The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance revels in the start of both another presidential election season and baseball season as it brings you this week's roundup of lefty blog posts.

Off the Kuff looks at the case to pass a state law that would enable "rideshare" services like Uber and Lyft to operate in Texas cities.

Libby Shaw, writing for Texas Kaos and contributing to Daily Kos, cautions Latino voters to beware of slowly starving Republican wolves that are dressed in sheep's clothing. GOP woos Latino voters while punishing immigrants.

WCNews at Eye on Williamson writes that as the GOP-dominated Texas House passes its budget, taxes take center stage, in The Texas Way - the more you make the less you pay, and the less you make the more you pay.

SocraticGadfly thinks that creating a national Appomattox Day could be part of dealing with all the political problems that unreconstructed Southerners have caused for America.

To quote Emperor Palpatine: "It is inevitable." To quote the Borg: "Resistance is futile." And to quote Yogi Berra: "It ain't over 'til it's over." PDiddie at Brains and Eggs dissects the 'inexorable' meme that surrounds Hillary Clinton's presidential bid.

Texas Leftist also posted about Hillary's rollout, declaring "she has no healthy competition" for the Democratic nomination.

Dos Centavos asks if Latino voter turnout is dependent on Latino candidates.  It's an open-ended question.

Nonsequiteuse says it is time to wear orange and head to Austin (or the internet) to rally against HB 723 as the Texas House of Representatives Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence committee considers a little word with constitutional consequences for minors who need access to safe, legal abortion services.

The Lewisville Texan Journal confirmed that a conservative group sent questionnaires to local candidates, inquiring about vital issues such as the ACLU and sharia law.

Neil at All People Have Value said that the Houston/Galveston National Weather Service offers useful instruction about life. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

=================

And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.

Spaced City celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Houston Astrodme, along with tens of thousands of others.

Texas Watch blogs about sex, drugs, and plant biology; or why Texas is covered in all of this green, brown, and yellow gunk (and why we're all dosed up on over-the-counter allergy medication).

Juanita Jean coins a new word for our culture war-infused times.

Dwight Silverman answers your burning questions about cable cord-cutting.

Free Press Houston noted that Texas Right to Life bullied Saint Arnold's Brewing after they rented out party space to a pro-choice group.

In lauding the Purple Hearts given to survivors of the 2009 Fort Hood shootings, Ted Cruz glossed over his 'no' vote on the bill authorizing them, writes Trail Blazers.

The Lunch Tray explores the ethics of sneaking vegetables into school food.

Better Texas Blog calls for raising the minimum wage.

Texas Clean Air Matters points out that promoting the use of clean energy is a great strategy for conserving water.

The Texas Election Law Blog decries "indignities and tyrannies" in local elections.

And finally, Grits for Breakfast penned an ode to Rep. David Simpson (who is sponsoring the legalization of marijuana bills in the Lege) called "treat it like tomatoes".

Of inevitability and Hillary Clinton

Above all, however, Hillary Clinton will struggle against the inevitability of her own campaign, the messianic pull of an office that has long eluded her and could once again be out of reach.

“Inevitability as a message is a bad message, especially when it becomes clear you’re not as inevitable as you thought you were,” says Democratic strategist Anita Dunn and former senior campaign advisor to President Obama. Clinton, however, “has learned that nothing in politics is inevitable.”

Compared with other nominees in the Democratic field, Clinton certainly looks inevitable. O’Malley is polling at 1% and Bernie Sanders is at 4% compared with Clinton’s 66%. She also holds a remarkable lead over her likely GOP opponents, beating out former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush 54% to 40% in a match-up, and with even larger margins over Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio. Though her favorability dropped over the last month after the controversy over her private email account, she still commands a solid approval rating among voters. No candidate in recent memory has faced such a wide-open field on the opposing side.

Resistance is futile.

But in the immortal words of Yogi Berra: It ain't over 'til it's over.

Though there are some who have been ready for Hillary since 1992, Democrats usually aren't the party that nominates the person whose turn it is.  Look what happened the last time they did: 2000, and Al Gore.  The old saw that 'Democrats fall in love, while Republicans fall in line' appears to be reversed for 2016.  Ominous?  Maybe.  There's about an equal number of Americans that want, and don't want, to see her in the White House.

My own feeling is that 2016 represents -- assuming Hillary and Jeb Bush are the major party standard-bearers -- a breakout possibility for the minor party nominees: Jill Stein of the Green Party, Gary Johnson of the Libertarians, perhaps others.  Progressive Democrats (an oxymoron, but also a digression) already seem scared shitless about that.  The most likely scenario that turns an apathetic electorate more so is the torrent of money flowing into the candidates' coffers.  Even the completely unelectable Ted Cruz, whose bid this year is really just to set him up for 2020, is awash in cash already from the richest of the very, very rich.

There are a few things Hillary needs to explain better, as we know.  Benghazi is not one of them, no matter how much of that incessant whining we are forced to endure from the right.

And if you don't want to go there, maybe you should go here.  Or here.  On a more encouraging tack, by far the most cogent thought about a transformative Clinton candidacy comes from here.

(My son) said that the amount of money that is being reported as about what Ms. Clinton’s campaign will cost presents a unique opportunity for both her and the Democratic Party. He is aware of the massive sums that the Republican party will be spending, both on the presidential and other races (congressional, state, and local). He noted that the Koch brothers and their ilk will be attempting to channel their millions into a coordinated, saturation campaign of lies. Hillary Clinton, he noted, has the opportunity to change the process; by using a method similar to judo, he said, she could use the current “corporations are people” mega-money madness to bring a higher level of awareness to the public.

Could you imagine, my son asked me, if rather than enriching advertising agencies et. al., she went to various communities -- cities and towns -- and used a large portion of her campaign funds to invest in them? If she said, “The American people have donated money to me, because they believe that I can institute change. It starts now: I am re-investing this much-needed money in your community. And that is exactly the approach that I will take as your President.”

He said some funds should go to charities, which would allow her to address specific social problems -- and solutions. It’s true that some problems can’t be “solved,” they must be dealt with on an ongoing manner. (He was quoting his father.) Other funds could go to specific community needs, again allowing her to highlight problems and solutions. He said that large segments of the country have accepted the problems that the bankrupt Bush-Cheney policies inflicted on our country. A great leader must change the way that people think -- about themselves, their value, and their relationship to community and country -- before those people can be expected to behave differently. And no single person, not even the President of the United States, can “solve” our nation’s problems: they require an ongoing effort upon all of our parts. 

I know, I won't hold my breath.  Still, that kind of candidate could be the progressive populist leader that millions of disaffected Democratic voters might take themselves to the polls to vote for.  We'll watch and see if some semblance of her shows up over the course of the next year-and-a-half.

Sunday Funnies

The Turner-Whitmire dynamic

It's the key to the runoff, and perhaps the mayor's office itself.  Not the most recent news development for observant watchers, but it's been busy blogging around here for the past couple of weeks.

The mayor, the senator, and the representative 

announcing the firefighters pension agreement last month.

"My name is John Whitmire, and I'm Sylvester Turner's state senator," he said, a go-to laugh-line that landed in a sea of donors. "Everyone in my district is important, but Sylvester Turner kind of stands out."

Kind words like those -- exchanged again and again over the past 12 months in both directions -- have gone a shade past the standard "good friend" lavished by nearly every politician on their predecessors at a dais. The alliance between Turner, a powerful Democratic state representative, and Whitmire, the most senior Democrat in the Senate, say people familiar with their ties, is genuine yet politically potent and already is sculpting the local Democratic landscape.

"The moon, the sun and all the planets have come together in the Sylvester-John orbit," said Carl Whitmarsh, a longtime Democratic activist close to both men.

This is the primary reason -- beyond all the other good reasons -- why Sylvester Turner is and has long been the front-runner in the race for mayor of Houston.  It's why Noah has already picked him as his favorite, why Kuff has taken note, and why the stars seem to be aligning, as Carl Whitmarsh pointed out above.  They're both not only senior legislators in powerful chairs in the Lege (in a dominated minority party), they're also personal friends.

Earlier (in March), Turner and Whitmire claimed credit for brokering a deal between an equally dug-in City Hall and fire pension board to modify the city's pension payments. And Whitmire is expected to co-chair Turner's mayoral campaign, formalizing what has been an aggressive courting of the local political establishment by the senior senator on Turner's behalf.

To see how their long and strong partnership is shaping the race, just look at a couple of the other contenders' reactions.

"They've been allies for a long time. It doesn't surprise me that they support each other," said Turner opponent Oliver Pennington, a city councilman who is critical of the pension deal struck by the Democratic pair.

Pennington is one of two Republicans most likely to be in a mayoral runoff with Turner.  (The other is Steve Costello.)  The Democrat most likely to join Turner in the second round is Chris Bell, and Turner and Whitmire know it.

When Jim Jard, a politically connected developer, planned to align with Chris Bell, one of Turner's opponents, Whitmire "called in a chit," according to a person with direct knowledge of the interaction.

Jard is now supporting Turner.

"  'Hey Jim, Sylvester has a self-interest in fixing a lot of these problems that everyone's worried about,' " Jard recalled Whitmire saying. " 'If he's going to be mayor, who has more of an interest in getting it fixed?' "

Seems a little redundant, Whitmire's rationale.  Jard's probably not telling us everything he knows.

It's still too early to rank Pennington, Costello, and/or Bell after the odds-on favorite, and if Adrian Garcia ever busts a move, things get scrambled... but only for second place.  I remain of the opinion that Garcia is wise to stay out because he has by far the most to lose.

I just don't think Sylvester Turner is going to let himself get Laniered a second time.

Update:  This kiddie pool-depth "Where's Waldo" article -- meant to update us on Garcia's status but not telling us anything new -- from Groogan at Fox26 (who usually does a better job) contains yet another odious fundraising importance meme from a political consultant, and the most ridiculous Mark Jones quote to date.

As for the threat of losing support among influential Hispanics, Jones says rivalry driven defection among Latino leaders has become the norm.

"I think there are quite a large number of Hispanic political elites in Houston who believe if they can't be mayor or someone in their faction can't be mayor I think they would prefer that a non-Latino be mayor," said Jones.

Remind me what you think their options are again, Dr. Jones?  Latino, non-Latino and what else?

K-Pax draws grand jury scrutiny

Our lazy-eyed unlicensed financial adviser/attorney general might be in trouble... but is probably not.  RG Ratcliffe (who is really doing a great job in taking over Paul Burka's blog):

The Houston Chronicle’s Lauren McGaughy got the break on reporting that the Collin County grand jury had asked the Travis County district attorney for its files in the Paxton securities case. District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg had previously decided the proper venue for the case was Collin County and referred it to Collin District Attorney Greg Willis. Paxton is from Collin County and any possible crimes occurred there. Willis, who is a Paxton friend and former business partner, has refused to act.

[...]

Paxton admitted to the Texas State Securities Board that on multiple occasions he sold securities without registering as a securities dealer. The board issued a reprimand and fined him $1,000.

To review, this is stuff we all knew a year ago, when Paxton was in the process of being nominated by the TXGOP to replace Greg Abbott in the OAG, and the bad news kept breaking all through the election season, and into this year.  Here's more on this week's worm-turn from Chris Hooks at the TO.  (Be sure and read from the start to understand his premise that Paxton is in deep doo-doo.  Let's scroll to the bottom, excerpt, and disagree.)

Once the grand jury hears the evidence in Paxton’s case, an indictment seems more likely than not.

“This case is absurd because Paxton has already admitted to a crime with Texas regulators,” says )Texans for Public Justice head Craig) McDonald (who has called for a special prosecutor). His admission of guilt, passed off by his consultants during the election as the end of the matter, “in no way adjudicates his potential felony criminal behavior.” As a reminder of the surreal nature of the fact that he may not be prosecuted for a crime which he has apparently admitted to committing, McDonald says, he keeps Paxton’s “signed confession” on his desk.

"Once the grand jury hears the evidence in Paxton’s case, an indictment seems more likely than not."

I doubt it.  It's just as easy to no-bill a ham sandwich when your pal is the DA.

*coughDavidMedinaArsonChuckRosenthalcough*

And I would surmise that more than a few of Willis' and Paxton's supporters sit on that GJ.  I smell a whitewash, but then I'm a skeptical sort when it comes to Republicans and ethics.

Update: DallasMorningViews reveals the big stall.

One hundred fifty, one hundred, and fifty years ago today

-- Sesquicentennial: The War between the States ended.

Lee and Grant, both holding the highest rank in their respective armies, had known each other slightly during the Mexican War and exchanged awkward personal inquiries. Characteristically, Grant arrived in his muddy field uniform while Lee had turned out in full dress attire, complete with sash and sword. Lee asked for the terms, and Grant hurriedly wrote them out. All officers and men were to be pardoned, and they would be sent home with their private property – most important, the horses, which could be used for a late spring planting. Officers would keep their side arms, and Lee’s starving men would be given Union rations.

Shushing a band that had begun to play in celebration, General Grant told his officers, “The war is over. The Rebels are our countrymen again.” Although scattered resistance continued for several weeks, for all practical purposes the Civil War had come to an end.

Yes, about that 'scattered resistance'.  It continues to this day.

(T)he Sons of Confederate Veterans are now nearing completion on a monument to their ancestors just off I-10, just this side of the Sabine and the Louisiana border.
 
Situated at the corner of I-10 and Martin Luther King Jr. Drive, “The Confederate Memorial of the Wind” will feature a walkway lined by the Confederate battle flag and those of several dozen (the count varies in every article) Texas regiments leading up to a circular monument composed of 13 columns honoring each of the Confederate states.

Around the time the project got underway two years ago, Granvel Block, an Orange resident and the SCV’s Texas statewide commander, rejected the idea, often espoused by the NAACP, that Confederate symbols are hateful relics of white supremacy and slavery.

Block said the group wants to preserve history. He said some people, white and black, do not like the Confederate battle flag design because they don’t understand the history. “So many things (about the Confederacy) have been taught wrong or with a poor skew,” he said. As examples, he said the Civil War was not fought over slavery and that slaves were owned in the north, not exclusively in the south. He said individual state governments were sovereign and that “our states were invaded by northern troops.”

Right.  Not about slavery.  Despite what the secession statements of Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas actually say.  Despite what the vice-president of the Confederacy, Alexander Hamilton Stephens, said.  Tip of the hat, Grant-to-Lee-style, to Infidel for the links, and for this.

That was the Confederate cause: slavery and explicit racism drenched in self- righteous Bible-thumping.  It's no wonder certain elements today feel nostalgic for it.

Related: Gadfly, on why we need an Appomattox (or a "You lost, traitors") Day.

-- Centenary (plus two days): The birth of Billie Holiday.

She wore white gardenias in her black hair and sang about the scent of magnolia, sweet and fresh.

Billie Holiday, born 100 years ago Tuesday, is being remembered as a timeless American jazz singer who risked her career to record a song with a civil-rights message that resonates still today.

In 1938, Holiday became the first Black woman to work with a White orchestra. One year later, her label, Columbia Records, would refuse her request to record "Strange Fruit," a song about the lynching of a black man.



Major record labels feared losing sales in the South. Holiday recorded "Strange Fruit" with Commodore Records, recognized as America's first independent jazz record label.

[...]

Time Magazine called Holiday's haunting ballad the song of the century. It has sold millions of copies.

The late jazz writer Leonard Feather called "Strange Fruit," "the first significant protest in words and music, the first unmuted cry against racism."

-- Golden anniversary: The opening of the Astrodome.

They're throwing a party for her tonight, and I'll be there.

Scattershooting Rand Paul, Rahm Emanuel, and other clay targets

It's as easy as Dick Cheney blasting a pigeon-load into that guy's face.

-- I wanted to save some Randy snark for today because everybody else in the world jumped on Ron Paul's boy yesterday.  Lindsey Graham -- excuse me, Senator Huckleberry J. Butchmeup -- got hot out of the gate on Sunday morning.

“The best (Iran nuclear) deal, I think, comes with a new president,” Graham said. “Hillary Clinton would do better. I think everybody on our side, except maybe Rand Paul, could do better.”

Ha.  Then the rest of the GOP hawks followed suit, running a million dollars' worth of television advertising as he was declaring, calling him a dove.  Or maybe a pussy.  NYT, via Crooks and Liars:

As Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky is set to announce his presidential campaign on Tuesday, a television ad tethers him to President Obama’s policy on Iran as part of a $1 million advertising buy painting him as “dangerous.”

The ad is a 30-second spot that will run on broadcast networks and on Fox News this week in the first four early primary states — Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, according to a person familiar with the buy, who provided the spot. It is unusual for an outside group to try to swamp a candidate’s announcement day, but Mr. Paul has been viewed with deep concern by foreign policy hawks for his non-interventionist views. The ad is being run by a 501(c)4 group, the Foundation for a Secure and Prosperous America, that doesn’t have to disclose its donors and is led by Rick Reed, a strategist involved in the “Swiftboat Veterans for Truth” against John Kerry in the 2004 presidential campaign.

Their emphasis.  You gotta love it when they eat their own like this.

Libertarians said to stop calling Rand a libertarian.  FiveThirtyEight pointed out that he's losing his father's base (of racist wingnuts; they have many better options in 2016, after all).  Mark Halperin said -- in an apparent compliment, in context -- that Paul sounded like the "Peanuts mom" to the rest of the GOP. Wahwah wahwah wahwah.  At least he'll let me keep my dick pics.

Seriously though.  Which would you rather buy: a Rand Paul-autographed copy of the United States Constitution for a thousand bucks, or a cellphone case from Ready for Hillary that cannot be used for multiple devices for $20.16?

