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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Another example.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Unless something really unforeseen happens, that is.

Sunday Funnies

Fox covers up Corker's tactics in celebrating UAW loss

Millions of Texas voters, mostly Ds, are MIA

Ross Ramsey, talking about things some people are painfully aware of.

The biggest chunk of the state’s growth can be attributed to an increase in the minority populations, and the biggest part of that growth has been Hispanic. And that is where the hype about politics revs up: To the extent that they vote, minorities in Texas tend to vote for Democrats more than Republicans. If the number of minorities rise along with the population, and if those new voters behave like their voting counterparts, then the electorate should grow to favor the Democrats.

That was the idea behind the Democrats’ “dream team” ticket in 2002, which included a couple of big-city mayors, Ron Kirk and Kirk Watson; a wealthy Hispanic oilman, Tony Sanchez Jr.; and a mix of proven veterans and promising prospects. It didn’t work, but there were some hopeful years, when Democrats in the Legislature made gains.

Then the 2008 presidential race arrived. The Democratic primary that year had 2,874,986 Texas voters. Most of the time, presidential contests are all but settled by the time the campaigns reach Texas. But in 2008, neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton had clinched the nomination, and their battle over Texas lifted turnout considerably. The excitement over a contested national race even helped increase Republican turnout that year.

The Republicans held their numbers, turning out about the same number of voters in each of the two primaries that followed, but many of the Democratic primary voters who came out in 2008 never returned. In 2010, only 680,548 Texans voted in the Democratic primary. Two years after that, only 590,164 voted. In general elections, their top-line numbers also fell. Obama received 43.7 percent of the overall vote in the 2008 general election. Former Mayor Bill White of Houston got 42.3 percent in 2010 in a race for governor, and Paul Sadler lost the U.S. Senate election to Ted Cruz with 40.6 percent.

The population may be booming, but the electorate is not, and the Democratic electorate got smaller.

These figures have been previously identified; there is a large number of Texans who are citizens and are of voting age -- between 2.5 and 3 million -- that are not registered to vote.  Those are the prime targets for Battleground Texas.

But there are some eight million Texans registered to vote who did not do so in 2012.  They might not all be Democrats, but you can rest assured that a large majority of them are.  And that is precisely where the turning of Texas to a purplish shade of blue rests.

Republicans are confident their firewall can prevent that from happening.  Between the biweekly stoking of Tea Party outrage to the efforts, legal and extralegal, to keep potential Democratic voters from doing so (photo ID requirements and thug tactics practiced by the King Street Patriot/True the Vote pale mafia), the job lies with the Texas Democratic Party, their candidates, activists, and assorted supporters to make the case for change.  To persuade those millions of Texans who have no habit of regularly performing their civic function -- of participating in the selection of the leaders of the state -- into those that do.  Here's some Census statistics from a worthwhile article by Patti Hart, in the Chron...

46.3 percent of Texans earning more than $75,000 voted in 2010, compared to 26.7 percent of those earning less than $35,000 

52.4 percent of Texans with college degrees voted, compared to 22.8 percent with less than a high school diploma 

16 percent of Texans under 30 voted, while 42.7 percent of the over-30 crowd participated 

43.8 percent of white Texans voted in 2010, compared with 38.7% of African Americans and 23.1% of Hispanics

That task makes turning a battleship around look like a walk in the park.  Back to Ramsey...

The Republicans have more money, and their steady, habitual turnout has given them a list of stalwarts who vote no matter what. The Democrats have a list of stalwarts, too, but it is considerably smaller.

So they are looking for first-timers, people who haven’t voted before because they just moved here or just recently came of age or haven’t been involved in elections before and are just waiting for someone to ask them.

And there is the other group, the 2.2 million Texans who turned out in March 2008 and haven’t been seen in a primary location since then. The Democrats already have their names, if not their votes.

GOTV is a door to door, block to block effort.  Turning out one's precinct means visiting your neighbor, calling them on the phone, or mailing them a postcard.  We'll get a glimpse, beginning next week as early voting for the March primaries gets under way, as to whether Battleground Texas' initial efforts are bearing some fruit.

Eye on Williamson has more detail, and links to other analysis.

My Funny Valentine

Davis moves back to the left

Let's give Senator Davis the hap tip she deserves for doing the right things this week.  First on weed...

Texas Democratic gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis said she supports medical marijuana use as well easing the state's legal consequences for possessing small amounts of the drug.

Davis' comments echo those of current Republican Gov. Rick Perry, who said he supports less stringent penalties in Texas for marijuana use. 

She moved (relatively) quickly here, to draft off Governor Goodhair's surprising shift, and left Greg Abbott sitting way over there on the right.  The Dallas News ed board broke it, so let's tap their analysis.

This takes the decriminalization discussion beyond where Perry took it, and Davis showed little hesitation. In his recent remarks in Davos, Perry talked about moving “toward a decriminalization,” whereas Davis said she’d consider signing a bill removing criminal provisions for possessing small amounts. That would be de facto decriminalization if Texas made small-time possession a civil matter.

Pre-Davos, I doubt Davis would have been as willing to address this head on. But Perry provided safe harbor to Davis or anyone else who wanted to go there. Plus, a statewide poll last year showed voting Texans are open to change on the pot question.

Davis probably picks up more votes that she loses on this. Those general election voter who are motivated by law-and-order issues aren’t getting near her anyway. Those persuadable middle-spectrum voters who could tilt either way have an important issue to consider here.

Davis, to them, might seem more in touch with a national sense that the war on drugs is so Richard Nixon. Our editorial page has said we appear to have reached a national tipping point.

Sticking by the status quo on drugs would make Abbott seem decidedly retrograde. Then again, his handlers seem to be looking for a very safe course so far. Abbott certainly isn’t coming off as a man of new or great vision, lest it’s Rick Perry’s vision. If he thinks that’s a formula for victory in 2014, we’ll see.

That's a solid take all around.  Kudos to Davis for pouncing on an opportunity left open by Rick Perry, of all people.  And secondly, she comes correct on marriage equality.  Lone Star Q:

In her first public statements in support of same-sex marriage since announcing her campaign for governor, Democrat Wendy Davis called on likely Republican opponent Greg Abbott to stop defending the state’s marriage bans in court.

