As if I needed reminding

... that the political world continues to pull away to the right, hard and fast, leaving me looking like a radical leftist.


More numbers like the ones cited in Ted Rall's toon above from the Pensito Review. They frame almost precisely the conversations I am having at the moment with blue partisans. They usually begin with a variation of Republican talking points 'justifying' the Iraq invasion in 2004 ("We're at war with terrorism", "Anything that keeps me safe I am OK with", "what would you have us do, wait for the next attack", etc.) and generally end along the lines of "I trust Barack Obama to make the right decisions w/r/t the kill list".

Yes, it is hypocritical, Ms. Ball, to support something -- as in anything -- that Obama is doing which you would oppose if Bush (or any other Republican who comes to White House in the future) were president. That's precisely the definition of hypocrisy.

But the vast majority of people really do not know how to respond with anything but apoplexy every time some actual progressive ideas start to surface, particularly on mainstream outlets. Please go to that link and view some of the video that Noah Rothman of Mediaite has embedded, and share his fear and loathing of *gasp* a midday talk show on MSNBC that has a "seeming desire to become a parody of excessive whining and hand-wringing over society’s perceived ills regularly displayed by only the most competitive of progressives".

...Now has not just abandoned any pretense of objectivity, but has overtly courted partisan controversy, hosting some of the network’s most inflammatory guests and coaxing inflammatory statements out of even the guarded of news makers and opinion leaders. For 2013, Now has become the network’s most controversial program – by far. 

ROFL, and not just at 'inflammatory' used twice in the same sentence. Mr. Rothman, meet Thom Hartmann, a longtime, nationally syndicated actual progressive radio talker -- one which regularly hosts *doublegasp* Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders. One that also has a regular TV gig on RT, Channel 9418 on my Dish Network and also on Direct TV channel 348. (That's one of the low-numbered ones, too, dude.) He also appears on something subversive called "Free Speech TV".

And hey, man: RT was formerly known as "Russia Today". Breathe deeply and slowly into the paper bag...

A couple more things. Alex Wagner isn't a troll; these are. And what she is doing on Now isn't trolling. THIS is trolling. And so is this.

But I hear you can pick up FOX News on your rabbit ears. If that doesn't work then just go to your nearest doctor's office. You can watch TV for free all day there.

As I double back to the point, It would be important to note here that Democrats -- particularly the ones who have abandoned the label "liberal" for "progressive" but think like Krystal Ball -- are not actually progressive. Alas, they are just Democrats.

There is, more and more often lately, a big difference.

Update: As it usually does, The Onion reports on the internal conflict some Americans are experiencing about the issue better than any other news outlet.

Following the release of a secret Department of Justice memo (two weeks ago) that outlines the administration’s legal justification for killing U.S. citizens, a new Pew Research Center poll has revealed that a majority of Americans are torn over whether they support the government’s right to kill them anywhere at any time without due process.

“On the one hand, I get it—it’s important for the government to be able to murder me and any of my friends or family members whenever they please for reputed national security reasons. But on the other hand, it would kind of be nice to stay alive and have, maybe, a trial, actual evidence—stuff like that,” said visibly conflicted 39-year-old Nashua, NH resident Rebecca Sawyer, who, like millions of other Americans, is split over whether secret federal agents should be allowed to target and assassinate her anywhere on U.S. soil.

“I wouldn’t mind if federal officials blew up other citizens and claimed it was in the name of my safety. But it’s just that when it comes to me, I guess I’d rather not be slaughtered by my own elected officials on charges that never have to be validated by any accountable authority. This is tough.”

While most Americans expressed conflicted feelings regarding the memo, the poll also found that 28 percent of citizens were unequivocally in favor of being obliterated at any point, for any reason, in a massive airstrike.

SD-6 final push begins today

Charles and Stace posted their previews yesterday earlier. Neither of them mentioned the e-mail the Garcia campaign sent out last week, though.

While Republican leaders in Austin moved to block the restoration of $5.4 billion in education funding, Carol Alvarado was nowhere to be found at the State Capitol. In fact, she was nowhere near Austin. Carol Alvarado was over 160 miles away in Houston trying to save her failing campaign for the Texas Senate. As a result, Texas school children missed an opportunity to receive the money they rightfully deserve.

There's more and it's just as nasty.

