![]() |
||||
|
|
NEWS & ANALYSIS
Rumble Under the Big Tent: Lisa James Attacks GOP Chairman Pullen; Readers Respond June 2, 2007
Arizona Republicans continue to bicker under their "big tent." The
latest shot fired off in the big tent rumble is a letter (below) written
by Lisa James, who lost the election for state Republican chairman in
January. As her husband, Gordon James, had done in a recent letter to
the editor in the Arizona Repugnant, Mrs. James attacked the man
who defeated her last winer, GOP Chairman Randy Pullen. Like the vast
majority of grassroots Republicans, Pullen has been critical of Sen. Jon
Kyl's role in the Bush-Kennedy amnesty bill in the U.S. Senate. Kyl
claimed to have made legitimate gains in reaching a compromise; however,
conservatives don't see many pluses in the highly controversial
legislation.
Dear Friend,
Senator Jon Kyl, our U.S.
Senator, is under attack for doing the very job we sent him to
Washington to do. We did not send him to be a placeholder until
Republicans regain control of the Senate. We sent him to represent us
to the best of his ability and to make sure conservatives have a seat
at the table. He has done an exceptional job for us over the past 20
years just as he has with his work on the proposed immigration
legislation.
Unfortunately, the Arizona
Republican Party is doing nothing to stop hateful, personal attacks.
In fact, the Party is actually encouraging this divisive and
reprehensible behavior. Rather than promoting our Party they are busy
holding press conferences displaying obscene pictures. Rather than
defending someone who is attempting to make something good from
something terrible, they encourage the bad behavior of those calling
for a recall and accusing Senator Kyl of treason.
In fact, they have gone beyond
Arizona to national television to make their point. I note, with much
disappointment, that there were no AZ GOP alerts to respond to Janet
Napolitano's Op Ed in the Republic--only alerts to promote Chairman
Pullen and his reaction to Jon Kyl and the bill itself.
Setting aside the content of
the bill - and how many of us have even read this document from
cover to cover? - Jon Kyl is a fine man, a statesman. We are
fortunate to have such a voice representing us in the U.S. Senate.
In fact, I know that you joined me in working hard toward his
landslide victory just this past November.
(http://www2.nationalreview.com/dest/2007/05/19/immigrationdraft051807.pdf)
At the very least, if our
Chairman doesn't support the bill, and he has every right not to do
so, he should remain publicly neutral. He should demonstrate
leadership by denouncing those slinging personal attacks on a
Senator with
96.9% and publicly state his personal support for Jon Kyl.
Here is what we believe as
Republicans, as articulated in our Party Platform:
"As Republicans, we know who we
are and what we believe. As the Party of the open door, while
steadfast in our commitment to our ideals, we respect and accept that
members of our Party can have deeply held and sometimes differing
views. This diversity is a source of strength, not a sign of
weakness, and so we welcome into our ranks all who may hold
differing positions. We commit to resolve our differences with
civility, trust, and mutual respect, and to affirm the common goals
and beliefs that unite us." (Republican Party Platform, 2004,
page 83, emphasis added)
The most emotional debate we
have had in the party within my lifetime has been the debate over
abortion.As someone completely committed to life, I have worked for
pro-life candidates since my time as a delegate with Phyllis Schlafly
for Jack Kemp in 1988. As a Party, we have had a great history of
debating issues internally in primaries and at conventions, but once
we have a nominee or an office-holder, we unite to work to elect and
support them.
Clearly, the immigration issue
is the new inter-party challenge we face.We don't all agree on how to
solve the problem, and we all have a duty to voice our opinion to
elected officials. The process with the current immigration bill is
far from over and there will be much discussion about all aspects of
the legislation. However, personal attacks that question Senator
Kyl's integrity, and call for his resignation or recall are completely
contrary to the principles of our great party.
Please join me in writing
letters, making phone calls and sending emails to your lists to
encourage the Arizona GOP to unite, rather than divide, registered
Republicans. We can have a healthy debate about the issue, but
attacking Senator Kyl only hurts our Party.
Thank you for your time and
your action.
