Courtesy of TPM:
Hey, remember the birthers?
Infamous Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio does -- which is why he announced a five-person "Cold Case Posse" that will delve into the issue of President Obama's birth certificate.
The posse follows a request by the Surprise, Arizona Tea Party, who Arpaio met with on August 17. The Surprise Tea Party believes that the long-form birth certificate released by President Obama in April -- which put the issue to rest for pretty much everyone -- could be a forgery.
"The Surprise Tea Party is concerned," they wrote, "that no law enforcement agency or other duly constituted government agency has conducted an investigation into the Obama birth certificate to determine if it is in fact an authentic copy of 1961 birth records on file for Barack Obama at the Hawaii Department of Health in Honolulu, or whether it, or they are forgeries."
Arpaio says he has over 3000 people participating within his larger "posse" program in Maricopa County -- including celebrities like Lou Ferrigno of "The Hulk" and Steven Seagal, actor and alleged puppy-killer . But, according to WND, for the birth certificate probe there's a special "posse within the posse" made up of two former law enforcement officers, two retired lawyers and headed by retired detective Michael Zullo from Bergen County, NJ.
You know I am fairly confident that Sheriff "pink underwear" Arpaio could not find his own ass with a flashlight and a road map.
Oh! I guess I stand corrected.
Arizona must be SO proud!
Showing posts with label Arizona. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arizona. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Friday, September 2, 2011
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Arizona Republicans to raffle off same model of handgun used in the attempted assassination of Gabrielle Giffords!
From Raw Story:
The Republican Party in Arizona's Pima County, which is represented by Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), is in the midst of a fundraising raffle, $10 per entry.
The prize: the same model of gun that delivered a near-fatal blast to the Democratic lawmaker's skull outside a Tucson grocery store in January.Tucson is in Pima County.
The local party sent out its e-newsletter late last week advertising the raffle. On the third page of the seven-page document, a large illustration of the gun appears with the headline "Help Pima GOP get out the vote and maybe help yourself to a new Glock .40."
The winner of the gun will also receive a case, three 12-round magazines and grips for the firearm."Tickets will go quickly for this firearm!" the blurb in the newsletter warns.
The $1,250 raised from the raffle tickets will go toward get out the vote efforts for the party.
The gun is a Glock 23, an updated model of the Glock 19 Jared Loughner used during his January 8, 2011 shooting spree that killed six and injured 13 others, including Giffords
Oh my God! What the fuck is wrong with these people?
How can ANYBODY, even Republicans, be this completely insensitive and hateful?
I'm sorry, but I am literally so pissed off by this that I am shaking and can't even type any more.
The Republican Party in Arizona's Pima County, which is represented by Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), is in the midst of a fundraising raffle, $10 per entry.
The prize: the same model of gun that delivered a near-fatal blast to the Democratic lawmaker's skull outside a Tucson grocery store in January.Tucson is in Pima County.
The local party sent out its e-newsletter late last week advertising the raffle. On the third page of the seven-page document, a large illustration of the gun appears with the headline "Help Pima GOP get out the vote and maybe help yourself to a new Glock .40."
The winner of the gun will also receive a case, three 12-round magazines and grips for the firearm."Tickets will go quickly for this firearm!" the blurb in the newsletter warns.
The $1,250 raised from the raffle tickets will go toward get out the vote efforts for the party.
The gun is a Glock 23, an updated model of the Glock 19 Jared Loughner used during his January 8, 2011 shooting spree that killed six and injured 13 others, including Giffords
Oh my God! What the fuck is wrong with these people?
How can ANYBODY, even Republicans, be this completely insensitive and hateful?
I'm sorry, but I am literally so pissed off by this that I am shaking and can't even type any more.
Labels:
Arizona,
assassination,
Assholes,
Gabby Giffords,
gun control,
Jared Loughner,
Republicans,
shooting
Monday, August 29, 2011
The mother of Christina Taylor Green: "I didn't know what had happened, but I knew it was bad."
I will warn you ahead of time that this story about the death of little Christina, and how her mother and family dealt with it, is heart wrenching.
However I feel it is an important story for people to read, especially for those who have a hard time understanding the devastating effect that easy access to handguns and assault weapons have on our citizens.
