Bubbalicious

Thanks to Mediaite for that.

Former President Bill Clinton injected some of his gigawatt political star power into President Obama‘s reelection effort Wednesday night with a rousing speech to the Democratic National Convention, capped off by a last-minute appearance onstage by the incumbent nominee himself. With his trademark wit and charm, and his hard-won statesmanlike gravity, President Clinton made President Obama’s case for reelection persuasively and convincingly.

You can go on and read all that if you didn't watch. There's also video. Let's get this over with, though, for the sake of sensitivity to the other side.

What The Big Dog is, is a closer.

He's better at it than the best car salesman on Planet Earth. Better than Alec Baldwin in Glengarry Glen Ross. "Second prize is a set of steak knives."

Bill Clinton, the guy that The Most Interesting Man in the World is modeled after, has tapped so much ass -- scattered liberally across seven continents; yes, even Antarctica -- that most conservatives can't even count that high. He puts Wilt Chamberlain to absolute shame. Check this out from the Onion.

During his speech Wednesday evening at the Democratic National Convention in downtown Charlotte, former U.S. president Bill Clinton finally just unzipped his fly and showed the entire country his penis.

[...]

“So should we just get this over with then?” the president asked the 20,000-member audience, as well as millions watching the nationwide telecast. “Should I show you my penis?”

Immediately after Clinton asked this question, there was reportedly a brief pause, after which a few murmured consents of approval were audible in the crowd, as well as a number of voices clearly shouting “okay” and “sure.”

Sources said the sounds of convention attendees shifting in their seats could then be heard as the president stepped forward to the end of the stage.

“Okay, I’m going to show you my penis now,” said the former president, his hand reaching for his pants zipper as a dead quiet fell over the arena. “Wow. You know, it’s funny, now that it’s finally happening, I actually feel a little nervous. I think it’s good that I’m doing it, but still… Okay, here goes.”

And THAT's how the cow eats the cabbage. Any questions?

Clinton fixed the first Bush economy trainwreck and still found time for a handful of chippies on the side. Obama, of course, still has both hands full with a much bigger mess.

See, this is all you need to remember: Republicans fall in line, but Democrats have to fall in love.

Yeah, they're swooning in Charlotte, the headliner is tonight, and it all spells blue wave disaster for the Bloods. Nancy Pelosi's slip of confidence is showing.

Good luck in 2016, GOP. Take comfort in the fact that this doesn't dent the status quo in Texas all that much.

Convention speakers Castro, Rubio highlight Latino divide between Mexican- and Cuban-Americans

This is what I was talking about last week.

The Hispanics with the highest profiles in this year's political conventions, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida and Mayor Julian Castro of San Antonio, stand as opposites in a cultural and political split that has divided millions of U.S. Latinos for decades.

Republicans chose Rubio, who is Cuban-American, to introduce Mitt Romney at the party's convention last week. Democrats, meeting this week in Charlotte, N.C., picked Castro, who is Mexican-American, as keynote speaker, the role that launched a young Barack Obama to national political prominence.

Although they often are lumped together as Hispanics, Rubio and Castro are emblematic of acute political distinctions between Mexican-Americans, who are the largest Latino group in the U.S., and Cuban-Americans, who are the most politically active. Despite their shared language, these two constituencies have different histories in the United States and are subjected to distinctions in immigration policy that go easier on Cuban immigrants.

"Historically, many Cuban-Americans for the last few decades have tended to be a little more conservative. So it's not surprising that you would see Sen. Rubio and the Republican nominee for Senate in Texas, Ted Cruz, running as Republicans," Castro told The Associated Press. "And I don't begrudge them for that. I think the policies they espouse are wrong, are not the best ones. But, you know, they're doing what they believe. And I applaud them for that."

[...]

Moises Venegas, a retired Mexican-American educator and Latino community activist in Albuquerque, N.M., said the two groups have little in common besides an historical connection to Spain, and Spanish surnames.

