Running on his physical appearance

There seems to be a meme running through the Internet's series of tubes today. Let's begin with Peggy Fikac:

No, really, women aren’t any more shallow than men.

When a poll by a group of newspapers including the San Antonio Express-News/Houston Chronicle showed that about 50 percent of women likely to vote favor GOP Gov. Rick Perry -- compared to 40 percent for Democratic challenger Bill White -- some called it a testament to Perry's looks.

Among them was the pro-Perry blog "Rick versus Kay" which posted this (tongue-in-cheek?) item: "If you want to know the real reason Rick will win women, it is the same reason Obama won so many women ..... or why Clinton won so many women ..... women don't want to have to look at Bill White's gollum-looking mug for four years whereas Rick is who they wish their husbands looked like at age 60."

I know someone might be laughing - and I'm not picking on Rick versus Kay. But let's face it, it's a bit annoying.

It might be annoying -- even pathetic, I submit -- if it were true, Peggy. And who are these "some"? But before we get to that let's note that Corrie MacLaggan at the Austin Statesman dutifully followed suit...

"Perry is doing extraordinarily well among women," said Mickey Blum, whose firm, Blum & Weprin Associates Inc., conducted a poll on behalf of the American-Statesman and other newspapers. She said that in years of polling in Texas, this might be the first time she's seen more women than men backing the Republican.

The poll found that 50 percent of women who are likely voters prefer Perry, while 40 percent prefer White. Overall, 46 percent of likely voters picked Perry and 39 percent liked White, the poll said.

Yes, this might indicate some trouble for the Democratic nominee if it were accurate. However, as Phillip Martin has demonstrated, it is a false assumption that women prefer Perry over White. The newspapers reference a single poll, the one they commissioned. The average of ten polls since May indicates White has a plurality of support with Texas women voters. One of those is the mighty Rassmublican poll from 9/22 -- two weeks ago -- showing a 51-39 split in favor of the Democrat.

But those facts didn't stop Fikac or MacLaggan, and they sure as hell didn't slow down Big Fat Jolly in his Big Fat Whine about last night's gubernatorial debate (I warned you he was going to be cranky). No excerpt; let's give him the traffic.

In BJ's defense, he attended the event. After a long day of activism, I was too worn out to do so and instead watched the online stream. Neil Aquino also made it and had a much more reasoned take, including this:

All in all, the debate served a useful public purpose. I urge folks to consider all the candidates.

Many Texas voters will likely follow that advice (whether they read Neil's blog or don't). Many of those Texans will be women.  And after ten too-long years, Texas will have a new governor on Tuesday evening, November 2. Thank goodness.

Update: Rachel gets mean.

The Weekly (Fall, finally) Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance welcomes the arrival of October as it brings you this week's blog roundup.

WCNews at Eye On Williamson posts about Rick Perry still in denial about the economy in Texas: Trying to make a living in the best state not to have a job in.

Off the Kuff examined the possibility of a Libertarian effect on the governor's race.

Bay Area Houston has an opinion on Renew Houston's new tax for drainage improvements.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme thinks that the Republican running for Harris County Clerk is an idiot.

News you won't hear on the Lamestream Media this week is that the conservative/TeaBag/GOP momentum peaked three weeks too soon, while the liberal/progressive/Democratic momentum is surging. You can wait a month and learn what happened on FOX ... or you can read all about it now at PDiddie's Brains and Eggs.

Rev. Manny at BlueBloggin takes a look at Tea Party candidates and sees more proof that they are running cover for the Corporate Agenda. When you think of classic business hustles, there is a long list but at the top are sweatshops, mercenaries, commodity profiteering and environmental assault. Enter the Tea Party.

It was another bad week for Sleazy Todd Staples. First off, there is now a video to go with his votes to expand eminent domain. Then he tried to defend some of his inaction with stupidity. Hank Gilbert, of course, slapped him down hard. Read it at McBlogger.

Libby Shaw does yeoman service to us all, gathering together a sort of bestiary of Far Out Right Wing Republicans running for office this cycle. Check out the videos. Word of warning: don't try to ingest anything while you are viewing. Either you will gag or you will burst out in laughter. Neither is good for your digestion. Check it out at Texas Kaos... The Scourge of the Republican Radical Right.

Neil at Texas Liberal noted a report that aliens are disarming nuclear missiles in the U.K. and the U.S. Neil supports this course of action by our alien visitors, and urges them to come to Texas to disable the means by which we execute people. The number of innocent people executed in the U.S. is a crime of galactic scale.

Sunday Funnies

Some of the real news

Conservative momentum peaked about two weeks too early. By contrast, progressive momentum is just beginning to rise. (But you won't hear anything about this on the Lamestream Media.)

The Republican National Committee's less-than-stellar fundraising this summer is forcing the party to dial back on some of its traditional get-out-the-vote efforts in the final weeks of the 2010 campaign.

As first reported by Roll Call's Jackie Kucinich, the RNC has decided to end the long-standing practice of sending congressional staffers into hotly contested districts to make contacts with voters and assist the GOP's midterm election efforts. A spokesman for the RNC says the program isn't "cost-effective" and the party plans to spend its money on other get-out-the-vote efforts, like mailing fliers to voters' homes.

The move seems counterintuitive on the eve of an election in which Republicans are strongly favored to make serious gains in the Senate and possibly regain control of the House. But with less than five weeks to go before Election Day, the RNC doesn't have the cash it had in previous years to spend on dollar-intensive get-out-the-vote efforts.

As of Aug. 30, the RNC had roughly $4.7 million cash in the bank for the final push, according to its latest Federal Election Commission report. By comparison, the Democratic National Committee reported more than $13 million.

RNC Chairman Michael Steele has been under fire for months for the party's lackluster fundraising and what some officials have described as frivolous spending. Steele is currently on a 48-state bus tour — which some GOP insiders have privately criticized as a waste of money.

Bob Schieffer's teevee program this morning was all about the Democrats' infighting, the projected loss of Congress, what went wrong with Obama's agenda ... basically the same thing you would hear if you were listening to Mike Wallace's wayward son on FOX.

This might have been news last month. Today it's already false.

Now if you will excuse me again, I'll get back to GOTV efforts and rallying the base.

2010 Texas Gubernatorial Debate, Sunday October 3, Houston *update*

Bill White and Deb Shafto and Kathie Glass will be there, but All Hat and No Cattle will be off somewhere shooting conservative bloggers and sucking up to coyotes. Or is it the other way around?

Go here to register, as only 350 are allowed. Since the Republican candidate will be MIA -- Neil is taking suggestions on empty chairs to be displayed -- Fat Jolly may not be able to give you an on-the-scene report. Then again, he may think that he's being excluded because he is not one of Houston's Top Political Bloggers (heck, he may be a 'bottom', for all that I know). But present or no, you can certainly count on his whining about it afterward, and that those whines will be echoed by his sycophants.

Because they really have nothing of consequence to say, I suppose.

There will be another debate just like this one October 19 in Austin.

Update: The press release indicates they can accommodate 650 (though the registration website above still says 350).

The 2010 Texas Gubernatorial Debate on Oct. 3 will feature KTRK Channel 13 news anchor Melanie Lawson as debate moderator, with three candidates committed to date. The debate is scheduled from 6-8 p.m. at Harris County Department of Education, 6300 Irvington Blvd. in Houston.

With a focus on education topics, the debate is co-hosted by HCDE and The League of Women Voters of Texas and the Houston Area. All four gubernatorial candidates have been invited to participate. Candidates committed to debating to date are Democrat Bill White, Libertarian Kathie Glass and Green Party candidate Deb Shafto.

“Education is a hot topic in the November election,” said Harris County School Superintendent John E. Sawyer. “We look forward to co-hosting this historical debate and anticipate keen interest from the education public. Of course, all citizens are invited and urged to attend.”

An audience of 650 can be accommodated in the HCDE Conference Center located in northeast Houston off the North Loop near the Hardy Toll Road. Participants must register for the debate online at www.hcde-texas.org . Go to “register now,” create a user account, search for the workshop by date or title and complete the form. Registration confirmation must be presented for admission. Doors will open at 5:45 p.m. There will be no late seating.

The Weekly (cool snap) Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance is no longer in wait for that first nip of fall in the air as it brings you this week's blog roundup.

This week on Left of College Station Teddy writes about why the Tea Party has an expiration date. Also, as the semiannual protest against reproductive rights 40 Days for Life begins, a guest blogger writes about being a pro-choice feminist Christian, and Teddy has a post about how the Coalition for Life lies to women. Left of College Station also covers the week in headlines.

Off the Kuff interviewed Harris County Judge Ed Emmett, County Commissioner Sylvia Garcia, and Democratic candidate for County Judge Gordon Quan.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme knows that deregulation means more tainted food and more BP disasters like this one.

Bay Area Houston lists some alternatives to white-wing wadio in Houston.

Nat-Wu at Three Wise Men examines the situation in Somalia, coverage of which has mostly ceased in the American press.

Jeff Weems, the Democratic candidate for Texas Railroad Commission, earned the endorsement of both the Dallas Morning News and the Houston Chronicle. Keith Hampton, our man for the Court of Appeals, got the DMN endorsement. Bill Moody (Texas Supreme Court),Wally Kronzer (14th Court of Appeals), and Robert Ray (1st Court of Appeals) also got endorsed by the Houston newspaper.

WCNews at Eye On Williamson has a question for you: did you know Texas' public education finance system is hopelessly broken?

WhosPlayin calls BS on GOP Congressman Michael Burgess' taxpayer-funded "survey" over extending the Bush tax cuts. The only options were a dishonest choice of all or nothing, so WhosPlayin posted its own survey with the third option of "extend for the middle class".

This week at McBlogger we take a look at Sleazy Todd Staples and his johnny-come-lately advocacy for tougher eminent domain restrictions.

Neil at Texas Liberal noted this week that the party holding the White House has lost seats in the U.S. House of Reps. in 33 of 36 midterms since the Civil War. Neil is not pleased that Democrats may lose some seats in the upcoming election, but these things do happen.

Libby Shaw at TexasKaos explains how one of our smirking Republican friends claim that "The American People Wrote the Pledge" when it was actually written by lobbyists. Check it out.

More Funnies (less funny)

A True Tale from Texas

The Texas State Board of Education is a laughingstock. Rebecca Bell Metereau and Judy Jennings, along with Michael Soto, will change that.

Sunday Funnies

Weems captures DMN endorsement

The Dallas News got it completely wrong in the agriculture commissioner's race (after all, they endorsed Kinky in the March primary, so what could you expect?) but they got it right in the railroad commissioner's contest.

Seldom do we run into a first-time candidate for any office and wonder why that person hasn't already been elected to the job. But that's how impressed this newspaper is with Democrat Jeff Weems, who is seeking election to the Texas Railroad Commission.

The 52-year-old Houston attorney would be ready on Day One to make a significant contribution, which is why we strongly recommend him for the three-member panel.

His understanding of the industry shows. He can talk chapter and verse about energy issues, which the oddly named Railroad Commission oversees. And he is a sharp contrast to some candidates who shoot for the commission on their way to a higher post.

This newspaper also supports Weems because of the balanced view he articulates. He understands the importance of oil and gas production to the state's economy and, for example, doesn't favor a moratorium on Barnett Shale natural gas production.

We also agree with him that the Railroad Commission can't leave a void for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to fill when it comes to monitoring the practices of natural gas extraction. As an example, he wants producers to tell the commission what chemicals are in the fluids they use to unlock the gas from the Barnett Shale geological formation. Those trade secrets would be sealed but would still allow the commission to know, for environmental reasons, what goes into the hydraulic fracturing that companies use to extract the gas.

Weems wants the commission to be more aggressive in lobbying the Legislature about its goals. We particularly like his idea of limiting fundraising for this quasi-judicial post to selected times during a commissioner's six-year term. He would curtail fundraising shortly after a commissioner's election until essentially the member's next election cycle.

These are just some of the many examples of Weems' smart and thoughtful views. His opponent, Republican David Porter of Midland, filled out our questionnaire, but the 54-year-old CPA neither showed up for an interview alongside Weems nor returned a call seeking a phone interview. Roger Gary is running as a Libertarian, and Art Browning is running as a Green Party candidate.

