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.

Rick and Ted's (and Sarah's) Excellent Super Bowl Sunday Venture

It won't be retarded, but it will be crazy ... because you couldn't pile the nuts any higher if you used a steamshovel:

Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is coming to Texas on Sunday, February 7, 2010 to headline a rally for Governor Perry's re-election campaign. We invite you to join Sarah Palin, Rick Perry, and your fellow conservatives in Houston for this exciting event. ...


Due to the enthusiastic response and to ensure everyone has a chance to see Governor Palin, Ted Nugent, Governor Perry and others, they have agreed to have two events at the Berry complex, and both will be simulcast together.

Lock up the women and children, get your dogs inside the house, tie down your valuables and stay the hell away from 290 at Barker-Cypress at all cost. 

This is a private event. No trespassing is allowed, it is for Perry supporters. No signs, sticks, or glass bottles or cans allowed. Please bring your cameras, cell phones, and PDA’s, your voices, your enthusiasm, your patience and your conservative spirit. This is going to be a liberty-lovin, freedom-singin', blow the doors down, good ole' fashioned rally. 

They didn't say nuttin' about no guns, though. Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

Nuge is doin' the Anthem. Ain't that great? A brave American who defecated on himself and wore the pants for several days before showing up at his Vietnam draft board hearing.

They didn't take Ted into the US Army, but that's OK; now he's Rick Perry's boy all day long.

Obama suggests healthcare reform is nearly dead

After insisting for a year that failure was not an option, President Barack Obama is now acknowledging his health care overhaul may die in Congress.

His remarks at a Democratic National Committee fundraiser Thursday night sounded contradictory at times, complicating congressional leaders' effort to revive health care legislation as Democrats hunger for guidance from the White House. Even while saying he still wanted to get the job done, Obama counseled going slow, and bowed to new political realities. Democrats no longer command a filibuster-proof Senate majority, and voters and lawmakers are far more concerned with jobs and the economy than with enacting sweeping and expensive changes to the health system.

Not exactly bold leadership on the issue.

Sweeping health legislation to extend medical coverage to more than 30 million uninsured Americans passed both chambers of Congress last year and was on the verge of completion before Republican Scott Brown's upset victory in a Massachusetts special U.S. Senate election last month. Brown was sworn in Thursday, giving Republicans 41 votes, enough to block the initiatives of the Democratic majority.

Now the health legislation hangs in limbo. Lawmakers are looking to Obama for a path forward, but he has not publicly offered specifics. His signals have been mixed. At the DNC event he said Republicans should be part of the process — something they've shown little interest in and that would doubtlessly drag out a legislative effort that many rank-and-file Democrats want to end quickly. The health care bill has become unpopular with the public and a political drag for lawmakers.

As usual he's not tipping his hand, again so as to avoid catching the blame:

"And it may be that ... if Congress decides we're not going to do it, even after all the facts are laid out, all the options are clear, then the American people can make a judgment as to whether this Congress has done the right thing for them or not," the president said. "And that's how democracy works. There will be elections coming up and they'll be able to make a determination and register their concerns one way or the other during election time."

Don't let the moment pass, but be deliberate. Move forward to a vote while at the same time have meetings, listen to the Republicans' ideas (sic), take your time, make a decision.

Remember when this was going to be done by Christmas?

I was a proponent some time ago of letting HCR pass away, but it should have been done so that its death was clearly the fault of the GOP. Responsibility for the failure -- whether the inept Dems could make it so, or not -- belongs squarely at their feet.

But once again the president has managed to kowtow to the intransigent minority and piss off his base while looking weak, all at the same time. That's an award-winning recipe for failure.

39% and Kay Bailey headed to run-off

As I previously predicted, Rasmussen shows the GOP goobers primary as a MoFo's to lose:

Incumbent Rick Perry's lead over Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison has grown a little bigger in the race for this year's Republican gubernatorial nomination in Texas. Tea Party activist Debra Medina also has gained ground, and her gains appear to come at the expense of Hutchison.

The latest Rasmussen Reports survey of likely Republican Primary voters in Texas finds Perry leading Hutchison 44% to 29%, with Medina at 16%.

Medina has gained four points since the previous survey while Hutchison has lost four points. Perry's support is little changed from a month ago.

Harvey observes that this is the first time Kay Bailey has polled below 30%.

Now that first link above -- here it is again -- also contains my prediction for the Democratic primary, a prediction I reposted today on Dr. Richard Murray's blog... where he thinks Bill White is going to get 60% on March 2.

I will certainly look forward to comparing the outcomes with our predictions on Election Night.

The Weekly Wrangle

Dr. Stephen L. Klineberg of Rice University and the Houston Area Survey notes:

In 2009, 25% of the respondents said that "buying the groceries to feed their family" was either a "very serious" or " somewhat serious" problem for them during the past year, up from 19% in 2002.

Other highlights from the 2009 survey at the link (in .pdf form).

The Texas Progressive Alliance brings you the following blog highlights from the past week.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme thinks that the Houston Chronicle caught the essence of the GOP with this headline: 'Many attacks, but few suggestions'.

WhosPlayin is tired of hearing obstructionist Republicans whining about not having a seat at the table for health care insurance reform, after they make it clear they'll vote against any attempt to harm their Big Pharma and Big Insurance benefactors.

Off the Kuff notes that the Texas ParentPAC has endorsed Thomas Ratliff in his GOP primary fight against uber-SBOE wingnut Don McLeroy.

Bay Area Houston watched as the Texas Association of Builders got kicked in the nuts at a hearing in Austin over the abuse of mandatory binding arbitration.

