Post EV, pre-ED snips

-- Paying to play in the GOP primary.

This election season, some prominent Republicans are calling foul on the political "slate mailers" that show up in your mailbox. Critics say the mailed advertisements -- which endorse a slate (or list) of candidates -- are textbook examples of "pay for play" politics.

Three well-known Houston Republicans -- Steve Hotze, Terry Lowry and Gary Polland -- publish newsletter/mailers that have an outsized influence on election returns. But do the endorsements involve a shakedown? In the case of the Lowry and Polland newsletters, a candidate seeking an "endorsement" usually purchases a pricey advertisement that far exceeds the cost of a mailer. Hotze's newsletter doesn't carry ads, but critics claim that candidates must employ his friend, political consultant Allen Blakemore, to win an endorsement.

Recently, Houston attorney Ed Hubbard set off a firestorm when he wrote on the political blog Big Jolly Politics that "most voters don't understand that (the mailers) are not official evaluations from the local party, but instead, are paid-for propaganda from one person or organization intended to influence the outcome of the primary." Hubbard suggested that a better system would be a party-sponsored candidate guide, much like the League of Women Voters.

"Candidates are victimized by this," said Hubbard. 

First, click on the names with links above, which will take you to the HouChron's archive of stories about the high-dollar whores in the Harris County Republican Party. Second, the link to Ed Hubbard writing on BJ has been removed, but the folks at Breitbart.com have the excerpt, and even they are embarrassed for the locals.

How low must you go to be a Republican scorned by the heirs to Andrew Breitbart's legacy? Lower than a rattlesnake's anus in a wagon rut, that's how low.

I just don't know who to feel sorrier for, the poor victimized GOP candidates or the sheep carrying the slate cards to the poll with them. To commemorate Ralph Waldo Emerson on the occasion of his 209th birthday, let's revisit his words on groupthink:

“A sect or party is an elegant incognito devised to save a man from the vexation of thinking.”

-- Alas, more political junk mail, this time from Democrats...

The Harris County District Attorney’s Office is investigating how political mailers from at least one candidate running for Precinct 1 constable were sent to the home addresses of current deputies employed by that precinct.

Some law enforcement information, including the home addresses of officers, is exempted from the Texas Public Information Act.

Kyle Johnston, who is handling mail for the Alan Rosen campaign, said he was subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury this week, but that his appearance was then delayed. Johnston said investigators showed him two hand-addressed envelopes containing Rosen political mailers and was asked whether he knew anything about them.

When Johnston asked what was wrong with the mailers, he said the investigators told him, “It’s who they went to and how they went about getting that list.”

Johnston said he designed the mailers as part of his work with the campaign, but did not mail the letters in question. He said he suspects the inquiry may be politically motivated and an effort to hamper Rosen.

“I do the bulk mail. I don’t do first-class stamps and hand-written envelopes,” Johnston said. “If (deputies) are getting my mail it’s because they’re a voter that lives in Precinct 1. There’s nothing in my databases that says ‘law enforcement,’ nor was I provided a list of law enforcement officers or anything like that.”

If I never have to blog another fucking word about mailers, life will be simply grand.

You realize we could eliminate many of these problems by limiting campaign spending, don't you?

-- Finally, a word about turnout in the Harris County primary elections: dismal.

Possibly spurred by a hotly contested U.S. Senate race and a presumed-but-not-final presidential candidate, twice as many Republicans showed up to vote in person - 60,347 - compared with 30,142 Democrats.

Republicans also greatly outpaced Democrats in the number of mail-in ballots requested and returned. 

Well, I suppose the Crips can hope that many of their voters crossed over to cast ballots for Ron Paul and Craig James in the Bloods primary.

-- State conventions are happening all across Texas weekend after next. The Democrats are coming together here in Houston, the Greens are assembling outside San Antonio near Bandera (they will be hosting David Cobb's Move to Amend roadshow on Friday June 8), and the Republicans and Libertarians are both meeting in Fort Worth. All that should make for lots of fun political headlines.

Happy Memorial Day weekend and don't forget the reason why we're off on Monday.

Update: Oh yeah, this is kind of important.

WASHINGTON – The Justice Department announced today that it will monitor primary elections on May 29, 2012, in Fort Bend, Harris and Jefferson Counties in Texas, to ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and other federal voting rights statutes.  [...]

Federal observers will be assigned to monitor polling place activities in Fort Bend and Jefferson Counties based on the attorney general’s certification.  In addition, Fort Bend is subject to a court order entered in 2009, which requires the jurisdiction to comply with the minority language and assistor of choice requirements of the Voting Rights Act, as well as the requirements of the Help America Vote Act.  The observers will watch and record activities during voting hours at polling locations in these counties, and Civil Rights Division attorneys will coordinate the federal activities and maintain contact with local election officials.

In addition, Justice Department personnel will monitor polling place activities in Harris County.  A Civil Rights Division attorney will coordinate federal activities and maintain contact with local election officials.

"Squiers endorsed by none of the three Democrats who lost already to Culberson"

Thank goodness for small favors. From the Cargas campaign e-mail earlier today:

In the upcoming May 29 Democratic primary all three prior Democratic candidates for Congressional District 7 have endorsed James Cargas, a Houston public servant, as the person who can defeat the incumbent congressman and serve in Congress with honor and distinction.  John Martinez, who ran in 2004, Jim Henley, who ran in 2006, and Michael Skelly, who ran in 2008, have all thrown their support behind James Cargas. 

I feel certain that the Cargas campaign simply forgot to note that Lissa Squiers ran as a write-in candidate for Congressional District 7 in 2010, because no Democrat dared to relive the woes of Martinez, Henley, and Skelly. Thus no one filed.

As the demographics and views of Harris County change, each democratic (sic) candidate earned more than the person before.  Martinez received 33.3%, Henley received 38.5%, Skelly received 42.3%, and, if a Democrat had run in 2010, that person would likely have received 46.8%.

Uh, no. No, that mythical Democrat wouldn't have come close to 46.8%. Because 2010 was a wipeout for Democrats, and most of those who ran in Harris County and across the state of Texas got well under 40%. But let's not spoil the fantasy.

If the same trend continues, Cargas will cross the winning threshold and earn 51.3% of the vote. It’s time for Congressional District 7 to turn blue, and James Cargas is the person who will make it happen. 

You can wake up now.

James Cargas isn't likely to pour millions of his own money into a Congressional race like Skelly did, nor does he have the warmth and personal appeal of Jim Henley -- a man whom I respect a great deal, but is simply mistaken this time around. Mr. Martinez is provided here as the third of the three-for because he has a Latino surname. Thus the continuation of the Cargas campaign as a 'stealth Latino' goes on, despite the campaign e-mail's disclosure in the very last line...

