Edouard headed right at Houston

The Weekly Wrangle

We're making preparations for Edouard here -- a full tank of gasoline, some batteries and extra water -- but there's still time to read the Texas Progressive Alliance's Blog Round-up (for those who aren't in danger of losing their electricity) ...

Last week on Bluedaze , Big Oil threatened TXsharon. In "Big Oil" Threatens Harm to My "Lovelies" and Me she calls out the abuser and includes a new PR plan that will save Chesapeake Energy millions of dollars and help clean up Big Oil's act.

Mike Thomas of Rhetoric & Rhythm is critical of a campaign to knock off Blue Dog Democrats , even if it means electing Republicans, all in an effort to punish Democrats for failing to hew the line on certain progressive issues.

refinish69 from Doing My Part For The Left has always heard that What happens in Vegas, Stays in Vegas or does it for Pete Sessions?

Burnt Orange Report went on strike last week to raise $1000 for Chris Bell's State Senate campaign. 12 hours later, 15 donors raised $1,075 for Bell and the BOR team is back to blogging.

jobsanger opines about the lack of Democratic leadership from Speaker Nancy Pelosi in Pelosi: Where's The Leadership?, and lets us know the Nanny State is alive and well in The "Nanny State" Strikes Again.

The Texas Cloverleaf is on a strike for change! Help raise money for selected candidates. What do we want? Donations! When do we need them? Now!

Texas Liberal suggests that life is like a harbor where ships come and go.

Off the Kuff calculates how many eligible but unregistered voters there are in Harris County, and compares it to 2004.

Obama came to Houston but only for a few high-dollar fundraisers in River Oaks, a trend sadly that is repetitive of past Democratic presidential nominees. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs had the report, and the total take was $1.5 mill.

Mean Rachel gets a response from Rep. Elliott Naishtat to her modest proposal from last week, and at dinner discovers just how unwired the Yankee in the Texas House really is.

Over at TexasKaos, lightseeker makes the case for a Republican straight ticket ballot, and for the Democratic slate (with video)! It may be the only way to save the Republican party from its present delusional masters!

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme wonders which will come first -- the death of the Republican Party or a full blown police state. CBT, ever the optimist, predicts the former.

Vince at Capitol Annex notes that Railroad Commissioner Elizabeth Ames Jones is going to run for US Senate if and when Kay Bailey Hutchison vacates her seat to run for governor.

Aimlessness at WhosPlayin got one too many email forwards about "Why Men are Republicans", and decided to retort with "Why Men Prefer Democrats".

McBlogger takes a look at the ability of DHS to snoop on you. And you thought the FISA stuff was bad...

BossKitty at TruthHugger wonders "What is Adrenarche and Why Are America’s Services Sexually Immature?"

Paris Hilton's mother (McCain maximum contributor) objects to ad

Bold is mine:

It is a complete waste of the money John McCain's contributors have donated to his campaign. It is a complete waste of the country's time and attention at the very moment when millions of people are losing their homes and their jobs. And it is a completely frivolous way to choose the next President of the United States.

Oh, there's also this:

Kathy Hilton and her husband donated a total of $4,600 to McCain's campaign earlier this year.

Do you think his campaign will stop the slime now? Nah, I didn't think so either.

Greenwald: Let's give the Blue Dogs the boot

A reminder to all the Republicans who relish the carping of the 9% Congress: they score that low because Democrats are pissed at them. Because Pelosi took impeachment off the table, because they continue to fund Bush's Wars, because they have cheerily joined in the evisceration of constitutional rights, because they refuse to do anything about Karl Rove's sneering contempt, and because too many of their members vote like Republicans. Not because they oppose offshore drilling or undocumented immigration or any of that other conservative bullshit ...

Perhaps most remarkable, some polls -- such as one from Fox News last month -- reveal that the Democratic-led Congress is actually more unpopular among Democrats than among Republicans, with 23 percent of Republicans approving of Congress compared with only 18 percent of Democrats. One would be hard-pressed to find a time in modern American history, if such a time exists at all, when a Congress was more unpopular among the party that controls it than among voters from the opposition party.

