(final podcast link)

Thank you everybody for being such a great audience and an even better source of learning over the years. I fully intend for this to be the final post on the Arizona Growler. Hey, if professional athletes can call a long hiatus “retirement,” so can I. Therefore, I “retire” from politics.

Jeff Rutledge continues to pursue his degree in media arts and general business administration. Trevor Smith is graduating with a B.A. in political science and will be working in Washington (that’s all he let me say). Ratman continues to wreak common-sensical havoc upon liberal public schools in southwestern Arizona.

I was going to announce my specific career plans on this blog, but recent events have led me to handle this a little more securely. If you’d like to know, and if I know you (having only met on the Internet still counts), you can feel free to shoot me an email at gpohara at gmail dot com, and I’ll be more than willing to let you in on the secret.

On a podcast-related note, you might recall some legal research back on the “O’Hara Factor” where I determined that getting the Arizona Board of Regents to turn its current weapons policy around would be sufficient to restore gun rights on Arizona’s university campuses. I hope that helps anybody who decides to make a political push.

The Arizona blogosphere meanwhile looks as healthy and vibrant as ever. I only hope that more people pay attention as blogs become the norm as opposed to a niche. Thank you everybody for the good times. Please know full well that I’m leaving on a better note than what the podcast might imply. It’s a challenge that I hope will be taken up soon.

Best Regards,
G. P. O’Hara

As most have already heard, astronaut Lisa Nowak has been arrested for kidnapping in what appears to be an odd “love triangle” including two astronauts.

As I watched the Fox News report on the ordeal this morning however, I noticed someone else: Nowak flew aboard STS-121 alongside Mark E. Kelly, who is engaged to District 8 Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. You may remember back in October that Kelly and Giffords were accused in the blogosphere of dating while Kelly was married. That turned out to be a last-minute defamatory cheap-shot at attempting to keep Giffords from getting elected. I’m surprised the blogger who reported that didn’t get sued.

Nowak is likely to receive life imprisonment. Frankly, I’m compelled to pray about the whole situation; this looks to be a huge mess.

Friendly reminder: Please consider voting for yours truly for the 2007 Political Blogging Scholarship.

Remember this?

ASU’s paper reported Monday that one of the professors is going to be arraigned for assault. I don’t have word on what happened to Mitchell’s charges for intimidation and harassment, but I’d imagine they were dropped for being baseless.

I just received an email supposedly from egreetings.com which contains a link to "postcard.exe", which I scanned with AVG.  The file according to AVG is "IRC/Backdoor.flood".  It was sent to my email.arizona.edu account, so I suspect I’m not the only UA student to receive it.

This is the source code for what I received.  Moreover, you can also read the warning from one of the online businesses with which the email claims to be affiliated.

The basic gist is that if you receive an email claiming to be sending you a postcard from "a family member", don’t click it. 

If you see the same thing and you’re UA affiliated, be sure to notify CCIT.

Update: Looks like BYU got it, too.

It looks like ERes was down for a while, but DocuFax and Audio reserves are still down.

Commenter "Topher George" astutely noted in a comment yesterday that it could be a hack attempt against the university’s terrorist intelligence tracking project.  It’s certainly a possibility, but I don’t imagine they’d ever tell us.

ASUA is holding its candidate information session today in the SUMC Santa Rita room at 6:00 p.m. Expect my presence. We’re about to find out whether free speech survived the ASUA Senate.

Update: New elections code is online.  From a very quick inspection, there’s only one part I don’t like.

7-2.03    Any and all websites, web pages, and/or profiles on online networking sites
including, but not limited to Facebook and MySpace, utilized for the purpose of
campaigning by a candidate and/or a member of their campaign staff shall be
approved by the Elections Commissioner. Any changes made to the
aforementioned after initial approval do not require subsequent approval;
however, the changes are subject to the rules and regulations of this Code.

The major free speech changes made look to include no longer requiring approval of physical campaign materials and no longer requiring approval for electronic updates.  It looks like liberty has prevailed.  Now we shall see whether we can change "tradition" and make these elections dignified.

Candidates, expect questions much like last year.  Readers, direct questions to ask the candidates by emailing me.  [gpohara at gmail dot com]

Update II: Benny Parsons has passed away.  It’s been a sad winter for NASCAR.  Rest in peace.

Both the Citizen and the Star are reporting that the UA network has been hacked from a French IP address.  The initial break-in happened back in November, but only back on Tuesday did they actually find that something had gone wrong.  Services to students appear now to be restored, but there are concerns over theft of UA credit card numbers and employees’ Social Security Numbers.