Cargas and his wife, Dr. Dorina Papageorgiou, are members of Annunciation Greek Orthodox Cathedral.

To be fair, James Cargas is probably a very fine gentleman. I don't know him, haven't met him. I've heard far more about him from others than I ever wanted to know from people who do, and most of it is as far from the definition of 'public servant' as it can be. Recall this data from one of my very first posts on the topic:

In January of 2007, Illumina Energy (the new name of PowerSol) un-registered James Cargas as a power marketer and replaced him with Hector Carreno. The contact addresses and phone numbers remained the same, although the email address changed. Why swap out Cargas? Because it was time for him to go to work for the city, advising them on who to buy power from. Let’s see, a power broker hires you for awhile, then sends you off to advise city hall on buying what he sells. How convenient!

[...]

How did Cargas get linked to Carreno this way? We have to roll back the calendar to introduce a pivotal player to the story; Emil Pena. Pena is a lifelong lobbyist; he’s good at it and has an impressive list of clients. He has lobbied for beer, cigarette, oil, and gas companies. But he made his name in the energy arena. He participated in the energy regulator/lobbyist revolving door, while also funneling money from energy companies to candidates they’d like to buy. This was noted by Texans for Public Justice in their report on PACs active in the 2000 election cycle, in a sidebar titled Stealth PAC.

James Cargas, Hector Carreno, Emile Pena. Google them for yourself if you think I'm being biased.

Since 2008, James Cargas has worked for the City of Houston as their energy advisor. However, he continues to use advocacy groups and local clubs to push his insider agenda.

Cargas is a past Deputy Director of the North American Energy Standards Board, and is still a member. At a recent meeting, Emil Pena presented the idea that “system safety” might apply to shale gas, and explained how it could be implemented quickly. Now, as a lobbyist for oil companies, this advice probably seems quite reasonable to Pena: profits first, safety later … as PR damage control, maybe? For his part, Cargas proudly claims his involvement in NAESB, and seems perfectly content with their worldview. This is far from the “public service” attitude I expect in a city employee!

Cargas is also on the Board of the Energy Bar Association, where he basically says “alternative energy will not happen in Texas, due to existing regulations”. (.pdf, page 3) One might interpret this as “don’t bother trying to compete with my partners; we’ve got the market sewed up.” Again, not the attitude I would hope for from someone advising the city on energy purchases, but all I could expect from an energy trading insider.

===

James Cargas deserves to lumped with his partners, Carreno and Pena: fossil fuel fans, shills for Big Oil & Gas, profiting off pushing their poisonous products, pinching OUR pennies for their pockets. No law against any of that … this is America, after all. But is this who we want making the law of the land, our land, our water, our air? No! Cargas is undeserving of our respect, much less a Democrat’s endorsement or vote.

If you think we need another energy lobbyist and attorney representing us in Washington, then you've got your man. If you would rather support a conservative Democrat than an actual one, you've a better choice: Phillip Andrews. I've met Phillip twice, both times at Sean Hubbard events, and dined with him at one of those. From what I can tell he represents an improvement over Cargas (albeit barely).

But if you want to vote for a Democrat who represents the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party, who will represent the people and not the powerful, who owes nothing to any special interests, AND who can defeat John Culberson without pie-in-the-sky projections, then your choice is Lissa Squiers.

That's as plain and simple as I can make it.

Update: In another indication that the Cargas campaign either doesn't understand much about percentages, or is engaging in a fudge-up with the numbers that would make the people who valued Facebook at 38 envious, yet another e-mail is circulating which purports to divine the results of a straw poll -- taken over the weekend among 78 people who attended the HCDP Club Carnival -- as indicating Cargas has "overwhelming" support.

I'm starting to be embarrassed for them.

Texas judge brags in campaign mailers about stopping EPA

Bloomberg:

With aspects of the case still pending in his courtroom, Judge Trey Loftin sent fliers to voters saying he forced the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to back down.

Loftin, who is campaigning to keep his state judgeship in a county west of Dallas, also sent out materials with the image of talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who credited the judge’s ruling in favor of driller Range Resources Corp., based in Fort Worth, Texas, for getting the EPA to reverse course.

(Image from Parker County Blog, an avid supporter of the judge)

What Loftin might be suggesting here -- besides a separate case that EPA settled with Range in March -- is the resignation of Dr. Al Armendariz from his post as director of EPA's South Central region just last month. While the mail piece doesn't quite go that far, reported eyewitness accounts have the judge commenting in campaign appearances that his court decisions resulted in Armendariz's firing.

Except of course that Armendariz wasn't fired. Continuing from the Bloomberg article, which quotes the following text right off the back of Loftin's mailer:

“The EPA, using falsified evidence provided by a liberal activist environmental consultant, accused and fined a local gas driller of contaminating wells,” according to a campaign flier for Loftin’s campaign. President Barack “Obama’s EPA backed down only after Judge Trey Loftin ruled that the evidence was ‘deceptive.’”

At least the law is fairly clear.

The Texas code of judicial conduct prohibits judges from commenting on pending or impending cases "in a manner which suggests to a reasonable person the judge’s probable decision."

That would be Canon 3 B .10 of the Code.

"A judge shall abstain from public comment about a pending or impending proceeding which may come before the judge's court in a manner which suggests to a reasonable person the judge's probable decision on any particular case."

Let's read more reactions to this (apparent) ethical breach.

“The problem of having judges run for office is that sometimes they cross a line in trying to get elected,” James Alfini, a professor of law at South Texas College of Law in Houston and co-author of a book on judicial ethics, said in an interview. “In this case, I think he crossed a line.”

[...]

Even without specific references, the mailer may cause a reasonable person to think Loftin was biased in the case, said Keith Swisher, a professor of law at the Phoenix School of Law and expert on judicial ethics. “The fact that a specific name wasn’t used doesn’t provide” an out, Swisher said in an interview. ...

Judge Loftin's primary challenger delicately weighed in as well.

“I don’t think a judge should ever comment about a case pending in his court,” Craig Towson, Loftin’s opponent in the Republican primary on May 29, said in an interview. “One could feel slighted if you have a judge commenting on the case.”

A complaint will have to be filed with the state commission on judicial conduct for any action to proceed further. So we'll wait and see what happens.

Update: WFAA in the Metroplex reports that Parker County Sheriff Larry Fowler, who was quoted in a separate mailing as endorsing Loftin, called the county's residents with a recording that stated he in fact did not endorse the judge, and furthermore did not authorize the use of his name or photo in the mistaken mailout.