From AZ Central:
To the gunman, they probably looked about the same size - Hileman, tiny at not quite 5 feet, and Christina-Taylor, the tallest kid in third grade. Maybe he didn't know he was shooting a child. It doesn't matter. He did.
Hileman was hit three times trying to shield her young charge. Christina-Taylor was shot once. The two fell to the pavement next to each other, bleeding. Hileman looked into the little girl's eyes and, in her best mom voice, admonished, "Don't you leave me, Christina-Taylor Green. Don't you die on me."
But the 9-year-old was one of six people killed that day. Their names are written on six white wooden crosses that stand in memorial across Ina Road from the Safeway. Christina-Taylor's name is on the fifth one. Thirteen other people, including Hileman and Giffords, were shot and lived.
A surgeon entered then, trailed by three nurses. He was crying, and so were the nurses, and then Green knew for sure. The surgeon sat next to her and said, "We tried the best we could." His voice caught, and he choked out: "We tried the best we could. Your daughter passed away."
Green pinched her arm again and again. It still hurt. But this wasn't real. It couldn't be real.
"This is the worst dream ever," she thought.
And yet, ever the mother, ever the nurse, Green thanked the surgeon, repeating his words: "I know you tried your best. It's OK. Thank you."
She looked into the face of her son sitting beside her, his eyes searching her face.
"Can we see Christina now?" Dallas asked.He had heard the police officer, and the surgeon, but maybe he needed to hear the words from his mother for them to be true.
"Christina is in heaven, Dallas," Green told him, and then she cried, holding her tearful son.
Every death caused by a handgun in this country seems senseless, but this one, at least for me, just seemed especially unnecessary. And especially painful.
However if the anger we feel over such a senseless act of violence translated into citizens demanding that lawmakers create laws making access to handguns significantly more difficult for those people who simply should NEVER have access to a weapon whose sole purpose is the ending of a human life, then perhaps little Christina's death would serve some higher purpose.
By the way speaking of senseless acts perpetrated on the citizens of this country, and I am not saying the two are directly related, today is the third anniversary of John McCain's announcement that he chose Sarah Palin as his running mate.
One cannot help but wonder how much better the country would be right now if he had NOT allowed himself to be bullied into making such a regrettable choice.
However I feel it is an important story for people to read, especially for those who have a hard time understanding the devastating effect that easy access to handguns and assault weapons have on our citizens.
From AZ Central:
To the gunman, they probably looked about the same size - Hileman, tiny at not quite 5 feet, and Christina-Taylor, the tallest kid in third grade. Maybe he didn't know he was shooting a child. It doesn't matter. He did.
Hileman was hit three times trying to shield her young charge. Christina-Taylor was shot once. The two fell to the pavement next to each other, bleeding. Hileman looked into the little girl's eyes and, in her best mom voice, admonished, "Don't you leave me, Christina-Taylor Green. Don't you die on me."
But the 9-year-old was one of six people killed that day. Their names are written on six white wooden crosses that stand in memorial across Ina Road from the Safeway. Christina-Taylor's name is on the fifth one. Thirteen other people, including Hileman and Giffords, were shot and lived.
A surgeon entered then, trailed by three nurses. He was crying, and so were the nurses, and then Green knew for sure. The surgeon sat next to her and said, "We tried the best we could." His voice caught, and he choked out: "We tried the best we could. Your daughter passed away."
Green pinched her arm again and again. It still hurt. But this wasn't real. It couldn't be real.
"This is the worst dream ever," she thought.
And yet, ever the mother, ever the nurse, Green thanked the surgeon, repeating his words: "I know you tried your best. It's OK. Thank you."
She looked into the face of her son sitting beside her, his eyes searching her face.
"Can we see Christina now?" Dallas asked.He had heard the police officer, and the surgeon, but maybe he needed to hear the words from his mother for them to be true.
"Christina is in heaven, Dallas," Green told him, and then she cried, holding her tearful son.
Every death caused by a handgun in this country seems senseless, but this one, at least for me, just seemed especially unnecessary. And especially painful.
However if the anger we feel over such a senseless act of violence translated into citizens demanding that lawmakers create laws making access to handguns significantly more difficult for those people who simply should NEVER have access to a weapon whose sole purpose is the ending of a human life, then perhaps little Christina's death would serve some higher purpose.