The AP reports that a UAPD officer shot and killed a man brandishing a shotgun during a traffic stop this morning.  We don’t know much more than that, but expect some developments to come out later.

The Arizona Daily Wildcat has no updates on the story, as it is currently on winter hiatus until January 10th.

I guess the story makes this odd to say, but Merry Christmas to everybody, and remember that tomorrow is no less His day than today.  God bless.

Update: The Tucson Citizen reports that the traffic stop was for a stolen license plate.  Deceased is Raul Marquez Jr., 43.  Encounter initiated at 4:50 a.m.; Marquez pronounced dead 45 minutes later.  UA Phonebook indicates no such name being affiliated with the university.

Update (26 Dec): The Arizona Daily Star has more details, including details on the records of the officer and the suspect.  The suspect’s criminal record doesn’t surprise me.

Update 3: Marquez had a felony warrant out for DUI, but was being pulled over specifically for having stolen plates.  Please allow me to echo what the commenters said on the Star article and thank the good Lord this wasn’t the tragedy for the officer’s family that it could have been.

I have concluded that University of Arizona President Shelton broke Arizona state law by having publicly spoken to encourage a specific vote on an elections issue.

I never reported this, but readers of the Wildcat may recall that UA President Robert Shelton spoke against 107 during the "UAdiscusses: Inclusion" event at the main student union (on-campus) on October 4th.

I have just been made aware of A.R.S. §15-1633, which includes this:

A. A person acting on behalf of a university or a person who aids another person acting on behalf of a university shall not use university personnel, equipment, materials, buildings or other resources for the purpose of influencing the outcomes of elections. Notwithstanding this section, a university may distribute informational pamphlets on a proposed bond election as provided in section 35-454. Nothing in this section precludes a university from reporting on official actions of the university or the Arizona board of regents.

I’m all for academic freedom, but we also must recognize that President Shelton is the ultimate representative of the university, not an individual college student with an opinion.  Even the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education recognizes that "representatives of the college" can be restricted in their speech.  I posted earlier concerning the ASU Undergraduate Student Government signing against Proposition 107, and whether such a thing might break state law or rules instituted here at the University of Arizona, but I would stop short in saying that student governments represent the university itself.  FIRE’s quote comes in the context of student-athletes, who can be considered representatives of the university.  President Shelton’s position as a representative is even more clear than that.

Former UA President Peter Likins did the same thing, though Dr. Likins’ most recent on-campus event did not include President Shelton.  Perhaps Dr. Shelton realized it would be a mistake within one month of an election.

This could be a matter of statutory interpretation, as the law also states "Nothing contained in this section shall be construed as denying the civil and political liberties of any person as guaranteed by the United States and Arizona Constitutions."  The primary difference here could be that President Shelton spoke at a university-sanctioned event occuring on-campus.  University (read: public) funds were used to take this position.

Let me know if you can find Attorney General Terry Goddard’s required guideline to the Arizona Board of Regents (which should have been sent before 01 January 2006) concerning such political speech.  We need to take a hard look at this issue for this and future elections.

Update: From the Arizona Board of Regents Policy Manual, we have this concerning political activity.

6-905 Political Activity  (PDF)

Employees may participate in political activity outside their employment, but shall not allow their interest in a particular party candidate, or political issue to affect the objectivity of their teaching or the performance of their regular university duties.

Oh, and we never see that, do we?

The Wildcat has the story on the Grijalva incident today.

Natalie Luna, press secretary for Grijalva, said O’Hara passed himself off as a journalist although he was a blogger.

Bloggers have more of a "mouthpiece," as they can be objective or not objective as they choose, Luna said.

Luna said there was initial confusion because Grijalva though O’Hara was a reporter with the Arizona Daily Wildcat.

However, when O’Hara did not get the answers he wanted, he began attacking Grijalva, Luna said.

Funny how other candidates didn’t feel I was "attacking" them, let alone think I was trying to turn public schools into "armed camps."

I’m currently trying to figure out the best way to include links to the rest of the Grijalva story to accomodate usability.  Expect a few random changes throughout the morning. 

There’s mass confusion on various blogs concerning the nature of my physical contact with the Grijalva staffer, not the least of which is oddly enough on a post critical towards me, so let me set the record straight:

Initial contact with the staffer was during the interview with Rep. Grijalva.  She said "You’re done" and condescendingly laid her hand on my right forearm in order to appease me.  She did this again after the second podcast clip when Grijalva stopped speaking.  Simply put, it was condescending and downright disrespectful, especially when you factor in that I’m 21 and she was about 35.  One could argue that she was taking advantage of her gender.  I’d certainly be more willing to sock a man who had laid his hand on my arm in that manner.