(Whatever one may think of Judge Loftin's actions in this regard, it appears that Sheriff Fowler is pretty mad about the endorsement that wasn't. Robo-calling all the landlines in the county -- even an exurban one like Parker -- isn't cheap.)

No chance Ron Paul endorses Gary Johnson

The Independent Political Report, via Reason:

Ron Paul campaign manager/spokesman/family member Jesse Benton told reporters during a phone conference May 15 that there would be no chance of any endorsement of Libertarian Presidential candidate Gary Johnson by Ron Paul. Benton said that Ron Paul endorsing Republican presumptive nominee Mitt Romney was not out of the question. 

Here's the rationale.

Ron Paul ran as a Libertarian for President in 1988, but has served separate stints as a Republican in Congress before and since, and has run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 and 2012. His son Rand Paul is a freshman US Senator from Kentucky and is considered by many to be a future presidential aspirant as early as 2016; other Paul family members are also rumored to have a possible future in politics. 

And here's some of the recent history. I'm emphasizing the names of the players in bold.

Subsequent to his return to Congress as a Republican, Ron Paul has continued his involvement with alternative political parties to some extent, speaking at a number of their events and endorsing a number of their candidates. [...]

In 2008, former Republican Congressman Bob Barr, a Libertarian National Committeeman in 2006-8 who had also supported (2004 Libertarian presidential nominee Michael) Badnarik, ran as the Libertarian presidential candidate and famously earned the Paul campaign’s ire by first agreeing to, then at the last minute refusing to participate in a joint press conference with Dr. Paul, Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin, Ralph Nader (who was running as an independent, as he had in 2004, and ran as a Green in 2000 and 1996), and Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney. The press conference was planned as a way to announce agreement between these candidates and Dr. Paul on several key issues, and in turn Paul was to suggest that voters consider these four candidates as better alternatives than Obama and McCain without making a specific endorsement. After Barr, who was on the premises, refused to appear with the group on stage and instead offered Ron Paul to become a substitute VP candidate for the Libertarians, Paul responded by endorsing Baldwin. 

Barr backed Gingrich earlier this year but has recently endorsed Romney.

This gives every indication that the Kook Caucus is slowly coming together behind Mitt -- though I believe Tom Tancredo is still a holdout --  even as the relatively sane conservatives offer a legitimate third option in Gary Johnson and Jim Gray, whose nominations as Libertarian Party standard-bearers for 2012 were chronicled here.

Charles Kuffner doesn't agree -- and maybe it's just me who is more aware of third-party efforts while most everybody else remains not -- but I believe the minor parties in Texas are collectively going to exceed much more than their traditional 1-2% of the statewide vote. I think it could be as much as 5% for all of them combined, perhaps a bit more. We'll see.

The traditional media discovers Sean Hubbard

This is a good thing.

The young Democrat likes to remind audiences that Joe Biden was 29 when he was elected to the U.S. Senate from Delaware, and like the current vice president, Hubbard is articulate, engaging and well-versed on the issues. During a Houston debate a couple of weeks ago, he did not hesitate to engage the presumptive GOP front-runner, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, who is more than three decades older and who has nearly 15 years more experience in office. Hubbard won the KUHF News live blog poll immediately following the debate.

In a state where a Democrat has not won statewide office since 1994, Hubbard's chance of taking the oath of office in Washington next January is even less likely than the Astos sweeping this fall's World Series. And, yet, his quixotic candidacy may offer a boost to his beleaguered party. Along with Julian Castro, the vastly more experienced mayor of San Antonio, Hubbard could be the party's face of the future.

Influential Democratic consultant Harold Cook surprised - and irritated - some of the party faithful recently by making just that point. On his "Letters from Texas" blog, Cook noted that Hubbard "would be the kind of Democratic nominee more capable of attracting new folks to the Democratic column."

Here is about ten minutes' worth of Hubbard doing some Q&A in Sherman recently.



This is it, Texas Democrats. A moment of truth, clarity, peace love and understanding.

Sean Hubbard is your man. THE man. If you fall back on a tired old Blue Dog to run against whatever POS the Republicans nominate, you won't crack 40%.

The party has fallen and it can't get up... for nearly twenty years now. And Paul Sadler can't lift a thing, bless his heart. Good man, poor timing.

Get Hubbard on the ballot and you will begin to see the peeping dawn of a renaissance, or keep doing the same thing over and over again, expecting better results.

Your choice.

Update: As usual, Neil and I agree right across the board.

For Judge Steven Kirkland and Lane Lewis

Despite not being eligible to vote in the Democratic Party's primary this year -- I was elected an alternate delegate in the spring to the Texas Green Party's state convention -- there are, as I have said before, proud progressive Democrats whom I do heartily support and advance for election in November. Two of these are Judge Steven Kirkland to the Harris County bench, and Lane Lewis as chair of the HCDP. Michelle Risher at OutSmart magazine assembles all the moving pieces of the puzzle to reveal the picture. Emphasis is mine.

(Bethel) Nathan, who has worked for the Republican National Committee, and (Justin) Jordan, who is Republican Precinct 76 Chair, are both African-American, as is Kirkland’s ostensibly Democratic challenger, Elaine Palmer. Palmer has been heavily funded by (attorney George) Fleming and three out-of-state personal injury lawyers who also litigate Fen Phen claims. These out-of-state attorneys have no readily discernible ties to Fleming, Palmer, or the Houston legal community, but have nevertheless contributed $30,000 to Palmer’s campaign out of the goodness of their hearts.

Fleming and his firm contributed a total of $35,000, and his self-funded PAC, Texans for Good Leaders, added another $23,000. Throw in the $2,000 from “Texas Hammer” Jim Adler, $5,000 from Cliff Roberts, and the Holman Law Firm’s attempted initial contribution of $35,000—$30,000 of which had to be returned along with another $2,000 from Fleming—and a cynic might infer they were trying to buy themselves a judge. The most mysterious contribution of all, though, was $5,000 from Republican Tea Party operative Paul Kubosh, who also funded Tea Party councilwoman Helena Brown.

Kubosh is also a major source of funds for Keryl Douglas, who is running against openly gay Lane Lewis for the Harris County Democratic Party (HCDP) Chair. Kubosh has of late been meddling in the affairs of the Harris County Democratic Party even though he is a lifelong Republican whose brothers, Michael and Randy, are the former Harris County Republican Party Finance Committee Chairman and the Precinct 2 Chair and Republican Hispanic Citizens in Action treasurer, respectively.

Miya Shay has more on the latest smear of Kirkland appearing on your radio.

Any questions before the exam, class? The test is open-book and it's pass/fail, and it's going on right now at early voting locations across Harris County until Friday. It will then resume at your precinct's poll for one day only, Tuesday May 29, and be graded shortly after 7 pm.

