It's Ted Nugent's party, we just have to live with it

-- That's the headline at this Texas Observer piece written by Christopher Hooks, their new add.

Now, no one’s begrudging Nugent’s right to be an immoral, hateful asshole. Plenty of great artists are assholes. But you won’t see Woody Allen stumping for New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, and you won’t see R. Kelly posing with California’s Jerry Brown. It’s amazing that so many Texas GOPers are willing to bear-hug Nugent. We’re a long way from the party of William F. Buckley.

Abbott’s team more or less copped to employing Nugent cynically—a senior aide told CNN they were “only bringing on the gun rights activist to help spur voter turnout among the base.” (How much Abbott really needs to juice turnout for a primary in which he’s basically unopposed is unclear.) But using Nugent this way communicates to “the base” that he’s a serious figure and should be taken seriously—it makes the Nugent problem worse. Nugent’s getting more from this than Abbott is. And if you’re hoping for the Republican Party in Texas to straighten out and ditch the stranglehold of the fringe, that’s a crying shame.

The Abbott/Nugent brotherhood continued to bleed out yesterday after Nuge twisted on CNN in the wake of Wolf Blitzer's shout-out.  And then Ted bagged a CNN appearance at the last minute because Erin Burnett is as badass as the Viet Cong he got sick.  Hope it wasn't the runs.

On a more serious note, look at this moment where CNN reporter Ed Lavandera engages Abbott.  You can watch it with your sound turned off.  I gotta say, that is one cocky mofo in that wheelchair.  He isn't remotely interested in what anybody thinks, and that includes Paul Burka.

It reveals Abbott, at the very least, as someone who doesn't have acute political judgment. Nugent is political dynamite. He can blow sky high at a moments' notice. And if Abbott truly believes that he needs Nugent to establish his 2nd Amendment credentials, as if they were in any doubt, then Abbott must believe that his own record doesn't speak for itself. You can't have it both ways. The likely next governor of Texas should be better than that.

I think Republicans should be worried. This is exactly the kind of brashness and bravado that turns voters off -- in particular women voters -- and it may drive some Republican voters out of their party. In my opinion, at least, Abbott and the Republicans are a lot closer to the precipice than most Republicans realize. Yes, Texas is still a red state. But even in Texas, there are limits to what you can say. Ted Nugent put his mark on Greg Abbott. That mark is going to be indelible.

Yeah well, we'll have to wait and see about that, Paul.  There are all kinds of Republicans, not just in Texas, that want to stay close to this shitstain with legs and brandishing a semiautomatic weapon.  The stench may linger into a third day if Dave Carney (Abbott's handler) can't get the muzzle on Nuge.

-- Extending the bad week for the TXGOP: Problemas grandes para Dan Patrick.  Another great headline, may I say, even if it comes from Breitbart Texas.

In a Dallas Morning News report, Miguel “Mike” Andrade, 48, of Missouri City, told (the newspaper) and Houston’s KTRK-TV that he, his cousin and two other men from Mexico worked at one of Patrick’s five sports bars that operated in the Houston area until 1986.

At that time, there were no penalties involved in hiring someone in this residing in the U.S. illegally according to the report.

Patrick's most serious headache here is that he was once hospitable to an immigrant, which is totally unacceptable in a Republican primary.

“He said Patrick was a compassionate employer. He said Patrick offered sympathy over their anguish at living so far from their loved ones and being constantly in fear of being deported.

“He was real, real, real kind with us … real good with the Hispanic community. He was really wishing (he had) some kind of power…to help us to work in this country and have a better life,” said Andrade, who recalled that he was hired at the West Houston sports bar in 1983 or 1984.

In fact Patrick was so kind that he made Andrade an unusual offer, so unusual that Andrade was instantly suspicious.

“He said (is there) anything I can do so you can go and see your mom (in Mexico)? I don’t want to see you suffer,” Andrade said.

Patrick then said, “I can go and bring you to here,” according to Andrade, who said he believed that meant Patrick could drive him to Houston past U.S. inland border checkpoints.