During the conversation between Rep. Grijalva and Mr. Drake, she grabbed my microphone (in my right hand the entire time) and forcefully switched it off.  I then switched it back on, moved to my right (east) and raised my arm up to get a better vantage point for the microphone, at which point she ripped the microphone cable from my recorder (which was in my left hand).  As such, aggressive contact occured at the time when she switched the microphone off, not when she was trying to condescend me earlier.  Theft (at minimum) occured when she ripped the cable from my recorder, as a small 3/32" to 1/8" adapter was lost in the process.  I ended up combing my hand through the sand below me to see if this adapter was around; I have no way of telling whether she had the adapter in hand or simply threw it away whether by incident or intention.

If you’re still confused, ask me.

Note: I replaced some of the language in the second paragraph shortly after posting.  I didn’t really need to be calmed down, but ultimately she wanted to keep the little pipsqueak plebian from approaching The Great Raúl.

Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion thinks…

• …that was intentionally "trying to start an argument."  I was actually trying to get a fresh interview with Rep. Grijalva just like I did with the rest of the candidates.  Somehow, Tedski thinks that asking a question that hasn’t come up as hot-button is automatically off-limits.  I’m a citizen, and this issue is important to me.  A citizen should not need any more qualifiers than that to ask a question of his or her elected officials.

• …that I "nudged [my] way between the two candidates."  Also false.  I pointed my microphone at them, but I never physically nudged my way.  My only physical contact with Rep. Grijalva was an initial handshake.  The rest of the contact was the staffer trying to end the interview ("You’re done") or switching off my microphone and then ripping the microphone cable out from the recorder, losing a piece of my personal property in the process.
• …that I "called a reporter."  I emailed various bloggers, but I never personally called any reporters from the mainstream media.  Mr. Drake has done that for me.

I recorded the podcast in that tone precisely because I had to get my thoughts down and get news of the event out.  This isn’t about my victimhood; this is about the kind of action that a sitting United States Congressman condones if not outright advocates.

Some supplemental items:

• I have called the Tucson Police Department in order to at least file a report and possibly press charges if I can get the identity of the staffer whom I believe to have assaulted me on the night of October 6th (depending on legal definitions).

• I am thankful to Rep. Grijalva’s Republican opponent Ron Drake, as he is fully behind me in this affair.
• I plan to attend tonight’s gubernatorial debate at the Student Union ballroom, and I’ve submitted a question similar to the one about the Second Amendment that I asked nearly all of the candidates from October 6th.  Conservative groups are asking conservatives to wear red, but I’m actually leaning more in favor of Barry Hess right now, so I think I’ll wear white.  That could change, though.

Update (October 9th): Expect a podcast report with my interviews of other candidates either tonight or tomorrow. You will find that the responses of the other candidates, even when we disagreed on many fundamental things, were very respectful and always ended with a genuine handshake. I unfortunately cannot say the same of Congressman Grijalva. Members of the press who seek direct comment may contact me at my email address: gpohara-at-gmail.com.

Update II (October 9th): I had never figured out why Grijalva and his staffer were so sensitive to having the conversation recorded, but perhaps it’s because they’re in a dispute over which debates they actually agreed upon. With this recent incident, Rep. Grijalva might be more likely than ever to avoid the University of Arizona as a debate site.

Update III (October 9th): The other interviews

THIS IS NOT A SATIRE.

I’m not going to delve into legal details here; I’m just going to say what happened and give myself some time to decide a course of action. Interviews of other candidates as well as further personal analysis of what happened will be posted at a later time when I can muster a more professional voice.

In short, I became involved in what I will term an "incident" with Representative Raul Grijalva (AZ-7) and one of his staffers during the October 6, 2006 Voter Block Party held at Main Gate Square by the Associated Students of the University of Arizona. The recording explains the rest.

While I wait upon my senses to allow me to choose a course of action, I urge my fellow District 7 voters to take this into account when marking the ballot on November 7th.

Garrett P. O’Hara
University of Arizona political science senior

P.S.: If you subscribe to the podcast, you might notice that the server I used for the other files is down. I’ll let you know when it’s back up.

How to listen:

Play episode (128 Kbps MP3) | Play episode (64 Kbps MP3) | RSS 2.0 Feed (podcasts) | Subscribe with iTunes or other podcatcher

Addition: This audio work falls under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License. Content on the rest of this blog falls under the license seen at the bottom of the right hand column of the page unless otherwise noted in a post. Added October 9th: As stated in the license, this in no way affects your fair use rights.

