Subscribe to EspressoPundit

About Greg

« Seven Year Niche | Main | Fast and Furious Went as Planned... »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Steve Gallardo would have been the easiest State Senator to recall. His general election turn-out was the lowest in the state. It would have taken even less signature than the Pearce Recall.

If recalling a legislator were so easy why has it never happened in the 100 years that the recall has been a part of the Arizona State constitution? And why do the very people who say they support and the defend the constitution (and of course that must also include Arizona's constitution) want to now change that very same constitution? I was a part of the recall and we followed every law pertaining to it's use. I live in LD 18 and I only obtained signatures from voters of LD 18. I and other volunteers like myself) did not mis-represent what the recall meant as some have tried to claim. We found most of those we contacted eager to sign the recall. If they weren't sure or weren't interested we politely thanked them for their time and were on our way. We did not coerce or force people to sign. We did it legally and under the direction of the Arizona State constitution. You claim Mr. Lewis is "whining". I think as you point your finger of scorn at Jerry Lewis you might want to notice the 3 fingers pointed right back at yourself.

Steve Gallardo is an open borders/illegal alien supporter so he's exactly the kind of politician these people want to keep.

Nobody said recalling a legislature was easy. In fact, Greg said that it would have been easier to get Gallardo out because of his low general lection turn out. In the last 100 years there wasn't a clever enough group with major $$$ and motivation to go after someone like Pearce. The illegal alien supporters are desperate and have the right backing. Enter Randy Parraz, the community organizer with the Sal Alinsky tactics. You may not have used any dirty dealings to get your signatures but there are others who did and that's a fact that has been publicized.

Thanks for the analysis, Greg. If that's the best knock people can make on Jerry Lewis, I guess I can accept it. Compared to exorbitant gifts from lobbyists and the Fiesta Bowl and recruiting a sham candidate, sarcasm seems relatively harmless...and not illegal or unethical. Sophomoric? I'll agree.

So naturally, you're also opposed to the juvenile Fox News press releases about people like LL Cool J:

“Real American Stories” features uplifting tales about overcoming adversity and we believe Mr. Smith’s interview fit that criteria. However, as it appears that Mr. Smith does not want to be associated with a program that could serve as an inspiration to others, we are cutting his interview from the special and wish him the best with his fledgling acting career."

Or Senator Al Franken:

"It's time to return Al Franken to the obscurity he's normally accustomed to," a Fox spokeswoman later told CNN.

Ha ha! Just kidding, I know you're cool with Fox and wouldn't say an ill word against. That's just one of those things that's OK if a conservative does it!


I'm still waiting for Laurie Roberts to apologize for insinuating along with the Randy Parraz, that RP or his supporters threw a "padlock" and his Lewis in the groin. No retraction or apology from Lewis either. So much for the "soft-spoken" "Bishop".

All I have heard and seen has been a coordinated attack on RP by the open borders crowd that makes money off of illegals at the expense of the taxpayers of this State.

This is not an election, it's the weird result of an extraordinary but plausible (yet symbolic) effort to punish Pearce. It's less a debate and more of an unexpected streetfight, where tactics and weapons change rapidly.

There is no such thing as a traditional recall election, so your mention of "manners" or "class" ignores the lynch mob character of the anti-Pearce campaign.

Whatever the result, this recall election is quite meaningless.

And I'll ignore your concatenated misquote of Hobbes and Rousseau, unless it's a deliberate pun?

Your false indignation at our irony-filled press release is ironic itself. I personally wrote that press release, and yes we were laughing while we wrote it: The Pearce team has a sham candidate in the race, and everybody knows it. She runs and hides from the press (as she was told to do by Greg Western and others). By pointing out that she will not make any mainstream media appearances we further highlight the ploy. Tell me, why is it that when people are exposed doing something that, though legal, is unethical, they want to complain about the ones that caught them? The way the Pearce team is campaigning is a campaign issue in and of itself.

