February 28th, 2016 from Zona Politics with Jim Nintzel on Vimeo.
On this week's episode of Zona Politics with Jim Nintzel: Tucson City Councilman Steve Kozachik comes by the set to talk about the city budget, the proposal to require private employers to provide sick time to the their workers and more. Then we talk with former public defender Joel Feinman, who wants to challenge Pima County Attorney in this year's Democratic primary. And then international correspondent and UA School of Journalism professor Mort Rosenblum talks about the state of reporting on foreign affairs, the reputation of the United States around the world and more.THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY YOU DON’T WANT TO MISS
Psst, want to make a quick killing? Go into the school business with me. The state’s making it just too good to pass up.
They’re going to put well over $3,000 of taxpayer money in every kid’s backpack, tell his parents nothing more than he needs to get instruction in reading, grammar, mathematics, social sciences and science, and send him out to spend the money on whatever “education” provider he chooses.
Here’s the best part. All you and I have to do to collect this kid’s check is call ourselves a “school,” set up an Arizona address, and accept every child who walks through the door regardless of his race, color, or national origin. And believe me, we’re going to want to lift the money off of any and every of the little snot noses even if they come from New Zealand.
That’s all we have to do. No, really. That’s all there is. We don’t need accreditation or certification or any of that other education crap. You’re no educator, and neither am I. But what difference does that make? The state couldn’t care.
All we need right now is for our buddies in the Legislature to pass this bill they’ve got making tax money available to every kid.
Tags: Empowerment Scholarship Accounts , HB 2482 , Richard Gilman , Bringing Up Arizona
The two senators had an almost impossible task - landing a decisive blow against a player who has been entirely impervious to decisive blows and is simply a better debater than either of them. The need to land that decisive blow created a series of visuals, set pieces and mini-dramas in which they gave their absolute all to take him down and inevitably failed. On balance, that made them look small and confirmed the pervasive impression of his strength and their weakness. They're being crushed by a guy who by any normal political calculus is a joke.
In virtually every instance, Cruz or Rubio would launch some slashing attack, often both of them in succession or even at the same time only to see an unflappable Trump raise his index finger to the moderator, wait his turn and calmly slap his attackers down and reiterate his basic mantra. 'I'll make us great. I'll win. I'm winning. We'll win.' Since Cruz is a bit shorter than Trump and Rubio is substantially shorter than Trump, the visual, with Trump in the center, often had the look of one of those old Bugs Bunny or Popeye cartoons where one tough guy is holding two runts at bay with outstretched arms to both sides.
Toward the end of the debate, even Cruz and Rubio seemed to lose their enthusiasm for the fight. The attacks degenerated into arcane discussions of Supreme Court jurisprudence between Cruz and Hugh Hewitt, whether John Kerry is worse than Hillary Clinton and arguments over the 2004 election. It was like overhearing a Federalist Society meeting at a cigar bar - all completely irrelevant to the politics of the moment.
During the debate and during the infomercial-esque Chris Cuomo interview after the debate, Trump said again and again that he was enjoying himself and that his opponents were losing badly. These are perhaps the most credible things Trump has ever said.
Let's be clear: Trump is no fluke. Nor is he hijacking the Republican Party or the conservative movement, if there is such a thing. He is, rather, the party’s creation, its Frankenstein monster, brought to life by the party, fed by the party and now made strong enough to destroy its maker. Was it not the party’s wild obstructionism — the repeated threats to shut down the government over policy and legislative disagreements; the persistent call for nullification of Supreme Court decisions; the insistence that compromise was betrayal; the internal coups against party leaders who refused to join the general demolition — that taught Republican voters that government, institutions, political traditions, party leadership and even parties themselves were things to be overthrown, evaded, ignored, insulted, laughed at? Was it not Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), among many others, who set this tone and thereby cleared the way for someone even more irreverent, so that now, in a most unenjoyable irony, Cruz, along with the rest of the party, must fall to the purer version of himself, a less ideologically encumbered anarcho-revolutionary? This would not be the first revolution that devoured itself.
Then there was the party’s accommodation to and exploitation of the bigotry in its ranks. No, the majority of Republicans are not bigots. But they have certainly been enablers. Who began the attack on immigrants — legal and illegal — long before Trump arrived on the scene and made it his premier issue? Who was it who frightened Mitt Romney into selling his soul in 2012, talking of “self-deportation” to get himself right with the party’s anti-immigrant forces? Who was it who opposed any plausible means of dealing with the genuine problem of illegal immigration, forcing Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) to cower, abandon his principles — and his own immigration legislation — lest he be driven from the presidential race before it had even begun? It was not Trump. It was not even party yahoos. It was Republican Party pundits and intellectuals, trying to harness populist passions and perhaps deal a blow to any legislation for which President Obama might possibly claim even partial credit. What did Trump do but pick up where they left off, tapping the well-primed gusher of popular anger, xenophobia and, yes, bigotry that the party had already unleashed?
Tags: school of authentic journalism , greg berger , narco news , cuernavaca , mexico city , kickstarter , Video
Tags: desert vintage , fourth ave , vintage , thrift
Tags: american civil liberties union , detention watch network , national immigrant justice center , immigration and customs enforcement , eloy detention center , immigration , arizona
Arizona House Speaker David Gowan last month repaid the state more than $12,000 for mileage reimbursements he claimed for trips that he took in state vehicles and for days he claimed to work but did not.
Gowan repaid the travel reimbursement money after the Arizona Capitol Times published a Jan. 8 article detailing the increase of state fleet vehicle use by top Republican lawmakers and their staff. The speaker declined to comment on the issue.
House Republican caucus spokesperson Stephanie Grisham said after the Capitol Times published its investigation into Gowan and other lawmakers’ use of state fleet vehicles, the speaker instructed House staff to comb through his personal mileage reimbursement claims and cross reference those records with his fleet vehicle use to look for any travel reimbursements.