The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance is rested and ready after the holiday weekend as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff notes that for the second election in a row, the city of Houston voted 61% for President Obama. Keep that in mind the next time someone tries to tell you that Texas is Austin surrounded by a bunch of Republicans.

Success for Democrats in Williamson County has been few and far between in recent years, and has only come through hard work. WCNews at Eye on Williamson points out that little has changed: It won't just happen...(continued).

Barack Obama's re-election to the presidency, just as his first election, is defined in large measure by the pathetic quality of his competition. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs observes that while Republicans have only themselves to blame for their circumstances, maybe it's time for the victors to help them work through their bitterness.  

BossKitty at TruthHugger believes it's time to instruct those we elected to legislate responsible actions and stop polluting America's water: Water – Supply and Demand, Cause and Effect.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme notes that establishment Republicans hate their base. I can understand that.

Neil at Texas Liberal said that the table of self-respect is always set. The question is will people show up?

Sunday Funnies

Walmart's low wages, every day

This comes a little late for those who are already out there busting doors, pepper-spraying their opponents, and otherwise celebrating the corporation's most wonderful time of the year.

A half century ago America’s largest private-sector employer was General Motors, whose full-time workers earned an average hourly wage of around $50, in today’s dollars, including health and pension benefits.

Today, America’s largest employer is Walmart, whose average employee earns $8.81 an hour. A third of Walmart’s employees work less than 28 hours per week and don’t qualify for benefits.

There are many reasons for the difference – including globalization and technological changes that have shrunk employment in American manufacturing while enlarging it in sectors involving personal services, such as retail.

But one reason, closely related to this seismic shift, is the decline of labor unions in the United States. In the 1950s, over a third of private-sector workers belonged to a union. Today fewer than 7 percent do. As a result, the typical American worker no longer has the bargaining clout to get a sizeable share of corporate profits.

It was not surprising to see all of the Khronically Konservative Kommenters blame the bakers' union for the demise of Hostess this past week. After all, a company's primary product being Type II diabetes and a management that awarded itself bonuses every time they put the operation into "a chapter", as Donald Trump once said, cannot possibly be responsible for its own failure.

If we still had a strong labor movement in this nation, I assert that people wouldn't be peeing into cups in order to acquire or even keep their jobs, and thus would not be demanding that poor people do the same in order to secure some meager welfare benefits.

Card-check. "Right-to-work" laws. Reagan -- a former union man himself -- busting the air traffic controllers' union. This triumph of capitalist pigs over common people goes all the way back to the Democratic National Convention of 1944, when the party bosses (like Houston's own Jesse Jones) installed Harry Truman over Henry Wallace as vice-presidential nominee. Watch Oliver Stone's "Untold History of the United States" for the story.

But that's a digression. Later this morning at the new Walmart in Houston's Heights, and all across the nation, people will protest outside the stores, calling attention to the fact that Walmart earns $16 billion in profits annually yet pays its employees starvation wages (which is why so many of them are also on food stamps).

The most effective way to fix this, as the conservatives will attest, is through the free market. Don't buy anything today unless you're buying it from a locally owned business, preferably a mom-and-pop. And for God's sake, if you have to go to Walmart, join the real people outside asking the corporate people inside for a little better way of life.

Less meat, fewer starches, more vegetables

Defined by the quality of the competition

It isn't meant to be mean to say that Barack Obama's legacy as a presidential candidate is tied in no small way to the quality -- more specifically the lack thereof -- of his two rivals, John McCain and Mitt Romney.

They have demonstrated their presidential mettle in recent days, as you are likely aware.

With conservatives still in grief-stricken denial about their loss and the reasons why, it would be merciful -- and simplistic -- to chalk 2012 up to their powerful ignorance and dishonesty. But it would be more accurate to observe that, while Obama's presidential campaigns have been transformative (his presidency, not so much), it is also correct that his two relative mandates to govern have not been met with gracious concession or even professional courtesy on the part of his adversaries.

McCain's slow-motion implosion has been going on for at least five years. His enablers -- like Steve Schmidt and more recently Joe Lieberman, for example -- have gradually excused themselves to a safer distance. Romney's delusional tumble from a perch believed by him and everyone around him to be his birthright has been more clinically fascinating to observe. The photo that surfaced on Reddit this week of the $250 million dollar man in a wrinkled shirt, with disheveled hair, pumping his own gas in La Jolla, reveals the depression brought on by the crushing reality of defeat.

It would be easy to keep on laughing if he didn't look so much like someone who needs to call a suicide hotline. While Mitt needs an intervention, the embittered McCain and the Republicans who are still seething and ranting need some help of their own. Greg in the comments of this post is evidence of this unhealthy anger. (He's sent me additional comments which won't appear. He's in a timeout lasting at least through the end of the year.)

