At Least the Lakers won…

…or To Lawton with love: I don’t hate you, I hated the situation.

I’m the type of person who bristles at the idea of paying extra for anything. I don’t super-size. Don’t do extra cheese or dealer installed desert “undercoating”. It is mostly because I am cheap but I also am a strict adherent to the law of diminishing returns. And, because that “undercoating”, if anything at all, is WD-40 sprayed under the car by the exhaust.

Last night I sat in first class for the first time ever on a connection from DFW home. I have looked into it before, upgrading, but when I look at the price I laugh. Even on a nine hour transcontinental, to me, it’s just not worth it. Anyway, it was awesome. The seat was roomy and comfortable and the booze was included and served in glass tumblers, no plastic for me last night.

So, how did I find myself in such luxury? The airline I fly the most does not have first class, so the ones that do I fly so rarely that I use my miles for magazines. It was the result of a plethora of cascading annoyances. I spent the day in Lawton, OK yesterday on a business trip. It was the perfect plan. I left Wednesday afternoon with only carryon bags so I could get out of the airport as efficiently as possible.

Then, “light storms” in Dallas happened. My flight was to leave Lawton at 4:45, arriving in Dallas about 6 and my connection leaving at 7:18. Plenty of time I thought. So I’m figuring out what’s up with the airport in Lawton, my flight was to leave in half an hour and the security checkpoint was locked. Turns out that the two gate puddle jumper supported airport doesn’t have bathrooms past the checkpoint so they don’t open it until just before boarding for one of the four daily flights to Dallas.

After I learn this I hear that the flight has been delayed until 6. I start to panic. I then go to the ticket agent with my curiosity and he says that I will have no problem making my 7:18 flight. I should have recorded that statement.

I retreated to the friendly café in the Lawton airport to have a Blue Moon and play Free Cell. 6 comes and nothing. Then another announcement, the plane will be here (and the one intended for the 6:55 to Dallas) between 6:30 and 6:40. This is bad so I again go to the ticket counter and insist on a contingency ticket for the 10:10 (delayed to 10:40) as I am certain that (outside of a naïve hope) that I would not make it for my original flight. Being a little snotty, I insist on an upgrade, I figured why not? I’ve heard of other people who have done this before. Why not me? The friendly ticket agent complies and I get first class seat 4F, or more importantly, the ability to be the sixth person off the plane.

I wish that was it. But it was not. Before I continue I must state my admiration for the staff at the Lawton airport. Before all of this the Hertz agent could not print my rental car receipt. But she was friendly and the estimated bill was the final bill so I had a piece of paper stating what I paid for a night with a Mazda 5. Also, it turns out that the airport staff in Lawton are multitaskers. The TSA agents scan luggage and man the security check. The ticket agents bring in the planes, pack and unpack the luggage and take tickets at the gate. Impressive.

Anyway so what else could go wrong? Try the following:
- They board and launch the 6:55 before my 4:45! Ugh.
- We finally board just past 7.
- We get to Dallas just after 8 and wait on the tarmac for half an hour, they were not prepared to gate!
- They take 10 agonizing minutes to open the door into the bridge! Was it the first time this was ever done?
- I am in the Dallas airport at just before 9, more than an hour and a half after my flight left!
- The “Irish” pub serves Blue Moon, I am not amused!
- On the SIX STOP skylink ride to near my gate I have to get out two stops from mine because the car I’m on is going out of service and wait for another!

Needless to say I was very happy to get home. It was a wild ride and I am not inclined to fly American ever again. It was good that the in flight magazine had an article on stress relieving labyrinths and that scotch is good, especially when it’s included in the purchase price (there is no such thing as free). And the Lakers won. Thank you Ron Artest.

Election Day – Sort Of

Well, the primary election here in New Mexico is next Tuesday but I’m going to go ahead and vote early this afternoon on my way out of town for a business trip. So, in the contested races I am going as follows:

Governor: Susana Martinez

Susana Martinez has been, along with Doug Turner, the most attractive candidate for Governor to me. Turner has the rhetoric down and is very impressive, but he doesn’t have the support. His advertising has disappeared outside of billboards the last few weeks. Martinez is an experienced DA and is also impressive in person. While her rhetoric is not as fiery as that of Turner it is sharp and precise. She is also a Republican convert, from years ago. Her record and public statements indicate that this conversion was not due to political expedience and it is my opinion that this is a plus because her conversion was led by true convictions. True conversions to me seem to be the best adherents to any type of conviction. Her closest competition in the polls, Allen Weh, is a disaster. His campaign is angry and full of misdirection. I am stupefied that he has more support than most everyone else in the polls because he is surely the worst candidate this year. I also believe that Allen Weh hurt the New Mexico GOP as chair and that a vote for him will most assuredly mean that Diane Denish will continue the Bill Richardson administration. Pete Domenici, I think, just could not overcome the name issue because he does not have much experience in politics. Janice Arnold Jones is a fine state legislator but never could build name recognition throughout the state.

Lieutenant Governor: Kent Cravens

Land Commissioner: Bob Cornelius

County Assessor: Christie Humphrey

County Sheriff: William Kurth

Allen Weh, the neophyte politico

Ok, so now in defense of his support of President Bush's illegal immigration bill (AKA Amnesty by some)Weh's commercial is all over the radio stating that he has spent YEARS fighting liberals to enforce illegal immigration statutes.

This grinds my gears, Weh's campaign is predicated on the fact that he has never been an elected official, so he's not a politician. To wit, how could he have fought liberals for years and in what capacity exactly? Weh, as NM Republican party chair from 2004 to 2009 wants it both ways. He's not a politician but he is an influential policy maker at the same time, for YEARS. What more would you expect from the worst Republican candidate?

A vote for Allen Weh is a vote for Diane Denish. You can take that to the bank. I would be willing to bet my Triumph Daytona 675 (you know, if gambling were legal) and promise to ride only 150cc scooters going forward on that. Some say it is not fair to state that a Diane Denish administration would be four more years of Bill Richardson to which I respond, we've had eight already, what do you not know about Diane Denish?

Allen Weh's Excuse

Only this morning did I take the time to note that Allen Weh was kind enough to send along this pledge:

I have always said that I would not air a single negative attack ad against a fellow Republican.

In a case of pot v. kettle, this pledge to take the high road happened to be an attack on Susana Martinez’s attacks on Weh:

in an act of desperation, Mrs. Martinez pulled the plug on civility and went back on her word to not attack a fellow Republican.

No thanks to Allen Weh’s website I finally was able to learn what exactly got him so incensed:

First, on the question of whether Weh supported amnesty in 2007 when he backed President Bush’s immigration reform proposal: Martinez says in her new ad that Weh supported amnesty. Weh calls that allegation false.

The proposal would have required anyone here illegally who wanted to start down the path of becoming a citizen to first pay a fine and back taxes and meet other requirements.

Many – but not all – on the right called that amnesty, saying anything that allowed undocumented immigrants to stay in the United States and work toward citizenship was amnesty. President Bush defended the proposal as not being amnesty – a claim Karl Rove continues to make to this day. Many on the left agreed, pointing to the fact that there was a price that had to be paid for breaking the law before an undocumented immigration could begin the path toward citizenship.

The point? This isn’t a black-and-white issue. Martinez is taking a position – saying what Weh supported was amnesty – and Weh takes the opposite position that it’s not amnesty.

There’s a huge amount of disagreement in America about whether letting people who are here illegally stay – while facing some penalties less severe than deportation – is amnesty.

So the big deal has to do with support from Weh for a proposal that some believe is amnesty. This ad works for a Republican primary because when President Bush announced his plan it had almost no support among Republicans and Conservatives. Could this ad be considered by the dreaded adjective, draconian (fancy way to say mean)? I suppose so, but the question that should be asked is do New Mexicans want a Governor that flies off the handle every time someone questions their public statements? Weh could have explained his position on the Bush proposal but in his note and in his advertisement currently airing he resorts to calling Martinez “desperate” and “negative” but never takes the time to mention why Martinez’s ad asserts what it does. I have finally seen the Martinez ad in question and it explains exactly why it states what it does.

Finally, Weh absolves himself of his own negativity by stating:

Let the record show that Mrs. Martinez has decided to take a negative turn in this race, and we will defend ourselves in an appropriate fashion.

And has now proceeded to air television and radio ads accusing Susana Martinez of what seem to be actual crimes, misuse of public funds and tax evasion. There is no elaboration, no proof, no citations and it paints Martinez as a corrupt politician who steals from her constituents. To this, I wonder, why is Susana Martinez not in jail? How could she have made it so far? Why has she not been impeached from her position as Dona Ana County DA? Where is the Larry Barker expose?

If this narcissistic and sophomoric behavior from our worst primary candidate, who is inexplicably close in the polls (no doubt thanks to an influx of ads from a million dollars the regular guy Weh loaned himself) doesn’t prove Weh to be desperate I don’t know what could be. The latest Journal poll and endorsement from Sarah Palin for Susana Martinez must’ve really spooked Allen Weh.

And as always, remember, a vote for Allen Weh is the same as a vote for Diane Denish in the general election. There are many people like the zombies in the Denish ads and how many of us will be motivated to vote for an angry downer like Weh?

The Presumption of Incumbency

We have seen it happen twice already this primary season. First Bob Bennett in Utah and now Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania. Before both of these incumbents lost primary elections there were more than a few “premature” retirements. Disappointing is the analysis that any of these primary ejections or retirements are bad news and that the low polling of incumbents is a sign of infighting or an ill-tempered electorate. Bennett cried about losing his career. The 80 year old Specter switched party affiliation when faced with a primary challenge and lost anyway. Both are pathetic and we are better for seeing them move on.