It's been such an amazing news week in the Barnett Shale that it's hard to pick one topic for the round-up. One item that should be of interest to anyone in the DFW area who drinks water: Argyle Disposal Well in Denton Creek Flood Plain. No kidding! It's for real on Bluedaze: DRILLING REFORM FOR TEXAS.

The Texas Cloverleaf looks at the taxing TAKS becoming the pretty STAAR that school children will have to shoot past in order to graduate.

Has the so-called nuclear renaissance been dealt a blow by the South Texas Project's troubles? Learn more at Texas Vox.

If you missed the GOP governor's debate, check out McBlogger's rather insightful analysis of the three players' performances, along with a mercifully brief comment on the sexual desirability of Rep. Louie Gohmert.

WCNews at Eye On Williamson posts on the latest Texans for Public Justice "Watching Your Assets" report, this one about the Texas Enterprise Fund: Perry's corporate welfare not paying off for Texas.

Over at TexasKaos, Libby Shaw puts a local spin on young James O'Keefe's foiled attempt to tamper with Mary Landrieu's phones. The roll call of Texas Republican admirers is quite long. Of equal interest was the discussion that followed the outing of these Republicans. See it all at Texas Republican Lawmakers Honor James O'Keefe.

It's a travesty that only Bill White and Farouk Shami are participating in the Texas Democratic gubernatorial debate on February 8 because the other five candidates don't meet the "standards". PDiddie at Brains and Eggs believes it's impossible to reconcile that KERA, a public broadcasting station, together with the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Univision and other corporate and media industry sponsors, would conspire to preclude candidates for the state's highest public office.

Neil at Texas Liberal is glad that Houston city councilmember Jarvis Johnson is talking about poverty in his 18th U.S. House District primary fight with incumbent Sheila Jackson Lee. However, it will take some solid ideas and not just talk to feel that Mr. Johnson is really serious about the issue.

White and Shami only

This is wrong, and not good for democracy:

Texas’ two leading Democratic gubernatorial candidates will square off in the televised debate next month but the five other candidates on the ballot won't be joining them.

Former Houston Mayor Bill White and hair-care magnate Farouk Shami will face off in their first debate on Feb. 8 in Fort Worth.

The debate will be hosted by public TV station KERA/Channel 13. As with KERA's Republican gubernatorial debate earlier this month, the Star-Telegram is a co-sponsor.

Along with White and Shami, five other candidates are running for the DemocraticBill White nomination: educator Felix Alvarado, doctor Alma Aguado, private investigator Bill Dear, professor Clement Glenn and home builder Star Locke.

You may recall that Belo pulled this same crap on Debra Medina with the GOP gubernatorial debates. Only a outpouring of protest made the debate sponsors relent and include her.

I simply don't like the idea of a  collection of corporations and trade groups (comprised of a handful of "very important people") deciding who gets to participate in democracy based on shit criteria like this:

3. Polls are a measure of voter interest. If a candidate receives a minimum of a 6% rating in an established, nonpartisan poll or an average of established, nonpartisan polls, the candidate will be presumed to be newsworthy. Voter interest may also be measured by the amount of votes cast for a candidate, and so a candidate would have to receive a minimum of 6% of votes in a previous election for the same office or a comparable office.

And if you agree with me, then contact KERA and their co-sponsor the Startlegram, and perhaps the other sponsors including KTVT and Univision and the Texas Association of Broadcasters and the Texas State Radio Networks and the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas and tell them so.

jobsanger observes that KERA ia a public broadcasting station:

I would have expected this kind of slanted-opinion behavior from a privately-owned television station or network (like Fox News), but it is very disappointing when it comes from a station supposedly owned by the people. After all, KERA is supported by federal funds (that is, taxes paid by all of us) and donations from ordinary citizens. It seems traitorous for them to only allow the rich candidates to debate on their station (the candidates who already have the money to buy all the publicity they need).

Public television advertises itself as the station and network that brings the people programming they can't get on other privately-owned networks and stations -- quality programming that may appeal to only a minority of television viewers. Why then, do they change that mission when it comes to politics? Why do they allow in their debate only the rich candidates declared to be frontrunners by the privately-owned media?

It may be true that the other five candidates don't have nearly the funds of the two rich candidates, but does that mean they would have nothing to offer the people of Texas? In fact, their lack of funds makes it even more important for the people's public television to give them the opportunity to show they are (or aren't) a quality candidate, possibly with more to offer the voters than the rich "anointed" or self-funded candidates.

Felix Alvarado, one of the untouchables, points out ...

Apparently, money is the only driving force in the democratic arena…

For the past few months, we have read over and over again the need for recruiting well-qualified democratic candidates to run for statewide office.  Few can deny that the objective was to recruit a Latino to run against Perry, but anyone would do, anyone that is …that the democratic establishment felt was well – qualified.

And Dr. Alma Aguado noted in the comments there that minorities and the poor lack the resources and the literacy -- technological as well as information sifting (ie, "the ability to interpret the reliability and accuracy of information") -- in order to fully participate online. Which is where the action, as we all know, is.

This circumstance is particularly odious for an organization like the FOIFT to go along with. And since there are two Hispanic candidates in the race being frozen out of the debate, it would be interesting to know how the folks at Univision feel about their participation.

Obviously this is about the ease of moderating a two-person debate than a seven-person one, and the 'dangerous precedent' set by having anyone who pays the filing fee getting to be on teevee with the VIPs. What, pray tell, would happen if twenty people filed for governor four years from now? However would they be able to control that?

Limiting participation limits choices and restricts the democratic process. It allows for greater control by already-too-powerful sources. We can stop this but it requires taking action to do so.

The Medina supporters got it done. Can we?

Sunday Funnies

Who won? Depends.

Which probably means Governor 39% won by not losing ... even if he really didn't do anything to win.

