So long, Rudy

Is there any Republican politician out there who just has normal, run of the mill sexual relationships? Any one at all?

No gay airport bathroom propositions, no asking underaged congressional pages to email you their penis size, no secret visits to prostitutes in multiple states? No divorcing your cancer-stricken, hospitalized wife in order to better carry on an affair with someone else? No weird sex trysts overlooking the smoldering ruins of New York's ground zero, or billing your secret mayoral booty calls to the budgets of city agencies tasked with helping poor people? No meth-addicted gay sex while preaching about the horrors of gay sex? No calling your coworkers at night while masturbating, telling them how much you'd like to falafel them up in the shower? No shoving pictures of fetuses in people's faces, or taking their own daughters into "chastity vows", or pontificating about the dangers of man-on-dog relationships?

Seriously, is this why Republicans are always so obsessed with governing everybody else's sex life -- because it's simply inconceivable to them that any two people would have a healthy, non-messed-up relationship?

Last night's YouTube debate questions were prepared well in advance of the breaking scandal yet it slipped in anyway; Giuliani denied all. That's not going to go over well with a GOP base having nearly nothing in common with a thrice-divorced cross-dressing librul.

And so, with the mayor's blood in the water, they each went at each other hammer and tong in St.Petersburg last night. First Mitt and Rudy over immigration, then later McCain and Ron Paul over Iraq, and later on McCain and Romney over waterboarding, and several skirmishes in between that appeared to this observer to give Mike Huckabee a star turn. He did the best job of avoiding questions with laugh lines that I've seen. And I thought Fred Thompson and McCain did well enough in comparison to the other loons to warrant a second look by the indecisive GOP voter.

Romney and Huckabee stand to benefit the most from the fast-approaching conclusion of the Giuliani campaign. Maybe McCain, although he still has a deep hole to climb out of. Perhaps it opens the door a bit wider for Dr. No.

But those madcap libertarians are pretty unpredictable, so who really knows?

Julie Mason had the live-blog. As one commenter there noted: "Mars and the Stars and Bars. And not one question on health care."

Update: Who's Playin' (Norman Fell! Precisely!) and Texas Moratorium Network (Preach it, Huck!) have quick opinions and video snippets.

Remember that Democrat in CD-07?

A few years ago he was a Republican, last week he told us he was a Democrat, but today he's an independent. Here, you can read his press release for yourself:

"RADIO REBEL" TELLS DEMOCRATS "THANKS, BUT NO THANKS"

Truitt says he'll run as Independent Candidate for Congress


The ink was barely dry on his first press release when John Truitt issued a statement reversing its message, saying he will run for US Representative from the 7 th Congressional District in Houston as an Independent, not a Democrat.

"The Democrats I talked to were very helpful and supportive," says Truitt; "but I'm really more of an Independent who's pretty disgusted with the leaders of both the major parties. My supporters are just plain fed up with politicians who put their party's interest ahead of what's good for the country. We believe i t's time to put our country first and stop all the partisan bickering in Congress, particularly while we're at war. If I'm lucky enough to get elected as an Independent, I'll work with all parties to find smart, sensible solutions to the real problems our country faces today."

The official web site of the Truitt for Congress Committee is www.truittfortruth.com. It outlines his "7 Ways We Can Do Better If We Pull Together " and includes links to his plan for "swift, successful completion of our mission in Iraq", his resume and articles on various issues.

Truitt acknowledges he has no real organization and very little political experience, or money to fund a campaign. The business consultant and award-winning author says he does get a lot of support from a listening audience that grew during his four years on the air as CNN's "Radio Rebel" talk show host. He says his basic campaign strategy relies upon a lot of footwork on his own, plus the help of loyal listeners, friends, like-minded contributors, campaign workers and volunteers he hopes to recruit along the way.

Good luck with that, buddy.

Solidarity for striking writers

Thanks, HuffPo:

... 30 Rock's Tina Fey and Jack McBrayer, SNL's Amy Poehler and Seth Meyers, plus Sex and the City's Kristin Davis, The Office's Rashida Jones, The Player's Tim Robbins, The Color Purple's Danny Glover and Michael Emerson, aka the Creepy Guy from Lost. rallied in support of the writers, Oh, and special guest star John Edwards! "This is all about fairness, it's about opportunity, it's about making sure those who create the work that generates revenue actually gets to share in that revenue," said Edwards.