I've had high school friends, others I've known for decades, click the unfriend button on Facebook because they couldn't stand to have finally figured out that I am a "librul". And that was well before November 6. Their moods must be wretched since the election results came in a couple of weeks ago.

I'm going to enjoy my turkey and dressing with several members of my extended family tomorrow, some of whom are as hard-boiled Republican as they come. I hope they can manage the few hours okay. It's got to be awful tough for some of them, still.

Anyway, help a few of these people -- you know who they are in your life -- along in their stages of grief by being a little nicer than you normally would. They might not yet be able to appreciate it, but they deserve it just the same. Their transition to something approaching calm is important for all of us.

Have a Happy Thanksgiving. And don't gloat. The time for mending fences is nigh.

"This Land is Mine"

Lyrics by Pat Boone, sung by Andy Williams, animation by Nina Paley.



As of this morning, Israel and Hamas cannot even agree on whether or not they, in fact, have a ceasefire in place.

I really don't care any more who started it or whose fault the latest contretemps is. These people need to stop fighting with each other.

Thanksgiving Week Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance wishes everyone a happy and peaceful Thanksgiving as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff took a look at how Latinos voted in Texas and how Ted Cruz did in Harris County.  

BossKitty at TruthHugger learned a new word. NATECH describes how toxic materials mix together after disasters, in Hurricane Sandy, The NATECH Disaster.

Rick Perry and the Texas wing nuts are back at it again. WCNews at Eye on Williamson shows us that no matter the economic situation their game plan is the same -- cut government lower taxes on the wealthy, and the rest of us be damned: Perry and the wing nuts getting back to work.

Rick Perry and David Dewhurst are driving right past those red "Wrong Way" signs straight toward another legislative 'emergency' in search of a problem. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs observes that if peeing in a cup is suddenly such a high priority, perhaps the governor and lieutenant governor would like to go first.

Neil at Texas Liberal wrote about when it is best to thaw your Thanksgiving turkey in a post that also included a link to recipes for an all-veggie Thanksgiving.

Sunday Funnies

Wrong Way: drug-testing welfare applicants

Leave it to Texas Republicans to drive right past those red signs, though.

Out of the more than 250 bills filed Monday, the first possible day to file legislation for the 83^rd session, one measure — concerning drug testing for welfare applicants — is already drawing the support of the state’s top lawmakers and the criticism of civil liberties advocates.

Senate Bill 11 would require applicants to the Texas Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program to undergo a drug test. If applicants fail the test, they would not be eligible to apply again for a full year, unless they attended a substance abuse treatment program. The bill was written by state Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, and several other Republican lawmakers.

“This will help prevent tax dollars from going into the pockets of drug abusers,” Gov. Rick Perry said Tuesday at a news conference. He said that the goal of the bill is to "empower every Texan to reach their potential," because "being on drugs makes it harder to begin the journey to independence.”

More at the link makes for worthwhile reading, but let's present the rebuttal not mentioned by the Trib.

This program was implemented by the state of Florida and has been demonstrated to be cost-ineffective. In fact, the cost of the testing -- not including administrative costs -- far exceeds the savings realized on denial of benefits. Nor does the "threat" of drug testing result in fewer applications for aid, according to the Blog of Rights...

Despite the complete failure of this program to unearth anything other than the fact that there is no overwhelming drug problem amongst welfare applicants, the state of Florida continues to defend this law. And unfortunately, other states have followed Florida's ill-informed lead. Over 25 states introduced welfare drug testing legislation this year. You'd think that the court rulings and high costs might have logically stopped these bills, but they have not.

In these lean budgetary times, do conservatives actually want to implement a new invasive government program that wastes money we don't have?

They need to stop calling themselves fiscal conservatives if they do.

Just in case anyone was wondering, the correct governmental response is decriminalization of certain substances, followed by regulation and taxation. Once again the American people understand what its elected leaders are slow to figure out.

Imagine what effect this would have on the Mexican drug wars, for just one thing.

More from Christy Hoppe at the DMN. The argument against denying children assistance because of their parents' "violations" is laudable, but I just don't think an appeal to empathy is effective with the Republican hive mind.

Update: Grits...

... (S)tate leaders begin to pursue yet another policy likely to reinforce the politically toxic meme that Republicans are at war with women (and in this case their young children). If the Governor and Lt. Governor's goal is to help dissuade TANF recipients from drug use, eliminating their benefits is counterproductive. If they have some other goal, maybe they should just drop it before we have another round of embarrassing court decisions slapping down Texas policy once again. 

And Rep. Joe Deshotel, via The Bayou...

“Senate Bill 11 is both fiscally and morally irresponsible. Its even more egregious that it comes at a time of slow economic recovery and while Texas has almost twice the national average of uninsured children. It would violate personal privacy, ignore the presumption of innocence, and continue the Legislature’s expansion of government into our personal lives.”

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance congratulates President Obama on his re-election as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff has his initial analysis of the 2012 election returns.  