When this arrived in my inbox at lunchtime last Thursday -- on Valentine's Day -- I was shocked. And as cynical as I am, it takes a lot to shock me.  But rather than write about it then, I waited to see if there would be a response to it from other quarters.  Alvarado campaign consultant Marc Campos eventually posted this on Monday morning the 18th. Here's an excerpt (his emphasis in bold serves to set off the remarks that are not his, except at the close).

Someone named politics@houstonpolitics.com sent the campaign the following:

We know Carol can’t run on her record as Lee Brown’s Chief of Staff, or Council Member for District I, or State Rep, but does she really have to attack her opponent and take things into the gutter.

As Lee Brown Chief of Staff, she assisted Brown in raising the city employee benefits to unsustainable levels, which led to major budget problems.

As Council Member for District I she waisted community leaders time and energy by:

Having meetings on Air Quality in the East End after high levels of benzine were measured at the plants, nothing happened;

Had Deed Restriction data base meetings which led to nothing; 

Due to lack of her oversight her Mayor Pro-Tem staff gave themselves illegal bonuses;

And as far as what she has been doing as State Rep, other collecting money from special interest groups, I have no idea.

This week I have received four mail-outs from Carol trashing Garcia. If Carol can’t win on her record, then she needs to drop out!

Let me kind of respond to this.  First, who are you and where do you live?

He or she obviously doesn’t live in the district because anyone named politics that lives in SD6 would know that our opponent sent six mail pieces in Round 1 attacking Carol.  So hitting back shouldn’t come as a surprise.  In Round 1, I would have been impressed if politics would have said:

This week I have received four mail-outs from Sylvia trashing Alvarado. If Sylvia can’t win on her record, then she needs to drop out!

Any one named politics should know that Carol never served as Mayor Brown’s Chief of Staff.

Of course if one isn’t going reveal their real name, well we can only guess about one’s motivations.

Campos is right, and the Alvarado campaign has, publicly at least, hewed to the high road throughout the campaign. (Whatever is going on underneath my radar -- I speak here of salacious third-hand gossip and rumor-mongering -- I can't and won't speak for, or about.)

Update (Saturday, 2/23): Yet more vitriol from the Garcia campaign. It just never ends.

By contrast, it is my opinion that Garcia's mud-slinging has done her no favors in this cycle. She remains, however, the odds-on favorite to be the next senator from the district on the strength of her volunteer effort and fundraising, not to mention her reputation as a "fighting Democrat" -- the type I am typically a solid supporter of. But her means of getting to the seat leaves a lot to be desired. You have to wonder what her relationship with Rep. Alvarado will be if they have to work together on issues of common interest. The level of spite just seems excessive.

The Chron may have picked up on this as well, because the notion of a 'challenging' senator versus an accommodating one appears to be the reasoning behind their endorsement of Carol...

Both are Democrats who vow to strengthen state education spending and expand Medicaid. They differ chiefly in the way in which they'd go about achieving their goals. Garcia vows to go toe-to-toe against Gov. Rick Perry and other Republicans. Alvarado says that she'd continue to do what she's done as a member of the Republican-controlled Texas House: work with members across the aisle to get legislation passed.

We believe that Alvarado's approach will serve her district best. In part, that's pure pragmatism. Given Republicans' utter dominance of our state's government, a Democrat who hopes to accomplish anything at all has to play nicely with the GOP. But it's also the solution to a larger problem. Both Texas and the United States need more politicians, both Democrats and Republicans, who can find middle ground and nudge the body politic forward. Alvarado is that kind of legislator.

There's more there that you should read that points out the differences between the two. Keep in mind that the Chron also endorsed Mitt Romney and Ted Cruz, two pathetic losers whose election outcomes were polar opposites. I wouldn't hazard a guess as to what that might mean for Rep. Alvarado's prospects.

I'm not fond of of the fact that Alvarado has taken lots of money from Republicans, especially from Bob Perry and the like. I am not a fan of her political advisor. I am almost never in favor of Democrats who brag about how amenable they are in working with Republicans -- particularly the virulent strain of vicious, ignorant Republicans infesting the Texas Legislature.

But to my view, Carol Alvarado has fought the fights that made the point to Texas Republicans even when there was no way she (and Democrats) were going to win those fights. She sharply rebutted, she did so with class, and she held her head high in defeat.

And she has taken a similar approach in this set-to with Sylvia Garcia.