Davis’ statements came a day after a federal district judge in San Antonio heard arguments in a lawsuit challenging Texas’ marriage bans, including its 2005 constitutional amendment.

Davis, D-Fort Worth, is a strong LGBT ally who has co-authored bills to ban anti-LGBT employment discrimination and bullying during her time in the Legislature. Davis is backed in her run for governor by LGBT groups including Equality Texas and the Human Rights Campaign.

But Davis’ statements to the San Antonio Express-News editorial board on Thursday marked her most public and emphatic endorsements of marriage equality in her 15-year political career.

“It’s my strong belief that when people love each other and are desirous of creating a committed relationship with each other that they should be allowed to marry, regardless of their sexual orientation,” Davis said.

She could have done this much sooner and saved herself a minor amount of grief over it, but getting to the right place (even if it is tardy, like Barack Obama) is still worth commending.

Decriminalizing pot and legalizing gay marriage are the two fastest-moving American taboos that are turning into mores.  Davis put herself on the good side of history -- and the electorate -- by endorsing this social progress.  Open carry is going to remain an unnecessary drag to her base, and nothing she said a couple of days ago on reproductive choice seems to have been beneficial, but if she can string together a few good days like yesterday (particularly with the media, which may wish to overcompensate for the unnecessary roughness with which 2014 opened), she will have the fence-mending under way.

Socratic Gadfly remains skeptical.  That's healthy enough; I'm sticking with 'she finished the week better than she began it'.

I'm just wondering what offensive Tweets and quotes are going to erupt out of this sad gathering of freaks next week.

Ted Cruz puts out a hit on Mitch McConnell

Our junior senator is going to remake things in his own image, and nobody -- but nobody -- is going to stand in his way.

The tea party is teeing off on Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

Matt Bevin, who is challenging McConnell in the GOP primary in Kentucky, seized on the senator's vote Wednesday to move ahead on legislation to increase the nation's debt limit, describing it as a blank check for President Barack Obama. The tea party-backed businessman and conservative groups signaled they won't let Senate Republican incumbents forget the vote this election year.

"Kentucky and America can literally no longer afford such financially reckless behavior from the likes of Mitch McConnell," Bevin said in a statement.

Minority Mitch may not survive his primary, let alone November. 

Setting the vote in motion was one of McConnell's Republican colleagues — Texan Ted Cruz, the tea party darling who has caused heartburn for his GOP colleagues in his year in the Senate.

Cruz insisted on a 60-vote threshold for the Senate to proceed to must-pass legislation to allow the government to borrow money to pay its bills. House and Senate Republicans had decided against another round of brinkmanship and let it be known that they were ready to let Democrats deliver the votes on the debt bill after the House had passed it Tuesday.

Not Cruz, who along with Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, precipitated the 16-day government shutdown last October over their demands that Obama gut his health care law.

This is Brutus and Cassius at work against Caesar.

Instead of going along with a simple majority vote, Cruz showed no mercy in forcing Republican leaders to cast a tough vote to clear a filibuster hurdle, exposing them to widespread criticism from primary challengers and outside groups.

After what seemed like an eternity, a grim-faced McConnell finally voted yes. An equally grim-faced Sen. John Cornyn, the party's No. 2 leader and Cruz's Texas colleague, changed his vote from no to yes. Sen. John McCain rallied other Republicans to vote yes, providing a show of political support for the leaders. The 67-31 tally advanced the bill to a final vote.

In that vote, no Republican supported lifting the Treasury's borrowing authority. The bill passed on a party-line 55-43 vote, moving on to Obama.

Cornyn, the Senate's likely minority leader after McConnell is disposed of, has to see the writing on the wall.  With a safe primary to skate through and an ever safer fall election, Corndog's biggest problem next year will be "Norovirus" Cruz.

Pressed after the votes about what he made his leaders do, Cruz was unapologetic.

"It should have been a very easy vote," he told reporters. "In my view, every Senate Republican should have stood together." Whether McConnell remains the leader, Cruz said it "is ultimately a decision ... for the voters in Kentucky."

Either the rest of the Senate's Republicans are going to find a way to take him down, or else Poop Cruz is sailing all the way to the top.  Of the dung heap.

He's making far too many enemies to go any higher than that.

Update:  You are what you eat, GOP.

I can't figure out what she's saying, either

Did she fall into a trap?

This week, Texas gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis delighted her detractors and confounded her pro-choice supporters when she appeared to support the very same 20-week ban she spent 11 hours filibustering.

Davis’ remarks to the Dallas Morning News that she would have voted for a ban with a broader health exception than the one in force – i.e., not an actual reversal, though it wasn’t terribly clear – were promptly represented as “flip flopping.” More accurately, they represent Davis falling into a trap set for her by abortion opponents, a place of awkward hairsplitting on unpopular later abortions.

 Is she reinforcing what she has previously stated?

Davis' statement comes as a shock, but perhaps that's because we weren't paying close enough attention. Though Davis' opponents prefer to characterize her filibuster as nothing more than a defense of later-term abortions, in truth the bill she stood against was mostly written to shut down access to safe first-trimester abortions. And her remarks this week are largely consistent with what she said during the filibuster, when she argued that the medical exceptions in the bill for later-term abortions were too narrow, replacing a doctor's judgment with that of nonexperts like judges.

Is she splitting hairs?

Abortion is a complicated issue, and one about which most Texans have complicated feelings. There has never been any real reason to think that Davis is enthusiastic about abortions, despite the fact that she was against a law that would restrict access to the procedure. The fact that she is so often accused of being a "cheerleader" for the procedure, in fact, proves nothing so much as the sanctimony, dishonesty, and occasional misogyny of her critics. [...] Think of Davis as a regular pro-choice person, rather than the abortion advocate her critics have tried to paint her as. From that perspective, the comments offered yesterday are an elaboration of her previously expressed opinions, rather than an attempt to distance herself from them. 

Is what she is saying making sense?

What Davis is saying about the nature of later abortions — the fact that they’re very rare, are typically necessary when serious health issues arise, and require consultation between women and their doctors — is all true. Those realities just aren’t compatible with a ban on the procedure.

