Republican Ben Buehler-Garcia is not among the conservatives out there who are opposing Prop 200, no matter what KGUN-9 is reporting.
The Pima County Democratic Party sent out a bulletin following a KGUN-9 report last night that Buehler-Garcia did not have a position on Prop 200. But Bueher-Garcia says the KGUN reporter misunderstood what he said regarding his position and that he stands by his support for the Public Safety First Initiative, which would require the city to spend more than $60 million a year once its fully implemented in five years.
Buehler-Garcia says he missed a follow-up phone call from KGUN anchor Jennifer Waddell, who tried to clarify his position before last night’s newscast.
The Democrats, meanwhile, are engaging in some revisionist history of their own on the topic:
Council member Karin Uhlich, on the other hand, opposed 200 before opposing 200 was popular, showing her to be a leader and not a follower, like Buehler-Garcia.
But Uhlich was actually the last city council member to take a position on Prop 200. It wasn’t until Friday, Oct. 9, that Uhlich announced that she would oppose the initiative. By that time, early voting was underway and the Tucson Chamber of Commerce, along with many left-leaning groups, had already announced their opposition.
Until then, Uhlich had pointedly declined to take a position on Prop 200.
This article appears in Oct 29 – Nov 4, 2009.
Revisionist my ass. She’s been opposed to 200 since at least July, as any google search will confirm.
David, I’m surprised you did not know this, but for several months, Karin said she wasn’t personally taking a stand on Prop 200 and declined to say that people should vote against it. She did say it would be bad for the community if it passed, which made her reluctance to say vote “No” very odd, at least to me. Go to the tape: On Arizona Illustrated, she declined to say that people should vote against it.
http://ondemand.azpm.org/videoshorts/watch…
She had a very clear opportunity there to take a stand and she said it wasn’t her role.
She did the same thing in at least two other interviews with me. In the first one, she said she didn’t know if she would be taking a stand at all. In the second interview, she said she didn’t think her opinion was of any great interest to anyone.
Nintz’s reply is the best illustration I have seen of why Uhlick should not have been re-elected. Talk about double think. Its a bad idea, and I know it, but I can’t offend some interests, and so I won’t say vote against it. Save us.