The Mutinous Local Republican Party

“A battered wife gets used to living with bruises. She won’t run away from her husband because she fears that if he catches her, the bruises will turn into broken bones.

“We are used to living with this city government – we’re used to those bruises / we know what we’re in for with this group. We could openly support you, but if you lose, the bruises we’re used to could turn into broken bones.

“You tell me how to get a battered wife to leave her husband, and I’ll openly support your campaign.”

My answer – act on principle. Do what you know is best for the long term interest of the community, not what may be in your own short term interest. Unless and until the community does that, nothing changes.

I apologize for not being permitted to give attribution for this quote at this time. Maybe soon. But, I assure you this is a verbatim answer from a local spokesperson for a local developer when queried about why the Pima County GOP and its operatives will not put themselves on the line and lend their full support for the very fine man and candidate for Ward 6, Steve Kozachik.

I met with Steve K, for 4 hours yesterday. The purpose was to get to know him first, and to thank him for helping out with our Veterans Fundraiser last week at Hotel Congress. Steve has offered to do more for local veterans than any candidate I have ever known.

As is the case with most all political dialogue, one thing leads to another…a lot! So, I ask him why the local GOP never seems to have any fire in their belly for their candidates? With the vociferous opposition they have to the current council, why is it that when it comes down to the wire, they will not open their check book and support their candidate?

This writer’s suggestion, not candidate Steve’s, is that the incumbents are securely slotted by the powers that be, that have been the powers that be for nye on 40 years, and they do not want any retribution in the event of a loss. Ergo, the battered wife analogy.

The political situation in Tucson has an uncanny similarity to the fictitious Mr. James Taylor and his political machine in the classic movie, “Mr Smith Goes to Washington.” I will leave the James Taylor comparison up to the reader’s imagination. However, the genuineness, integrity, and purity of intention of Steve Kozachik is quite like Jeff Smith, the character played by Jimmy Stewart. After endless years of a stranglehold control of Tucson by the real estate moguls, it may well be that it is time for the Boy Rangers to take back the City.

If the local GOP had the inspiration, the principles, and the moxie of Steve K, the local GOP could win an election and have a voice of reason in the KOS!

15 thoughts on “The Mutinous Local Republican Party”

  1. What’s the connection to veterans issues?  Yes, you mention Steve Kozachik’s support for a veterans’ fundraiser—and then you moved on to a political discussion. If I click on a link to a blog titled Veteran Veritas—Advocacy for our Veterans, I expect to read about veterans issues.  Mike, you’re certainly entitled to write what you want.  But, as a veteran myself, who doesn’t agree with your version of veritas (truth), you might want to retitle this blog. 

    1. Aw, come on Don! Name one subject that does not involve veterans. Veterans of any party have the power to move mountains if they so desire. Are you aware that many, many veterans prefer to distance themselves from political news? This subject should be considered by everyone in Tucson, and where else would they get this information?
       
      Try commenting on the subject at hand, rather than deflecting.

      1. Winneo, based on the logical trail you’ve laid out above, I guess that ANY subject can be tied to veterans, in one way shape or form.  (Sort of like “Seven Degrees of Kevin Bacon.”)

        Actually, winnieo, I think the title of this blog is a subject worth discussing.

        This is just me talking—but, if I come to a blog titled “Veterans Veritas—Advocacy for our Veterans,” I’d expect to see discussions about veterans issues, an essentially nonpartisan subject. 
        More to my point—if I clicked on a blog whose title implied it dealt with veterans issues, but found myself instead in the midst of a political discussion, I might never visit that website again.  I suspect I’m not alone in that sentiment.
        Imagine if I, a self-identified conservative, titled my blog “TUCSON’S CHILDRENS BLOG: A Place To Talk About The Future Citizens Of Tucson.” 

        Next, imagine the reaction of parents who visited the blog to read about local kids issues (e.g., kids activities at the Tucson parks, preschool funding)—but instead found me talking about Ronald Reagan.  Think they might feel a bit misled?  I do.

