Sunday Funnies

The Sacramento Bee's Jack Ohman, with the 2016 Pulitzer Prize winner.

Sanders is a Democrat, and this makes Clintonites seethe

So at least something good has come out of it.

Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-VT) campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, said on Wednesday that the senator will remain a Democrat after the 2016 presidential election.

Weaver was asked on Bloomberg News' "With All Due Respect" whether Sanders would still be a Democrat even if he lost the presidential nomination.

"Well, he is a Democrat. He’s said he’s a Democrat, and he’s gonna be supporting the Democratic nominee, whoever that is," Weaver responded.

And when asked of Sanders was now a "Democrat for life," Weaver said, "Yes, he is."

*heavy sigh*

Some will insist this is not where his heart lies; that it is only technical; a formality -- and to be clear I fit this description myself -- but that Sanders and his people have repeatedly insisted it so is unfortunate from my long-held (well, two-plus years) perspective.  His declarations remove a substantial portion of his political leverage IMHO, but avoid his being demonized as a Nader-ish spoiler (sic).  I do not expect Status Quo Democrats to do anything except pretend to be happy about this development, and not until post-primary season, and certainly not for the foreseeable #StillSanders future.

Clinton's campaign, eager to move past Sanders and focus on the general election, is getting impatient and even angry at some of the attacks.

One in particular has Clinton worried. Sanders' campaign is raising the issue of whether the Clinton campaign is violating campaign finance rules with how it raises money jointly with the Democratic National Committee -- an argument that has the Clinton people "pissed," as one source told CNN.

The concern is that the theme could play into Donald Trump's recent moniker for her -- "Crooked Hillary" -- especially if he is the Republican nominee.

They worry about the impact of such attacks because they're not aimed just at Clinton but also at the DNC and could weaken the nominee in a general election fight.

Jennifer Palmieri, Clinton's communications director, told reporters Tuesday night that the Sanders campaign "has been destructive" to that point that he is "not productive to Democrats" and is "not productive for the country."

Decrying what she described as "false character attacks," Palmieri compared them to criticism Clinton gets from the GOP. "And any time you mimic Republican attacks, we think that is destructive."

Yeah, that tone will be good for post-primary party unity, all right.  They just don't care any more, though, especially when they're accusing me of being buddies with Ted Cruz.  Of course this is all just 'fun'.  There's a lot of Clinton people that have been removed from my social media timelines as a result of this sort of 'fun' (some are still tethered, if somewhat tenuously).  I find I have to prune them on a weekly basis, just like the wisteria that grows on my side fence.

So the invasive species known as neoliberalism claims another urban-legend-believing victim.  Taken at his word, Bernie Sanders has been assimilated by the collective.  Maybe I can just hope he's lying, like I do about Hillary's in-advance declarations of war on Iran.  And Trump/Cruz is the greater evil, which is the best aluminum-siding sales job they can come up with to push Hillary on Bernie's supporters.

Energizing, isn't it?

66% of Democrats said the primary contest is "energizing" the party...

Feels like negative energy to me, but that is allegedly good for you, so what do I know?

Fidel Castro still not dead, but close

By his own acknowledgement.

“I’ll be 90 years old soon,” Castro said in his most extensive public appearance in years. “Soon I’ll be like all the others. The time will come for all of us, but the ideas of the Cuban Communists will remain as proof on this planet that if they are worked at with fervor and dignity, they can produce the material and cultural goods that human beings need, and we need to fight without a truce to obtain them.”

YaddayaddavivalarevoluciónyaddaCubaLibreyadda.

“This may be one of the last times I speak in this room,” Fidel Castro said. “We must tell our brothers in Latin America and the world that the Cuban people will be victorious.”

Es demasiado dramática.

Fifty-five years after Fidel Castro declared that Cuba’s revolution was socialist and began installing a single-party system and centrally planned economy, the Cuban government is battling a deep crisis of credibility.

With no memory of the revolution’s heady first decades, younger Cubans complain bitterly about low state salaries of about $25 a month that leave them struggling to afford food and other staple goods. Cuba’s creaky state-run media and cultural institutions compete with flashy foreign programming shared online and on memory drives passed hand-to-hand. Emigration to the United States and other countries has soared to one of its highest points since the revolution.

A nation's leaders completely out of touch with its citizens.  Imagine that.

The ideological gulf between government and people widened last month when President Barack Obama became the first U.S. leader to visit Cuba in nearly 90 years and delivered a widely praised speech live on state television urging Cubans to forget the history of hostility between the U.S. and Cuba and move toward a new era of normal diplomatic and economic relations.

The Cuban government offered little unified response until the Communist Party’s Seventh Party Congress began Saturday, and one high-ranking official after another warned that the U.S. was still an enemy that wants to take control of Cuba. They said Obama’s trip represented an ideological “attack.”

[...]

Jon Lee Anderson, a staff writer at The New Yorker who is writing a biography of Fidel Castro, called the day’s events “a way of restoring some kind of essential revolutionary presence or muscle in the room after the star-struck effect of Obama.”

The Cuban government appears to be engaging in “overcompensation for being bowled over a little bit by Obama’s unexpectedly elegant and charismatic performance in Havana,” said Anderson, who covered the visit. “Cubans who aren’t prepared for the full extent of what he was saying, it took them aback.”