First: Why doesn't anybody who covers these ever write about what a supreme ass Rick Perry is?  His conduct is mostly obnoxious and occasionally reprehensible. He's rude, condescending, snide, boorish and basically a jerk and that's only when he's not acting like Dick Cheney. As a matter of fact he's almost a blend of the preceding governor and the former vice-president/domestic-terrorist understudy; a snarl with a smirk.

Good ol' Burka thinks he won going away...

So, who won? I think Perry was the clear winner. He got all of his messages out, anti-Washington on highway funding and securing the border, proud of having a vision on transportation. He took a big hit on the Enterprise Fund, but he didn’t yield, insisted it would work out. He didn’t ever say Everybody wants to move to Texas or engage in a lot of braggadocio. It was pretty clear that he wasn’t excited about being there, but every time they took a shot at him he would just grin a little more. I’m sure that he was gritting his teeth behind that grin. When he was asked for information, he knew his stuff cold. He came across as a serious politician. Hutchison had no energy. She was very weak on the issue of how to fund TxDOT. It’s like that beer commercial where the guy can’t say he loves the girl. Can’t get the word out. Ttttaxes. Ttttolls. BBBonds. She wants to audit TxDot. Perry killed her. TxDOT gets audited every two years, he said.

Medina came across as more of an amateur this time. Last time she was spunky. This time she was old news. I was impressed that she nailed the question about how much starting school teachers made. The questions weren’t really good for her. She didn’t have a lot of opportunity to score points with the tea party crowd. Her issues are pretty esoteric. Property tax versus consumption tax. Nullification. I think this debate was really set up to be a fight between Hutchison and Perry for the GOP base vote, not the crazies. It was her last chance to win them over, and she didn’t come close to doing it. Perry by a mile.

Mmmmmmnnnot quite, Paul.

If he won, it was only because Kay Bailey was pathetic (he's dead solid about that) and Medina was not the kid-that-nobody-expected-to-be-in-the-finals this time (she had a higher bar to clear and missed it).

Medina's backtracking on secession after they showed tape of her calling for it  on the south steps of the Capitol was her Waterloo. She did get a few good shots in and she aced a pop quiz answer or two, but she's really just a flash in the pan.  The ultra-loonies will stick with her but the movement will be toward Rick Perry because they all hate Kay so much.  Her nuance on Roe crushes her with these people.

Rick Perry lied through those grinning, gritted teeth so many times, advanced his BS talking points ('"I always stand on the side of life"... and I'll kill ya if ya don't get outta my way') until the mods and panelists cut him off, determinedly ignored his opponents while they spoke, and generally acted like the petulant frat boy Medina called him in the WSJ (but backed away from when grilled about it) until the clock ran out.

Winning by not screwing up, and by having the lamest opposition ever.  Yeah, he's on a winning streak, all right.  Other reactions:

Peggy Fikac: Well, it was a debate

KHOU: Mobile text poll results give edge to Medina (has links to the debate video)

RG Ratcliffe (and Peggy Fikac): Many attacks, few suggestions

John Cobarruvias:  Wayne Slater won

Texas Tribune: No knockout in final round (audio analysis of the debate going forward to March 2) and Watching the Focus Group (I'll spare you the click-over: all but one of a group of GOP undecideds thinks Perry won)

Burnt Orange and Texas Blue also live-blogged. (Sorry fellas, but with Facebook and Twitter also offering all the instant analysis anybody could ever want, live-blogging anything has become more boring than being alive.)

Following up two recent posts *make that three*

-- "TeaBuggin'" drew an enormous amount of unique visitors and click-throughs this week. The post connected the escapades of filmographer/"pimp"/"telephone repairman" James O'Keefe, his employer/contractor Andrew Breitbart, and Governor Rick Perry, who hosted Breitbart and other right-wing bloggers in an Austin get-together just this past weekend. Perry praised the "New Media" which Brietbart advocates and O'Keefe creates.  Maybe some enterprising journalist will ask the governor how proud he is of their most recent work in tonight's debate.  Meanwhile, you can view Brietbart (who demonstrates the same unhinged rage in person that he does in his writing on his blog) and MSNBC's David Shuster squaring off -- loudly and rudely -- in this video:



... and Perry and Brietbart and the other conservo-bloggers worshipping their weapons and each other in this video (Pajamas Media will allow you to watch it a limited number of times before they force you to register).

-- The snickering and implied sexism noted in "iPad: Mini or maxi?" also made several rounds elsewhere throughout the online world. Here are some pictures of the, ah, "hybrid product" introduced by Apple and Steve Jobs earlier in the week, courtesy Freetechie. And Feministing piled on, observing the probable lack of women's input on the name. But Apple has endured snark before about its branding and seems poised, as usual, to capitalize on the power of its product (and not its marketing).

Update: And Obama's State of the Union address, advanced here in cartoons and reacted to here by our Alliance, drew only a muttered 'you lie' instead of a shouted one, this time from Justice Samuel Alito. Demonstrating his remarkable judicial temperance, Alito scowled, shook his head, and said "not true" in response to the president's criticism of the Citizens United v. FEC decision handed down last week. Republican reaction -- led in ever-embarrassing fashion by our very own John Cornyn -- was proto-typically hypocritical. It conveniently overlooked GOP presidents' own harsh criticisms of Supreme Court decisions such as Roe v. Wade. And as the world comes around once more, we recall that Alito, as a Reagan DOJ attorney, had a hand in crafting legal strategies to overturn Roe as well.

Say no to activist judges? Republicans lie.

Howard Zinn and J.D. Salinger

I note their passings this week with greater woe in admitting that I have read neither A People's History of the United States nor Catcher in the Rye.

