Remaining Brainy Endorsements, Part II (Harris County and statehouse)

(See Part I for the federal and statewide endorsements.)

Texas State Board of Education

I previously endorsed G.C. Molison in District 6, where I reside, but residents of Districts 4 and 8 should cast their ballots for Democrats Lawrence Allen and Dexter Smith, respectively.

State Senator

Similarly, David Courtney in my home district of SD-17 has a Libertarian opponent and a Republican incumbent, so if Democrats can see their way past an STD ballot then he will reward them with effective leadership in the Senate. Other state Senate candidates worthy of your vote include...

SD-06: The late Mario Gallegos. If he defeats his GOP challenger as expected, there will be a special election called by the governor to replace him.

SD-7: Sam Fayed (Tejas) Texas. A ham sandwich would be better than Dan Patrick. Tejas/Texas is all but a rotten ham sandwich. Charles Kuffner doesn't think he's worth it; I'll let you decide.

SD-11: Jackie Acquistapace (D). Conservative, Christian, fairly poor with the English language, and still better than Larry Taylor.

SD-13: Rodney Ellis (D). Still the liberal stalwart of the Texas Senate.

SD-15: John Whitmire (D). He drew a Republican opponent, and he could be better on progressive issues, but Whitmire can continue to be the Dean as long as he likes.

Texas House of Representatives

State Representative, District 127: Cody Pogue (D). Pogue is challenging "Rookie of the Year" Dan Huberty in this Humble/Kingwood-area district. Egberto Willies has written extensively about Pogue's campaign.

District 130: Art Browning (G). Browning is challenging Republican incumbent Allen Fletcher in this northwest Harris County district. Fletcher, whose brushes with illegality are mounting, is bound to collapse of his moral turpitude sooner rather than later; he needs to be removed from the Texas House before that happens.

Browning, a semi-retired petroleum geologist, ran for Texas Railroad Commission in 2010.

District 131: Alfred Molison (G). One of the first Brainy Endorsements.

District 134: Ann Johnson (D). Also an early Brainy Endorsement.

District 135: Paul Morgan (D). A retired printer, Morgan is challenging Republican incumbent Gary Elkins in this Jersey Village -area district. Elkins couldn't even be bothered to fill out the Vote 411 questionnaire. He was described as "used furniture" by Texas Monthly...  in 2003. Isn't it about time we throw that ratty old chair out?

District 137: Gene Wu (D). Wu won a challenging primary and deserves to be the able replacement for the indomitable Scott Hochberg. A legacy Wu can live up to, I believe.

District 139: Sylvester Turner (D). Turner is one of the most capable legislators in the Harris County delegation.

Districts 140, 141, 142, 143: Armando Walle, Senfronia Thompson, Harold Dutton and Ana Hernandez-Luna (all Ds). All four are experienced and capable, face token November opposition if any at all, and have been mentioned as successors to the SD-6 Texas Senate seat after the passing of Mario Gallegos.

District 144: To replace the deceased Republican incumbent, Ken Legler (who had opted not to run for re-election prior to his demise), the Democrats picked Mary Ann Perez, and seek to flip this purple Pasadena-area district. Just a few years ago it was represented by Crazy Bob Talton, so it's evident that the Latino Democratic wave is actually coming in a few places. Perez is running against a Republatino and a Libertarian. Chances are good.

District 145: Carol Alvarado. See D-140-143 above. Texas Monthly wrote about her feisty battle over the sonogram bill in the last session. Her detailed description of the procedure involving transvaginal wanding (pictured at left) had the House transfixed. BOR had more (NSFW). Alvarado is a real fighter, and whether she serves in the Texas House or the Senate in the next legislative session, she will be formidable.

District 146: Borris Miles (D). My representative has regained his footing after some rocky episodes in years past that involved personal troubles. He's a rock-solid progressive.

District 147: Garnet Coleman (D) or Deb Shafto (G). This is mostly a keep-him-honest referendum on Coleman. If you don't think he's done a good enough job, then vote for Shafto, the Green Party's gubernatorial candidate in 2010, and before that, a competitor for Houston city council in 2009.

District 148: Henry Cooper (G) over Jessica Farrar (D) as previously detailed in this Brainy Endorsement from August.

District 149: Hubert Vo (D). Was it only a few years ago that this district was represented by the vile Talmadge Heflin?

District 150: Brad Neal (D). Neal once again picks up the gauntlet against Debbie "Pit of Hell", "Go Live in Afghanistan" Riddle. Maybe some day they'll get tired of her nasty, sorry ass and vote her out. Maybe this November 6.

Justice, First Court of Appeals

Places 2, 6, 7, 8, and 9: Ron Lovett, Chuck Silverman, Natalia Cokinos Oakes, Nile Copeland, and Kathy Cheng (all D).

Copeland was, of course, the very first Brainy Endorsement of this election cycle. Cheng is Copeland's law partner. They have both worked tirelessly, registering new voters at citizenship swearings-in and walking blocks to introduce themselves. I have known Cokinos Oakes' family since I was a child growing up in Beaumont. Silverman barely lost a district court race in 2010 2008; here's the Q&A with his challenger from vote411.

Justice, Fourteenth Court of Appeals

Places 3, 4, 5, and 8: Barbara Gardner, Jim Wrotenberry, Tanner Garth, and Julia Maldonado (all D).

You've seen Gardner's Brainy Endorsement, I take it? She's the best. Maldonado likewise. Wrotenberry and Garth are making bids again for judicial office after narrow losses in 2008 and 2010.

Harris County Judicial Courts

Recommended candidates include: Mike Miller (11th), Al Bennett (61st), Larry Weiman (80th), Kyle Carter (125th), R.K. Sandhill (127th), Michael Gomez (129th), Jaclanel McFarland (133rd), Mike Engelhart (151st), Robert Schaffer (152nd), Alexandra Smoots-Hogan (164th), Josefina Rendon (165th), Ruben Guerrero (174th), Shawna Reagin (176th), Vivian King (177th), David Mendoza (178th), Randy Roll (179th), Tracy Good (333rd), Donna Roth (334th), Herb Ritchie (337th), Hazel Jones (338th), Maria Jackson (339th), and Mack McGinnis (351st).

Please note that some races are left out. That's for good reason.

Harris County District Attorney: No Endorsement.

Lloyd Oliver is both party pariah and Tea Party Democrat. After reading that article, I cannot in good conscience recommend a vote for him. I'm leaving this race blank.

Harris County Attorney (Vince Ryan-D) and Harris County Sheriff (Remington Alessi-G).  Both are previous Brainy Endorsements.

Harris County Tax Assessor/Collector: Ann Harris Bennett. Also an earlier Brainy Endorsement.

Harris County Court at Law #1: Erica Graham, and #2: Damon Crenshaw.