"The Cubans have never been one of us," Venegas said. "They didn't come from Chihuahua or Sonora in Mexico and from poor backgrounds. They came from affluent backgrounds and have a different perspective. The Republican Party also has opened doors just for them."

Pedro Roig, a Cuban-American attorney and senior researcher at the Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies in Miami, disputed the notion that there is significant rivalry between the groups. He attributes divisions between Cuban- and Mexican-Americans in part to geography and noted that many in the Cuban community admire Castro's selection as the Democrats' keynote speaker.

This has been precisely my own experience; Mexicanos hold more than a little simmering resentment toward Cubanos, while the Cubans don't give a damn what anybody thinks. 

Yes, there is some elitism demonstrated by Cuban-Americans. Many of them are lighter complected and thus can "pass" as Caucasian, for starters. Calle Ocho, the heart of Miami's Cuban community, is somewhat insular and distinct, whereas the places where Mexicans first settled in El Norte -- San Diego, El Paso, and Laredo come to mind -- are so blended now as to be barely considered singularly 'Mexican'. Santa Fe, NM, like so many great American cities, was a Spanish outpost with many Native American roots -- Pueblo, Navajo, Tewa. The Aztecs and Mayans are also of Mexican origin. (Did you know that the word "Anahuac" is an Aztec word for the civilized time before the Spanish arrived? I did not.)

The indigenous people of Mexico -- as in the United States -- were what we (white eyes) once called "Indians", of course.

Of the 52 million Latinos in the U.S., 33 million are of Mexican descent, followed by 4.7 million who are Puerto Rican and 1.9 million of Cuban descent, Pew Hispanic Center numbers show. The remaining 10 largest Latino groups are Salvadorans, 1.8 million; Dominicans, 1.5 million; Guatemalans, 1.1 million; Colombians, 972,000; Hondurans, 731,000; Ecuadorians, 665,000; and Peruvians, 609,000, the center reported.

In 2008, 9.7 million Latino voters cast ballots in the presidential election, and 5.2 million were Mexican-Americans, about 45 percent of eligible Mexican-American voters, according to Pew Hispanic Center data. When it comes to showing up at the polls, however, Cuban-Americans outpace Mexican-Americans — some 713,000 Cuban-Americans showed up to vote in 2008, 69 percent of eligible Cuban-American voters, the center found.

Obama won 47 percent of the Cuban vote in Florida that year, according to data from The Associated Press.

In Texas, some Republican candidates garner roughly 30 percent of the Hispanic vote, which is overwhelmingly Mexican-American, said Antonio Gonzalez, president of the San Antonio-based Southwest Voter Education Project.

Go to the article to read more about one of the friction points between the subgroups: immigration. A snip more...

While some Cuban-Americans have hoped for decades for a return to a free Cuba, many Mexican-Americans recognize parts of the U.S. as historically Mexican. "We didn't cross the border, the border crossed us," is a favorite refrain. Mexican immigration has fed much of the U.S. population growth in recent decades.

DeeDee Blase, founder of the Arizona-based Tequila Party, an independent political group made up largely of Mexican-Americans, said Cuban-Americans have failed to support policies important to Mexican-Americans, like immigration reform and health care, while wanting Latinos to rally around the trade embargo on Cuba. Blase is Mexican-American.

Guarione Diaz, outgoing president of Miami-based Cuban-American National Council, said resentments are disappearing as more Mexican-Americans have moved to Miami and more non-Cuban politicians are elected to offices with heavy Cuban support. Intermarriage between the groups has bridged the divides along with growing Latino unity around equal access issues, Gonzalez said.

So it will be interesting to see if the dynamic of Gilberto Hinojosa suggesting that Ted Cruz is a coconut continues to be a political tactic used to motivate (a specific origin-based subset of) Latino voters in Texas. A tactic that would backfire in Florida.

And I will ask again: is all this -- as in love, war, and the rest of politics -- fair?

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance has its eyes on Charlotte as it brings you this week's roundup.

