Showing posts sorted by relevance for query greg abbott. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query greg abbott. Sort by date Show all posts

Sunday, February 16, 2014

Greg Abbott's self-loathing demonstrated in his ADA litigation

Attorney General Greg Abbott, who has said he supports the Americans with Disabilities Act, has tenaciously battled to block the courthouse door to disabled Texans who sue the state.

In a series of legal cases in his three terms, Abbott’s office has fought a blind pharmacy professor in Amarillo who wanted reflective tape on the stairs to her office; two deaf defendants in Laredo who asked for a qualified sign language interpreter in their courtroom; and a woman with an amputated leg. In that case, the state argued she was not disabled because she had a prosthetic limb.

Abbott, who has used a wheelchair since a tree fell on him while he was jogging and crushed his spine almost 30 years ago, applauds the 1990 federal law. It has helped provide the ramps, wide doors and access that allow him to give speeches and meet with constituents.

Unspeakable, isn't it?  In his defense, Abbott says he's just doing his job.

While Abbott, the leading Republican contender for governor, benefits from the ADA mandates that guide businesses, builders and cities, he believes it is unconstitutional to force the state to comply. He has argued that his duty is to protect the state’s autonomy and its taxpayers by using all legal tools available to him — including the argument that the state is immune from disability lawsuits brought under the ADA.

“It’s the attorney general’s duty to zealously represent the interests of the state of Texas, and in these cases that meant raising all applicable legal arguments in litigation where Texas was sued in court,” said Abbott spokesman Jerry Strickland.

I'm sure he thought he was just doing his job when he advocated for tort reform, in order to deny all future Texans the legal bootstraps that he pulled himself up by after he ran under that tree.

Advocates for the disabled say Abbott’s office has worked to deny ADA protections by repeatedly and falsely claiming that impaired Texans don’t have the right to sue the state for discrimination. Abbott declined several requests from The Dallas Morning News to discuss the matter.

It touches on two key elements of Abbott’s campaign to succeed Gov. Rick Perry. He is touting his record of defending conservative legal principles. But Abbott also is highlighting his disability as evidence of his toughness. In campaign speeches and videos, he notes that he has “literally, a spine of steel” as a result of the accident.

There's a difference between being tough and being mean, just as there is a difference between a spine of steel and a titanium spinal implant.  'Tough' isn't the proper word to describe Abbott; 'cruel' is.  One example.

For former Texas Tech University Health Sciences professor Elaine King Miller, who was suffering a degenerative eye disease, the question was whether the university would provide her, among other things, reflective tape on the stairway and voice-recognition software for typing on her computer.

It took a five-year legal fight with the state. In 2005, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals cleared the way for her to pursue a discrimination suit.

Another example.

...In 2004, it argued before the Texas Supreme Court that a woman with one leg could not claim disability discrimination because she wore a prosthesis that remedied her mobility.

The all-Republican court rejected the argument, issuing a unanimous, written opinion just three weeks later. The court usually considers cases for months, even years.

The most bizarre disclosure in the article is that Abbott frequently loses his requests to have the cases dismissed on sovereign immunity... but frequently wins them when they go to trial.

You would think any sensible barrister would eventually come to the conclusion that he could just let the cases be tried on their merits.  Not Greg Abbott.  Besides being a lousy lawyer and a sorry individual, and like most people who at some basic level are both stupid and cruel... he's stubborn.

Dennis Borel, executive director of the Coalition of Texans with Disabilities, said that advocates’ frustration stems from Abbott’s office consistently seeking immunity for Texas agencies, regardless of the claim.

“When you invoke the sovereign immunity defense, you’re not responding to the merits of the case,” he said. “You’re simply saying the state is immune for its violations of the ADA and therefore there’s not even a point of having a day in court.”

Brian East, senior attorney for Texas Disability Rights, said the repeated efforts to raise sovereign immunity against the disabled cuts off the chance to fix problems.

“I wouldn’t say they were hostile,” East said of the attorney general’s legal team. “They are hostile to the notion that individual citizens might have redress against the state, in general. They are not targeting people with disabilities specifically, but doing what they can to limit the rights of individuals to use the courts in civil rights cases against the state.”

It's really difficult to understand how Greg Abbott -- as a man, as a human being with a semblance of conscience -- is able to live with himself.  There's simply no amount of psychological counseling, or prayer, or whatever you want to call it that can resolve these inner conflicts.  It just winds up manifesting itself as some kind of internal and/or external rage and hatred.

The man is so reprehensible that people with a functioning soul can't comprehend his motivations.  Which naturally excludes the vast majority of Texas Republican primary voters.

Abbott's ego and self-importance -- I'm sure he just thinks of it as his destiny -- has completely consumed his conscience.  That minor annoyance was sacrificed on the altar of his political aspirations many years ago.   And yet he is surrounded by sycophants who believe he is honorable, decent, "God-fearing", and every manner of similarly happy horseshit.

This is the deepest, most disturbed, most profound cognitive dissonance on public display I can say I have ever witnessed.  It's hard to predict how truly hideous a governor Greg Abbott is capable of being in the wake of fourteen years of Rick Perry, but Texans are very likely to find out.

Unless something really unforeseen happens, that is.

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

"Act like a Texan"

I still have some thoughts to collect from yesterday's meeting on the Texas Central Railway, so let's catch up on Wendy Davis slamming Greg Abbott around (I'm sure someone somewhere might construe that to be insensitive to a man in a wheelchair)...

Texas gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis delivered a strong message to Republican opponent Greg Abbott on equal pay for women Monday morning, telling him to "act like a Texan" and stop letting his surrogates speak for him on the issue.

"I have a message for Greg Abbott today," Davis said at a speech in Austin. "Stop hiding behind your staff members. Stop hiding behind your surrogates. This Texas gal is calling you out. Act like a Texan and answer this question for yourself: What on earth is going on at your attorney general's office?" 

That's vintage Ann Richards right there.  Or maybe Don Vito Corleone.