I posted mi Cubana's story -- following the passing of my father-in-law -- with the title of the phrase he and his wife (and I presume many other Cuban expatriates) often used to describe Fidel: "bicho malo nunca muere".  There's going to be a yuuuge party at our favorite Cuban restaurant on the evening of his demise, and I won't miss it for all the tea in China.

Not sure where we will celebrate on the day Dick Cheney finally dies, but that might be just as big a deal.  Maybe both guys are drinking the same blood of Camp Fire Girls, who knows.

New York, New York. SMH

Trump and Clinton smash their challengers and reassert control of their nominations.

A preview of the face-biting to come

Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton scored sweeping victories in nominating contests in their home state of New York, and immediately cited them in arguing they are all but unstoppable as their respective parties' presidential nominees.

Trump's crushing defeat of Ted Cruz in Tuesday's primary election tilted the energy in the Republican race back to the front-runner, just as Republican National Committee members begin meeting in Florida on Wednesday to discuss their July convention, where the nominee will be chosen.

For the Democratic favorite, Clinton's more narrow victory over Bernie Sanders snapped a string of victories by the 74-year-old democratic socialist and gave her a much-needed lift with more tough fights ahead.

The eventual victors of the Democratic and the Republican nominating campaigns will face each other in November's general election.

Trump's win, celebrated to the tune of Frank Sinatra's "New York, New York" at Trump Tower in Manhattan, marked a rebound from his Wisconsin defeat two weeks ago. It set him up for another big night on April 26, when Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Delaware, and Maryland will hold primaries.

Sanders lost NY for the same old reason: black voters (22% of the electorate there) went 75-25 for Clinton.  They made up their minds a long time ago and they ain't changin' 'em.

Those same five states mentioned in the last graf of the excerpt above were also named in Sanders' most recent e-mail overnight as where the battle would go on, so it appears neither he (nor Ted Cruz) is ready to throw in the towel.  In fact Jeff Weaver, Sanders' campaign chief, still seems more than a little defiant despite various calls for his man to quit and fall in line.

By the (CNN) numbers ...

With 93% of the vote in at 12:15 a.m ET, Trump was in the lead at 60% while Ohio Gov. John Kasich was at 25.2% and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz was at 14.8%.

With 94% of the Democratic vote in, Clinton was leading Sanders 57.7% to 42.3%.

Clinton outperformed the advance polling, including the exit polls taken just before voting concluded last night, which showed a very tight race.  If Sanders' campaign funds start to dry up as reality slowly sinks in, he'll take a powder and call it a day.  At this point that's the only trend to watch for.

So what next, revolutionaries?

As promised, Bernie will end up endorsing Hillary. Doesn’t mean we have to follow in lockstep like programed cyborgs pic.twitter.com/Jz2MZOytzi

— Viva la causa! (@70torinoman) April 20, 2016

Could you be more specific?

Time to turn to Jill Stein. #NYPrimary

— mohammad barakat (@Mbarakat1990) April 20, 2016

Good.  This is the right idea.  Writing him in is wrong.  Write-in votes aren't counted in many states because of onerous pre-certification requirements (see this from the TXSOS, this from Ballotpedia, and this handy start-to-finish slideshow on the process here in Texas).

It's starting to get a little boring at this point, isn't it?

Houston now receives a hundred-year storm on a quarterly basis

Perhaps we should rename them.

Houston (was yesterday) in the midst of an unbelievable deluge, with already more rainfall in a single day than any hurricane to ever hit the hurricane-prone city. The National Weather Service has called Monday’s flooding “historic.”

More than 21,000 square miles of southeast Texas is now in a flash flood warning, but the worst flooding seems to be occurring in western parts of the Houston metro area. More than 17 inches of rainfall has fallen in just the past 24 hours in some neighborhoods, with about 1 foot of rain coming just since midnight—already making Monday the rainiest day ever in Houston before noon. At Houston’s George Bush International Airport, 11.16 inches fell by 10 a.m., breaking the all-time daily record of 10.34 inches set on June 26, 1989. And it’s still falling. More rain is in the forecast for the next 36 hours or so. Update, 6:35 pm ET: The rain has stopped for now, with 11.75 inches measured at George Bush Airport on Monday.

5 dead, 900 rescued from floodwaters in their homes or on the highways and roads. 

Officials in Harris County, where Houston is located, have declared a disaster area and estimate at least 1,000 homes have already been flooded. More than half the watersheds in Harris County are experiencing significant flooding, with at least one cresting above its estimated 500-year flood mark, a new all-time record. Bayous and creeks have overtopped levees in some parts of Houston, and the water continues to rise, with downtown Houston also in the direct path of some of the worst floodwaters.

Emergency personnel in Houston have already performed hundreds of water rescues, with firefighters taking to boats. With lightning crashing overhead, one journalist helped rescue a man after he had driven into floodwaters that threatened to overwhelm his car. Another image of a man rescuing an armadillo was widely circulated on social media, and there’s also video of people teaming up to save a stranded horse.  

Horses, plural.

They saved more than 70 of the 80 or so at the stables in the northwest portion of the county, but not all of them.  Very upsetting video here if you can take it.

Honestly though, it's just situation normal for us old hands around here.  The main thing you have to do is stock up and hunker down.  This is obviously not feasible for the working class, those who must travel to jobs via public transit, and others of the least fortunate among us.