Good luck.

Previous posts:

That old black magic (4/29/12)

Still on the case of the mysterious rift (4/19/12)

Harris County Democrats' rift between blacks, gays boils over (4/15/12)

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance reminds you that early voting for the 2012 primaries continues through Friday as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff sincerely hopes there's an uprising among parents and educators over the way public education was treated last session, but he's still waiting for the campaign rhetoric to match the reporting about it.  

BossKitty at TruthHugger was moved by an award-winning documentary and saw the connection to the current state of mental health in Texas and everywhere else. Here are Lessons of the Weeping Camel for Texas.  

BlueBloggin had not anticipated how long America would engage in war. Enough men and women have been exposed to combat, cruelty and death to populate a small country. Americans must be prepared for When They Come Home – Critical Update.

There aren't many Democrats earning the endorsement of PDiddie at Brains and Eggs, but the most important one of the 2012 primary cycle in Harris County is Lissa Squiers for Congress. And Sean Hubbard for US Senate. Oh, and Rachel Van Os for state party chair (election to be held at the state convention in Houston in June). And maybe a few more coming in the week before Election Day.

This week in GOP infighting: should Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst win his bid for the US Senate, picking his replacement will be a proxy war between Rick Perry and Joe Straus. WCNews at Eye On Williamson has the rest of the story in The Tie-Breaker.

Libby Shaw puts Repug redistricting in prospective in her latest posting: The Gerrymander Cowards. Check it out at TexasKaos.

Neil at Texas Liberal posted a picture of a cigarette machine that he saw last week in Houston. If you can imagine, the cigarettes cost $10 a pack in this machine.

Justin at Asian American Action Fund Blog strongly supports Gene Wu in the race to succeed Scott Hochberg in HD-137.  

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme notes that Texas is #1 -- in workplace discrimination complaints.

Even Meaner Funnies

"I have no issue with paying taxes and whatever needs to be done for my country to grow. I believe very firmly that my ability to sit here — I'm a black man who didn't go to college, yet I get to travel around the world and sell my movies, and I believe very firmly that America is the only place on Earth that I could exist," Smith said. "So I will pay anything that I need to pay to keep my country growing."

That's when the interviewer mentioned that France could have a 75 percent tax rate on income over one million Euros.

 "Seventy-five?" ("Men in Black" actor Will) Smith gasped. "Yeah, that's different, that's different. Yeah, 75. Well, you know, God bless America."

Click on this one for the larger, more readable version. It's worth it.

Defriending Facebook

I spent much of the past couple of weeks posting status updates to my Facebook timeline castigating the social network's initial public stock offering, which came down Friday. Here's a sample:

-- Four ways the IPO will change Facebook forever: 1. More ads. 2. Ads on your mobile. 3. Less privacy. 4. More FB-generated content.

-- FB testing a feature that charges you to send messages to your friends: It's called 'Highlight' and it's currently live in New Zealand. See, not everyone sees all your posts; just the ones that FB's algorithm decides to publish in their -- not yours, theirs -- feed. So you can pay extra to make sure everyone sees a specific post. Maybe.

Or you can just send them a free e-mail.

Here's more on why using FB is soon going to be costing you money.

-- Facebook changes their privacy policy yet again. Hint: it's not to provide you more privacy, or even more control over what little privacy you still have.

-- Nine ways criminals use Facebook.

-- Deleting a FB app doesn't delete your data from their system. This is probably a good time to be reminded that everything you upload to FB -- and I mean everything-- becomes their property. Not yours. Theirs.

-- FB users 'like' and 'share' too much, according to Consumer Reports. And it's not just college kids on spring break intoxicated and partially nude. That post you liked about diabetes? Your insurer is able to purchase that data from FB, and they probably aren't going to do so to help you manage yours.

-- So given all that, would you be surprised that a majority of its users don't trust Facebook?

More than 40 percent of American adults log in to the site — to share news, personal observations, photos and more — at least once a week. In all, some 900 million people around the world are users. But many of them don’t have a very high opinion of Facebook or trust it to keep their information private.

-- Or would you be more surprised that despite that, Facebookers aren't quitting on them?

Those links are what I posted to FB just from last week alone. Truth to tell, I wanted to see if it was possible to get FB to defriend me on the basis of this criticism. Turns out the answer is no, so far at least.

But as you might imagine, this bevy of bad news gave some negative momentum to Friday's initial public offering.

-- 5 reasons not to 'like' FB's IPO.

-- Warren Buffet stayed far away.

-- The AP's finance writer said just don't do it.

-- There are some other dirty little secrets.

-- HuffPo established the Tech Bubble Death Watch in honor of Facebook's IPO.

-- At $38 per share, the stock was valued at over 100 times earnings. That compares with Apple's 14 times, and  Google's 19 times. Thus the headlines Friday became 'overvalued' and 'under-demanded'. And in case you needed a refresher course on the 'level playing field' for small investors...

It's as if no one at Facebook ever heard of MySpace.

Yes, FB is limping into Monday, where the share price could dip below Friday's closing of $38.63, and with a summer bear market rearing its head. I suppose that last is good news if you're a contrarian.

I would be interested to know how my posts about Facebook and their myriad of fuck-ups affected the FB algorithm for what my interests are. I doubt whether Markie Z will be sharing that with me. Besides he'll be busy honeymooning for a few weeks.

Wonder if the newlyweds are scouting domiciles in Singapore?

Update: Oh, there were some techno-difficulties at the NASDAQ on Friday morning, providing a convenient scapegoat for the lack of momentum.

Despite hours of testing, Nasdaq failed to detect a problem with the way the trading system processed order cancellations. Greifeld said Nasdaq is "humbly embarrassed" about the technical glitch, and plans to redesign its IPO systems. He added that Nasdaq will ask the Securities and Exchange Commission to approve its plan to repay investors who were hurt by the computer error. 

But read a little further and you find this.

On Friday lead underwriter Morgan Stanley stepped in to keep the stock from falling below its $38 IPO price, and at the end of the day Facebook was up only 0.6 percent. Sources say the bank won't continue propping up the shares this week. There may also be more fallout from the Nasdaq glitch. Rick Meckler, president of investment firm LibertyView Capital Management told Reuters: "I don't know if people stepped away at some point because they just couldn't execute in a clear manner, and that Monday we will have some follow through of people that weren't executed and still need to sell."

More Mean Funnies

"Mitt Romney once lost $2 billion. Then he found it in another pair of pants."

-- David Letterman

"President Obama and Mitt Romney both gave commencement speeches over the last few days. Obama was like: 'You can be whatever you want to be.' Romney was like: 'I can be whatever you want me to be.'"