I sort of feel bad about Garcia and her campaign. I still expect her to prevail in the runoff despite all this -- there's no other appropriate word for it -- brutality, and I have no doubt she will be a strong advocate for the district, and the issues and the cause of Texas Democrats in the state Senate. She probably is, despite the Chron's advice, the best woman for the job.

But the equally brutal truth is that she is, by far, not the best candidate.

I don't live in the district and my preferred choice came in seventh in an eight-contestant general election race, with 73 total votes. So feel free to weight my analysis accordingly. All I know is what I see, hear and read.

Buena fortuna to both women, and let's see the one that prevails get busy accomplishing a lot for SD-6, which needs all the help it can get.

Previously on the topic of the SD-6 special election, in chronological order:

Alvarado declares for SD-6

Sylvia Garcia jumps in 

No Noriega(s) for SD-6 *with updates

Governor finally calls SD-6 special election 

Eight for SD-6 

SD-6 developments (that mention Keystone XL) 

Sylvia Garcia punching down

SD-6 candidate boycotts TransCanada-sponsored debate

Local media goes to work reporting on SD-6

Garcia hits Alvarado again and more SD-6

Garcia surrogates push back against Rodriguez, Alvarado

The East End Leaders sign their letter

Viva Houston has the SD-6 candidates on this morning

2.9%

Results for SD-6 *updates*

One takeaway from yesterday

KXL protestors get SLAPPed, plan counterpunch

So God made a factory farmer

And that ultimately begat shameless pandering to 1950s-era heartland values.

Hubris

In about an hour you'll be able to watch the premiere on MSNBC.

A decade ago, on March 19, 2003, President George W. Bush launched the invasion of Iraq that would lead to a nine-year war resulting in 4,486 dead American troops, 32,226 service members wounded, and over 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians. The tab for the war topped $3 trillion. Bush did succeed in removing Saddam Hussein, but it turned out there were no weapons of mass destruction and no significant operational ties between Saddam's regime and Al Qaeda. That is, the two main assertions used by Bush and his crew to justify the war were not true. Three years after the war began, Michael Isikoff, then an investigative reporter for Newsweek (he's since moved to NBC News), and I published Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War, a behind-the-scenes account of how Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and their lieutenants deployed false claims, iffy intelligence, and unsupported hyperbole to win popular backing for the invasion.

Since we still have Republican senators demanding information on 'coverups' that aren't, it is important to point out that when an actual con job happened right before their eyes, they swallowed it. Hook, line, sinker.

One chilling moment in the film comes in an interview with retired General Anthony Zinni, a former commander in chief of US Central Command. In August 2002, the Bush-Cheney administration opened its propaganda campaign for war with a Cheney speech at the annual Veterans of Foreign Wars convention. The veep made a stark declaration: "There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." No doubt, he proclaimed, Saddam was arming himself with WMD in preparation for attacking the United States.

Zinni was sitting on the stage during the speech, and in the documentary he recalls his reaction:

It was a shock. It was a total shock. I couldn't believe the vice president was saying this, you know? In doing work with the CIA on Iraq WMD, through all the briefings I heard at Langley, I never saw one piece of credible evidence that there was an ongoing program. And that's when I began to believe they're getting serious about this. They wanna go into Iraq.

That Zinni quote should almost end the debate on whether the Bush-Cheney administration purposefully guided the nation into war with misinformation and disinformation.

Yeah. But no.

The film highlights a Pentagon document declassified two years ago. This memo notes that in November 2001—shortly after the 9/11 attacks—Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld met with General Tommy Franks to review plans for the "decapitation" of the Iraqi government. The two men reviewed how a war against Saddam could be triggered; that list included a "dispute over WMD inspections." It's evidence that the administration was seeking a pretense for war.

The yellowcake uranium supposedly bought by Saddam in Niger, the aluminum tubes supposedly used to process uranium into weapons-grade material, the supposed connection between Saddam and Osama bin Laden—the documentary features intelligence analysts and experts who at the time were saying and warning that the intelligence on these topics was wrong or uncertain. Yet administration officials kept using lousy and inconclusive intelligence to push the case for war.

There has already been one excellent film on that subtopic: Fair Game. To this day the only person who demonstrates any remorse for the whole scandal is Colin Powell.