By the way speaking of senseless acts perpetrated on the citizens of this country, and I am not saying the two are directly related, today is the third anniversary of John McCain's announcement that he chose Sarah Palin as his running mate.
One cannot help but wonder how much better the country would be right now if he had NOT allowed himself to be bullied into making such a regrettable choice.
Thursday, August 4, 2011
The "Curse of Palin" infects the office of Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar. Apparently Thomas Van Flein is a carrier.
| "Could you hold that thought Congressman? My Sarah Palin emergency cell phone is ringing!" |
Staffing problems at the highest level of Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar’s office have thrown his operation into disarray — spurring a string of departures and prompting members of the congressman’s inner circle to reach out for help, internal emails obtained by POLITICO indicate.
“Gosar has serious congressional staff issues,” said one Arizona Republican familiar with the operation. “It’s a total cluster.”
The emails, written by former staffers while they were still on the payroll, implicate chief of staff Rob Robinson and legislative director Tom Van Flein as the heart of the problem.
Gosar’s decision to hire the pair after he was elected raised eyebrows from the beginning — both men had no prior congressional experience and both had close ties to Sarah Palin, who boosted Gosar’s campaign with an endorsement.
Gosar’s relationship with Robinson began long before his recent venture into politics. They met when both served on the American Dental Association’s government affairs council, and eventually grew so close, Robinson quit his Wasilla-based dental practice in 2009 to become Gosar’s chief adviser. Robinson got to know Palin during his time dabbling in Alaska politics and through Van Flein, who also counts as clients Palin and the Alaska Dental Society.
In January, Gosar assured those concerned about Robinson and Van Flein’s lack of political experience that he trusted both men and that their relationships with Palin wouldn’t affect his office. “When it comes to politics, it’s nice to be mired with Sarah Palin. But I’m Paul Gosar. I’m my own person,” he told Roll Call at the time.
In a lengthy message sent in late January by Gosar’s former communications director, Stefani Zimmerman describes Van Flein as disengaged and preoccupied with the former Alaska governor’s portfolio.
Zimmerman accused Van Flein — who remains one of Palin’s most trusted advisers — of spending office time on Palin and other clients. She also said he “relays information the staff discusses with each other to people like Sarah Palin” and “writes op-eds and speeches without permission, all from Sarah Palin’s point of view.”
In meetings, Zimmerman claimed, Van Flein “asks questions that would benefit Sarah, not Paul,” and “advises Paul from a tea party perspective, not Arizona 1st’s perspective.”
Zimmerman also charged that Van Flein, like Palin, “goes rogue, … takes meetings, advises Paul, etc., without telling anyone, including Rob.”
Go ahead and ask yourself if this comes as any surprise to you.
No, of course not. Because as we all know EVERYTHING Palin touches turns to shit.
You know on a personal note I just have to say how much I have missed "Tommy" Van Flein around here.
Why it seems like just yesterday he was desperately bailing like a one armed sailor while Joe Miller's Senate campaign sank into the inky blackness of Alaska politics. With experience and credentials like that you can imagine what an asset he must be to Paul Gosar.
I am almost embarrassed at how sentimental I become when I think back to the days when Tommy would threaten to sue me on the Grizzled Mama's behalf (When we both knew he did not have the legal right nor sufficient set of balls to pull it off), or I would trick him into having brunch with me just to see the shocked look on his face.
But does he ever call? Or even write? Hell no.
Oh well I guess those carefree days of constant strife and "take no prisoners" warfare are all but gone now.
What can I say? Alaska's loss is....well apparently now Arizona's loss.
It is interesting to note, by the way, that it now seems apparent that whenever somebody pisses Klondike Kardashian off that it makes Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar's ability to do his job grind to a standstill, since part of his staff is then preoccupied with helping her with damage control and soothing her ruffled feathers.
You know SOMEBODY in Arizona politics might take that information and use it for their benefit.
I am just saying.
Labels:
Arizona,
Palin-bots,
Paul Gosar,
politics,
poodle,
Sarah Palin,
Thomas Van Flein
Friday, July 15, 2011
Not that I had any respect left for Jay Leno, but after this pathetic Bristol Palin interview I kind of wish Conan O"Brien would find him in an alleyway and kick his ass. Is that wrong of me?
In my opinion the ONLY true host of the Tonight Show was the late, great Johnny Carson. (Steve Allen and Jack Paar were fine, but Carson was the king!)