Everyone knows she's saying "act like a man" (a phrase usually preceded by "Stand up and") and everyone also knows that Abbott has been acting like a man in his business dealings with the women that have been hired in the OAG over the years.

Two of his surrogates stumbled in television interviews on the subject, saying women are too "busy" to think about equal pay for equal work and insisting that the reason women are paid less is that "men are better negotiators." The San Antonio Express-News reported that Abbott's office pays female assistant attorneys general $6,000 less, on average, than men in the same position, and Abbott's campaign said he would veto equal pay legislation that because current wage discrimination laws are sufficient, he would make it easier for women to sue over pay discrimination.

As attorney general, Abbott also successfully defended the state against a female college professor who was being paid less than her employees for the same work, arguing that federal equal pay protections don't apply in state court.

Davis pointed out on Monday that as state senator, she introduced an equal pay bill in a Republican-controlled Texas legislature that would have changed the circumstances under which women can sue their employers for pay discrimination, and it passed. Gov. Rick Perry (R) vetoed the bill last June.

The only thing Greg Abbott has done in the nearly twelve years he's held office -- besides sue Barack Obama, of course -- is act like a man.  Just as every other man has been acting towards the women they hire, in Texas and across the country, for decades.

Keep in mind that it's just an act.  In order to get men like Greg Abbott to act differently -- and also the millions of other men who have kept women down with this pay gap since, I don't know, forever -- enough shame and blame needs to be heaped on their heads and draped around their shoulders until they get it.  Until they start acting better.

Paying women less than men like me for the same job is wrong.  It's wrong even if their experience differs: if they are good enough to be hired, they are good enough to be paid the same.  Underpaying people on the basis of their genitalia is plain old discrimination.  Since so many women are primary breadwinners in their households now, pay inequality affects the children they are struggling to raise as well.

But here's where we are reminded that Republicans don't really care as much about children as they do fetuses.  Once that umbilical cord is cut you're on your own, kid.  Get out there and make something of yourself, like I did.

Especially if you're a man, like Greg Abbott.  Why, you can have a tree fall on you and collect ten million bucks for it, then make certain nobody else -- man, woman, child, or fetus -- ever does the same.

That might be what a real Texan looks like to Republicans.  But it's not how one acts.

Wednesday, October 13, 2021

Hump Day Wrangle from Far Left Texas


Humpin' it to the finish line.


I just don't have the will to post the play-by-play from late last night.  Scott Braddock, Michael Li, and a few other regulars on the #txlege timeline are your go-to for the micro.

Governor Fish Lips gets exposed again as feckless.  All that bragging about the steel in his spine, and it turns out it's jelly.

(Abbott is) so overwhelmed by politics that he’s become a Random Policy Generator, throwing out edicts that make sense only if you forget everything he said before.

[...]

When the former president -- whose political favor Abbott craves -- expresses some disappointment, the Texas governor snaps into line. That disappointment often parallels the views of Donald Trump’s favorite Texas politician, (Lt. Gov. Dan) Patrick.

[...]

This is straight-up schoolyard politics. Trump is a bully. Patrick is egging him on. Abbott is the target, doing everything they want to avoid an electoral wedgie.

An executive order from the governor in August barred cities, counties and other local governments from requiring vaccines. Another one, in May, barred those local governments from requiring people to wear masks.

Now there’s a new executive order that tosses aside some of that “decide for themselves” business.

Abbott wanted a show of strength here, but settled for a sign of weakness. He didn’t hold his ground, instead caving in to demands from conservatives like former state Sen. Don Huffines of Dallas, who’s challenging the governor in next year’s party primary. Huffines is trying to label Abbott a moderate and himself as a Trump-style Republican -- what he calls in his advertising “an actual Republican.” Trump has already endorsed Abbott, but that’s not necessarily his final answer: The former president has shown a willingness to change his preferences in other campaigns.

In terms of his political chances, Huffines is more light breeze than hurricane. But like his former superior in the state Senate, Patrick, he’s a conduit for Trumphobia -- a contagious affliction marked by its conservative victims’ obsession with the goodwill of the former president and of the multitude of voters devoted to him. Abbott has no reason to fear Huffines, but the idea of getting on the former president’s naughty list gives him the shivers.

He’s not alone in that. Dozens of other Republicans have fallen into this particular personality cult. Abbott is seeking reelection next year amid talk that he -- like a small mob of other Republican wannabes -- might be contending for president in 2024.

They want to be in line with Trump’s voters. And in the meantime, that means staying in line with Trump himself. That, for Republicans with ambitions for higher office, is imperative -- almost a mandate.

Weak. As. Rainwater.


In late August, one of Gov. Greg Abbott’s primary challengers, Don Huffines, accused Texas’ child welfare agency of “promoting transgender sexual policies to Texas youth” under a section of its website titled “Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation.”

“These are not Texas values, these are not Republican Party values, but these are obviously Greg Abbott’s values,” Huffines said in a widely circulated video on Twitter. The webpage published by the Department of Family and Protective Services linked to a suicide prevention hotline and other resources “dedicated to helping empower and celebrate” young LGBTQ people.

Within hours, the webpage was gone.


I have said it now about six times, but it's worth repeating: if Governor Strangelove loses, it will be next spring, in his primary.  It won't be a year from now, no matter who's on the ballot.


Some Texans aren't taking his crap any more.


And the corporations supporting the bad actors are getting their comeuppance as well.

The latest AT&T ad.



AT&T, the largest communications provider on the planet, not only connects families and friends, it also "helps fund One America News Network," the ad's narrator boasts. "OANN is a streaming channel that hires radical white nationalists as hosts, cheers the Capitol attacks, and promotes Covid-19 conspiracy theories."

The ad lets us in on what we pay for when we sign up for AT&T, including "OANN host Pearson Sharp to call for mass executions," and "funding politicians like Texas governor Greg Abbott, who pushes radical new laws against voting rights and women's rights."

Wrapping up with its tagline, "AT&T, funding sedition, suppression, and of course, One America News Network," the ad parodies AT&T's false altruism to such a tee, I almost missed it on the first view, mistaking it for a real AT&T ad -- which it might as well be.