There were two major court rulings last week, with the state of Texas losing and the voters of Texas winning as both the redistricting maps and the voter ID law were found to be illegal. Off the Kuff followed the action
  
BossKitty at TruthHugger is sick of all the emails and robocalls wanting money for this or that political cause. Quit violating my personal space to beg for money when Super PACs are doing that job: You Have My Vote, But Not My Money!

With the Texas GOP's dual losses on redistricting and voter suppression this week, it's still key for Democrats to keep the pressure on. Because, as WCNews at Eye on Williamson points out, they still have big and destructive plans for the future: Public education being left for dead in Texas.

The Austin Police Department not only infiltrated Occupy Austin, but one undercover cop designed and supplied the devices used in the Houston port protest that resulted in felony charges against several protestors. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs wants to know if Mayor Annise Parker still supports this kind of police misconduct.  

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme wants you to know that Quico Canseco is a whiner -- your typical Republican crybaby.

Labor Day Funnies and Facts

The first Labor Day holiday was celebrated on Tuesday, September 5th, 1882, in New York City, in accordance with the plans of the Central Labor Union. The Central Labor Union held its second Labor Day holiday a year later, on September 5th, 1883.

On September 5th, 1882, some 10,000 workers assembled in New York City to participate in America’s first Labor Day parade. After marching from City Hall, past reviewing stands in Union Square, and then uptown to 42nd Street, the workers and their families gathered in Wendel’s Elm Park for a picnic, concert, and speeches.

Labor Day parade, Main Street, Buffalo, NY, ca. 1900.

This first Labor Day celebration was eagerly organized and executed by New York’s Central Labor Union, an umbrella group made up of representatives from many local unions. Debate continues to this day as to who originated the idea of a workers’ holiday, but it definitely emerged from the ranks of organized labor at a time when they wanted to demonstrate the strength of their burgeoning movement and inspire improvements in their working conditions.

In 1884 the first Monday in September was selected as the holiday, as originally proposed, and the Central Labor Union urged similar organizations in other cities to follow the example of New York and celebrate a “workingmen’s holiday” on that date. The idea spread with the growth of labor organizations, and in 1885 Labor Day was celebrated in many industrial centers of the country.

Here are some quick tips on how to celebrate labor the union way:

• Fire up your Weber grill, made by the International Union of Allied Novelty and Production Workers.

• Grill some all-beef Butterball patties. If you are in the mood for hot dogs and brats, Oscar Meyer, Nathan’s and Johnsonville have what you are looking for.

• Add some Heinz Ketchup, Gulden’s Mustard and Vlasic pickles.

• Throw it all on a Wonder Bread bun.

• Funyuns, Fritos and Doritos are good side options.

• Wash it all down with a cold Budweiser or any other union-made brew. And there’s Minute Maid juices for the younger set.

Update: The Agonist has some good reading about Eugene V. Debs, who ran for president in 1920 from his prison cell.

When Republican Warren Harding was elected, he commuted Debs' sentence and invited him to the White House. The day after leaving the Atlanta Penitentiary, Harding greeted Debs at the White House with these words: "Well, I've heard so damned much about you, Mr. Debs, that I am now glad to meet you personally." It was a different time.

APD infiltrated Occupy Austin, helped make illegal devices used in Houston port protest

This is abominable.

Soon after Occupy Austin protesters began their months-long demonstration at City Hall last fall, Austin police officials assigned at least three undercover officers to infiltrate the group to gather intelligence on any plans that might break the law.

The officers camped with other participants in the movement, marched in rallies and attended strategy meetings with Occupy Austin members.

The officers also may have crossed a fine line in undercover police work: They helped plan and manufacture devices — often called "lock boxes" — that allowed Occupy members to tie themselves together during a protest in Houston, according to interviews and court records. The use of the devices, which makes it harder for police to break up human chains, resulted in Houston police filing felony charges against seven protestors who had attempted to block a port entrance in Houston on Dec. 12.

Felony charges from which the mayor of Houston has publicly declared she will not relent, you might recall. We'll see if this news compels some clearer thinking on her part. Returning to the Statesman article...