Leno has never able to ever come close to filling that great man's shoes.
And this interview did almost as much to make me dislike him as when he threw Conan O'Brien under the bus to satisfy his need to feel relevant, and to feed his gigantic ego. (Gee who does THAT sound like?)
Part One:
Bristol does not waste one second before trotting out her first lie, this one being about why she had her chin done. (Bristol fails to mention that she had undergone procedures to have the fat sucked out to make her face look thinner a few times in the past. And when she says that it is NOT an implant, I don't think even Rickles buys that load of moosecrap.)
"I wanted to be candid in the book?" Really? Then why weren't you?
Quickly. of course, the slams against Levi begin. Essentially Bristol claims her parents never liked him, and knew he was no good.
The idea that Sarah never liked Levi is undoubtedly accurate, she really does not like anybody besides herself. But she DID have him to living in her house, and running errands for her. Not to mention that he was one of the VERY few people allowed in the hospital when Sarah "gave birth" to Trig.
That does not exactly sound like he was despised.
Leno asking Bristol about her mother running for President: "Is there any reason she SHOULDN'T run?"
Rickles: "Cause she could lose."
This inspires the crowd to erupt in wild applause, which clearly causes Bristol to become very uncomfortable.
Leno: "Do you want her to run?"
BP: "I think so, yeah." Careful Bristol you almost told the truth there.
Again Bristol's version of how she learned that her mother had been tapped as McCain's VP choice does not jive, in any way, with the version that Palin wrote in "Going Rogue." I think they are going to need anothervisit to the re-education camp family meeting.
Now the only intelligent remark that Leno makes during the interview is to say, after Bristol trots out the "lawsuits" excuse for why her mother quit as Governor (By the way , those were ethics charges, NOT lawsuits.), "That happens with every Governor. Everybody gets lawsuits, its all part of the job." (Again these were ETHICS CHARGES!) However Bristol has been trained well, and insists that her mother did it "for Alaska."
Bristol also says that her mother is not building a house in Arizona. I never heard that she was "building" one but I am unsure if Bristol was denying that she had purchased one or not. Because, you know, THAT would be another lie, which good "Christian" girls should never tell. (Sorry I made myself choke laughing at that one.)
Part two:
Bristol talks about her reality show and Rickles provides the appropriate unimpressed response. ( I am beginning to warm up to Rickles, who keeps reaching over to touch Bristol's hand which is clearly freaking her out a little.)
Then Leno decides to attack Levi concerning his upcoming book by essentially saying he "dislikes this guy" because he divulges too much private information that the public does not need to know.
Now just absorb THAT for a moment. Essentially Leno believes that LEVI is airing too much dirty laundry, as if HE was the one to accuse Bristol of getting him drunk and stealing his virginity. Apparently that giant head of Leno's is an "irony free" zone.
Fucking idiot!
Leno has never able to ever come close to filling that great man's shoes.
And this interview did almost as much to make me dislike him as when he threw Conan O'Brien under the bus to satisfy his need to feel relevant, and to feed his gigantic ego. (Gee who does THAT sound like?)
Part One:
Bristol does not waste one second before trotting out her first lie, this one being about why she had her chin done. (Bristol fails to mention that she had undergone procedures to have the fat sucked out to make her face look thinner a few times in the past. And when she says that it is NOT an implant, I don't think even Rickles buys that load of moosecrap.)
"I wanted to be candid in the book?" Really? Then why weren't you?
Quickly. of course, the slams against Levi begin. Essentially Bristol claims her parents never liked him, and knew he was no good.
The idea that Sarah never liked Levi is undoubtedly accurate, she really does not like anybody besides herself. But she DID have him to living in her house, and running errands for her. Not to mention that he was one of the VERY few people allowed in the hospital when Sarah "gave birth" to Trig.
That does not exactly sound like he was despised.
Leno asking Bristol about her mother running for President: "Is there any reason she SHOULDN'T run?"
Rickles: "Cause she could lose."
This inspires the crowd to erupt in wild applause, which clearly causes Bristol to become very uncomfortable.
Leno: "Do you want her to run?"
BP: "I think so, yeah." Careful Bristol you almost told the truth there.