The poor always bear the brunt of nature's temper tantrums, exacerbated in H-Town by poor planning and decisions made long ago by short-sighted elected officials and greedy real estate developers.  But that's a digression.

The National Weather Service had been warning of the potential for very heavy rainfall in southeast Texas since at least last Tuesday, as a continental-scale blocking pattern—in which an unusually stable jet stream locks weather systems in place—made conditions favorable for a stalled weather front to unload copious amounts of tropical moisture.

I went to the grocery store on Friday, had some ice chests as backup in case we lost power.  (We did not.)  The only times I so much as opened the outside door yesterday was to let the dogs out to pee, and they didn't want to go outside either.  Because both I and the wife telecommute, we don't ever worry about traffic or flooded roads nor experience the accompanying stress.  (This may be white privilege; it's certainly a benefit of our class status.)

I think it's a rite of passage living here; you have to get your car flooded out at least once in order to learn your lesson about these things.  Ours was in 1994 and this old NYT account is accurate.  This was before blogging, and there's a great tale I have to tell about getting through that storm, but not today.

Since the 1950s, Houston has seen a 167 percent increase in the heaviest downpours—defined as the number of days where total precipitation exceeded the heaviest 1 percent of all local events—one of the fastest rates of increase anywhere in the country. That’s exactly what’s expected to happen as the climate warms, since warmer air can hold more water vapor than cooler air.

An increase in the frequency of heavy rain events has long been considered one of the likeliest consequences of global warming, and a recent comprehensive National Academies report endorsed this link. Blocking weather patterns like this weekend’s may be happening more often due to climate change, boosting the likelihood of heavy rainfall events, according to a new study published last week.

This is at least the fourth major flood in the Houston area in just the past 12 months, with previous flooding events last May, June, and October pummeling Texas hard. The triangle between Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio is sometimes referred to as “flash flood alley” because of its dangerous mix of hilly terrain, sprawling urbanization, and frequent heavy downpours, adding to the region’s already considerable vulnerability to climate change.

This go-around it was north Houston (from Aldine to Greenspoint) and northwest Houston (from Spring Branch to Cypress) that took it in the neck.  Less than a year ago it was my side of town, Meyerland, which still got a pretty good hit (first drone video here).

There is a great irony in the fossil fuel capital of the world being forced to endure the calamitous side-effects of the fossil fuel industry's misadventures over the past hundred years or so.  Even as oil in tank farms in Cushing, OK fills to the brim, and supertankers line up off the coast of Basra, Iraq to bring over more, Americans -- and Texans -- have reduced their consumption by switching to alternative fuels like wind and solar, and protest the mineral barons who are trying to squeeze a few more drops out of their respective lemons.

"Leave It in the Ground" doesn't seem to be resonating with the Persian Gulf oil states.

This business is as dead a man walking as your nearest Republican neighbor.  You can't tell a fucking zombie anything, though.  He just wants to eat your brain.

Green Party state convention pics, update

Thanks to the Bexar County Greens for these photos.

David Collins had this review of the business conducted.

The Green Party of Texas just concluded a packed weekend at the Grey Forest retreat in San Antonio. On Saturday (April 9), GPTX held its nominating convention for statewide offices, including the selection delegates to August's Presidential Nominating Convention in Houston. On Sunday (April 10), the Party held its annual meeting, at which the delegates assembled elected members to the State Executive Committee and passed a few resolutions regarding policy positions and internal procedures.

According to Green Party Watch, here is the Texas delegation to the Presidential Nominating Convention:
Jill Stein: 15
SKCM Curry: 3
Darryl Cherney: 2
Kent Mesplay: 2
Bill Kreml: 1

The win for Stein continues a nationwide pattern: Among states that have had their primary elections, caucuses, or conventions, Stein has won all of them. Unless something changes radically in the next three months, she will likely be nominated resoundingly on the first ballot in August.

​State Offices
David Wager, longtime treasurer for the Harris County and Texas Greens, reports that all the candidates for the various state offices had their nominations confirmed:

Railroad Commissioner: Martina Salinas
Supreme Court, place 3: Rodolfo Rivera Muñoz
Supreme Court, place 5: Charles Waterbury
Supreme Court, place 9: Jim Chisholm
Court of Criminal Appeals, place 2: Adam "Bulletproof" King Blackwell Reposa
Court of Criminal Appeals, place 5: Judith Sanders-Castro

​​ At Sunday's annual meeting, the delegates elected Laura Palmer of Harris County to another two-year term as co-chair. She will continue to serve along with Dallas County's Aaron Renaud, who was elected at last year's meeting. Also elected to the SEC:

Secretary: katija assata gruene, formerly known as kat swift (Bexar)
Treasurer: David Wager (Harris)
Members at-large: Antonio Diaz (Bexar), Wesson Gaige (Denton), Ona Marie Hendricks (Dallas)

Three resolutions passed and were referred to the national convention's committee.  Among them was a review of range voting for elections to public offices.

Salinas, who debated her Libertarian opponent on the day before the state convention, appears to be both standard-bearer and dreamcatcher for the GPTX in this cycle.  Her challenge is to keep the Greens on the ballot for 2018 by achieving 5% or more of the vote this November.

