Bill vs. Farouk

Tonight, live and in person, on your teevee. And lately also in the news and in the blogs.

Here's Red White and Blue's video interview with Shami (it goes 26 minutes plus). And the TexTrib has compiled several links and video in "The More You Know ... About Bill White". Charles Kuffner has audio interviews with both men.

The Texas Observer's The Mayor and The Mogul has some good Q&A. Here's a bit from both fellows ...

TO: Can you elaborate a little on your plans for stimulating the economy? you said you want to start at the bottom. What does that mean?

Shami: I’ve been to El Paso, and I visited the colonias. I understand there are thousands of these. In Houston, I see the Fifth Ward, Third Ward, Sunnyside, Acres Homes. Such poor people. As long as those people are poor and having no jobs ... so my concept is to start with these people and create jobs. Bring factories to these communities.

I’ve been working for the last few months with engineers and experts on solar panels. Soon we will be building the first solar panels in El Paso and hiring hundreds of people and working there with the community for people to do installing of those solar panels. [Shami has been a major investor in a solar panel project in El Paso.] I’m hoping we can do that in all poor communities and create approximately 150,000 jobs in the next couple of years.

So that’s where I say stimulate the economy starting from the bottom. Those people, when they get a check, they spend it the next day. It goes back to the economy. And that keeps the money in the state. That’s how you stimulate the economy.
We need green jobs. They would serve many purposes—working with the solar panels, using the sun, which is the cheapest form of energy and the cleanest form of energy, and it’s creating jobs.

TO: We’re in a time when there’s a lot of anti-Obama backlash and a lot of antigovernment sentiment. Clearly you are running on a good-government message, which hasn’t always worked in Texas, to say the least. How are you going to sell people on competent governance?

White: You know, Texas will be a poorer state without an economic future that’s as much as it can be. We lead the nation in the percentage of adults without a high school diploma. Texas is unusual among American states and countries on Earth of having the younger generations having a lower percentage of college degrees than older Texans. We will not have a solid economic future unless we invest in the people of this state and have people who are productive, that can save and invest in small businesses, that can purchase consumer goods. And I think Texans understand this.

We need to move our state forward. We’ve had too much of the wedge politics issues in the past. And I think that most Texans are ready for somebody just to work for the people of Texas on solutions.

I think what you’re seeing a backlash against is what people consider to be a lot of political theater in Washington. There’s a lot of hype and rhetoric. When you have two wars going on, when you’re in a global and economic recession, and we’re in a state that is last in a lot of things we ought to be first in, then people are ready for some new leadership.

Despite being the house organ for the Texas Democratic establishment, Burnt Orange Report breaks with the party line in their aggregate of the Austin Statesman's reporting. The AAS's PolitiFact breaks down Shami's racism allegations against White. And Dr. Richard Murray of the University of Houston and ABC13 predicts that White will get 60% of the primary vote on March 2 (a contention I dispute in the comments there and in this post as well).

Hal levels a critique on the Shami campaign and specifically campaign manager Vince Leibowitz, who is the president of the Texas Progressive Alliance, in which the three of us of are members. Muse posted about Shami's "beefy aides", and compared statements between White and Kay Bailey (personally, I can't tell the difference).

I posted about the exclusion of the other five candidates for governor from tonight's debate here, an entreaty that fell on completely deaf ears. I also had a compilation of news and blog articles on Shami last month, and my 2007 meeting on e-Slate issues with White, before and after.

Hank versus Kinky

Lots and lots of news about the Democratic primary contest for commissioner of agriculture. What follows is a selection of excerpts and links to the source, which I recommended following and reading entirely.

Democratic agriculture commissioner candidates Kinky Friedman and Hank Gilbert met for their first, and likely only, editorial board meeting together late Friday afternoon at The Dallas Morning News.

Friedman balked when he arrived and heard Gilbert was attending. He said he had not been told of the joint session. Editorial board staff told him it was written in a letter he had received.

But Friedman need not have worried. His counterpart showed up half an hour late. This left Friedman time to talk about following the "Hightower model," throw in some jabs at Gov. Rick Perry and use his latest line, "putting the culture back in agriculture." ...

Gilbert talked about his agricultural background and his desire to build reservoirs and develop desalination plants across the state.

At one point, Friedman looked over at Gilbert and said, "Taken together, we'd probably make up an adequate human being."

He got a smirk from Gilbert who responded, "I'm gonna have to dispute that."

More from Trail Blazers, including these ...

Kinky: Longhorns to Haiti

Gilbert: Campaign cash for clothes

Kinky: Jason Stanford and Chris Bell (and a dog)

And from the DMN a couple of weeks ago ...Friedman, Gibert butt hat brims in tense stand-off:

When Friedman took a break, during the speeches, Gilbert followed him. The showdown took place outside the conference room, the brim of Gilbert's white cowboy hat up against Friedman's black one.

"There is no reason to bring up things that are not relevant to this campaign," Gilbert said. "That's old-time politics that have long passed by."

Friedman pulled his trademark cigar out of his mouth and denied leaking any information.

"I don't know what you're talking about," he said, shaking his head. Gilbert backed off, and Friedman suggested to his campaign manager that they go outside to defuse the situation.

As you might imagine, the Texas left blogosphere has been lively about all of this.