Proudly, unabashedly radical, with a mop of white hair and bushy eyebrows and an impish smile, Mr. Zinn, who retired from the history faculty at Boston University two decades ago, delighted in debating ideological foes, not the least his own college president, and in lancing what he considered platitudes, not the least that American history was a heroic march toward democracy.

Democracy Now! collects his appearances on their program, which you may select, watch, and listen. In November 2008, Zinn was in Houston to give the keynote address at the National Council for the Social Studies annual conference.  You may watch that speech here.

==================

Mr. Salinger’s literary reputation rests on a slender but enormously influential body of published work: the novel “The Catcher in the Rye,” the collection “Nine Stories” and two compilations, each with two long stories about the fictional Glass family: “Franny and Zooey” and “Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction.”

“Catcher” was published in 1951, and its very first sentence, distantly echoing Mark Twain, struck a brash new note in American literature: “If you really want to hear about it, the first thing you’ll probably want to know is where I was born and what my lousy childhood was like, and how my parents were occupied and all before they had me, and all that David Copperfield kind of crap, but I don’t feel like going into it, if you want to know the truth.”

Though not everyone, teachers and librarians especially, was sure what to make of it, “Catcher” became an almost immediate best seller, and its narrator and main character, Holden Caulfield, a teenager newly expelled from prep school, became America’s best-known literary truant since Huckleberry Finn.

With its cynical, slangy vernacular voice (Holden’s two favorite expressions are “phony” and “goddam”), its sympathetic understanding of adolescence and its fierce if alienated sense of morality and distrust of the adult world, the novel struck a nerve in cold war America and quickly attained cult status, especially among the young. Reading “Catcher” used to be an essential rite of passage, almost as important as getting your learner’s permit.

The novel’s allure persists to this day, even if some of Holden’s preoccupations now seem a bit dated, and it continues to sell more than 250,000 copies a year in paperback. Mark David Chapman, who killed John Lennon in 1980, even said the explanation for his act could be found in the pages of “The Catcher in the Rye.” In 1974 Philip Roth wrote, “The response of college students to the work of J. D. Salinger indicates that he, more than anyone else, has not turned his back on the times but, instead, has managed to put his finger on whatever struggle of significance is going on today between self and culture.”

Many critics were more admiring of “Nine Stories,” which came out in 1953 and helped shape writers like Mr. Roth, John Updike and Harold Brodkey. The stories were remarkable for their sharp social observation, their pitch-perfect dialogue (Mr. Salinger, who used italics almost as a form of musical notation, was a master not of literary speech but of speech as people actually spoke it) and the way they demolished whatever was left of the traditional architecture of the short story — the old structure of beginning, middle, end — for an architecture of emotion, in which a story could turn on a tiny alteration of mood or irony. Mr. Updike said he admired “that open-ended Zen quality they have, the way they don’t snap shut.”

Mr. Salinger also perfected the great trick of literary irony — of validating what you mean by saying less than, or even the opposite of, what you intend. Orville Prescott wrote in The New York Times in 1963, “Rarely if ever in literary history has a handful of stories aroused so much discussion, controversy, praise, denunciation, mystification and interpretation.” 

So many people I know well -- and more just in passing -- were so moved by both men's words that I felt compelled to mark their deaths, and I hope I can make acquaintance with those words in the very near future.

Repugs debate tonight (and Dems next week)

TeaBagger darling Debra Medina tries to catapult her propaganda from the last tussle with Kay and Rick to even higher political fortunes in the second face-off between GOP gubernatorial contenders in Dallas this evening.

As the Republican candidates for governor prepare for what likely is their last debate tonight on statewide television, the first debate between Democrats Bill White and Farouk Shami has been set for Feb. 8 in Fort Worth. ...

Hutchison and Medina both benefited from the first debate, the former because of her energetic assault on Perry's record. Medina, as an unknown candidate, gained credibility through her knowledge of the issues.

Perry again will be the target in tonight's debate, hosted by Belo Corp., its affiliated newspapers and TV stations. Perry said he felt confident.

“I've been preparing for this debate for about 25 years. So nothing's different,” the incumbent said Thursday.

He sounds terrified to me.

“The economy is the No. 1 issue that is out there and I'm going to argue that Texas is in better shape than just about any other state,” Perry said. “Texans want a leader who is confident. Texans want a leader who knows exactly where he wants to take this state and has the record to back it up.”

Hutchison spokeswoman Jennifer Baker said the senator, who was in Washington on Thursday, plans to focus her debate on Texas' future and challenge Perry to explain how he would use another term in office.

Medina, meanwhile ...

(...) acknowledges that voters and political observers wonder whether Perry and Hutchison were just caught off-guard at the first debate, and whether she will prove to be a credible candidate.

"It’s important to see whether I can take the heat" in the second debate, she says. "We deserve as Texans to know whether someone we’re putting in leadership can handle herself under pressure. This is the only chance for all Texans to be able to see that."

We'll be watching. As will Bill White and Farouk Shami and the rest of the Democratic field, who may not make the Belo cut to appear. More on that outcome today from the Dallas News.

Texas Progressive Alliance rejects Obama's spending freeze

*Note: I missed the deadline to include my statement in this release, so my thoughts appear at the end of this post.

Top progressive bloggers from across Texas issued a statement today in response to President Obama's State of the Union address cautioning the President to avoid implementing a federal spending freeze.  While these bloggers maintain their support of their President and their Democratic candidates, they reject the notion that a spending freeze is a valid solution for working Americans in this time of economic crisis.

"A spending freeze is foolish," said Trey McAtee, an Austin-based blogger who writes under the pseudonym of  'McBlogger.'  "It is not in line with the ideals of President Obama's supporters, and as progressive bloggers we're here to make sure he knows that."

These members of the Texas Progressive Alliance, a coalition of progressive Texas bloggers formed in 2007, call on President Obama to reconsider his plans for a spending freeze and instead focus on restoring the confidence that businesses have in the future.