From a policy position, Davis’ stance simply doesn’t make sense. If the goal is to “give enough deference” to women who are making complicated decisions about their reproductive health, and allow medical professionals to exercise their own judgment about their patients’ care without being hampered by the legislature, that’s directly undermined by the enactment of a ban. For proof, look no further than any abortion provider who practices in a state with abortion restrictions on the books. Every attempt to separate abortion from the rest of medical care, and use political language to describe the circumstances under which it may be performed, changes the way that doctors would have otherwise chosen to conduct their work. Even attempting to include exceptions for some women doesn’t actually work in practice.

All these translations are as all over the map as the candidate's own statements.  Every time she tries to clarify something, it gets muddier.

This is a campaign in complete disarray, and we've reached the point where that can no longer be blamed on the handlers and consultants.

Alameel, Fjetland, Scherr appear together in Houston next Monday

(Ed. note: Early Voting Ballot Board service to commence in short order, so posts will be lacking some of the usual strident advocacy.  Hopefully not boring.)

Three of the four Democratic candidates for the the US Senate will be in Houston next Monday, February 17, as the Meyerland Democratic Club hosts them for a question-and-answer forum. 

For some reason I'm thinking the fourth candidate is likely to make an uninvited appearance, as she did a few weeks ago in College Station.  I hope club president Art Pronin has a contingency plan in place for that.

As is typically the case, there will be dozens of Harris County Democratic hopefuls working the room, so this is a great opportunity to meet and greet several of the folks -- Congressionals, judicials, countywide offices, Austin representatives -- that will appear on the primary ballot.

-- Agriculture Commission candidate Hugh Fitzsimons is also in town tomorrow night at Hughes Hangar for a fundraiser.  The Chron has endorsed him, and he recently got favorably Politifact-checked with regard to the matriarchal society that is a bison herd.  Seriously.

-- MSNBC's Krystal Ball (a person, not a thing) has implored Hillary Clinton not to run for president.  Egberto Willies with more on that.

Nothing here has really changed in the past year.  If she runs, she wins.  If she picks a Texas Latino to run with, Texas turns blue in 2016 and never goes red again for a long, long time.

-- Ted Cruz is helping Democrats in Texas every time he opens his mouth.

On a conference call with reporters today, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) hinted that he may filibuster the House passed debt ceiling suspension in the Senate....

Cruz broke out the same rhetoric that he used before the government shutdown, and hinted at blocking the debt limit bill, “If you get outside Washington, D.C., this issue is practically a no-brainer. President Obama is asking Congress for a blank check. …Under no circumstances will I consent to the debt ceiling being raised with only a 50-vote threshold. I think Senate Republicans should stand united and insist upon a 60-vote threshold. And that is my intention.”

The 'stand united' language was the same point that he made before the government shutdown. 

He also launched the torpedo that sank immigration reform.  God bless that sorry bastard.  Run, Ted, run! (Warning: Breitbart.)

-- One funny thing and one serious thing to finish: Jon Stewart tore both Republicans and Democrats a new one last night on the failure of CIR (comprehensive immigration reform), and Robert Reich helpfully explains why so many people vote against their own economic self-interest: fear.

People are so desperate for jobs they don’t want to rock the boat. They don’t want rules and regulations enforced that might cost them their livelihoods. For them, a job is precious — sometimes even more precious than a safe workplace or safe drinking water.

This is especially true in poorer regions of the country like West Virginia and through much of the South and rural America — so-called “red” states where the old working class has been voting Republican. Guns, abortion, and race are part of the explanation. But don’t overlook economic anxieties that translate into a willingness to vote for whatever it is that industry wants. 

We see this again with Keystone XL as the unions line up behind it, mumbling "jobs".  There won't be any jobs to speak of, naturally.  After three decades of trickle-down economics, some people just can't wake up and smell the coffee.  The "job creators" aren't going to create any, because increasing demand for employees raises wages, and nobody in charge wants that.  Why do you think Republicans won't raise the minimum wage, for Pete's sake?  Because that would give poor people greater power over the lives.  And the corporatists certainly can't have that.

Update: As if on cue, here's the most recent example of the incrementalism Rall refers to in the lower left panel.

This is the same reason they oppose Obamacare, and try to twist the meaning of its implementation through the media.  Because, in addition to keeping the center of control in the hands of the corporations, these lies help them with the poor, scared rubes on Election Day.

A 30-second ad is the perfect vehicle for a visceral lie. It's a lot easier to scream "job killer" than it is to explain the CBO's carefully hedged nuances. Typically in politics, when you're explaining, you're losing.

And most importantly, the Republican lie is red meat for the ravenous conservative base that delights in hate-feasting on the health law. Those voters are conditioned to believe the worst; passion drives turnout, which means they're likely to dominate midterm balloting in November. They've already swallowed a slew of lies - from "death panels" to "rationed care" - so why would factual reality enlighten them now?

As my friend Neil says often, this stuff is all connected.

No Fags League?

Is that really where Roger Goodell, Jerry Jones, Bob McNair, et. al. want to be standing?

The best defensive player in college football's best conference only a third to fifth round NFL pick? Really? That is shocking, and I guess that other thing is, too.

Michael Sam would be the first openly gay player in the NFL; says he knows there will be problems... and they've already started.

Several NFL officials are telling Sports Illustrated it will hurt him on draft day because a gay player wouldn't be welcome in an NFL locker room. It would be uncomfortable, because that's a man's world.

There's no more prolific whisper network than the college of NFL scouts, coaches, owners, former players, etc.  The Brotherhood of Manly Men.  And the white noise is like a loud ringing in American society's ear right now. 

You beat a woman and drag her down a flight of stairs, pulling her hair out by the roots? You're the fourth guy taken in the NFL draft.

You kill people while driving drunk? That guy's welcome.

Players caught in hotel rooms with illegal drugs and prostitutes? We know they're welcome.

Players accused of rape and pay the woman to go away?  You lie to police trying to cover up a murder? We're comfortable with that.

You love another man? Well, now you've gone too far!

I'll add: you can run a 4.4 forty?  You can shut down your corner?  You got a 'high motor' and you're a 'character guy'?  Congratulations, son.  Welcome to the NFL.  Try to keep your nose clean, but don't worry too much if you can't.  Just don't ever lose that quick first step.