There's a chance that presidential nominee-in-waiting Stein could get this done for Texas Greens, and that's essentially the only reason why I would also like to see some early polling of the Texas electorate, with Trump and Clinton as the red and blue team leaders.  The Bernie or Bust movement -- such as it is -- needs to come to Jesus, but that's likely later than sooner.

Better late than never.

The Weekly Wet Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance stands with the LGBTQ communities of North Carolina and Mississippi as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff looks at the insane amounts of money being spent on the Austin rideshare referendum.

Libby Shaw, contributing at Daily Kos, sounds the alarm bells on Ted Cruz. Desperate Republican donors, afraid of Trump, are rallying around the scary man from Texas. Beware Ted Cruz. He is more dangerous than W.

Socratic Gadfly wonders if California's expected full legalization of marijuana could be the impetus in it joining North Dakota and creating a state bank.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme notes that the Texas Republican party, like its national parent, is heading further down the rat hole. John Cornyn was bad enough, but Ken Paxton et al maybe worse.

The water got hotter for Texas AG K-Pax as the feds piled on with some stock fraud charges. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs wishes the GOP would take out their trash and clean up their mess, but isn't going to hold his breath waiting for it.

Egberto Willies knows Lady Liberty, aka the woman who was arrested in the Democracy Spring protests last week, and interviewed her for his radio program on KPFT.

In Denton and via Bluedaze, a screening of the film Dear President Obama is being held at the University of North Texas on Wednesday, April 20.

Texas Vox had the advance on the protest by Native Peoples at the Dos Republicas coal mine, near Eagle Pass.

Lewisville's outdoor arts festival Colorpalooza was a hit despite the weekend rains, reports the Texan Journal.

And Neil at All People Have Value spotted and snapped a rainbow over a Walgreens in Houston.  APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

=======================

More blog posts about Texas from around Texas!

The Observer describes how Amarillo became both safe haven for -- and then a battle ground over -- economic and war refugees from across the world.

The Houston Press underscores the glaring sexual misconduct hypocrisies in the Baylor University football program.

BOR has point/counter point posts about whether the Texas GOP state leadership is still funny, or not quite so much.

Robert Rivard takes issue with a proposal to build a minor league baseball stadium in San Antonio.

Former Texan Elise Hu muses about female role models.

Genevieve Cato tackles the problem of how female ambition is perceived.

Austin On Your Feet, Mike Dahmus, and Austin Teacher Dad all weigh in on the May 7 referendum to repeal Austin's ordinance that regulates vehicles for hire companies like Uber and Lyft.

Newsdesk introduces the anti-LGBT culture warriors who will be running the Attorney General's office during those times when AG Ken Paxton is too busy defending himself from multiple criminal allegations to do it.

Grits for Breakfast calls the ban on surrogate social media accounts for inmates a bad idea.

Juanita Jean welcomes Tom DeLay back to the scene.

The Rag Blog hosts actress/singer Barbara Williams and her husband Tom Hayden on Tuesday, April 26 at Austin's High Road on Dawson.  Hayden has recently switched his support from Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton, notes Ted at jobsanger.

Prairie Weather excerpts some letters to the editor of the New York Times about the Democratic presidential primary, and Carol Morgan excoriates CNN for portraying the Clintons in 'Tom and Daisy from The Great Gatsby' fashion.

And Pages of Victory declares such in the War on Poison Ivy.

Sunday Funnies

Find many more toons from this past week -- none repeated here -- at Balloon Juice and the World's Most Dangerous Beauty Salon.

No sleep 'til (after) Brooklyn

Apologies to the Beasties.

The bitter struggle between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders for the Democratic presidential nomination erupted into fractious and at times personal attacks on Thursday night as the simmering animosities between the two candidates burst onto a Brooklyn stage.

In the ninth and possibly last televised debate between the former secretary of state and US senator from Vermont, the candidates hurled themselves at each other in barely restrained terms. From the first minute of the two-hour event to its final moment, they questioned each other’s judgment, susceptibility to lobbyists and grasp of political reality in by far the most heated discussion of the campaign to date.

From Wall Street to the minimum wage, gun control and mass incarceration, Israel and climate change, the rivals battled to set themselves apart in the hope of pulling ahead in the race. With the stakes so high – just five days before the critical ballot in New York state that carries a bonanza of 291 delegates out of the 2,383 needed to win – the rhetoric also reached a new intensity.

Right from the get-go, they were slugging each other.

“Oh my goodness, they must have been really crushed by this,” Sanders said to Clinton earlier on, referring to her claims that she was tough on the big banks. “And was that before or after you received huge sums of money by giving speaking engagements?” he went on, in a tone that went beyond sarcasm into the fringes of disdain.

The debate was feisty from the off. Sanders walked back from previous comments that he thought his competitor was unqualified for the White House. Answering a question on whether Clinton had the experience and intelligence to be president, he said: “Of course she does.” But hardly pausing for breath, he clarified: “I do question her judgment. I question a judgment which voted for the war in Iraq – the worst foreign policy blunder in the history of this country.”

There's much more at the Guardian, CBS relates more detail of the issues they quarreled about, and CNN has six takeaways, but ultimately this sparring revealed that the campaigns reached critical mass, and the most recent polling shows Sanders falling farther back.