It does seem correct that many voters are displeased with congress regardless of the party initial following their name. And I believe that it has everything to do with people who are tired of a congress that does not listen to its constituency. Too often congress treats us as subjects and believes that they are our bettors. Thanks in no small part to gerrymandered districts many believe that they are entitled to their positions. The seniority rigged policies of congress are used as a weapon to frighten the electorate into being afraid to vote for someone new out of fear of not receiving their “fair share”.

Politics is a cynical and cruel game and I feel sorry for anyone who points to the federal government as a cure to our societal ills. A so-called representative body whose only goal is self perpetuation can never be trusted to put the interests of anything other than itself first. And that is what we have today in our legislative branch.

Our system of government is supposed to be of, by and for the people and it has grown and grown into something very unrecognizable. Bennett and Specter should be ashamed of their self important behavior to this point instead of continuing to act as victims. No one is entitled to a seat in congress. Congress should not be a career. Serving in congress is a privilege and those few chosen by their peers should always remember how they got to where they are. No member of congress should cloak themselves in the warm blanket of humble public servant after losing in an election in order to make themselves seem worthy of our pity.

A group called the Club for Growth was cited by both examples of incumbency gone wild as reasons for their loss. In citing the Club for Growth both ex-senators had nothing but ugly words for this group. From what I understand the Club for Growth is a group of citizens that attempt to elect the most conservative candidates in races they target. The establishment would like nothing more than to silence groups like the Club for Growth and any other person who dare speak out about our bettors.

The reason why this kind of situation exists is simple. It is because the elitists in congress do not view us as citizens, they view us as subjects. The only answer to this problem is term limits and more citizens joining together like the Club for Growth to help elect the people who would make it happen.

Allen Weh, Victim

In other posts I have expressed my belief that Allen Weh is an unacceptable candidate for governor. From the way that he campaigns as a neophyte politician while serving as the head of the New Mexico Republican party to framing himself as a truck driving everyman even though he has loaned his campaign a million dollars to touting his successful business without ever mentioning its name or what it does. Perhaps most troubling about Weh is as a candidate is that he seems to be considerably thin skinned. In interviews, when questioned about his stances and behaviors as state Republican Party chair he reacts angrily and refuses to answer the question. This demeanor has seemed to worsen as the campaign has gone on and it is my belief that in a long general election, Weh’s apparent short fuse will be taken advantage of and he will appear contentious and difficult to work with. This is not the kind of persona that bodes well for a candidate running for executive office.

Last night I received an email from the Weh campaign that demonstrates his tendencies to be petulant and holding back what I think is critical information. The message:

Dear Friend,

Today I called on my opponent, Susana Martinez, to reconsider the path she is on and take down the negative, false television ad that she is currently spending tens of thousands of dollars to keep on the air.

Republicans in this state are weary of nasty, last-minute attack ads that serve only to divide our party and distract us from the real issues at stake -- like securing our border, fixing our education system and putting New Mexicans back to work.

Up until yesterday, this Republican Primary had been a positive discussion of the issues, with each candidate abiding by Reagan's 11th Commandment to not attack a fellow Republican.

But the career politicians just don't get it.

Less than a month ago, Mrs. Martinez pledged to not attack fellow Republicans, saying, "I'll definitely not be getting into that negativity in the Primary."

But yesterday, in an act of desperation, Mrs. Martinez pulled the plug on civility and went back on her word to not attack a fellow Republican.

Just like they do in Santa Fe, Mrs. Martinez says one thing and does another.

I have always said that I would not air a single negative attack ad against a fellow Republican. Mrs. Martinez said the same thing. But with yesterday's attack, she went back on her word and broke a promise to all Republicans.

I call on Mrs. Martinez to take down the ad because it is not just negative; it is false.

The assertion that I support amnesty for illegal immigrants is laughable.

Democrats like former Mayor Marty Chavez attacked me on many occasions, because they said I was too tough on illegal immigrants.

On border security , my position has always been pure and simple --I will end sanctuary policies and make sure our police enforce all our laws. I'll rescind the executive order that prohibits State Police officers from reporting illegal immigrants to federal agencies, and I'll stop the issuance of driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

It's too bad Mrs. Martinez has decided to take her campaign down the old, tired road of political deception.

Let the record show that Mrs. Martinez has decided to take a negative turn in this race, and we will defend ourselves in an appropriate fashion.

The message is troublesome because it contains too much posturing and does not outline the content of the Martinez ad. I do not recall any recent Susana Martinez commercial that “attacks” Allen Weh for any reason. If Weh wants to accuse the Martinez campaign of making false statements he must specify what the ad states that is false clearly and in what way and link to the ad if it exists online and if not the ad must be clearly outlined so the reader can truly understand what the problem is and judge for themselves.

This message seems to attack Martinez for attacking another Republican, something the sender assures us he would never do. Is anyone’s head spinning from the lack of irony on display here? Self labeled “Reagan Republican” Allen Weh also invokes President Reagan’s oft quoted “11th Commandment to not attack a fellow Republican”, which makes me wonder if this was true why did President Reagan run against President Ford in 1976?

He did it because he believed that he was a better candidate than Ford. And he was. If anything, Martinez (and I have not seen the ad so I am guilty of conjecture here) is doing voters a service by pointing out inconsistencies in Weh’s positions and helping to bring out Weh’s behavior when he responds poorly.

I reiterate my position that Allen Weh is the poorest Republican primary candidate and it is imperative that every Republican primary voter understand that a vote for Weh is the same as a vote for Diane Denish and four more years of the Bill Richardson administration.

Albuquerque 1, the Sanctuary Duo 0

I am disappointed that I never received responses from either Ken Sanchez or Rey Garduno in regard to my email messages discouraging their resolutions for the City of Albuquerque to boycott Arizona and disallow Mayor Berry from having prisoner's immigration status verified. It seemed reasonable that at least one of the Sanctuary Duo would respond, to send up some fiery rhetoric based solely on emotion and without any semblance of logic. Regardless, the Sanctuary Duo lost their cynical political ploy for attention:

a proposal to boycott city services connected to Arizona was voted down, and an attempt to block Mayor Berry's new immigration policy was also shot down.

And, on another note, the easiest criticism of those who oppose immigration law is that they have no understanding of what the actual law is. And, those in opposition proved themselves ignorant once again:

At the meeting, about two dozen people against Mayor Berry's policy wore stickers on their shirts that read “Keep Albuquerque Immigration Friendly.”

It is this misunderstanding and frankly, the absolute refusal of the opposition to become informed in any way shape or form that is most disheartening. It is simple to misrepresent the people attempting to make Albuquerque safer as being anti-immigrant. One can only hope that real debate can one day exist with those on the other side actually being thoughtful instead of insulting.

Deftones Diamond Eyes

Sometime after I began living in Arizona (I moved to Tucson in June 2001) I was at some record store (showing my age here, yes they did exist once upon a time) and was jamming to some Deftones. Another store patron came by and we started to discuss the band and their awesomeness. He then informed me that Chino (lead singer Chino Moreno) had ripped up his vocal cords and this development was probably the end of the band. I was instantly taken aback, I had never seen them in concert before and of the three albums that they had produced to that point in time, every single song was amazing. It sounded like a horrible thing for Chino and personally I was upset over the thought of there being no more Deftones. That was the point at which I realized that the Deftones were my favorite band. Moreno ended up resting his vocal cords and taking voice lessons to aid in avoiding recurrence.

Almost two years ago the Deftones faced tragedy when bassist Chi Cheng was in a car accident that eventually left him in a semi-conscious state that he remains in to this day. At that point the band was nearly complete with sessions for a new album that was to be called Eros. They had to make some difficult decisions in regard to the nearly complete album and the future of the band. The Deftones moved forward once again with friend Sergio Vega (formerly of the band quicksand) filling in for Cheng on bass. With that, they have no certain plans in regard to the Eros album waiting for Cheng to recover first.

Fifteen years after the release of their first studio release, Adrenaline, and more than twenty years after they initially formed, the Deftones have released their sixth studio album, Diamond Eyes. I was sixteen when Adrenaline was released and the instant I heard it for the first time I was hooked, in the best of ways. As I have gotten older I have come to realize that the music that has endured from my formative years include artists and music that remain endearing. For an example I am sufficiently embarrassed to admit that once upon a time I thought that the Insane Clown Posse and Eminem were talented. The Deftones, however, carry on. Their early catalog persists and with every new release introduces their fans to something new yet familiar at the same time. It is my earnest belief that one day the Deftones will be considered similarly to other bands that have extensive history like Guns ‘n Roses, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, the Eagles, etc.

Significant to the history of the Deftones is that as they release more music they can be recognized for what they are. Early on they were often characterized as “nu metal”, whatever that means. I think the official definition is “sounds like Korn”. That was never quite right. Then, following the 2000 release of White Pony they were characterized as “experimental metal”, which I believe is official defined as “sounds kind of like Korn but is weird in a good way like Radiohead”. Again, this was not quite right. It will always astound me the way that when something good exists, there is a rush to define it within existing boundaries. Something can be good without it having to be like something that has already been around. The Deftones are the Deftones. They are unique and each studio release expands on an already excellent catalog of Deftones music.