The following individual statements were issued:

"The economy is still in a precarious and fragile state, even today.  The deficit hawks in Congress have decided to willfully ignore reality and opted instead to play politics on the issue of the deficit.  They're making demands that, if the President accedes, will lead to a long lasting economic malaise."

-- Trey McAtee of McBlogger (http://www.mcblogger.com)

"The spending freeze will likely affect those who need it the most during this difficult time in our economy.  Throughout his campaign, Obama criticized his opponent's calls for a spending freeze, calling it a 'hatchet when we need a scalpel.'  The only difference progressives see now between Obama and McCain's platform is that Sarah Palin isn't standing next to him."

-- Rachel Farris of MeanRachel (http://www.meanrachel.com)

"During his candidacy, President Obama promised to overhaul immigration early in his first term. However, many immigrant rights advocates fear Obama's spending freeze will put a halt to any type of immigration reform. Any further delay to fix the broken immigration system and this nation will continue to see the devastation of thousands of families and neighborhoods."

-- Edmundo Rocha of Para Justicia y Libertad (http://xicanopwr.com/)

"The spending freeze is both bad policy and bad politics. The last thing we need to hear about right now are ideas for what the government won't do to get us out of the economic crisis that has crippled many American families. What we need instead is bold leadership, not efforts to satisfy the whims of obstructionist Republicans and cowardly Blue Dog Democrats."

-- "Xanthippas" of Three Wise Men (http://threewismenblog.com.)

"A spending freeze is a passing gimmick that does not address the long-term problems facing the American people. Instead of offering up a stunt, President Obama needs to discuss the realities of a changing global economy in an adult manner with the American people. Instead of retreating, government has a part to play in helping Americans with jobs, health care and education."

-- Neil Aquino of Texas Liberal (http://texasliberal.wordpress.com)

"President Obama is struggling because he's allowing his political enemies to drive the public discourse, delay his agenda in Congress and slow-walk his nominees. By refusing to fight for the issues he campaigned on, his electoral majority from 2008 is disillusioned and unmotivated. Perhaps once we have a Speaker Boehner and a Leader McConnell, Obama will realize that abandoning his base in search of approbation from the right was a mistake."

-- Editors of Eye On Williamson (http://eyeonwilliamson.org/)

"Americans need to be reminded that Obama did not create this financial mess, he inherited it! The Republican attempt to erase the George Bush presidency is astonishing. Obama needs to remember that this time the mandate is his, given to him by the very people who will suffer most under his proposed spending freeze."

-- Sharon Wilson of BLUEDAZE: Drilling Reform for Texas ( http://txsharon.blogspot.com)

"Irresponsible leadership by George W. Bush and Congressional enablers left Americans on the brink of complete economic meltdown and we are far from out of the woods on that score. Why adopt the failures of  the minority party, or pretend to for political cover? There is a very small window of opportunity  before voters decide whether to let Democrats keep their majorities.  Time to turn on the gas, not put on the freeze."

--  "Boadicea," Managing Editor of Texas Kaos (http://www.texaskaos.com)

"Although deficits and debt are a undoubtedly a long-term concern, we will have little ability to fix them and reverse course until our economy is fully back on track and unemployment comes down to a reasonable number.  To that extent, the federal government ought to be looking at continued investment that will inspire confidence and leverage private investment. Any across-the-board spending freeze is counter-productive."

-- Steve Southwell of WhosPlayin.com (http://www.whosplayin.com)

==========

I think a federal spending freeze is the worst possible thing that could be done at this moment. And while I don't completely share the expressions of support for the President expressed in the above statement's opening, 'Democrat' is my default setting.  I will vote for Obama in November 2012 if he is the Democratic nominee but I prefer to see a strong primary challenger from his left -- far left (relatively speaking).

But to the freeze: I am of the mind that the stimulus did not go far enough nor was aggressive enough; that too much was packaged as tax relief than actual spending; in short I am in complete agreement with Krugman and consider myself a full-bore Keynesian in economic philosophy (as simply as it can be expressed, that it is government's responsibility to spend its way out of a recession).

This freeze might be the greatest mistake yet made by this President ... if he should actually follow through on it (no sure thing given his record on broken promises like closing Guantanamo). It strikes me as a unilateral capitulation to the screaming of conservatives whose eardrum-pained caterwauling about deficits and debt were as AWOL during George W. Bush's terms as he was during the Vietnam war.

Obama has gone too far already in trying to entice Republicans to join him and his party to participate in governing the country. If he does not begin instituting the policies that motivated Americans to elect him to the White House, he could be ejected in 2012 -- depending in large part on who his competition is.

And yet ...

And thus - while anything's possible, of course - I am hard pressed to see how the Obama administration is anything but finished. ...

The obvious solution, of course, would be a sharp turn to the left.  Go where the real solutions are.  Fight the good fight.  Call liars ‘liars' and thieves ‘thieves'.  Do the people's business.  Become their advocate against the monsters bleeding them dry.  Create jobs.  Build infrastructure.  Do real national health care.  End the wars.  Dramatically slash military spending.  Produce actual educational reform.  Launch a massive green energy/jobs program.  Get serious about global warming.  Kick ass on campaign finance reform.  Fight for gay rights.  Restore the New Deal era regulatory framework and expand it.  Restore a fair taxation structure.  Rewrite trade agreements that undermine American jobs.  Rebuild unions.  Fill the spate of vacancies in the federal judiciary, and load those seats up with progressives.  Rally the public to demand that Congress act on your agenda.  Humiliate the regressives in and out of the GOP for their abysmal sell-out policies.

