Seven hundred, and fifty-four thousand

There's only ninety-nine seats remaining -- as of this posting -- on the Noriega Express. Are you on board yet?

See the endorsement by the Texas Democratic Party's stalwarts, including Sens. Rodney Ellis, John Whitmire, and Mario Gallegos here:



And see Rick's remarks on Senator Box Turtle here:

DOJ opposes net neutrality

Bad news:

The Justice Department said today that Internet service providers should be allowed to charge a fee for priority Web traffic.

The agency told the Federal Communications Commission, which is reviewing high-speed Internet practices, that it is opposed to "Net neutrality," the principle that all Internet sites should be equally accessible to any Web user.

This is another example of how our pervasive the neo-fascism has grown: government has again taken the side of the corporations over the people.

It's mobilization time.

Update: From the comments section of the Chron link above ...

How does this threat to Internet freedom affect you?

Small businesses — The little guy will be left in the "slow lane" with inferior Internet service, unable to compete.

Innovators with the next big idea — Startups and entrepreneurs will be muscled out of the marketplace by big corporations that pay Internet providers for the top spots on the Web.

Bloggers — Costs will skyrocket to post and share video and audio clips—silencing citizen journalists and putting more power in the hands of a few corporate-owned media outlets.

Google users — Another search engine could pay dominant Internet providers like AT&T to guarantee another search engine opens faster than Google on your computer.

I-pod listeners — A company like Comcast could slow access to iTunes, steering you to a higher-priced music service it owns.

Online shoppers — Companies could pay Internet providers to guarantee their online sales process faster than competitors with lower prices—distorting your choices as a consumer.

Telecommuters — When Internet companies like AT&T favor their own services, you won't be able to choose more affordable providers for online video, teleconferencing, Internet phone calls, and software that connects your home computer to your office.

Parents and retirees — Your choices as a consumer could be controlled by your Internet provider, steering you to their preferred services for online banking, health care information, sending photos, planning vacations, etc.

Political groups — Political organizing could be slowed by a handful of dominant Internet providers who ask advocacy groups to pay "protection money" for their Web sites and online features to work correctly.

Nonprofits — A charity's website could open at snail-like speeds, and online contributions could grind to a halt if nonprofits don't pay Internet providers for access to "the fast lane."
What They've Got Planned

The threat to an open internet isn't just speculation -- we've seen what happens when the Internet's gatekeepers get too much control. These companies, even, have said as much about their plans to discriminate online. According to the Washington Post:

William L. Smith, chief technology officer for Atlanta-based BellSouth Corp., told reporters and analysts that an Internet service provider such as his firm should be able, for example, to charge Yahoo Inc. for the opportunity to have its search site load faster than that of Google Inc.

He's not alone. Ed Whitacre of AT&T told BusinessWeek in late 2005:

Now what they would like to do is use my pipes free, but I ain't going to let them do that because we have spent this capital and we have to have a return on it. So there's going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they're using. Why should they be allowed to use my pipes?

By far the most significant evidence regarding the network owners' plans to discriminate is their stated intent to do so. As Verizon's Ivan Seidenberg told the Wall Street Journal:

We have to make sure they don't sit on our network and chew up our capacity. We need to pay for the pipe.

Network Neutrality advocates are not imagining a doomsday scenario. We are taking the telecom execs at their word.

Such corporate control of the Web would reduce your choices and stifle the spread of innovative and independent ideas that we've come to expect online. It would throw the digital revolution into reverse. Internet gatekeepers are already discriminating against Web sites and services they don't like:

In 2004, North Carolina ISP Madison River blocked their DSL customers from using any rival Web-based phone service.

In 2005, Canada's telephone giant Telus blocked customers from visiting a Web site sympathetic to the Telecommunications Workers Union during a contentious labor dispute.

Shaw, a major Canadian cable, internet, and telephone service company, intentionally downgrades the "quality and reliability" of competing Internet-phone services that their customers might choose -- driving customers to their own phone services not through better services, but by rigging the marketplace.

In April, Time Warner's AOL blocked all emails that mentioned www.dearaol.com -- an advocacy campaign opposing the company's pay-to-send e-mail scheme.

This is just the beginning. Cable and telco giants want to eliminate the Internet's open road in favor of a tollway that protects their status quo while stifling new ideas and innovation. If they get their way, they'll shut down the free flow of information and dictate how you use the Internet.

Who wants kolaches? Czech it out

Clearing the weekend schedule so we can go to Caldwell:

(I)n an age of kolache innovation that has resulted in the jalapeño cheese sausage - a taste that might have been as foreign as text messaging to the Czech immigrants who introduced the doughy pastry to the farmlands of Burleson County - tradition remains important.

It is a guiding principle of the annual Kolache Festival, which will be held for the 23rd year Saturday. In Caldwell, the Kolache Capital of Texas by act of the Legislature, the kolache has become a symbol of tradition.

As Caldwell Mayor Bernard Rychlik sees it, the kolache is a gift from the Czech immigrants who settled in the Burleson County area, bringing with them the pastry and a sense of hospitality that provided ample chance to offer them by the dozens to visitors.

For many in the Houston area, the doughy pastry topped with fruit or stuffed with sausage comes courtesy of chain stores. But in Caldwell and the Fausts' hometown of nearby Snook, a call remains for homemade.

"I'm 68 years old, and I haven't met a bad one,'' said Rychlik, the festival chairman. "I've met some that weren't as good as others, but I haven't turned down any.''

The pastry is part of a tradition that Rychlik inherited from grandparents who immigrated in 1883-85. His first language was the Czech spoken in his childhood home five miles outside Caldwell. He maintains a collection of Czech polka music in his GMC Yukon.

For 15 years he has served as the mayor of the city of about 4,000 that many might recognize as they pass the intersection of Texas 21 and Texas 36 on the way over the Brazos River, along cotton and corn fields, to Bryan or College Station.

Although the Legislature dubbed Caldwell the state's "kolache capital," lawmakers have been generous with their recognition of the pastry's role in other former Czech communities. West, for example, home to three bakeries that serve kolaches to its 2,750 residents, was bestowed the title of "home of the official Kolache of the Texas Legislature."

The 23rd annual Kolache Festival will be held this Saturday in Caldwell.

• Where: The main county courthouse square of Caldwell, a city at the intersection of Texas 21 and Texas 36 (directions from Houston, about a two-hour drive).

• When: 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.

Highlights:

• 11:30 a.m.: Kolache-eating contest

• 12:15 p.m.: The Czech Heritage Singers of Houston

• 3 p.m.: Mark Halata and Texavia, a Houston-based Czech polka band

• 4 p.m.: Bake Show competition awards ceremony

• 8 a.m.-3 p.m.: Car show

• Information: www.burlesoncountytx.com or 979-567-0000

Texas justice isn't for sale -- because it's already been paid for

Two revealing reports about the state of Texas jurisprudence this week. First, from RG Ratcliffe of the Chron, it seems that Mikal Watts has been spreading more than just his money around:

Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mikal Watts of San Antonio once tried to pressure a legal opponent into a $60 million personal injury lawsuit settlement by claiming he would have an advantage on appeal because of his firm's "heavy" campaign financial support to an appellate court's justices, "all of whom are good Democrats."

More:

"This letter seems to confirm what everybody thinks about Texas justice. Very seldom is it this well-articulated," said Craig McDonald of Texans for Public Justice, an organization that advocates for campaign finance reform. "It confirms the fact Texas courts are filled with politics."

Naw. Ya think?

Watts said Tuesday he noted his contributions in the letter because defense lawyers always tell trial lawyers they cannot win their cases ultimately because the Texas Supreme Court consists of all Republican justices.

"It was in response to the garbage we hear from defense lawyers every day," Watts said.

Opposing counsel, he noted, typically will say, "It doesn't matter what a jury is going to do because we've got nine angry Republicans on the Texas Supreme Court who will take away whatever a jury does."

Oh. So it was just "aggressive negotiations". I get it now.

The only qualification Mikal Watts seems to have in standing for public office is that he has millions of dollars to spend getting himself elected. I just can't see much difference between him and John "Bush's Box Turtle" Cornyn.

Pretty hideous if that's our two choices in 2008.

You knew where I stood on this race sometime ago, but really there's no underscore I can add about the differences between Watts and Rick Noriega. If you see this as your opportunity to personally Change the Equation, then here's your link.

Update: Markos has more.

And from the Lone Star Project:

Study Shows Harris County Republican Judges are Financial Conduits to Non-Judicial Candidates and GOP Party Efforts

A detailed review of campaign finance reports filed by Harris County Judges shows that the Harris County Republican Party and its allied partisan Republican organizations received a surprisingly large level of support from Harris County GOP Judges. Over the last 6 years, Harris County partisan Republican political efforts received nearly one half million dollars from Republican judges.

Harris County Republican Judge Donations
Donations to Harris County Republican Party	$349,567
Donations to GOP Allied Republican Groups	$56,468
Total Donations to GOP Causes and Candidates	$450,308
Source: The Texas Ethics Commission

Donors to judicial candidates generally contribute because they support the individual candidate and do not take into account partisan considerations. In light of this, many Harris County donors might be surprised to learn that their contributions to Harris County incumbent Republican Judges are often quickly cycled through judicial campaign accounts and into the coffers of the Republican Party itself and to non-judicial Republican candidates.