This week even Nick Lampson and Barack Obama announced that they would be open to drilling for oil in the nation's most fragile ecosystems, and they did so not to satisfy America's insatiable consumption but to appease the knee-jerk polls that suggest Americans want it.

Just in Texas, we have Lampson and Ciro Rodriguez and Chet Edwards (odiously mentioned again this morning by Pelosi on George Snufflelufagus' This Weak as vice-presidential material) and even Silvestre Reyes, the head of the House Intelligence committee, who barely managed a decent whine about the White House's restructuring of the nation's intelligence apparatus this past week. Of course there's all the Texas House representatives who keep electing Tom Craddick speaker, but even I'm tired of complaining about that.

(T)he only question worth asking among those who are so dissatisfied with congressional Democrats is this: What can be done to change this conduct? As proved by the 2006 midterm elections -- which the Democrats dominated in a historically lopsided manner -- mindlessly electing more Democrats to Congress will not improve anything. Such uncritical support for the party is actually likely to have the opposite effect. It's axiomatic that rewarding politicians -- which is what will happen if congressional Democrats end up with more seats and greater control after 2008 than they had after 2006 -- only ensures that they will continue the same behavior. If, after spending two years accommodating one extremist policy after the next favored by the right, congressional Democrats become further entrenched in their power by winning even more seats, what would one expect them to do other than conclude that this approach works and therefore continue to pursue it?

If simply voting for more Democrats will achieve nothing in the way of meaningful change, what, if anything, will? At minimum, two steps are required to begin to influence Democratic leaders to change course: 1) Impose a real political price that they must pay when they capitulate to -- or actively embrace -- the right's agenda and ignore the political values of their base, and 2) decrease the power and influence of the conservative "Blue Dog" contingent within the Democratic caucus, who have proved excessively willing to accommodate the excesses of the Bush administration, by selecting their members for defeat and removing them from office. And that means running progressive challengers against them in primaries, or targeting them with critical ads, even if doing so, in isolated cases, risks the loss of a Democratic seat in Congress.

I am pretty close to fed up with voting for Democrats who once elected vote like Republicans. And I appear to be far from alone in that regard. I likewise refuse to continue to enable this bad behavior by supporting them simply because of their label.

If they lose, I consider it to be their fault, not mine.

EV 8/3: Keeping it close

Most others do not show it so tight, but I'm going to be consistent and keep states that are polling the candidates within one percentage point in the gray.

<p><strong>><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/campaign08/electoral-college/">Electoral College Prediction Map</a></strong> - Predict the winner of the general election. Use the map to experiment with winning combinations of states. Save your prediction and send it to friends.</p>

John Heilemann has a good piece in New York Magazine about John McCain's strategy. It is to run a campaign attacking Barack Obama personally as too young, too elite, and too pampered to be President as opposed to attacking Obama's ideas and also as opposed to promoting McCain's ideas are something the country really needs. A variety of ads have already surfaced in this vein. More will follow. The irony, of course, is Obama was raised by a single mother whereas McCain is the son and grandson of admirals and married a woman worth an estimated $100 million.

McCain, for all his slime-smearing this past week, still cannot win.

Sunday Funnies (collection of fools edition)

Seymour Hersh: Cheney considered killing Americans in pretext to attack Iran

Don't you wish it wasn't real? That he was just making it up?

Bush administration officials held a meeting recently in the Vice President’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran.

In (Seymour) Hersh’s most recent article, he reports that this meeting occurred in the wake of the overblown incident in the Strait of Hormuz, when a U.S. carrier almost shot at a few small Iranian speedboats. The “meeting took place in the Vice-President’s office. ‘The subject was how to create a casus belli between Tehran and Washington,’” according to one of Hersh’s sources.