Latest opinion surveys suggest that Clinton is extending her lead in New York with an NBC 4 New York/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll putting her 17 percentage points ahead, on 57% to Sanders’ 40%. But Sanders shows no signs of going away quietly. He came into the debate with wind in his sails, following an epic rally in Washington Square park in Manhattan on Wednesday night, attended by 27,000.

Bernie is on his way to the Vatican this morning to give a speech.  Hillary canceled a town hall on Good Morning America today, probably to rest up for her two California fundraisers this weekend, including another gig with the Clooneys.  New Yorkers vote in four days, and your taxes are due (if you haven't done them already, of course).

I'm going to try to make it out to the CounterCurrent Festival this weekend, maybe eat some crawfish.  See you later.

Update: Harry Cheadle at VICE wraps it up tight,  Socratic Gadfly's take is sharp, with a cartoon I was planning on using (Juanita Jean at the WMDBS usually pre-empts some of my selections on Fridays, making me scramble),  and Talking Points Memo has the details of the kerfuffle that has broken out overnight between the Israeli/Jewish liberal and conservative sides, who keep fighting their own war between themselves as a smaller skirmish within the larger Palestinian question.  The first paragraph at this MSNBC link tells what the debate mentions about Israel and Palestine were really all about.

Sanders was speaking mostly to American liberals (who are increasingly sympathetic to the plight of Palestinians), while Clinton was speaking to New Yorkers (whose Jewish community is still pretty pro-Israel). And by the way, yesterday’s NBC New York/WSJ/Marist poll – which came out before the debate – showed Clinton leading Sanders among Jewish Democrats in New York by a 2-to-1 margin, 65%-32%.

Crawfish.  And outdoor festivals.  Yeah, that's the ticket.

Update II: Oh, and Vox has 2 winners -- Bernie Sanders and the Fight for $15 (minimum wage), catching Hillary in another of her ridiculous waffles -- and three losers: Clinton (naturally), the lame-ass New Democrats, and 'liberal technocrats'...

The dynamic you see here is one where there's such overwhelming grassroots support for an idea that even policy elites who traditionally take it upon themselves to moderate and channel on-the-ground sentiment into more viable policy avenues aren't doing that. They're jumping on board and then talking to journalists like me off the record about their concerns, and about their concerns as to what happens if their misgivings were to become public.

Big ideas defeat pragmatism once again.  More, please.

If he can make it there...

... then anywhere, you know.  (And so can she.)

And now, after competing press releases and months of negotiations, the two Democratic presidential candidates have their chance to show which one of them is ready to make it all the way to the White House.

A political subway series, if you will, ladies and gentlemen. Two (sort of) New Yorkers battle it out on the debate stage again just days before the Empire State votes on Tuesday, April 19. 

ABC's five things to watch for this evening include the skills of one-upsmanship (without being too nasty), Round Two of the 'qualified' spat, Wall Street connections and how they might be linked to terrorism, and fracking and momentum.

Let's read the latest from the NYT's First Draft:

Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont will hold a debate at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, hosted by CNN and NY1. Their contest has become increasingly nasty, although it is genteel compared with the Republicans. But they are clearly sick of each other and tired of hiding it. Mr. Sanders has struggled in New York amid tough questions, and he has been tripped up on issues related to Israel. The borough is home to a large Orthodox Jewish population, a fact that might come up.

Brooklyn is also home to a large African-American population. Mrs. Clinton received a lukewarm response at a National Action Network conference hosted by the Rev. Al Sharpton on Wednesday as she dealt with fallout from a racially hued joke during a skit on Saturday with Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York. 

Oh yeah, there might be something racial that gets discussed.  Fun.

I'll be filling up the Tweet feed on the right with the smarts and snark of others mostly, so if you don't do Twitter but want some (ten-to thirty-second delayed) play-by-play, I'll be there for you.

Clinton, Sanders, and the Empire State

We might get back around to who's qualified and who's not by Thursday, but if we don't there's still plenty of topics upon which the Democratic Party's race for the presidency is going to be decided, on the debate stage or off.  One is that the NY primary is closed, which aids Hillary Clinton and hinders Bernie Sanders since the election data has demonstrated his strength among indys, who would have had to register as a D weeks ago in order to vote next week (as Donald Trump's children glaringly reminded us).  That helps us understand why Clinton has taken to questioning Sanders' Democratic bonafides; she's speaking to a New York electorate that votes in that primary consistently, and not so much for the Zephyr Teachouts on the ballot.

And despite her (and her husband's) by-now-typical collection of verbal malaprops, Clinton maintains a solid polling lead in New York.  Also in spite of her waffling on the death penalty, as well as some historical and damning evidence that black folk have been taken for a ride downtown in the back of the squad car for the past twenty-two years courtesy of the Clintons -- long before social media's scrutiny of summary executions by paranoid, trigger-happy LEO became a thing -- that support base is still standing by their woman.

This is best explained in the context of why Bernie Sanders has been unable to erode her support by Salim Muwakkil at In These Times.  Go read the whole thing; the following has three links you should also check out.

Many are perplexed by what they consider black Americans’ perverse allegiance to Clinton. Michelle Alexander, author of the highly influential The New Jim Crow, for example, argued in a widely discussed Nation essay that Clinton is undeserving of black support. Alexander notes that the Clintons “presided over the largest increase in federal and state prison inmates of any president in American history.”