It wasn't that long ago when we were being told that black players couldn't play in "our" games because it would be "uncomfortable." And even when they finally could, it took several more years before a black man played quarterback. Because we weren't "comfortable" with that, either.

So many of the same people who used to make that argument (and the many who still do) are the same people who say government should stay out of our lives. But then want government in our bedrooms.

I've never understood how they feel "comfortable" laying claim to both sides of that argument.

Yeah, those poor Republican conservatives.  Always getting something they don't like "shoved down their throats".  This is going to be some fun to watch, as Michael Sam transforms into Jackie Robinson, and the taboos start crashing to the ground.  Lots of opportunities for satire.

Update: Astros pitcher Jarrod Cosart picked a bad day to Tweet about Justin Bieber.

Update II: Fifteen reasons why Michael Sam matters, and why football is ready for him, even if some in the NFL aren't quite.

In the final minutes of the Cotton Bowl, with Missouri clinging to a three point lead, their opponent, the Oklahoma State Cowboys, were driving deep into Tigers territory. A field goal would have tied it for the Cowboys, a touchdown would probably have won it. On third down, inside the thirty, the Cowboys quarterback dropped back to pass. Sam, in a wondrous combination of power and speed, shot past his blocker on the outside. As the quarterback was flushed from the pocket, Sam sacked him, knocking the ball loose. His teammate scooped it up and returned it for a touchdown. Sam’s play helped seal the victory, and it was obvious to anyone watching just what kind of player he was: a real man’s man.

No matter what happens next, Sam has proven what we already knew: that football, or any sport, isn’t somehow in itself hostile to the breadth of human sexuality. At Outsports, in a great behind-the-scenes explanation of how Sam’s announcement was planned and timed, Cyd Zeigler writes that Sam has no plans to become an activist anytime soon: “His role in the movement toward LGBT equality in sports will be simply playing the sport as an out gay man.” He’s done it before.

"When you're explaining, you're losing"

Could someone please text that to Matt Angle, stat?

Sen. Wendy Davis got some criticism from her own party when she came out for open carry of handguns, but she emphasized Monday there are some caveats in her position.

The Fort Worth Democrat said that entities including cities should be able to make their own decisions not only on any proposed open-carry law but on the existing law allowing licensed people to carry concealed handguns.

“Obviously in Texas we have a culture that respects the Second Amendment right and privilege of owning and carrying guns — but we also, of course, have respect and understand a the rights and privileges of property owners to make decisions about what’s right for them,” said Davis, who is expected to face Republican Attorney General Greg Abbott in the general-election in the race for governor.

“My position on open carry reflects my respect for both of those principles, and I believe that municipalities, school districts, hospitals, private property owners should be the ones that ultimately have a say as to whether this is right for them and their facilities,” she said.

Davis, pointing to her time as a city official, said, “My position on that is consistent both on open and concealed carry. I do believe that municipalities should be able to make that decision for themselves. I sat on the City Council in Fort Worth when that decision was made for us.

“I believe that local control means local control, and we should respect municipalities’ positions and opinions in these matters and we shouldn’t make the decision for them,” she said.

So then... everyone could have predicted this.

Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, a Republican candidate for lieutenant governor who championed the concealed-carry law as a state senator, called Davis’ position “absurd.”

“It’s a constitutional right,” Patterson said. “There is no such thing as local control of constitutional rights.” State law spells out places at which handguns are barred.

And this.

Abbott spokesman Matt Hirsch said, “Greg Abbott believes that Texans’ constitutional rights don’t stop at the city limits.”

I suggested she just stop talking about guns.  But noooo...

That’s fine as it goes, but local gun carry restrictions are the precise thing the most passionate parts of the open carry movement are mobilizing against. Increasingly agitated open carry protesters aren’t looking for the right to carry guns openly in some places, they want that right in all places—so what, exactly, is the political utility of this argument? Who is it supposed to win over, and at what cost to the small number of Democrats in Texas for whom gun control is a primary issue?

It's just getting embarrassing for Davis at this point.  Don't know what else can be said.

Update: It's valuable to take note that at a moment when her opponent is stepping in rolling through his own crap, she is too busy explaining something else to hit back.

Texas Attorney General and Republican gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott made no apologies Monday for his statements comparing public corruption on the border to conditions in third-world countries. Instead, he accused critics of his border policy of having their “heads in the sand,” and said such corruption isn't unique to the border.

In his brief campaign stop at a warehousing business that facilitates cross border commerce and trade, Abbott said that corruption is a problem statewide.

“It doesn’t matter where you are in the state of Texas, public corruption does mimic third-world” practices, he said. 

Who would know any better than Greg Abbott about widespread corruption throughout the state of Texas, after all?  Who besides the attorney general of Texas would be responsible over the past twelve years for doing something about it, if it were truly a concern of his?  It's not like he was busy suing Barack Obama for the fortieth time, was it?

Yes, Davis had this over the weekend, and thanks to Abbott doubling down on the stupid, she has another shot she can take tomorrow, or maybe the next day (this is what I meant back here about the lack of rapid response).  But please, Senator: no more about guns.

John Coby has your comic relief.

Update II: And Socratic Gadfly has some direct advice for the incognito Green gubernatorial candidate, Brandon Parmer, who is squandering his own opportunity at this moment.

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance is still learning the rules of team figure skating as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff published interviews with US Senate candidates Mike Fjetland and Maxey Scherr.

Horwitz at Texpatriate expresses shock and anger over Wendy Davis' new positions on guns.

House Republican leadership finally announced last week that the chances for comprehensive immigration reform are "in serious jeopardy." But thanks to the great people at Houston Matters, Texas Leftist was able to discover that there was never a real chance to pass it in the first place. The only way it's going to happen is if Democrats take control the House and the Senate.

The news of the week was Wendy Davis coming out in favor of open carry, and PDiddie at Brains and Eggs fears that might be a fatal error.

Eye On Williamson observes that Texans and their families that are purposefully being left without health care because of a cruel right wing ideology: Perry and the Texas GOP Left Me Out.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme wants everyone to know that Greg Abbott insulted the entire Rio Grande Valley. Way to reach out, Bucko!