Still something funny going on with SWA.


A few more "Texas Capitalists Behaving Badly" updates.

Exxon Mobil Corp. said on Tuesday that a vote to remove the United Steelworkers union (USW) from representing locked-out workers at its Beaumont, Texas, refinery would go forward no matter the outcome of a contract ratification vote next week by those same workers.

USW Local 13-243 announced on Monday night that Beaumont refinery and lubricant oil plant workers would take their first vote on an Exxon contract offer on Oct. 19, six months after they were locked out of their jobs and 10 months after negotiations began.

If you're in the market for a new or used car ... get out.  Those thieves have gone full batshit.


The TADA has always owned the Lege, and now they seem to be pressing their greed to extreme levels, like everybody else.


Texas Monthly also had a story about this.


Moving on to the environment.


And the criminal and social justice news.


Sorry about the FOX news link.


And the soothers.

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Income inequality, debates for the 1%, and abortion clinic bombers

-- Paying women the same as men is hard work, to paraphrase a previous Texas governor (who fell upward).  And the national media is all over it.  Charles beat me to this, but it's worth repeating.

Houston Chronicle / Siobhan O'Grady
Just one week after Greg Abbott, Texas' attorney general and the GOP's nominee for the state's gubernatorial race, skirted around a question on equal pay, the executive director of the Lone Star State's newest Republican PAC stumbled through her response to a similar question in a television interview on Sunday.

Talking Points Memo / Catherine Thompson
Cari Cristman, the executive director of Red State Women PAC, was asked in an interview with Dallas TV station WFAA about Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott's (R) position on equal pay laws. Abbott, who is running for governor against state Sen. Wendy Davis (D), previously told the news station that existing law was sufficient to protect women's pay.

Jezebel / Kelly Faircloth
Salon reports (see next) that this fascinating line of argument comes via Cari Christman, who heads Texas's Red State Women PAC. Local ABC affiliate WFAA asked whether her organization believes Texas needs an equal pay act. This has become an issue in the state gubernatorial race, as Wendy Davis faces off against former attorney general Greg Abbott. In his last gig, he convinced the Texas Supreme Court that the Lily Ledbetter Act-which gives women longer to file gender discrimination claims after leaving a job-didn't alter Texas's statue of limitations.

Salon / Katie McDonough
As Laura Bassett at the Huffington Post points out (see below), Texas gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis has been making Republican opponent Greg Abbott's record on equal pay a focus of her campaign. As attorney general, Abbott successfully argued before the Texas Supreme Court in a lawsuit brought by a female professor that the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which extended the statute of limitations in such cases, didn't change Texas' state statute of limitations.

Raw Story / David Edwards
During a Sunday interview with WFAA's Inside Texas Politics, host Jason Whitely told RedState Women Executive Editor Cari Christman that Democrats had accused Republicans of "hitting the panic button" and launching the PAC in the final months before the 2014 elections after gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott was criticized for campaigning with Ted Nugent. Whitely also pointed out that Abbott had recently said that Texas did not need new laws to protect women against pay discrimination.

Dallas Morning News / Christy Hoppe
Last week, on the same show, GOP nominee Greg Abbott declined to answer whether he also would have vetoed the equal pay act, called the Lilly Ledbetter Act, named after the federal version of the law. Three years ago, Abbott's office successfully argued before the Texas Supreme Court that federal equal pay protections do not apply in Texas. The 2012 decision determined that a female college professor did not have the right to sue because she discovered the alleged discriminatory pay more than 180 days after she was hired. The Lilly Ledbetter Act provides that a suit can be filed within 180 days of a woman discovering the pay discrepancy.

Huffington Post / Laura Bassett
Democratic candidate Wendy Davis has been going after Abbott on equal pay in recent weeks. In addition to dodging the question of whether he supports equal pay, the Davis camp points out, he actively fought against it during his career as Texas Attorney General. Abbott successfully argued before the Texas Supreme Court in Prairie View A&M University vs. Chatha that federal equal pay protections did not apply in Texas, so a female college professor who was paid unfairly did not have the right to sue more than 180 days after the discrimination began.

To quote a really smart woman: "If you have a vagina, and you vote Republican, you are a moron."  I would add: "If you have a vagina, and you don't plan on voting in 2014, then that's the same thing as voting Republican."


-- And just so everyone understands precisely who the Republicans on the ballot answer to, witness the development of a proposed debate between Dan Patrick and David Dewhurst over the weekend, to be held at the 'C' Club in River Oaks.  Except now it's not.  Follow Quorum Report's bulletins, beginning late Friday afternoon...

A LITE GUV DEBATE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS
Dewhurst and Patrick to make their case to some of Houston's business elite

"It's a sign of what kind of government we have," said one observer after hearing the news Friday afternoon that Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and Sen. Dan Patrick will debate behind closed doors in a room with some of Houston's business elite. 

The debate, first reported by the Houston Chronicle, will be held at the River Oaks Country Club and is being hosted by the C Club of Houston. No press will be allowed.  

Then on Monday morning...
A PUSH ALLOW THE MEDIA TO ATTEND TUESDAY'S CLOSED-DOOR LITE GUV DEBATE 
Patrick tries to pressure business group; Dewhurst says he wouldn't mind if C Club debate is open to the press
Sen. Dan Patrick on Monday asked that the business-friendly C Club of Houston allow the media to attend tomorrow's planned Lite Guv debate at River Oaks Country Club. More than a few eyebrows were raised on Friday when it came out that Lt. Gov David Dewhurst and Patrick have agreed to debate behind closed doors in front of some of Houston's business elite. 

Then, after 5 yesterday... 

PATRICK TAKES A PASS ON CLOSED-DOOR DEBATE IN RIVER OAKS, DEWHURST WILL STILL SPEAK TO C CLUB 
Patrick had asked for forum to be open to the press; Dewhurst will speak to them regardless of Patrick's decision
A spokesman for David Dewhurst indicated the incumbent will appear before the business group, despite Patrik's decision to pull out. "Yes. Lt. Governor Dewhurst appreciates any opportunity to speak to groups of Texans and looks forward to debates and forums that are open to the press in the near future," spokesman Travis Considine said. 