Others are not so perplexed. Glen Ford, executive editor of Black Agenda Report, argues that black people “tune Sanders out, because their main purpose for voting in national elections is to keep the White Man’s Party, the Republicans, out of the White House, and believe Clinton has a better shot.”

I think Ford is on target, and although he bemoans this tendency, it’s one that’s been honed by centuries of hard-earned experience. New York Times columnist Charles Blow calls it “functional pragmatism.”

Alexander, Ford, Blow, and other black intelligentsia (some would call 'elite') including Dr. Cornel West, radio show host Tavis Smiley, rapper Killer Mike, author Ta-Nehisi Coates, Hollywood- connected activists Spike Lee, Sidney Poitier, Danny Glover and others -- have made the case for Sanders over Clinton, but their 'bookish, boutique' support, as Muwakkil calls it, doesn't resonate with the African American working class that votes in droves for Democrats, mostly establishment ones.  There is no 'gospel accent' (again, Muwakkil's term).  It helps to apply Rev. Al Sharpton to this label, and note that while he had a sit-down with Bernie two months ago, he's also been critical.  Sharpton's blessing may be the key to victory for one or the other; so far he's not giving it up.

What I find profound (as the unenlightened middle-aged white guy) is this.

The significance of these ideological nuances made a brief appearance during a debate in Flint, Michigan, when Sanders’ response to a question about his “racial blind spots” implied that only black people live in “ghettos” and that most black people were poor.

It was a minor verbal gaffe that was likely the product of debate exhaustion. But it was a gaffe that might also be characterized as a “Marxian slip,” in that a bit of Bernie’s worldview slipped out. Specifically, his conflation of black America with the lumpenproletariat, a Marxist-Leninist conceit widely held during the days of the Black Panther Party, the time of Sanders’ ideological formation, but one that can elide the specificities of racial oppression and the subtleties of class divisions in the black community.

It was indeed a slip for Sanders. He’s been trying hard to update his rhetoric to be more attentive to issues of white supremacy. He effectively incorporated an early encounter with Black Lives Matter protesters into a more inclusive campaign platform.

But his gaffe also played into an ongoing squabble among progressives about the role of race in the class struggle (or the role of class in the racial struggle). That disagreement has been debated rancorously for the better part of a century now. And despite the historic campaign Bernie Sanders has run in this election, we still don’t seem any closer to resolving it.

I had to Google some of those words to get the full meaning.  I didn't when I read D. R. Tucker in Washington Monthly a couple of weeks ago: that blacks just aren't so keen on Bernie's message of upending the system because they have long sought a seat at the table within the system.  A piece of the pie, as The Jeffersons soundtrack sang about.

In all likelihood, most African-American voters reject Sanders because they reject the tenets of democratic socialism, preferring a more effectively regulated capitalism as a solution to the country’s woes. Sanders’s call for a “political revolution” is one most African-American voters do not hear. They don’t want to overthrow the current system; they just want more fairness in the current system.

[...]

It is this ethos—the creed of the African-American striver—that fuels black opposition to democratic socialism. Most black voters would agree with Sanders that the system is rigged; they’d specifically point out that the system has been rigged against African-Americans since 1619. Yet most African-Americans do not wish for the system to be destroyed: they wish for the system to be un-rigged, to be made fair, to be made whole.

[...]

Most African-Americans believe in capitalism, and praise those who have overcome the obstacles of racism to succeed in a capitalist system. They do not believe that capitalism and racism are inextricably linked; they believe it is possible to reduce bias without having to shift towards democratic socialism. In other words, Sanders’s core message—his linking of racism and other social “-isms” to capitalism—is one most African-American voters have zero affinity for.

Bernie's win in Michigan pointed to the class distinctions between Southern African Americans (low wages, no unions) and Midwestern ones (unions and high wages) as part of the reason why he won there and lost badly to Clinton in the South.  Reasonable enough, but not as thorough as Muwakkil and Tucker.

Last summer I wrote about the two reasons Bernie wouldn't win the nomination: minority voters and superdelegates.  So all of this helps me better understand why, exactly, that forecast is coming into tighter focus.  I'll hold off on another prediction until after Thursday night's debate, but absent something earth-quaking the nom is still Hillary's to lose.  And she could still lose it.

Update (4/14) More from Nina Turner.

SEC charges Paxton with stock fraud

Civil charges (which means a fine), not criminal, as with the state jail felonies he's been facing.  In fact there's only a few new details to add to this embarrassment.

U.S. regulators charged Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Monday for his alleged role in a stock scam that defrauded investors in a Texas-based technology company called Servergy Inc.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission accused the company and former Chief Executive Officer William Mapp of selling private stock while misleading investors about the energy efficiency of its sole product, and accused Paxton of working to raise investor funds for the company without disclosing his commissions.

The SEC's civil case followed a related criminal case against Paxton for securities fraud. Last year, a Texas state grand jury indicted Paxton for his alleged role in a scheme to mislead investors.

Let's skip over to the Chron for this:

The complaint alleges that Paxton told the SEC that he intended to pay for the shares and even offered to pay $100,000 to Mapp during a meeting at a Dairy Queen in McKinney, Texas.

According to Paxton, Mapp then said, "I can't take your money. God doesn't want me to take your money." So Paxton took the shares as a gift.