Harris County School Trustee

Position 3, At Large: Diane Trautman
Pos. 4, Pct. 3: Silvia Mintz
Pos. 6, Pct, 1: Erica Lee

Harris County Commissioner

Precinct 1: El Franco Lee
Precinct 3: Glorice McPherson
Precinct 4: Sean Hammerle

Justices of the Peace

Precinct 1, Place 1: Dale Gorczynski
Pct. 2, Pl. 1: JoAnn Delgado
Pct. 3, Pl. 1: Mike Parrot
Pct. 6, Pl 1: Richard Vara
Pct. 8, Pl. 1: Tommy Ginn

And finally...

Harris County Constable, Precinct 1

Carlos Villalobos (G)





Precinct 2: Chris Diaz (D)
Precinct 3: Ken Jones (D)

And don't forget to vote for ALL the bond issues.

This week's epic fails from Texas Republicans

-- Texas comptroller Susan Combs, seeking any tactical advantage her overly-long arms can reach in her stealth bid for lieutenant governor in 2014, is going after Julian Castro and Annise Parker simultaneously via the bond issues on the respective local ballots.

"As taxpayers step into a voting booth to approve new debt, government should tell them how much debt they are already responsible for repaying and how much debt service is included," Combs said in a statement. "Elected officials are responsible for telling the taxpayers they serve about the price tag associated with new and existing debt."

Critics of Combs' report were quick to assert that local governments have been forced to take on essential projects the state has refused to fund.

Yes, it's those pesky unfunded mandates again, especially when it comes to the state constitutionally-mandated public education budgets. Muse did some of the best writing on this, but she has walled off her blog these days and I am not invited. (You, however, may be. Give this post by Big Jolly a click and try the links he has to see.) More from the TexTrib as to how the Lege tried to work around that in the last legislative session. Expect more James White-styled exemptions in the coming one.

The most laughable hypocrisy from "Stretch" was this:

Combs acknowledged that "there is plenty of good debt" that voters approve to help finance highway and water-related projects, for example. Still, she charged that too many governmental bodies are piling up debt without regard to its impact on future generations of Texans. "Have they done all their due diligence? Have they tried as hard as they know how to be strategic, to be careful?"

The first part defeats her purpose of dog-whistling to the Tea Party. The last part is just comical coming from the person who left your Social Security number posted online for a year. Like Mitt Romney, she just cannot pull off a freak-right pander.

-- Greg Abbott wheeled himself into the Kountze cheerleader/prayer banner fray this week.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has offered to help a Southeast Texas school district and its cheerleaders fight a challenge to putting Bible verses on high school football game banners.

Kountze Superintendent Kevin Weldon initially banned the signs after the Freedom From Religion Foundation complained. But a judge ordered that the banners continue to be allowed until a court hearing can be held next month.

In a letter to Weldon, Abbott said he was on solid legal ground by allowing the signs. He said his office was prepared to file a brief on the cheerleaders' behalf if the Freedom From Religion Foundation sued.

The conservative Liberty Institute already is defending the cheerleaders, arguing that banning religious speech on student-made signs is discriminatory. 

The Khronically Konservative Kommenters get it right on this one (see the bottom of the link). This is just one more legal case Abbott is bound to lose if the fight is joined.

Update: This is perfect.

-- Robert Miller, the GOP version of the Burnt Orange Report, suddenly noticed there were two other political parties on the ballot.

In Texas, the polling is beginning to show an uptick for Democratic legislative candidates.  We are also seeing the Libertarians poll strongly in Texas this cycle.  Normally, a Libertarian candidate will pull 2% to 3% of the vote in a competitive race between a Republican and a Democrat. 

 In 2012, we are seeing the Libertarians in the 3% to 5%+ range. Every cycle, there are a handful of races where the Libertarian candidate receives more votes than the margin of victory for the Democrat over the Republican.

He's got some fun spreadsheets, but can't come up with the names of the Libertarians and Greens running. Just 'yes' or 'no'.  He even got that wrong in HD-102; there is a Green, Michael Joseph Spanos, contending against Republican incumbent double-token Stefani Carter and Democrat Rich Hancock. She surfed into office on the 2010 Red Tea Tide, but may be more vulnerable in an Obama low-to-medium blue wave. Miller does has some good stuff, though...

Libertarians in the Austin area generally run stronger than any other area of the state, and this could be problematic for (Jason) Isaac and (Tony) Dale.  The Libertarian in HD 144 further strengthens Mary Ann Perez’ position.  However, the lack of Libertarians in the DFW house races and SD 10 is a significant benefit for the Republicans.  Finally, the Green candidate could provide the margin of victory for Harper-Brown in a close race, presuming all of the Green vote would otherwise be Democratic. A Green candidate can be expected to receive about 1% of the vote in a legislative race.

Although there are not that many competitive legislative races in Texas this year, the presence or absence of a Libertarian on the ballot is likely to have a major impact on the end result.

We're all hoping for a bit more influence than what Robert expects. Everybody except red and blue partisans, that is.

Brainy Endorsements: Max Martin

Max Martin won the Democratic Party's primary to represent Texans in the 36th Congressional District (after clicking, zoom and drag to see a closer view of the map). It includes the Southeast Texas counties of Orange, Newton, Jasper, Tyler, Hardin, Polk, Liberty, Chambers, and the eastern part of Harris, including the Houston suburbs of Clear Lake and Baytown. It is a new district, one of the four awarded to Texas as a result of the state's growth after the decennial census of 2010.

The Republicans nominated Louie Gohmert's kissin' cousin, Steve Stockman. He was TeaBaggin' before it was cool. Though Stockman served a single term and hasn't been in Congress since 1997, he posted signs during the Republican runoff that said "Re-elect Congressman Stockman". Republicans are as wary of the guy as everybody else, despite the fact that his returning to Washington is considered all but a foregone conclusion.

There is also a Libertarian candidate, Michael "MKC" Cole. He has a compelling life story, and presents a good option for those conservatives in the district who are intelligent enough not to vote a straight R ballot.

But Martin is by far the best choice, and here's a few reasons why, from his FB postings.

"Max at the Planned Parenthood rally the Monday following the AIDS walk (8/17/12). Ask the keynote speakers Sheila Jackson Lee and Al Green what they think about Democrats campaigning for Libertarians. That's me under the "c" in care."

A bit on tax policy:

The real problem isn’t these numbers, it’s the hidden ones. The .1%, like Mitt Romney, who have migrated their incomes to total capital gains. They pay a top rate of 15% and nothing towards the social security system or Medicare/Medicaid. To make thing even worse, they want to reduce that 15% to 0%. You know, for the “Job Creators”. Give me a break! We will never balance the budget without an income system that requires everyone, out of poverty, to pay, and to pay progressively more the more they earn. That’s the way it was for the 70 years before 1986 and that’s the way it should be now.

He supports the 2nd Amendment, Planned Parenthood, and the Occupy movement. He was also one of the only Democrats on the ballot who spoke in favor of Lissa Squiers, when she was under assault from the James Cargas/Hector Carreno slime machine. Here's what he wrote after that pathetic, fawning, not to mention plagiarized-from-Cargas-himself endorsement...

Regarding The Houston Chronicle’s endorsement of James Cargas for U.S. House of Representatives in the Texas 7th district, posted in the editorial section on Friday, July 20, 2012, I feel compelled to disagree with several aspects of the writer’s assumptions. I have been in contact with Lissa Squiers on a steady basis over the last few months and find her to be a formidable opponent to upset the obstructionist incumbent, John Culberson. From her blue collar background, to her family commitment in raising children in the public school system, to her drive to propel herself to earn an MBA from the University of Houston, Lissa has exhibited a tireless ability to set goals and make them happen.

The author states, “Lissa Squiers’ approach of taking the strongest position possible and unapologetically charging forward” as a reason to not consider her for the position for which she seeks, when in effect it is the foundation for which the Democratic Party is standing proud in support of the needs of the many over the wants of the few. This article seems to think what the Democratic Party needs is more Republican thinking candidates. Nothing could be further from the truth. Lissa Squires has fought long and hard for herself and her family and she’ll do the same for the citizens of the 7th district.

Yes she would have, Max, but at least the voters of the 36th have a chance to elect you.

To be sure, most of the Democrats in places like Orange County and Hardin County have given up and flipped parties. The communities are in strong support of Keystone XL. There are precious few East Texans that haven't drunk the Tea, and if the Libertarian manages some success in leeching support from Stockman, there might be a chance for Martin to prevail. A slim one for sure, but as a retired aviator Martin understands that flying is all about throwing yourself at the ground from extreme heights at high velocity... and consistently missing.

Show some support for sanity and a few progressive values if you live in East Texas. Or even if you don't. Because the last thing we need in Washington right now is Steve Stockman 2.0.

Update: Charles Kuffner has his audio interview with Martin up.

Previous Brainy Endorsements include...

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

The quandary of Lloyd Oliver for Democrats on the ballot

His lawsuit to remain on the ballot has the potential to be destructive for the Harris County Democratic Party's candidates and their November prospects.

On Friday, Houston attorney Lloyd Oliver filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent the Harris County Democratic Party's attempts to oust him from the ticket.

"They're not going to put any candidate on the ballot. They just shut the whole thing down," Oliver said.

The lawyer called the move an attempt by party officials to disenfranchise voters.

"They are the elite of the Democratic Party. They trump the voters and that's wrong," Oliver said.

I mentioned earlier in the week that I didn't think this would damage races down ballot, but I have to rethink that. I see no percentage in Democratic candidates, especially judicial candidates, supporting Lewis and Martin Birnberg in this petty vendetta. Unless they -- those on the ballot and not in the backroom -- opt to distance themselves quickly from it.

See, Democrats are obviously one thing, and democracy is another quite different one.

You would like to see the members of the Democratic Party always supporting democratic principles, but the fact is that doesn't always occur. It's part (a small part) of why I cannot call myself a Democrat any longer. I can and will heartily support many Democratic candidates, but I will no longer fall blindly in line behind a party's orthodoxy. It has simply produced too much cognitive dissonance for me.

Most Americans agree with me, by the way. Since about half of all residents of this great nation do not vote in any election, it would stand to reason that they don't hold either major political party in high regard. Since about 40% of the remaining half of our countrymen vote for the Bloods, and about 40% vote for the Crips, that leaves a solid 10% of voters -- or 5% of all Americans -- who report themselves as "undecided" for the two gangs to fight over. That percentage, again very roughly, is approximately the amount of support minor parties like the Greens and Libertarians and Independents have generally shared in presidential elections past (only Ross Perot and George Wallace in my lifetime have been exceptions to this rule).

The daily skirmishes in that battle -- more tit-for-tat in my humble O -- is what the traditional media reports, via several outlets, on a 24-hour basis. Here is today's example.

It gets worse for democracy, as we know. Because of the Electoral College, that 10% of registered/likely uncommitted voters is scattered throughout a dozen or so "battleground" states, which is why the two Corporate Parties must raise and spend vast sums of money to pay for Corporate Media advertising in order to sway this small number of lowly-informed "undecideds".

Most Democrats and Republicans are, at this stage of the cycle -- about 60 days before the start of early voting, and about 75 days before Election Day -- turning their focus away from persuasion and toward mobilization. 'Get Out the Vote', as it is called. 'Let's get more of our people to the polls because there are going to be a lot of those nasty  _______ voting, and we've got to overcome that'.

The methodology of GOTV differs a bit between Republicans and Democrats; the GOP wants to keep their base in a perpetual state of fear and loathing while simultaneously making efforts to ensure that fewer folks get to cast a ballot, particularly those with a little extra pigmentation in their skin. Whereas Democrats want more people to vote, on the theory that many non-voters will vote Democrat... if they can be convinced to get up and go do it. In 2012 this premise is particularly valid.

A digression, but a necessary one to illustrate my point.

Fort Bend and Texas Democratic Party officials have disavowed two-time Congressional nominee Kesha Rogers, but none of them have tried to remove her from the ballot (yet). Way back in 2010 when this uncomfortable situation arose the first time, I assembled a few views in this post, the most eloquent by my friend, occasional co-poster, and former SDEC committeeman John Behrman.

One is left with the supposition that ignoring Rogers' call for Obama's impeachment -- while taking legal action against Oliver's favorable remark about DA Pat Lykos -- is just garden variety hypocrisy and not a decision made on any racial and/or gender considerations of the two candidates.

Ultimately the Dems are going to have to mitigate this away in some fashion (just as they did their legal efforts to keep the Texas Green Party off the ballot in 2010). If they lose it, Oliver has made them look incompetent; if they succeed, they appear wildly and discriminatorily undemocratic. In the short term it grows increasingly likely that this effort will cost them votes... and contests they might otherwise win in an Obama-turnout-swollen year.They cannot afford that.

Many undercurrents have trended in their favor lately: the inept Romney campaign; the choice of the controversial Paul Ryan as running mate; the policy positions of the top of the ticket that motivate seniors, women, and minorities, particularly Latinos, to support the Dems are just a few. The vast extremism of Texas TeaBaggers, from Ted Cruz and throughout the Congressional and statehouses races, has never been more apparent.

But this obnoxious, internecine squabbling turns off voters -- especially voters of the undecided, uncommitted variety -- to a tremendous degree. The Democrats look like childish siblings fighting over a trinket when they do things like this. And for a political party that is already on life support in Texas, it is just plain ridiculous, not to mention foolish.

This is to say nothing of the nonsensical choice to leave the District Attorney's race empty. Since they are meeting in county convention this morning, the assembly of precinct chairs could, if they were in agreement to do so, select another DA nominee.

All of this leaves Harris County Democratic candidates in an unpleasant quandary. Either they publicly disavow the actions of their party's chair and previous chair to arbitrarily remove a duly elected nominee -- one of their ticketmates -- over a technicality, or they try to ignore it (not a good option either, since silence is consent). I don't consider that publicly announcing support for Oliver against local party leaders is really an option.

Unless this matter resolves itself fairly quickly in time to smooth over the unpleasantries, other Democrats are going have to run away, hard, from this ill-conceived legal action on the part of Birnberg, Lewis, and Dunn, or else they stand to be tarred with the same broad brush.

That would be the brush with the oligarchic paint on it. Low-information, low-participation voters get this even when they have no idea what an oligarchy is.

Update: Charles very cautiously -- and maybe only slightly -- agrees. I also checked to see if there was any news made at yesterday's Harris County Democratic convention, but it looks as if the activities were limited to boosting morale.

Bad week for the local Democrats *updates

First, the city controller stepped in it big time. Then his wife, the justice of the peace, showed up in some of the questionable dealings with the same swindler. Then the former head of the HCDP -- who seems to be having a little trouble transitioning into retirement -- filed a complaint against the voters' pick for District Attorney, trying to get him off the November slate. (The fact is that Lloyd Oliver is a jackass... and not just the four-legged variety.) Today my own first-term city councilman seems to be in hot water over a missing million bucks from the non-profit he ran before being elected a year ago.

But the biggest loss is the retirement of Judge Kevin Fine.

State District Judge Kevin Fine, who triggered controversy in 2010 when he said the death penalty was unconstitutional, announced Tuesday he is resigning from the bench effective immediately.

The Democrat elected in 2008 made headlines and earned the scorn of Republicans, including Gov. Rick Perry, when he declared the death penalty unconstitutional during a routine hearing. That ruling was later reversed, and Fine's continued efforts to see the issue re-litigated in his Houston courtroom came to naught.

The judge, a recovering cocaine addict who ran his first campaign touting his experience with addiction, did not seek re-election this year.

Republicans won't ever understand why it was of a great value to have Judge Fine on the bench. They will just look at two things: "anti-death penalty" and "recovering cocaine addict" and close their minds.

Fine represented people who have been rejected by the system having a voice on the bench. The poor, the disadvantaged, the people most of the rest of us don't want to look at or think about. Not the lazy, not the born-into-privilege, not the "boot-strappers", as conservatives like to say. But the unlucky.

That was very much a minority caucus on the Harris County bench. I for one will miss him a great deal. There are some excellent judges and judicial candidates on the Harris County ticket, but none with Fine's life experience.

As for Controller Green and Judge Green, they are heavily damaged by their own hand. I suspect, as with Marc Campos, that they will draw challengers from among the Blue gang the next time they face the voters (for the controller, that's coming up next year).

Not as fast as Lloyd Oliver's, however.

With only a Republican -- former city councilman Mike Anderson, no stranger to scandal himself -- and a James-Cargas-ish Democrat to choose from, my recommendation in this race is likely to be 'neither'. Further, I believe that Murray assigns Oliver too much weight here...

Any candidate who proudly boasts of his three indictments and then advocates for boxing lessons for domestic violence victims adds an anchor to what many political analysts believe is a sinking ship when it comes to the local Dems' chances in Harris County this year.

I doubt it. Harris County voters simply aren't that well-informed. The judicials can disavow Oliver with confidence.

It will be amusing to see if Lloyd finds himself in the position of having to run against both Anderson and the Democrats. The ultimate outsider. Might be a barrel of laughs.

Update: But it ain't gonna happen. For now, anyway.

The Harris County Democratic Party Wednesday took district attorney candidate Lloyd Oliver's name off the ballot, deciding to go forward without a candidate in November's general election.

Chad Dunn, the attorney for the party confirmed the decision by Harris County Democratic Party Chairman Lane Lewis to sustain a complaint filed by Gerry Birnberg, the former party chair, that Oliver endorsed the sitting district attorney, Republican Pat Lykos.

Birnberg said in his complaint that Oliver told the Houston Chronicle in May that Lykos was such a good candidate that she "would have gotten my vote."

Oliver, a perennial candidate in both Republican and Democratic primaries, said he will fight to stay on the ballot, including appealing to state party officials and, if he loses there, suing in federal court to stay on the ballot.

"I can't believe the state party chairman would be in the same boat as those two goobers," Oliver said. "And I guarantee that I'll do what I have to do to get a federal injunction."

My opinion? This is going to turn out badly, and not necessarily for Lloyd Oliver.

Update: And it gets worse for Ronald and Hilary Green.

Houston contractor Dwayne Jordon, a five-time felon, has remained free on bond since 2009 though he's admitted his role in a major Houston real estate scam and appears to have used his court-granted freedom to continue to cheat consumers, businesses and banks in Harris, Montgomery and San Jacinto counties, according to civil suits, criminal records and officials and victims interviewed by the Chronicle.

Brainy endorsements: Keith Hampton

Keith Hampton is the Democrat running for Presiding Judge of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. His opponent is the most reprehensible Republican serving in the entire judicial system in Texas, Sharon "Killer" Keller. There is no Libertarian or Green on the November ballot. In Hampton's own words, here is one sentence about the incumbent.

(Keller) is the judge who shut the courthouse doors promptly at 5PM to a death-sentenced inmate, and agreed that poor people aren’t entitled to lawyers who remain awake during trial. 

Keller tried to get Hampton removed from the ballot by challenging his petition signatures, but that effort failed. Hampton has outraised Keller over 60 to 1 in the most recent fundraising period. When Hampton ran for the CCA in 2010, he received broad bipartisan support, and that is once again the case in 2012. We have previously seen what happens when Republicans publicly reject Republican judges who betray the public trust.

Here's Scott Henson at Grits for Breakfast, outlining the pitch-perfect strategy Hampton must pursue if he is to win.

Judge Keller, the self-styled, "pro-prosecution" judge, has so much baggage coming in it'd be hard to know where to attack first. The findings of facts against her by the Commission on Judicial Conduct were damning and provide ample fodder for campaign attacks. (Her punishment was overturned as illegal but the findings of fact on the merits remained untouched in a circus-like tragi-comedy that embarrassed the court and the state.) Keller was also fined by the Ethics Commission $100,000 for failing to disclose a vast web of financial entanglements. (See the ruling [pdf].)

Even more than those dark moments, though, many of her opinions and dissents contain jaw-dropping pro-government assumptions that could be mined for anti-populist material that would make any good Tea-Party type cringe. Just as Governor Perry's greatest political achievement has been to maximize power over state agencies through appointments of political allies, creating a (relatively) strong executive where Texas historically had a weak one, Judge Keller's principal achievement as the CCA's Presiding Judge has been to oversee (and arguably principally author) an expansionist accumulation of government power by law enforcement and prosecutors over nearly two decades. A comprehensive vetting of her opinions by a campaign researcher would yield lots of attack fodder. But (Hampton) must undertake that work, then use the information to construct and deliver political attacks: That's the piece that I'm not sure is going to happen, though there's still time.

Most recently, the state of Texas executed a man whose IQ of 61 defined him as retarded. Though the United States Supreme Court has ruled that mentally incapacitated people are not to be executed, Sharon Keller -- and Antonin Scalia -- made sure he was put to death anyway.

Keith Hampton is the only sane option for Democrats, Greens, Libertarians, and Republicans. Period, end of story.

Hampton has a Facebook page, and here's his Twitter feed. Do what you can: volunteer, donate, advocate. We can't begin to change much in Texas until we rid our government of fiends like Sharon Keller.

Libertarians tour Texas

Presidential hopeful Gary Johnson and US Senate candidate John Jay Myers are taking a Texas swing.

[...] Myers will join Governor Johnson for a meet and greet and breakfast in Dallas (8/15-8/16), a book signing and dinner in Austin (8/17), a meet and greet and VIP reception in San Antonio (8/18), and a reception and open mic night in Houston (8/19). Myers will also be stopping at East Beach in Galveston (8/19), and visiting East Texas for a public  barbecue in Tyler (8/21), and dinner in Mount Pleasant (8/21) during an extended part of the trip.

As Republicans feel the splitting hangover of their Mitt Romney/Ted Cruz rage binge, the Libertarians are going to start looking better and better, particularly to all of those non-TeaBagging conservatives. Myers is fire-branding...

“The Republican primary in Texas was a contest between the banks and the oil companies, and the banks won.” ... “Ted Cruz is not the outsider people think they voted for. Cruz worked for the federal government, and he also advised George W. Bush’s campaign on domestic policy. And how did Bush’s domestic policy of bank bailouts and stimulus work out? Ted Cruz’s government resume does not match his claims to be an establishment outsider.”

Myers questioned Cruz’s commitment to liberty: “Cruz expresses pride in his family’s escape to the U.S., and yet maintains a platform hostile to immigrants. He claims to support freedom and yet wants government to dictate whom you can marry and what substances peaceful people put in their bodies. And he follows the same foreign policy doctrine of entangling alliances our Founding Fathers warned us about.”

Myers condemned the false choice presented to Republican voters: “During the primary, the Republicans were given a choice between a millionaire former CIA officer who runs an oil and gas company, or a rich establishment lawyer who is literally in bed with a vice president of Goldman Sachs, the bank that was by far the largest beneficiary of the Bush-Obama bailouts through its insurer AIG. How do you think the pillow talk will go when Goldman Sachs needs $100 billion more after the next market meltdown?”

You might fall for that tough talk if Myers weren't more devoted to Ayn Rand than even Paul Ryan. Democratic nominee Paul Sadler is hoping he can capture Republican leakage from Cruz, but that has been shown time and again to be a fallacy. But since this post is about the Libs, let's return to Johnson, who articulates the message a little better than Myers.



Now that's damned solid and effective. I don't buy it, of course, but a lot of people will, and lot more should. And there's plenty of additional evidence that the Liberts have an excellent opportunity to put a dent in GOP futures this fall. First, the Austin Chron:

Historically, Libertarians have been perceived as a thorn in the GOP's side, occasionally nudging elections toward the Democrats by pulling away some right-wing voters. In 2008 the GOP actively courted the Libertarian Party of Texas and asked them to pull candidates from the ballot in marginal seats (see "State GOP Fears Libertarian Upset," Aug. 8, 2008). Locally, Libertarians could become a factor in two key House races. Republican Paul Workman survived a bruising primary in House District 47, and Dem Chris Frandsen may be hoping that the addition of Libertarian Nick Tanner – running against Workman for being "pro-Amnesty, anti-free market" – may increase his chances. Next door in HD 48, Democrat Donna Howard narrowly squeaked out a multi-recount victory in 2010 and, while she is still favored over self-proclaimed moderate Republican Robert Thomas, Libertarian Joe Edgar could help her by further splitting the GOP base.

I posted over three months ago about the Libs and the Weed Bloc. Here's a bit more about their electoral chances from the Johnson campaign itself, via Third Party Politics.

Libertarian Presidential candidate Gov. Gary Johnson is polling at 5.3% nationwide. (JZ Analytics/Washington Times).

But look at the numbers when he’s included in statewide polls against Obama and Romney. 13% in New Mexico. 9% in Arizona. 7% in Colorado. 7% in New Hampshire. 8% in Montana. (PPP and others)

Governor Johnson’s poll numbers – and his votes this November – may be the critical factor in “Tipping Point” or battleground states like North Carolina, Virginia, Florida, Nevada, and Colorado – where Obama and Romney are 1% to 6% apart. Mitt Romney needs these 5 states, these 74 Electoral votes to win the White House.

North Carolina and Virginia voted Republican 7 out the last 8 Presidential races. Florida and Colorado voted Republican in 6 out of the last 8. Nevada voted Republican in 5 out of the last 8. All 5 of these battleground states voted for Barack Obama in 2008.

But the one thing that will really make a tremendous difference is if Johnson and Green Party nominee Jill Stein are included in the fall's presidential debates. Here's something provocative to read about that. You will want to read the whole thing -- especially if you're unfamiliar with the 15% polling threshold to qualify to participate -- but here's the last few grafs as moneyshot.

Getting on ballots across the country requires time, organization, support and money. That should be difficult enough to weed out the riff-raff, but if you wanted to make it even harder to get an invite to the debates (but not impossible, which for all intents and purposes, the current system is), why not amend the third criterion to read: 15% of public support --OR-- the candidate is eligible for federal matching funds and has received the nomination of their respective party?

Under this system, the 2012 presidential debates might look like this:

• Barack Obama (Democrat)
• Mitt Romney (Republican)
• Gary Johnson (Libertarian)
• Jill Stein (Green)

Something tells me that this debate would touch on issues more thoughtful than who the real "outsourcer-in-chief" is. And considering that federal tax dollars are, in part, funding the campaigns of Gary Johnson and Jill Stein, it would be nice to hear them talk.

It's been 20 years since a third-party candidate has been invited to debate Republican and Democratic presidential nominees; we all know how political discourse has played out since then. Sometimes, it makes sense to look at the system that is in place and ask ourselves: Is this really the best way to do things? I realize that I'm not the first to say this, but I think we can do better.

If you wish to petition the Commission on Presidential Debates to include Gov. Johnson and Dr. Stein in the debates, go here. As John DeFeo notes in his opening...

The U.S. presidential debates are like a "Best Beer in America" contest where only Bud Light and Coors Light are invited. Of course, there's nothing inherently wrong with these beers, they satisfy millions of Americans. But to claim one of them is the "best" while ignoring the hundreds of independent American breweries churning out some of the world's most unique and innovative suds -- well, that seems wrong.

Not just 'seems', John.

Texas Greens build momentum

This ought to piss off both Carl Whitmarsh and Bethany a little more. And that's never a bad thing. (Update: Noting the correction sent out by cewdem last weekend, he did not make the erroneous assertion. Somebody *ahem* put colored words on his e-mail. Or something.)

From the San Antonio Current:

David Collins walked to the front of the Hill Country cabin with a green toga draped over shirt, tie and slacks, a throwback, he said, to mankind's first republic: the Roman Senate. "The toga has great symbolic significance for me," he said, "and I've felt myself to be politically and spiritually green for a long time." Staring down at the getup, Collins laughed. "I would run for office naked if I thought the Green Party would benefit from it."

Collins, a Houston-based longshot candidate for Texas' open U.S. Senate seat, was among a smattering of candidates and activists working to dismantle the country's two-party dominated political system meeting at a small Hill Country retreat in Grey Forest Saturday and Sunday for the Green Party of Texas' convention. Far outside the clubby, insidery scenes of political officialdom on display in Houston and Fort Worth at the weekend's state Democratic and Republican conventions, Texas Greens held a quiet, low-key gathering on the outskirts of San Antonio to tap nominees and chat philosophy, politics, and revolution.

You really need to read the whole piece. Laugh, cry, gnash your teeth, get motivated to help or power up to thwart, whatever floats your boat.

The Texas Greens ultimately, and unsurprisingly, threw support behind Jill Stein for the party's nomination for president. Stein, who once ran against Mitt Romney for governor of Massachusetts, says her win in the California primary last week guaranteed her place as the Green Party nominee for president at the party's national convention in Baltimore next month. Sitcom comedienne and celebrity Roseanne Barr, who didn't show at the Texas convention, spoke to Texas Green members via phone conference Saturday, saying she'd continue to seek the Green nomination for president.

Stein, an eloquent Harvard-educated physician keen on quoting Frederick Douglass ("Power concedes nothing without a demand") and Alice Walker ("The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don't have any"), seems to embody the type of voter Greens across the country are fighting to win over: liberals, progressives, peace activists, and environmentalists who feel ditched by rightward-drifting Democrats.

Stein wrote off the so-called spoiler effect of third parties, that the major impact is to tip close races between Democrats and Republicans by siphoning off small, crucial pieces of the party base. "We've been told to be quiet, that this silence is an effective strategy," she said. "Well, how's that 'lesser evil' thing working out for you exactly? … We have assured the policies of expansive war, of ignoring a climate meltdown, of economic collapse by silencing ourselves as the only real, non-corporate voice of public interest," she said. "So many progressives have muzzled themselves."

More Jill Stein, from last weekend's convention outside San Antone.



Texas is thisclose to qualifying for federal matching funds. When that happens, the momentum hits a higher gear.

Finally, a terrific Q&A with Kat Swift, Bexar County godmother of the Texas Green Party, which resolves some of the lingering mythological questions people always seem to have about the Greens. Didn't they keep Al Gore from getting elected in 2000? (No.) Didn't they take Republican money to get on the ballot in 2010? (Not exactly, no.)

Go read the whole two things from the SAC and then let's hear what you have to say about it in the comments.

That old black magic

As practiced by Republicans on Democrats in Harris County. Some background likely is in order unless you are an HCDP insider.

An occasionally harsh muckraker myself, I admit that I often admire John Coby's wit, and certainly his self-deprecating admission of being full of it.

He let his outrage get the better of him here, however. Elaine Hubbard-Palmer used an excerpt from that post in an e-mail circulated through the D-MARS listserv, as well as Carl Whitmarsh's, with the headline "you people have five positions already", emphasizing some of the most undesirable responses to her candidacy against incumbent Judge Steven Kirkland (a close family friend, in the interests of full disclosure). Perhaps, Dear Reader, you have also read the story written by the Chronicle's Patti Kilday Hart I excerpted in this post which detailed the curious circumstances surrounding the recruitment efforts by Republicans of a primary opponent to Kirkland.

This contentiousness, and the instigators behind it, is mirrored in the contested primary for Harris County Chair between Lane Lewis (like Kirkland, a gay man) and Keryl Douglas (like Hubbard-Palmer, an African American woman). Forget the kerfuffle over the e-mail's digital autopsy; when you're a Democrat and a Kubosh shows up at your press conference to stand beside you in support, you know something is amiss.

In my recent Democratic Party experience, as well as my humble O, this is a recurring problem: oily Republican operatives mucking around in Democratic primaries -- as they are in the CD-07 primary between James Cargas and Lissa Squiers, as they did when Chris Bell ran for the Texas Senate 17th seat (remember Stephanie Simmons?), as they have done often in elections past.

Let's first establish that Judge Kirkland is a fine judge worthy of re-election. Let's also note that Ms. Hubbard-Palmer is certainly entitled to challenge him -- or anyone else -- in this or any other contest. It's the barely cloaked agendas of the puppeteers off stage that must be examined.

Driving wedges -- racial, sexual, what have you -- among Democrats is a successful strategy as long as Democrats allow Republicans to make it one. To be clear: differences of ideology are discussions that are vigorous, worthwhile, and worth having; the direction of the party, so to speak. Liberal and progressive Democrats and conservative ones -- so-called Blue Dogs, but they were also called Boll Weevils in another time -- are continually striving for control of the national agenda. Competition of ideologies are likewise part of the history of the TDP. As I am sure I have mentioned here a time or two before, one of the reasons John F. Kennedy came to Texas in November of 1963 was to mend a rift between Texas liberals (led by Sen. Ralph Yarborough) and Texas conservatives (led by Gov. John Connally).

So for Democratic fortunes, it's not that there are differences of opinion so much as what is at the heart of those differences. The truth is that Democrats just don't have the luxury of dividing into warring factions and still get themselves elected like Republicans can in Texas.

If Democrats refuse to acknowledge (or if they just don't care) that they are once again being -- indeed, have long been -- manipulated in this fashion, then that's certainly their prerogative. While there have been several prominent leaders, Rodney Ellis and Garnet Coleman among them, who have publicly decried these most recent efforts to divide, the sad history is that whoever prevails in primaries like these winds up being damaged goods in November. And that takes place in a county where it is difficult enough as it is for Democrats to get elected and re-elected.

The GOP seems on every level -- national, state, and local -- to be exploiting the worst of human instincts for political gain, from their non-stop racist diatribes against President Obama to the unrelenting assault on women's reproductive choices to this "let's start a fight between the blacks and the gays" business we are seeing in Harris County this cycle. I'm hoping Democrats can rise above the hate being fomented by outside agitators and nominate the most qualified individuals who best represent the values of the Democratic Party. And, most importantly, unite behind those nominees for the general election. Because if they can't, 2012 might wind up just as grim as 2010 was.

And that would be unspeakably bad for the county, bad for the state of Texas, and bad for the nation.