Andrade said he declined to make the trip, for fear he'd be caught and Patrick would get in trouble.

I believe that allegation qualifies Dan Patrick as a coyote.  Oy vey.

Have you cast your ballot yet, conservatives?  Are we experiencing any debilitating cognitive dissonance?  If so, you'll get a second chance to make it right in about two months, and if you're really feeling queasy about now, just hang on until November.  Nobody is yet convinced that this strain of stomach flu will last all the way into the fall.

Pants Crappers for Greg Abbott

-- There's not much for me to add after yesterday's media meltdown over Greg Abbott and his "blood brother", the child predator.  If the Abbott campaign can't fully comprehend what a fantabulous pooch-screwing they performed yesterday... well, I'm not going to remind them.  Let's move on.

-- I almost made this its own post: Texas Libertarian Candidate for Statewide Judicial Race Outpolls Democrat in Texas Bar Poll...

On February 14, the Texas Bar Association released a poll of its members, for the 2014 statewide partisan judicial races. Over one-eighth of all bar members participated in the poll. See this story, which has a link to the results.

For Court of Criminal Appeals, place 3, the Libertarian, Mark W. Bennett, outpolled the Democratic candidate, John Granberg. Bennett is well-known in Texas, partly because of his blog “Defending People”. He is a Houston criminal defense lawyer, who was also a Libertarian nominee in 2012 for a statewide judicial race. In his 2012 race, in which his only opponent was a Republican, Bennett polled 22.1% of the vote. His 2012 vote total, 1,331,364, was the highest number of votes ever received by any Libertarian nominee for any office.

The full results for the 2014 poll for Criminal Appeals, place 3, are: Republican Bert Richardson 2,166; Republican Barbara Walther 2,115; Bennett 2,083; Democrat John Granberg 1,802.

Libertarians and Greens also did well in the poll in some other judicial races. For Criminal Appeals, place 4, a race with no Democrat, the Libertarian, Quanah Parker, received 23.39% and the Green, Judith Mills Sanders-Castro, got 16.06%. For Criminal Appeals, place 9, another race with no Democrat, the Libertarian, William Bryan Strange III, got 23.02% and the Green, George Joseph Altgelt, got 19.42%. In the race for Supreme Court, place 7, a race with a Democrat and a Republican, the Libertarian, Don Fulton, got 13.10% and the Green, Charles Edwin Waterbury, got 5.78%.

Repeat after me: no straight-ticket voting in 2014.

-- Egberto Willies, one of the real shining stars in H-Town's blogosphere, shares the insights of Houston Latino activist Ivan Sanchez, which is worth about a thousand times more than everything Marc Campos has ever said and done combined.  There's too much good stuff there for an excerpt to do justice, but here's a place to start before you go read the whole thing.

In 2014, we Hispanics: Mexicans, Colombians, Cubans, Ecuadoreans, Argentineans, Bolivians, Salvadorians, Peruvians, and every other Latino Country – make up 44% of Houston’s population. However, the countries we come from divide our united voice as each Latino from each country separates themselves into multiple segregated groups, therefore forming smaller separate percentages. Our cultures, soccer fanaticism, pride and other variables are separating and diminishing our united voice in the United States. Hispanics need to realize that no matter where we come from, here in the US, we all pledge to one flag. There is nothing wrong with preserving the culture, but we need to understand that we as individuals are nothing without each other. And as Houston is a melting pot of all ethnicities, I only hope all Hispanics melt together as well. My family already did.

-- Ten more reasons (nobody should need any more, but here you go anyway) why the Keystone XL pipeline needs to die (again). Number one:

1. There are no jobs on a dead planet.

-- Some people say that the end is near for Mucous.

Michael Quinn Sullivan, the political warlord who’s striven to purify and shape the Texas Republican Party in line with his particular vision, has managed to outfox a number of threats to his would-be empire in the last couple years. But increased scrutiny from the Texas Ethics Commission over charges of impropriety and the question of so-called “dark money,” the fuel that powers Sullivan’s political activity, presents the possibility that the state political Establishment he’s always railed against, and by extension state government itself, has finally found a way to weaken him.