Again Bristol's version of how she learned that her mother had been tapped as McCain's VP choice does not jive, in any way, with the version that Palin wrote in "Going Rogue." I think they are going to need another
Now the only intelligent remark that Leno makes during the interview is to say, after Bristol trots out the "lawsuits" excuse for why her mother quit as Governor (By the way , those were ethics charges, NOT lawsuits.), "That happens with every Governor. Everybody gets lawsuits, its all part of the job." (Again these were ETHICS CHARGES!) However Bristol has been trained well, and insists that her mother did it "for Alaska."
Bristol also says that her mother is not building a house in Arizona. I never heard that she was "building" one but I am unsure if Bristol was denying that she had purchased one or not. Because, you know, THAT would be another lie, which good "Christian" girls should never tell. (Sorry I made myself choke laughing at that one.)
Part two:
Bristol talks about her reality show and Rickles provides the appropriate unimpressed response. ( I am beginning to warm up to Rickles, who keeps reaching over to touch Bristol's hand which is clearly freaking her out a little.)
Then Leno decides to attack Levi concerning his upcoming book by essentially saying he "dislikes this guy" because he divulges too much private information that the public does not need to know.
Now just absorb THAT for a moment. Essentially Leno believes that LEVI is airing too much dirty laundry, as if HE was the one to accuse Bristol of getting him drunk and stealing his virginity. Apparently that giant head of Leno's is an "irony free" zone.
Fucking idiot!
Labels:
Arizona,
book tour,
Bristol Palin,
Jay Leno,
Levi Johnston,
lies,
NBC,
politics,
Sarah Palin,
Tonight Show
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Gabby Giffords receives standing ovation during first public appearance.
Wounded Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords made her first Houston public appearance Monday night since being shot in the head in January by joining her husband, former astronaut Mark Kelly, at a Houston awards ceremony where he received the Spaceflight Medal.
Her communications director, C.J. Karamargin, confirmed her attendance, late Monday but could provide no further details.
According to a report from ABC News, Giffords was pushed into the auditorium in a wheelchair and received a standing ovation from the crowd of hundreds assembled at Space Center Houston.
Giffords reportedly rose from her wheelchair to hug and kiss her husband. The couple held hands for most of the event. The Arizona Democrat appeared to chat with people sitting around her, and laughed when the crew of STS-134, the Space Shuttle Endeavour’s last mission, was introduced, ABC reported.
Karamargin said he was not surprised his boss was out and about in Houston.
“You have to keep in mind that the congresswoman was just in Tuscon … for a Father’s Day visit. She met with the staff there and she climbed a flight of 18 stairs. I think it’s no surprise the congresswoman is getting out more and more … She’s showing greater physical strength, greater cognitive abilities and greater verbal skills, so it’s not a surprise.”
I don't know about all of you, but when I think of "steel spines" and "thick skins" THIS is the person who I picture.
Gabby Giffords is a true inspiration, and I am beginning to think that she might very well return to House someday and be a force to be reckoned with.
Labels:
Arizona,
Gabby Giffords,
politics,
shooting,
strength
Monday, May 24, 2010
How to Win the Arizona Boycott
¡Hola! Everybody...
I came across this post and had to share it (h/t to antiracismdsa)...
I came across this post and had to share it (h/t to antiracismdsa)...
* * *
How to Win the Arizona Boycott
Created 05/12/2010 - 1:25pm
By Randy Shaw
In the past two weeks, the call for an economic boycott of Arizona has spread far beyond the political arena. In addition to labor and immigrant rights groups, it quickly won support from such unusual suspects as pop singers Shakira and Ricky Martin, the NBA’s “Los Phoenix Suns,” and the Major League Baseball Players Association. Polls show African-Americans are even more hostile than Latinos to the racist Arizona law, and conventions from multiple groups are already being switched out of state.
But boycotts typically start with a flurry of activity. Most then dissipate without building the boycott infrastructure necessary to achieve their original goal. For the Arizona boycott to succeed, activists must follow the lessons of the UFW grape and lettuce boycotts of the 1960’s and 1970’s, the South Africa divestment campaign of the 1970s and 1980’s, and the UNITE HERE “Hotel Rising Boycott” of 2006. And the timing is perfect for a “Boycott Summer,” which would boost immigrant rights activism both in Arizona and nationally.