(The infiltration operation) was the topic of a hearing in a Harris County district court case earlier this week, in which protester Ronnie Garza is seeking to have the charges against him dropped.

It's not clear who first proposed making the lock boxes. But during the hearing, attorneys and Austin Police Detective Shannon Dowell — who wore a long black beard and was known to Occupy members as "Butch" — disclosed that Dowell had purchased PVC pipe and other materials with Occupy Austin money and delivered the finished lock boxes to movement members.

The devices used in the Houston protest are generally built from five-foot lengths of 5-inch wide PVC pipe with a bolt inserted in the center. Two protesters can put their arms in the pipe and grip the bolt, making it much more difficult for police to pull them apart. (See the photo above.)

Garza's attorney, Greg Gladden, said the case against his client should be dismissed because Dowell and other undercover police played a central role in the charges filed against Garza. While 10 protesters who didn't use the lock boxes were charged with lower-level misdemeanors, Harris County prosecutors charge Garza and six others with felonies, using an obscure statute that prohibits using a device that is manufactured or adapted for the purpose of participating in a crime. They face up to two years in jail.

"Entrapment is one term," Gladden said. "Police misconduct might be another term."

Harris County District Judge Joan Campbell, who initially dismissed the case — prosecutors then took it before a grand jury and obtained indictments — said she plans to decide next week whether the case will go forward.

I reached out to Don Cook, the Green candidate for the 22nd Congressional District and an activist in police misconduct issues, who provided the following response.

There have been a number of arrests of "terrorists" in this country since 9-11, and it is disturbing to me that most of them have involved operations where undercover officers with one law enforcement or anti-terrorist agency or department or another have proposed the illegal operation, recruited the "terrorist," and supplied all the necessary materials.  One wonders how strongly encouraged those "terrorists" were, and meditates upon the distinction between good police work and framing the innocent in these cases. 

I have no first hand information about events surrounding and leading to the civil disobedience arrests at the Houston Port Authority of several people from Occupy Houston last December, but I am not surprised to hear that there were several police officers apparently pretending to be "occupiers" involved behind the scenes in those arrests.  It involves a great deal of time, effort, and expense to mount an undercover law enforcement operation, and law enforcement is likely disinclined to go to all that time, effort and expense only to drill a dry well, so to speak.  But there is a fine line between good police work and entrapment, which I fear is not always perceived by law enforcement officers or the courts.  It would be a travesty of justice in a democracy for prisoners of conscience to additionally be concerned about being framed.  

Related: Did police go too far in undercover Occupy mission? (with video)

Update (9/6/12): The Houston Chronicle finally catches up, and gets the verb in the headline completely wrong. And Grits provides this.

Austin police administrators gave contradictory statements to Austin Chronicle reporter Jordan Smith about their use of three undercover operatives (or, perhaps, provocateurs) who infiltrated the Occupy Austin organization.

Police detective Shannon Dowell built a "lockbox" device for use at a Houston sit-in, the use of which upped criminal charges against the protesters from a misdemeanor to a felony. Reported Smith, such a "device usually must be cut off, posing risk to the user and, potentially, to the police or firefighters doing the cutting, if booby traps are employed inside the pipe." Further, "It was those concerns about safety, says APD Assistant Chief Sean Mannix, that prompted APD detective Shannon Dowell to get involved last December in constructing a series of lockboxes that the seven protesters were arrested for using at the Port of Houston."

So according to Mannix, the officer's actions were part and parcel of the intent of the operation to promote the safety of protesters and law enforcement. However, Austin police chief Art Acevedo told Smith that the undercover activities "went beyond the scope of the mission ... that was established at the executive level." "The trouble wasn't coming from the 'core Occupiers,'" says Acevedo, ignoring that the trouble was coming in part from APD's own officers. The chief told Smith that "'we are reviewing the matter, from top to bottom,' ... to see where the mission might have gone astray, in order to keep anything like that from happening in the future."

Which is right? Mannix's comments imply the officers were doing exactly what they were put there for, while if Acevedo is correct, it speaks to gross failures in management and oversight.  

Last bit.