Neil at All People Have Value said Wendy Davis announcing support for open carry of guns, as in the times of Wyatt Earp, recalls for us all yet again that the work of freedom is up to each of us and not politicians. All People Have Value is part of NeilAquino.com.

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

And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.

The Feminist Justice League does the math on the declining abortion rate nationally and in Texas.

The TSTA blog laments that self-styled education reformers are often part of the problem.

BOR highlights another example of the Texas Medical Association endorsing candidates that work against their own stated interests.

Texas Redistricting examines the components of Texas' population growth.

Grits for Breakfast cheers a report showing that Texas led the nation in exonerations in 2013.

Molly Cox details how the Affordable Care Act would have saved her a lot of trouble and worry if it had been the law when she first got sick.

Texas Vox notes the Texas House interim charges to watch.

PTA mom Kim Burkett informs teachers they've received a wake up call.

Cody Pogue gives his perspective on Wendy Davis and open carry.

Rand Paul gives clue to Harris GOP, but they may not be listening

Politico first.

Sen. Rand Paul on Saturday predicted that Texas would turn blue within a decade if the Republican Party doesn’t become more inclusive.

“What I do believe is Texas is going to be a Democrat state within 10 years if we don’t change,” Paul (R-Ky.), who grew up in Texas, said at a dinner held by the Harris County GOP. “That means we evolve, it doesn’t mean we give up on what we believe in, but it means we have to be a welcoming party.”

Paul, who is heavily weighing a presidential bid, noted that his assessment was shared by the chairman of the Republican Party of Texas. The Lone Star state, currently the largest Republican bastion in the country, is nearly 40 percent Hispanic — a demographic that has overwhelmingly supported Democrats in recent elections.

The senator, whose father was a longtime congressman from Texas, acknowledged that immigration reform is a “touchy” subject before offering his vision for people who want to come to the United States.

“We won’t all agree on it,” he said. “But I’ll tell you, what I will say and what I’ll continue to say, and it’s not an exact policy prescription … but if you want to work and you want a job and you want to be part of America, we’ll find a place for you.”

There was some quiet applause in the massive hotel ballroom, in which hundreds of Republicans — a mix of high-dollar donors, activists and state officials — were gathered. But Paul remarked that the response was “kind of tepid.”

There's all you need to know about how things are going for Jared Woodfill.  Scott Braddock's subhead: "Resistance to change bodes well for Woodfill's reelect"...

Against the backdrop of a fierce struggle for leadership of their party and a fundamental argument about which direction it should be led, the largest county GOP in America largely came together Saturday night in Houston for their annual Lincoln-Reagan Day Dinner. By any measure, the fundraiser itself was a success. It was a sellout which drew about 800 of the party faithful and netted about $200,000 for the Harris County GOP, organizers said.

But, there were several key moments scattered throughout the evening that embodied the larger internal struggle the Republican Party is having nationally to retain relevance and locally to do likewise.

The longtime Party Chairman, Jared Woodfill, faces his most serious challenge to date because some key Republican power players in Houston now believe it is time for a change. Dick Weekley, John O’Neil, and Harris County Judge Ed Emmett are among those who have now donated about $133,000 to Woodfill’s challenger, Paul Simpson. This of course is much more money than is usually seen in a local party chairman’s race. At last check Woodfill had about $10,000 on hand. “They’re spending all this money against me,” Woodfill said. “What does that tell you? That I’m effective and I’m doing things they don’t like.” 

I can't wait for Big Jolly's take and his photos from the event last night.  His latest seems a little... well, unenthusiastic about both the incumbent and his challenger, Simpson.  Greg seems conflicted as well; he doesn't have anything lately but this post a month ago reveals a preference (Simpson), as do his more recent comments posted to Jolly's blog.  But this from the blog's Facebook page reveals some measure of not receiving Sen. Paul's message.

Out of town, there's Laura Ingraham from the Sunday Talking heads this very morning.

Conservative radio host Laura Ingraham battled the rest of the Fox News Sunday panel over immigration, arguing that immigration reform and current enforcement of immigration laws were weakening the American workforce, even as her fellow panelists countered that reform would bolster the economy.

“I think what we’re seeing here is a split inside the Republican Party between two staunch conservatives,” host Chris Wallace said, going on to ply Ingraham with a Wall Street Journal editorial that called flinching on reform “de facto amnesty.”

“As far as I can tell, the Wall Street Journal is on the side of Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, Pat Leahy and La Raza,” Ingraham said. “I think they should put down their dogeared copy of Fountainhead and live in the real world…Do we care about American workers at all?”

“You’re the one who’s arguing the AFL-CIO argument,” Will said, noting that the “economic dynamism” aided by immigrants would help sustain the American workforce.

“So why have a border at all?” Ingraham said. “There is no will to enforce the border. There is no faith in this administration to do it. The Republican elites and the Democratic elites agree, and the people are revolting across this country.”

So Rand Paul is a Republican elitist, eh?

I'll keep watching these developments, and with plenty of popcorn on hand, but the Republican civil war just isn't claiming enough casualties fast enough to flip Texas in 2014, and that has nothing to do with Wendy Davis' identity crisis.  The path to 50%-plus-1 was almost too steep for her anyway, and that was before she started blasting shotgun holes in both running shoes.

There remain, however, good opportunities for a breakthrough elsewhere on the ballot.  Specifically in the lieutenant governor's race and the comptroller's contest, as Leticia Van de Putte ("Momma ain't happy") and Mike Collier ("accounting, not abortion") adeptly draw the proper distinctions between themselves and any one of the Republican reactionaries they are likely to  face in November.

That's how you run against the fruitcake conservatives, folks.

Update: More -- mostly skepticism -- from Booman and his commenters with regard to Texas turning blue any time soon. And Bay Area Houston and Juanita Jean pick at Woodfill's scabs.