“Boycott Summer”
The critical distinction between successful and failed boycotts is the creation of a boycott infrastructure. In other words, a campaign operation that continues after the media launch event ends, and that builds the boycott through continually harnessing and recruiting volunteers.
The Center for Community Change, its network of affiliated groups, and its labor allies collectively has the staff capability to build an Arizona boycott infrastructure. And while some might argue that focusing on Arizona is a distraction from comprehensive federal reform, at this point the only way a breakthrough can happen on the latter is by activists showing clout on the state boycott.
With summer approaching and many colleges already out, the timing is perfect for a massive “Boycott Summer” campaign in Arizona. Whether this occurs depends on the commitment of boycott groups to build such an infrastructure, which appears to be a golden opportunity to keep immigration reform on the national radar during hearings on proposed Supreme Court Justice Kagan, the ongoing oil spill, financial reforms, and other news.
Recruitment for a Boycott Summer campaign will keep the issue alive across the nation, nationalizing a local struggle in the same way that the UFW used grape and lettuce boycott recruitment to spread word of its struggle with growers in California’s Central Valley. Recruits also become troops in the larger battle for federal reform, so their value extends beyond Arizona and will likely continue when they return to school in the fall.
In addition, the campaign must set up the type of boycott team used by UNITE HERE to persuade conventions to switch from boycotted hotels. In this case, this means staff contacting every convention and public body scheduled to be in Arizona through 2012, and both urging and helping them to switch states (ideally coordinating with UNITE HERE so that the new hotel site is union).
Some conventions are set for this summer in Arizona and cannot move at this late date without a huge financial sacrifice. But most can switch, and with Las Vegas, San Diego and Los Angeles nearby, there are plenty of quality non-Arizona venues.
The staffing of boycotts, with or without a “boycott summer,” is where the rubber hits the road. It means that activists are so committed to success that they will use this labor intensive and often controversial strategy to prevail. Announcing a boycott and then relying on quick media hits rather than building a boycott infrastructure sends a counter message, one that adversaries see as organizational weakness.
The immigrants’ rights movement has clearly shown it will do what it takes to win. The movement desperately needs to attract new recruits and energies, and running a full-scale Arizona boycott offers the perfect opportunity.
Defining Success
The national coalition announced the boycott on May 5 stating that it would continue until the Arizona law “is repealed, reversed by the courts, and/or superseded by comprehensive federal immigration.” This middle option---a court ruling striking down the law -- could mean that the boycott could end quite soon, as many believe it is unconstitutional and/or federally pre-empted.
When California farmworkers forced growers to accept an agricultural labor relations law, South Africans compelled the white minority leadership to accept majority rule, and hotel workers won good wages, benefits and working conditions through boycotting global hotel corporations, movements were strengthened and the grassroots was empowered. None of these successful boycotts ended prior to the target conceding to the economic pressure.
But a favorable court ruling would not require a boycott or even any new activism (to the extent judges are influenced by grassroots action the necessary amount has already occurred). Ending the Arizona boycott without forcing any action by the State Legislature or Governor would not empower the movement, and not provide the political victory apparently needed to pass comprehensive reform this year or anytime soon.
So the Arizona boycott should not be viewed as a short-term project. If it is, it is unlikely to succeed.
The Long View
A common thread through prior successful boycotts is that activists turned to the strategy because they had no real alternative. The same is true with immigrant rights in Arizona, a state that has tried to enact racist, anti-Latino laws for years.
An all-out grassroots, multi-pronged Arizona boycott cannot only change the new law, but also the political climate surrounding immigration. And not only in Arizona, but throughout the country, and in the Republican Party.
It’s good to see activists taking matters into their own hands, and showing Arizona business leaders that attacking immigrants hurts their bottom line.
Randy Shaw is the author of Beyond the Fields: Cesar Chavez, The UFW, and the Struggle for Justice in the 21st Century, which will be out in paperback in July.
In the past two weeks, the call for an economic boycott of Arizona has spread far beyond the political arena. In addition to labor and immigrant rights groups, it quickly won support from such unusual suspects as pop singers Shakira and Ricky Martin, the NBA’s “Los Phoenix Suns,” and the Major League Baseball Players Association. Polls show African-Americans are even more hostile than Latinos to the racist Arizona law, and conventions from multiple groups are already being switched out of state.