-- Jimmy Fallon

"I'm actually – I'm not familiar with precisely, exactly what I said. But I stand by what I said, whatever it was. And with regards to – I'll go back and take a look at what was said there."

Until next week, when I'll say whatever I think you want to hear and then I'll stand by that until I have to stand by something else I said.

-- Me

Jamie Dimon, still Master of the Universe

Perhaps he has added 'Master of the Putzes' to his many titles and professional distinctions. Then again, maybe it's the customers and shareholders of JPMorgan Chase that are the larger schmucks.

It’s official. Just as he was voted in for a second term as Class A New York Fed director in February 2010, Jamie Dimon was reelected chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase yesterday afternoon. He got to keep his $23 million pay package, too. All without breaking a sweat.

This means that at each of three of the top five bank-holding companies dominating U.S. derivatives exposure, loans, assets, and deposits, the same man holds the chairman and CEO positions—at Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, and JPM Chase.  (Bank of America and Citigroup separated those roles.). If the stock buckles under another “discovery,” shareholders can take comfort in blaming themselves, not Jamie Dimon.

[...]

At the shareholders meeting there was no mention of the details behind the “mistake” that cost the bank $2 billion, just that it “should never have happened.” (The Titanic shouldn’t have sunk either.) Most shareholders had already voted before the loss became public anyway. Ultimately, 91 percent of them approved Dimon’s pay, and 60 percent voted for him to retain both executive positions. This makes the timing of the loss announcement, if not suspicious, then, self-serving -- or self-inflicted.

If you haven't watched the HBO docu-drama Too Big to Fail, (based on the book by Andrew Sorkin), I heartily recommend doing so at your earliest opportunity. Here's the trailer:

Bill Pullman -- the President of the United States in Independence Day -- plays the far-more-MVP Dimon in this flick. It's both comical and pathetic to watch the once (Hank Paulson, played by William Hurt) and future (Tim Geithner, played by Billy Crudup) Secretaries of the Treasury kowtow, grovel, and prostrate themselves before Dimon.

One of the movie's best lines comes after Geithner (Crudup) describes a conversation with Dimon (Pullman): "I told him we need his help. And I asked him very politely not to [expletive] with us today."

Art imitates life imitating art. In real life, Geithner avoids any harsh language in suggesting, as politely as possible, that Dimon may want to reconsider his service on the same regulatory body that is responsible for policing his even-bigger-now-than-it-was-then TBTF bank.

No public response yet from the MotU. But I bet I can guess what the private one was: something along the lines of "STFU, MoFo".

The nicest thing that can be said about Jamie Dimon is that he may not be as evil as Mark Zuckerberg -- who got married yesterday following the failure of his company's IPO (not for him and a few others, but for everybody else). Congratulations, Mark and Priscilla. Y'all aren't moving to Singapore too, are ya?

Update: In quite possibly the worst conclusion ever leapt to in all of recorded history, Loren Steffy, business writer for the Houston Chronicle, argues that Chase's $2 billion dollar derivatives trading loss is why Elizabeth Warren should not be running for the US Senate.

Sunday 'We Mean Business' Funnies

Emphasis on 'mean' (adj).

Lissa Squiers for Congress

Personally speaking, this is the most important race in Harris County.

I have said this a time or two before, but it bears repeating as the early voting period gets started: there are three people running in the Democratic primary for Congressional District 7 for the right to square off against John "Doesn't Keep His Word" Culberson in November. One of the two men is an oil and gas attorney with Clinton administration connections, but whose campaign is managed and funded by Republicans and Republican interests (where have we heard of that elsewhere?). One of the more odious things this man's campaign has undertaken is to revisit local Democratic clubs and organizations to persuade them that their co-endorsement of his candidacy and one of his challengers should be revoted in his favor.

What's even worse is that he has occasionally succeeded in this venal tactic.

The other gentleman runs a global defense/security company (remember Blackwater? Like that). Until recently his website proclaimed in large letters at the top "Blue Dog Democrat".

The third person is Lissa Squiers, who has spent all of her time for the past several years engaging the community on the part of childhood education, womens' rights, gay rights, ... you name it. (Well, she names it all in her statement below.)

She has lived Democratic causes and fought Democratic battles while the two men made money and hired expensive consultants -- again, some of them Republican -- and decided to run for office.

Once again my friend Neil and I see eye-to-eye on this choice. Here is Lissa's appeal to the Democrats of CD-07, asking for your vote.

As a candidate for political office I meet a lot of people.  Every one of these people has the same basic needs, and underneath everything else, they are saying they want a good life for themselves and their children.   Every family benefits when people are healthy and educated.  Every community benefits when they have good roads and bridges and schools and first responders.  Every business benefits when people and families and communities are strong.  No one ever says they don’t want these things.

The next logical step is where we differ:  what’s good for people is what’s good for business.   That’s what I believe and that’s what liberal Democrats believe.  Centrists and ‘moderates’ in both parties believe the opposite.  They say that what’s good for business is what’s good for people.  Both of my opponents for Congressional District 7 have made a lifetime and a business out of this opposite approach.  But the economy and Occupy Wall Street and current reality for the majority of Americans shows us this doesn’t work – catering to corporations has given us nothing but a few scraps of their leftover lunch and a big mess to clean up.


I believe in equality:  Voting equality.  Women’s equality.  Wage equality.  Education equality.   Social equality.  Marriage equality.  Religious equality.   Racial equality.  Healthcare equality.  These things are our God-given, inalienable rights.   If I am honored with the opportunity to represent Congressional District 7 in Washington, my votes and acts and policies will come from these beliefs.   These things are good for people and good for communities.  Healthy people and healthy communities create and support healthy businesses and a healthy American economy.

My work in the community in education, juvenile justice, religious and voting rights, women’s rights and union rights are extensive and come from the heart.  As a Texan and Houstonian, my family’s history and future are here.  I hope you will vote in the upcoming Democratic primary to choose candidates that will support the equality and rights that are necessary to let Americans create the American Dream that we are all capable of.  I would be honored to receive your vote for Congressional District 7.  As a woman, as a mother, as a Texan, I know that 2012 is the year for the changes we need to take America forward.  And as a Democrat, I know that 2012 is the year that we make better lives for all, not just the privileged few.

So the choice is clear. And that holds true even if you're a Republican or a Blue Dog (not that there's a dime's worth of difference, mind you).

The Weekly Early Voting Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance reminds everyone that early voting has begun as it brings you this week's blog roundup.

Off the Kuff finished his interview tour of Texas with a conversation with Domingo Garcia in CD33.
  