In case you didn't buy a program, challenger Patrick is the Buc-ees populist standing up for the TeaBaggers little guy, and wounded, bleeding incumbent Dewhurst is the elitist grubbing for five- and six-figure checks.  This is the most perfect representation of what the Republicans have devolved to than anything you will ever see.

Wayne Slater at the DMN in his Friday story linked to the 'C' Club's site listing their members, but now the club has pulled it down... which is why I took a screenshot.


Yes indeed, we already knew that was how Republicans roll.

-- Last, the abortion clinic bombers are making a comeback.  I wonder if these terrorists will be prosecuted this time.  Eric Holder, I'm not looking at Greg Abbott.

Saturday, December 07, 2013

Greg Abbott, CPRIT, and an indictment

Despite the deep freeze Texas finds itself in this morning, Greg Abbott is lying in bed sweating and hitting his call button, trying to wake up the maid to turn down his thermostat.

Texas Democrats, including their presumptive nominee for Governor Sen. Wendy Davis, sought on Friday to make Attorney General Greg Abbott feel political heat for an indictment related to the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas. As the (Austin) Statesman first reported, former executive Jerry Cobbs was indicted in relation to an $11 million grant that did not go through the agency's proper review process. An agency audit faulted Cobbs for “improperly” putting the application of the company in question on a committee agenda.

“The indictment of a former CPRIT official confirms that Greg Abbott has betrayed Texas taxpayers by failing to show up to even one CPRIT oversight board meeting,” Sen. Davis said. “Abbott has yet to fully explain why he failed in his basic oversight responsibilities to Texas taxpayers.”

As Harvey Kronberg has noted at the link above: "nearly silence from Abbott's folks".  Maybe they're all snowed in.

Just one year ago, Glenn Smith predicted the cancer/cronyism scandal would engulf the GOP.  The fire has been smoldering all this time, and -- despite Harvey's casual toss-off as just some political maneuver -- is about to erupt in flames.  Then...

In a series of explosive articles, the Dallas Morning News has revealed that many of the grants went to Perry and Dewhurst’s allies and donors. The agency’s scientists that review grant proposals have resigned in protest. Those actions have already made the scandal news in international science journals like the well-respected Nature.

[...]

The Dallas Morning News video above gives a thumbnail version of the growing scandal. I would also encourage you to read articles here, here and here.

... and now:

A former top executive of Texas' $3 billion cancer-fighting effort was indicted over an improperly awarded $11 million taxpayer-funded grant that plunged the state agency into turmoil, prosecutors said Friday.

Ending a yearlong criminal investigation into the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, prosecutors said a single felony count against former chief commercialization officer Jerald "Jerry" Cobbs will be the only criminal charge filed after an Austin grand jury declined to issue indictments related to other agency missteps.

Cobbs, 62, is charged with securing the execution of a document by deception. He is accused of allowing Dallas-based Peloton Therapeutics in 2010 to secure one of the agency's most lucrative awards ever even though the merits of the company's proposal were never scrutinized.

There's been lots written here about it, and lots more by others.  In July, the HouChron...

In the more than four years he served on the state cancer agency's governing board, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott exercised no oversight as the agency made misstep after misstep in awarding tens of millions of dollars to commercial interests.

The state's top lawyer and watchdog instead appointed one of his deputies, who missed about a third of the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas Oversight Committee meetings, and, by all accounts, was not much of a presence in the agency's questionable decision-making.

"It turns out that Abbott sitting on the oversight board was a green light rather than a caution sign," wrote Matt Angle, director of the Lone Star Project, a Democratic political action committee. "Businesses backed by Abbott contributors - many of whom are partisan Republicans - have received large grants and contracts from CPRIT without fear of any oversight at all."

And yesterday, the Texas Tribune.

Cobbs served as the institute's chief commercialization officer for three years, before resigning (in November 2012). In that role, he was responsible for presenting the Peloton grant to the Oversight Board for approval. Given the amount of the grant, and the allegations that Cobbs failed to disclose that it had not gone through the required review process, he is being charged with a first-degree felony punishable by five to 99 years in jail and up to a $10,000 fine. He turned himself in (Friday) morning and was released on an $85,000 bond, according to the Public Integrity Unit's Gregg Cox.

Frankly I think Tom Pauken pulled out too soon.  But that assessment is dependent upon Texas Republicans finally discovering some understanding of the moral corruption and ribald incompetence of their presumptive gubernatorial nominee.

Based on the enthusiasm expressed in this advance from Big Jolly of Abbott's appearance at the Houston Pachyderm Club just this past Thursday -- I'll link to his slideshow of the festivities as soon as he puts it up -- I'm not holding my breath on them getting it.

Update: Slideshow linked.  They ain't getting it.

More on how this topic is a ready-made cudgel with which to beat on Abbott from Socratic Gadfly.  And from John Coby: Abbott's campaign wheels wobble.

Tuesday, May 06, 2014

Greg Abbott's Scandal O' Week, shared with Rick Perry

It's an old scandal, but as new details emerge, the boil continues to fester and ooze.  Wayne Slater, tying all the latest strings together.  (My emphasis below.)

A political group allied with Wendy Davis opened an attack Monday using cancer survivors to highlight allegations Republicans Greg Abbott and Rick Perry benefited from money designed for cancer research.



The Progress Texas political committee began airing an online video accusing the state leaders of complicity in the scandal. One cancer agency official has been indicted, the agency board has been replaced and a grand jury is investigating. Perry, who is considering another race for president, was instrumental in creation of the state cancer research agency. Agency grants have gone to political donors. As attorney general, Abbott was on the oversight board that failed to take action to avoid questionable grants, including at least one to an Abbott campaign donor.

After The Dallas Morning News first broke stories raising questions about funding problems, Abbott’s office announced it would investigate what went wrong at the Cancer Prevention and Research Fund. That announcement put Abbott in the position of investigating an agency over which his office already had oversight. That means the attorney general potentially is looking into the behavior of board members who are his campaign donors. Abbott says he sees no problems with these arrangements.

