Let me just go on the record as saying I hate blanket statements. Inevitably, they’re made out of anger, or some feeling of injustice. And they are inevitably almost always flawed, prejudiced, or just plain wrong.
Like the following statement made by you, Representative Raul Grijalva, regarding votes against you in the recent election:
“I’ve never had the privilege of getting a majority there, and I probably won’t have that in the future. You bring projects in, clinics, a new port of entry, and it doesn’t seem to have an effect. But the politics are more polarized and more racial in Pima and Santa Cruz, so you deal with what you get.”
Indeed, Representative Grijalva. Deal with it.
Yes, the politics probably are more polarized here. But to me, that’s to be expected. Look at the economy here, and the proximity to the border. Look at the major industry—farming, and developmental testing of equipment, weapons, and vehicles for the military. People here depend on these things for their ways of life. We need industry, and customers to come here.
Do not forget, sir, that you represent the people of this state—even the ones that do not agree with you and the way you vote on issues that are important to them. So when a senate bill is proposed (that provides the means to enforce Federal legislation ALREADY IN PLACE) to attempt to slow down illegal immigration, and approved with a significant majority, and you encourage a boycott of your OWN STATE in regard to service and industry, I think Yumans found it decidedly off-putting.
And when it came time for re-election, and you, Representative Grijalva, saw you weren’t going to get the votes here you’d get in your other counties, you made your blanket statement. Which to me, sounds like if people in Yuma didn’t vote for you, it’s because of racial motivations of one sort or another.
That may be true of some people, maybe even many people.
But it is not true of everyone.
My wife’s aunt is a staunch defender of Representative Grijalva, and maintains that Representative Grijalva should not be held accountable for encouraging a boycott because the statement was made out of anger, regarding “crap” legislation.
I don’t care why he said it, only that he did, and he meant it. That’s not in dispute. And in my opinion, that’s why a lot of people did not vote for him that might have otherwise.
But not me, Representative Grijalva. Not me.
I didn’t vote for you because you either voted for something I find morally reprehensible, or voted against something that I support.
It’s my right to NOT vote for you if I disagree with something you stand for, or voted for. So when I don’t vote for you, you have no right to imply anything about my motivations. But since you did, allow me to express why I did not vote for you, and will not vote for you next election, either.
Voted NO on allowing Courts to decide on “God” in Pledge of Allegiance. (Jul 2006)
Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Jan 2007)
Voted YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
Voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
Voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
Voted NO on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration. (Jun 2003)
If you keep sailing along on your present course, sir, securing another victory may not be so easy next time. You may represent the people of this county, Representative. But based on your votes, you do not represent me.