Diamond Eyes is instantly recognizable as a Deftones album. It is easy to assume it would, Chino Moreno’s vocals are unlike anything else. But there is more than vocals to the originality that defines this band. The bass lines of Chi Cheng and for now Sergio Vega, the intricate and diverse drumming of Abe Cunningham (fancy way of saying he belts out a multitude of cadences), the scratches and mixes (yes, I did just write both of those) of Frank Delgado and of course the hard edged, creative guitar of Stephen Carpenter.

The first single released was Rocket Skates, a hard track that often reminded reviewers of the Deftones first two albums. The track starts with a hard guitar riff intro followed by Chino singing in a dream like whisper to a pulsing riff. It’s an awesome song and by the time the chorus of Guns.Razors.Knives was belted I was head banging and singing along. The next single released was the title track, Diamond Eyes. This track starts with a strong guitar and Chino coming in at the same time. The lyrics are more decipherable in this track than in Rocket Skates. Diamond Eyes is a softer song and lends itself to swaying and a light head bang, about three fifths speed. Towards the end of the song the guitar solo is excellent, strong and easy to follow. To a fan like me any of the other songs could easily be released and I would automatically tune to the station that played them. It seems though that of the remaining songs and finite attention span awarded new albums on the radio, my opinion is that possible future releases could include CMND/CTRL, Beauty School and Sextape.

It’s always possibly that a band one defines as a favorite could release something that is disappointing because of issues with expectations. The Deftones are a band that is always the Deftones. Diamond Eyes features a new member and is seamless. At this point in a review many would recommend a song or three. I can’t do that. It’s impossible. Just like picking a best album or song by this band. It could change by the day and re-listening to them only beings out more favorite songs. Instead I recommend getting it whichever way works and using the shuffle feature and enjoying it however long it is that one may have to enjoy it. It’s that good.

With 82 songs over 7 studio releases (including the rarities album which included B-Sides and covers) spanning six point three hours the Deftones have become timeless.

They will be in Albuquerque on Monday, 31 May at the Sunshine theater. I'll be one of the older dudes who remembered listening to Adrenaline the first time instead of paying attention in Geometry.

Get well Chi.

Janice Arnold Jones on the Bob Clark Show

This morning, Bob Clark welcomed New Mexico Gubernatorial candidate Janice Arnold Jones to his show and interviewed her during the 9 o’clock hour. Prior to this interview I was not inclined to vote for Jones mostly on her commercials and press releases I had read. But, there have been other cases where I have changed my position on a candidate so perhaps after this interview I will be swayed.

Introduction
Janice Arnold Jones is a state legislature representative since 2003 from Albuquerque. There is a current poll with Weh and Martinez leading. Jones states that it is just a poll and she believes that there are still many people undecided and her campaign had some issues as she was hamstrung by a lack of fundraising due to her duties in the state legislature. She believes that she has a good message and that it is getting out because of her campaign volunteers.

Notes
- On immigration, Arizona and Albuquerque checking every one arrested. If we do not secure our borders and stem the tide of drug criminals we will lose our state. She supports Mayor Berry. She believes that it is wrong to boycott Arizona over their new law. She believes that it is important to respect the laws of a country when a visitor. The problem is that drug traffickers do not. As governor she would support a fence on the border and that checkpoints on the border should be effective. If the federal government won’t do it then the state has to. She supports guest worker programs.
- Where are we in regard to the state budget? We are short of funds, down 600 million dollars. Frustration comes from an unrealistic revenue outlook, creating a budget that is far larger than what is coming in. She believes that raising taxes depresses the economy. Regulations, licensing also need to be relaxed.
- How prepared should New Mexicans be for cuts? We cannot do everything for everyone. Some will be distressed but it is something that has to be done.
- Would you pass a law that double dipping would stop unless in regard to law enforcement? She agrees in regard to law enforcement and double dipping must be examined. People should only have one retirement and not two.
- People ignore retirement commitments to state employees, what needs to be done there long term? We are going to have to increase the commitment from state employees, their contributions. Change from defined commitment to defined contribution. We have to keep the promises already made but must change it moving forward.
- How do you differ from the other candidates? Jones believes that most are similar, two attorneys and 4 business people. She is the only legislature who is prepared for the next step. She understands the legislative process and how state government works. One of her big accomplishments is to open up the state legislature with web cams in session.
- There is a supporter who calls at this point and spends his time complimenting the candidate. There is no question here and a waste of time.
- Transparency is a mind set and all agencies need to be open. In a bureaucracy the citizens cannot participate. She wants to make government efficient and serve citizens.
- A democrat calls and wants to vote for Jones in the general election. The third plank of her platform is that we must have a smarter and more efficient school system. How? We have approached education the same for a long time with no better results. Technology opens the door to better things. If teachers are not trained we must offer better teaching by any means including distance learning. We must have connectivity in the class room and offer vocational training.
- What can we do to improve pedestrian safety and do you support red light cameras? Red light cameras to raise revenue are not effective and they are not uniform all over the state so she does not support them. Pedestrians and drivers both need to be responsible in regard to safety.
- Will there be a time where she will be willing to re-open and pursue corruption charges against Richardson that were dropped when Obama became president? She thinks that any time the citizens of NM are abused by the government; it has to be pursued legally. She will pursue charges.
- Caller would like to see an ethics bill that if they commit a felony they forfeit state sponsored retirement benefits. She agrees and believes that state benefits should be lost if someone commits a crime against the state.
- Another supporter calls and complains about the rhetoric, no question.
- There was an email that says Jones does not support a certain tax break for military veterans. She says it is true because she favors a restructuring of the tax system in the state first. Tough question to interpret.
- Energy. How would Jones balance more resources in NM while ensuring the state’s environment. First, to sustain drilling we need to lower business taxes and encourage private industry. We need to get it exported also with new transmission lines.
- How are you going to deal with the legislature? Having served she is well aware of what it takes to work with both sides of the aisle. She understands problems and issues within the total legislature. She has built relationships there over the years.
- Would she consider entitlement takers to take drug tests? On the surface it makes sense because we want stressed families to be drug free. How to pay for it and how to implement are issues but it is a good idea.
- There is no regard for the constitution, the country’s and the state’s, what would she do to protect our rights? As governor she has requested the AG to look at breaches in the constitution such as laws that have more than one subject also line item vetoes by the governor that do not include appropriations.
- On the rail runner she believes we have to shut it down to stop the bleeding. It would take a miracle to keep it going and building a business case for it. She would privatize it if possible but does not see who would take it. It could cost the state 50 million a year as a loss.

Conclusion
Following the interview I must say that I came away impressed. The generalities in advertising that led me to believe that Janice Arnold Jones was kind of an empty candidate were not on display in the interview. She was able to answer questions very well in the interview. Her positions were clear and easy to understand and recognizable from a conservative standpoint. My favorite Jones position is the possible shuttering of the rail runner. It was a mistake and there never was a business case for its existence. It serves mostly as a convenience for state employees, which is nice but does nothing for most of the state. Jones is a good candidate, at least on par with Pete Domenici, Jr. and if she wins the primary I will be glad to vote Janice Arnold Jones for governor.

Two pieces of news hurt the Jones campaign and I believe help to clarify the field. A poll released recently shows Allen Weh and Susana Martinez at the top with the others trailing. Second, Sarah Palin came to town this weekend to endorse Susana Martinez. Martinez, along with Doug Turner are what I consider to be top candidates, our best choices. Allen Weh, I consider to be our worst choice. I sincerely believe that a vote for Allen Weh is a vote for Diane Denish in the general election. These items make it hard to choose anyone other than Susana Martinez for Governor. I haven’t yet made up my mind but will do so very soon.

Spinning Wheels

I knew that it was going to be one of those days. I was sitting in the stall in the bathroom of my building and the lights went out, stupid motion sensing system with what must be a short timer. Then the automated soap dispenser spews soap at me while I’m washing hands. The sensor is too close to the faucet. On top of that the soap is made of hemp I think because after washing, my hands smell like a Santana concert.

It started over the weekend. I received an email about an issue with a contract that I was currently working on a proposal for. Basically I am working on a proposal to work in a position that I have held in the past. I left a couple of years ago because of company policy and disagreements with my supervisor at the time who I characterized as being both micro-managing and indecisive. When the contract was up I was interested because I like the job and believe that I can do a good job of it.

Anyway, the issue is that the position that I am proposed to take requires 15 years of experience on top of a bachelor’s degree. Trouble is that I was a sophomore in high school 15 years ago. Technically speaking I have 9 years of “experience” or as I would rather phrase it, it has been 9 years since I graduated from college. However, I held the position that I am proposing to hold two years ago. The team that we are working with on the proposal is skittish about the requirements and wants me to take a lesser, assistant position instead of simply asking the customer if what I believe to be relevant experience holds any weight.

The deeper issue here is something that has bothered me the entirety of my adult life. In every job that I have ever had I have faced limitations because of my age and had nothing to do with the quality of the work I have done. In my first job following college, I left because I was denied a promotion because of my age and lack of familial attachments. In my second job, the one I am proposing to take once again, part of the reason I left was because I was not eligible for promotion no matter how well I was doing because I did not have the requisite number of years of experience. I was frustrated because I was managing a department of engineers one with less years of experience and half a dozen with many years more experience than I had. From that group I was deemed the most qualified for the position. The “promotion” did not come with any more money or a different position designation, only the promise to be “taken care of” in the future. After a year of empty promises the added stress and responsibility was not worth it any more so I left.

What bothers me the most about this is what I see as an obsession with years experience in most engineering positions locally, ignoring actual work done. I believe that there are many qualified younger engineers that are discouraged by this barrier. They are high achievers and by all measures willing and able to take on more responsibility. However they are left at the gate because they have not yet been to the requisite reunion of their college graduating class. This is completely unfair. Too many regulations force employers to value check box items and irrelevant things that are of no importance to a position. Experience is more than a number of years. The accomplishments of a person must count as well.