BossKitty at TruthHugger will not weigh in, whether or not the truth was actually served in court, when a black woman fired a warning shot into a wall. Firing a gun in irresponsible ways is natural in Texas. But Florida has contradictory laws that allow courts to pick and choose who gets punished for similar irresponsible behavior. You can decide for yourself how good a job of it they do.

Rick Perry came to Williamson County this week and endorsed John Bradley -- the man who whitewashed the investigation into whether the state of Texas executed an innocent man -- for District Attorney. WCNews at Eye On Williamson has the rest of the story: Birds of a feather.

It was a good week to be gay if you were Barack Obama and John Carona, and a bad week to be gay if you were Mitt Romney and Dan Patrick. And if you think that's confusing, wait until you read what PDiddie at Brains and Eggs said about Greg Abbott's rose petals and Joe Arpaio's pink panties.  

Lewisville Texan Journal looks at the Republican candidate for HD 106 Pat Fallon's residence, and addresses whether he committed voter fraud by voting from an address where he apparently did not live.

At TexasKaos, lightseeker asks: Could the education cuts be the beginning of the end for Texas Republicans? Check out the details.

Neil at Texas Liberal endorsed Sean Hubbard in the Democratic primary for the open U.S. Senate seat.

Sunday Not so Gay Funnies

DOJ moves on Arpaio

I'd like to see this sadist in pink panties and living in a tent, right alongside those he has done similarly. But that would be as cruel and unusual as he is, so I'll settle for arrested, charged, held without bail, and quickly tried, convicted, and incarcerated. For a long, long time. Hopefully the remainder of his miserable life.

A few days after the “Toughest Sheriff in America” oversaw his 60th Latino-harassing raid in the Phoenix area, the Obama administration’s top civil-rights lawyer flew to Phoenix and slapped Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his office with a monumental civil-rights tort alleging rampant constitutional abuses, including widespread racial profiling of Latinos. The suit also claims the sheriff violated the civil rights of his critics by “illegal retaliation” that included baseless lawsuits and meritless administrative actions.

Abuses? What abuses?

In one case, the suit says, a five-months’ pregnant American citizen was stopped as she pulled into her driveway. Officers ordered her to sit on the hood of her car. She refused. They slammed her into the car three times—fetus-side first. Next, they placed the woman in a patrol car without air conditioning for half an hour. She was released and cited with failure to provide identification. Later, the charge was changed to “failure to provide proof of insurance.”

In another case, deputies trailed a U.S. citizen to her home, then knocked her to the ground, kneed her in the back and handcuffed her when she tried to run into her house, the suit alleges. They charged her with disturbing the peace. (A judge dismissed the charge.)

In the jails, some Latinos were placed in solitary confinement because they didn’t speak English, the lawsuit says. On some streets, Latinos were nine times more likely to be stopped than non-Latinos. And sheriff’s officials detained dozens of Latinos because “probable cause” included smelling of “strong body odor” or appearing nervous and avoiding eye contact, the lawsuit says.

What do you mean only the first two above make the top ten?

1. Forcing Women To Sleep In Their Own Menstrual Blood: In Arpaio’s jails, “female Latina LEP prisoners have been denied basic sanitary items. In some instances, female Latina LEP prisoners have been forced to remain with sheets or pants soiled from menstruation because of MCSO’s failure to ensure that detention officers provide language assistance in such circumstances.” [...]

5. Criminalizing Living Next To The Wrong People: “[D]uring a raid of a house suspected of containing human smugglers and their victims . . . officers went to an adjacent house, which was occupied by a Latino family. The officers entered the adjacent house and searched it, without a warrant and without the residents’ knowing consent. Although they found no evidence of criminal activity, after the search was over, the officers zip-tied the residents, a Latino man, a legal permanent resident of the United States, and his 12-year-old Latino son, a citizen of the United States, and required them to sit on the sidewalk for more than one hour, along with approximately 10 persons who had been seized from the target house, before being released.” 

These atrocities have been going on for quite some time. In 2009, Arpaio's deputies detained (too mild a word to use to describe what happened) a 9-month-pregnant Latina, refused to remove her shackles even as she gave birth, and then refused to let her hold the baby and threatened to put the child into state custody.

Think this is still America, land of the free and home of the brave? Think again. Did you miss the words 'American citizen' in those excerpts?

Arizona is, amazingly, worse than Texas and Alabama when it comes to this shit.

See what happens when you vote for Republicans? Or when you don't bother to get out and vote against them?

Stace is kinder and gentler, but the time for that has long passed. When they're going after American citizens who look like him, it's time for people who look like me to stand up, speak out, and fight back. Else they come for people who look like me next.

Romney's Gay Pride Week (not so much)

So Mitt Romney fired accepted the forced resignation of an openly gay member of his foreign policy staff. Yes, it was almost two weeks ago, eons in the collective memory, but its recollection bleeds into "This Week in Gay Marriage", in which Obama is yanked out of the closet even as his protagonist pushes past him and forces his way in.

Oh yeah, Mitt also bullied a gay kid when he was in high school.

Reading that story almost makes strapping an Irish Setter to the roof of your car for a ride to Canada sound like a normal thing, doesn't it?

At least the Log Cabins are unswayed. So he hasn't lost the entirety of another voting bloc. But let's back away from the snark for just a moment.

This story is resonant because one can, all too easily, see Romney walking away even now, or simply failing to connect, to grasp hurt. How he talks about this incident will be impossible to divorce from how he talks about same-sex marriage in the wake of President Obama’s announcement, and about questions of basic dignity for gay and lesbian Americans. But unless he deals with it soundly, it will also be present as people wonder about his compassion for anyone not as well situated and cosseted as he has always been. Who else might he walk away from? Until now, the campaign has talked about his fondness for pranks as a way to humanize him; his wife called him wild and crazy. Is this what they think that means?

There's a whole lot of excuse-making on the Right in the wake of these developments. "Everybody gets/got bullied in high school", "I was a bully; I got bullied; it's just a part of growing up, a right of passage'. I believe most of us know better than that today. Just as many of us know better than to vote for civil rights discrimination as codified into the state constitution. But mentioning gay anything lathers up the Christian conservatives so badly that they leap out of the pews and mob their e-mail accounts, or the phones, threatening to do the same thing at the polls. So the GOP knuckles under.

As for Mitt, he's left with "Can't we just talk about the economy, please?"

Hey, they're YOUR base, buddy. You get 'em in line.

Update: Cenk Uygur had a more expansive report on this topic last night: "(W)hat looks like a lifelong pattern of Mitt Romney’s mean-spirited behavior, from allegations of bullying a prep school peer, taunting a blind English teacher, hazing classmates at Stanford and, later, pressuring a pregnant woman whom he counseled not to have an abortion, even if it risked her life."