Meh.  He's already lined up an afterlife at Breitbart Texas.

-- Mark Morford, on how to eat an Internet troll.  Short answer: Don't feed them; let them consume themselves.

Here’s something you surely already suspected but which is nevertheless sort of nice to have validated by science:

Internet trolls? Those nasty, scabrous, hate-spitting folk who spend their sunlight-deprived days taunting, baiting and venomizing all over the Interweb’s anonymous comments sections in response to, well, just about about any article, column, video, photo gallery, product review or heartfelt tale of love and woe from the here to Gawker to Amazon, Car & Driver to Knitter’s World to the NYT, including but certainly not limited to the very Slate article which discusses the general cruelty and stupidity of trolls itself?

Turns out they really are awful people. Sociopathic, sadistic, narcissistic, cruel by nature, highly unpleasant to be around. They love to cause pain. They delight in ruining the beautiful. The more pure and integrity-filled something is, the more they enjoy corrupting it. So says a new psychology study. Also, they’re antisocial. Poor dressers. Ungainly. Hairy in all the wrong places. Smell like soggy asparagus and old toenails. I’m just guessing.

I actually do spend too much time watching these trainwrecks, and it's probably not good for my mental health.  So I am going to cut back a little on that.  After all, there are people who might mistake me for a troll, and I wouldn't want that...

Stockman: 5 polls show Cornyn being pushed into runoff

The alternative news outlet JP Updates:

In the latest poll out of Texas by Human Events-Gravis Marketing, there’s some trouble for current Senator John Cornyn who is running for re-election.

When asked “if the election were held today, would you vote for Republican Steve Stockman or Republican John Cornyn?” Cornyn holds a 15-point lead, 43% to 28% Stockman, while 29% of the voters are still undecided.

“Congressman Stockman is much closer than expected,” Douglas Kaplan of Gravis Marketing said. “Cornyn is under 50% with a significant amount still undecided, which is dangerous territory for an incumbent. The poll was conducted before Cornyn’s recent cloture vote on raising the debt limit, which could hurt him among conservative primary voters.”

When asked if they approve of Rep. Stockman, 55% said they’re unsure while 28% approved and 18% disapproved. When asked the same about Sen. John Cornyn 49% said they approve, 26% disapprove and 24% were unsure.

The poll was conducted between 2/10/14 and 2/12/14, 729 likely Republican voters participated in the phone survey. The poll has a margin of error 3.6%.

Stockman is crowing about this, and heaps on some additional derision for the incumbent.

This is the fifth independent poll published in Cornyn’s race.  All five show Cornyn failing to win over 50 percent.  Cornyn has refused to release his internal polling results and has begun directly attacking Stockman, which usually indicates a candidate is in trouble.

A University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll conducted between Oct. 18 and Oct. 27, 2013 found Cornyn with only 39 percent support among likely Republican primary voters, far below where a two-term incumbent and member of Senate leadership should be.

An Oct. 26, 2013 Gravis poll showed Cornyn failing to win a majority in a two-way race against five different candidates.  It showed Cornyn getting only 41 percent against Stockman, whom many voters were not familiar with.

A Public Policy Polling survey conducted Nov. 1-4, 2013 found “49% [of Republican primary voters] say they would like their candidate next year to be someone more conservative, compared to only 33% who say they support Cornyn.”

PPP concluded “John Cornyn is in grave danger of losing a primary next year if a serious campaign is run against him. Cornyn’s approval with Republican primary voters is only 46%, with 33% of voters disapproving of him.”

Even a poll by WPA Opinion Research conducted Dec. 10-12, 2013, and touted by Cornyn himself, showed Cornyn only at 50 percent among likely Republican primary voters. At the time of the poll many voters were not aware Cornyn had an opponent.