A grand jury investigation of Rick Perry is now under way for his threatening to withhold state funding for the Travis County District Attorney – while she was investigating activities at the cancer research fund. Perry has denied any wrongdoing.

More from Jonathan Tilove at the Statesman.

“When I found out the money had been misspent, at first I was angry, extremely angry. I mean, these are people’s lives. You go through anger, disbelief, shock, then you want to get even,” Becky Arreaga, an Austin business owner, says in the ad, in which she is joined by Austinites Kerry Tate, a homebuilder, and Berry Crowley, an attorney, and Pat Pangburn, a Dallas homemaker.

[...]

The gist of the attack on Abbott is that campaign donors were also investors in companies that received grants from the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas — known as CPRIT — that had not been properly vetted, and that Abbott, who was part of the oversight board for the agency, turned a blind eye, not even attending the board meetings.

This is the same old cancer cronyism we've known about for a couple of years now.

In another time, place, or state, this would be a bombshell.  The presumptive governor-in-waiting would be forced to publicly address the accusations of corruption, and would be then held to account for his unethical conduct by the voters.  Of all political persuasions.

But this is Texas, and this is Rick Perry and Greg Abbott.  And they are Republicans.  And that's how Texas Republicans roll.  Abbott will go into hiding from the media for a week or two, while Perry will adjust his glasses, fly to Iowa with his state-paid Texas Rangers security team in tow (the tab is almost $3 million now), says "aw-shucks" and "second chances", and Republican primary voters will snort and say it's all just another liberal media conspiracy.

Facts cannot frack any understanding into their skulls.

We'd all like to think that it will be different this time around, but I'm not confident it will.

Update: Like cockroaches, built to last.

In the case of Perry and Abbott, it's as if both are trying to out-cockroach each other. Rick Perry's entire time in office has been one of bribery, slush-funds, under-the-table-payments for appointments and a million other gubernatorial transgressions. Maybe that's why he chose to be re-baptized recently. Nothing less than the Pacific Ocean will wash his political sins away.

And what of Greg Abbott? He wants to sacrifice four-year-olds to Pearson, the omnipotent gods of testing, but only for informational purposes. He hangs out with pedophiles and misogynists and worst of all, while he served as watchdog, on the Oversight Board of Cancer Research Institute, his donors' companies received $42 million of Texas' taxpayer money.

[...]

In spite of all the proof, the publicity, the news stories, and all the examples of backroom deals, illegal grant writing, and garden variety political theft, voters will continue their present state of passivity and continue to vote for the political profiteers based solely upon the single letter beside the candidate's name.

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

And starring Greg Abbott as Constipation

Only two things are certain in the Texas redistricting cluster: there will eventually be some elections this year, and Greg Abbott is the source of all the problems.

Rather than inch closer to a resolution over the weekend, both sides may have dug in their heels further. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott told the court that one deal-breaker is carving up the district currently held by Democratic U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, which would in turn help make Republicans more electable in heavily Democratic Travis County.

Abbott wrote in a filing Monday that while his office was reviewing new proposals to other changes on the map. But he also acknowledged that Doggett's district alone could prevent any chance of a breakthrough.

"The State cannot compromise on this district and that may prevent a global compromise on the Congressional map," Abbott wrote.

There's no legal justification for him to insist on shattering Travis County into five pieces, but who still believes the Attorney General of Texas knows anything about the law anyway? Particularly since he's suffering from a ten-year-old case of Doggett Derangement Syndrome?

Rather than going to the Justice Department, which had been standard practice, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott took the fight to federal court, entering largely uncharted legal territory.

“It's very unusual for a state to just sue” for preclearance, said Michael Li, an elections lawyer in Dallas who has covered the legal saga extensively on txredistricting.org.

Abbott pursued the high-risk legal strategy to get the Republican-dominated maps approved, he said. “Had it worked, it would have been brilliant,” Li said.

The aggressive stance was necessary because the Legislature's maps heavily favored Republicans. Under those maps, three of Texas' four new congressional seats were drawn in Anglo-dominated areas, even though minority population groups accounted for about 90 percent of the state's population growth.

Because of that, Democrats and minority groups quickly filed lawsuits, challenging the maps in the San Antonio federal court. [...]

Doggett managed to survive the 2003 Tom DeLay-backed redistricting that transformed his Austin-centric district into one that stretched from the capital city all the way to the Rio Grande Valley.

“Lloyd Doggett has been a thorn in their side for years and years,” said Harold Cook, a longtime Democratic consultant. “He is their one piece of unfinished business from 2003.”

Republicans tried again in 2011. The maps passed by the Legislature carved Austin into five different congressional districts, drawing Doggett into a heavily Hispanic district that stretched from San Antonio to Austin. State Rep. Joaquín Castro, D-San Antonio, also was eyeing the district, setting the stage for a tough primary fight. But delays in the preclearance trial in Washington forced the San Antonio court to draw a set of interim maps in an attempt to preserve the March 6 primary.

That congressional map restored much of Doggett's old district, icing the primary fight -- but the U.S. Supreme Court then threw out the interim maps. Doggett has continued to campaign in San Antonio, in case “the Perrymandered map” becomes law.

The entire process, he said, has been “really outrageous.”

The real problem for Texas Republicans isn't the jacked-up maps or even the stonewalling by the OAG; it's the inevitable separation of the primary elections down the ballot from the presidential.

A delayed primary is seen as a boon to challengers, especially in the U.S. Senate race, because they have more time to boost name identification and raise money.

Based on recent polling, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst is the prohibitive favorite in the GOP race, Cook said, “but if I was his campaign manager, I would worry a little bit. If the election was held today and you'd win, you want the election held today. Every day that goes by introduces a little more uncertainty.”

A split primary could add even more pressure on Dewhurst.

There's no question that holding the presidential primary first, then the Senate race later, would benefit tea party candidates like Ted Cruz, Houston lobbyist Robert D. Miller said. The second primary almost certainly would suffer from lower voter turnout -- and those that do come out are more ideological.