WCNews at Eye on Williamson tells us now that the election is over, it's time to get to work: It won't just happen - The Democratic demographic myth in Texas.

BossKitty at TruthHugger is tickled that the corporate takeover failed to win the White House.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme wonders why John Cornyn, the rapist enabler, keeps doubling down on bad ideas?

Carol Alvarado and Sylvia Garcia are squaring off to replace Mario Gallegos in the Texas Senate. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs says it will be a clash of the Houston titans (and the elite falling in to support them).

Neil at Texas Liberal took a ride to Galveston for a walk on the beach on the day after the election. The second Obama term will be nothing but lazy days on the beach for the coalition of moochers that elected him for a new term.

Texas House speaker politics begins

Two excerpts; the first is from a source I usually don't read, much less quote.

RedState has uncovered never-before-seen, profanity-laden e-mails between senior staff and legislative lieutenants of Texas’ liberal GOP House Speaker Joe Straus demonstrating disrespect for, and even hostility towards, grassroots activists and conservative lawmakers.

Tea party activists are called “idiots,” allies of U.S. Rep. Joe Barton are called “mother f***ers,” and decorated U.S. Marine and State Rep. Van Taylor is dismissed as “stupid,” by a top Straus political strategist.

The truth is occasionally brutal, and more frequently when the truth concerns the far right extremists in the Texas Legislature. Let's move on with the unbiased accounts of recent developments.

House Speaker Joe Straus' bid for a third term as leader of the 150-member state House may not come as quickly or as easily as he had anticipated.

The San Antonio Republican finds himself caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place: His re-election path is complicated by a challenge from the hard conservative wing of his own GOP, combined with growing unease among some Democratic legislators upset with how Straus handled last year's redistricting and other issues affecting minorities.

Straus faces a challenge from Rep. Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola, who is drawing support from tea party Republicans, FreedomWorks and some of the chamber's more conservative members.

There's a good bit more at that link if you want to know the players, the agendas, and the portent of future developments.

I'm not going to be into this so much because it's fairly predictable, just like two years ago.

Joe Straus is going to walk the line, before the session opens in January and after, between letting the Tea Freaks run wild a bit and then reigning them in, in order to quell the grumbling from the minority.

Straus is not going to be re-elected without all the votes from the 55-member Democratic minority delegation. The Democrats, for their part, don't have any leverage beyond their bloc. With all the Ds, Straus needs just 21 of the remaining 95 Repubs to earn back the big chair. None of the Blue team are going to vote -- nor should they -- for a reactionary like Bryan Hughes. So Straus will throw a few bones to the Dems (ie committee chairmanships, prioritizing the scheduling of bills and the like) to keep their whining to a minimum, and he'll do the same for the lunatics in his own caucus. He'll guide the session alternating between a fairly loose hand and a fairly firm one, keeping what's left of the moderate coalition of Republican representatives the most happy.

He'll tell both sides what they want to hear. They'll press for more and he'll say he can't because of those weirdos on the other end of the spectrum. Both contingents will complain, privately and publicly, just as they are now.

And Straus will get re-elected speaker. The rest is all kabuki. So when Harvey Kronberg fills up your inbox from now until the middle of January with all of the various machinations, just know that it's all posturing and preening. On both sides.

Once the session opens and the speaker takes the gavel, the conservatives will reassert themsleves in governance. There might be another redistricting sqabble. There will certainly be the same fights over funding, especially for women's health care and public education and so forth. In fact, the item that will be of most interest is the advance -- or lack thereof -- of immigration reform in Texas.

(Rep. Ana) Hernandez Luna is still upset that GOP leaders stopped debate on an immigration-related bill last session before Democrats could present all their amendments. She responded with an emotional personal privilege speech describing her fear as a child that one of her undocumented immigrant parents would not return from a shopping trip because of detection and deportation.

There may yet be some House Republicans that can come to a more sober understanding of tolerance on the issue in the wake of their electoral shellacking nationally. Rick Perry was attacked for being a moderate on immigration by Mitt Romney while he was still a presidential contender, you may recall. David Dewhurst won't have a two-thirds majority in the Senate, and now neither will Straus. So with some prodding from the top, a little temperance of the stridence of the Tea Party may come due (once they concede the speaker's contest, that is).

Then again, perhaps not. This is still Texas, after all.

(FWIW this might be an area in which rank-and-file Democrats can have some sway with their Republican representatives in the statehouse. An e-mail or phone call to their offices about supporting appropriate legislative action on immigration could make the difference between a bill getting passed and one dying in committee at the end of the session next spring. Just two cents' worth of advice to liberal and progressive activists.)

In my opinion, how the topic gets discussed and whether a bill clears the lower chamber will be the most-watched development in next year's legislative session.

Update: Big Jolly agrees, for different reasons.

Sunday Funnies

Hoping for a lot more change this time around, Mr. President.