Some Texas electoral postpourri

-- Tonight's Texas Progressive Alliance conference call guest was Dan Barrett, the lone Democrat in a field of seven challengers in Fort Worth's HD-97. He was also the leader in votes tallied, and his challenger, Mark Shelton, is coming under harsh (and legal) scrutiny from other Republicans in the district for his negative robo-calling at the end of the campaign.

-- Last week Charles Kuffner, Muse, and I had lunch with CD-07 Democratic challenger John F. Truitt, who is taking on entrenched incumbent John Cumbersome. Truitt had a radio program in Houston and was a Republican before coming to the light. He's got an idea about getting our soldiers out of Iraq:

Americans have the right to know if the people of Iraq want our troops in their country before investing more blood and treasure. Today our troops are held hostage by partisan bickering in Washington and the Iraqi government’s inability to act. Bush and the Republicans are stuck with “stay the course” and the Democrats can’t come up with a plan that doesn’t require the President to retreat and admit his failures. If the Iraqi leaders won’t get their act together, then we should go over their heads directly to the Iraqi people. Instead of demanding timetables for withdrawal which are automatically subject to a Presidential veto along with “surrender” and “cut and run” derisions, Congress should insert language that requires the Iraq government to hold the following referendum within the next three to six months as part of any Iraq spending bill.

This would be a very astute diplomatic move by the American government. By asking the people of Iraq to decide when foreign troops leave their country instead of American politicians, we don’t seem so arrogant. We can prove to the world our good intentions as well as our faith in Iraq’s democracy by asking for a referendum on the presence of coalition forces as soon as possible. The ballot should read precisely as follows:

“US & Coalition Forces would like to redeploy our troops outside of Iraq (nearby for aid in emergencies) over the next six months unless you want us to remain. Respecting the democratic rights of the Iraqi people, we ask: Do you invite US and Coalition Military Forces to stay in Iraq as guests of the Iraqi people for another year to maintain security and help rebuild your country? Yes ____ No ____”

If as expected the people of Iraq vote “no”, we can leave as promised, showing confidence in the democracy we created and leave behind, as well as respect for the wishes of the Iraqis. Realistically, if the people don’t want us in their country we cannot be effective. Remaining thereafter would only increase the resistance, tensions and violence, while sending more of our troops home in flag-draped coffins. By letting the Iraqi people decide if they’re ready to handle their own security or not, coalition forces can either leave or stay with honor.

-- Via eight feet deep and KFDM, attorney Larry Hunter will take on HD-19 Michelin Man look-alike Mike "Tuffy" Hamilton for the right to represent three counties in Southeast Texas in the statehouse.

I have more than a passing personal interest in this one, as Hunter is from my hometown and his firm handles a few estate matters for my family. He's got a solid resume' of getting elected in the district and has some ability to self-fund as well as raise money from a thick list of contacts. The district is considerably more purple than many in suburban and rural Texas, and Hamilton under-performed the other Republicans on the ballot in 2006. Those circumstances make HD-19 ripe to flip in '08. Update: Kuff has more about Hunter and Hamilton in a post which leads with the news that toll road lover and on again/off again Craddick ally Mike Krusee won't run for re-election in Williamson County's HD-52 . Diana Maldonado has already declared for the Democratics.

-- Finally, if you're interested in attending the 2008 Democratic national convention as a delegate, then you need to attend the workshop this Saturday in Houston to understand what's required of you to qualify.

lib•er•tar•ian

n. 1. a person who believes in the doctrine of the freedom of the will
2. a person who believes in full individual freedom of thought, expression and action
3. a freewheeling rebel who hates wiretaps, loves Ron Paul and is redirecting politics

Some thoughtful reading in between your Cyber Monday work blahs and online shopping:

How to make sense of the Ron Paul revolution? What's behind the improbably successful (so far) presidential campaign of a 72-year-old 10-term Republican congressman from Texas who pines for the gold standard while drawing praise from another relic from the hyperinflationary 1970s, punk-rocker Johnny Rotten?

Establishment conservatives have played the Nazi card on Paul. So if they despise him, I suppose he can't be all bad. Though he is pretty nutty:

A former Libertarian Party presidential candidate, he has at various times called for abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, the CIA and several Cabinet-level agencies. A staunch opponent of abortion, he nonetheless believes that federal bans violate the more basic principle of delegating powers to the states. A proponent of a border wall with Mexico (nativist CNN host Lou Dobbs fawned over Paul earlier this year), he is the only GOP candidate to come out against any form of national I.D. card.

A pro-war Democrat actually challenged Paul in his 2006 Congressional re-election bid; that's how weird Texas gets sometimes. Anyway, the neoconservatives hate him ...

Republican pollster Frank Luntz has denounced Paul's supporters as "the equivalent of crabgrass . . . not the grass you want, and it spreads faster than the real stuff." And conservative syndicated columnist Mona Charen said out loud what many campaign reporters have no doubt been thinking all along: "He might make a dandy new leader for the Branch Davidians."

When conservatives feel comfortable mocking the victims gunned down by Clinton-era attorney general Janet Reno's FBI in Waco, TX in 1993, it suggests that a complacent and increasingly authoritarian establishment feels threatened.

There's even been speculation that he will join forces with Dennis Kucinich on an independent label. Fantasy for some and nothing more, IMHO.

Ron Paul is going to be a source of nearly constant amusement to me, I believe.

Trent Lott cuts and runs

Mississippi's other senator was widely rumored to be the one stepping down, but the former Senate majority leader beat Thad Cochran out the door:

No reason for Lott's resignation was given, but according to a congressional official, there is nothing amiss with Lott's health. The senator has "other opportunities" he plans to pursue, the official said, without elaborating. Lott was re-elected to a fourth Senate term in 2006.

Lott's colleagues elected him as the Senate's Republican whip last year, a redemption for the Mississippian after his ouster five years ago as the party's Senate leader over remarks he made at retiring Sen. Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party in 2002. Lott had saluted the South Carolina senator with comments later interpreted as support for southern segregationist policies.

Lott also publicly broke with Bush after that incident, saying in his book Herding Cats that the president's rebuke was "devastating... booming and nasty."

So now what happens?

Mississippi's Gov. Haley Barbour, a Republican, will appoint Lott's replacement, who will serve until the 2008 elections, when voters will elect someone to serve out the balance of Lott's term, which runs through 2012. Rep. Chip Pickering of Mississippi, a former Lott aide who recently announced his retirement from the House, is widely seen as a potential successor. Pickering could not immediately be reached for comment.

Daily Kos has speculated about Democratic possibilities, including AG Mike Moore, whose name was mentioned before Cochran declared his intentions to run for re-election. An open seat makes this another chance for Senate Democratics seeking the 60-seat majority that overcomes presidential and Republican obstruction.

There's a small downside: MS would be a less expensive pickup opportunity than Texas, and some DSCC money that might come Rick Noriega's way could be redirected. But that's political fodder for another day. Today is to celebrate the departure of one more of a bad Lott of Republicans from the US Senate.

Update: DHinMI observes that it's all about the greed.

The DMN and the Alliance's Weekly Wrangle

As muse observes, the liberal Texblogosphere is getting more and more mainstream attention, and the article in today's Dallas News focuses on our little Alliance, next summer's Netroots Nation convention in Austin (see ad at right), our little PAC, and where we're headed with all of that. Having noted our growing prominence we can segue into this week's TPA Blog Round Up, compiled as always by Vince from Capitol Annex.

Dealing with recalled toys that contain lead is putting a damper on charities' holiday toy drive efforts. Muse discovers some charities are not accepting toys or are throwing donations away.

Despite the Dallas Morning News article claiming the Texas Railroad Commission is stepping up Barnett Shale inspections, an injection well in North Texas remains seriously out of compliance. TXsharon has pictures, history and solutions at Bluedaze.

John Coby at Bay Area Houston compiles an obvious list of who won't be President in 2009: Any GOP candidate. The Republicans must have worked overtime to find this bunch of losers. White. Old. Dull.

McBlogger takes a brief look at the concerns of a Republican Bexar county commissioner who doesn't realize the Republican Party of Texas is already known as the Tolling Party of Texas.

North Texas Liberal reports on President Bush's loss of an ally in prime minister John Howard of Australia, whose Liberal Party lost handily to the Labor opposition in Saturday's elections.

The Texas Cloverleaf visited Capitol Annex for Thanksgiving with a guest blog about Turkey, Football, and JFK. Oh my!

Off the Kuff looks at mass transit versus highways for dealing with traffic congestion.

Vince at Capitol Annex reprises his holiday tradition begun last year by reprising his Laws of Thanksgiving--with a 2007 update.

In "Giving Thanks for the Corporations", PDiddie at Brains and Eggs has a few choice words from David Van Os, Jeff Cohen, and John Edwards.