I find myself today at a crossroads. Over the last month I have been positioning myself to complete this proposal successfully and to create a department based on competence, efficiency and hard work. Because of a technicality I may not be allowed to move forward and that likely means that I will find myself looking for work once again. How can anyone be expected to get ahead in this kind of work environment?

Likely I will have to take a position that requires me to start over once again for the simple reason that it has only been nine years since I graduated college. There is something broken here and I am not optimistic that it will ever change. Eventually I will simply meet this requirement by virtue of aging. This is not right. Maybe I should just leave this field entirely. It’s terrible that leaving may be the best solution. Unfortunately there is nothing else that I can do.

The Sanctuary Duo vs Arizona

And they're at it again. What exactly are Ken Sanchez and Rey Garduno running for? And what are they attempting to prove in boycotting Arizona? Petty city council members pandering, that's what they're doing. Whatever. I need to find something I can buy from Arizona.

In response I sent another note to the sanctuary duo:

Mr. Sanchez and Mr. Garduno,

I have read in the news that in the next city council meeting to be held this coming Monday, 16 May you plan to introduce a resolution cutting financial ties to the state of Arizona in a retaliation of their Senate Bill 1070.

Mr Sanchez is quoted as saying: “I just think we need to send a message to Arizona and we do not support racial profiling,” Sanchez said. “I think this truly undermines the United States constitution and the exclusive powers belong to congress.”

To which I ask, Mr Sanchez:

1. Have you read the entirety of the Arizona Law?
2. In what statement of the law does it direct racial profiling as you suggest?
3. How does this law undermine the United States Constitution, which clause and how?

If the answer to number 1 above is yes I think you would understand that there is no answer to the other two questions. Only if Arizona were to create new immigration laws, separate of those set forth by congress instead of voting to cooperate with federal authorities could the law be in violation of the constitution.

Reading your statements and understanding your plan to “boycott” Arizona only leaves me with the impression that you both are simply pandering to the illegal immigrant constituency which is puzzling as they should not be able to vote here in Albuquerque.

It is shameful to boycott a state that was once a part of the New Mexico territory and shares much of the same culture as New Mexico and faces many of the problems that we have here. If anything, you should be using your power to consider how to make our city safer and not making political points against the decisions of another state. It is simply none of the business of the Albuquerque city council to interfere with the state of Arizona.

I urge you to reconsider and remove this resolution immediately. In absence of that, I urge every one of your fellow council members to vote down this ill-conceived resolution and prevent it from ever airing again.

We'll see what they say.

On Mayor Berry, City Council and saving Albuquerque from being a Sanctuary City

In response to the reality that Mayor Berry has put forth in terms of guidelines for persons arrested in Albuquerque and their immigrations status, politicians on the city council see opportunity:

Two Albuquerque city councilmen are trying to strike down Mayor Richard Berry's new illegal immigration policy.

City Council President Ken Sanchez and Councilman Rey Garduno are proposing a resolution that commands the city to cease the guidelines immediately....Garduno and Sanchez said the mayor is overstepping his boundaries. The councilors, who weren't notified of the new policy until Thursday, said the mayor needed to either issue an executive order or get the city council to approve the policy.

"For anybody to say I can do something like this, without having to go through the process, is just not understanding what the whole idea of democracy is all about," Garduno said.

Both Garduno and Sanchez disagree with the mayor's comments that Albuquerque was "sanctuary city" for before the policy went into effect.

"I have lived here my entire life and Albuquerque is not a sanctuary city," said Sanchez.

In response to this nonsense I wrote a letter to both councilors, copying each other councilor and the Mayors office:

Mr. Sanchez and Mr. Garduno,

I have read in the news that Monday, 17 May 2010 you plan to sponsor a resolution to attempt to halt Mayor Berry’s policy of having federal agents check the immigration status of every person arrested in Albuquerque. The stated reason, according to news reports is that you worry the guidelines will do more harm than good by creating a silencing effect among victims who want to report a crime.

I believe that you are incorrect in your claims and are in fact overstepping your bounds in regard to what Mayor Berry has issued as guidelines. As simply a general policy in regard to the city detention center, Mayor Berry as city executive is entitled to this decision. This is not legislation or an ordianance and is a policy that serves the best interests of the community at large. It is difficult to imagine that people are terrified to report crimes because they are worried that a criminal will be deported.

Mr. Sanchez is quoted in regard to the issue as follows: "I have lived here my entire life and Albuquerque is not a sanctuary city,". I believe that you are willfully ignoring this very important issue Mr. Sanchez. I have also lived in this city my entire life. Several years ago my Grandmother was forced to move from her home of more than fifty years in the North Valley in no small part thanks to policies put in place by Martin Chavez making it a sanctuary for illegal immigrant drug criminals. There are more than several known drug dealers near what was once her home. All of them are known to be in this country illegally.

It is my hope that the other members of the council thoughtfully consider the issue and work with Mayor Berry on making this city a safer place for its legal residents instead of misunderstanding the issue and making power plays, as Mr. Garduno said; "For anybody to say I can do something like this, without having to go through the process, is just not understanding what the whole idea of democracy is all about," Please reconsider your position and withdraw the resolution immediately.

I am curious in regard to any response. I will that and discuss if anything comes back.

Berry takes reality into account on Illegal Immigration

It will be interesting to take in all the disdain, misinformation and nonsense that will exist in news coverage of Mayor Berry’s establishment of:

equipping the new Prisoner Transport Center (PTC) with technology and the resources to check the immigration status of everyone who is processed through the facility, regardless of nationality.

The purpose of which is to:

eliminate procedures that make Albuquerque a sanctuary for criminals

Simple enough, right? And how could anyone be against the deportation of Illegal Immigrants who happen to be criminals? And it begins. For instance:

The consul of Mexico in Albuquerque says he's concerned about Albuquerque's decision to check the immigration status of every person arrested in New Mexico's largest city.

Consul Gustavo De Unanue says he worries it could led to human rights or civil rights violations toward immigrants.

To which I respond, on behalf of my little slice of paradise in our formerly sanctuary city, forget you. In Mexico, if a foreign citizen criticizes the state they’re shipped out. And that doesn’t even take into account what happens if you’re a citizen. Why should we, as New Mexicans and as Americans, take into consideration the opinions of an official of a third world country that encourages the breaking of our country’s laws? There is no reason. So, whatever. Consul Gustavo De Unanue, you’re uninformed opinions don’t count.

It is disappointing that this is only the beginning. The uninformed will no doubt start with making unfortunate comments. The president next? Personally I applaud Mayor Berry for coming through on a campaign promise and for taking steps that will hopefully make Albuquerque safer.

My two cents on an “Events Center”

So, the city of Albuquerque is soliciting comments on a new events center in downtown Albuquerque on which the city (read: MARTIN CHAVEZ) has been talking about for several years. I will dutifully add my comments as soon as possible.

First. Why? With the existence of The Pit, Hard Rock Pavilion and a rather large convention center in town and Santa Ana Star center only twenty dusty, middle of freaking nowhere miles away, why does Albuquerque need an “Events Center”?

Second. In conclusion; no. No. No. It makes no sense. There is no need for an “Events Center” considering existing facilities. It will be nothing more than a drag on the city’s already stretched finances. Some people want it to be privately owned. What private entity would own such an albatross? It is a horrible idea and any reference to it should be banned from city proceedings henceforth.

Allen Weh, so normal he drives a pick-up

The New Mexico “Independent” also recalls one of the hallmarks of the Massachusetts Senatorial Bid of one Scott Brown in Allen Weh’s third commercial. I really wish I didn’t have to link to the “Independent” since in this case independent means news organ of Bill Richardson and hopefully Diane Denish. Weh hasn’t gotten around to posting the ad on his web site yet so alas, democrat house organ I must go with.

Personal observations and biases aside, this ad targets Denish for using state funds for riding on a state jet for not so much state business. It’s important that voters understand this kind of thing but it can’t be surprising to anyone that doesn’t close their eyes and plug their ears that Denish seems to think she is entitled to treat state funds as her own. She’s democrat and is the same as Bill Richardson. So duh on that part, so this part of the ad is a home run.

And then it get’s sticky. Scott Brown notably earned points because his old, beat up pick-up had as many miles as one of those illustrated in an old Toyota commercial. So at the end of the ad, Weh stands in front of his beat up looking (because Dodge Dakotas look beat up, not because of any noticeable wear) pick-up and exclaiming that if he has to go somewhere he’ll take his truck. The thing is that the comparison doesn’t work. It’s cute but Scott Brown wasn’t a rich dude and his truck was old. In the commercial Weh tries to come off as a regular dude, But… Someone who can afford the following (Pardon the “Independent” again):

With another $250,000 donation to his campaign in the last month, GOP candidate for governor Allen Weh has reached $1 million in self-loans.

Just doesn’t seem like a regular dude. I couldn’t loan myself a million bucks, and not a lot of people can. Regardless, I have a better vehicle than Weh and would rather travel in comfort than in a Dakota. Anyway, the commercial just rubs me the wrong way. The commercial should have led to a pledge to not use state resources for unrelated activities. Instead of trying to copy someone else in creating a photo op and false representation.