 

All of this could be done, and most of it would be very popular, especially if it was backed by an aggressive and righteously angry Oval Office advocate for the people who knew how to use the bully pulpit to shape the narrative, to market ideas, and to mobilize public support.

Obama has just nine months to get some of the things done that he spoke about tonight that will quickly put Americans back to work, the most important and valuable thing he can do. Otherwise the electorate will spill his party's blood in the midterm elections. He's blown this first year but to analogize it to football, it's halftime; he can still make the necessary adjustments and come out slinging.

And swinging.

iPad. Mini or maxi?

"Dude, you're NOT gettin' a Dell, you're gettin' a ... feminine hygiene product that resembles a Kindle. Or maybe a giant iPhone."

State of the Union toons

TeaBuggin' *updated*

Anti-ACORN scam artist and 'pimp' James O'Keefe was arrested yesterday doing his best Watergate 'plumber' impersonation:

(O'Keefe and three other men) were charged with entering federal property under false pretenses and attempting to gain access to (Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu)’s office by posing as telephone repairmen, according to a copy of an FBI affidavit unsealed Tuesday.


The complaint said that O’Keefe was waiting in the office when Flanagan and Basel each entered the premises, wearing light green fluorescent vests, denim paints and blue work shirts, tool belts and hard-hats. They informed a member of Landrieu’s staff that they were telephone repairmen and requested access to the main telephone at the reception desk.


At that point, the two men allegedly attempted to manipulate telephones and accessed the telephone closet, saying they needed to work on the entire system. The men, who said they left their credentials in their vehicles, were arrested by the U.S. Marshals Service soon afterward. O’Keefe, who had been filming the two men on his cell phone camera, was allegedly involved with planning, coordination, and preparation of the operation, according to an affidavit signed by Steven Rayes, special agent at the FBI.

O'Keefe has been praised by FOX, lauded by conservative-freak-blogger Andrew Breitbart (who was in Austin over the past weekend with other right-wing bloggers/gun nuts lovingly fondling Rick Perry's pistol) and hailed even by our own Sugar Land Congressman Pete Olson, who introduced a House resolution commending O'Keefe for "setting an example for concerned citizens across America" and was "owed a debt of gratitude by the people of the United States" -- a resolution joined by his fellow Republican goons Joe Barton, John Carter, Michael Conaway, John Culberson, Louie Gohmert, Kay Granger, Ralph Hall, and Kenny Marchant.

All of whom could not comment because they are busy running in the opposite direction at the moment. Except for that criminally insane lunatic Breitbart.

Keep an eye out for their continuing attempts in coming days to spin this scandal away.

Update: Rachel Maddow's segment from her show last night, exposing additional angles ...



Update: More all over the InterTubes, but MOMocrats has a good collection of links, including some dope on the getaway car driver/listening device operator Stan Dai, who probably met O'Keefe at a Leadership Institute get-together, and The Daily Hurricane samples liberally from Governor MoFo's right-wing-blog/gun nut fest in Austin last weekend.

Update II: Glenn Beck and Michelle Malkin have begun the recriminations.

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance congratulates the city of New Orleans for its first Super Bowl as it provides an instant replay of its blog highlights for the week.

Something stinks about the recent TCEQ Barnett Shale air quality testing in Fort Worth and in Flower Mound. It's all in Bluedaze: DRILLING REFORM FOR TEXAS.

Off the Kuff looked at a report on the economic impact of dropouts.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme sympathizes with Lamar Smith's constituents who were told they must contact Smith's office if they want him to stop illegally calling their cellphones. Smith's breaking the law and his solution is to make his constituents ask him to stop.

At Texas Vox we're pleased as punch to see that Austin isn't alone in preparing for a clean energy future; Portland General Electric plans to shut down its coal plant by 2020!

WhosPlayin reposted a article from 2007 about the corporation: Don't hate the player, change the game, which is especially apropos considering the news this past week.

A Republican in Democrat's clothing tries to ride into office in Dallas County. SDEC members and precinct chairs say 'no way' to this Eagle Forum darling at The Texas Cloverleaf.

Citizens of Texas say &^%$ Governor Perry! at Bay Area Houston for screwing up the state after ten years. Add your own!

WCNews at Eye On Williamson takes a glass half-full approach in analyzing the muffed election last week. Let's HOPE it's seen as a wake up call.

Right-wing bloggers gathered in Austin to worship Rick Perry's pistol. Seriously. Read the entire revolting display of sycophancy at Brains and Eggs.

BossKitty at TruthHugger is continually amazed at the general ignorance concerning the actual words in the US Constitution. Interpretations abound from the mouths of people who have never read the document, or do not comprehend the words in context. Embellishments and fantasy surrounding the Consitution are spoken every day. What is especially disturbing is how these fantasies infiltrate America's politics. To be elected in some regions, a politician must fertilize the fantasy. Perspective must return to how Americans regard the Law of the Land: American Theocracy divorces US Constitution, promotes terrorism.

Over at TexasKaos, Boadicea offers a little not-so-subtle advice to Democrats who find themselves unmanned by the events of last week. She calls it Dear Democrats: Balls. Trust me, you will like the video she found to illustrate her point!

Neil at Texas Liberal made note of the fact that just two months remain before his tenth wedding anniversary. Neil is damned glad about his marriage. Neil is not certain he could advocate for liberal causes if he did not have such a solid personal relationship in his life to help him manage his frequent anger at the world. The personal and the private are often connected in many ways that we may not often consider.

Caption Kay Bailey and the Quaker Oats Man

Here, I'll get us started:

"Speaking of Haiti ... what color did you re-do your bathroom in?"

"I know what it looks like, but I'm telling you it's an IED."

"I appear to have killed your dog. But really, isn't it better off anyway?"