Respectfully,
Lisa James 1st Vice Chair, LD 8 Precinct Committeeman, Cocopah Precinct READERS RESPOND Bob Haran, Legislative District 6, Phoenix -- Uniting the party is a good objective, we could start by not having losing candidates for state chairman attacking the current state chairman. We can unite the party by agreeing that we will put our country before party and principle before politics. We will be a stronger party if the power in the party comes from the bottom up and not from the top down, this is a political party, not a business. We will be a better party if we respect each other's First Amendment right to free speech and refrain from stifling the voices of those who disagree with the actions of their elected representatives. We can grow as a party if we are honest with the people and don't play word games and call an amnesty an amnesty and not something else. George Teegarden, Treasurer, LD 11 -- Dear Lisa,
First to dispense with the obvious. Some very nasty and
disrespectful things have been said of Jon Kyl but not by the
State party leadership. Lisa, four days before you accused Randy
of attacking Jon Kyl, Randy posted a very well thought letter to
the base. Here is a small portion:
You can find the entire post
here.
I hope, had you taken the research time to find it before you sent
your letter, that it would have lead you to take a different tack.
The Republican Party in Arizona has recently evolved from one
dominated by the delegation to one that serves the grass roots.
From everything I've heard since our party election, the grass
roots are a lot happier now that someone is actually listening to
them. The delegation not so much. The ugly rhetoric that has been
going around about the immigration issue is unfortunate, unseemly,
undesirable and disrespectful, particularly in the case of Jon Kyl.
But it occurs because people with valid concerns are routinely
ignored by the people they worked hard to send to Washington to
represent them. Respect, after all, is a two-way street.
That was one of the issues that was settled in the recent party
election. When we "hire-on" by becoming precinct committeemen we
don't volunteer to work for our elected representatives. We
volunteer to work on behalf of a set of principles and to bring
forward and elect people who will stand up for those principles.
If in the process it looks like we're working "for somebody" well,
that's just appearances. The people we send to represent us tend
to forget that. Occasionally it is necessary to remind them,
respectfully.
From web articles now current, it appears some of our representatives say they were taken by surprise at the heat of the debate over this issue. Is it surprising some of the folks feel the respectful reminders aren't getting through?
Lisa, you and others have resurrected the "D" word, "DIVISIVE"
against Chairman Pullen. Peggy Noonan and Hugh Hewitt among others
say you've got it exactly backwards. Back on May 18, more than a
week before the date of your letter, Hugh Hewitt wrote:
Full text available
here
Also on May 18, Hugh wrote:
Full text available
here
On your point "how many of us have even read this document" I would direct you to a fine attempt at analysis by Hugh Hewitt, posted May 21, here. More to the point, I have attempted to read it. The structure, language, grammar and forward, backward and sideways references make it something even a law student would have nightmares about. That makes Senator McCain's objective of "through the Senate in less than two weeks" extremely suspect. Finally, as to "divisiveness," today June 1, Peggy Noonan took George Bush to the woodshed with this:
Peggy ends her piece with this:
Full text (it's an excellent read) is available
here:
Did you ever have a professor take a paper you worked your !!s off
to put together, tear it up in front of you, and say: "now go back
and put together something worthwhile"? Our government spends
something like 18 percent of a twelve trillion dollar economy.
Believe me, in spite of John McCain's hubris and Jon Kyl's
patriotic and dutiful support, this is not the best that
can be done for the money. The Heritage Foundation has some
excellent ideas
here and they did it for a heck of a lot less money. If the
current bill really is the best they can do, well, we'll be better
off if they do nothing.
Lisa, I could not agree with you more that some of the rhetoric
going around the email circuit is deplorable. A few of those
emails had me wondering how Howard Dean got my address. But their
language is mild compared to the scalding phone calls coming in to
the AZ GOP hq from plain old regular republicans. As to the
grassroots and the email circuit you're complaining about,
Chairman Pullen, Randy, has addressed that problem as far as is
possible in a free society. He has not been, as you say "encouraging
this divisive and reprehensible behavior." To attempt to hold him
responsible, to accuse him of "divisiveness" in the face of what
the delegation and our president is doing to the party is a tactic
more worthy of our opponents across the aisle.