Susana Martinez on the Bob Clark Show

On a side note I am posting this late because I decided to play the Sean Hannity “Literally” drinking game this afternoon and after half an hour and Sean’s fiftieth use of the word “Literally” to describe something that might or might not be literal, I hit the floor. I had to turn off the radio and listen to Deftones “Around the Fur” as part of my weekly listen to all their albums after their latest dropped last week. Anyway, on to my thoughts from this morning.

This morning Susana Martinez, Dona Ana County District Attorney (since 1996) and Republican candidate for New Mexico Governor was the 9 AM guest on the Bob Clark show on 770 KKOB AM Radio. Unfortunately for me, I was unable to listen to the complete interview because of a meeting that I could not re-schedule. Every attempt was made to listen to as much of it as possible and then relay my thoughts on the candidate based on the interview and other news relating to Martinez campaign.

Introduction
Like me, Martinez has allergies that come into full affect in Albuquerque. Martinez has a lot of ads right now and is gaining a large amount of endorsements. She did well at the primary convention and feels that her campaign is full of momentum. Her experience as a DA translates to the Governor’s office starts with a career of delivering results. The voter wants someone who not only talks about what they have done but delivers such as dealing with corruption, securing the border and balancing a budget.

Notes
- How to deal with the borders? First get rid of drivers licenses for illegal immigrants. Second, make NM less attractive to illegal immigrants by removing sanctuary policies, law enforcement should be able to inquire about citizenship in legal contacts. Third we should not allow scholarships to illegal immigrants that graduate from local high schools. It is a mistake for the current executive to court illegal aliens.
- Would she adopt the AZ law? The law in AZ is changing because of issues with it. She wants to see the finalized version. Before any new laws Martinez would adopt her outlined three steps. She also supports similar efforts in Oklahoma. Martinez clarifies the intent and what exactly are the legal ramifications of the AZ law.
- How to deal with corruption and how it affects the economy? Martinez believes that the favoritism and pay to play corruption exhibited by the executive branch in our state leads to an unpredictable state in regard to the economy and hurts it. This is because it results in changing policies and does not allow for business to find a stable environment when it comes to identifying what works and what does not in their interactions with state government. She has heard that her ads sometimes seem as though she is running for state AG instead of governor and has tailored her ads in this way because corruption has become so commonplace now that enforcement and change to this environment is very important.
- Martinez believes that Political appointments must be limited and that the current administration has done too many favors for friends and insiders. State employees must be judged strictly by their qualifications and not because of who they know.
- She would not sign the domestic partnership law. She would veto it.
- Our state keeps losing business, what do you plan to do? Reduce business taxes. There are only 6 states that tax on more business things than NM. So that makes NM uncompetitive to businesses. Business to business transactions are taxed, known as pyramiding, and leads to increased cost to the consumer. This needs to stop. There is now a back door secondary income tax that also needs to be stopped.
- She was a democrat in the 90s, why did she change? She did what her parents did. Later she met with Republican friends and talked about issues and thought of her own values and realized that she was a Republican. It was not a political decision, running as a Republican in Dona Ana County is not easy. This is an easy thing to understand. My dad registered as a Democrat because my Grandpa told him to and my Mom did because my dad was one. In my early twenties I spoke to my parents about the issues and values and that resulted in both switching to the Republican Party. It happens. I have always been one because my parents and grandparents encouraged me to be thoughtful and explore what was important to me. Additionally, my grandpa, my mom’s dad was a Republican so I didn’t feel what can be a paternal pressure (as much as that exists in this state) to become a Democrat because of tradition.
- Because I missed some of the interview because of a meeting I went to the candidates website and clicked the ‘On The Issues’ link to learn more. This may not be the best way to really judge a candidate but a good candidate can really stay on message and the composed way that Martinez is in an interview I think reflects this and so I think that the candidates official statements are sufficient.
- On the state budget Martinez opposes raising taxes to solve budget deficits because it will hinder economic growth. She believes that the problems are a result of poor financial decisions and little to no planning. In good economic years money should be paid or refunded. She will cut programs that don’t work and establish a relationship between spending and revenue.
- On health care, Martinez believes that decisions should be made more locally and not at the federal level. She will pursue tort reform to stop junk lawsuits that hurt physicians, incentive based approach including individual tax credits and support insurance purchasing across state lines. I hope that this means that she will push the AG to sue the federal government over ObamaCare. If not, then her goals are impossible.
- On education, Martinez will stop just throwing money at the state education infrastructure. Under Richardson spending went up 40% and 40% of students in New Mexico do not even graduate. That is a depressing set of statistics. She will fight for the education of children first starting with pushing to ensure that students go to class, going so far as to holding parents accountable.

Conclusion
Turning on the radio this morning I was looking forward to it as Martinez is one of the two candidates that I plan to vote for. After following her campaign and listening to her plans if she were to win I thought that Martinez would make a worthy Governor. After the interview I was impressed but not as much as I thought I would be. Martinez interviewed well and her answers to the questions of the host and listeners were complete and detailed. I was hoping for more specifics but in the radio format and from a candidate there is only so much you can really expect. So, for that I understand. Also, as a long time District Attorney, Martinez’s perspective is very much lined with legalese and tied to law enforcement which is a good thing but does not lead to much fire or charming rhetoric. Martinez is also experienced in running a campaign and it shows. I do wish there were more details in regard to specific policies and legislation that she would pursue on the campaign web site. There are short descriptions of her approach to several issues which is helpful but as a specifics type person I would prefer these (what I see as) introductions have links to white papers or some such thing.

It remains my opinion that Susana Martinez is one of the top two candidates running for Governor this election. It will be difficult to choose between her and Doug Turner. Hopefully one of them wins and if not at least Pete Domenici, Jr. is acceptable and I wouldn’t mind him winning. Janice Arnold Jones interview is Monday and I am not inclined to vote for her. And Allen Weh, I really would not like for him to win, more on that in a bit. Good luck New Mexico. Voting for Diane Denish is simply an extension of the Richardson administration.

On Diversity and the Supreme Court

Because I only play a lawyer when arguing insurance inanities with Presbyterian I am not exactly in any position to really understand all the finer details of a legal career and how that career leads to a Supreme Court appointment. This lack of knowledge does not preclude one from noticing something genuinely intelligent and thought provoking though. From the Weekly Standard:

President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, the current U.S. solicitor general and former Harvard Law School dean Elena Kagan, is being touted as a “diversity” choice because she is a woman, while there are currently just two women on the Court in a country in which women make up more than half the population.

Previous choices to the Court have been similarly touted as bringing diversity to that august institution. Sonia Sotomayor, Obama’s previous appointment, was hailed because she is a woman and the first Puerto Rican appointed to the Court. Justice Scalia was the first Italian, Ruth Bader Ginsburg the first Jewish woman, and Clarence Thomas only the second African-American appointed to the Court, filling the vacancy of Thurgood Marshall. Yet the diversity on the Court always seems to stop at considerations of race, gender, and ethnicity.

On other important grounds, the Supreme Court appears as a surprisingly monolithic group of justices. Nearly all attended elite colleges and proceeded from there to a few Ivy League law schools. They come from either a few northeastern states or from California. Considered as a group, the absence of genuine diversity on the Court is more than a little stunning.

Reading this column, it makes a lot of sense. Think about it from the perspective of yourself and your peers. From my own perspective a lot of the people that I went to college with that pursued the same or similar studies are noticeably similar in terms of career and values. And, not all of them are near six foot tall dark and handsome Hispanic men like me. Normally, I would not tout the diversity of the people that I know because it’s an absurd habit. Reality is that New Mexicans have a history of being diverse and being proud Americans without prodding from the government.

Drive without fear in Las Cruces, starting Thursday

Over the next few days, traffic enforcement cameras at two Las Cruces intersections will be shut down…. the cameras will be deactivated at midnight Wednesday.

And in a strange comment on this news:

Las Cruces Police Department spokesman Dan Trujillo warned motorists police will continue enforcing traffic ordinances in all parts of the city.

So, does that mean that Las Cruces Police Department spokesman Trujillo thinks that residents are so unintelligent as to believe that once the cameras come down, the roads become anarchy? What a condescending and silly comment.

What is Bill running for?

Apparently Bill Richardson is looking to curry favor with some unknown constituency for some unknown political office for that day he’s out of work next year…

Gov. Bill Richardson has directed the New Mexico Human Rights Division to assist any New Mexicans who are worried about traveling to Arizona in light of the controversial, recently-signed immigration law. The office could help New Mexicans by “giving them the information they need to protect themselves from unlawful detentions and investigations, assisting them in any legal action should they be unlawfully detained or investigated, and referring them to individuals and foundations, both private and charitable, that are willing to help.”

Richardson must know that the law is not yet in effect, no? And what problems would New Mexicans have traveling to Arizona anyway? Did Bill Richardson forget that New Mexico is a part of the union and therefore citizens of New Mexico are United States citizens? What garbage.

Look, the only reason why any New Mexican has to worry about having the wrong paperwork is because of the policies of the Bill Richardson administration. His support of giving illegal immigrants driver licenses is completely fallacious and means that our state’s primary form of identification is worthless as a means of proving legitimacy. So, that means we have to use passports. Thanks Bill.

Doug Turner on the Bob Clark Program

This morning on the Bob Clark show, New Mexico gubernatorial candidate Doug Turner was the guest at the nine o’clock hour. Unfortunately I was unable to listen to the entire interview because of another commitment so my impressions are from about twenty minutes into the show. There is a debate on 27 May for the candidates. It will be from 7 to 8 on channel 4, KOB TV and simulcast on 77 KKOB AM radio. He worked with Gary Johnson, on his campaigns. I did not listen to the introduction so I went to Turner’s web site to read more about the candidate. He was the Chairman of the NM Judicial Standards Commission under Johnson. He was also Chairman of the Albuquerque Development Commission. He started a public relations firm twelve years ago, which has 24 employees. No mention of the company’s name. From Wikipedia the company’s name is DW Turner. Below are my notes from the interview and following that is a conclusion.