The choice is clear.  (Neither.)

Update: More hilarious misfires from AMERICAblog that include music copyright violations, Paul's "eductation" policy, use of stock photos to represent supporters, and reTweeting a picture of the Aurora, CO movie theater murderer, Photoshopped, holding  a "Stand with Rand" sign.

This is an even more epic online failure than Ted Cruz's rollout.

-- Score another win for the Evil Empire, as Rahmbo turns back Chuy Garcia in Chi-town.

With nearly all voting precincts reporting results, Emanuel had about 56 percent of the vote compared to around 44 percent for Garcia.

[...]

Many of those heading to the polls Tuesday said the election should be a signal.

"Hopefully he (Emanuel) takes heed of the runoff when he should have been a shoo-in," said Richard Rowe, a 50-year-old, who planned to vote for the incumbent.

Jesus Fernandez, a 44-year-old window washer who voted for Garcia, had the same view.

"If he (Garcia) gets close, we might push Rahm to do something," Fernandez said. "At least we push him a little bit."

Yeahno.

"The mayor is who he is," said Paul Green, political science professor with Roosevelt University. "I think he's sincere when he says he'll listen more, but I don't think it will change much."

Political consultant Don Rose, a Garcia adviser, said Emanuel is both the "ultimate pragmatist" and the "ultimate egotist," so it is tough to say what lessons he will take from the election. One change Emanuel will need to make is his reputation as anti-union, Rose said.

Good luck with the hope for change, Chicago.

-- Speaking of cannibalization, Shell is swallowing BG for $69 billion, and there's more devouring of each other by Big Oil in the pipeline.

I'm sure someone will tell us this is a good thing.

-- Speaking of dick pics, good old Uncle Sam has been wiretapping Americans without a warrant since at least 1992.

The U.S. government was tracking the international phone calls of Americans nearly a decade before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, USA Today reported, citing current and former officials involved with the operation. The report said the Justice Department and the Drug Enforcement Administration amassed logs of virtually all telephone calls from the USA to as many as 116 countries linked to drug trafficking. The now-discontinued operation was the government's first known effort to gather data on Americans in bulk, the report added.

Why was it discontinued, pray tell?

The program, run by the (DOJ and DEA), was halted by Attorney General Eric Holder in 2013 amid the fallout from revelations by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden about NSA data collection, the paper reported.

Another thing I am grateful to Snowden for.  That makes at least five, counting these four.

Where to from here?

There are some larger questions at stake but let's start with this, yesterday at the Capitol.

During a debate over the repeal of the so-called Texas DREAM Act, Sen. Donna Campbell (R-New Braunfels) said in-state tuition at Texas colleges and universities acts as a magnet for undocumented immigrants.

“[The Texas DREAM Act] is bad policy that rewards illegal immigration in perpetuity,” Campbell said as she laid out Senate Bill 1819, which would shut down the program.

Several experts who testified against the bill, including Texas Commissioner of Higher Education Raymund Paredes, disagreed.

“We have absolutely no evidence that in-state tuition acts a magnet for undocumented immigrants,” Paredes said.

The act, passed in 2001, allows undocumented students who graduate from Texas high schools and who have been in the state at least three years to pay in-state tuition at public colleges and universities.

Sen. Jose Rodriguez (D-El Paso) said that Campbell’s bill unfairly punishes hard-working students who were brought to Texas as children and will have negative economic consequences for the state.

“Our economic future depends on educating these young people,” Rodriguez said while observing the hearing from the dais.

[...]

“There is not one single shred of evidence that suggests that DREAMers are a threat to the border or to Texas,” Rodriguez said. “I think this sends an inaccurate message about these students.”

Dozens of those students, many wearing graduation caps and gowns, waited hours to testify against Campbell’s bill.

Blanca Leyva, a sophomore at Texas A&M University, testified that she has been in the country for more than 14 years and graduated from her Dallas high school as valedictorian. She said she wouldn’t be able to attend college if not for the DREAM Act.

“As DREAMers we simply want to be successful. We want a better life. I want a better life,” Leyva said.

Elections do have consequences.  When people who want better public schools (so that ignorant people like Donna Campbell aren't elected) don't vote, this is one of them.

If DREAMers lose their affordable tuition, would they mobilize, organize, turn out their families to cast a ballot?  In every election, not just in the presidential ones?  I don't think it's appropriate to make excuses on their behalf when they don't.  But this is a small point in a larger one: what more, better, or different should Democrats do to get people who are suffering (or are going to suffer) to vote for them?  And not just the people who very recently voted for them, but don't any more?