"Next on the History Channel: 'When Dinosaurs Ruled The Earth'"

"Come gaze into our little pond of fathomless corruption, Senator ..."

"How long do you think he will vomit like that?" ...
"I can't say. He went for 67 minutes when we made him buy the Rangers."

========

* Inspired here. Sorry, but comments are F'd up thanks to Haloscan and Blogger. Will continue working on a fix.

Gov. Perry creates jobs for Texas felons

Thanks, Governor Perry:

Gov. Rick Perry's campaign has unknowingly paid convicted felons as part-time workers under its incentive program to turn out voters for the Republican primary.

The campaign lists about 300 part-time workers on the financial disclosure forms it filed with the state, recruits under the "Perry Home Headquarters" program that pays people to get others to sign up as a Perry supporter and pledge to vote. A handful have criminal histories, a Dallas Morning News review shows.

No really, THANKS! I think it's great that he's giving these people opportunities in this economy when they would have few even in a good one.

"People in life make mistakes," said Perry spokesman Mark Miner. "It doesn't mean they can't get a second chance and work hard. That's what these people are doing. They are out there trying to change their lives and make a difference."

Hear, hear! (Spin, spin.)

Beyond that, the program has become a money-making opportunity, especially for those with extensive social networking profiles. Some may be in it more for the cash than the candidate. For instance, one lists herself as a Facebook fan of President Barack Obama, an unlikely political pairing.

Well maybe she's, you know, just another disillusioned Democrat.

...Joshua Furrh of Fort Worth, convicted of possession of a controlled substance and sentence to three years probation in 2007, was paid $480 by the Perry campaign.

He acknowledged that he was on probation but declined to discuss his case any further or to talk about the Perry program.

"He's going to make a great governor, again," Furrh said.

Good on ya, buddy. Don't buy any more dope with it.

Enterprising workers use their Twitter and Facebook accounts to help them recruit. Shaniqua Curry of Denton earned $3,420 for her effort, which included a plaintive Twitter plea: "HELP ME RAISE MONEY FOR MY NEXT CAR!!! COPY, PASTE, AND SIGN UP TO SUPPORT RICK PERRY!" the tweet read.

Maybe Shaniqua can cross-sell with her Avon or Amway network. Yeah, that's the ticket!

"As a reminder, you have the potential to receive an additional $20 for each headquarter that fulfills their commitments of voting early in the primary (Feb. 16-26) and recruiting 11 voters," wrote Elyse Derian, the Houston regional director for Perry's campaign. "Please take these next few weeks to encourage your headquarters to recruit those 11 individuals to commit to vote!"

Needing to focus on getting voters to the polls, the Perry campaign scrapped part of its incentive pay.

"For those of you that are being compensated for your work, the campaign will not compensate you from this point forward for any new" recruiters that are brought in, Derian wrote this month. "However, the bonus for getting your [recruiters] to identify and turn out 11 registered voters is still as is."

Derian also urged the workers to make sure the people they recruited were registered to vote. Many of the names turned in by the part-time workers were either not registered to vote or lived outside of Texas.

Campaign officials remain confident the program will help Perry at the polls.

"It's doing what we said it would do," Miner said. "When you're taking on an unprecedented effort like this, there is always room to grow."

Who wants to be a millionaire? Thanks again, Governor Perry!

(You don't think any of 'em could also be working for ACORN, do you?)

Extra Sunday Funnies

TeaBaggin' bloggers fellate Rick Perry's gun barrel and boots

I couldn't make up shit this crazy if I tried with all my might and smoked heroin too:

Gov. Perry looked over at me and asked if I wanted to squeeze off a few rounds with his personal handgun. I jumped at the chance. So there we are, Gov. Perry and I, squeezed into a 5′ wide alley ... and the next thing I know, Gov. Perry has cocked and loaded his handgun, and hands it to me and says, “It’s live.”

There I am, standing no more than 6-9″ from the Governor of Texas, holding his loaded handgun. ...

-- Robbie "Douchebag" Cooper

During his speech, at one point the Governor hoisted his leg up onto the table, lifted up his pant leg to reveal his specially made leather boots with a cannon and insignia "Come and Take It!." He pointed to Andrew and said this is what the spirit of Texas is all about.

-- Eric Dondero, "Yes, that really is the Governor himself who Tweats"

Don't miss the photos of all the TeaBagging, circle-jerking conservatives shooting their wads.

If you ever really wondered why Texas is so screwed up, you have a small bit of raw, naked evidence at those links.

Thanks, Governor Perry.

Sunday Funnies

Playoff football

I don't think they realize that they have already lost (and it was the Super Bowl).

Time for a new coach, and a new quarterback, and training for next season.

Wilson off the ballot, Sylvia in big trouble

-- Homophobe Dave Wilson is disallowed from being a Democratic candidate, and we're all appreciative of that.

The 14th Court of Appeals in Houston has denied a request for a place on the March Democratic primary ballot from a would-be challenger to Precinct 4 Commissioner Jerry Eversole.

Sign company owner Dave Wilson sought to run for the Democratic nomination for commissioner. Because no other Republican or Democratic candidates filed to run, Wilson would have faced Eversole in November. ...

Wilson filed a writ of mandamus last week seeking to be placed on the ballot. The appeals panel denied his petition late Wednesday. Wilson said he has not given up and intends to file an appeal with a state district court today.

“I'm disappointed, but not surprised, that the 14th Court of Appeals has made a political ruling rather than one based on the law,” Wilson said, speculating that the court's motive is to protect Republican office seekers.

Allen Blakemore, a political consultant for Eversole, said of the court's decision, “It means that the commissioner is re-elected and excited about that and excited to dispense with politics and get back to the business of roads and bridges and parks and libraries and all of the business of Precinct 4.”