Thank you Greg

I'm still not sure why any Republican decided to take the bait and run in an election that was created by a Democratic party operative. Nice job playing into your ideological opponent's hands!

A good rule for GOPers ought to be: If your actions make Randy Parraz happy, you're doing something wrong.

Good blog, Greg. As we all can tell by the anti-Pearce rants it generated, you hit a nerve. All's fair in love, war, and politics. The Republican moderates teaming up with Democrats is nothing new, either. Let the battle begin. My prediction: Despite all the money and effort from the pro-illegal alien/open borders crowd (including the Arizona Republic), Pearce wins a majority (not a plurality) by at least six points.

Looking at the media coverage, including videotapes, of the Olivia Cortes affair, there is one and only one conclusion any fair minded person could come to: Cortes is a sham candidate, put on the ballot by Pearce supporters in a deliberate effort to deceive voters. A fraud.

There is only one fair and decent solution: Cortes needs to remove her name from the ballot and apologize to the voters of her district for her participation in a dishonest and deceitful scheme. Pearce, his family, his supporters, and the Tea Party folks who participated in this fraud owe apologies, as well. Their little scheme is disgraceful and tinged with racism as well. Wouldn't Hispanic voters in Mr. Pearce's district have the right to feel just a wee bit insulted by Ms. Cortes, her candidacy, and her "Si Se Puede" signs?

Rather than telling Mr. Lewis to stay classy, perhaps that message might be directed to Mr. Pearce, his supporters, and the Tea Party. Their little scheme involving Cortes is far from classy.

Rather than telling Mr. Lewis to man up, perhaps that message might better be directed at Mr. Pearce. Is Pearce afraid to face up to Mr. Lewis man to man, one on one? If he is not afraid of this, why did he need to bring in a fake candidate? How manly of him.

Rather than telling Mr. Lewis to stop whining, perhaps Mr. Pearce should be directed to do so. He fought the recall all the way to the State Supreme Court with a claim that the recall effort "deceived" people into signing petitions. While Pearce was complaining to the courts about deceit on the part of the recall campaign, his supports, including his own family members, were deceiving people into signing petitions and placing a fraudulent candidate on the ballot to deceive the voters. Perhaps Mr. Pearce should not have whined about the recall effort all the way to the Supreme Court.

Why should Mr. Lewis man up, act classy, and stop "whining" when Mr. Pearce whines, schemes and deceives, does not have the decency to own up to or apologize for his mistakes, and does not have the courage to face up to Mr Lewis man to man?

Equal standards, please. It is the conduct of Mr. Pearce, not Mr. Lewis, that is sadly deficient in class, decency, and courage.

Russell Pearce and his Tea Party sympathizers were caught red handed running a sham candidate. Mr. Espresso bends over backwards to make this look as good as he can make it look: "It looks like some Pearce supporters may have put another candidate on the ballot in order to dilute the vote." No, it does not "look like" Pearce supporters "may have" put another candidate on the ballot. If the Arizona Republic deployed such pussy-footing language in describing something,such as SB 1070, they'd be blasted for it, right here on Espresso There's no "looks like" or "may have" involved. Pearce and his buddies put a fraudulent candidate on the ballot. Deliberately trying to deceive the voters in his district. How truly and amazingly classy. Outright racist as well.

Mr. Espresso, of course, holds Mr. Pearce to absolutely NO standards of conduct at all. NONE. With Pearce, lying, deceiving, bullying, whining, and deceiving his own district are all par for the course. But Mr. Espresso expects more of others than he expects from Mr. Pearce of from himself. Jerry Lewis needs to man up and stop whining and stay classy. What crap.

Pearce and his buddies got caught on this one. They could man up and admit it. Or they can go on lying and deceiving and scheming. Come on, Russell, MAN UP! You got caught.

Does Mr. Espresso actually think that Russell Pearce can do no wrong? Does he actually think that Jerry Lewis is the one who needs lessons on class, manners, and manhood? I've never seen such a case of right eye blindness in my life, especially in an election involving two conservative Republicans, both of them members of the LDS church. It's baffling beyond words.

