----- Original Message -----

From: Legislative District 8 Republican Committee

Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2007 5:05 PM

Subject: A Letter from 1st Vice Chair Lisa James

Dear Friend,

Senator Jon Kyl, our U.S. Senator, is under attack for doing the very job we sent him to Washington to do. We did not send him to be a placeholder until Republicans regain control of the Senate.We sent him to represent us to the best of his ability and to make sure conservatives have a seat at the table. He has done an exceptional job for us over the past 20 years just as he has with his work on the proposed immigration legislation.

Unfortunately, the Arizona Republican Party is doing nothing to stop hateful, personal attacks. In fact, the Party is actually encouraging this divisive and reprehensible behavior. Rather than promoting our Party they are busy holding press conferences displaying obscene pictures. Rather than defending someone who is attempting to make something good from something terrible, they encourage the bad behavior of those calling for a recall and accusing Senator Kyl of treason.

In fact, they have gone beyond Arizona to national television to make their point. I note, with much disappointment, that there were no AZ GOP alerts to respond to Janet Napolitano's Op Ed in the Republic--only alerts to promote Chairman Pullen and his reaction to Jon Kyl and the bill itself.

Setting aside the content of the bill - and how many of us have even read this document from cover to cover? - Jon Kyl is a fine man, a statesman. We are fortunate to have such a voice representing us in the U.S. Senate. In fact, I know that you joined me in working hard toward his landslide victory just this past November. (http://www2.nationalreview.com/dest/2007/05/19/immigrationdraft051807.pdf)

At the very least, if our Chairman doesn't support the bill, and he has every right not to do so, he should remain publicly neutral. He should demonstrate leadership by denouncing those slinging personal attacks on a Senator with 96.9% and publicly state his personal support for Jon Kyl.

Here is what we believe as Republicans, as articulated in our Party Platform:

"As Republicans, we know who we are and what we believe. As the Party of the open door, while steadfast in our commitment to our ideals, we respect and accept that members of our Party can have deeply held and sometimes differing views . This diversity is a source of strength, not a sign of weakness, and so we welcome into our ranks all who may hold differing positions. We commit to resolve our differences with civility, trust, and mutual respect, and to affirm the common goals and beliefs that unite us." (Republican Party Platform, 2004, page 83, emphasis added)

The most emotional debate we have had in the party within my lifetime has been the debate over abortion.As someone completely committed to life, I have worked for pro-life candidates since my time as a delegate with Phyllis Schlafly for Jack Kemp in 1988. As a Party, we have had a great history of debating issues internally in primaries and at conventions, but once we have a nominee or an office-holder, we unite to work to elect and support them.

Clearly, the immigration issue is the new inter-party challenge we face.We don't all agree on how to solve the problem, and we all have a duty to voice our opinion to elected officials. The process with the current immigration bill is far from over and there will be much discussion about all aspects of the legislation. However, personal attacks that question Senator Kyl's integrity, and call for his resignation or recall are completely contrary to the principles of our great party.

Please join me in writing letters, making phone calls and sending emails to your lists to encourage the Arizona GOP to unite, rather than divide, registered Republicans. We can have a healthy debate about the issue, but attacking Senator Kyl only hurts our Party.

Thank you for your time and your action.

Respectfully,

Lisa James
1st Vice Chair, LD 8
Precinct Committeeman, Cocopah Precinct

First to dispense with the obvious. Some very nasty and disrespectful things have been said of Jon Kyl but not by the State party leadership. Lisa, four days before you accused Randy of attacking Jon Kyl, Randy posted a very well thought letter to the base. Here is a small portion:

I hope, had you taken the research time to find it before you sent your letter, that it would have lead you to take a different tack.

The Republican Party in Arizona has recently evolved from one dominated by the delegation to one that serves the grass roots. From everything I've heard since our party election, the grass roots are a lot happier now that someone is actually listening to them. The delegation not so much. The ugly rhetoric that has been going around about the immigration issue is unfortunate, unseemly, undesirable and disrespectful, particularly in the case of Jon Kyl. But it occurs because people with valid concerns are routinely ignored by the people they worked hard to send to Washington to represent them. Respect, after all, is a two-way street.

That was one of the issues that was settled in the recent party election. When we "hire-on" by becoming precinct committeemen we don't volunteer to work for our elected representatives. We volunteer to work on behalf of a set of principles and to bring forward and elect people who will stand up for those principles. If in the process it looks like we're working "for somebody" well, that's just appearances. The people we send to represent us tend to forget that. Occasionally it is necessary to remind them, respectfully.

From WEB articles now current, it appears some of our representatives say they were taken by surprise at the heat of the debate over this issue. Is it surprising some of the folks feel the respectful reminders aren't getting through?

Lisa, you and others have resurrected the "D" word, "DIVISIVE" against Chairman Pullen. Peggy Noonan and Hugh Hewitt among others say you've got it exactly backwards. Back on May 18, more than a week before the date of your letter, Hugh Hewitt wrote:

On your point "how many of us have even read this document" I would direct you to a fine attempt at analysis by Hugh Hewitt, posted May 21, here. More to the point, I have attempted to read it. The structure, language, grammar and forward, backward and sideways references make it something even a law student would have nightmares about. That makes Senator McCain's objective of "through the Senate in less than two weeks" extremely suspect.

Finally, as to "divisiveness", today June 1, Peggy Noonan took George Bush to the wood shed with this:

Did you ever have a professor take a paper you worked your !!s off to put together, tear it up in front of you, and say: "now go back and put together something worthwhile"? Our government spends something like 18 percent of a twelve trillion dollar economy. Believe me, in spite of John McCain's hubris and Jon Kyl's patriotic and dutiful support, this is not the best that can be done for the money. The Heritage Foundation has some excellent ideas here and they did it for a heck of a lot less money. If the current bill really is the best they can do, well, we'll be better off if they do nothing.

Lisa, I could not agree with you more that some of the rhetoric going around the email circuit is deplorable. A few of those emails had me wondering how Howard Dean got my address. But their language is mild compared to the scalding phone calls coming in to the AZ GOP hq from plain old regular republicans. As to the grass-roots and the email circuit you're complaining about, Chairman Pullen, Randy, has addressed that problem as far as is possible in a free society. He has not been, as you say "encouraging this divisive and reprehensible behavior". To attempt to hold him responsible, to accuse him of "divisiveness" in the face of what the delegation and our President is doing to the party is a tactic more worthy of our opponents across the aisle.

I want to leave you with one final quote from Hugh Hewitt's analysis of the bill: