As dumb as bean dip

That's what Juanita said on Facebook about Jodie Laubenberg, the House sponsor of the Texas abortion restrictions legislation almost ready to be sent to the Texas Senate. More about Representative "Cleaned Out" has been previously written here and here, and Kuffner has the morning's best update on where things stand for the moment.

Just another bit of hypocrisy about Laubenberg that needs wider distribution.

Texas State Rep. Jodie Laubenberg (R), the author of the radically anti-abortion bill making its way through the Texas Legislature this week, argued for hours on Tuesday that lawmakers should support her bill because of its strong protections for a person's "pre-born life."

The bill, HB 2, responds to "the definite death to the 70,000-plus babies who have been aborted in this state," Laubenberg said during remarks on the House floor. "HB 2 focuses on both the child and the woman."

But back in 2007, she made the case against treating the unborn as people -- at least, when it comes to qualifying for health care services.

Worth repeating for emphasis: they're pre-born babies when we want to score an emotional political point, and they are not if we have to pay for their health care. Pre-born, born, or in any other condition (that defies explanation or understanding).

During a House debate on an appropriations bill that year, Laubenberg, a staunch conservative, put forward an amendment that would require expectant mothers to wait three months before they could begin receiving prenatal and perinatal care under the Children's Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, a program that helps cover uninsured children in low-income families.

Laubenberg's amendment drew criticism from Democratic Rep. Rafael Anchia, who said the change would mean that more than 95,000 children, in utero, would be kicked out of the CHIP program. As the two sparred over whether that was true -- Anchia cited CHIP data from hospitals, Laubenberg alleged it was "misinformation" -- Anchia asked if Laubenberg recognized those in-utero babies as people.

"You do know, don't you, that these are U.S. citizens?" Anchia asked.

"But they're not born yet," Laubenberg said.

Laubenberg's response drew a look of shock from Democratic Rep. Dawnna Dukes, who could be seen standing next to Anchia during the exchange. Anchia also appeared to relish the moment as he pressed Laubenberg that she was now arguing against treating a fetus as a person. "That's the whole point, see?" Anchia said. "You have an anti-life amendment."

Laubenberg fired back that there is "no one more pro-life" in the House than her, and again said Anchia's data was wrong. Still, something he said must have rattled her because she pulled down her amendment.

"I will be back," Laubenberg said as she prepared to leave the podium. "But right now, out of consideration for the body, I will pull this amendment down."

Yep, there's video.

There just aren't appropriate words to better demonstrate all that Texas Republicans stand for -- and against -- than Rep. Laubenberg's own. What we are witnessing in our state legislature today, and over the next several days, is some of the most powerful dishonesty human beings are capable of.

I just hope people can remember it a year and a half from now.

What fighting back in Texas looks like

At the Senate committee hearings on the abortion restrictions legislation being jammed through the Legislature, a young woman's testimony -- and the response it drew from chair Jane Nelson as well as the four state troopers who dragged her away from the mic -- is today's gas on the fire that started burning two weeks ago.

That is Sarah Slamen, known on Twitter as @VictorianPrude, who also served as the campaign manager for Amy Price's Houston city council campaign in 2011. You can read the text of her remarks here (scroll down about halfway to the bottom, until you see the YouTube similar to the above). After she was removed from the hearing room -- there's also video of that -- she was interviewed at Daily Kos.

She's barely a Democrat, much like me, to some degree because so many Democrats are simply willing to be well-behaved in the face of the authoritarian fascism that is being presented in the cramped conference rooms and marbled halls of the Capitol building. And the reaction that not-so-well-behaved women receive -- and their place in history -- should not be lost on anyone. Especially Democrats.

In yesterday's post about the people not named Wendy Davis who might be the 2014 Democratic nominee for governor of Texas, the qualities that they possess are so far removed from those that Sarah Slamen owns as to be alien to each other in comparison. Nobody (except for Wendy Davis) who might stand for statewide office in 2014 is half that brave, half that bold.

It's a shame Sarah is leaving Texas for New York, as we need lots more like her in Austin. And in Washington. And not just protesting and testifying, either.

The Bayou and Politics USA with more. And with Lawrence O'Donnell the following day to finish her testimony.