All you Pearce haters still haven't come up with a single quote from him that could even be remotely described as "racist" or "hateful." You all regurgitate the same, and typically leftist, talking points about hateful, racist, destroying our economy, bad for Arizona, etc., ad nauseum. And now, out of the blue comes Jerry Lewis to rescue LD 18, the Republican Party and, indeed, the entire state of Arizona. You talk about sham candidates. Does anyone honestly believe that if this guy's name was Jerry Harris and not Jerry Lewis that he would be the left's standard bearer? And where are the Democrats? With Pearce being such a lousy person, why didn't the Dems step up and nominate one of their own? In reality, Lewis is the Democrats "sham candidate." Please, spare us the hypocrisy.

Posted by: Robert Woodman
"Does Mr. Espresso actually think that Russell Pearce can do no wrong?"

Has Robert Woodman spent much time BOTHERING to read Espresso often before posting a rant?

Anyone who has been following Expresso Pundit over the past few years knows Gregs views have varied; anything but a blind partisan front or an echo chamber.

Quite the opposite of the Klute/Woodman/Tsosie/Jorgenson 'caucus' - if one can even refer to it as such.

Set aside the fact the AZ Supreme's punted on their responsibility to vett this circus to begin with - by refusing to ensure transparency through validating the signatures - paid for as they were with out of state monies.

[hardly the kind of 'grass roots' effort folks like Ms Jorgenson claim]

We have had a drawn out period of ugly and nasty politics in this state - and it's been both draining and destructive. Along with The Thomas affair, this latest routine is same silly season garbage.

Ten years ago Arizona was top destination state for businesses & growth - with a future that looked bright and limitless.

Today people are coping with very difficult times. At what do we get politically? Just mindless partisan self-destructive warfare. The kind of teenage hair-pulling stuff that would be funny if it wasn't so expensive.

The state Bar Association is conducting it's brand of payback is a #$%^&...and simultaneously we have to suffer the likes of this Jerry Lewis faux 'uprising' - part 'modern family' LDS feud & and part Randy Parazz Cal Berkley 'free speech' movement.

That there is a recall at all is a joke; a total violation of the spirit of the law regardless of the rest.

Expresso has done an excellet job of explaining that over the past few months for those who have stopped to listen.

And while I don't always agree with Greg, I am grateful he puts in the effort. ala the prior post - on the 7 year itch - thanks again for doing so.

Without it - dolts like the Parazz 'lincoln brigade' would have a easier time trying to shill their viral brand of 'comprehensive liberal facisim...'

no smilely face included.

The Buzz word is "sham". If she's a "sham" she won't get many votes will she? Any votes she gets, takes away from Pearce as well as Lewis. If she got the signatures, they are valid (just as Lewis's) what's the problem?

If she's a "sham" and Lewis's message is something worthy to vote for, why worry about Cortes? Because Lewis isn't that great of a candidate?

Was the "sham" candidate label thrown out at the other two alleged candidates whom Failed to file the signatures?

or is she just a "Sham" because Randy and Chad, and the Democrat party thinks so? Why didn't the Democrat party field a candidate?

Just let the election continue.

I think it may be a wrong assumption to believe that Mr. Lewis has been practicing what he's been preaching in Sunday School for 20 years.

There's an old saying,
'The fish rots from the head.'

To know Mr Lewis is to observe the actions of his organization.

I'm amazed at the a**holes on this blog who with snide remarks continue the fallacy that Ms Cortes is somehow related to the Pearce effort.

Can Lewis not win this on his own without making up this kind of wack-a-doodle nonsense?

Comments made by Lewis team members and supporters are strikingly similar to the sort of rhetoric we hear routinely from Democrats and Liberals. Maybe because that's what's behind Lewis?