Sitting judges usually try to avoid appearances of overt partisanship. Their campaign funds are typically used to support their own election efforts or activity not related to campaigns. Texas election law includes many specific restrictions on how judges can raise and spend money in order to a avoid conflict between partisanship and public service. (Source: Texas Election Code - Section 253.151)

Judge Sharolyn Wood Source: Harris County Website

Harris County’s Republican Judges who have been especially generous to the Harris County Republican party include Judge Sharolyn Wood, who donated $19,500, and Judge Ken Wise, who donated $6,700 over the last three and a half years. On average, Harris County Republican causes have received more than $5,000 per GOP Judge.

Harris County Republican Judge Donations
Judge Sharolyn Wood	$19,500
Judge Ken Wise	$6,700
Average Donation from all Harris Ct. GOP Judges	$5,003
Source: The Texas Ethics Commission

We're going to have an excellent slate of Democratic judicial candidates in Harris County, and one of the ancillary benefits will be the end of this practice.

John Edwards for President

"We cannot replace a group of corporate Republicans with a group of corporate Democrats, just swapping the Washington insiders of one party for the Washington insiders of the other."

And there you have it.

The entire speech is worth reading, but that one sentence above is what separates the former senator from North Carolina from all of the other very fine Democratic candidates for president. For me.

Yes, Edwards has the most aggressive environmental platform (here's more about that), and yes, he's the only candidate who is talking about poverty in America by going to the most poverty-stricken areas in America and talking to impoverished Americans. And yes, he's got deep grassroots and netroots support.

Today he receives the endorsement of two of the nation's largest unions of working men and women, indicative of his strong support for and from American labor.

There have been many brighter minds than mine who have written about the choice we have. Stirling Newberry is one. Derek Larsson is another. Julie Kornack is a third.

Republicans, conservatives and assorted ankle-biters have whined about his haircut, the size of his home, even his wife's frank comments. Ann Coulter called him a "faggot", employing the unique Republican definition that is only a gay slur secondarily. (It's the same way "bleeding heart" and "tree-hugger" are derogatory, in case you were wondering.) There have been screeds written about his investments, about his SUV, about whether Karl Rove is terrified of an Edwards nomination. Their latest insane ranting is about his health care proposals.

There have been far more attacks from the right on John Edwards than there have been on the seemingly inevitable front-runner. (This is a a subjective quantification by yours truly, to be sure.)

If you need to know whether you agree or not with any of his positions, the entire listing from ontheissues.com for Edwards is here.

There's a bottom line and here it is: There's nobody else who comes close to the progressive, populists ideals than John Edwards. This blog happily and proudly endorses his candidacy.

Update (9/4): Texas bloggers TXsharon and refinish69 join me in the endorsement. Also Vince and Hal. My dear friend Prairie Weather is almost there. David Mizner of MyDD also endorses, and has the collection of blogs around the nation who do likewise. Neil Aquino at Texas Liberal and The Texas Cloverleaf add Rick Noriega to an Edwards endorsement.

Edwards also is the current leader in the Texas Democratic Party's e-Primary poll.

The Weekly Wrangle

Even though it's Labor Day, Texas progressive bloggers are still hard at work, and so the Texas Progressive Alliance is proud to present the TPA Blog Round-Up for September 3, 2007. This Labor Day edition was compiled by Vince from Capitol Annex.

In the opening part of his in-depth series on the policies of the Democratic presidential candidates, Phillip Martin at Burnt Orange Report examines where the candidates fall on issues concerning energy and the environment. From their stance on CAFE standards to new coal plants, to renewable energy and greenhouse emissions, the post provides a well-sourced comparison of all eight of the candidates' platforms.

Texas Toad at North Texas Liberal lets us know that, even after the resignation of embattled attorney general Alberto Gonzales, Texas' unpopular Sen. John Cornyn is still defending Bush's crony.

As Bush prepares to ask Congress for $200 billion in supplemental spending, TXsharon at Bluedaze tells us just who the Iraq War Profiteers are.

Muse at Musings live-blogs NASA administrator Michael Griffin's press conference about astronauts and alcohol use and finds his "sensationalism" and "urban legend" accusations of the independent commission's report a little tiresome. Not to mention defensive.

Over at Texas Kaos, in "Clinton Did Nothing to Stop Bin Laden" Is a GOP Lie, Krazypuppy takes on the Republican frame that Democrats are soft on terror with some of them facts we in the Reality-Based Community are always on about. As one commenter notes, Dems aren't weak on terror, they're weak on Republicans. Time for that to change -- for America's sake, Iran's sake, and the entire world's sake.