WCNews at Eye On Williamson notices the conspicuous absence of Rep. Mike Krusee since a rumor surfaced that he may be retiring in Where's Krusee?

CouldBeTrue at South Texas Chisme notes Lyndon Johnson was right, but demographics are having the last laugh.

Sunday Funnies (late and long edition)

Hillary Clinton and the politics of disappointment

Paul Loeb offers a pretty accurate assessment of my own sentiments these days:

When Democrats worry about Hillary Clinton's electability, they focus on her reenergizing a depressed Republican base while demoralizing core Democratic activists, particularly those outraged about the war, and thus maybe lose the election. But there's a further danger if Hillary's nominated -- that she will win but then split the Democratic Party.

We forget that this happened with her husband Bill, because compared to Bush, he's looking awfully good. Much of Hillary's support may be nostalgia for when America's president seemed to engage reality instead of disdaining it. But remember that over the course of Clinton's presidency, the Democrats lost 6 Senate seats, 46 Congressional seats, and 9 governorships. This political bleeding began when Monica Lewinsky was still an Oregon college senior. Given Hillary's protracted support of the Iraq war, her embrace of neoconservative rhetoric on Iran, and her coziness with powerful corporate interests, she could create a similar backlash once in office, dividing and depressing the Democratic base and reversing the party's newfound momentum.

I had forgotten that happened with her husband. I do recall that he put his wife in charge of universal health care right off the bat, and the blowback was immediate and severe ...

Think about 1994. Pundits credited major Republican victories to angry white men, Hillary's failed healthcare plan, and Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America." But the defeat was equally rooted in a massive withdrawal of volunteer support among Democratic activists who felt politically betrayed. Nothing fostered this sense more than Bill Clinton's going to the mat to push the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Angered by a sense that he was subordinating all other priorities to corporate profits, and by his cavalier attitude toward the hollowing out of America's industrial base, labor, environmental and social-justice activists nationwide withdrew their energy from Democratic campaigns. This helped swing the election, much as the continued extension of these policies (particularly around dropping trade barriers with China) led just enough Democratic leaning voters in 2000 to help elect George Bush by staying home or voting for Ralph Nader.

1994 was a time before my political activism; I was working hard and long hours on my corporate career (having moved from Midland to St. Pete, FL and then to Houston in '92, 3, and 4) and while I had successfully converted from republican to Democratic in the wake of the post-Reagan era, I wasn't paying particularly close attention beyond reading the newspapers, Newsweek and such. So while Loeb accounts for his grassroots experience in Washington state as evidence of the disillusionment of enthusiasm by liberal activists, I just can't verify that was the case in Houston or Texas. I wasn't on the ground. Let's pick his point back up, though:

To prevail in close races, Democrats need enthusiastic volunteer involvement. This happened in 1992, and then again in 2006. If Hillary is the nominee, she's likely to significantly damp this involvement, especially among anti-war activists. She'll also draw out the political right in a way that will make it far harder for down-ticket Democrats in states like Kentucky and Virginia where the party has recently been winning. She might not win at all, despite Bush's disastrous reign.

Recall my many postings about Texas Democrats down-ballot from Her. Though I think Loeb is wrong about her losing.

But even if she does, she is then strongly likely to fracture the party with her stands. She talks of staying in Iraq for counterterrorism operations, which could easily become indistinguishable from the present war. She backed the recent Kyl-Lieberman vote on Iran that Senator James Webb called "Cheney's fondest pipe dream." She supported the bankruptcy bill and the extension of Bush's tax cuts on capital gains and dividends. If her contributors are any guide, like those she courted in a $1,000-a-plate dinner for homeland security contractors, she's likely to cave to corporate interests so much in her economic policies that those increasingly squeezed by America's growing divides will backlash in ways that they're long been primed to by Republican rhetoric about "liberal elitists." And if Democrats do then begin to challenge her, the relative unity created by the Bush polities will quickly erode.

Because the Republican candidates would bring us more of the same ghastly policies we've seen from Bush and Cheney, I'd vote for Hillary if she became the nominee. But I'd do so with a heavy heart, and a recognition that we'll have to push her to do the right thing on issue after issue, and won't always prevail. We still have a chance to select strong alternatives like Edwards (who I'm supporting) or Obama. And with Republican polling numbers in the toilet, this election gives Democrats an opportunity to seriously shift our national course that we may not have again for years. It would be a tragedy if they settled for the candidate most likely to shatter the momentum of this shift when it's barely begun.

That's pretty much me, right?

Sunday Funnies (early edition)