        Now, I could justify my sleight-of-title-wording by claiming that, in my opinion, all parents and children should read the words of Ronald Reagan.  But, I bet most moms and dads would still felt snookered.
        If Mike wants to write a personal blog, I encourage him to.  I do, as does Carolyn Classen.  On personal blogs, you can be as opinionated as you want.

        I am concerned, though, when the writers of non-partisan topical blogs (veterans issues, health, etc…) use those blogs as a political forum.  IMO I think that’s what Mike has done here.  And I don’t think that’s good for TucsonCitizen.com, which is trying to build a readership.

        But that’s just me.
         

        1. Uno, Veteran Veritas is a sub-heading under ” Pol. & Govt.” If you are having a problem with that, you might want to take it up with the Head Blog Meister.
           
          Deux, you said, “I think the title of this blog is a subject worth discussing,” and I read on eagerly to see what you had to say about the subject. Oops! You forgot to discuss it.

          1. Ein, you can’t be this obtuse.   

            Zwei, I spent several paragraphs discussing why I think Mike’s blog name is a bait-and-switch, based on his last three posts.  (I also made clear that that was my opinion, which he is free to dismiss).  Try reading again, after the word “discussing” in the second paragraph.  If you read what I wrote, it should be painfully obvious that I’m referring to Mike’s blog name.
            If you still don’t get it after that, you and I must be on different wavelengths.  We’ll have to leave it at that.

          2. Oh…I get it now.  You thought I was referring to this particular blog, on the “Mutinous Republican Party.”  (Even though the text of my post dispelled any confusion).

            OK, winneo, ya got me.  I should have made clear I was referring to the title of Mike’s blog overall, instead of this one post.

            Congratulations.  You win a cookie.

          3. I love your numbers!
            Gluten-free cookie, please.
            Yes, I thought you were referring to this post. Easy to see the confusion, no matter which way you look at it. Like so much of life, aye?

  2. Well now ‘winnieo’ I see by your quill you must be a writer. Your takes are surely interesting.
    I have discovered in recent weeks that there may not be so many ‘versions’ of truth as there are varieties of  projections of self.
    I cannot quite see how some of our thoughtful posters have missed the advocacy part. I made it clear that Steve K came out to support our program at the Merritt Center, for combat vets. And I thought it was clear that I support him.  Unless, I am sizzled from summer heat, I think that is titled “advocacy.”  The process is such that  you have to get someone elected first before they can advocate.  Is that not the American way?
    I have been in about 18 cities in the past two years, many of whom are actively engaged with programs for veterans transitioning to civilian life, and our supported in one way or another by local elected officials. None of our current elected officials can point to such activity from their respective wards.
    Summarily, the intent of the mini-essay was to bring into the sunlight, how difficult it is for a good man or woman to get elected in Tucson without first appeasing the icons of real estate. I know, I spent 29 years in the industry. So I am advocating for an honest process… the one that veterans defend. I do hope that is a proper syllogism, or at least a “verity”

    1. 43 of 45 posts have been pure advocacy. One piece made national news, with the announcement of widows benefits for ALS/ Lou Gehrigs’ Disease and resulted in 92 calls from all over the nation.  That is veritas.  A bit of personal perspective is called humanity. Smith chimes in to one post, puts some kindling on the fire, and then hollers Fire!  The gentleman is really splittin’ hairs on this one.

    1. Tell ya what…I’m signing off on this issue.  I’ve made my point, and I’ve no desire to be a pest.  This is your blog, after all.

      I’ll monitor this thread throughout the rest of today (I leave for Disney tomorrow, so blog commenting will de facto cease!).  If you want me to respond to you directly, I will—I owe you that.  Just, please do it before 7 PM PST—I’m hitting the sack after that.  :)

      We’ll have to agree to disagree.  If nothing else, the caffeine has indeed been flowing in the tea this weekend!

      Until the next time we ideologically joust, or agree, or both…

      Your TucsonCitizen.com colleague
      Don

Leave a Reply