...(H)ere the police sought not to deter crime but to worsen it, facilitating felonious actions instead of thwarting them, and withheld exculpatory evidence from prosecutors. Combine that with the contradictory justifications from APD administrators -- disavowing their officers' activities while simultaneously justifying them -- not to mention the evasive refusal to provide documentation to the judge, and it's difficult not to find understated the judge's observation that, at the very least, the episode caused the department to "lose a little bit of the dignity that they should be carrying themselves with." 

Nicely understated. More, including photos of Shannon Dowell and a dozen of links on this coverage, from Occupy Austin.

Sunday Funnies

"This year the theme of the Republican convention is '50 Shades of White.'" -- David Letterman

Clip of RNC Chair Rience Priebus at the GOP convention: "President Obama's never run a company. He hasn't even run a garage sale or seen the inside of a lemonade stand!" Jon Stewart: I gotta say, if the tone you were goin' for there is 'angry drunk guy', you nailed it. … I'm beginning to think this guy's name isn't Rience Priebus, it's Ryan Peterson and he's always too fucked up when he says it to people." -- The Daily Show

And starring Clint Eastwood as Abe Simpson

It went from odd to surreal to hilarious to sad to just pathetic in ten minutes.

See, my Dad is Alzheimer's-ridden here at the end of his life, so I'm not given over to the great humor present in last night's talk by Mr. Gran Torino. I'll just point some of it out to the rest of you so that you can have a good time with it.

But this wasn't just funny. It was instructive of the quality of Mitt Romney's campaign. Just think of everything that had to happen to deliver us (last night)'s disaster:

• Republicans started buzzing about their "secret guest" on Monday, if not earlier. That means they had four days to help Clint write a speech and, you know, vet it. They didn't.


• They then spent four days building up the hype about their super duper awesome secret guest. A joke that it would be a zombie Reagan hologram soon got a life of its own, and rumors abounded that yes, it would be Reagan! But no matter what, Clint Eastwood was never going to live up to the hype. He's cool, but this is a political convention, not a Comedy Central roast. There was palpable letdown when he was announced.


• Did they read Clint Eastwood's latest hits? Pro-gay marriage, pro-choice, cut and ad celebrating the auto bailout for the Super Bowl, and someone quoted as saying he didn't believe in the modern Republican Party. So if nothing else, it provided snark fodder all day.


• Here's the big one -- the campaign obviously spent big bucks putting together a super effective and beautifully done biographical mini-documentary on Romney's early years. The guy has had a terrible job selling his personal story because he's got none. Some video director moved heaven and earth to make the guy seem almost compelling -- a great introduction to people who haven't been tuned in to the race until now. And ... they run it before the networks cut in. Sure, the folks at Fox and CSPAN saw it, but they already know whether they like Romney or not.


• No one felt compelled to lend Clint a comb?


• Bumping their pretty bio piece for Clint might have worked if the campaign knew what they were getting. He's a big star, a Hollywood legend. Convention ratings have been downright atrocious for this convention (40+ million saw Sarah Palin speak, 22 million saw Paul Ryan). Clearly, schedulers hoped that having a big time celebrity lead the coverage would keep people watching. But conventions are scripted for a reason. Or put another way, people aren't allowed to ad-lib because if they do ... well, you know.

At first, people tried to work out why the old mumbly guy was hearing voices in his head. But it wasn't his head, it was, uh the chair, which wasn't much better. But wait, this could turn out genuinely funny. It was, after all, Clinton Fucking Eastwood! So for about three minutes, it was debatable how things might turn out. But then it was no longer debatable, as minute after interminable minute passed no coherent point or end in sight and people remembered that Clint Fucking Eastwood isn't supposed to be funny! I mean, actual quote:

Do you just - you know - I know - people were wondering - you don’t - handle that OK.

Here's Politico's Tweet round-up.