“The later it is, the better it is for Ted Cruz,” Miller said.

Without even factoring in the diminishing country-wide enthusiasm, fewer Lone Star conservatives are going make it out for two different elections, the scheduling of which is still to be determined. Greg Abbott is going to disenfranchise Texas Republicans from having any meaningful say in who their presidential nominee is, just like he's screwed the pooch with his hare-brained legal strategies in pursuing a conservative super-majority in the state and national legislatures.

(Why am I concerned about Republican disenfranchisement? Hey, I'm an empathetic guy that way.)

His hubris means they will lose even bigger than they would under normal circumstances. Greg Abbott, in short, is the Kareem Jackson of the RPT. Every time he takes the field, you know it's bad and going to get worse.

But honestly, he reminds me more of the Colon Lady on that TV commercial.



You Republicans need to keep these failures of his in mind when Abbott runs for governor in 2014.

Update: Charles has a bit more to say about relevance and Texas Republican presidential primaries.

Monday, June 16, 2014

Greg Abbott's Bad News This Week

If Texas were any place else in the Union, there's no way a guy so profoundly corrupt would be leading in the polls.

Families who live and work near hazardous chemical facilities no longer have access to information about the type or amount of dangerous toxics in their community. According to a report by WFAA-TV, Greg Abbott recently issued a legal opinion barring the disclosure of such information despite federal law permitting disclosure and longstanding state practice to make that information available to anyone who requests it.

Abbott’s decision reflects an about-face from proclamations made by other state leaders to beef up disclosure of chemical facilities in the wake of last year’s disastrous explosion of an ammonium nitrate storage facility in West, Texas.

Why do you suppose he wants corporations to be able to keep that a secret?

The ruling by Abbott says the locations of explosive and toxic chemicals must be kept confidential because of security concerns. The ruling states that information ”is more than likely to assist in the construction or assembly of an explosive weapon or a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon of mass destruction.”

But Tommy Muska, the Mayor of the town of West, where last year’s tragedy struck, believes there is greater danger in withholding the locations of potentially dangerous chemicals from the public. He hopes the state can find some middle ground that will keep the public informed.

“They’re worried it could get into the wrong hands,” he says. “I strongly feel, though, that the public, the 99 percent of good people out there, have a right to know what’s in their backyard.”

He can always roll away and hide for a few days until the dust settles.  Speaking just for myself, I don't trust Greg Abbott to keep me safe from domestic terrorists... or the companies they own that contribute to his campaign.  Like these Wilks brothers.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott (R) dodged the question last week of whether he agrees with his party's support for "reparative therapy," a process purported to change the sexual orientation of gay people. But campaign records show the gubernatorial candidate has been flying around on a private plane donated by two billionaires who help fund the "ex-gay" movement.

Texas fracking tycoons Dan and Farris Wilks have given Abbott a combined total of more than $30,000 worth of in-kind donations this year for the use of a private plane. The Wilks' charitable trust, The Thirteen Foundation, has contributed nearly $3 million to groups that promote gay conversion therapy, a discredited pseudo-medical practice meant to change people's sexual orientation from gay to straight. The foundation also donates millions to anti-abortion and conservative religious groups.

Abbott's campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

The Texas Republican Party endorsed reparative therapy in its platform this year and asserted that homosexuality is not "an acceptable alternative lifestyle." 

The Wilkses are frackers AND homophobes.  A Teabagging two-fer!

How foul does Greg Abbott have to stink before Texans decide they've had enough?

Sunday, January 27, 2013

"If you run for governor, I'll kill ya."

Caption attributable to either man.


Attorney General Greg Abbott doesn't want to talk about whether he's seeking the governorship, but he is in overdrive on all the issues that make him a leading contender for the GOP nod, even if Gov. Rick Perry runs for re-election.

I would like to see a contested gubernatorial primary, but my instinct is that Rick Perry is going to make another run for president in 3.9 years. No reason he can't do both, of course.

It appears Abbott is determined not to prod the competitive Perry into running for re-election to show he can beat him the way he did then-U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison in 2010 — a comparison Perry was quick to make when a TV station asked him about word that Abbott was telling donors he was aiming at the top job.

“I've been underestimated many times before,” Perry told Austin television station KVUE.

Perry, who's leaving the door open to a re-election run in 2014 and another White House bid in 2016, plans to disclose his plans in June, after the regular legislative session ends.

Abbott has multiple options as well.

“Everything is pure speculation until this summer, but I can envision virtually no scenario where Perry and Abbott face off against each other,” said lobbyist Ray Sullivan, Perry's former gubernatorial chief of staff and his former presidential campaign communications director.

Sullivan cited the men's friendship, similar philosophies and partnership on policy.

Some think Perry will decide not to run; others say that if Perry runs, Abbott will aim instead for lieutenant governor.

“There are a myriad of possibilities,” Sullivan said.

GOP consultant Matt Mackowiak also considers it more likely that the two will find a way to avoid a contest.

“Someone told me once if Abbott was smart, he would go find Rick a job,” Mackowiak said.

Heh heh huh huh, chuckled Beavis. But what do the most important people say... you know, the ones who write the fat checks?

What major donors decide will be key, said Rice University political scientist Mark Jones, who suggested they might think it's better for the party's future to ease out Perry.

[...]

Among GOP donors, many are giving to both Perry and Abbott, though others are not.
Of the 42 largest donors to the two candidates in 2012 — those who gave more than $50,000 to Perry, to Abbott or to the two combined — 26 gave to both, according to an analysis by Texans for Public Justice, which tracks money in politics. Of the rest, one gave no money to Abbott, and 15 didn't donate to Perry.

Nearly $5 million of the combined 2012 donations to Abbott and Perry came from these donors, with nearly $2 million to Perry and nearly $3 million to Abbott.

Wouldn't a faceoff between the two be in the interests of the corporate media, for all the advertising revenue they have become increasingly dependent upon? Not to mention the political advisors holding targeted mail lists for donors and voters.