Jim Ehl, Sierra Vista -- Sour grapes? From time to time one reads about the 'split' in the party. The 'split' really is a few who have been in the lime light and have the ear of the press and didn't get things their way. So instead of trying to help the party looks like they are trying to tear it down. Split? Ask about increased registrations. Ask about increased donations. So many people have become disenchanted with Sen. Kyl. So what? Most people can read, It's not the party's place to defend him. The party didn't appoint him to that position (it was the voters). And, when it come to the party, unlike his predecessors, Randy Pullen listens to, and represents those who elected him to that position. If Lisa can read, she can read a resolution passed in 2006 by the state party and one passes in 2006 by the NRC is basically what Randy is supporting. Who stands between the voter and the elected, or furnished the checks and balances? If Randy is supposed to let the elected dictate everything and support their every action, like in the past, why have a party?
If we want to unite the party, call
Ms. James and ask her to shut up and quit trying to upstage
Randy. He would probably appreciate her help.
After reading Ms James, two
things. Those who voted for Randy are probably glad that they
did. And those who voted for Ms. James are probably wondering
why?
Republican Party Implodes over Border Invasion, Amnesty By Dennis Durband, Editor Embattled U.S. Senator Jon Kyl is pulling out all the stops to engage in damage control as he comes home to face constituents angered by his work with Sen. Ted Kennedy to force an unpopular amnesty compromise bill upon Americans. During his re-election campaign last year, Kyl talked tough on border control, but more recently has conceded more to border appeasers than most Americans would prefer. Recently, the chairman of the Arizona Democratic Party said that Kyl had come around to the Democrats' position on the border invasion. Pullen, who played an instrumental role in the passage of the Protect Arizona Now (PAN) proposition in 2004, has been critical of Kyl and Sen. John McCain, who has been pushing guest worker amnesty legislation. In a major case of paternalism and disconnect with the party base, Arizona's congressional delegation opposed PAN. Nathan Sproul, former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party, initiated auto-dialer phone messages critical of Pullen. In addition, Gordon James wrote a letter to the Arizona Repugnant this week to criticize Pullen for dividing the party. It was James' wife Lisa who lost a bitterly-contested January election to Pullen for the the state party chairmanship. Earlier this week, Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy, wrote a letter of support for Kyl, who has been roundly criticized by the nation's conservative pundits and news organizations. That drew a strong response from Rob and Marne Haney, of Paradise Valley. Now, Congressman Trent Franks has written to the Arizona Federation of Republican Women in an attempt to rally support for Kyl. Following is the text of Franks' message:
Dear
Arizona Voter:
Our
nation and state are dealing with several very important issues. One
of the most important and complex issues facing our country is illegal
immigration. Republican Senator Jon Kyl is in the untenable position
of trying to forge critical immigration policy in a democrat
controlled Senate.
I have
known Senator Kyl for over 20 years. In that time, I have witnessed an
individual of impeccable moral character. He is a man who operates
with the highest level of integrity, and he has established himself as
one of the true leaders in the United States Senate.
Senator
Kyl also has a proven track record as a conservative senator. He has
consistently supported the values and platform of the Republican
Party. When history records his legacy, it will record a man of
remarkable political courage, moral integrity, and the heart of a
genuine patriot.
Consequently, I am deeply concerned and hurt by the inflammatory
language I see being directed at Senator Jon Kyl in recent days.
I
understand that some people may disagree with Senator Kyl's position
on immigration reform. However, I believe that the vitriolic rhetoric
recently used by some to condemn Jon Kyl is highly inappropriate and
shameful. I urge anyone who may disagree with Senator Kyl to do so
respectfully and to refrain from attacking the personal integrity of
this honorable man.
Sincerely,
Congressman Trent Franks
Rob Haney, GOP District 11 chairman, e-mailed party members and activists and stated: "Nathan Sproul has just admitted that it was him who was responsible for the auto-dialer calls attacking Randy Pullen for representing the state party while opposing the Amnesty legislation."
Furthermore, Haney said, "I believe Randy is doing an absolutely
marvelous job representing the concerns of the Republican base ...
you. We would have no one to speak for us without him. He and his
staff have endured much abuse since his election as state
chairman. Makes more sense now though doesn't it, about the massive
campaign by our congressional delegates and staffs to keep Randy
from being elected, eh? They didn't want anyone at the state level
objecting to the amnesty bill when it was introduced."