I don't have any idea how much stock to place in this data.  Primary polling is even less reliable than it is ahead of general elections, and this latest one is an ultraconservative source with an agenda.  Let's just mark it down as a data point worthy of some chat for now.  I find it more interesting that Cornyn's other Tea Pee challenger, Dwayne Stovall, appears to be finding some traction, especially with a video ad you can see here, which earned him the coveted Big Jolly endorsement.

If the conventional wisdom here is this far removed from the battle on the GOP ground, and one of these two morons forces Cornyn into a May runoff, I can certainly believe that Big John will be too politically wounded to hold on.  At this point I still don't see it, but stranger things have happened.

If you are still reading, then you can click over to view the results of a Central Texas Republican Assembly (sounds Communist to me) straw poll from almost two months ago that has Stockman ahead of Cornyn 45-41, with Stovall and four others registering no support whatsoever.  This is why you can't pay too much attention to these things so early... and why paying anything but marginal attention to them is like nailing a rack of ribs to a tree to lure Bigfoot.

Update: Juanita Jean is encouraged.  And on some level, I am a little surprised that this guy isn't ahead of Cornyn.  Maybe he should have run for governor, or lieutenant governor, or...

A. Because Greg Abbott is Ted Nugent's wingman

Q. Why is Greg Abbott palling around with a predator?



Update: What exactly would Ted Nugent have to say in order for Republicans to stop campaigning with him?  I'll bet I can guess; something like "I was wrong all this time, and I support President Obama".

James Moore takes down the TexTrib

"Bush's Brain" author James Moore has been on a tear for the past month, between cracking the skulls of Texas political reporters over the Wendy Davis stories, and then cracking Davis herself over her clumsy relations with same.  He made a clean break with her over open carry, and now he's got the Texas Tribune in his crosshairs in a two four-part piece.  First, he upbraids Trib editor Emily Ramshaw for thanking a candidate on Twitter for an "*unbelievably* generous financial contribution".

Ramshaw may not have known she was talking to a candidate in a district only seven miles from the Tribune’s office, or she simply did not care. Either of those possibilities, however, is not acceptable to anyone who might believe the Tribune can do meaningful reporting on Texas politics and government. One suggests incompetence; the other points toward collusion. The Trib simply cannot be unbiased because it has become a part of the institutions it told the public it intended to scrutinize and hold responsible for good government. Regardless of the organization’s intentions, there is no conclusion to reach other than the Texas Tribune has to be considered corrupted by its sources of funding.

In journalism, appearances are destiny.

The “non-profit” Tribune is the recipient of significant amounts of money from the same corporations and lobbyists that donate to legislators and other office holders to help them in their campaigns, and to influence the outcome of legislation related to those donor’s special interests. In any context, this is a classic conflict of interest, and regardless of how much the Trib’s editors might insist they are able to do their work without being affected by these funds, they have been in operation long enough to see there is no reason to take them seriously as a news organization, and the evidence to reach this conclusion is abundant.

It’s also a kind of rank hypocrisy that is so grandiose as to be entertaining.

With the news over the weekend that Breitbart is to begin posting a Texas version of its very own truthiness for conservatives, this remains a bad time to be a real, actual journalist in the Lone Star.  From the second part of Moore's story...

During the glory days of journalism at the Texas capitol in Austin, newspapers with large bureau staffs covered hearings and debates on legislation, almost every statewide campaign for office, and also held the governor and lawmakers accountable on a daily basis. TV stations from the four major cities maintained full time broadcast bureaus even when the legislature was not in session. We were expected to be on the air every evening with a new and important story. The hourly machinations of state government in the 80s and 90s were scrutinized by many sets of eyes. Big city newspapers circulated in Austin and reporters read and watched the competitions’ stories to learn what had been missed, and so did the lobbyists and legislators.