But boycotts typically start with a flurry of activity. Most then dissipate without building the boycott infrastructure necessary to achieve their original goal. For the Arizona boycott to succeed, activists must follow the lessons of the UFW grape and lettuce boycotts of the 1960’s and 1970’s, the South Africa divestment campaign of the 1970s and 1980’s, and the UNITE HERE “Hotel Rising Boycott” of 2006. And the timing is perfect for a “Boycott Summer,” which would boost immigrant rights activism both in Arizona and nationally.
“Boycott Summer”
The critical distinction between successful and failed boycotts is the creation of a boycott infrastructure. In other words, a campaign operation that continues after the media launch event ends, and that builds the boycott through continually harnessing and recruiting volunteers.
The Center for Community Change, its network of affiliated groups, and its labor allies collectively has the staff capability to build an Arizona boycott infrastructure. And while some might argue that focusing on Arizona is a distraction from comprehensive federal reform, at this point the only way a breakthrough can happen on the latter is by activists showing clout on the state boycott.
With summer approaching and many colleges already out, the timing is perfect for a massive “Boycott Summer” campaign in Arizona. Whether this occurs depends on the commitment of boycott groups to build such an infrastructure, which appears to be a golden opportunity to keep immigration reform on the national radar during hearings on proposed Supreme Court Justice Kagan, the ongoing oil spill, financial reforms, and other news.
Recruitment for a Boycott Summer campaign will keep the issue alive across the nation, nationalizing a local struggle in the same way that the UFW used grape and lettuce boycott recruitment to spread word of its struggle with growers in California’s Central Valley. Recruits also become troops in the larger battle for federal reform, so their value extends beyond Arizona and will likely continue when they return to school in the fall.
In addition, the campaign must set up the type of boycott team used by UNITE HERE to persuade conventions to switch from boycotted hotels. In this case, this means staff contacting every convention and public body scheduled to be in Arizona through 2012, and both urging and helping them to switch states (ideally coordinating with UNITE HERE so that the new hotel site is union).
Some conventions are set for this summer in Arizona and cannot move at this late date without a huge financial sacrifice. But most can switch, and with Las Vegas, San Diego and Los Angeles nearby, there are plenty of quality non-Arizona venues.
The staffing of boycotts, with or without a “boycott summer,” is where the rubber hits the road. It means that activists are so committed to success that they will use this labor intensive and often controversial strategy to prevail. Announcing a boycott and then relying on quick media hits rather than building a boycott infrastructure sends a counter message, one that adversaries see as organizational weakness.
The immigrants’ rights movement has clearly shown it will do what it takes to win. The movement desperately needs to attract new recruits and energies, and running a full-scale Arizona boycott offers the perfect opportunity.
Defining Success
The national coalition announced the boycott on May 5 stating that it would continue until the Arizona law “is repealed, reversed by the courts, and/or superseded by comprehensive federal immigration.” This middle option---a court ruling striking down the law -- could mean that the boycott could end quite soon, as many believe it is unconstitutional and/or federally pre-empted.
When California farmworkers forced growers to accept an agricultural labor relations law, South Africans compelled the white minority leadership to accept majority rule, and hotel workers won good wages, benefits and working conditions through boycotting global hotel corporations, movements were strengthened and the grassroots was empowered. None of these successful boycotts ended prior to the target conceding to the economic pressure.
But a favorable court ruling would not require a boycott or even any new activism (to the extent judges are influenced by grassroots action the necessary amount has already occurred). Ending the Arizona boycott without forcing any action by the State Legislature or Governor would not empower the movement, and not provide the political victory apparently needed to pass comprehensive reform this year or anytime soon.
So the Arizona boycott should not be viewed as a short-term project. If it is, it is unlikely to succeed.
The Long View
A common thread through prior successful boycotts is that activists turned to the strategy because they had no real alternative. The same is true with immigrant rights in Arizona, a state that has tried to enact racist, anti-Latino laws for years.
An all-out grassroots, multi-pronged Arizona boycott cannot only change the new law, but also the political climate surrounding immigration. And not only in Arizona, but throughout the country, and in the Republican Party.
It’s good to see activists taking matters into their own hands, and showing Arizona business leaders that attacking immigrants hurts their bottom line.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Randy Shaw is the author of Beyond the Fields: Cesar Chavez, The UFW, and the Struggle for Justice in the 21st Century, which will be out in paperback in July.