Sunday Funnies

Curtains

So... I was wrong about Keystone XL being dead.  Charles Pierce, with some additional links I embedded beyond his:

The ducks are lining up in a very pretty row regarding our old friend, the Keystone XL pipeline, the proposed continent-spanning death funnel that would bring the world's dirtiest fossil fuel from the environmental hellscape of northern Alberta down through the richest farmlands on the planet all the way to refineries in Texas, and thence to the world. Ed Schultz is running the bullshi...er...ball on liberal MSNBC. Progressive champion Brian Schweizer is on board; what the hell, they're not going to take his land to build it. The State Department's cheesecloth "environmental" study is being treated as dispositive, not least by former Energy Secretary Ken Salazar, and AFL-CIO president Rich Trumka's on board as well, guaranteeing that the stupid stand-off within progressive politics between organized labor and the environmental movement will go on for another decade, because we all know how helpful that has been. And just for entertainment's sake, here's Glenn Kessler at the Washington Post being baffled by the jobs numbers, which all have been fake from the beginning because TransCanada, the company that wants to build the pipeline, cannot be trusted. And the State Department's numbers, as the National Resources Defense Council makes clear, are one big ball of fudge. You simply cannot make the case for this monstrosity on the basis of economic stimulus unless you count the strippers. Are we counting strippers?

Yes, exotic dancer jobs should be counted in the economic impact study.

I think the deal has gone down. Some late Friday afternoon, the president and John Kerry are going to stick their heads out the window and whisper, "We gonna build this sucker," and then blow town. This is what will happen next. There will be massive civil disobedience all along the length of the pipeline. It will get built. TransCanada, as is its historic pattern, will then neglect to maintain it and it will leak, badly. The environmental damage will be massive and lasting. All over western Canada, which has stood firm against running this creature through its territories, people will chuckle wisely at what suckers we all were. And important pundits -- and fact checkers -- will tell us nobody could have predicted this.

It'll happen like Pierce says, probably about a year from now, once 2014's election is in the books, irrespective of whether the US Senate flips or a Democrat gets elected to something statewide in Texas.  But I'll let David Nangle, the top FB commenter to Pierce's article, finish.

... and we will pay dearly in tax money for an inadequate cleanup that makes the perpetrators even wealthier, somehow. The perpetrators will pay less in taxes from their profits than I will from my job. Obama will be blamed (correctly), and socialism will be blamed (insanely.) Liberals will be blamed. The victims all along the pipeline will fiercely vote Republican in response. Cancer rates will soar along the path of death. Firebrands will stand very, very far away from each disaster and proclaim that government regulations caused the mess. Freedom will be mentioned. Rights will be mentioned. Solar power will be declared more dangerous, as will wind power. None of this is avoidable.

Don't blame me; I voted for Jill Stein.

Hey Wendy: you're not supposed to run to the right until after the primary

Another poorly-advised headscratcher from Wendy Davis. TexTrib, because they wrote the best headline.

State Sen. Wendy Davis has taken plenty of shots from conservatives for proposing new gun restrictions, but on Thursday she faced blowback from liberals and fellow Democrats over gun rights.

Sparking the fallout: Davis’ embrace of so-called open-carry laws, which would allow Texans to pack pistols on their hips. Under current law, people licensed to carry handguns must keep them concealed.

Not even Leticia Van de Putte and Gilberto Hinojosa are standing with Wendy on this one.

While the position essentially mirrors the stance on open carry taken by her likely Republican opponent, Attorney General Greg Abbott, it puts at her odds with statements from her own Texas Democratic Party and her fellow senator, Leticia Van De Putte of San Antonio, the Democratic candidate for lieutenant governor.

Van De Putte looked flummoxed Thursday morning in a Texas Tribune interview when asked about the revelation — reported overnight by The Associated Press — that Davis wanted to allow Texans to carry firearms in public.

“The discussions that I have had with the law enforcement back home, they think that open carry does not make their job any easier, and I’m with them,” Van De Putte said. “This is one where Wendy and I are on a different page.”

Texas Democratic Party Chairman Gilberto Hinojosa also said he did not support open carry, but noted that many Democrats in Texas are members of the National Rifle Association and have been strong supporters of expanding gun rights here.

“We’re not in favor of it,” he said. “The position that we’re taking at the Democratic Party today, we don’t think that promotes the safe use of weapons in Texas." Hinojosa said Davis could lose support from some gun control advocates, but he predicted liberals would keep up their “intensity” for her campaign because they’re more concerned with bread-and-butter issues such as education and health care.

Probably the worst disfavor she did herself is that she simultaneously deflated her base while aggravating the conservatives and gun nuts who refuse to believe her.  Just read some of the comments here.

Privately, though, some of Davis’ top supporters said they were caught off guard and disappointed by her embrace of a position that has in the past sparked divisions even among traditional supporters of strong or expanded gun rights.

And it seemed doubtful that Davis would attract much support from pro-gun groups.

There's a lot of people outside Texas who were ready to write checks that aren't going to do so now.  They don't understand the culture of the Lone Star State, and certainly not the subculture of guns and Texas.  More importantly, they don't want to.

Sidebar: I own a few guns -- a .22 rifle my father bought me at the GI Surplus in Beaumont when I was 12, a 20 gauge shotgun I bought from a friend in high school, a Ruger .38 caliber revolver that I traded another high school friend a broken-down motorcycle for, and a 9mm Glock I bought at a Pasadena gun show about 8-10 years ago.  (I was judging the Labor Day BBQ contest with the AFL-CIO and the gun show was going on simultaneously.  So I cruised on in and looked around with some guys, and whoops there it was.  How often are you going to see that, after all?  At core, I'm just East Texas white trash.)

See, Wendy Davis grew up fairly poor, and lived in a trailer park for awhile; I'm sure she knows something about guns.  So this bit about open carry doesn't come as so much of a shock or surprise to me.

But it's a dealbreaker for lots and lots of Democrats inside and outside Texas, many of whom are to the right of me otherwise politically.  For my part, I would like to be a more idealistic peace-loving Green, but I just can't fully commit. (It's sort of like being a conflicted carnivore.)  You can't win any revolutions without some firearms, and muskets and balls are a little out of style.

I just don't think Thomas Jefferson was joking around when he pushed it up to the Second Amendment.

Yet... I favor gun legislation of almost all kinds, especially on the assault weapon-variety.  I do NOT have a CHL because I believe that law enforcement -- even the lousiest of Texas cops, HPD -- should be the only people licensed to carry, concealed or unconcealed.  I am confident that is enough to keep me safe in public places.  I am most certainly not in favor of weapons being brandished, or strapped, or hidden in boots like Jerry Patterson.