The only larger schmucks in this matter are Eversole and his attorney Blakemore, whom we're still stuck with.

--Meanwhile over in Chambers County, Judge Jimmy Sylvia -- apparently by enjoining his son Jimbo in an employment fraud that is Sopranos-worthy -- is in big trouble for allegedly bilking FEMA out of a boatload of taxpayer money. Wayne Dolcefino (via Bay Area H-Town) did the deed:



Read these two previous entries about my meeting with Sylvia in 2006. It appears there's going to be some music to face for the county judge and his son in this matter. FWIW Sylvia was a Democrat for many years but switched to the GOP in 2007 -- just like some other exurban Texas county officials -- in order to hang onto his job.

-- Update: John links to Dolcefino's second nightly newcast explaining how the scandal is spreading to other Chambers County officials. And here is part three.

SCOTUS removes campaign spending limits on corporations

You know, it's been a really shitty week for justice and democracy.

In a stunning reversal of the nation's federal campaign finance laws, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Thursday that as an exercise of free speech, corporations, labor unions and other groups can directly spend on political campaigns.

Siding with filmmakers of "Hillary: The Movie", who were challenged by the Federal Election Commission on their sources of cash to pay for the film, the court overturned a 20-year-old ruling that banned corporate and labor money. The decision threatens similar limits imposed by 24 states.

The justices also struck down part of the landmark McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill that barred union- and corporate-paid issue ads in the closing days of election campaigns.

Because, after all, corporations are people too, and they need First Amendment protection like any other living, breathing person.

The ruling is sure to send a jolt to political campaigns throughout the country that are gearing up for the 2010 midterm elections. It will also impact the 2012 presidential race and federal elections to come. ...

It also undercuts recent congressional legislation mandating tighter controls on political donations that had restricted the flow of corporate dollars into the political system.

Some other opinions of the ruling:

The ruling marks the boldest step yet for Roberts and fellow George W. Bush appointee Alito, who previously had shied away from explicitly reversing precedents. The majority overturned a 1990 Supreme Court decision that said corporations can be barred from using general treasury funds to pay for campaign advertisements.

-- BusinessWeek

Today’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC abolishes the previously settled distinction between corporate and individual expenditures in American elections and would appear to apply to state and local elections as well as Federal ones given that the Court recognizes such a First Amendment right. This is literally an earth shattering change in the lay of the land in campaign finance, and it will have ramifications in every way imaginable for the foreseeable future.

-- emptywheel at firedoglake

If you like Congressional gridlock and insider politics, then you'll love this decision. If you think the lobbyists for the banks, insurance firms, and oil companies need more power, you'll love this decision. But if you value fairness, democracy and the free speech of ordinary citizens, this is a disaster. It is an immoral decision that puts the Roberts' Court on the side of Wall Street and the big money lobbyists against the interests of Main Street America.

-- Nick Nyhart of Public Citizen

Update: Olbermann spells it out.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Killer Keller skates

Because "public humiliation" is punishment enough for her.

A special master has concluded that Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Presiding Judge Sharon Keller doesn't deserve to be removed from office or even given “further reprimand beyond the public humiliation she has surely suffered” for her conduct in a death row inmate's failed effort to file a last-minute appeal before his execution. San Antonio-based District Judge David Berchelmann Jr., serving as special master in the case of alleged judicial misconduct, wrote that the Texas Defender Service in representing Michael Richard “bears the bulk of fault for what occurred on September 25, 2007.”

Unbe-fucking-lievable. Here's her attorney:

"Judge Keller takes to heart the advice that she should strive to be more collegial and that the Court's internal communications should improve," (attorney Chip) Babcock's statement said.

'More collegial'.

Grits:

Interesting to note that "public humiliation" is a substitute for an official reprimand when a judge engages in behavior that's "not exemplary of a public servant" and considered "highly questionable." ... Judge Berchelmann's recommendation will now go to the full Commission on Judicial Conduct who will decide whether to dismiss charges, reprimand Keller, or recommend her removal from office.

And Elise Hu:

The timing of (death row defendant Michael) Richard's last-minute appeal was especially key in this case. He was set to be executed the same day the U.S. Supreme Court stayed all executions in the country after it decided to hear Baze v. Rees, which questioned whether lethal injection constituted cruel and unusual punishment. The SCJC review says Richard's execution would have likely been stayed too, but his lawyers had to exhaust the lethal injection argument in state courts first. The claim was never presented to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which Keller leads, after a series of miscommunications between her court and lawyers from the defender service. A key miscommunication had to do with the message about the early closing time.

I gotta say I'm speechless. A compilation from the StandDown Texas Project for the history of this case is here and my previous postings are here.

Updates:  More astounded reactions. Othniel ...

Equality under the Law?
Due Process for all?
Not in Texas. More process than is due to and superior standing under the law is accorded to Chief Judge Keller than to litigants before her.  Apparently those who dare approach her Court seeking Justice enjoy neither equality nor due process.  She cannot be bothered to keep open the Court House door after 5:00 p.m., even though a defendant's life hang in the balance.

WSJ Law Blog (the most conservative source I would ever post):

Well, we weren’t entirely sure that Sharon Keller, the presiding judge the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, was going to get in big trouble over the events of Sept. 25, 2007.

But we hardly expected that the special master presiding over the judicial misconduct charges against Keller would blame another party for the unfortunate series of events. Or that the master, San Antonio-based judge David Berchelmann Jr., would express sympathy for Keller.

Texas Cloverleaf:

Ethics in Texas is never really ethical, and this case is no different. Judge Sharon Keller closed her office promptly at 5pm and allowed a man to be executed, rather than accepting the appeal. ...

Republican judges saving Republican judges. Ahhhh the ethics of Texas. Way to go, impartial judiciary.