So the record shows it's a lot more than just bullying gay kids or family pets. I doubt Mitt is going to be able to talk much about the economy for the next few days.

Obama's position on gay marriage needs to evolve a little faster *and so it does*

That's not just my opinion.

On Tuesday night, Jon Stewart delved in to the twilight zone that is Washington D.C. to discuss an issue dominating the news this week: gay marriage. Tracing the chronology — from Joe Biden‘s remark on Sunday, to the reaction that followed, to the subsequent reassessing of President Obama‘s “evolution” on the issue — The Daily Show looked at how far the president has come in terms of supporting marriage equality. He has evolved: from openly supporting gay marriage to becoming, well, a political candidate.

Ron Reagan was even better in describing it.

“This whole evolving thing has really jumped the shark at this point,” Reagan said. “I mean, [Obama's] taking more time evolving on this issue than humans took evolving from apes.” He acknowledged that’s a bit of “hyperbole,” but digressed. We all know it’s a “political calculation,” he added: we could argue whether it’s a correct or incorrect one, but it’s an “obvious” calculation.

Reagan continued: “He’s taking a civil rights issue and he’s trying to kind of, you know, straddle the fence on it, and it’s unseemly. He’s beginning to look ridiculous on this issue. He needs to just get off the fence and just go wherever they know he really is in the first place.”

Matthews asked, “If he loses the election because of this, and Mitt Romney walks into the White House, a man who says he will not evolve — doesn’t evolve, RINO, doesn’t believe in evolution, period — [...] is that good for the cause?” Reagan replied, “It’s not good for the cause, although the cause will continue and will prevail just because of demographics if nothing else.”

He further added: “I understand what the calculation is, but I think the calculation is now incorrect. You can only make this political calculation when people don’t generally see it as a political calculation. If people know that you’re not actually speaking your mind and your heart, if you are inauthentic about this issue – and it is an important issue to some people, a lot of people – then you’re doing yourself harm. You’re actually harming your electoral prospects.” 

What's amazing to me is that this president -- who took the biggest risk possible for his electoral prospects when he ordered the raid on bin Laden's compound -- is so equivocating on a civil rights issue. To me it's more cowardly than his lack of effort stamping the Affordable Health Care Act with a public option, which of course was way watered down from 'universal health care'.

Obama needs to get off the goddamned fence and take a stand on this, and he needs to do it yesterday. Let the conservatives wail and froth, and promptly counter-punch their teeth out. He could give a grand speech invoking Martin Luther King and LBJ and 1964 and call for legislation and out the Republicans in Congress in all their bigoted, hate-filled glory.

Ten-to-one nothing like that happens, though. This president is way too cautious -- way too conservative himself -- to stand up and fight for anything as messy as gay marriage in an election year. He'll probably promise to do something after he gets re-elected, and a whole lot of Democrats will be just fine with that.

That's not leadership; that's management by swing-state polling.

Update: Somebody should have taken my bet.

"At a certain point, I've just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married," he concluded.

Steve Clemons at The Atlantic leads the cheers.

John Carona has never said Dan Patrick was gay

This is uproarious. Two Republicans in the state Senate jockeying for the day a when Texas needs a new lieutenant governor are hurling rotten tomatoes at each other.

The Quorum Report scored a scoop highlighting the animosity between Republican Sens. John Carona, of Dallas, and Dan Patrick, of Houston — complete with Patrick accusing Carona of lying about Patrick’s marriage, and Carona not only denying it, but adding that he also didn’t call Patrick gay.

The accusation from Patrick, in part, in an e-mail to fellow senators:

I was in Dallas last week and learned that Senator Carona has told people outside the Senate that Jan and I are separated and may get divorced. He added in a few other negative comments about me in an obvious attempt by him to discredit me for some reason. … There is no excuse or justification for his actions. He could have easily checked the story out to see if it was true. He didn’t care if it was true.

The response from Carona, in part, also in an e-mail to fellow senators:

The email which you blasted to our colleagues and then provided to the media is false and you would have known that had you called or emailed before sending it. …Though I have heard rumors regarding your marital status and sexual preferences for a while now, at no time have I told anyone that you are either separated, divorced, or gay. (emphasis is mine)

Carona went on to blame Patrick’s political ambition for the e-mail.

Carona is a potential candidate for lieutenant governor if Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst is elected to the U.S. Senate and senators choose an interim replacement, and also in the 2014 statewide election for the seat. Patrick is a potential lieutenant governor candidate in 2014.

Carona also called Patrick “a snake oil salesman” and “a narcissist that would say anything to draw attention to himself.”

Patrick, in response, suggested that Carona is “at a very dark place in his life for some reason” and said:

“I find Senator Carona’s response repulsive and unbecoming of a Senator. I stand by my statement. … He still owes my wife and my family an apology. Now he owes me an apology for his latest smear, another fabrication by Senator Carona.”

Paul Burka is solemn and sober in his judgment. The rest of of us are Laughing Our Asses Off.

Greg Abbott is either incompetent or defiantly ignorant

Or he's playing some kind of long con game that nobody else can decipher.

The U.S. Department of Justice has asked a panel of federal judges to postpone the trial in Texas' Voter ID case because of complaints that state Attorney General Greg Abbott continues to stall requests for information.

The inability to get documents and Abbott's fight to keep Republican legislators from having to testify make a July 9 trial date impractical, Justice Department lawyers said in their motion to a three-judge panel in Washington, D.C.

Abbott wanted a quick trial to put the Voter ID law in place for the Nov. 6 general election.

"If Texas wants a speedy trial, then Texas will have to follow the rules. They shouldn't cherry-pick which rules they want to enforce and which rules they want to ignore," Mexican American Legislative Caucus Chair Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio, said Tuesday. 

The court agrees with the DOJ.

In a harshly worded order issued this afternoon, the court in the Texas voter ID case reprimanded the state for what it said were “well-documented” discovery violations “that can only be interpreted as having the aim of delaying the Defendants’ ability to receive and analyze data and documents in a timely fashion.”

The court said:

Texas has repeated ignored or violated directives and orders of this Court that were designed to expedite discovery, and Texas has failed to produce in a timely manner key documents that Defendants need to prepare their defense.  Most troubling is Texas’ conduct with respect to producing its key state databases, which are central to Defendants’ claim that S.B. 14 has a disparate and retrogressive impact on racial and/or language minority groups.  The record reflects that these databases are voluminous, complex, and essential to the preparation of the opinions of Defendants’ expert witnesses. Yet, according to Texas, the full production of such databases to the United States was only complete on May 4, 2012 - 35 days after they were initially due.  The production to Defendant-Intervenors is still not complete.