Let me just say that this is very entertaining, but holy hell it is weird.— Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) August 31, 2012

this is a disaster— Jon Ward (@jonward11) August 31, 2012

This alternates between brilliant and catastrophic train wreck.— Clara Jeffery (@ClaraJeffery) August 31, 2012

This is a perfect representation of the campaign: an old white man arguing with an imaginary Barack Obama.— Jamelle Bouie (@jbouie) August 31, 2012

And somehow he’s losing. RT @allisonkilkenny: This is utter insanity. CLINT EASTWOOD IS ARGUING WITH AN IMAGINARY OBAMA. #RNC— Jamison Foser (@jamisonfoser) August 31, 2012

A great actor and director isn’t doing much of either tonight. Needs a script badly.— Neil King (@NKingofDC) August 31, 2012

Facial expressions of many delegates at #RNC = bewilderment #GOP2012 #Eastwood— Luke Russert (@LukeRussert) August 31, 2012

It’s halftime in Clint Eastwood’s speech— Benjy Sarlin (@BenjySarlin) August 31, 2012

The Fact Checkers are going to completely ignore this one.— LOLGOP (@LOLGOP) August 31, 2012

This may be even worse than “Changeling.”— daveweigel (@daveweigel) August 31, 2012

Clint, my hero, is coming across as sad and pathetic. He didn’t need to do this to himself. It’s unworthy of him.— Roger Ebert (@ebertchicago) August 31, 2012

This seat’s taken. OFA.BO/c2gbfi, twitter.com/BarackObama/st…— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) August 31, 2012

Clint Eastwood on the phone with Obama now: “It all went according to plan,sir.” #RNC #GOP2012— Chris Rock (@chrisrockoz) August 31, 2012

That was…weird.— S.E. Cupp (@secupp) August 31, 2012

The speech even inspired at least three parody accounts:

Make me firewood. NOW. PLEASE.— ClintEastwood’sChair (@EastwoodChair) August 31, 2012

Okay, I’m sick of taking this sitting down— Clint’s Empty Chair (@ClintsChair) August 31, 2012

The GOP built me.— Invisible Obama (@InvisibleObama) August 31, 2012

I'm not going to embed the video; it's just too painful, in that side-splitting kinda way. One last bit of poetry, also from Twitter.

Yesterday, upon a chair
Clint met a man who wasn’t there
How sad it is that Rowdy Yates
Has ended up as Orly Taitz 

Abbott loses again.

Or as Gabriel Escobar at the Dallas News clarifies... the Lege gave him an "impossible burden" of a legal case.

The latest humiliation was inflicted today, when a three-judge panel decisively ruled that the Voter ID law in Texas violated Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

Like the decision on redistricting earlier in the week, there was nothing ambiguous about this latest ruling. Texas had the burden of proving that its Voter ID -- the most restrictive in the nation -- did not adversely impact minorities.

It’s one thing to lose, it’s another to be trounced. The judges concluded that all the evidence presented by Texas was some combination of  “invalid, irrelevant and unreliable.”

"So you're sayin' there's a chance..."

... the blame lies squarely with the GOP majority in the legislature because they came up with a law that stood no chance under the Voting Rights Act.

Toward the end of the opinion, one of the attorneys for Texas is quoted as saying that the state faced an “impossible burden.” No doubt this was a reference to Section 5 of the act, which we all know is the real target of Abbott and others in the GOP.

Justice David Tatel, writing for the three-judge panel, uses this plaintive cry from our attorney to slam our legislature. “Texas lawyers,” Tatel observes, “have only their client to blame.”

Gosh, I wish I had written this.

Indeed, several states have Voter ID laws that have survived legal challenges. The one passed and approved in Georgia is especially relevant because, like Texas, it needed preclearance under the Voting Rights Act.

Here’s the difference. Georgia’s law by design makes Voter ID accessible to those who lack a driver’s license and other acceptable means of identification. First, the ID is free. Second, a broad range of personal identification can get you one, including a student card and even a paycheck.

Texas, by comparison, is designed to exclude voters, particularly those who are poor.  If you don’t have a valid ID, it will cost you at least $22 to get one. The list of acceptable documents to obtain an official ID is the most stringent around.  Most significantly, state-issued Voter ID’s are only available at DPS offices. As the judges heard during the trial -- and helpfully cited in the opinion -- 81 counties in Texas have no DPS office and an additional 34 are open two days a week or less.