It appears now that many U.S. congressmen are not holding town hall meetings during the Memorial Day break because they don't want to run into opposition over guest worker amnesty. Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) and Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) were both booed in their respective home states this week for supporting amnesty, a bill opposed by 74 percent of Americans, according to a credible poll. The split fracturing the Republican Party is part of a greater problem in that its "big tent" approach includes people at the opposite ends of hot-button political issues like abortion and the border invasion. The GOP abandoned its own principles to accommodate people opposed to long-standing party platform planks and is now reaping the whirlwind. Conservative Stalwarts at Odds over Sen. Kyl May 24, 2007 Two long-time Arizona conservative stalwarts are at odds over the work of U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl on the controversial "immigration" bill. Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy, and Rob Haney, chairman of GOP Legislative District 11, found themselves on opposing sides of analyzing Kyl's involvement in a bipartisan compromise on what many regard an amnesty bill. Herrod penned the following letter, to which Haney and his wife Marne sent a lengthy email response to The Arizona Conservative: Friends:
In the
past few days, U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl has been attacked and criticized
heavily for his role in negotiating the immigration bill now pending
before the U.S. Senate. I
am not voicing any opinion on the immigration issue or the pending
bill.
I will
stand, however, and defend my friend, Jon Kyl, against the vitriol and
opposition being voiced against him. I have known and worked with Sen.
Kyl for over 20 years. At all times, he has been a man of integrity
and honor. Sen. Kyl has been a solid vote for traditional family
values, especially the right to life for unborn children and marriage
being between one man and one woman. A very intelligent man with a
keen strategic mind, Sen. Kyl has served us well. At no time have I
ever seen Sen. Kyl abandon his principles for political
expediency. Rather, he has worked very hard to advance conservative
principles even when it meant he might be standing alone. I've never
had any reason to not trust Sen. Kyl's explanations for any of his
actions nor to doubt or question his motives.
Disagree with Sen. Kyl if you want on the immigration issue. But the
harshness and animosity being thrown at Sen. Kyl is unwarranted and
even unconscionable.
Please
pray for Sen. Kyl and all our elected officials for wisdom and
guidance as they address this very difficult issue.
Cathi
Herrod
(Letter
shortened; Herrod urged people to read the opinion piece Sen. Kyl
wrote for the Arizona Republic on Sunday.
She
urged
his critics to consider his words carefully and give him the benefit
of the doubt as to the why and how of his role.)
Following is the response to Herrod by the Haneys:
Dear friends,
Cathi starts her defense by saying she is not voicing any opinion on the immigration issue or pending bill. That is the first problem. Cathi should be screaming from the hill tops about the evils of this bill. It will destroy all she has been diligently working to accomplish for over a decade. We believe strongly that our medical system is about to break with the burden of baby boomers looming on top of 20 million illegals. The calls have already begun for "Hillary care." With that we will have abortion and euthanasia on demand. The second problem is placing friendship above national security. We would hope that with the threat to our national security, friendship would become secondary. We have a very serious threat to the survival of our country as well as western civilization, and Cathi chooses to place friendship above taking action. We do not feel that this is an exaggeration. The rhetoric is strong because we feel frustrated on how to stop this legislation. People are furious that Kyl worked with Kennedy behind closed doors to produce this abomination, and now with McCain's assistance is trying to force feed it down our throats. Our legislators have a terrible record of protecting our borders or keeping their word. This bill cuts by more than half the length of the Duncan Hunter fence legislation passed and funded just last year. Do we believe Kyl, Bush, McCain and Flake or do we believe Lou Dobbs and Hugh Hewitt? Post 9/11/01, our borders should have been secured by 9/11/02. We are defending our country because our government refuses to do so. We tell the truth and we tell it strongly. We feel BETRAYED! This betrayal needs straight, honest, and loud objection. Cathi says Senator Kyl is a man of integrity & honor, a solid vote for traditional family values, right to life, traditional marriage between one man and one woman, that he has never abandoned his principles for political expediency and has worked hard to advance conservative principles. She never had a reason to not trust Senator Kyl's explanations or doubt his motives. Wow, that's quite a defense. Allow us a few examples of rebuttal. First of all, let's start with the 12 million illegals Kyl continually uses in his references. He and our government officials have been using this bogus figure for 5 years. Reliable sources place the figure at over 20 million (www.immigrationcounters.com) and climbing rapidly. Kyl has consistently appointed, endorsed and raised