@RonJ - In 2006 Russell Pearce used text from National Alliance, a white separatist group, in an email to a group of supporters. He later apologized for it and tried to clear it up but the email still went out. Is that enough of a quote for you?

I don't care if Cortes is a sham, I am not all that concerned that someone put out a fake twitter account for Jerry Lewis and was tweeting comments that supposedly linked Jerry Lewis with Randy "whatever his name is", I don't care if you say that everyone not supporting RP is for open borders.

Non of this is going to help me support RP because frankly he has done a poor job... had he done a better job he wouldn't be recalled...

I am voting for Jerry Lewis.

If I recall correctly, Russell Pearce's son, a police officer, was shot by an illegal immigrant in the line of duty. I wonder if that has anything to do with his strong opposition to illegal immigration? Most people aren't opposed to immigration, it's illegal immigration they have a problem with.

Greg, I think you are the one who is whining. It's politics, DUDE. (your favorite word, not mine.) Plus, you at times are the king of sarcasm. Kettle. Black.

Beeep! Sorry, wrong, Preston, but thanks for playing. Pearce was sent the link. There were some agreeable points made in the column. Pearce admitted and apologized for two things: 1) He didn't read the whole piece, and 2) He didn't know the origin of the original. Blame him for not doing his due diligence, but he spoke no racist or hateful comments, nor did he intend to. Good try, though. Keep playing.

Shorter RonJ:

Why does no one talk about all the good things the Confederacy did?

I love the high level discourse here.

Apparently anyone who believes that Cortes is a sham candidate is an "a---hole" who believes in wack-a-doodle nonsense.

Wack a doodle indeed. The evidence is overwhelming: Pearce's supporters and the Tea Party collected the signatures and put Cortes on the ballot. They told people straight out that their aim was to "dilute" the vote.

Right wing extremists are allow to deny obvious facts on this blog. They are allowed to call polite names like "a--hole." Those on the left are not extended the same, uh, courtesy shall we call it.

While were being scolded on bad manners, of all things. How unmannerly and unmanly. Man up. And mind your manners.

Yeah evidence and facts are what determines a case. NOT bearing false witness by making false claims that a RP supporter stole the Lewis yard signs... especially when it sure looks like an excellent opportunity for Lewis to gain some media attention by having his own supporter do the stunt himself.

Kind of like opening a fake twitter yourself and claiming your opposition did it to you.

Again, just as elsewhere, its the LDS who lack integrity and honesty (like Ronald McDonald) who spoil the image of the Church.

Hi Bernie! Funny you're here, its not your district or your political party...

Bottom Line?

IF the proponents of this recall and their candidate truly respected the Constitution and the Rule of Law, they would have waited until the regular election cycle to challenge RP.

Instead they have divided the Church; and they are placing a burden on the taxpayers for the cost of their election. Where is the high ground in this Mr. Lewis?

"The evidence is overwhelming: Pearce's supporters and the Tea Party collected the signatures and put Cortes on the ballot. They told people straight out that their aim was to "dilute" the vote."

Um, perhaps I'm missing something? ...

Parraz's supporters and the Dems collected the signatures and put Lewis on the ballot. They told people straight out that their aim was to "recall" a sitting legislator because they (i.e. not the people who voted him into office in the first place) didn't like the direction he was taking the state.

I guess, by your standards, that Lewis is a much of a "sham candidate" as Cortes, yes? That means Sen. Pearce is the only legitimate candidate left in the race. Might as well end it now ...

Randy Parraz;
9 years with the Industrial Areas Foundation, founder and benefactor? Saul Alinsky

9 years with the AFL/CIO?

And Jerry Lewis signs on with someone like this? Perhaps Lewis should atone for his sin of character association.

Mr Lewis has allowed through his consent, this outsider to divide the Church and create division in Arizona.

Yea shall know them by their fruits.

I've suspected who Veritas Vincit is for some time now. It just became crystal clear.

Dude. It was actually kind of funny. Pull your panties up and be a big boy.

The comments to this entry are closed.