner.

You put your logo next to Karl Rove? Are the red and blue bars just to fill space, or is it something deep?

6/14/2007 5:01 PM  
Blogger Framer said...

If that "8th" is what passes for a logo on my site, I need to do better. I played around with an 8 ball motif for a while, but decided against it.

I believe the secret fund Pullen is talking about is Obey's great idea to not include earmarks in the actual bills when they are voted on and reported, then slip them in after conference committee to avoid scrutiny and disclosure rules. It would also stop individual, egregious earmarks like the "bridge to nowhere" from being singled out and voted down. Because the earmarks are not reported, the actual spending is obscured, hence a "secret fund."

All this is pretty dishonest and cheap, and, yes, with her voting thus far and silence, Gabby is complicit, even if she is not the ultimate architect. If she won't step forward to say "enough," who will? For the Arizona 8th District, this is her responsibility.

You would think that the new majority would have waited longer than 6 months before moving to top the abuses of the last majority. I guess I just don't get it.

6/14/2007 10:06 PM  
Blogger x4mr said...


I just responded to your other comment on economic development, with which I agree. I guess it's the two of us this Friday night. Yes, the 8th does refer to your site, and I used it because you have no other logo. Of course, Tedski has no logo either other than RRR.

For what it's worth (did I already mention this?), I have heard your site is emerging as THE site for the local GOP scoop. You are the red Tedski. Congrads!

I have learned a little more since posting the story above and would have spoken differently knowing what I know now.

I stand by the assertion that the reality of the events sited has nothing to do with Giffords. It's a sloppy attack that smells, frankly, like the twisting of meaning Patty Weiss tried in the primary.

6/14/2007 10:43 PM  
Blogger Sirocco said...


I am not sure where you read that the idea is to slip earmarks in _after_ the conference committees? Everything I have read said the plan it to provide the list of earmarks well in advance of the committees, so they could be addressed in committee if needed.

6/15/2007 8:14 AM  
Blogger Framer said...

Sorry, sirocco, I meant during the committee, AFTER the bill had passed, avoiding scrutiny. Things are pretty fluid right now on where this will end up, with Republican actually fighting against this tooth and nail. Too bad we didn't get this type of passion a few years back, or things may have been different.

From what I can tell, Giffords remains silent on this issue.

6/15/2007 11:11 AM  
Blogger Sirocco said...


Ok, makes sense. I have a response to Ace's post about the matter on your site.

6/15/2007 12:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the Doctor:

That's not Lisa James. It's former LD 17 Representative Laura Knaperek.

6/15/2007 2:50 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home