We are, of course, already aware of this financial windfall locally in the SD-6 special election... and now the runoff. It's going to be a good two-year cycle for the people who make their living consulting politicians on their campaigns. It's already off to a great start.

Update: Rick Perry: "Greg Abbott won't run for governor against me"

In an exclusive interview with Gov. Rick Perry on Wednesday, he said Attorney General Greg Abbott has told him he won't run against him in next year's GOP primary should the incumbent seek reelection.

A spokesman for Abbott's campaign issued a statement saying he wasn't familiar with any such deal, and called any speculation about the attorney general's political future "unproductive."

Friday, May 30, 2014

Price to change Greg Abbott's mind: $350K

And Republicans say he's a Christian.  A moral man.

In a surprise legal about-face, Attorney General Greg Abbott on Thursday ruled that state prison officials no longer have to tell the public where they obtain drugs used to execute condemned criminals.

Abbott's decision falls in line with other states that have sought to keep secret the source of their lethal drugs, to keep death-penalty opponents from pressuring suppliers to quit selling to execution chambers. His decision reversed three rulings since 2010 that had mandated the information about the suppliers be made public.

Abbott, the Republican nominee for governor in the state that operates the nation's busiest death chamber, said in his five-page decision that he was swayed to allow secrecy by a "threat assessment" from Steve McCraw, director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, that disclosure of details could endanger suppliers.

In arguing for the secrecy, officials with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, which conducts the executions, insisted pharmacies supplying the drug pentobarbital used in executions could be subject to death threats if their identity was known -- an assertion an Associated Press investigation could not validate as true.

How's that old joke go?  "We already know what you are, now we're negotiating the selling price."  So I wonder if $350,000 is the MSRP, or if there's a little wiggle room.

Campaign contributions totaling $350,000 to Attorney General Greg Abbott from the owner of a Conroe compounding pharmacy drew criticism from a government-watchdog group on Friday, at a time when Abbott is involved in two issues with the lightly regulated pharmacies nationally: Tainted drugs and executions.

In a new report, Texans for Public Justice questioned the contributions by J. Richard "Richie" Ray, who heads Richie's Specialty Pharmacy. According to the report, Ray is Abbott's sixth largest campaign donor between January 2013 and January 2014 in his campaign to become Texas' next governor.

"The $350,000 that Ray gave Abbott in the past year catapults him from obscurity into the ranks of this year's Governor's Cup," the report states.

Let's review.

"For 350 large, I'll change my mind.  We ain't gonna tell no more about how we're killin' these killers, 'cause somebody mighta said they would kill us if we did.  'Cause killin' is wrong, but potential threats against us killers is wronger.  I'm pro-life, and don't you fergit it."

Last word to Mother Jones.

Given the massive conflicts between his current job and one of his biggest campaign contributors, Abbott can only hope that defense lawyers manage to drag out the legal battles over lethal injection long enough for him to get elected in November.

That's the perfect summary of the Abbott campaign's election strategy: stall.  Avoid all uncomfortable questions, duck the media, don't debate your opponent.  Stay hidden and out of sight as much as possible.

That's the only way Greg Abbott can get elected governor.  Because if enough people would ever learn the truth about him, he would have never been elected a single time.

Tuesday, October 14, 2014

"Responsible procreation"

This is the legal premise Greg Abbott (also known in various lawsuits as "the state of Texas") advances in the case against marriage equality.

In a brief filed with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday, Texas attorney general and GOP gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott argued that lifting the state’s ban on same-sex marriage would not encourage opposite-sex couples to procreate within wedlock, and therefore the ban should stay in place. Abbott reiterated the “responsible procreation” argument he has already made in defense of a same-sex marriage ban, saying that the motivation for denying marriage rights is economic, according to the Houston Chronicle.

“The State is not required to show that recognizing same-sex marriage will undermine heterosexual marriage,” the brief reads. “It is enough if one could rationally speculate that opposite-sex marriages will advance some state interest to a greater extent than same-sex marriages will.”

There's nothing new here.  Supporters of California's Prop 8 gave the postulate a test drive in 2013; Utah employed the argument as well.  What motivates a (supposed) small-government conservative to advance a state interest in procreation in the first fucking place, you might be asking yourself. 

The economic benefits to the state of people having children, it appears.

Texas, represented by Assistant Texas Solicitor General Mike Murphy, countered that the state has a legitimate interest in preserving the "traditional definition of marriage," calling the same-sex kind, which became law in Massachusetts in 2004, "a more recent innovation than Facebook."

[...]

"The purpose of Texas marriage law is not to discriminate against same-sex couples but to promote responsible procreation," Murphy said, according to The Dallas Morning News. Kids, he argued, fare better when they're raised by heterosexual couples.

That premise is false, as scientific data has revealed.

In a 2010 brief filed in a gay-marriage case in California, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy wrote that claims the straight people make better parents or that children of gay couples fare worse "find no support in the scientific research literature."

Indeed, the scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents. Empirical research over the past two decades has failed to find any meaningful differences in the parenting ability of lesbian and gay parents compared to heterosexual parents.

As Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan asked, what about when two heterosexual people over the age of 55 get married?  What about infertile couples of any age?  And I would ask: what about the children produced by women of low socio-economic status who are being compelled to give birth because the state refuses to allow them to end their pregnancies?  Weren't conservatives calling those mothers and their children 'moochers' and 'freeloaders' just the other day?  That's certainly counter to a claim of "economic benefit".

The speciousness of these legal arguments defies common sense.  More from the Chronic from behind the paywall.

"By encouraging the formation of opposite-sex marriages, the State seeks not only to encourage procreation but also to minimize the societal cost that can result from procreation outside of stable, lasting marriages," Abbott's brief read. "Because same-sex relationships do not naturally produce children, recognizing same-sex marriage does not further these goals."
 
LGBT and pro-gay marriage activists were surprised Abbott led with the "responsible procreation" argument since it has been rejected in the 10th and 4th Circuit Courts.

