Those of you familiar with me know I seem to have an on-going, rather wary relationship with Arizona's 8th District Freshman Congressman, Gabrielle Giffords.
In our last go round, I published a letter she had sent me, and shredded it. I then emailed that blog entry to her office.
What I didn't get a chance to do was follow up with that blog entry until now. Allow me to do so.
I was contacted by Miss Giffords' chief of staff, who called me at work. I hadn't yet arrived; however, I was told she would be calling later that morning. From what I've seen of Miss Giffords, she is NOT one of the normal Dems who has an extensive, expensive staff. I have got to give her kudos for that. Further, her chief of staff appears to be her only staff member. No one can accuse Miss Giffords' of wasting taxpayer money on staffing and I will certainly give her that. I will also grant her this: her chief of staff was EXTREMELY cordial, pleasant, willing to answer questions (to a point) and certainly did not have to personally call me to discuss my concerns.
What we did disagree on, and I was very vocal about, was the lack of respect given to the office of Commander in Chief and the underlying disrespect in communications regarding the president and the war. I did get rather testy on that and stated it was NOT "Bush's war" it is AMERICA'S war and, she was perfectly entitled not to like the president but she was out of line in showing her disrespect for the office. That, however, was about the testiest it became; the vast majority of the conversation was extremely pleasant, cordial and polite.
I was actually invited to personally call anytime I had further concerns I wished to discuss--and it appeared to be a genuine invitation.
But, wait Miss Beth--you're being NICE to Miss Giffords! WHAT GIVES? HAVE YOU TURNED TRAITOR ON US?
NOT AT ALL. However, when one is treated nicely and with polite respect from a member of a party that appears to be on the verge of a total implosion and/or meltdown, it bears acknowledgment and appreciation to the person(s) who gave you that treatment. Just as I would be ripping her to shreds had it been otherwise, it is only right and proper to acknowledge when one has been treated with respect and politeness.
Imagine, then, my utter surprise when I found I was on Miss Giffords' email list (of course, I track her voting record through MegaVote and other vote tracking services) updating me on her activities on Capitol Hill. Imagine my further surprise when I received an invitation to her forum this weekend on Veteran's Affairs. You could have knocked me over with a feather!
Unfortunately (GROAN), I missed the rsvp date and won't be going as I had anticipated. So, I will ask my questions here and send her another email with the blog link. Keep in mind I have not yet checked her voting record regarding Veteran's Affairs. Nevermind, I just did. It apparently hasn't made it to Congress yet so she hasn't yet voted on it; I can be cautiously optimistic and hope she is having this forum to address Veteran's concerns in order to better formulate her vote.
Again, I will give her the benefit of the doubt based on the fact she hasn't yet voted and appears to want input prior to voting--I would expect that kind of responsiblity from any representative, Republican or Democrat, and I will try to think the best until I see otherwise.
One thing I must point out here is, while my and Miss Giffords' views are often in direct opposition to each other, I must commend her on her attention to her district. It is certainly NOT unusual to see her in Tucson, OFTEN, meeting with her constituents. Certainly far more than her counterpart, Mr. Grijalva (see below) who seems to think his deigning to visit his consitutency is the equivalent of a visit by crowned royalty. Again, DON'T GET ME WRONG, MISS GIFFORDS AND I ARE IN VERY DIFFERENT MINDSETS BUT SHE DOES KEEP IN CONSTANT TOUCH WITH HER CONSTITUENTS. That's a positive, a very definite positive.
Veteran's Affairs are something a lot of people don't think about; those blogging and doing our best to support the troops see horror stories of the mistreatment our Veterans receive upon their return home. It's not enough to support the troops while they're in battle--far too many need help upon their return home and subsequent discharge and far too many of THOSE Veterans just can't get the help they need.
One of my guest posters asked me to ask Miss Giffords something very specific. It was this:
Ask her why she isn't supporting legislation right now to protect our veterans monuments. Ask her why she isn't supporting legislation to make it a crime to desecrate our flag or insult our troops in a time of war. Ask her why she isn't supporting legislation right now that would make it a crime to spout out inflammatory, seditious and treasonable speech in public while this country is at war.
So, Miss Giffords? What is your answer to this Veteran's questions? Are you aware of the vandalism that occurred this past weekend to the Vietnam memorial? Are you aware of the pictures we have here on our blogs showing the criminal acts being perpetrated under the umbrella of "Free Speech"?
Here's a post from yesterday that was cross posted from another blog to mine--and many, many others. It's called
"THIS Is What Anti-War Protestors Are Folks" and shows a late teen/early 20's male dropping his pants in an Oregon protest in March, 2007, in front of God and everybody (including children) to SHIT on OUR FLAG--a flag that had been burned earlier--along with a soldier in effigy--and he was shitting to put out the flames. This is NOT "Free Speech". This is "Hate Crime". How do you stand on Hate Crimes against this country, Miss Giffords?
