Sunday No Big Bird Funnies

Brainy Endorsements: Vince Ryan

Vince Ryan is running for re-election to Harris County attorney. He was elected in 2008's Obama wave and faces Republican Bob Talton to return to office. If you don't count Wayne Dolcefino as political opposition, that is.

The Chron beat me to this endorsement (as slow as they are, I am disappointed I let that happen) and while gathering plaudits for Ryan's work and experience, drops in this intriguing paragraph.

We have noted, however, that partisanship has on occasion been taken to unhelpful lengths in blogs written by high-profile members of Ryan's team. These reflect on the county attorney himself and do not always promote civil and respectful relations with the many elected Republican officials at the county.

I can't find what they refer to here. Anyone?

GOP Godfather Gary Polland, something weird calling itself Texas Patriot Statesman, and Big Jolly have made the usual partisan appeals, but anything critical of Talton and supportive of the Ryan campaign "from high-profile members" of his team eludes my searches.

And Charles Kuffner -- from his continuing series of paeans on the inexorable power of money to get elected -- queried his readers in the spring about the rift among Republicans in the primary. No one appears to have answered his question.

I'll give that a whirl, without being able to confirm some of my supposition.

Talton earned the nickname "Crazy Bob" when he was in the state legislature. Talton, in fact, was so crazy that he bucked Tom Craddick -- hard and often -- when he was in the statehouse, which at the time was virtually a suicidal act. Jolly alludes to this in the link above (at the end).

Talton kamikaze style was so feared, in fact, that no less than Representatives Garnet Coleman and Jessica Farrar, state Senators Mario Gallegos and Rodney Ellis, former Harris County Commissioner Sylvia Garcia, former state representatives Scott Hochberg and Rick Noriega, all refused to support the Democrat that ran against Talton in 2006, Janette Sexton. It's worth excerpting a small bit...

(S)everal Houston-area Democratic legislators made promises of help of all kinds, but when she called to take up those offers, her calls went unanswered and unreturned. There were some people who leveled with Padilla-Sexton: state representative Garnet Coleman told her that he and his colleagues had discussed her race and come to the conclusion that they could not assist her because “they had to work with Bob Talton on regional issues”. (I contacted Phillip Martin, Coleman’s chief of staff, for a response but my queries went unanswered.) Mostly she got the cold shoulder: Rep. Jessica Farrar was effusive in her initial offers of assistance, but declined to return phone messages when the time came to help. Padilla-Sexton also reached out to Harris County commissioner Sylvia Garcia (mentoring), Sen. Rodney Ellis (about an air quality question), Rep. Scott Hochberg (regarding state education funding), Sen. Mario Gallegos (for adding credibility to her campaign) and Rep. Rick Noriega (for general help and direction), but none of those people returned her calls, either.

There were obviously conversations between Craddick's many enemies, Republicans among them, in 2006 about how to take him down. This may have earned Talton the respect so many Democrats showed him, as well as some enmity from conservatives of a Craddick-loving stripe. After all, there were over a dozen Texas House Democrats lining up behind the former Speaker in January 2007. Given that, how could any conservative fall out of formation and not be accused of heresy?

What this tells me -- and what it should tell you -- is that Democrats are such a beaten-down minority that they don't hesitate to throw one of their own under the bus if they can find a Republican to make a deal with. That's classic battered-spouse syndrome, folks. But the more important question is: what's the difference between the two parties, again?

I have a post prepared that is going to talk more about these local concession-tenderers, as John Behrman has referred to them. I may run it before Election Day... if I want to burn the last bridge between me and the Harris County Democratic Party. Suffice it for now to say that this is precisely where the roots of the problem for Democrats are dug in: with the oligarchs who are collecting markers, waiting for their next electoral opportunity.

But all of that is a digression from the low-quality opponent Vince Ryan has, as well as from the fine work he has done. Let's get Ryan back downtown to keep working as a check and balance against the worst of the Republicans on Harris County's Commissioners Court.

Brainy Endorsements so far include the following...

Nile Copeland for the First Court of Appeals
Alfred and GC Molison for HD 131 and SBOE, respectively
Henry Cooper for HD 148
Keith Hampton for Presiding Judge, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Barbara Gardner for the Fourteenth Court of Appeals
Don Cook for Congress, 22nd District
Max Martin for Congress, 36th District
Remington Alessi for Harris County Sheriff
David Courtney for Texas Senate, District 17
Ann Harris Bennett for Harris County Tax Assessor/Collector
Ann Johnson for HD-134
Mike Engelhart, Larry Weiman, and Al Bennett for the Harris County bench
Mark Roberts for Congress, 2nd District
David Collins for United States Senate

Jill Stein and Kingwood's Students for Democratic Socialism

Three hundred people, not all of them students at Lone Star College, and not all the students present as required for curriculum. If I hadn't taken the pictures myself, I never would have thought it happened, either.

Despite reading Stace and Egberto all these years, I had no idea there was such a thriving nest of communist pit vipers in Kingwood.

This is exactly what conservatives have been warning us about for years: damn liberal professors corrupting the minds of our impressionable young people.