The Lord's name invoked over BeltBusters, fries, and shakes at DQ as the dirty deal went down.  That's what I like about Texas.  More from the Houston Press:

Paxton's connection to Servergy has been one of the most intriguing details about the AG's current legal woes. Before his indictment on state securities fraud charges last summer, the SEC had already accused Servergy of lying to investors by falsely claiming its data servers had already been sold to huge companies, like Amazon and Freescale. The SEC claims Servergy even lied to investors about the very servers the company was selling, falsely claiming the machines required 80 percent less cooling, energy and space than others on the market.

According to a press release announcing federal charges against Paxton and others, the SEC claims former Servergy CEO William Mapp sold millions of dollars in company stock by exaggerating his product's merits. As for Amazon's supposed interest in the company's servers, the press release states: "In reality, an Amazon employee had merely contacted Servergy because he wanted to test the product in his free time for personal use."

And last, this.

Bill Miller, a longtime Austin consultant who has represented politicians under investigation and facing criminal charges, said he expects Monday's federal charges will only make Paxton "lock down for the long haul. He will not step down."

"The feds are straight-up business in cases like this," Miller said. "They don't care whether he's attorney general or not, and they're going to press ahead with their case – and you can expect him to fight it," he said. "In a case like this, once you're there – like he is now – he's going to tough it out to the end."

Paxton is relying on the same Lone Star justice that saw Rick Perry skate on his indictments, which is that the courts in Texas are overwhelmingly Republican-elected and thus deliver their own unique interpretations of the law.  Republican voters picked Paxton in the runoff two springs ago over Dan Branch -- who was endorsed by W Bush -- despite his having already confessed to his crimes, mostly because (and here I have to make an educated guess about the rationale formed in the mind of the typical Republican primary runoff voter) of Paxton's personal relationship with Ted Cruz Jesus Christ.

After all, if you're only accountable for your sins on the day you stand before your god, who is the GOP base to judge you?

The Weekly Wrangle

No members of the Texas Progressive Alliance can be found in the Panama Papers, but there are some salacious blog posts in this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff warns about the likelihood of North Carolina-style anti-equality legislation being put forth in next year's Legislature.

Libby Shaw at Daily Kos believes the GOP deserves its bigoted presidential frontrunners. 50+ years of an ugly dog whistling Southern Strategy reaps the worst among us. The Republican Party and its bigoted frontrunners. The devil made them do it.

Ken Paxton, under indictment for fraud, hired another theocrat on the public dime. CouldBeTrue at South Texas Chisme doesn't think much of his family values.

Socratic Gadfly takes a look at Bernie Sanders, presidential politician.

One of the topics later this week in the New York Democratic presidential debate will surely be qualifications to be president, writes PDiddie at Brains and Eggs.

jobsanger calls 'BernieBros' the TeaBaggers of the left, and Bay Area Houston goes after Sanders' "quote-unquote".

Egberto Willies wonders if the Dem primary is on the verge of implosion, like the GOP's.

Neil at All People Have Value said that while we discuss the anti-gay legislation in North Carolina and Mississippi, we should recall that Houston voters repealed our human rights ordinance just a few months ago. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

And the Lewisville Texan Journal eulogizes former mayor Gene Carey.

=================

And here are more posts from the Texas blogosphere.

In a truly horrible account, Trail Blazers points how badly 4-year-old Leiliana Wright needed Dallas CPS, and how it failed at every turn.

Grits for Breakfast updates on legislation in California and Texas regarding 'junk science writs'.

Prairie Weather is struck with a realization while reading Robert Kaiser's The Disaster of Richard Nixon: maybe this is how the Republicans can appear to get away with 'it'.

Idiotprogrammer has some e-publishing updates you might be interested in.

Ashton Woods at Strength in Numbers clears up a few misconceptions.

Better Texas Blog argues that sales tax holidays are not good for consumers.

The Lunch Tray gives a meal delivery service a try.

Paradise in Hell looks forward to being able to discriminate against numerous of his fellow citizens who have raised his holy ire.

The TSTA Blog bemoans the effect of ideology on public education.

The Makeshift Academic examines cost sharing and access to health care.

The Urban Edge defends the maligned urban freeway.

And Pages of Victory tells some stories about hitchhiking and train-jumping.

Sunday 'It's Up to You, New York" Funnies

"Trump shuffles campaign staff after stumbles"

On qualifications

The temperature inside the Democratic bubble increased overnight, with Twitter hashtags and their subsequent hijacking the order of the morning.  I think I'll dodge the catfight except to point out that Hillary and her people have always been just this progressive in their acidity, and she appears to have dragged Bernie down to her level at last, with this 'who's qualified' crapola.

Following a week where Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign refused to agree to a New York debate unless Bernie Sanders “toned down” his campaign, the Clinton campaign escalated its negative tone against Sanders, with one aide telling CNN their goal was to “disqualify” and “defeat him.”

One day after losing the Wisconsin primary by a sizable margin, Clinton appeared on “Morning Joe.” POLITICO’s Glenn Thrush gave Clinton a flattering interview. The New York Daily News published a cover story headlined, “Bernie’s Sandy Hook shame.” It accused Sanders of callously defending gun manufacturers against a lawsuit brought by relatives of the victims of the Sandy Hook school shooting.

As CNN reported, “It’s the latest chapter in Clinton’s approach to Sanders. She’s tried ignoring him, brushing him aside, gently dismissing his policies.”