And along that line of questioning, please tell me how you feel about the MoveOn.org's New York Times full page ad villifying and slandering General David Petraeus. And please tell me why I haven't heard you come out strongly and extremely vociferously against that slander. Why you haven't distanced yourself IMMEDIATELY from that ad? Would you please clarify that for me? I would certainly have more respect for you, regardless of party differences, if you were to immediately and loudly divorce yourself from any association with MoveOn.org--not just because of the ad, but also because of MoveOn.org's statement:
In a December 9th e-mail signed by “Eli Pariser, Justin Ruben, and the whole MoveOn PAC team,” the Soros front group stated: “In the last year, grassroots contributors like us gave more than $300 million to the Kerry campaign and the DNC, and proved that the Party doesn't need corporate cash to be competitive. Now it's our Party: we bought it, we own it, and we're going to take it back.” (quoted from FrontPageMagazine.com article MoveOn: 'We Bought' the Democratic Party; December 10, 2004)
I'm sure I'm not the only constituent that would be very interested in your response to these questions.
********************
THIS Congressman is Raul Grijalva, Arizona's Senior 7th District Congressman.
I've written him just as many letters as I have Miss Giffords. I've asked him just as many questions; in fact I've asked him identical questions.
I've received one form letter in response to my concerns. I signed up for his email notifications. It has been ignored. His email form on the contact reps page has cutesy little "tests" you have to answer correctly before you can leave him an email. Little things, like what is 2 + 2 (tonight's little challenge was 3 x 1--and you had three tries to correctly answer).
Now, considering he used to be a member of the Tucson Unified School District (and his daughter is now a member of said district), one would think he could have come up with something a little more challenging as a "screening" agent. Or not. The question is though--why should he be afraid to hear from his constituents to begin with?
Then again, once he got the NEA firmly ensconced into the school district with their agenda at dumbing down and indoctrinating the kids into mindless, non-questioning, goose-stepping obedience to the liberal, communistic, socialistic agenda, he went on to run for Congress. His work in Tucson was accomplished.
See, Mr. Grijalva only wants to hear from you if your skin is brown and you're mexican; legal or illegal doesn't matter. I happen to be white with a white surname, so I don't count. He even ran his campaign ads almost exclusively in spanish and did not campaign in the white areas of his district.
His voting record over his tenure shows him to be, in fact, one of the far left fringe. One particular issue that completely irritated me with this man was a particular young soldier Tucson lost. This was a young man who was an illegal, brought by his illegal parents across the border. However, this young man graduated high school and enlisted because of his love for this country. He fought AND DIED for this country. He was awarded his citizenship posthumously. I do not recall seeing Mr. Grijalva at this young man's grave site. I don't recall him being anywhere near the memorials.
I could be wrong and if I am, I will gladly apologize.
However, the message was clear--though this young man was illegal, he did the unthinkable in this far leftist's eyes--he enlisted to DEFEND THIS COUNTRY. He GAVE HIS LIFE to his adopted country. And that is unforgiveable in Mr. Grijalva's lexicon of the downtrodden illegal. This young man, had he not have died in a field of battle, would surely have made a success of himself. He had the drive and the ambition. He had the desire to become legal and do something FOR the country he loved rather than leech off the government his entire life. This ambition, this drive, this love of country is completely foreign to Mr. Grijalva. It doesn't fit in with his agenda; so, this young man was postuhumously punished because he didn't fit the party line agenda of entitlement and law breaking.
However, I'll give Mr. Grijalva one more chance. I presented several questions to Miss Giffords above.
I ask Mr. Grijalva to answer those same questions. In a public forum. Televised on mainstream stations, not just spanish speaking ones. And to answer those questions in the language of the land, English--AND ONLY ENGLISH, THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF AMERICA, so his American constituents can easily understand his answers without being forced to learn a language not the official language of this country.
Frankly, I have more faith in Miss Giffords. Even if there is some residual Democratic spin on the answers, I feel she will make a sincere effort to answer the questions in a somewhat thoughtful, measured manner.
I don't think Mr. Grijalva will even read this when I email it to him. After all, I'm white--I don't count. I'd wager it'll be ignored at best, and if by some chance it gets through his screeners (remember his cutesy little tests), it'll be deleted at worst. But we'll always have it here, won't we?
Who's with the traitors and seditionists at MoveOn.org and who isn't? Hopefully we shall soon see.
Who is going to at least make the effort to talk to Veterans before voting and who isn't?
Again, we have that answer.
It's not Mr. Grijalva. He could care less about Veterans. The Veteran's Administration complex is in his district. But, you see, they're VETERANS. THEY LOVE THIS COUNTRY. THEY TOOK AN OATH TO LAY DOWN THEIR LIVES FOR THIS COUNTRY. Completely foreign thought, totally anathemic idea to Mr. Grijalva. The only thing America is good for in his eyes is entitlement programs for the lazy and illegal, the drug thugs and the gangs (highly concentrated and growing in his district) while refusing the children quality education (most of the failing schools in the city are also in his district--his aversion to immersing the children in the language of the land so they can thrive here). In his eyes, America certainly isn't worth fighting and dying for. Just using.
Updates will follow.
********************
For those wondering why I have both these people as representatives, I own a house in Grijalva's district (my daughter lives in that house) and I live in Miss Giffords' district.
Sphere: Related Content
|