... I asked Hersh specifically about this meeting and if he could elaborate on what occurred. Hersh explained that, during the meeting in Cheney’s office, an idea was considered to dress up Navy Seals as Iranians, put them on fake Iranian speedboats, and shoot at them. This idea, intended to provoke an Iran war, was ultimately rejected:

HERSH: There was a dozen ideas proffered about how to trigger a war. The one that interested me the most was why don’t we build — we in our shipyard — build four or five boats that look like Iranian PT boats. Put Navy seals on them with a lot of arms. And next time one of our boats goes to the Straits of Hormuz, start a shoot-up.

Might cost some lives. And it was rejected because you can’t have Americans killing Americans. That’s the kind of — that’s the level of stuff we’re talking about. Provocation. But that was rejected.

...

Hersh argued that one of the things the Bush administration learned during the encounter in the Strait of Hormuz was that, “if you get the right incident, the American public will support” it.

“Look, is it high school? Yeah,” Hersh said. “Are we playing high school with you know 5,000 nuclear warheads in our arsenal? Yeah we are. We’re playing, you know, who’s the first guy to run off the highway with us and Iran.”

Sometimes there's just nothing to add. This is one of those times.

Sunday Funnies

Obama's in town today, but only for the money

Using Texas as an ATM, the same as John Kerry and Al Gore and Bill Clinton before him. This is precisely the reason why we have been a one-party state for the past fourteen years. Taking money out of Texas and spending it on teevee advertising in Michigan and Ohio and Florida doesn't get a single Democrat elected to the statehouse or the courthouse here.

After conducting a midday public forum on the economy in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Barack Obama will head later today to Houston, whose metropolitan area has more registered voters than all of the Hawkeye State.

But Obama has no scheduled public events in Houston. Instead, he will collect donations for his Democratic presidential campaign and the Democratic Party at two private gatherings.

Of the $287 million raised across the nation by the Obama campaign, only a quarter has come from contributors of at least $2,300, according to the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. Federal law puts a $2,300 cap on the amount an individual can give for a primary or general election, for a maximum total of $4,600.

The Houston events fall into the big-money category. They start at $2,300 per person, with amounts above $4,600 going to the party. The receptions take place at the River Oaks home of trial lawyer Richard Mithoff and his philanthropist wife, Ginni, and the Memorial area home of energy company chief John Thrash and his philanthropist wife, Becca Cason Thrash. Top donors at each event will get a chance to have their photographs taken with the Illinois senator.

Whether you have $23 or $2.300 to give a political candidate, we're all much better off if you give it to Rick Noriega or David Mincberg or C. O. Bradford or Diane Trautman, or Sherrie Matula or Kevin Murphy or Joe Montemayor or Larry Hunter, or Chris Bell or Joe Jaworski, or Mike Engelhart or Jim Sharp or Linda Yanez.

Obama is going to have all the money he needs to get elected, believe me.

Update (8/1): At least $1.5 million ...

Barack Obama collected more than $1.5 million in campaign funding Thursday night in two Houston neighborhoods built by oil and natural gas profits while telling his audiences that America needs to liberate itself from those fuels.

... Standing on a platform just above the water level of a lighted indoor pool at a Memorial home, Obama said the nation needs to develop wind and solar energy and other alternative sources. He spoke to about 55 paying guests at candlelit, round dinner tables under skylights in the 18,000-square-foot home of John Thrash, chief of a natural gas infrastructure company, and wife Becca Cason Thrash.

...

On Thursday morning in Iowa, Obama told a public audience that amid record-high oil profits, Republican opponent John McCain's proposal to lower corporate taxes is wrong and that the Republican Party is bereft of ideas that would help steer the nation to long-term energy independence.

At his other closed-door stop in Houston, the River Oaks home of trial lawyer Richard Mithoff and wife Ginni, Obama vaguely outlined a desire to work with both major parties to fashion short-term oil and gas usage policies. ...

Mithoff ... said the event had raised $1.5 million for Obama's campaign and the Democratic Party. Donations started at $2,300 per person and the total raised at the Thrash home was unknown.

The River Oaks audience was a multiethnic blend of lawyers, politicians, business people and others.