(Small government  at work, or hardly working).

The Texas legislature -- did I say it was dominated by the GOP? -- tabled or defeated amendments that would have greatly expanded access. A sign of how important this weighed on the case? All the measures are listed in the opinion. “Put another way,” Tatel concludes, “if counsel faced an ‘impossible burden,’ it was because of the law Texas enacted -- nothing more, nothing less.”

This court ruling is so devastating that the attorneys who lost the case would likely be fired immediately if they were privately employed. But they will of course toil on... on the public dole.

I am not certain that the lawyers who serve in -- as well as those who only give advice to -- the Republican party in the statehouse will make themselves heard in next year's legislative session. That's provided they have the fortitude to even suggest to the most intransigent among conservative lawmakers what it is about a Photo ID law that would pass legal muster.

I expect nothing more than continuing efforts to suppress and disenfranchise poor and minority voters. I believe the one thing Republicans understand is that they cannot win elections -- even in Texas -- without doing so.

Is Ted Cruz legitimately 'Hispanic'?

And more to the point: is that a fair or even respectable inquiry? The chairman of the Texas Democratic Party, who is of Mexican descent, apparently thinks so.

"This is a guy who didn't claim he was Hispanic any time before he won the primary," (Gilberto) Hinojosa said, adding that Cruz was born in Canada (although it is not a requirement to be born in the United States to run for U.S. Senate).

"He's half-Cuban, and he made point of saying he's half-Cuban and his mom was German-American, was born in Canada. Interesting for a 'birther' and a guy supported by 'birthers,'" Hinojosa said, referring to people who question whether President Obama was born in the United States.

The Cruz campaign has previously said Cruz's mother is actually Irish-Italian.

Hinojosa also criticized Cruz for not using his full name, and even questioning Cruz's heritage.

"If I was named 'Rafael Cruz,' I would be proud to use that name," Hinojosa said. "The guy has denied his own Hispanic heritage, if he is a Hispanic."

When asked if he really thinks Cruz is not Hispanic, Hinojosa said: "Well, I mean, you know you are what you believe you are, right?"

As the fight for Texas Hispanic voters literally gets into name-calling, Republicans at the convention say Latinos should like the GOP message of conservative family values, improving the economy, and creating jobs.

"Hispanic Texas, come home to your values and come home to the Republican Party," said State Rep. Aaron Pena (R-Edinburg). "We're all conservatives right now."

Hispanic voters, however, typically strongly favor Democrats, who point out that Cruz is against the DREAM Act and education cuts affecting Hispanic students.

To keep it that they way, they take issue with not only Cruz's positions, but of him as a person.

"It doesn't matter what your last name is," Hinojosa said. "It matters what you do for a community and what you believe in."

There was a time in the recent past when I would have favored this aggressive, no-holds-barred approach from my TDP chairman. But this seems too close to the "Obama is a Kenyan' stuff for my comfort.

I've been using 'Latino' instead of 'Hispanic' in my own efforts to reflect cultural sensitivity, as 'Hispanic' is regarded as a 1970-census-constructed label, which suggests a Caucasian origination. But this from the NYT usage and style blog demonstrates that there is some degree of division among the community itself.

Q. How do Hispanics themselves feel about the labels “Hispanic” and “Latino”?

A. The labels are not universally embraced by the community that has been labeled. A 2006 survey by the Pew Hispanic Center found that 48% of Latino adults generally describe themselves by their country of origin first; 26% generally use the terms Latino or Hispanic first; and 24% generally call themselves American on first reference. As for a preference between “Hispanic” and “Latino”, a 2008 Center survey found that 36% of respondents prefer the term “Hispanic,” 21% prefer the term “Latino” and the rest have no preference.

But back to the point: can a Mexican American properly accuse a half-Cuban born in Canada of not being Hispanic?