"It hasn't succeeded very often because it doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it doesn't really comport with what most of us think about marriage," said Rebecca Robertson, legal and policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas. "(State law) doesn't have to be perfect. It just has to be reasonable."

'Reasonable' and Greg Abbott shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath.

But these ridiculous, contorted legal justifications discriminating against people who love each other, wish to share their lives, and not be penalized by society, tax law, probate law, hospital visitation polices, and all the rest are actually not what concerns me most.

What is genuinely disconcerting is that Greg Abbott -- who had a tree fall on him and break his spine at the age of 26, leaving him paralyzed from the waist down -- has apparently been thinking about the sex other people have for a long time now.  And essentially he's reached the conclusion that the only people who should be allowed to have sex are straight married couples who desire children. (Let's overlook his ignorance of the reality of pre-marital and extra-marital sex, as well as recreational sex.  God only knows how wrong he must think masturbation is.  No economic benefit to the state there.  Likewise, Abbott is  probably only interested in the economic benefits of procreation by Caucasian and well-to-do Christian couples... but that's a digression.)

These are considerably more disturbing thoughts than anything I have read recently about wheelchairs and disabled people.  But since Abbott brought it up, it's fair to speculate: what economic benefit to the state has his own marriage produced (his only daughter is an adopted child)?  And if there's no responsible procreation activities going on in the Abbott household.... of what good to the general welfare of Texas has his marriage been?

By Greg Abbott's own logic, why should a paralyzed man be allowed to marry?

Charles has more, less graphic than me.  Update: And so do Margaret and Helen.  The Dallas News, tracking the case developments, notes that it will be several weeks before the Fifth weighs in.

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Greg Abbott scolds himself

It was his strategy to bypass the DOJ and pre-clearance by going directly to court with the Republican redistricting overgrab. He thought the two GOP judges would be in their corner.

He was wildly wrong, and now he's bitching about the outcome.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott's office on Friday slammed an interim redistricting map proposed by a three-judge panel in San Antonio, saying the federal jurists overstepped their bounds in redrawing House and Senate district lines that could cost Republicans a half-dozen seats next year.

"Contrary to (a) basic principle of federalism, the proposed interim redistricting plan consistently overturns the Legislature's will where no probability of a legal wrong has been identified," Lauren Bean, a spokeswoman for Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, said in a statement.

The three-judge panel had to create the interim maps for the 2012 election because a trial in Washington, D.C., on whether the redistricting plans approved by the Texas Legislature this year conform to the U.S. Voting Rights Act will not take place until after candidates have to file for office.

Greg Abbott's view of the law is so warped that it consistently makes him a laughingstock.

Update: Burka.

Republican sources tell me that there is disgruntlement toward the attorney general among Republican House members. Their gripe is: The attorney general’s office had a “lackadaisical” attitude toward the case; or, alternatively, “Abbott didn’t have his A team on this.”

Abbott’s ballyhooed strategy was an attempt to win the case through forum-shopping. The AG’s legal team thought they had figured out how to wire around the Obama Justice Department, which was to choose the option of taking the case before a three-judge federal court in the District of Columbia and bypass a trial by moving for summary judgment on all the maps in controversy. The problem is, the two Bush appointees on the panel didn’t take a partisan position. [...]

One unexpected problem Abbott encountered at the San Antonio trial is that one of his own expert witness–John Alford, a political science professor at Rice University– went south on him. Alford testified that he would have done things differently from the Legislature’s congressional redistricting map that Abbott was defending...

I didn't realize how fundamentally incompetent and corrupt the man was until I worked on the campaign of the man who ran against him in 2006. Of all of the profoundly ignorant, nakedly raw partisan schmucks running the state of Texas -- from Rick Perry, John Cornyn, David Dewhurst, Kay Bailey, and David Dewhurst trickling all the way down to Susan Combs, Jerry Patterson, and Todd Staples -- Greg Abbott is the worst. And the most dangerous.

You can be certain that Abbott will do everything he can to subvert the will of the federal court which slapped away his party's overzealous gambit for permanent super-majority status.

On the other hand, one of the conservative cabal's junior partner in Houston, Paul Bettencourt, gets it. Almost:

"I don't think the Democratic Party could have hoped to have a plan drawn like this if they controlled had been able to participate in any meaningful way at the Legislature," said Paul Bettencourt, a former executive with the state Republican Party and former Harris County tax assessor.

Fixed it for ya, Quitter. That's pretty much what I said yesterday.

This will be how the statewide Republicans will run their campaigns in 2012: completely against Washington D.C., much like Rick Perry conducted his 2010 re-election. 'EEEvil, evil feds want to tell Texans how to live', blah blah blah. Dewhurst is already doing it. The "Obama/socialist,DemocRAT" rants will only get louder.

That tea is weak. And stale.

The Republican party declares that 'government doesn't work' and then demonstrates its premise on a daily basis. No jobs bill. No budget deal. No tax increases. No, no, all the time no.

No voting without your photo id, no pensions for anybody unless we can let Wall Street get their hands on it, no money for schools and teachers, no money for Planned Parenthood's birth preventive education.

And you get even more 'No' if your skin is brown, you are female, homosexual, and/or you're not a Christian.

But there's plenty of tax breaks for oil and gas companies who foul the environment and lots of great deals for crony capitalists. The better friend you are of Rick Perry's, or the more money you can give to Republicans, the better off you will be. It's the classic example of the 1% waging war on the 99%.

And the only reason to keep the focus on abortion and gay rights is to keep the ignorant and the poverty-stricken distracted. Distraction is, in fact, the primary tool in their toolbox. A president misleads America about the costs to get a prescription drug bill passed, paying off Big Pharma cronies to the tune of $1 trillion dollars? Republicans snooze. President exaggerates intelligence to fool Americans into going to war against Iraq, costing 4,800 American soldiers' lives and over $800 billion? GOP snores, snorts, and rolls over.

President accelerates a loan guarantee to Solyndra, loan goes bad costing $500 million? The tried-and-true faux outrage erupts.

You like this? Want more of it? Keep voting for these vile Republicans.