I simply have diminishing confidence with every passing day that this outcome is possible, however. So if I'm going to lose anyway, I'm going to lose with my progressive principles intact, which is why I'm actively supporting candidates of the Texas Green Party in 2012.

Because they don't allow themselves to be compromised by either money or bigotry.

Update: Neil has also posted about the Kirkland/Hubbard-Palmer unpleasantry.

Greens likely to remain ballot-qualified in Texas after 2012

Ballot Access News (bold emphasis is mine):

Texas parties remain ballot-qualified in presidential election years if they poll at least 5% for any partisan statewide race. This year in Texas, the following statewide offices are up: President, U.S. Senate, Railroad Commission full term, Railroad Commission short term, Justice of the Supreme Court seat 2, Justice of the Supreme Court seat 4, Justice of the Supreme Court seat 6, Presiding Judge of the Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge of the Court of Criminal Appeals seat 7, Judge of the Court of Criminal Appeals seat 8. That is ten offices.

No Democrat filed to run for five of those offices. Whenever there is a partisan election in which only one of the two major parties runs anyone, any minor party nominee on the ballot in that election typically polls at least 5%. Because the Libertarians and Greens do have candidates in some of the statewide offices with no Democrat running, it is quite likely that each of those parties will meet the vote test in 2012.

[...]

Posts for which the Green Party has a candidate, but the Democratic Party does not, are Railroad Commission short term, and Justice of the Supreme Court seat 4. Libertarians have a candidate in all the statewide races.

Let's repeat that for emphasis: no Democrat filed to run against Supreme Court Justice (and once-alleged arsonist) David Medina, the weakest possible candidate on the ballot. Really, how stupid is that? Even the Libertarians manage to have a candidate file for every single office.

And after fielding the most qualified Railroad Commission candidate by far in 2010, only Dale Henry -- who ran in 2008 -- filed for TRC in '12, and he chose to run against a well-funded Rick Perry crony instead of an open seat.

Democrats really don't need to be wondering why they can't win a statewide office when they're not even seriously trying to. And they don't need to be blaming anybody but themselves for that.

Update: Neil has more.

Three to challenge Culberson in Democratic primary

With her filing today at HCDP headquarters, 2010 write-in Congressional District 7 candidate Lissa Squiers joins Phillip Andrews and James Cargas in a May 29th showdown for the right to face incumbent John Culberson in November (there will also be a Libertarian and a Green on the ballot in this contest).

Squiers is the progressive in this primary battle. She's an officer in TDW and has performed a litany of volunteer activities, including the start-up All Kids Alliance (see more here), and as mentioned before was so irritated that no challenger stepped forward in the last cycle to challenge Culberson that she ultimately did so herself as a write-in. (The Texas Political Almanac on CD-7 has maps and is up to date through 2010). Here's her campaign video from that match:



Andrews had "Blue Dog" in bold at the top of his website until recently and is president and CEO of a company that, to my examination, does the same thing as Blackwater. Cargas (that's Greek, not Latino) is a well-connected -- very well-connected -- oil and gas attorney. Additionally, two of my bloghermanos have declared support in the race: lightseeker at Texas Kaos for Squiers, Stace at Dos Centavos for Cargas. Both Cargas and Squiers have earned the AFL-CIO endorsement for the primary.

Having been drawn -- through the festering Republican redistricting morass -- first into Sheila Jackson Lee's 18th and then Al Green's 9th before being returned to the 7th, this race is, as it has been in the past, of personal interest.

Primaries are for picking your favorite among the challengers in a single party, and if you read here to any degree you know I usually support either the most progressive candidate or the underdog. In Squiers' case that's likely both, especially where campaign funds are concerned. I burned out long ago on evaluating the strength of Democratic candidates based on their fundraising prowess. That only serves to feed a broken model of paid consultants telling Democrats how to win and continually losing, and it's a particularly bad idea if you believe money is corrupting our democracy (see: Citizens United).

So attend her signing this evening at HCDP HQ at 5 p.m and then join her at Tecate on Ella from 5:30 to 7 and see if she fits your profile as grassroots progressive. She certainly fits mine.

Don Boates (AL#1) caught working both sides of the street

More of this crap again.

Houston City Council candidate Scott Boates is listed on the Harris County Republican Party Web site as one of three GOP contestants for At-Large Position 1.

Texas Conservative Review editor and former county GOP chairman Gary Polland says that isn’t so, though, and has provided a link to a YouTube site in which Boates tells a Democratic group that he is a sustaining member of the party.

So which is it? Both, Boates said.

“I joined both parties this year as part of this run for office,” Boates said.

Let's look past Scott Boates and his disingenuousness for a moment. Polland is either stupid or lying, probably both. On the Harris County GOP website -- the same party he was chairman of -- it plainly says:

Party affiliation (based on latest primary vote) will be provided for your information
(i) Incumbent   (R) Republican   (D) Democrat  (-) No Primary vote found

Not real sure who Polland thinks he's fooling here. Boates, incumbent Stephen Costello, and perennial candidate James Partsch-Galvan all have a bold 'R' beside their name. In addition, Boates is listed as a Republican Leadership Council member, which is defined as "those elected officials and candidates who provide generous financial support to the Harris County Republican Party". There is a link to an application to join the RLC there; its minimum contribution level is $1,000.

By contrast, the Harris County Democratic Party's sustaining membership entry level is $150.

So Boates gave at least a thousand bucks to the HCGOP and voted in their most recent primary in 2010, and gave at least $150 to the HCDP. Which party do YOU think he belongs to? Pay no attention to his words; just look at his actions.

Incumbent Stephen Costello of course is playing the same game. From my post less than two weeks ago:

Costello, a civil engineer made wealthy on municipal contracts long before he was first elected to Council two years ago, allegedly bragged recently to the Pachyderm Club that his own drainage assessment was coming in well below the city average. As in about a third of the city's now-revised average of $8.25. On his $300,000+ HCAD-assessed domicile.

You have your choice of three Republicans -- at least two of which are congenital liars -- or one Green in At Large #1.

Boates, Costello, and Bolivar Fraga in AL#2 put the "tick" in politics, telling everyone they meet only what they want to hear. To a lesser degree, Mayor Parker is doing the same thing.

And this gives me the only opportunity I will ever take to say something nice about Eric Dick: at least he isn't pretending to be a Democrat.

Ralph Nader, a Democratic primary against Obama, and better options

With this news, Ralph Nader is once again inserting himself into the process of a presidential election.

Worried the liberal voice is being drowned out in the presidential campaign, progressive leaders said Monday they want to field a slate of candidates against President Obama in the Democratic primaries to make him stake out liberal stances as he seeks re-election.

Ralph Nader warns that without an intraparty challenge the liberal agenda “will be muted and ignored,” the one-man primary will kill voter enthusiasm and voters won’t get a chance to reflect on the real differences that divide the Democratic and Republican parties.