Someone shoved a press release under Hal at Half Empty's nose: Ron E. Reynolds will challenge Dora Olivo for state Representative in HD 27.

WCNews at Eye On Williamson posts on TxDOT's plan to buy back interstate highways from the federal government and put tolls on them and asks Will TxDOT' Plan To Toll Interstates Be the Tipping Point?

The last public hearing prior to METRO choosing a route for its Universities light rail line was this past Tuesday. Alexandria Ragsdale attended the hearing, made her statement in favor of a Richmond Avenue alignment, and blogged all about it at Off The Kuff.

Whosplayin.com shares correspondence with his congressman urging the avoidance of pre-emptive war against Iran and shares a study regarding the administration's probable plans on the matter.

John at Bay Area Houston claims the recent changes to the Texas Residential Construction Commission makes it the most expensively worthless commission in Texas.

Vince at Capitol Annex examines some interesting questions raised by the lawsuit against the changes to the pledge to the Texas flag made by the 80th Legislature.

Unchecked development in Texas now threatens the continued long-term existence of an iconic bird species, the whooping crane, notes Peter at B & B.

CouldBeTrue at South Texas Chisme shows how El Paso women are taking a stand against NAFTA. These courageous women staged a hunger strike for the Labor Day weekend to bring attention to the loss of American jobs due to NAFTA.

And, McBlogger will be celebrating a birthday soon and has some conveniet gift ideas for everyone.

Be sure to check out these other great Texas Progressive Alliance blogs, too: Brains & Eggs, Casual Soap Box, Common Sense, Dos Centavos, Easter Lemming Liberal News, Feet To Fire, In The Pink Texas, Marc's Miscellany, People's Republic of Seabrook, Rhetoric & Rhythm, Three Wise Men, Truth Serum Blog, Winding Road In Urban Area, and Wyld Card.

The Texas Democratic Party's e-Primary

The TDP wants you to cast an e-ballot for your favorite Democratic presidential candidate. They appear to be attempting to control the freeping of it -- usually a questionable endeavour -- and the Lone Star Project points out the considerable differences between the e-Primary and the recently conducted GOP straw poll.

I voted, but I really agree more with this, from my inbox (author anonymous, for now):

The Dallas Morning News correctly describes the "Democratic e-Primary" as an attempt to get in on the Presidential "sweepstakes". Indeed, this is an artifact of money-driven politics. One problem is that, if one accepts the logic of money-driven politics -- an auction instead of a primary -- we should have stopped months ago and fallen in behind ... Hillary CLINTON!

But these fools are trying desperately to deliver Texas for John EDWARDS! He is a good man, still a contender, but very poorly served in Texas by flunkies of "Politico" Martin FROST.

Of course, the party elite also want to protect incumbents like the "Craddick Democrats" and "Bush-Dogs" in and around the party by subverting primary election participation generally and creating a "bandwagon" effect within the precinct, county/district, and state conventions.

The underlying logic of all this is "that's the way we have always done it!" Actually, "always" is simply during a few recent decades of decline presided over by a self-perpetuating party establishment in Austin. Still, superficially, this is a "high-tech innovation".

So maybe the fools running this party will find a "pony" some day. But by mocking the GOP publicly while laying-up baskets for them to tip-in, the Weimar Democrats -- no offense to Colorado County intended -- have done nothing for decades but help keep a fundamentally blue state red.

In any case …

• The e-Primary is wide open to GOP participation and thus runs counter to Texas' "closed primary" statutes.
• The e-Primary is open to persons ineligible to vote in Texas but having access to computers in Belarus, thus running counter to even the Texas Constitution.
The e-Primary is closed to Democrats who lack access to private digital network facilities, usually by virtue of economic circumstances, and thus violates state and national party "inclusiveness" rules.

• The e-Primary uses primitive internet technology and thus violates state and national party strictures against insecure electronic voting.

• The e-Primary plainly violates Article XII of the state party rules incorporating the ban on a "straw vote" in Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised.

Once again, caught flat-footed by the secretive staff and worn out by the Chair's usual time-wasting and diversions, nobody on the poorly-attended SDEC raised the least objection to this ridiculous move. It is not clear that it has the sanction of any national candidate authority.

So, what to do?

• Submission
• Temporary restraining order
• Boycott and ridicule
• "Gaming”
• Hacking and sabotage

I guess I am a moderate or centrist, so personally I will settle for boycott and ridicule. Hopefully, Ron PAUL will swamp the GOP "Straw Poll" event and grab the headlines.

Nonetheless, it is increasingly evident that the fools running this party are wasting Fred BARON's money and doing John EDWARDS no good at all by attempting to manipulate Democratic voters only to play into the hands of the GOP with stupid stunts.

Ouch. That's going to leave a mark, Boyd.