Rick Perry rumors harden (no, not the gay ones)

"Our normally reliable Republican source reports that Mr. Perry has surveyed the field and decided to get in the race later this summer, perhaps around the time of the national prayer meeting that Mr. Perry is hosting on August 6 at a Houston football stadium. Our source also reports that Mr. Perry is aiming to compete in the Iowa Straw Poll, even though it occurs just a week later, on August 13. The thinking is that apparent front-runner Mitt Romney 'does not reflect the Republican Party' and is therefore vulnerable to a credible challenge from the right, especially after Mr. Romney's recent squishy remarks on global warming."

The guy that ran Al Gore's 1988 campaign in Texas has decided to enter the 2012 presidential race because Mitt Romney is too soft on climate change.

That flip-flop is so massive that Goliath's whole foot fits in the big toe's crevice. That flip-flop could refloat the Titanic. That flip-flop is so huge that it has other smaller flip-flops orbiting it. That flip-flop is so effing big ...

HillCo Partners working on behalf of Bob Perry to kill sanctuary cities bill

That's what "multiple sources" are telling Harvey Kronberg at 5:18 p.m. today, and here is the subhead and the teaser:

Hillco's Bill Miller responds that they are definitely not trying to kill but definitely trying to change SB9

Ironically, Governor Perry declared sanctuary cities an emergency item in the regular session and put it back on the call for the special despite Bob Perry being one of his largest contributors. He is also a major direct and indirect contributor to state lawmaker races.

House State Affairs is scheduled to take up SB9 tomorrow.

UPDATE: House State Affairs has canceled its meeting scheduled for tomorrow morning and has scheduled a Monday hearing for 9 a.m. in the Agriculture Museum on the ground floor of the Capitol.

Don't know who HillCo is? Don't know Bill Miller? Now you do.  But the only thing that is essential for you to know is that if they are successful in defeating or watering down this legislation, the TeaBaggers are going to go frothing, screaming mad. I mean, more so than they already are. Much more. If you can imagine that.

Pop plenty of corn and get ready to watch the fireworks.

Update: "Sanctuary cities" bill loses momentum ...

As two of Texas' most politically-involved business leaders emerged as opponents, a bill banning "sanctuary cities" lost crucial momentum Friday, raising the possibility the measure will be killed or substantially weakened before the special session of the Texas Legislature ends Wednesday.

HillCo Partners' lobby team, led by Neal T. "Buddy" Jones, is working on behalf of Houston home builder Bob Perry and San Antonio grocery store magnate Charles Butt to alter a proposal that would permit law enforcement officers to inquire about the immigration status of people they detain, Jones' partner Bill Miller confirmed.

Miller declined to detail the changes Jones hopes to make in the legislation, saying only that they have "given language to members" to consider including in the proposal, which would carry financial penalties for cities that prohibit law enforcement from inquiring about immigration status.

The opposition of the business leaders demonstrates a schism in the Republican Party on the issue, designated a priority by Gov. Rick Perry. Bob Perry, no relation to the governor, is a prolific Republican contributor who has given $2.5 million to the governor's campaign coffers since 2001. HEB CEO Butt has made substantial contributions to members of both parties.

Too funny to wait until Sunday

Too big to sue

That is essentially what the Supreme Court's Wal-Mart ruling means.

Class action lawsuits have traditionally been the vehicle for individuals to seek justice from large corporations. It allowed these individuals to pool their resources in order to achieve the same level of justice as the corporation. This was the method that was used to counteract a corporation's lawsuit war chest, with which they could buy their way out of a lawsuit with an army of lawyers and endless appeals. The class action lawsuit leveled the playing field.

But the Supreme Court ruling this week means that many corporations are just too big to sue. Since large groups of people are now not allowed to pool their resources due to the vague "glue rule" advanced by Antonin Scalia, the only avenue left for suing these corporations is via small groups or individuals. And of course, when going up against small groups or individuals, a large corporation has all the advantages that money can buy.

Many lawyers are simply not going to take such cases any more, advising their client that they can't win. Thus justice will be denied, over and again. Congress and the White House could work to change this setback for Americans through either legislation or even constitutional amendment, but somehow I doubt they will. After all, they don't want to displease their corporate masters, especially after last year's Citizens United ruling (and didn't Obama make some vague promise about doing something about that atrocity).

We no longer live under the rule of law, but rather under the rule of corporations. That's fascism, folks. Or as Benito Mussolini* pointed out, more properly called corporatism.

What, if anything, should we the people do about that?

Do you still have hope that our elected officials will actually make the necessary changes? I don't.

A stronger labor movement would be a good thing towards this end. But the unions have been dying for decades now, and the corporations and the traditional media are busy putting the final nails in their coffins even as I blog.

Frankly I think that the only option left is the one to which the people of France resorted in 1789. I'm just not certain that I will live to see it. It's also quite likely that if a populist uprising like that occurred it would be led from the extreme Right, such as the TeaBags (they have most of the guns, after all). Which would move the country still further right. Toward more theocracy and more corporatism, without a doubt. With a bit of idiocracy thrown in.

But perhaps we could make a start in the not-right-but-certainly-proper direction by impeaching Clarence Thomas. As former US Senator John Blutarsky famously said: "Who's with me?!"

 *Some disagree that Mussolini actually said this.

Related reading:

Beyond the Supreme Court: Other Strategies Needed to Fight Discrimination at Wal-Mart (and Other Corporations)