“What we are looking at now is the dullest presidential campaign since Walter Mondale — and that’s saying something, believe me,” Mr. Nader told The Washington Times.

The group’s call has been endorsed by more than 45 other liberal leaders. They want to recruit six candidates who bring expertise ranging from poverty to the military.

I think Nader probably is going to find -- like Dick Cheney twelve years ago --that he is ultimately the best man for the job. And that is bad for progressives and the progressive movement, whether perceptible progressive movement is occurring within the Democratic Party (it is not) or outside of it (barely).

In its recruitment letter, the group faulted the administration’s handling of the Wall Street bailouts, the wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the U.S. involvement in the military effort in Libya. They also criticized Mr. Obama’s decision to extend the Bush-era tax cuts and the recent deal he struck with Republicans over cutting spending to raise the debt ceiling.

“We need to put strong Democratic pressure on President Obama in the name of poor and working people” said Cornel West, an author and professor at Princeton University. “His administration has tilted too much toward Wall Street, we need policies that empower Main Street.

I have enormous respect for Dr. West and even agree with him for the most part. Nader is the problem here, however.

To be sure, there are plenty of Democrats who still hold a grudge against Nader for 2000. I believe that blame is misplaced, even when it comes from the most esteemed sources (.pdf). My rebuttal is that Theresa LePore, the Democratic elections administrator for Palm Beach County, Florida, designed a butterfly ballot so confusing that it caused thousands of elderly residents there to punch a chad for Pat Buchanan, thinking they were voting for Al Gore.

That's what most directly caused the defeat of Gore, IMHO, more than anything Nader did or did not do.

But Texas Democrats are also still litigating over the Texas Green Party's ballot access for 2012, secured not only with the generous help of prominent Republicans but also by the Democrats' own ineptitude at failing to field a candidate in 2010 for the state comptroller's contest. The Green in that race, Ed Lindsay, surpassed the 5% threshold to secure ballot listing for the GP in '12. I spoke out loudly against this unholy alliance at the time, but came around to the understanding that the Democrats did it to themselves.

So once more, misdirected outrage. But I digress.

Nader has actually accomplished things of great significance in his life, most notably automobile safety activism, but today is more of an egotistical geriatric -- a crank -- who appears to believe that only he is capable of representing the will of liberal people in the United States. He's sucked all of the oxygen out of the room for decades now, stunting progressive growth in this country in the process. If he spent time recruiting and training people to a/the cause in-between his various presidential bids (a la Wellstone Foundation, for example), I'd have more respect for him.

To Nader's credit, and unlike Jim Hightower -- a progressive who has reduced himself to mere grifter and attention whore ever since he endorsed Kinky Friedman for governor in 2010 -- he's never done anything solely for the money in his life, from what I can tell.

Anyway, I wish Nader wouldn't run at all for anything -- his time has long passed -- and I would really prefer that, rather than an Obama primary opponent, there be a significant and notable presidential challenge from the Green Party ... preferably someone whom Nader has 'blessed' to some degree or another (rather than take potshots at).

Maybe that's going to be David Cobb again. He's making the rounds in Texas next month as part of the "Move to Amend" effort. From the inbox:

The recent U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. FEC opened the floodgates to unlimited corporate spending on elections.

David Cobb, an attorney and organizer for the Move to Amend coalition, will be touring Texas from October 2-10 to help local residents understand the history behind the recent decision and how they can work to abolish "Corporate Personhood" and establish a government of, by, and for the people by joining the Move to Amend campaign.

David Cobb is fiery speaker and former Green Party presidential candidate. His talk "Creating Democracy & Challenging Corporate Rule" is part history lesson and part heart-felt call-to-action!

“Corporate Personhood” is the court-created doctrine that gives corporations constitutional rights intended for human beings. “Corporate personhood is not an inconsequential legal technicality. The Supreme Court ruled that a corporation was a ‘legal person’ with 14th Amendment protections before they granted full personhood to African-Americans, immigrants, natives, or women”, says Cobb.

Move to Amend is a coalition of over 132,000 people and organizations whose goal is to amend the United States Constitution to end corporate rule and legalize democracy.

David is available for events in these places and tentative dates if we can find folks on the ground who will help us out:

• Bryan - College Station (Oct 2)
• Huntsville (Oct 3)
• Houston (Oct 4)
• San Antonio (Oct 5)
• San Marcos (Oct 6)
• Austin (Oct 9)
• Corpus Christi (Oct 10)

And wherever else you may be!

Update: Socratic Gadfly piles on.

Newt loses campaign staff (they're going to work for Rick Perry)

Though they aren't saying so yet. A summary of the reports:

In a major blow to Newt Gingrich's presidential hopes, senior advisers to his 2012 campaign resigned en masse today, citing strategic differences.

The staffers include Rick Tyler, a longtime political adviser and close friend to Gingrich who has worked for the former House speaker for years, as well as Rob Johnson, a former longtime aide to Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who had been hired to manage Gingrich's campaign. [...]

"When the campaign and the candidate disagree on the path, they've got to part ways," Tyler told the Post.

Gingrich campaign manager Rob Johnson, who ran Perry’s wildly successful 2010 re-election race, and New Hampshire political consultant David Carney, who has been a close Perry adviser throughout the governor’s rise to power, were among the Gingrich aides leaping off his tempest-tossed presidential campaign ship. [...]

If you remember our recent “Perry Watch” post entitled “Some important clues that will tell you whether Rick Perry is serious about running for president,” we wrote:

Watch Dave Carney and Rob Johnson. Unless you’re a political junkie, you probably don’t know those names. But Carney is Perry’s canny political guru and Johnson managed the governor’s wildly successful 2010 re-election campaign. Both are now working for GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, Johnson as campaign chief. Carney “is from New Hampshire, and he knows presidential politics as well as anyone in his party,” says Democratic consultant Paul Begala, a Houstonian and longtime Bill Clinton adviser who says he has “a high degree of respect for Carney.” If Carney and Johnson leave Gingrich while the Georgian’s struggling presidential quest continues, it’s a sign that Perry is reassembling his campaign brain trust.

During their time with Gingrich, Johnson and Carney have been able to tap into Gingrich’s national network of supporters and his fundraising machinery — two tools that could become invaluable in case Perry decides to go for the gold in 2012.

Yes, Rick Perry is definitely in. His Christian Ramadan scheduled for August is just days prior to an Iowa straw poll. Iowa's Christian conservative primary voters are key to any success Perry might have in the early going.

Carney, you will recall, was a player in the Texas Green Party ballot qualification shenanigans in 2010, during the last Perry re-election campaign against Bill White.

Finally and FWIW there's also an online poll at the Austin Business Journal -- no bastion of liberal media -- you can click on. Currently the results don't look so good for the governor.

Update: All of Gingrich's paid staff in Iowa has also resigned.