Through the months-long run-up to the invasion, Colin Powell, then the secretary of state, would become the administration's No. 1 pitchman for the war with a high-profile speech at the UN, which contained numerous false statements about Iraq and WMD. But, the documentary notes, he was hiding from the public his deep skepticism. In the film, Lawrence Wilkerson, Powell's chief of staff at the time, recalls the day Congress passed a resolution authorizing Bush to attack Iraq:

Powell walked into my office and without so much as a fare-thee-well, he walked over to the window and he said, "I wonder what'll happen when we put 500,000 troops into Iraq and comb the country from one end to the other and find nothing?" And he turned around and walked back in his office. And I—I wrote that down on my calendar—as close for—to verbatim as I could, because I thought that was a profound statement coming from the secretary of state, former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.

Wilkerson also notes that Powell had no idea about the veracity of the intelligence he cited during that UN speech: "Though neither Powell nor anyone else from the State Department team intentionally lied, we did participate in a hoax."

Yes.

A hoax. That's what it was. Yet Bush and Cheney went on to win reelection, and many of their accomplices in this swindle never were fully held accountable. In the years after the WMD scam became apparent, there certainly was a rise in public skepticism and media scrutiny of government claims. Still, could something like this happen again? (Rachel) Maddow remarks, "If what we went through 10 years ago did not change us as a nation—if we do not understand what happened and adapt to resist it—then history says we are doomed to repeat it."

The history is, of course, already being repeated... in the financial crisis. Refusing to hold our country's leaders -- the elected ones as well as the corporate ones -- to a legal reckoning when they tell lies and break laws is nothing but a grave mistake for the future of this once-great nation.

Update: Here are your links to watch it online.

The Weekly Wrangle

The words "pitchers and catchers report" has always made the Texas Progressive Alliance happy as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff looks at the partisan shifts in Texas House districts from 2008 to 2012.

We have enough money in Texas to fund our public education needs and expand Medicaid, as well as transportation and water infrastructure projects. But our current leaders don't see it that way. WCNews at Eye on Williamson shows that their adherence to ideology over what's best for Texas is the problem, in Transportation funding, the state budget, and ideology.

Two issues in the Texas Lege last week -- one of them the regulation of payday lending operators -- show bright potential for bipartisan legislation. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs is encouraged by the news.  

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme wants you to know that Lamar Smith is a dim bulb advancing the same old Republican 'ideas' on immigration.

At TexasKaos, Libby Shaw poses the same question to Ted Cruz that was asked of Joe McCarthy almost 60 years ago.



Unfortunately, the answer is no. Read all about it here: Senator Ted Cruz: Have You No Decency?

Neil at Texas Liberal wrote about Houston mayoral candidate Ben Hall. Neil is still posting at TxLib every few days; however he is mostly working on a new website going up in April. That site will feature a photo essay focusing on the value of the things that are around us each day, a metaphorical history of the universe and the Earth, some poems, and a new blog on 2013 City of Houston election politics.

Sunday Funnies

Cloture on Hagel nomination fails, 58-40

1 present.

So it's official: Thanks to a handful of Democratic senators who blocked filibuster reform, Senate Republicans have successfully blocked the Senate from voting on the confirmation of Sen. Chuck Hagel as secretary of defense, at least for the time being.

Fifty-eight senators voted to move forward with the nomination process, short of the 60 votes needed to end a filibuster. Four Republicans joined 54 Democrats on the losing side.

The four GOP were Mike Johanns of Nebraska (Hagel's home state), Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, and Thad Cochran of Mississippi. Orrin Hatch voted 'present'.

John Cornyn is on C-Span repeatedly saying that it wasn't a filibuster even as I type this.

I agree with those who say that Harry Reid looks like a chump.

The whole thing is something of a dark comedy. Last month, a handful of Senate Democrats blocked efforts to reform the filibuster. If they hadn't blocked reform, Republicans would have been required to actually speak on the floor to continue their filibuster. Instead, they settled on a handshake agreement between Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. And now, to nobody's surprise, McConnell is stabbing Reid in the back.

And John Walker at Firedoglake speaks for me.

At some point you need to stop blaming the Republicans for their filibusters. If someone decides to give a known arsonist matches and gasoline, they now bear most of the responsibility when he burns their house down.

Update: More from MaddowBlog.

(S)everal GOP senators who said they'd allow an up-or-down vote changed their minds in recent days.

Indeed, as recently as Monday of this week, for example, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said, "Never before has a defense secretary nominee required 60 votes on the floor to overcome a filibuster threat." He added a filibuster, if it were to occur, "sets a wrong precedent."

And then, today, McCain voted against cloture on Hagel anyway.

It was Mitch McConnell and Jeff Sessions, along with Cornyn, who repeatedly mouthed that "up-or-down-vote" line during the Bush years about judicial nominees. Media Matters has a post from last month in regard to that hypocrisy on the part of Senate Republicans.

This boil could have been lanced by Harry Reid, also in January, but he refused to exert caucus discipline. This failure lies as much at his feet as it does the GOP's.

Happy Valentine's

In a week filled with Fat Tuesday, Ash Wednesday, the resignation of the pope, the State of the Union address, the hilarious response to it, a DC KXL protest, a few showdowns in the Lege, the NBA All-Star weekend events, and the repainting of a local cultural icon due to its repeated debasement, it's comforting to know that some creatures just aren't concerned about much beyond finding a little love in a cold, cruel world.



More like that here.

Lege updates

Just a roundup of teasers here. Go to the links for more detail.

-- CPRIT has been the big issue of the session so far. The Senate Health and Human Services Committee yesterday approved a bill to reform the troubled Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) authored by Sen. Jane Nelson (R-Flower Mound). “Our laws and rules have been twisted in ways that are disappointing and unacceptable,” Nelson said in a press release. [...] According to the Texas Tribune, SB 149 would completely restructure the leadership staff in the institute, create provisions that would prevent conflicts of interest and remove Greg Abbott and Susan Combs from their positions on the oversight committee. The bill will now go before the full Senate.

-- Yesterday morning Sen. Troy Fraser (R-Horseshoe Bay), chair of the Senate Natural Resources Committee, presented SB 4. Fraser seeks $2 billion to aid the state in recovering from its severe drought, the Houston Chronicle reports. He also called for the Texas Water Development Board to upgrade from part-time to full-time and scolded the group for failing to appropriately set and fulfill priorities. The committee heard invited testimony, with the expectation that public testimony will follow in the coming weeks.

Two excerpts on that water bill from the Chron. This one...

The part-time board that oversees Texas water projects has been ineffective and should be replaced by a full-time board with more funding and accountability, a state senator told colleagues Tuesday in asking for $2 billion to pay for future water needs.

Sen. Troy Fraser ... blasted the Texas Water Development Board for failing to set priorities. He said he asked the board more than two years ago to give him a list of the 50 most important water projects in the state and that he's still waiting for an answer.

Often, he said, it's difficult to get the six part-time board members on the phone to discussion the state's water issues.

"Every time you ask them a question, they give you a non-answer and that's part of the frustration I'm having," the Marble Falls Republican told his committee. "Every group believes their project is the most important and the competition between the 16 (water planning groups) at times has been problematic."

... and this one.

"It is my No. 1 point of irritation," Fraser said ... "If you ask the Water Development Board which of the 562 projects are the most important, they say they are all important."

Sen. Glenn Hegar, R- Katy, agreed: "There is a difference between a wish list and a list that actually works. What are our real priorities?"

The water issue is Speaker Straus' top priority this session, so expect to read much more about it.

-- Democratic legislators are also accelerating the removal of the codified marriage discrimination in the Texas Constitution.

-- Sen. Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa (D-McAllen) filed a measure on Monday to legalize civil unions in Texas by 2014 and partially repeal Texas’ Defense of Marriage Act. SB 480 would require first changing Texas’ 2005 constitutional amendment prohibiting both same-sex marriage and civil unions, the Dallas Voice reports. Sen. Jose Rodriguez (D-El Paso) and Reps. Rafael Anchia (D-Dallas) and Garnet Coleman (D-Houston) have already filed resolutions to lift the ban. That seems unlikely. The measures would require a two-thirds majority in both chambers before being placed on statewide ballots.

Said Hinojosa:

“The creation of civil unions in Texas is critical for same-gender couples so they can be afforded the same benefits and protections that married couples enjoy. Providing legal protections, including property rights, homestead rights, child custody and support, adoption, group insurance for state employees, and worker compensation benefits, would treat same-gender couples with the dignity and respect they deserve as well as allow them the benefits to take care of their families.” 

-- Good news for brewmasters and brewpubs:

Texas lawmakers on Tuesday  introduced a package of bills that would help the state’s growing number of production breweries and the brewpub restaurants that would like to package and sell beer off-site.