The court told Texas that “[b]ased on the record to date, this Court would be well within its discretion to continue the July 9 trial date, to impose monetary sanctions against Texas, or to keep the July 9 trial date and impose evidentiary sanctions such as an adverse inference upon Texas.”

I simply don't understand what the Attorney General of Texas thinks he's going to accomplish here. His stonewalling might delay the trial he claims to want that he believes will settle the Photo ID business just in time to suppress November voting. But the judges seem more inclined to simply punish him for his sloth, or his deception, or whatever it is.

His refusal to comply with basic rules of discovery -- while attempting to create some kind of long-game legal precedent with this 'legislative privilege' BS that seems designed to produce a victory at the SCOTUS -- actually appears more directed to win in the court of TeaBagger opinion when the GOP finally loses the case. "Oh well, we lost because they forced the legislators to testify, and that's why the Ill Eagles are still able to vote 50 times..."

Greg Abbott is an abject failure at the simplest of tasks of an attorney's practice, and yet the very worst people representing the Republicans of Texas throw rose petals at his chair wheels.

Is this some parallel universe I have stumbled into?

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance thinks Mrs. Sarkozy would have been the better candidate than her husband (but probably still would've lost to the Socialist) as it brings you this week's roundup.

Three more Congressional candidate interviews from Off the Kuff: State Rep. Joaquin Castro, the heir apparent in CD20; Bexar County Tax Assessor Sylvia Romo in CD35; and former Bastrop County Judge Ronnie McDonald in CD27.  

BossKitty at TruthHugger is overwhelmed by the disgusting realization that everyone's future will be determined by America UNDER THE INFLUENCE!  

BlueBloggin sees zombies everywhere. Zombies are disengaging common sense and promoting the Great Unlearning of America at the bidding of the Koch Brothers: Zombie Politics Desecrates Science Education and Economy.

Texas GOP House Speaker Joe Straus and anti-abortion groups make nice. WCNews at Eye On Williamson has the skinny: The political calculus is changing in Texas.  

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme hopes the Valley recognizes Filemon Vela for the opportunistic a**hole he truly is.

The Libertarians selected former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson as their presidential nominee at their national convention in Las Vegas this past weekend, and then pushed all their chips in on the pivotal issue of 2012: weed. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs doesn't think it's a smokescreen.

Lightseeker explains, over at TexasKaos, how Texas has a shoot-first law and even the bill's sponsor didn't know it. Give it a read.

Sunday Evening Funnies

Click on these last two to see the larger version.

'Lesser of two evils' is still evil

He's a smug, Harvard-trained elitist who doesn't get how regular Americans are struggling these days. More extreme than he lets on, he's keeping his true agenda hidden until after Election Day. He's clueless about fixing the economy, over his head on foreign policy. Who is he?

Your answer will help decide the next president.

Is it Barack Obama, as seen by Mitt Romney? Or Romney, the way Obama depicts him? For all their liberal versus conservative differences, when the two presidential contenders describe each other, they sound like they're ragging on the same flawed guy. Or mirror images of that guy.

Will voters prefer the man waving with his left hand or his right?

Blame it on two cautious candidates with more traits in common than their disparate early biographies would suggest.

That article is dead solid perfect.

And Mr. Fish gets it right except for the "voting makes it worse" part. Voting for the lesser of two evils is the real problem, and this is particularly true for those of us living in Texas and other non-swing states, where the presidential contest will never be as close as the polling suggests it to be.

So the key is not to vote for the men. Or any Republicans.

Liberal and progressive women running for office will start fewer wars, torture fewer people, they won't cut education or women's health care, and they're a lot less likely to constantly act like assholes.

I'd of course like to be able to type "none" instead of fewer, but we have to get started somewhere.

Update: And just as a reminder, the lame-ass bunch of moderate Republicans running Americans Elect are not the solution to anything either. Buddy MF'n Roemer, for crissakes.

Libertarians go all in on the ganja vote

The Libertarian Party is wrapping up its national convention today (Vegas, baby!) having selected its presidential and vice-presidential nominees. I mentioned the dilemma Gary Johnson found himself in all the way back in February. Looks like he resolved it.

On the first ballot, Judge Jim Gray of California wins the vice presidential nomination of the Libertarian Party in 2012. Gray thanks (presidential runner-up Lee) Wrights for being a gentleman and said he looked forward to debating (Vice President Joe) Biden.

Judge Gray's candidacy was just rumored a week ago, and quickly bloomed into full flower. Excerpt from Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller, who broke this news; if you click the link, you'll understand why they had the inside dope first:

The decision to run with Gray “puts pot front-and-center in the campaign,” one Johnson adviser told TheDC, before adding that Johnson’s opposition to the war in Afghanistan will likely remain the campaign’s defining issue.

According to the biography on his website, Gray “currently presides over the civil trial calendar for the Superior Court of Orange County.” Gray previously served in the Peace Corps, was an attorney in the Navy JAG Corps, and prosecuted cases in the Los Angeles U.S. Attorney’s Office. He ran as a Libertarian against California Democratic Sen. Barbra (sic) Boxer in 2004. [...]

Gray was a conservative Republican who later became a Libertarian after deciding that the nation’s drug laws did more harm than good. He is the author of several books about law, politics and the drug war, and helped spearhead Proposition 19 in California, which would have decriminalized marijuana in the Golden State had it passed.

“I was a drug warrior until I saw what was happening in my own courtroom,” Gray said in 2010. 

This presents a fascinating conundrum for both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Nobody can say with any confidence who loses more of which demographic in a scenario where cannabis is the topic. The Republicans probably have to fall out against it. They've spent all of this time and effort sucking up to the Christian bloc that they can't put the pipe down back away now. Obama is in a bigger quandary because he owned the youth vote four years ago. Even as those voters have leaked away from the President before this development, his focus on addressing the student loan crisis may have been designed to shore up some lagging support.

Twenty-somethings with a mountain of college loan debt, bleak employment prospects, and a soothing habit of anti-depressant, sedative self-medication may be one-issue voters -- if they can find their way to the polls --  just like conservative Catholics.

Tom here seems to capture many of the absurdities of the haze surrounding legalization.

Toke of the Town has more (of the story).  

Update: You did know that yesterday was the Global Marijuana March, right? Yeah.

Update II: The secretary of state in Michigan (a Republican) will refuse to place Johnson's name on the ballot in that state due to an arcane law known as "sore loser", which is to say that nobody who lost his party's nomination can be nominated on another party's ticket. This development -- particularly if it spreads to other states -- bodes ill for the Libs unless they can successfully appeal it through the courts.

Update III: More opinions of Gary Johnson and the Libertarians' prime role as spoiler from Socratic Gadfly and The Daily Beast.