Update: It is valuable to observe that with the dearth of progressive populist candidates, conservative populist ones will attempt to fill the vacuum.

“Texans feel they aren’t being heard by political insiders who wield power,” (GOP gubernatorial candidate Tom Pauken) said in a statement. “There’s a style of governance that has developed even within our own Republican party’s leadership where primary allegiance goes to those who write the big checks, and powerful insiders pick and choose what issues get taken care of in Austin.”

Hell, I just wish I could find some Democrats who could bring themselves to agree with me that having their message co-opted like this is an embarrassment.

Stand with Texas Women road show today (and also about taking stands)

Because sustaining the momentum that outrage over abortion restriction legislation provides is important.

More at the Facebook event page and Stace's place. Speakers confirmed at post time include Wendy Davis and Cecile Richards. We might get to see Sens. Leticia Van de Putte, Kirk Watson, some of the Houston contingent such as Rodney Ellis and Sylvia Garcia, and a few Texas House members prominent in the fight on their side of the Capitol, like Senfronia Thompson and Jessica Farrar (that is, if they aren't busy debating/voting on the bill).

Here I'll digress into a conversation on Facebook that began yesterday among Democratic activists about a 2014 gubernatorial campaign between Davis and Greg Abbott, and whether a race that includes a slogan such as "standing with Wendy" might be insensitive to Abbott.

I have been ridiculing the attorney general's ribald hypocrisy since at least 2006, when I helped the David Van Os campaign challenge him in the AG race that year. This is one of my favorite posts of all time, and it was written on the inauguration of the clean Republican sweep in January, 2007. I have lots and lots to blog about Abbott, and much of the source material is going to come from the archives here.

Let me just say that if there are Democrats shirking from a fight this early, then Wendy Davis might as well stay in the Senate. And if anyone find themselves in a quandary over a campaign slogan that alludes to bipedal mobility or lack thereof, then let's "Roll with Wendy" instead.

Update: Am I the only person that remembers the vicious slander leveled at Max Cleland by Saxby Chambliss? How about Tammy Duckworth? Republicans simply do not suffer from these minor league moral dilemmas.

It's hard for me to imagine anybody -- even a group of Texans as profoundly ignorant as the Tea Party -- conjuring up an ounce of sympathy for a craven opportunist like Greg Abbott, but one thing I have learned in my activist years is that anything is possible. I don't see enough votes being lost over this that cannot -- should not -- be easily replaced with the canvassing efforts Democrats have to make to win anyway.

They stand to lose many more votes if they keep looking and acting like a bunch of cringing milksops.

AMF

Socratic Gadfly has already said all that needs sayin', so I'll just look ahead to the future. Which is Governor Greg Abbott at about 1:4 odds.

Texas Democrats probably had a better chance of defeating Governor Suckseed, despite what the early polls indicate.

For Wendy Davis, it means she can’t run against her perfect foil. She can’t run against damaged goods and a governor that many Texans have grown weary of. If Davis makes a bid for the Governor’s Mansion, she’ll most likely have to face Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, currently sitting atop a campaign fortune of $18 million and counting. The silver lining, though, is that Abbott is every bit as right-wing, if not more so, than Rick Perry. And in recent polling, Davis actually performs better against Abbott than she does Perry. Abbott leads her 48-40 (still a big lead) vs. Perry’s 53-39 advantage.

Davis, should she choose to run, would have a hard row to hoe no matter who she might challenge. And then there's the matter of defending her seat in the Texas Senate, which if lost gives the Republicans a 2/3rds majority in that body (and likely with Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick presiding over it).

Yes, that is all worse -- much worse -- than what is in place at the moment.

But Texas simply isn't changing fast enough to bring some big changes about in 2014. There might be a couple of lower-level statewide offices in closer play next year, but there are still no announced candidates that aren't Republicans.

Which means some wealthy fellow, probably Caucasian and conservative, gets to be the sacrificial lamb once more this cycle. Since Bill White probably doesn't want to get his butt beaten again, whose turn is it? I'm guessing businessman, maybe trial lawyer, devout Christian, similar sort of profile to what has been offered up in the past.

I'm pumped. How about you?

In related news, Katy Perry also announced that she would not run for governor of Texas.

I can't tell if those titties are strawberry ice cream or cherry-flavored whipped cream. Can you?