After 22 years of being a part of that capitol press corps as a TV news correspondent, I joined a startup company that tried to launch a statewide network newscast and website. The Internet was just beginning its maturation process and we were hopeful. My final year in the business, however, ended with me traveling on the George W. Bush presidential campaign for that nascent news operation and, subsequently, I left journalism to begin work in public relations. In retrospect, my timing was excellent. The slow shutdown of every TV news bureau and reduction of newspaper staff sizes indicated editors and budget writers had made a decision about what interested their readers and viewers, and government did not make the cut.

As for the TexTrib, their bias toward their corporate overlords was first revealed by Texas Sharon at EarthWorks, summarized here.  I have also excoriated their terrible polling more than once or twice.

If the TexTrib wants to be a mouthpiece for the corporations, much as what has become of NPR, then so be it.  Let's not kid ourselves about it, however.  And if the looniest of conservatives think the Tribune is "leftist media", you better know that the remaining load is to be dumped on top of your head in short order.

Update: Here are parts three and four from Moore, and Socratic Gadfly's take.  

Update II: And Eye on Williamson cuts to the nut as well.

There is no sustainable business model for doing the kind or journalism and reporting that the public needs in a democracy. Corporations and the wealthy will not buy advertising on media outlets that doggedly expose their malfeasance and corruption. The publicly funded model we once had did a pretty good job of supporting the kind of journalism and reporting we need. But when the same money that’s buying public and non-profit media, is also buying our politicians, it’s unlikely they’d be willing to ramp up funding for funding public media. One that would be independent enough to expose their political corruption.

Finally (which means any more updates on this topic will go into a new post), Moore provides the responses from the TexTrib in "No Country for Old Reporters".

The reaction to the Texas Tribune piece has been mostly condescension from Trib reporters. None of them addressed me directly in their tweets but one of their digirati tweeted a “counter-counter” response, “No country for old men.” I’m sure that is patently true. Best I can tell the only people over 50 at the Tribune are Ross Ramsey, though I think Jay Root is 50 or close, and Evan Smith is 47. Everyone else is quite young, and much more affordable, and easily taught the way things are done. 

But youth doesn’t slow down the Trib. CEO Evan Smith tweeted that they were looking for a reporter to do a deep, investigative dive into the Texas criminal justice system. A complex as hell topic that has befuddled many a grizzled journalistic veteran but the Trib is advertising the slot as “entry level.” Good luck, kid, from an old man who apparently doesn’t belong in that country.

The Early Voting Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance is always ready to cast a ballot as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff concluded his series of primary interviews with conversations featuring State Rep. Mary Gonzalez, and Ag Commissioner candidates Kinky Friedman and Hugh Fitzsimons.

Over two million Texas voters from the 2008 Democratic primary -- and eight million who were registered to vote in 2012's general election -- have not shown up to cast a ballot. Texas is NOT a conservative state; it's a non-voting state. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs has the details on what it will take for Texas to turn blue, and the numbers don't offer much encouragement.

Horwitz at Texpatriate explains why Attorney General Greg Abbott pulled the ladder up behind him on other disabled Texans after receiving his thirty pieces of silver.

WCNews at Eye on Williamson shows how the Texas GOP, with Rick Perry at the wheel, took the express lane to Crazy Town and the rest of Texas is along for the ride: It's Going To Be A Huge Mess.

Neil at All People Have Value admired turtles and a fish seemingly doing well in dirty water in Houston's Buffalo Bayou. These creatures recall the fact that people can not only thrive in a rough environment, they can also shape their surroundings for the better. All People Have Value is part of NeilAquino.com.

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

Texas Clean Air Matters calls on the state to work with the EPA.

The Feminist Justice League shows some love for Sen. Leticia Van de Putte.

The Texas Green Report cheers a study showing Texas among the nation's leaders in solar-related jobs.

Christopher Hooks wants Dan Patrick and Julian Castro to have that debate about immigration already.

Lone Star Q salutes outgoing Fort Worth City Council member Joel Burns.

Mustafa Tameez analyzes NASA's Tea Party Primary in CD36.

Battleground Texas had an amazingly successful event at Rice University for Wendy Davis.

And finally, the TPA congratulates Noel Freeman for a long awaited and much deserved second chance.

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