• On-site sales for breweries: Production breweries such as Houston’s Saint Arnold, which make no more than 225,000 barrels of beer annually, would be allowed to sell up to 5,000 barrels directly to customers for consumption on site each year. Take-away beer and growler fills to go still would be prohibited.
• Off-site sales for brewpubs: Brewpubs could package beer for off-site retail sales, up to 1,000 barrels on its own and the remainder through licensed distributors. Once a brewpub reaches annual production of 12,500 barrels, it would have to stop growing or switch to a production-brewery license.
• New limits on self-distribution: (Two bills) Breweries that produce up to 125,000 barrels annually would be allowed to self-distribute up to 40,000 barrels. Out-of-state breweries also would be allowed some self-distribution rights as well.

-- And lastly, what the Texas Observer's 'Floor Pass' blog is watching today.

1. The Senate Finance Committee, which meets this morning at 9 a.m., will hear from the Commission on Jail Standards about public safety and criminal justice, and the Department of Agriculture will present on natural resources.

2. The Senate Committee on Transportation will meet this morning at 8 a.m. and will hear testimony from the Texas Department of Transportation, the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles and the Texas Department of Public Safety.

3. The House Public Health Committee meets today to discuss, among other issues, Obamacare and its effect on Texas.

Grits is always your go-to blog for criminal justice matters in Texas.

Update: EOW with more on other bills.

Update II, referencing #2 above... TxDOT director calls for stable highway funding system:

TxDOT Executive Director Phil Wilson said the agency needs at least $4 billion more each year to cover road expansion and upkeep. The proposed $20.8 billion budget would set aside just under $2.5 billion to repay debts, but caps the new construction budget at just over $1 billion.

“I think that really puts in perspective the situation that TxDOT finds itself in today, with an extremely large amount on the debt service side and a limited amount on the new construction side,” Davis told Wilson. “In my perspective we’ve really gotten upside-down in terms of providing the support for this agency that’s needed, and for you to conduct what we expect you to do.”

Gov. Rick Perry has proposed spending $3.7 billion from the Rainy Day Fund on Texas transportation, but that would still come up short of Wilson’s request for TxDOT. Perry has suggested spending the money on building new highways and bringing old roads up to code for projects like Interstate 69.

What TxDOT needs, Wilson said today—and wrote in a letter to Lt. Governor David Dewhurst—is a new, sustainable transportation funding source.

#waterforelephants

While we wait for the SOTU...

-- A resolution of the standoff with former LAPD officer and current fugitive Christopher Dorner may interrupt the president's speech this evening. It will be interesting to see how the networks handle it if it does (Fox will probably cut away; MSNBC might crawl it across the bottom of the screen). One deputy shot earlier this afternoon has died of his wounds.

-- Some of your representatives have been squatting on the aisle all day for that coveted camera shot of the handshake with the prez. *cough*SJL*cough*

Seven hours or more. That's how long some members of Congress sit and wait to claim aisle seats for the State of the Union, all so they can be seen on TV shaking the president's hand as he leaves. Really. It's mystifying, but enough members of Congress care enough about those few seconds of televised presidential hand-shaking that there is a day-long wait for the seats, and rules for getting them...

I personally can't think of a better use of their time. Can you?

-- Here's the embargoed-until-minutes-ago excerpt of tonight's speech.

“It is our generation’s task, then, to reignite the true engine of America’s economic growth – a rising, thriving middle class.

It is our unfinished task to restore the basic bargain that built this country – the idea that if you work hard and meet your responsibilities, you can get ahead, no matter where you come from, what you look like, or who you love.

It is our unfinished task to make sure that this government works on behalf of the many, and not just the few; that it encourages free enterprise, rewards individual initiative, and opens the doors of opportunity to every child across this great nation of ours.”

[…]

“A growing economy that creates good, middle-class jobs – that must be the North Star that guides our efforts. Every day, we should ask ourselves three questions as a nation: How do we attract more jobs to our shores? How do we equip our people with the skills needed to do those jobs? And how do we make sure that hard work leads to a decent living?”

[…]

“Tonight, I’ll lay out additional proposals that are fully paid for and fully consistent with the budget framework both parties agreed to just 18 months ago. Let me repeat – nothing I’m proposing tonight should increase our deficit by a single dime. It’s not a bigger government we need, but a smarter government that sets priorities and invests in broad-based growth.”