You may recall that I am married to a Cuban -- born in Cuba, and emigrated as a toddler, acquired her US citizenship the requisite seven years later -- so I have familiarity with the resentment some Latinos feel toward Cubans. I have observed this arises from two things:

1. Cubans don't ever call themselves Hispanic or Latino. They are Cuban. Period.

2. Cubans get much more preferential treatment by the US government as a result of the wet foot/dry foot immigration policy that has existed for decades. This generates the most contempt from other Latinos.

So once again, back to the question: is this, to paraphrase Todd Akin, legitimate? Or is it racist? Or something in between? Personally I lean toward the latter, but I'd like to hear what you have to say. Leave a response in the comments, please.

Update: To illustrate my disgust with this tactic, Romney surrogate John Sununu has repeatedly insinuated that Obama is un-American, yet he himself was born in Cuba, to a Palestinian father and a Salvadoran mother. As much as I believe in fighting fire with fire when it comes to Republican prevaricators, there are still some things that are out of bounds. This heritage smearing is one.

Texas redistricting violates VRA, is also discriminatory

Let's go first with the LSP.

After months of deliberation, a three-judge Federal District Court panel in Washington, DC has ruled that the redistricting maps adopted by the Texas Legislature last year violate the US Voting Rights Act. The Court determined that Texas Republican leaders enacted maps that reduced the opportunity for minority voters in Texas to elect their candidates of choice AND the Court ruled that the Legislature used a process that was intentionally discriminatory in adopting the Congressional and State Senate maps.

A copy of the Court’s decision can be seen here.

The election in November will proceed as scheduled under the court-drawn interim maps ordered earlier this year. However, the DC Court’s ruling means that the maps passed by the Legislature in 2011 cannot be used for any election going forward. The current court-drawn interim Congressional, State Senate and State House maps will serve as the benchmark for determining minority voter opportunity. In effect, if the Legislature chooses to redraw the three maps next year, they cannot revert to their previously enacted maps but must start over using the court-drawn interim maps as a baseline.

Matt Angle also added...

The Court’s decision is a damning indictment of Rick Perry and other Texas Republican leaders who, in a cynical attempt to hold on to power, engaged in intentional discrimination against Texas Latino and African American voters.

Every fair-minded Texan familiar with the details of redistricting knew Republican leaders were violating the law. Greg Abbott and Texas Republican will stop at nothing to hold power – even if it means spending millions in Texans hard-earned tax dollars to defend illegal discriminatory redistricting plans. I’m sure he’s burning up more tax dollars as we speak.

Yes, Abbott plans to appeal the case to the US Supreme Court... naturally. More analysis from Michael Li.

* Opinion appears to be a sweeping win for DOJ and groups opposing the state’s redistricting maps. Unanimous except (1) that Judge Griffith dissents with respect to finding of retrogression in treatment of CD-25 (the current Lloyd Doggett seat) and (2) that Judge Collyer did not join in the portion of the opinion relating to retrogression in the congressional map as a whole.

 * Court finds that the State of Texas failed to show an absence of discriminatory purpose in the redrawing of SD-10. The court, however, rejects the contention that SD-10 is an ability to elect district since Wendy Davis was the only minority-preferred candidate to win the district and “a single victory is not the more exacting evidence needed for a coalition district.” 

And it gets deeper in the legal weeds from there.

The SCOTUS won't rule on the case until next summer, and it's hard to guess whether the Lege takes this up again in January 2013. They probably can't get anything they want past the courts, and the only thing that is likely to change their tack is if a Justice Department has an attorney general appointed by a President Romney.

I wouldn't count on that.

Update: More from BOR and DBN. And this from Socratic Gadfly:

Beyond that, the loser is the Texas taxpayer, whom the Texas GOP falsely claims to love. Because of this ruling, if it stands, next year's Legislature will have to start over from ground zero. The interim maps cannot be used as a starting point. And, the GOP is probably likely to try to get away with something again, especially if Romney is elected. So, we'll waste more taxpayer money on more court battles, more state redistricting experts, etc.