Notes
- What do you want to do with the red light cameras throughout the state in the context of bad accidents in the city? This was a silly question. Turner answered that even if you put red light cameras on every corner, bad drivers would still exist and that the cameras are not the answer to bad drivers. Good answer. Clark steered the conversation in another direction after this.
- Benefits plans for state workers. Defined benefit plans are separate of market conditions; it should be based on contributions or move to benefits starting at federal retirement (SS) age. He seemed very knowledgeable of the deficits of the state plans and needs.
- There is too much state bureaucracy, what can you do about it, including thing like Tax lightning? The legislature creates a lot of laws and often there are unintended consequences. State govt grows and grows and exists to continue being large. It should be lean and become smaller. There are too many people working for the state.
- Budget under Gary Johnson was half of what Richardson’s last. What is a reasonable number that Doug thinks works? 4 and a half, 5 billion? The population and the services provided are not bigger or better. Many state agencies need to be eliminated. Do not raise taxes, remove redundancy.
- Denish and her spending. She has like 8 million in a war chest. Turner talks about her spending money even though she is unopposed and that he is not worried about her saving and that even though she claims to be an outsider she is really not. Money alone is not a deciding factor in this climate.
- What would you undo in terms of energy from Bill Richardson? The role for government is to be more of an advocate instead of an over-regulator. Turner mentions that the state has tough mining regulations and lost a lot of natural gas production. For energy he would push for everything, and not remove oil, gas and mining. He would also promote wind and solar as well as nuclear.
- In regard to the number of state employees, would he consider a law for mandatory retirement at qualification and then freeze hiring. There are more than 262 employees for every 10000 NM residents. He would institute a hiring freeze immediately. Mandatory retirement is not legal and a bad idea, because if someone is a good employee and relatively young when they can retire, the goal should be to keep them on. It is not a good policy to encourage retirement. Attrition is the best policy. There can be a loss of 5-6 thousand due to attrition in a couple years. Salaries need to come down and political appointments need to be eliminated. From the 450-600 appointees now Turner wants to trim that considerably to 167.
- Would the Oklahoma law on illegal immigrants work for New Mexico? Unemployment went down in OK after that. How about like AZ? Or are there plenty of laws on the books? Turner responded that the laws should be followed, employers should use e-verify, probably no new laws need to be used. There have been successful work programs for immigrant workers, on a temporary basis that should be looked at. Sanctuary policies like driver’s licenses should be revoked.
- Turner is from New York and his wife is a supporter of Hilary Clinton, what does that mean for the Turner campaign. Dumb question, Turner is from Albuquerque he has worked all over the world and met his wife in an Albuquerque middle school. He believes that he can appeal to democrats, anyone who believes in smaller government and common sense policies.
- Rail Runner, what to do about it because it costs much more than it was supposed to. It was not cost effective. Public transportation is never cost effective. Find a way to make it less of a burden or moth ball it until it can be less of a burden. It cannot be sold. Unfortunately the state will be burdened with it because of commitments to it such as right of ways and rail usage signed by Richardson.
- He would seek to re-instate the death penalty. New Mexico has been judicious in using it and it may not be a deterrent but should be used as a tool.
- Would he be willing to make public contacts with any business or contributors to campaigns looking to do business with the state? While laborious he is open to it.
- What would he do to cut spending k-12 schools and move from the unions? Public education protects the status quo and he would like to see good teachers get paid a lot and he believes in competition and charter schools and school choice.

Conclusion
So, what do I think of Doug Turner as a candidate? Biased before this interview I had seen previous interviews with Turner and thought he would be a good governor so I was already leaning towards him as one of two Republican candidates that I would decide between. This interview did nothing to change that. It is true that he does not have the most experience but that might be a good thing. On balance there are not a lot of political regulars in the Republican primary and that could benefit Turner. What I am impressed with in interviews is the way that Turner handles himself. He is clear and confident in his responses to questions. His platform is clear and he can communicate ideas in a complete way. When questions are tough or silly he does not sulk or complain. So far his ideas and methods for running the state are the most palatable to me and so I consider Turner to be a top tier candidate. After listening to Susana Martinez’s interview I will read more and make my final decision on whom to support.

Allen Weh on the Bob Clark Program

This morning New Mexico Gubernatorial Republican Candidate Allen Weh spent an hour with Bob Clark on 770 KKOB. Below are my notes on the interview and following that is my conclusion.

Introduction
Spoke mostly about his campaign and not his qualifications. He worked hard on his campaign going around the state and getting feedback on how to be an effective candidate in a state where there are more democrats and independents than republicans. Also talked about silly skirmish with Diane Denish. Of course she uses taxpayer dollars for inappropriate things, she's an acolyte of Bill Richardson and a democrat.

Notes on the Interview
- Cap on rate of payday loans (stupid question) - He tap danced around this question
- What happens when stimulus money runs out? Blames denial in Santa Fe in regard to funds. Has to cut essential services. Cites building paint job as as non-essential versus cuts in schools or police. Cuts to museum hours. Cuts to unnecessary boards and commissions, no specifics.
- Budget question. 6 billion under Richardson, 3.9 under Johnson, what number? Danced around this question, north of 4 billion based on inflation. He does not know.
- Border security He said Arizona did the country a favor. I agree. He does not state how or why. Only that they drew attention to the problem. He will remove sanctuary policies with the state police not turning over to ICE. He thinks NM does not need a similar law to AZ. He thinks Licenses to illegals is dumb. New policy, immigrants must be legal. Duh. Termination must coincide with termination of visa. Border security is a national security issue. A secure border is an absolute requirement for the security of the country. Weapons, human trafficking, criminal elements cited as problems. We must intercept them before they get to far into the country. Border must be tight. Must use all state resources, unencumbered, add to the southern part of the state.
- Bicycle and Pedestrian safety. Punted as municipal decision.
- Red light cameras in state. Punted as municipal decision. On state roads, not neccesarily a proponent.
- Listens to the people is something a good governor should do not just what he wants.
- As state Republican chair, he could relieve county chair but was rebuffed by state and triede anyway. Does he believe that he can ignore rules and policies as he can. He blames it on unfriendly callers in political season. Claims 31 years of business as proof of being good at building coalitions. Does not name business and how he built coalitions and with whom.
- What can he bring to the table that other candidates can not? Another dumb question. States that all candidates have integrity. He states his experience, age, military experience (doesn't specify what) and his business (no specifics) and that he has managed money.
- State Govt cannot be run as a business states a question because it is not for profit. He says they are wrong because you have to be responsible, you have to set a budget, you cannot spend more than you take in. Govt has forgotten that they work for the people. He wants to manage state govt like a business.
- As chair did you push Steve Pearce to run against Heather Wilson? He said you can't and that they made up their own mind. Dumb question.
- Family issues, he is against same sex marriage and he is pro life.
- Bronze star, Silver star and purple heart military awards brought up as character plus by caller. Obviously a supporter, he asked why Weh does not bring these up more. He tries to balance his campaign. He vetoed the use of the word hero in his campaign. He spoke some about his military experience.
- If elected, what is the future of the rail runner? He will put guys on issue, peel back the onion and leave anything on the table. Last resort is shuttering and would like to make it at least sustainable with small govt subsidies.
- He will work with the legislature to re-instate the death penalty.
- Will he impose fines on business that knowingly hire illegal aliens? He says that if all the laws already on the books we would not have this problem so he should not have to.

My Conclusion
Before the interview I wasn’t inclined to vote for Weh and after the interview I know that I will not vote for him. For the most part he seems like a nice person and all but I am unimpressed with his campaign and his qualifications. For the most part he seems to be campaigning on his 31 years in business but never goes into any details. I had to look up that he and his wife have owned CSI Aviation, a charter flight company, since 1979. I’m not sure how large the company is and what his experience really is with it. Another tenant of his campaign is that he is not a politician. While it is true that this is his first political campaign he was the chairman of the New Mexico Republican party from 2004 to 2009. Perhaps unfairly I consider that to be a political position. The interview did nothing to change my perception of Weh and I could not vote for him in good conscious because I do not think that his vague answers and stances bode well to the office of Governor.

The New Mexico Gubernatorial Primary

The primary election for Governor here in New Mexico is coming up soon, the first of June to be specific. Currently there are five candidates on the Republican ticket while the Lt. Governor, (read Bill Richardson’s third term) Diane Denish, is running unopposed on the democrat ticket. As I find everything done by Richardson to be indefensible and offensive I think that it is important to tie Denish to his administration. Denish’s campaign has involved attempts to separate her but I don’t think that will work. She has been the Lt. Governor for all eight years of the train wreck that this state signed itself up for by electing a narcissist like Richardson. Her public comments and actions from the last eight years have done nothing to prove Denish to be anything other than a carbon copy of the shameless, life-long politician Richardson. As such, there is nothing there for me to vote for, therefore I will be concentrating on the Republican side to determine who I would prefer to lead our state for the next four years while correcting the mistakes of the last eight.

770 AM KKOB’s Bob Clark show has been doing me a great service by hosting the nominees during the 9 O’clock hour which allows for listeners to learn about the candidates outside of their campaign materials. In this space I will list my thoughts on each candidate as they are interviewed and I go through the process of determining who I think would best serve as governor of our great state.