JobsJobsJobs.

-- Three decades of SOTU climate remarks, and a brand-new drinking game.

-- So today is Darwin Day...

...and of course the Republican Party is looking forward to this evening’s many opportunities to ‘refute’ evolutionary theory via political kabuki. Dave Weigel at Slate, among his predictions for tonight, highlights a detail I hadn’t noticed:

…In all of the soft-focus stories on the speech’s invited guests, two names matter: Ted Nugent and Gabrielle Giffords. Texas Rep. Steve Stockman, an embarrassing member of the class of 1994 who lost in 1996 but managed to come back in 2012, has invited Nugent to attend the speech, despite Nugent being (humorously!) on record threatening the president’s life. Giffords, invited by Sen. John McCain, is the most compelling figure in the gun control (sorry, “gun safety”) movement. Democrats know that the mere sight of Giffords, or the sound of her voice, spurs a Pavlovian response: The listener cannot help but hear and think about ammo clips and background checks. Stockman knows … actually, there’s no way to end that sentence.

-- Via Greg, from the Kinder Institute's Houston Area Asian Survey (.pdf):

Fort Bend County, just to the south and west of Harris County, is now the single most ethnically diverse county in the nation. In the 2010 census, Fort Bend was 19 percent Asian, 24 percent Latino, 21 percent black and 36 percent Anglo.

The Houston region as a whole is the most ethnically and culturally diverse large metropolitan area in the country, at the forefront of the new diversity that is radically reconstructing the social and political landscape across all of urban America.

Payday lending legislation -- and bipartisanship -- in Austin

So maybe I was wrong when I said the Lege wouldn't respond to Mayor Parker's harsh language.

State Reps. Tom Craddick and Eddie Rodriguez are a political odd couple united by their legislation that payday lenders say will put them out of business.

Craddick is a Midland Republican, former speaker of the House and 42-year legislative veteran with a pro-business background. Rodriguez, an Austin Democrat beginning his ninth year in office, is an advocate for the poor with a strong pro-consumer record.

They have filed identical legislation, however, because of reports that lenders making short-term loans are legally sidestepping interest rate caps by charging fees that can push annual interest rates above 500 percent. Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, is carrying legislation in that chamber. 

This is really good news all around, in fact. The opposition will be prepared, though.

In 2009, the industry blocked legislation being considered by the Legislature before it reached the floor, and its influence at the Capitol continues today.

For example, Gov. Rick Perry appointed William "Bill" White, a Cash America executive, as chairman of the Texas Finance Commission, which writes lending regulations. 

But the momentum clearly seems to be in favor of reform.

Craddick and Rodriguez said their side is better organized this time.

Unlike in 2009, when several solutions were offered, the two have a common approach backed by a broad coalition of church groups, retirees and consumer groups.

Craddick said even an archbishop who delivered the invocation for the House of Representatives lined up a few votes while he was on the House floor.

"I like our odds better this time," Craddick said.

Walter Moreau, executive director of Foundation Communities in Austin, said the support of conservatives such as Craddick will assist in a Legislature dominated by Republicans.

"We're generally bleeding-heart liberals," Moreau said. "But I'm optimistic that there is a broad enough coalition to get something passed." 

Beyond the usual skirmishes -- the budget battle, the squabbling over education funding, the GOP's War on Birth Control and Planned Parenthood -- it's nice to see some bipartisan efforts paying dividends. As a matter of fact, bipartisanship is breaking out elsewhere. Look at this.

A few weeks before the start of the 2013 Legislature, incoming GOP Rep. Jonathan Stickland, a Tea Party-backed conservative, placed a phone call to state Sen. Wendy Davis, a Fort Worth Democrat whom Republicans had unsuccessfully targeted for defeat in the November elections.

"I said, 'You know, you're perceived as one of the more liberal senators in the state of Texas and I'm perceived as one of the more conservative members of the Texas House,'" the 29-year-old Bedford lawmaker said last week in recalling his side of the conversation. "'I think it would be a great statement to send back to our constituents that we could put all that aside ... and focus on getting through stuff that helps Texas.'"

The result was bipartisan legislation by the two lawmakers that aims to assist the children of military families. Stickland's House bill already has 80-plus supporters, more than enough to secure passage if it comes to the House floor.

Color me encouraged by the early developments in this legislative session.