I removed some of Alan Bernstein's more egregious sneering. Click over for the full Republican effect.

Person Linda Yanez

Right click for SmartMenu shortcuts

Four hundred and eighty two billion.

And that's after he inherited a $286 billion surplus:

The government's budget deficit will surge past a half-trillion dollars next year, according to gloomy new estimates, a record flood of red ink that promises to force the winner of the presidential race to dramatically alter his economic agenda.

The deficit will hit $482 billion in the 2009 budget year that will be inherited by Democrat Barack Obama or Republican John McCain, the White House estimated Monday. That figure is sure to rise after adding the tens of billions of dollars in additional Iraq war funding it doesn't include, and the total could be higher yet if the economy fails to recover as the administration predicts.

Iraq and Afghanistan war budgets are supplementals, and the deficit calculation includes an estimate of tax revenues based on an economic model that forecasts more growth (and thus more tax revenue) than is likely. But the truth-telling is buried at the end of the article. I'll emphasize it in bold:

Monday's figures capped a remarkable deterioration in the United States' budgetary health under Bush's time in office.

He inherited a budget seen as producing endless huge surpluses after four straight years in positive territory. That stretch of surpluses represented a period when the country's finances had been bolstered by a 10-year period of uninterrupted economic growth, the longest expansion in U.S. history.

In his first year in office, helped by projections of continuing surpluses, Bush drove through a 10-year, $1.35 trillion package of tax cuts.

However, faulty estimates, a recession in March 2001 and government spending to fight the war on terrorism contributed to pushing the deficit to a record in dollar terms in 2004.

The guy had a track record of running companies into the ground. We shouldn't be surprised.

But beyond the mismanagement of our national security (endless wars in the Middle East are not making us safer), of the country's treasury, and the curtailment of civil rights at home and abroad (torture, holding prisoners without due process, wiretapping Americans without just cause) there's several things much more grave about the Bush legacy. Let's consider just one ...

The economic dismantling of the middle class -- not just the lack of decent jobs at decent wages with decent health and retirement benefits, but people losing their homes, unable to afford gas to get to work, dying for lack of affordable health care -- is the sort of thing that revolutions in the past were begun over.

It's really looking more and more like the United States needs a little of the "blood of patriots and tyrants to fertilize the tree of liberty", to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson.

Veep speculation

Monica Langley at the WSJ:

Before leaving on his overseas trip, Sen. Barack Obama reviewed information on several prospects and narrowed the field. His focus now includes five colleagues in the U.S. Senate -- Joseph Biden, Evan Bayh, Chris Dodd, Hillary Clinton and Jack Reed -- and two governors, Tim Kaine of Virginia and Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas, according to Democratic operatives, though he could still make a different pick.

On the Republican side, Sen. John McCain also is understood to be narrowing his list, with speculation focused on about the same number of choices. They include ex-Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a rival during the Republican primaries; Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, with whom he has a strong friendship; and former Rep. Rob Portman of the battleground state of Ohio. Republicans also are touting Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, and campaign adviser Carly Fiorina, ex-CEO of Hewlett-Packard Co., among others.

Booman, on those names:

I would be very pleased with the selection of Sebelius, Dodd, or Reed. I'd be okay with the selection of Kaine. Biden, Bayh, or Clinton I would consider poor choices. Bayh and Clinton would be personally demoralizing.

On the Republican side, I'll be brief. ... None of these picks particularly frighten me. John Thune is probably the safest choice, but I can't see him fundamentally changing the game. Fiorina is untested as a campaigner and her qualifications are dubious. Romney would be a disaster. Crist has to overcome rumors about his sexuality. And Pawlenty just doesn't carry much juice.

I think it will be Biden for Obama (and I will be happy with that, agreeing with Booman otherwise even though I would love it if it were Dodd or Richardson, who is getting no buzz whatsoever) and Portman for McCain, although the WSJ article really makes it sound like McCain is being talked into Romney. poblano says:

If Bob Novak is circulating internal polls showing Mitt Romney helping John McCain in Michigan, you can be pretty sure that the Republican establishment is behind the idea of making Romney McCain's VP. It's easy enough to understand why. Romney has been a good team player: an excellent fundraiser and a tireless campaigner. He is unlikely to embarrass either himself or the ticket. And he could potentially be an asset in several states, among them Michigan, New Hampshire and Nevada.