“The Clinton campaign has refrained from going nuclear on Sanders, aides say, in large part to keep at least some goodwill alive in hopes of unifying the party at the end of the primary fight,” according to CNN. “No more, a top adviser [said]. The fight is on. Extending an olive branch to Sanders’ supporters ‘will come later.'

This is what her supporters refer to as her being "battle-tested", this fighting dirty like a Republican business.  It's one of the descriptions they file under 'qualified' (that she's withered the assaults from the right-wing and come out smiling).  The difference with Clinton is that all of her constant battling has left her weary and reactive in the most negative sense.  It has absolutely changed her for the worse over time.  Bearing scars from past scrapes has made her a much more bitter, vindictive candidate, one completely tone-deaf to her own hypocrisy.

To be redundant about it, I just don't think this long experience of fighting with everyone qualifies as a worthwhile presidential qualification.  And to be clear, I like my Democrats to be fighters, as a long list of archived posts here would show.  But in 2016, as in 2008, as her campaign loses enthusiasm and momentum, she and her subordinates aren't actually battling anything; they're flailing like a fish on the dock, trying to stick a spiny fin into somebody as they gasp for breath.

(T)he Clinton campaign and media outlets like CNN promote a false narrative that the campaign has not been in attack mode. Since September, she has used a network of surrogates and rapid response super PACs to push anti-Sanders talking points into the media.

Shadowproof has documented a pattern of dishonest attacks and rumors, particularly since January. The attacks include: Sanders supports Minutemen vigilantes and similar anti-immigrant hate groups, Sanders opposed bailing out auto workers, Sanders supports the NRA, Sanders wants to dismantle the Affordable Health Care Act, Sanders supported the indefinite detention of immigrants, and Sanders sees President Barack Obama as “weak” and will not support Obama’s legacy.

Voters have yet to see the full scope of what the Clinton campaign will sling at Sanders, but today’s interviews indicate she will return to her effort to paint Sanders as a gun-lover. She will focus on the fact that he is an independent senator, and, therefore, he is not a Democrat who will help the Democratic Party win in down-ballot elections in November. She also will attack him on regulating “too big to fail” banks and re-up her artful smear that Sanders has no respect for President Obama.

Let's take one example: the two candidates' perches on money in politics.  She has chosen the Rovian path -- attack your competitor's strength -- with her lambasting his responses in the now-infamous NYDN interview.

Hillary Clinton fashions herself as the ultimate general in a war against big-money politics.

“You're not going to find anybody more committed to aggressive campaign finance reform than me,” Clinton said following the New Hampshire primary.

But the Democratic presidential front-runner stands poised to bludgeon her general election opponent with Republicans’ favorite political superweapon: the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which earlier this decade launched a new era of unbridled fundraising.

Clinton’s massive campaign machine is built of the very stuff — super PACs, secret cash, unlimited contributions — she says she’ll attack upon winning the White House.

Indeed, a Center for Public Integrity investigation reveals that Clinton’s own election efforts are largely immune from her reformist platform. While Clinton rails against “unaccountable money" that is “corrupting our political system,” corporations, unions and nonprofits bankrolled by unknown donors have already poured millions of dollars into a network of Clinton-boosting political organizations. That’s on top of the tens of millions an elite club of Democratic megadonors, including billionaires George Soros and Haim Saban, have contributed.

She has to keep having $700,000 fundraisers with George Clooney headlining because Bernie Sanders gets $1.5 million dollars a day from people who can only give $27 on average.  I'm sure it's been humiliating for Candidate Clinton to have to keep beating the streets for more big donors even as Sanders outraises her with his legions of small ones.  This is to say nothing about the ethical standards of the people who are raising her money.  They're not all as squeaky clean as Clooney.

Her ability to pump this much jack -- specifically the craven panhandling for it -- has become a liability, one holding sway with Republicans as well as Democrats.

A Center for Public Integrity/Ipsos poll conducted in late February indicates many potential general election voters are likewise concerned about how serious Clinton is about remaking the nation’s campaign system —a monumental challenge under any circumstance, but a goal supported by the vast majority of Americans.

Half of all poll respondents overall — and nearly four in 10 self-identified Democrats — said Clinton is relying on super PACs and big money too much. That compares to 18 percent overall who said Clinton is relying on them the “right amount” and 5 percent who said “too little.”

And when asked, “If elected president, which of the following would do the most to reform the campaign finance system and make it less reliant on big money?” Clinton trailed both Sanders and Trump among respondents.

Her deeds don't match her words.  She has no credibility on the issue.

Citizens United reformer or no, she's very unlikely to be getting things done, progressively or not-so-much, with a Congress gone putrid after eight years of obstructing Obama.  (Sanders will have this same problem as well, of course.)  Supreme Court justice nominees with a freshly-Democratic Senate in 2017 should fare better, but climate initiatives that include something as innocuous as a BDS effort are a non-starter in a Clinton II Administration, and forget about $15/hour minimum wage jobs and an economy for the working class and not the investor/donor class.

As with our government-approved, private sector profit-motivated healthcare insurance, we're all just going to have to "keep shopping" until we find something we can get by with.  If the definition of 'qualified' includes the public duty of First Lady as her longest term of experience -- neither an elected nor appointed position -- yet you wish to have that experience considered only when it suits you and not when it doesn't, then we might just have to agree to disagree.