This is what I have verbatim from Mrs. Mitchell:

Breaking News: About 45 minutes ago [This is 3:55pm yesterday by my calculations –GPO], the police detective Osborne told me that charges have now been filed against me for “intimidation and harrassment.” Apparently, the flyers we put up (see attached) caused the professor to feel intimidated. Also, the police department says it was misrepresentation of them to put the ASU police phone # at the bottom of the flyers.

Additionally, the flyers somehow made it into residence hall postings.

My defense:

• I am extremely sorry for my role in the flyers. I had no idea it would interfere with the police investigation whatsoever.
• I actually thought we were helping the police. Additionally, I didn’t even file the charges until Tuesday because I thought I had to do the footwork to identify the professors first.
• I’ve never been involved in a criminal case before; I don’t know the processes of investigation and what’s not allowed.
• Since I am not a student here, I also did not know the posting policies, and had I known them, I would surely have abided by the rules. I am sorry about that too.
• The “WANTED…for assault” that the professor believes may have implicitly indicated her in the crime was just a theme on the Old Wild West kind of posters. We do live in Arizona, after all. It was a catchy look or theme to the flyer to get students’ attention.
• There was absolutely no vindictive or pre-meditated motive at work here. The flyers were thrown together last-minute in the heat of the moment, and students were passing them out because they felt indignant for their recruiter.
• The one and only motive of the flyer was simple: we wanted to identify the professors.

The sole press coverage of the assault that I’ve found is coming from the Douglas Daily Dispatch, which hasn’t mentioned the counter-charges.

Additionally, “johnny,” claiming the URL of the Student Press Law Center, thinks that Mrs. Mitchell is a racist.

i’m a white guy, emily mitchell sounds racist to me. for most of american history, minorities have been excluded. often brutally. terrorized. now you’ve started this group. sounds like a). a great way for emily mitchell to draw attention to her pathetic self and b). racists, ignorant about the past, finding ridiculous excuses to exclude non-whites and stir up racism. so minorities arent excluded from this club? why the hell would they want to join a club committed to their exclusion?
what an embarrassment for ASU.

As I said before, I dismiss the general notion of “hate crime” on constitutional grounds, and I don’t even agree with the CAMASU’s premise. There’s at least two things to learn here (with more to come):

• Just because you don’t agree with someone doesn’t justify assault! Unfortunately, the attitude within academia these days seems to be in favor of heckling or assaulting anybody with whom one does not agree right out of the marketplace of ideas. Just take a look at how Columbia University dealt with Minutemen Project co-founder Jim Gilchrist.
• The liberal response to CAMASU, if they are not hypocritical, should be exactly the same as their response to other “minority” groups on campus. As I said in a letter to the Wildcat earlier this year:
  

  […]

  University policy on multiple levels is bent on painting us students with a large brush into segregated factions whose members are apparently unable to develop social and professional relationships with members of any other faction. “Student affairs” offices split students into their own little racial hangouts. The greek system’s answer to diversity problems is to separate minorities into their own little fraternities and sororities apart from the others. The campus at large is no longer made up of over 35,000 individual students with unique thoughts, abilities and experiences; it is rather a collection of arbitrary demographic numbers based, if I may paraphrase Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., upon the color of our skin rather than the content of our character.

  So long as the university continues to encourage segregation between ethnicities, we will have made progress neither through the term of our new university president nor since the days of the forced segregation against which good and decent Americans of all ethnicities fought mere decades ago.

Related posts:

• Breaking: Charges filed against Mitchell
• ASU “hate crime” followup
• Breaking: Conservative field rep assaulted, harrassed by ASU professors

Charges have been filed against Leadership Institute field representative Emily Mitchell for "intimidation and harrassment." In addition, the police department’s objection to the flyers was the misrepresentation presented at the bottom of the flyers asking people to call the ASU police. More to come later; I’m in a study session right now.

Interested Participant opines that what two ASU professors did to Leadership Institute field representative Emily Mitchell was not a hate crime, despite the subjectivity of the term.

Personally, I dismiss the notion of “hate crime”; such definitions are a violation of 14th Amendment equal protection. Heck, I don’t even agree with the premise of the club. What is clear is that the assault was not justified. Unclear is whether ASU is either going to handle this incident according to its own policies or establish a double-standard because of the color of Emily’s skin or the content of her politics.

Remember, we are talking about the same university that ordered a large American flag in a cafeteria be taken down post-9/11 for fear of offending foreign students. Interested Participant speculates that the ASU Police are “running interference.” I’m inclined to agree and hope we’re both wrong.