One of those who sponsors the group and hosted the event indicated to me that when they polled 900 students four years ago, the campus went 61-39... for McCain. So maybe Republicans don't have so much to worry about after all.

Still, at a time when the Harris County Green Party can barely get fifty at a monthly general meeting, and the leverage of teachers over students notwithstanding, 300 people on an NFL Thursday night is, well... unbelievable.

Dr. Stein touched on everything her presidential campaign is about for the hour she spoke, and answered questions for another thirty minutes, before being greeted by about 40-50 of the attendees for face time and photos. Earlier in the day it was the same phenomenon at U of H: students thronged around her in rotating groups of twenty to thirty, listening raptly and snapping pics on their cellphones. A few I spoke to as I distributed lit knew who she was, and were delighted to see her on campus.

I had one black student tell me he made a mistake when he voted for Obama in 2008 (!).

I haven't spent much time on college campuses in the past few years, so I'm sore from all the walking and was miserable in the heat and humidity for what little I did yesterday. My shin splints fired up and I went hypoglycemic, necessitating a sit-down for about fifteen minutes with a sandwich and ice tea while others did the work.

But this morning, I'm still agog at what the potential is for a progressive (not necessarily blue, although by extension they will benefit) movement in Texas.


Jill Stein takes a "Toxic Tour" of the Houston Ship Channel and East End this morning, followed by a press conference at 11 at Tranquility Park, with Juan Parras of t.e.j.a.s and Tar Sands Blockade activist Ben Franklin, who was choked, pepper-sprayed, Tasered, and then arrested in east Texas last week. Yesterday, actress Daryl Hannah was also arrested, as was a Wood County great-grandmother, charged with trespassing... on her own property.

Finally, another public speaking event at St. Stephens in the Montrose at 7 p.m. wraps the Stein campaign's day. Tomorrow: San Antonio. See the full schedule of Texas appearances here.

More debate reaction

It's not nearly as serious as what you have been hearing.

-- Conan O'Brien, too.

-- Chris Matthews is still mad about Obama's debate performance.

-- One debate in the can, and one swing state voter -- a Republican-leaning Milennial working on her MBA, completely turned off by the GOP's war on women -- remains undecided.

And Nick Anderson re-clarifies how relevant debate spin is to reality.

Jiill Stein's Houston itinerary: Thursday October 4

As previously advanced, Green Party candidate Jill Stein brings her campaign for President of the United States to Houston today and tomorrow. The public is invited to attend the the morning and evening events listed.

At 11:30 am, after arriving in Houston earlier, Stein will appear at the main campus of the University of Houston (4800 Calhoun Road, 77004), specifically the  University Center Satellite food court, to meet and greet with Green Party supporters, progressive activists, students, faculty, staff, and local media.

This is your best chance to speak -- maybe have your photo taken -- with a 2012 presidential candidate... and not have to pay $10,000 for the privilege.

Dr. Stein at U of H this afternoon.

At 1:30 pm, Stein will join the first of two poly-sci classes at U of H for a discussion and Q&A.

Then at 3:00 pm, Stein will be in the KPFT studios, and on the air live, with Leo Gold, host of The New Capital Show.

By all indications at this time, Stein's 7:00 pm public speaking engagement at Lone Star College -- Kingwood (20000 Kingwood Drive, Kingwood 77339), could be the most popular event on the schedule. Stein will speak at the Student Conference Center, and will be available to Houston media before and after.

Stein will also be in Houston Friday and Sunday, with a day trip to San Antonio in-between. The full schedule is here, and also at the Stein for President website.

Not quite up to the hype.

Not exactly Ali-Frazier.

Not even "The Kenyan Assassin" versus "The Stormin' Mormon".

More like "See Mitt. See Mitt act like a dick."

Faced with several recent polls showing Romney falling behind, the GOP candidate may have bought himself some added time after Wednesday's debate, where he appeared on the offensive against Obama. Romney's answers to questions from the moderator, Jim Lehrer of PBS Newshour, who played a subdued role over the course of the evening, were crisp and appeared well-rehearsed. His responses included as many specifics as the limited time would allow, and Romney seemed to hit his marks in a way Obama was not able to.

The headline of that article called Obama 'subdued', and the excerpt says it was Lehrer who was somnambulant. The truth: Obama got carpet-bombed by the frenetic challenger, and the moderator lost control right from the jump.

Romney -- who, despite what they say about Mormons and caffeine, obviously had too many Red Bulls in the green room -- repeatedly interrupted both his debate opponent and the mod, crapped on the format by taking the last word every single time, and generally acted like he owned the debate hall.

Lehrer indicated, after Romney finally completed answering the first question, that they were already fifteen minutes behind. Mitt had something to prove last night but 'jackass' probably wasn't what he was hoping for. He went for it anyway. I'm sure TeaBaggers and Bibi Netanyahu are thrilled about Mitt's belligerence, but I can't see that it sways many undecided voters.

Romney was due for a rebound after the past couple of months, and this is probably it. Things could narrow in the swing states. Republicans should be very enthused.