In your home, under lock and key. At the range, or in the field.  All individuals handling them properly safety-trained (with continuing education courses for all, including children).  So hopefully that clarifies my position on open carry; absolutely not.  I'm not interested in living in the American version of Somalia, or Afghanistan, or Iraq, in spite the TXGOP's headlong rush to get us there.

I realize this makes me a confounding dichotomy among most every single progressive and conservative.  Too bad for them; gun-totin' liberals are here, we've always been here, get used to it.  But back to Wendy Davis.

I consider this to be the most colossal fuckup to date by the Davis campaign.  It suggests that someone outside Texas -- with no understanding of the previously-referenced Texas culture -- advised her poorly.  But even if that was the case, she should not have taken that advice.  At the very least, she should have exercised her political sixth sense and deferred this disclosure -- especially if it represents her beliefs and not some political calculation -- to after the primary election.  This rationale is almost precisely why she has been so hard to pin down specifically about gay marriage, and also why Greg Abbott has not outlined any specific policy proposals ... except for a border wall with armed guards and a moat and alligators and boiling oil.

He's not going after any Democratic primary crossover voters with that.

I'm pretty sure that everybody understands that Davis, contrary to the perpetual Republican whining, is no liberal.  She has voted Republican in the past, she is in law practice with a former GOP state legislator chief of staff of Rick Perry's, that practice does a lot of corporate work, she's advocated for safe water for the frackers, etc.  Even most Democrats understand that this is, sadly, the only kind of Democrat that stands a chance of getting elected in Texas.  Until non-voters who lean Democratic start showing up to vote, the Republicans aren't going to moderate themselves.  Once some Democrats get elected, then you focus on getting more.  Once you have more, you focus on better Democrats.

Texas Democrats have spent a couple of decades just trying to get one elected, without success, as everybody knows.  James Moore summarizes the brutal truth for Sen. Davis.

She's lost my vote with this Open Carry crap. I believe in the Second Amendment and have never felt the conceal carry legislation was as dangerous as portrayed. People have a right to guns. People also have a right to not get shot by guns. We even have what seems a moral right to go into a public place and not have to wonder if the guy wearing the .45 in his holster and swilling beer is not going to get pissed about something inane and clear his leather and start firing. A person entering a room wearing a holstered gun in open view completely changes the entire dynamics of that room without any real purpose.

I can't vote for Greg Abbott. And this makes it impossible for me to vote for Wendy Davis. I know politics is all about compromise. I've been around a bit. I know we sometimes have to settle for not getting everything we want in a candidate. But there are some things I refuse to accept in a potential leader. Pandering to the right to support Open Carry Laws fits in that category.

I'm sitting out this Texas gubernatorial election. 

No reason to do that, James.  There's plenty of other candidates in the race for governor besides the Democrat or the Republican.  Your vote won't be wasted; undervoting at the top of the ballot is for suckers.

Moore isn't alone.  Davis is leaking base Democrats like John Coby, for example.  Neil Aquino wasn't ever one of those, but has some good advice for those who wish to pursue a course outside the box.  And Socratic Gadfly has been a harsher critic of the senator's starboard tack on other topics for some time now.

Davis should be talking about anything else but guns -- or fundraising, or minor discrepancies in her life story, or other hot-button social issues that Greg Abbott picks -- going forward.  There's plenty of topics that need elaboration: she needs to focus even more on education, the rights of women and minorities (actual conservative crossover appeals), and an economy where all Texans can lift themselves up, not just the greediest and the wealthiest.

But she may be out of chances to do that now.

This might represent the moment in the 2014 gubernatorial campaign that we look back on in November and observe that all hope was lost for Wendy Davis.  It might also represent a pivotal moment for Texas Greens, if they can step up and deliver the proper contrast to a corporate, conservative Democratic party in Texas that is just too Republican-lite for many Texans.  But they might begin by getting their candidate a website, or a Facebook page, or even an image of his visage online.

We'll just have to watch and see what happens.

Update: McBlogger, succinct. And Juanita Jean, straight up no chaser.

It is mid February.  If this campaign doesn’t get back on track soon, it’s over.  We’ve sacrificed another Democrat to a nonexistent “persuadable Republican,” when all we had to do is excite the base in urban areas and South Texas.

I feel sure her campaign is telling her, “What’s your base going to do?  Vote for Abbott?   They won’t do that because he’s worse for them than you are.”   No, they won’t vote for Abbott.  They just won’t vote and that is the worst thing you can do to Texas.

More Texas Republican one-upsmanship

-- Chris Christie will be in the Metroplex today, raising money for the Republican Governors Association.  And neither Rick Perry nor Greg Abbott is going to meet him while he's in town.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) will not be at Christie's events in Dallas and Fort Worth. A spokesman for Perry told the Dallas Morning News Perry was "pleased" Christie would be visiting Texas.

"Governors come to our state regularly for a variety of reasons and we’re pleased to have them here," the spokesman said.

Greg Abbott, the likely Republican nominee in Texas' gubernatorial race this year also will not be at Christie's event. A spokesman for Abbott told the Dallas Morning News he would be in Houston for an appearance on immigration.

There was a third Republican who wasn't going to be able to meet Christie also, but nobody can remember who it is.  Oops.

-- Abbott does have his plate full, to be sure.  In a remarkable gaffe earlier this week, he revealed that South Texas is like a whole other country... a third-world one.  From my inbox:

Speaking from Dallas on Tuesday, February 4, Abbott also singled out the elected leadership and people of the Texas border region and neighboring Mexico, which is the largest trading partner with Texas, as being dishonest.

“This creeping corruption resembles third-world county practices that erode the social fabric of our communities,” Abbott said.

State Rep. Terry Canales of Edinburg took exception.

“What kind of Texas leader tells the whole world that the most important state in America has “Third-World” conditions, which sends the extremely damaging message that Texans are uneducated, unskilled, controlled by drug lords and other thugs, and served by incompetent local and county governments?” Canales asked. “It shows how much contempt that Greg Abbott has for millions of his fellow citizens. With so-called friends like Greg Abbott, who needs enemies?”