I listened to but did not take any notes on Pete Domenici, Jr’s interview this week as decided to start doing this today. What I can say though is that Domenici was impressive in his interview. At the start of his campaign I made the mistake of assuming that he was all name recognition, a gift from his long time senator father. I am happy to report that I was wrong and that Domenici seems to be someone well aware of the issues facing our state and capable of governing. In his interview he came off as a person of principle and with ideas that will be helpful to the future of our state. Because of this interview I move Domenici into the maybe column.

Coming back home

Up to November 2008 I had been a regular contributor to this blog and then all of a sudden I left. Part of it was due to work commitments that made it difficult to find the time to put into words the points I wanted to make and then even remember to do anything with those words. Additionally at that time I learned that I was to be a father for the first time. I thought at first that I would be able to continue with my life mostly unchanged. I was wrong and as Bill Engvall says; “Here’s your sign”. My son was born in July of 2009 and is nearing his first birthday, changing in an amazing way every day.

The biggest contribution to my dereliction of duty however had to do with the election of 2008. To me it had denigrated into a playground incident between seven year olds. The media was all in for Obama and ignored important things from his complete lack of meaningful experience including anything even related to the private sector to his radical associations and stated positions. John McCain was completely incompetent as a presidential candidate and Sarah Palin was sacrificed to the national scene and unfairly caricatured. To me, the campaign was just name calling of the Republican Vice Presidential Candidate, bumbling by McCain and a bunch of nonsense touchy-feely BS from the Democrat ticket. I read a lot and devoured everything I could about Obama. To many he was a fresh face but there was a lot to his history and at a relative young age, had authored two biographies full of evidence that he could not be trusted in executive office. His thin resume as a United States Senator existed of many rants of a leftist tilt, running for President and he was elected by luck as a friend allowed for the unsealing of private divorce records of his competitor who was leading. He is and always has been a community organizer. Simply put a rabble rousing, professional victim finder and exploiter. Knowing this, I could not fathom how a person like Obama could be elected to be President. Alderman, nutbag congressional district Representative, sure. But President, I did not think it was possible. As it became ever more apparent that he was going to be elected my mood became dark and I just didn’t care anymore. I worried about the future, mostly because I had a son on the way. When he was elected I was shocked but not. It was disheartening but I was not surprised. After all, in a country where many of my peers get their news from a blowhard like Jon Stewart how could I be surprised?

In all, I just wasn’t sure that I cared all that much for politics anymore. Pessimism is easy. Over the last year and a half the policies that have been put forth by this President and the Congress have been worse than I even imagined. It is as though our country is being run from an office complex on the yellow brick road. Those in charge of our government haven’t a care for the opinion of their constituents and treat the citizenry as infants. Every time our governor, Bill Richardson does anything I am in complete disbelief as to how a person of no character and utter incompetence could be elected for two terms. A ray of light has occurred recently. Last November, the seeming mayor for life of Albuquerque was defeated soundly by a responsible person. Massachusetts elected a Republican to the Senate. Perhaps the most impressive governor in our country runs New Jersey of all places.

It is time that I get back to hashing out my thoughts. Who knows if anyone cares about what I think but it is time, if only for myself, it is time that I finally get back at it. I plan to get more into local politics this time around because, it all starts at home.

Happiness Is ... Being Old, Male and Republican

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20090516/sc_livescience/happinessisbeingoldmaleandrepublican

This is why we are screwed

And also why we lost. There's a split between social conservatives and libertarians that's been festering for a while, as you can see in this post on Mike Huckabee's attacks on libertarians.

These two sides will duke it out, and the loser will join the democraps and Ballsack Obama's change we can believe in. :( I hope the "compassionate conservatives" lose. I'm getting older, more libertarian, and more federalist. Let the states decide social issues, peeps.

alright world, congratulations, great, wonderful, now let's get to work

When Obama did say "we are the United States," it does make me feel good and realize we are by far the best country on the planet, far more superior than everyone else in every category possible, and capable of having a verbally violent campaign leading to peaceful results.

That being said, however, as we look back, the bottom line fact is this. No President in the history of the US has been more disrespected than Bush. Even including Reagan and Nixon and Clinton.

People can learn a lesson or two from Paul Ryan (Wisconsin House Republican). The last 8 years proved one thing. When Bush wanted to reach to the other side of the aisle, the Democrats did not work with him. The last 8 years proved bipartisanship in DC is impossible. The bottom line is Bush proposed bipartisanship and *both* sides abandoned him. Republicans can't stand Bush because he chose Miers, didn't send the right amount of people to Iraq/no exit strategy, allow amnesty, NCLB, tax cuts weren't enough, not privatizing health care, etc. Democrats can't stand Bush because he chose Alito/Roberts, would not withdrawal from Iraq, won't open borders fully/give out driver's license, not enough funding for education, tax cuts too much, not supporting SCHIP, etc. See the point here? Bush is blamed for everything yet the Democratic Congress of the last few years gets a pass. How can Bush pass anything when he has vehement opposition? The last 8 years proved the only way you can win is to run on your views - and *stick* with them. That's the way Obama will be successful - but the key is to see if people are willing to accept his left liberal viewpoints. Time will tell there. But if Obama moves to the center, his Democrats in Congress will be angered and the Republicans will say he's not really conservative anyways. Presidents should stick with their viewpoints, and the members of Congress needs to swallow their pride and work with the President. Obama may get that lucky break considering most members of Congress agrees with him. Bush didn't have that break as he had almost the same members that would disagree with every little thing he said. Time will tell what Bush's legacy will be. It's way too early to analyze.

Now how do Republicans bounce back? Simple. Why do we have to stand on just one sub-issue of conservatism? There are people out there that's all of the above: Social conservative, economic, national security. Choose that one person and get Sarah Palin involved, get Mitt Romney involved, get Tim Pawlenty involved, get Bobby Jindal involved, get Michael Steele involved, get Grover Norquist involved, get Mike Huckabee involved, get Newt Gingrich involved, etc. or maybe one of them is the one. Get the "DC usuals" involved like Putnam, Boehner, Blunt, Pence, etc. Listening to the center has gotten us nothing. Conservatives may split amongst one another on sub-issues, but they will all rally together behind THE conservative. Independents only come on board if we are liberal on several issues. And as described in the previous paragraph, that ends up sinking the Republican party which essentially near-happened yesterday. And also come out positive. No need for depression like most of the Democrats' campaign themes have been. I know there are plenty of Republicans out there that think we should reach out to moderates and independents, and I respect that opinion, but I think we’ve seen that tried over the last 10 years now…and look what happened.

Now, liberals shouldn't be super confident come 2009. The culture war (whether one agrees/disagrees is not the point) still exists and they will not win the "right" by sticking with their original viewpoints. If Obama is asking for prayers from Christians, good Christians will do it, but Obama will need to think long and hard about his views on life and family if he's going to get full support. Democrats were able to get in mainly because of the economy conveniently near-crashing just a month before the election. Democrats capitalized and showed the world that you are all depressed - vote for us and you'll be happy again. McCain simply put ran a bad campaign and I've said that already. McCain himself distanced from Christians, Hispanics, and Suburbia and it was almost over at that point. And the campaign energized finally with Palin coming on board. Of course it helped most of the media were on the side of Obama, but that's beside the point. And after all that, may Republicans learn their lesson over the past couple of years. They came to Washington to "change it" and instead really it changed them and if anything, the party of fiscal responsibility threw it out the window. They didn't lower taxes enough and now we're witnessing outsourcing at record proportions. They, as well as Clinton, forced banks to give loans to pretty much anyone without logical discrimination. But like the economy, parties are cyclic, the Republicans will bounce back again.

And since economy has become the issue, how exactly will Democrats handle this? Well, the fact is most people are very negative about the future of our financial market. What we will see is the Democrats (let's just say that since they're in power now) will continue interfering in everyone's affairs, make government even bigger than it is now and as a result, continue the economic downturn. Congress showed (including Republicans of literally yesterday) they don’t know anything about the economy whatsoever, as well as other citizens in America. Some financial institution or an insurance company is in trouble. So what's the solution? Let government takeover *even more* and make matters worse. Democrats (yes they too) support the billions and billions and maybe trillions now of "relief" (note the quotes) to Wall Street and turn capital cheap. No one (McCain failed here probably because he too supported it) faulted the Congress of the home mortgage crisis that happened (Fannie/Freddie).

In order to restore confidence, they simply need to get out. That is really the only way. Stop taking on the liquidity and credit problems and let markets be truly free. If there is something stimulated, it's only temporary for a very short term. That's not exactly a recovery. Financial institutions are simply giving out in droves. Let them fail. It's really the only way something bounces back. But, they're not the only ones to blame, but also individuals that don’t know their financial boundaries and fall for the predatory schemes. Home values really need to reach a certain level. At those levels, new people who *can* afford will then buy. In the future, construction will start again. And if the economy grows, assets will go up.