Does this performance change much? Did Lloyd Bentsen using Dan Quayle as a mop alter the trajectory in 1988? On the other hand, when Reagan asked the question in 1980, he changed the game.

Debates as turning points historically appear to be attributable to gaffes, like Richard Nixon's flopsweat in 1960, Gerald Ford's view of Polish independence in 1976, or Bush the Elder checking his watch in 1992. Obama didn't make any... and he won't. But as with four years ago, his cool detachment serves him poorly in this venue. The president is fencing; Romney is playing hockey, slamming Obama into the boards up and down the ice.

Here's another blast from the past: When Mike Dukakis calmly replied to a hyperbolic question from CNN's Bernie Shaw about his wife's theoretical rape and murder, he was seen as emotionally devoid, i.e., weak. But all that really did that was feed in to a well-established campaign season narrative about Dukakis.

The 2012 narrative is that Mitt is disorganized, dishonest, waffly, and robotic. What he did well last night is dispel two or three of those. ('Dishonest' wasn't one of them.)

And I generally prefer my candidates with a little fight in 'em, and Obama just does not have that. Which is fine, because I'd rather not have a hothead with his finger on the button. That's why I watched the Democracy Now! debate, where Jill Stein and Rocky Anderson were spliced live into the the conversation between Obama and Romney: Stein and Anderson both are passionate about the issues without being manic or hostile.

At least this faceoff wasn't as cringe-inducing as Sadler-Cruz. Here's some additional perspective...

"The challenger, indeed": 

Republican Mitt Romney was fiery and having fun. President Barack Obama came off as the professor without much pop.

And while Democrats grudgingly conceded that Romney did well in Wednesday's debate, what matters is whether he changed the dynamic of a race that he appeared to be losing.

[...]

By that measure, Romney may not have changed the game, but he sure played it well. Obama avoided any gaffes but looked surprisingly lackluster at times.

"Will it be enough?":

After several difficult weeks, Republican Mitt Romney found his footing on Wednesday night in a strong debate performance against Democratic President Barack Obama. The question is whether it is too late to make a difference.

Romney could see a burst of fundraising, new interest from undecided voters and a wave of support from his fellow Republicans after he appeared to have emerged as a clear victor in his first face-to-face confrontation with Obama. Romney likely will benefit from favorable news coverage as well.

Still, with the November 6 election little more than a month away, Romney is running out of time to seize the lead.

Voting has begun in some form or another in 35 states, and 6 percent of those have already cast their ballots, according to a Reuters/IPSOS poll released on Wednesday.

And while debates are among the most memorable events of any presidential campaign, there is little evidence that they can change the outcome of an election.

Obama may have underwhelmed, but he avoided the sort of disastrous performance that can cause backers to reassess their support.

"Voters' reaction":

Mitt Romney seemed to be on the ball, more so than President Obama, in Wednesday night's kickoff of the 2012 presidential debate series. If you are keeping score, it's Mitt Romney: 1, President Obama, 0. 

Ultimately, I feel maybe President Obama played it too safe. I felt Obama wanted to speak more about Romney's platform than persuade the public of his own ideas. 

-- D. Emile Delaney, Austin, Texas

Romney's lack of details when it comes to health insurance and reducing the deficit is troubling. The most specific he got was saying that he would "eliminate all programs based on this test, if they don't pass it -- Is the program so critical it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it. And if not, I'll get rid of it." 

One of those programs is PBS; Romney said he loved Big Bird and would be sorry to see him go. Well, if Romney thinks that Sesame Street is PBS's sole contribution to society, then he really is out of touch with America. 

-- Lisa Zadok, San Jose, Calif.

Romney's performance was a textbook example of how one behaves in a debate. He was cheerful, but forceful, in command of his facts and, above all, relentless. Obama, on the other hand, seemed nervous and ill at ease, looking on more than one occasion at his shoes. He clearly did not want to be there and did not enjoy the experience. 

-- Mark Whittington, Houston

Romney stated during the debate that the role of the federal government is to "to uphold the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence." Doesn't that include my right to believe in my own God(s), and not be forced to worship the "same God" he spoke of? Apparently not as far as Romney is concerned, as long as Congress continues to "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." My vote is now firmly set on Obama, who at the very least hasn't presumed to tell me what my religious beliefs are or should be. 

-- Lori May, Denver

The best one of those was this one (my emphasis). 

 

I believe Romney performed better, but this debate was a loss for both parties, and our nation, because it concentrated mainly on the economy and health care, but made no mention of civil liberties. Obama is fighting to keep [controversial NDAA provisions]. Why not attack him on that domestic policy issue? Because the Republicans are for it, too. Democrats and Republicans are OK with it.

In my state, we have seven candidates for president. Only two of these people are allowed to debate. It's my belief that this is bad for freedom. And I will look into the other candidates and vote for one of them. 

-- David Garrett Jr., Knoxville, Tenn.

Yep. Me too.

Update: Prairie Weather assembled the fact-checks of Romney's blither-blather. He failed.