I don't think even Abbott's Latina wife is going to be able to help him out with this. That mistake is going to cost him another couple of million bucks in Spanish-language media, and Aaron Peña will be sent back out on the road again.

-- Not to be outdone, Congresscritters Pete Sessions and Joe Barton stepped up and tried to take the heat off Abbott with malaprops of their own.

Sessions:

Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Dallas, called long-term unemployment insurance “immoral” on Tuesday.

“I believe it is immoral for this country to have, as a policy, extending long-term unemployment [insurance] to people rather than us working on the creation of jobs,” he said on the House floor. “[People must] be able to have a job, to learn to take care of themselves, to be able to meet their needs, to be able to become engaged in their community and have self-respect enough to know that jobs are important.”

Sessions’ statements were first reported by the Huffington Post on Tuesday. As Rules Committee chairman, he wields significant influence in crafting the House’s agenda. In January, the Senate failed to pass a Democratic-sponsored bill that would extend federal benefits for more than 1.3 million Americans who have been out of work for more than 26 weeks.

Barton:

At a question-and-answer session with reporters, Representative Joe Barton said Republicans should push for deficit reduction in exchange for a debt-limit increase.

Barton, a Texas Republican who has been in Congress since 1985, said his party should push for curbs in spending on entitlement programs such as Social Security.

"A clean debt ceiling, I think, is capitulation," Barton said at "Conversation with Conservatives," a monthly forum moderated by the Heritage Foundation.

No UI, no SS.  Just go live under a bridge and starve while we find more tax cuts for oil companies, so that they can eventually create some jobs for you poor slobs in steerage class.  And if you get sick, then die quickly and reduce the surplus population.

If I hadn't linked it, you'd think I was making it up.  You would say to yourself: 'nobody could possibly be this cold-blooded'.

-- Finally, comprehensive immigration reform is dead in the US House until after the election.

Conservative Republicans on Wednesday ruled out any immigration legislation in the House this year, insisting that the GOP should wait until next year when the party might also control the Senate.

[...]

But several of the conservatives were adamant that the House should do nothing on the issue this year, a midterm election year when the GOP is angling to gain six seats in the Senate and seize majority control. Democrats currently have a 55-45 advantage but are defending more seats, including ones in Republican-leaning states.

"I think it's a mistake for us to have an internal battle in the Republican Party this year about immigration reform," Rep. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, told reporters at a gathering of conservatives. "I think when we take back the Senate in 2014 one of the first things we should do next year after we do certain economic issues, I think we should address the immigration issue."

Labrador's comments were noteworthy as he was one of eight House members working on bipartisan immigration legislation last year. He later abandoned the negotiations.

Wayne has more on the fecklessness of the GOP, and the spinelessness of the Democrats to effectively run on the issue.  Latino voters: it's all on you to change this if you don't like it.  As Howard Dean said not so long ago: you have the power.  Get your block, your neighborhood, your church, and your community registered to vote in November.  And make sure you have proper ID.

Update: Almost forgot to mention that the True the Vote pasty gangsters are once again vindicated; there is indeed voter fraud in Texas.  Unfortunately it's Harris County Republicans doing the defrauding.

Four political campaign workers have been indicted by a Harris County Grand Jury in the wake of allegations of election fraud in a Harris County Justice of the Peace race, first reported by Local 2 News in January.

The suspects -- two men and two women -- were paid to gather signatures to place Republican candidate Leonila Olivares Salazar's name on the ballot in the Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2, Place 2 race.

Salazar is fighting to stay on the ballot. She says the four workers were hired by her campaign consultant, Collonnade Marketing, owned by long-time politico Fred Blanton.

[...]

The indictments, handed down Monday, come about two weeks after Salazar’s Democratic opponent, incumbent Judge George Risner, sued to have her name withdrawn from the ballot.

As first reported by Local 2, Risner obtained signed statements from three of the suspects admitting they did not actually obtain the signatures listed on the petitions.

Risner said his investigation shows that 380 of 447 signatures submitted to put Salazar's name on the ballot were forged.

The indictments name campaign workers 57-year-old Ralph Basil Garcia, 53-year-old Annette Irigoyen, 28-year-old Iris Irgoyen and 55-year-old David Basurto. All face felony charges of engaging in organized criminal activity and tampering with a governmental record.

You just can't make this stuff up.

Only two things today

If your time is short -- like mine -- and you only have time to read one or two pieces about Texas politics today, then click on these from Paul Burka and Charles Kuffner.

The evolution of the Republican primary into a race to the far right is a sad moment in Texas politics. There is nothing left of the party of George W. Bush, or even the party of Rick Perry. The press has done little to hold up its side of the equation; they can't get away from the Wendy Davis saga. We should be talking about how Republicans have allowed creationism to creep into the schools, about the myopia of the media when it comes to setting the agenda for a political race, about the failure of the business community to shoulder its share of responsibility for educating Texans about the things our citizens need: better schools, better roads, better health care.

There's only three more paragraphs there.  Burka isn't all that accurate all that often any more, but he's dead solid perfect there.  And so is Charles.  All the grafs ahead of this last one are important.

Here’s where Mark Jones’ idea really makes no sense. Pretty much every county where Democrats are strong features important primaries. We already know about Harris County, where the need to nominate Kim Ogg outweighs Jones’ suggestion all by itself. Travis County is electing a County Judge, as is El Paso County, which also features three hot legislative races. Bexar County has races for County Judge, County Clerk, District Attorney, District Clerk, and a slew of District Court judges. Dallas County has a power struggle between current DA Craig Watkins and Party Chair Darlene Ewing, with the former running his own slate of candidates, including one against Ewing. Tarrant County will be key to Rep. Mark Veasey’s re-election. And those are just the big counties.

The media and the consultants and the anal-ysts like Jones have dictated the terms of this election so far, and not just with the roasting of Wendy Davis for the snarling consumption by the fringe right hogs in this state.

The only way that will ever change is if enough people refuse to buy what they're peddling, and upend the conventional 'wisdom' with their direct action at the polling place.  If that does not happen, then Texans will keep getting what they have gotten for the past 20 years.  And will excruciatingly deserve what they will surely get in the years to come.

This is your final warning.