funds for officials and candidates who have been adamantly opposed to the principles of the Center for Az Policy. When we first entered the AZ GOP office during the terms of Chairman Bob Fannin and Executive Director Ann Lynch (Kyl's people), we were dismayed to discover pamphlets in the literature rack for the recruitment of WISH (pro-abortion) Republicans. During the same period, articles appeared in newspapers of Fannin promoting the WISH List and of Lynch being one of their prominent members. Kyl has recently endorsed Senator Carolyn Allen (WISH list and homosexual agenda advocate in the AZ Senate) against a proven supporter of CAP legislation, Representative Colette Rosati, in the 2006 Republican Senate primary in Dist. 8. He just hosted a fundraiser for U.S. Senator Susan Collins, who has a liberal advocacy record similar to Allen's. Senator Kyl had his same staffer, Ann Lynch, lead a $20,000 campaign by the Republican elite, some McCain staff and supporters ( surprise, 9 of them appeared on Janet's web site as "Republicans for Janet"), to replace the reliably social conservative leadership in Dist. 11 last year. He, along with 9 other elected Republican leaders, (now fondly known as "the Gang of 10") authored a letter of recommendation to impress the Dist.11 PCs to support McCain's slate. Blessedly, the good, strong PCs were not impressed and they all lost. Senator Kyl dutifully lead this effort (3 AZ congressmen also followed marching orders) to unseat platform Republican leadership in favor of McCain's slate. Cathi, that is what was unwarranted and unconscionable, and would give many a Republican a reason not to trust Senator Kyl's explanation or motives. Pure political hardball to take out a few gnats with a battleship crew. You may also recall it was Kyl's strong endorsement that put Sandra Day O'Connor (who kept partial birth abortion legal) on the Supreme Court. Kyl was aware of her record in the AZ legislature as well as her political leanings. Senator Kyl has also strongly endorsed Senator McCain for President. McCain has voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment, and through McCain finance reform, against political free speech. For example, it prevents National Right To Life's efforts to inform voters 60 days before an election. McCain has also repeatedly voted for federal funding of both fetal tissue research and embryonic stem cell research. All of these votes are opposed to CAP's positions. We would not call McCain's positions conservative. If he were elected president in place of almost any other Republican the pro-family agenda would likely suffer. We would not call Senator's Kyl's position as AZ Campaign Manager for McCain "advancing conservative principles". How could Kyl state he has an "enforce the border first" position and at the same time support McCain for president? It doesn't compute, except as an act of political expediency. Kyl is following McCain and taking our Republican party off the cliff. Last Monday Barry Young asked Senator Kyl why only 2 miles of Duncan Hunter's fence had been built. Kyl knew very well what fence Barry was referring to and yet he misled the listeners. Kyl responded that Hunter was incorrect and that 80 miles had already been built in the San Diego area alone. Of course Hunter had that fence built years ago. Hunter's new legislation authorized 854 miles of fence from AZ to Texas last year. We wouldn't call this a principled response. Today, Congressman Hunter gave an update on the fence on the J.D. Hayworth show, and said about 12 miles had been built. Now let's address the Illegal Immigration bill itself that Kyl worked out in secret with Sen.Kennedy and is attempting to rush through. Hugh Hewitt, a well-known constitutional lawyer, (and many others) has already shown Kyl's bill to be a fraud and sham. A great number of commentators have described what a travesty the secretive process has been with this bill. We can agree Cathi, Kyl is very intelligent. Unfortunately, that makes it all the more clear that he is well aware of what he has wrought. We question, however, his keen strategic mind since Ted Kennedy checkmated him into the "great compromise" for which the Republicans will take the hit. This bill could destroy the Republican Party as well as the country's historical framework, and Kyl certainly must know this. Is it any wonder the populace is outraged? It appears he has purposely deceived us, and that constitutes a betrayal of the trust we placed on his word for "border enforcement first" in his 2006 campaign. Citizens last fall told us through their vote that we have spoiled the Republican brand, the only home for social conservatives. In discouragement, they stayed home or voted for Democrats like Mitchell and Napolitano who used Republican issues such as "secure the border" to get elected. We would hope that instead of praising Senator Kyl, you would tell the Senator that it is not too late. He should kill this bill and reestablish the credibility of Congress by honoring the legislation they passed last year to build 854 miles of border fence and secure our southern border. A temporary worker's program will only be effective with a secured border certified by a reliable source. We pray that the name of Jon Kyl will not be sullied and forever linked with this apparently ill conceived legislation, which may accomplish what no war could--the demise of our beloved country. Rob and Marne Haney "America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln |
|||