Pants Crappers for Greg Abbott

-- There's not much for me to add after yesterday's media meltdown over Greg Abbott and his "blood brother", the child predator.  If the Abbott campaign can't fully comprehend what a fantabulous pooch-screwing they performed yesterday... well, I'm not going to remind them.  Let's move on.

-- I almost made this its own post: Texas Libertarian Candidate for Statewide Judicial Race Outpolls Democrat in Texas Bar Poll...

On February 14, the Texas Bar Association released a poll of its members, for the 2014 statewide partisan judicial races. Over one-eighth of all bar members participated in the poll. See this story, which has a link to the results.

For Court of Criminal Appeals, place 3, the Libertarian, Mark W. Bennett, outpolled the Democratic candidate, John Granberg. Bennett is well-known in Texas, partly because of his blog “Defending People”. He is a Houston criminal defense lawyer, who was also a Libertarian nominee in 2012 for a statewide judicial race. In his 2012 race, in which his only opponent was a Republican, Bennett polled 22.1% of the vote. His 2012 vote total, 1,331,364, was the highest number of votes ever received by any Libertarian nominee for any office.

The full results for the 2014 poll for Criminal Appeals, place 3, are: Republican Bert Richardson 2,166; Republican Barbara Walther 2,115; Bennett 2,083; Democrat John Granberg 1,802.

Libertarians and Greens also did well in the poll in some other judicial races. For Criminal Appeals, place 4, a race with no Democrat, the Libertarian, Quanah Parker, received 23.39% and the Green, Judith Mills Sanders-Castro, got 16.06%. For Criminal Appeals, place 9, another race with no Democrat, the Libertarian, William Bryan Strange III, got 23.02% and the Green, George Joseph Altgelt, got 19.42%. In the race for Supreme Court, place 7, a race with a Democrat and a Republican, the Libertarian, Don Fulton, got 13.10% and the Green, Charles Edwin Waterbury, got 5.78%.

Repeat after me: no straight-ticket voting in 2014.

-- Egberto Willies, one of the real shining stars in H-Town's blogosphere, shares the insights of Houston Latino activist Ivan Sanchez, which is worth about a thousand times more than everything Marc Campos has ever said and done combined.  There's too much good stuff there for an excerpt to do justice, but here's a place to start before you go read the whole thing.

In 2014, we Hispanics: Mexicans, Colombians, Cubans, Ecuadoreans, Argentineans, Bolivians, Salvadorians, Peruvians, and every other Latino Country – make up 44% of Houston’s population. However, the countries we come from divide our united voice as each Latino from each country separates themselves into multiple segregated groups, therefore forming smaller separate percentages. Our cultures, soccer fanaticism, pride and other variables are separating and diminishing our united voice in the United States. Hispanics need to realize that no matter where we come from, here in the US, we all pledge to one flag. There is nothing wrong with preserving the culture, but we need to understand that we as individuals are nothing without each other. And as Houston is a melting pot of all ethnicities, I only hope all Hispanics melt together as well. My family already did.

-- Ten more reasons (nobody should need any more, but here you go anyway) why the Keystone XL pipeline needs to die (again). Number one:

1. There are no jobs on a dead planet.

-- Some people say that the end is near for Mucous.

Michael Quinn Sullivan, the political warlord who’s striven to purify and shape the Texas Republican Party in line with his particular vision, has managed to outfox a number of threats to his would-be empire in the last couple years. But increased scrutiny from the Texas Ethics Commission over charges of impropriety and the question of so-called “dark money,” the fuel that powers Sullivan’s political activity, presents the possibility that the state political Establishment he’s always railed against, and by extension state government itself, has finally found a way to weaken him.

Meh.  He's already lined up an afterlife at Breitbart Texas.

-- Mark Morford, on how to eat an Internet troll.  Short answer: Don't feed them; let them consume themselves.

Here’s something you surely already suspected but which is nevertheless sort of nice to have validated by science:

Internet trolls? Those nasty, scabrous, hate-spitting folk who spend their sunlight-deprived days taunting, baiting and venomizing all over the Interweb’s anonymous comments sections in response to, well, just about about any article, column, video, photo gallery, product review or heartfelt tale of love and woe from the here to Gawker to Amazon, Car & Driver to Knitter’s World to the NYT, including but certainly not limited to the very Slate article which discusses the general cruelty and stupidity of trolls itself?

Turns out they really are awful people. Sociopathic, sadistic, narcissistic, cruel by nature, highly unpleasant to be around. They love to cause pain. They delight in ruining the beautiful. The more pure and integrity-filled something is, the more they enjoy corrupting it. So says a new psychology study. Also, they’re antisocial. Poor dressers. Ungainly. Hairy in all the wrong places. Smell like soggy asparagus and old toenails. I’m just guessing.

I actually do spend too much time watching these trainwrecks, and it's probably not good for my mental health.  So I am going to cut back a little on that.  After all, there are people who might mistake me for a troll, and I wouldn't want that...