Weems and Porter are competing for an open seat, so voters would be well-served to take the time to distinguish between these candidates and dig deeper than sound bites. Weems clearly has the qualifications – and then some – to bring common-sense leadership to this influential commission.

Weems' Republican challenger really is just as weird and unqualified as the DMN discovered. Weems is the only sensible choice for the Texas Railroad Commission.

Update: The Houston Chronic follows suit.

Can you pick out the gay soldier?

Antediluvian

I always appreciate a piece of writing that sends me to the dictionary.

extremely primitive or outmoded <an antediluvian prejudice>

... Rachel Maddow has it exactly right. It was confirmed today for all to see. The Republicans absolutely will not allow a vote to get rid of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. We know why. Here's an example from what passes for a U.S. Senator in Georgia:

[The armed forces should] exclude persons whose presence in the armed forces would create unacceptable risk to the armed forces' high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion. In my opinion, the presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would very likely create an unacceptable risk to those high standards. [It will lead to] alcohol use, adultery, fraternization, and body art. If we change this rule of 'Don't Ask, Dont Tell,' what are we going to do with these other rules?

The homophobic Senate dinosaurs like Chambliss who cling to these pathetic antediluvian views are, as Maddow so perfectly showed, out of step with the majority of rank-and-file Democrats, Independents and Republicans, who all want an end to this harmful policy that endangers our national security, ruins careers and violates civil rights of Americans as surely as the segregated military of 1948 and earlier violated civil rights.

Yes, DADT endangers our national security by -- among other reasons --  expelling Arabic-speaking specialists from the ranks of the service.

Who's anti-American now? Who's not supporting the troops now? And the best objection the Republican senators can come up with is "we didn't get to add all of our amendments"?!?

That year, President Harry Truman, having been prodded into action by the vicious 1946 murder of two African-American veterans and their wives in Monroe, Georgia -- the last public lynching in the country --  chose to desegregate the military by executive order instead of waiting for legislation from Congress.

Even as the Pentagon works on its study of a possible change in Don't Ask, Don't Tell, it discharges gays and lesbians, including men and women for whom the military is a career, as part of its continuing witch-hunt. This will continue until somebody commands it to stop. There is a commander who can do that, a man who now sits where Harry Truman once did, a man who has said repeatedly in the clearest possible language that he opposes DADT and wants to see it ended.

After the Senate's inaction today, Maddow said:

The White House could decide right now -- tonight -- to stop implementation of this policy pending the military's review.  The right wants a culture war against gay people?  In 2010, that's a war anti-gay politicians lose and pro-civil rights politicians win.

Does the White House leave that on the table and walk away?  Or do they try to win?  Do they do well politically by doing what they say is right for the country?  Do they do it?  What happens next?

This would constitute no end run around the military's review of DADT. It would not violate the separation of powers. It would merely do the right thing until Congress makes it official: stopping the discharge of women and men who have signed up to serve our country by wearing the uniforms of our armed forces. Men and women with talent and skills and millions of dollars in specialized training who willingly risk their lives in the name of America. Some call such people patriots. Not, of course, chickenhawks like Saxby Chambliss, who launched his Senate career with cowardly disses of another patriot, Max Cleland.

Republicans proved once again Tuesday that they have no intention of working with their counterparts across the aisle. They do not believe, as Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mike McMullen believes, as President Obama believes, and as most of the American people believe, that civil rights should apply to everyone equally. And they never will. Eventually, they will lose their retrograde attempts to keep the old rules and their twisted prejudices in place. In the meantime, the President has the authority to end a discharge policy that weakens national security and divides people between those who have full civil rights and those who do not. It's the right decision.

All of your Republican senators -- and the two so-called Democrats from Arkansas (Harry Reid voted 'no' so that he may recall the vote later) -- voted in favor of denying the military funding authorization, against the DREAM Act, against DADT -- because they (falsely) claimed they weren't allowed to participate to their fullest happiness in a procedural matter involving the legislation.

All. of the Republicans. in the Senate.

You want more of this? Vote Republican.