Now how to get the economy growing again? Government *could* do something and that's to provide just enough liquidity so the markets continue to function. That can maintain markets. Again: just enough and this isn't a "bailout." And then promote economic growth by doing what Obama will *not* do and that's cut marginal rates on corporate as well as income taxes, and capital gains taxes as well. Investment spending will occur, jobs will be created, wealth will be generated. These are principles that Obama bluntly disagreed with in the entire campaign. Thus this is why I said the economy will continue to languish over the years

Consumers and workers ultimately pay corporate taxes. High corporate taxes does not produce jobs and reduces foreign entities of doing business here. It needs to go down from today's 35% level. As McCain said, it's the 2nd highest in the world - and it is

And here's the ultimate sacrifice: consumers must not be reckless with their finances. *and* Congress must reduce the debt. And this can be helped by economic growth

Congress should stop with all these "stimulus" packages. They're just rebates and they don't help the economy

Congress needs to stop helping people who got into the situation they were in to begin with. That is bluntly wasting money and not helping recovery. Banks should be able to decided whether or not to make deals with people and get the government out and pull away from the stupid law that was made back in the 90s forcing banks to give give give

Congress needs to stop making DoTre give equity to companies or unions because of the debt they caused to begin with

Congress *and* Obama needs to decrease marginal tax rates and allow free trade

Congress needs to stop this constant Union secret balloting legislation

And on top of *all* that, the Democrats will cut the DoD budget by at least 30% (that's said, so realistically it's gonna be more)

Congrats to President Obama: race and age is one thing, but policies is what matters

So it's done

Hey guys, I made a vow to disappear and divest myself of anything election-wise until today. If I got too invested, it would have been bad for business, plus I'm in the middle of a job hunt and I'd rather focus on that than this election. Now that it's done (the election, that is), I can finally weigh in.

This election, I was surprised to find out that my wife was a lot more gung-ho for McCain than me. I'm actually a registered independent now (long story), which sucks, because now the ACLU sends me crap and calls me. Yesterday, I resisted the temptation to pull the lever for Bob Barr. I usually lecture others about sissy third party antics, so I went and voted McCain.

So, the big question is, now what? I'm honestly proud of my country for this moment, and I think we should all reflect on that. I still think that Obama has this weird cult persona and hasn't done anything that qualifies him for the presidency, but the guy at least ran a flawless campaign and appears to have the temperament for the job. I'm going to be cautiously optimistic for the next couple of years. We're not going to be rounded up and sent to reeducation camps or anything, and I don't like the fearmongering on our side about what an Obama administration will look like. He'll be a left-wing president, but the American people are not stupid. As long as the press does its job (I have faith that they will end the 24/7 blowjob of this guy sometime next year) we'll be fine.

I have 2 great fears for the Obama presidency - 1) he will be assassinated or someone will make an attempt and 2) there will be a major terrorist attack on this country that he will be forced to respond to. The major reason for fearing both is obvious - they are greatly destabilizing. But I get the feeling that this guy is a lot like FDR and could use things to his advantage when it comes to unconstitutionally expanding his power. The first thing we should worry about is the credit crisis and his response - if he responds like FDR did, we'll be set for a long, extended depression with inflation highly likely. Personally, in the middle of my job hunt, I bumped government jobs up the list because those will likely be the most stable.

Anyway, guys, I'm cautiously optimistic that we'll be fine. The new reality is that we have a left wing government for at least a couple of years, but at least we're not nearly as bad as the other major powers of the world. Let's set aside party differences and congratulate the new President elect, and bask in this historic moment. I'm personally very proud to be an American right now.

surreal....

viewpoints from tonight:

---Wow, pretty historical...Interestingly and maybe this just happens to me, but when Republicans win, most of us conservatives nod, move on, and get to tasks. When liberals win, we know about it. In other words, liberals act, well, immature. It's like, yes, we know Obama won, now you rub it in? You can't get any of them to debate because they get too emotional. Probably because most of them don't know what Obama is gonna do and uneducated about policies. I took a risk, I've always said it's either Obama wins close or McCain wins close. And I'm wrong. But let's face it. Who's never wrong? No one. Obama won in a landslide due to the EV. Popular vote seems close (there's still time though), but EV-wise, yes Obama will eclipse 300. Let's just wait and see how Obama governs. Let's see if he moves to the center. Let's see how he handles terrorism. Because his past record clearly shows he's to the extreme left. I personally don't care about race. I care about what kind of policies he'll enact. With an extreme left Congress...we'll see. But bottom line, I said and now say congratulations to President Obama. Granted, it's more than likely I'll disagree with most of what he'll do, but we'll see. I just don't want to hear it from liberals - you got your President. Be mature about it. And Republicans? You only have yourself to blame. You had your chance for the last 8 years, well, really 6 years...and you didn't capitalize. May you learn your lesson.

---For me, the minute Obama won Ohio, I felt Obama was gonna win this election. The minute Obama won Virginia, all bets were off

---One thing I never understood is how networks (all of them) pick a candidate with only 1-2% of the precincts reporting and the results are like Obama 5,000 to McCain 4,000. Fox did that to Ohio tonight with 2% of precincts reporting and they went straight to Obama. They called New Mexico 1 minute after they closed. And if I remember, they called Udall and Pearce was ahead? I guess stations took their chance this year. They did this in 2000 and Florida bit them. I seriously think states should wait til they're 95% counted to declare.

---'nother thing I noticed. Democrats (well, at least Murtha and Obama) were coming out early declaring victory. I can't remember the last time candidates coming out early to declare victory already...

---Just realize this state went full Democrat. Gubernatorial, Senate, House, even the southeast NM voted Democrat...

---This election was really more anti-Bush than pro-Obama

---This is the first time the polls actually got something right in 8 years.

---Ahhh, watching all the young people get excited. I'll bet none of them know a single thing about policies

---I wonder what Israel is thinking at this moment...

---Obama: I wasn't the most likely candidate. [BS, the media set you up 2 years ago]

---Again, let's see what happens in 2009 (policies). Let's also see if he really does reach out to the other side. It'll be tough for conservatives because clearly the last 8 years the Democrats did not reach to the other side. Strength of arms is not his choice apparently. This could be another Carter term when it comes to foreign policy

Scare Tactics for a Democrat Win

When I lived in Arizona, I liked to be a good grandson and call my grandmother every few weeks. In these conversations my grandmother would often lament the dangers of the city, often stating a desire to stay home all the time. The source for these fears was the local nightly news and their sensationalized stories that only had the affect of scaring the elderly.


Today in the mail I received a political advertisement from one Victor Raigoza, New Mexico state senate candidate in my district. It was hard to find the sender as it was on the lower right of the addressed side in what appears to be about 8 pt font. The sender was not completely unobvious but it was curious that Victor’s opponent’s name appears eight times on both sides of what is a hit piece. The front page states that “JOHN RYAN is a CRIMINAL and a CRONY…was convicted of a felony, but was pardoned by then-Governor Gary Johnson (a Republican).” Reading the back of the page the reader is also alerted that Ryan works as a lobbyist and that he serves private interests while serving the state.


The tone of the ad was quite distasteful and the front of the ad features a copy of Ryan’s State Senate bio picture with a MS Paint (not quite good enough to be Photoshop or if it was, they paid too much for their capabilities) appended mug shot booking collar. All this made me curious. I moved into this district in March 2007 so I didn’t vote for Ryan nor did I have much an idea of his work in the Senate. A felony criminal record and a lobbyist? It sounded incredible that someone like that were elected and was running for re-election.

So, is John Ryan a criminal? Well that’s a judgment call and has to take into account what happened:

In 1980, when he was in high school, he and others broke into a North Valley home and stole family portraits which were held for ransom. He was indicted for extortion and convicted of felony burglary charges.

What Ryan did in this case was not acceptable behavior however two things struck me in regard to the explanation. First, he was in high school, it seems as though it was a prank, one that went too far as evidenced by the burglary part.1980 was almost thirty years ago, Ryan was sentenced to three years probation so when he was pardoned by Governor Johnson he had already served his sentence. Second he states that family portraits were taken. Victor Raigoza claims that he stole ‘paintings’, to extort someone. Strong language, the grandmothers of the North Valley are shaking.

So, how about the lobbying part? This question does not even pass muster at all simply because there is simply not enough information in the attack ad from Raigoza. It is true that Ryan is a lobbyist, but at the federal level:

Ryan is now a professional lobbyist at the federal level. He got started in that field in 1996 when he was hired by the City of Los Angeles to represent its interests in Washington. His next client was the National Rural Electric Co-op Association. … “I am a registered lobbyist in Washington DC and I pick my clients very wisely,” he explained. Those include The Southwest Power Group, which is trying to establish electrical transmission lines for solar and wind generators delivering power to Arizona and California, and a water pipeline project in the Clovis-Portales area that needs federal approvals.

Interesting, so the company, according to Raigoza, paid Ryan thousands of dollars to sponsor beneficial legislation required federal and not state approvals?

Nothing stated in the ad sent by Victor Raigoza has any reference and the type and words are clearly intended to scare elderly voters just like the nightly local news. Voters that won’t get the truth from someone like Victor Raigoza.

Who is Raigoza anyway? Other than the typical democrat website ‘who’s who’ and AFL-CIO endorsement information there isn’t much out there except vague platitudes alluding to what he supports (economy, education and affordable health care, and of course the Easter Bunny). What is known is that Raigoza is a financial advisor at Edward Jones and is proud of be a” community activist”, stopping the Wal-Mart that would allow me a five minute walk to obtain strawberry whoppers instead of a ten minute drive.

So Victor is a typical democrat, vague, ignorant of the issues, supported by labor unions, spiteful of business and subterranean in his capability to distort truth as scare tactics. And on top of that I bet he’s active in the Vista Del Norte homeowner’s association that’s the bane of my existence.

District 10 deserves better than someone like Victor Raigoza. John Ryan has the experience and is respected by his peers and the community he represents. The Village of Los Ranchos web site states:

The Village of Los Ranchos is fortunate and proud to have John Ryan, NM State Senator as a resident.

Don’t let sleaze peddling power seeking dishonest presumptive politicians like Victor Raigoza win.