But Romney also comes with several liabilities which, when combined with his strengths, would tend to produce a very interesting electoral map.

Go read it; it's cogent (as always). grantcart points out the similarities between Obama and Tim Kaine, concluding with his belief that the Virginia governor will be the one.

Who do you think will be the second bananas? Post a comment.

The Weekly Wrangle

Here are the TPA Round-Up blog highlights for the week of July 28:

TXsharon challenges you to view these pictures of domestic drilling Armageddon in the Barnett Shale and still support the Drill and Burn domestic drilling agenda.

U.S. Rep. Ciro Rodriguez' Republican challenger for the 23rd Congressional seat is taken to task by Mike Thomas of Rhetoric & Rhythm for shirking his responsibility on a critical hospital expansion vote before the Bexar County Commissioner's Court.

WCNews at Eye On Williamson posts on the GOP's "latest" energy plan in Carter, Oil, & Hair Of The Dog.

Neil at Texas Liberal asks what would be the impact if polar bears could vote.

Off the Kuff looks at a Texas Monthly overview of the effects of the presidential race on downballot elections in Texas and offers his criticism of it.

Guest columnist JR Behrman at Texas Kaos has a few strong words about Energy Policy: Democrats Routed. He also has a Texas plan.

Julie Pippert of MOMocrats asks the Obama campaign to explain its absence in Texas after they announced the roll-out of their Spanish language ads as an outreach to Hispanic voters, then discusses a Senate proposal that would require 50% of US cars to have a flexible fuel system by 2012, and finally the MOMocrats share the draft of their position paper to be submitted to the Democratic National Committee for inclusion in the party platform.

McBlogger had a great time at the subprime panel at Netroots Nation. So good in fact that he decided to offer some of his own solutions since the panelists, including the dimwitted Rep. Brad Miller, decided to offer nothing of substance.

XicanoPwr reports on the latest poll by the Pew Hispanic Center on the Latino vote. Polling shows that 66% of Latino registered voters will support Obama.

Burnt Orange Report points out that commissioner of agriculture Todd Staples finally comes around to what Democrat (and future Ag Commissioner) Hank Gilbert has been saying all along: Texans are being overcharged at the gas pump due to lack of state inspections.

BossKitty at TruthHugger dreams about the "Count Down To Accountability - Bush, Cheney Indictments".

refinish69 from Doing My Part For The Left invites everyone to meet Annette Taddeo -- A true progressive Democrat.

jobsanger writes about how, after years of the Bush presidency, even our closest traditional ally gives the US no credibility in Brits Don't Trust Bush On Torture.

Obama and the down-ballot races in Texas are the focus of two articles by R.G. Ratcliffe of the Houston Chronicle. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs summarizes, and finds some to agree with and some not.

Mean Rachel writes an open letter to Rep. Elliot Naishtat, encouraging him to consider joining the technology age and starting an inexpensive, user-friendly website, designed specifically for state legislators, with Wired for Change's DLCCWeb, a Netroots exhibitor.

nytexan at BlueBloggin keeps an eye on Mitch McConnell, the GOP king of distortion and extortion. McConnell plans to block legislation that can impact Americans now and push for a bill whose product will not be seen for 10 years in McConnell Extorts Senate For Off Shore Drilling. McConnell never fails to please Bush and his corporate buddies.

WhosPlayin looks at a new USGS petroleum estimate for the Arctic Circle, and notes that only a small portion of ANWR is estimated to be productive, and that the study doesn't address economic feasibility.

Vince from Capitol Annex tells us that, while indicted former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Sugar Land) won't accept a presidential pardon, he'd love one from Texas Governor Rick Perry.

CouldBeTrue from South Texas Chisme gets upset with a crappy newspaper article.