The World's Most Dangerous Beauty Salon, Inc.:

Juanita Jean likes cowboys. So, when Hank Gilbert decided to re-enter politics, she was pleased. But then Hank couldn’t decide what horse to ride, who was in charge of paying the band, or who his dance partner is. It was a goat rodeo. ...

“It’s gonna take a faith healer, a voodoo doll, and a 20 car prayer meeting to get this guy’s campaign back on track ...”

“He’s throwing us into Kinky Friedman’s arms,” Juanita moans, “and, Honey, there have been some things in Kinky’s arms that require an environmental impact study just to move across the room. I’m not overly anxious to be there, but at least he seems to know what he’s doing most the time.” I suspect she heard me snort. “I said MOST!” she reiterated.

jobsanger:

A few days ago, the campaign again blundered. After meeting with National Farmer's Union president Roger Johnson, Gilbert announced that Johnson had endorsed him to be Texas Agriculture Commissioner. The only problem with that is Mr. Johnson said he had NOT made any endorsement in the race.

Again the campaign came up with a rather weak excuse for the error. They said they'd been getting so many endorsements that they just made a mistake. That sounds like a pretty egregious mistake. Is the campaign so disorganized that it can't even keep something as simple as an endorsement straight?

Gilbert ran a pretty good campaign in 2006. Even though he didn't win, he actually got more votes than the Democratic candidate for governor did. But his 2010 campaign seems to be a comedy of errors.

McBlogger:

The interview was little more than a careening mess with Friedman clearly not cognizant that the position really involves more than just name dropping and asking Hightower what he'd do. And, of course, it gave Friedman a chance to misrepresent the DMN for calling him the safe, sane choice (which they did, but only when it comes to driving habits) ...

But what really got me what was him dropping out there that he'll increase Democratic vote by 7%, according to a good pollster. Which is cool except for one thing... now one knows how much of the Democratic electorate, made up of a large number of the same racial minorities Kinky has used for his insipid comedy routine for years, will decide to come out because he's on the ballot.

On the other side is Hank Gilbert. He can actually say he's done what Kinky claims he can do. He pulled 7% over the Democratic base vote in 2006 and he's only gotten stronger with Independents and moderate Republicans since through his work to kill the TTC. And, as an added bonus, he doesn't anger the Democratic base.

Texas Cloverleaf:

Both Hank and Kinky do have good ideas. They both hate toll roads. They both like ranches. Both really like animals. But what bothers me the most is the character of the man that we are about to elect. Sure, the recent news on Hank not wearing his seatbelt or driving on a revoked license is not the best thing out there, but it sure doesn't beat nigger eggs. Oh, you are wondering why I used that term? Well, it is because the Kinkster did, so it must be cool, right? No, it isn't cool. ...

We can not have an "entertainer" who has spent more time on a tour selling books, cigars, and salsa running a serious commission in the state. Remember the last slew of actors we elected to office? Ronald Reagan. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Jesse Ventura. Jerry Springer. How did those work out? I would rather have the guy who was a school teacher and a rancher deciding how our agriculture is promoted in Texas. That would be Hank Gilbert.

Super Sunday Funnies

NFL = socialism

As we all prepare -- well, most of us; well ... a lot of us -- to spend another late-winter Sunday afternoon sharing in a little social networking experiment called the Super Bowl, let's be reminded that the National Football League is not only the most wildly successful but also the most socialistic of all professional sports organizations. Let's count the ways ...

Revenue sharing (all money from the television contracts signed with the networks and cable stations gets split evenly among teams) guarantees that the Pittsburghs and Green Bays can compete with the New Yorks and Chicagos. In comparison, major league baseball owners have long eschewed the revenue-sharing model, enabling teams like the Yankees to earn and spend higher mountains of cash than their relatively poverty-stricken counterparts in Tampa Bay and Seattle.

Name me any other industry in this country where the franchisees share equally in the largest stream of revenue.

The taxpayers in each city subsidize the initial construction cost of the respective team owners' largest manufacturing facility (stadiums). The municipalities share in the expense but not in the income, unless you count tax revenue collected from the restaurants and sports bars near the stadium on game days.

When it comes to selecting the most talented and experienced workers -- the draft --  the worst is always first and the champion last. Even the scheduling takes into effect that the lousiest teams get to play one another the following season, while the best ones get to beat up on each other.

"Parity", and not 'just winning', to paraphrase Oakland-then-Los Angeles-and-back-to-Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis, is the name of the NFL game, baby.

And then there's the player salary cap, where each team's payroll is frozen at an equal sum across the league, as well as the fact that the NFL has never had any investment in a minor league farm system like baseball and basketball (the colleges and universities take care of that expense for them).

This quasi-socialist business model has paid off handsomely; billions of dollars (almost $7B in 2008 alone) for its 32 owners, making the NFL far and away one of the most profitable operations ever invented. The brand is so strong that the Houston Texans secured the second largest debt-refinance contract in team sports history (through 2003, that is) and that was before they ever played their first game. Professional football is in fact so lucrative that American multi-millionaires -- and billionaires -- have to make their millions and billions in other industries before they can get accepted into the exclusive private club of NFL ownership.

There's just one place where these titans of commerce show their true colors: like most other capitalist pigs, they blame the "fact" that they still aren't making enough money on their employees.