My recent experience -- in my precinct, face to face, door to door -- tells me people who were once engaged simply aren't any longer.  They have 'consciously uncoupled' (thanks, Gwyneth).  When a middle-aged white woman with a Democratic primary voting history tells you she doesn't see the point in voting, and you ask why, and she shakes her head and closes the door...

How hard should someone try to change the mind of a person who thinks like that?  How much should somebody like Steve Mostyn spend in order to get people of that mindset to vote?

How bad does it have to get before some folks decide, "this is as bad as we can stand"?

At some (low) point-- irrespective of skin pigmentation or the lack thereof, mind you -- people are going to have to figure out the importance of voting on their own time, and on their own dime.  I get the feeling that another low point is going to come on the evening of the first Tuesday in November, 2016.  Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton is going to set more drought records.  We're in for another shriveled, withered voter turnout, and maybe one like we've never seen.  No bets taken yet on the outcome, but as H.L. Mencken said, you won't go broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.

Of the many reasons, nefarious or otherwise, plain old stupid may be the best explanation why Jeb Bush registered to vote as an Hispanic.

The Republicans win not because they raise and spend more money, but because they have carefully cultivated an ignorant, apathetic citizen.  Those cuts in education have a purpose, folks.  They're not just hard-hearted (but that's a helpful pre-requisite).  DREAMers were at the Capitol yesterday begging  Donna Campbell, et. al. not to cut off their path out of poverty.

"When people think, we win." -- some former president.

And when people vote only because they are motivated by fear or greed, you get more Republicans voting.  Bernie Sanders had a great reframing of this dilemma in his chat with Evan Smith last week: "If you knew that the Republicans want to cut Medicare, Social Security, start a war and then abandon veterans after they get home... would you vote for that?"

(Scroll down a bit here for the tapas; go here for the full hour, half one-on-one, half audience Q&A).

Some variation of that is what I should have said to that lady before she closed her door.

The Democrats don't need to raise more money or hire more advisers; they just need to talk about what people should really be afraid of.  They need a small handful, two or three is enough, of people in every precinct going door to door -- every single door, and NOT a predetermined walk list from a Democratic voter database -- and ask people a question like that.  (Keep in mind that one of the fallacies of trying to recapture lost voters is that there is some number, significant or not, of Texas kinda-sorta Democrats voting in the GOP primary because they think that's the only way their vote makes a difference.) 

And any focus that may require extra application needs to be on younger people, irrespective of the color of their skin.  This effort requires no consultants, no polling, and no advertising.  Just volunteers who are willing to try to save the world, as they say.  And willing to have doors slammed in their faces, threatened with guns, and dogs and the heat and get up and do it again next weekend.

Good luck, Democrats.  The future of democracy, our nation -- hell, the entire planet -- depends on your improvement in this regard.

Update: McBlogger has a similar-yet-different take.

The Weekly Wrangle

With Easter eggs collected, baskets and fake plastic grass all put up, and stuffed bunnies and lawn crosses ready to be stowed away, the Texas Progressive Alliance hopes that our state can learn the lesson of the Indiana debacle.

Here's the round-up of lefty blog posts from last week.

Off the Kuff compared Greg Abbott's performance in heavily Latino districts to that of Rick Perry in 2010.

Libby Shaw, writing for Texas Kaos and contributing to Daily Kos, is absolutely stunned to learn Texas elected a crook as its top cop. Not. The Texas attorney general is an "admitted law breaker".

Socratic Gadfly wrote about the DPS' stupid disciplining of trooper Billy Spears.

Nonsequiteuse explains to Rep. Stuart Spitzer -- the Kaufman Republican who bragged about his sexual history on the floor of the Texas House of Representatives during debate on a budget amendment -- that virginity and abstinence aren't the same thing, and neither will protect a person from all methods of HIV transmission.

John Coby at Bay Area Houston has the rewrite of Greg Abbott's press release on Indiana's RFRA.

Bluedaze noted that Rep. Drew Darby and the authors of HB 140, the bill intended to allow the state to overrule city ordinances regulating fracking, told an inconvenient truth.

Dos Centavos commends Durrel Douglas, a candidate for Houston city council who opposes SB185 (the "show us your papers" bill in the Texas Lege) and has urged Council's involvement.  That's well ahead of any mayoral candidate to date.

A conversation between Sen. Elizabeth Warren and JPMorganChase CEO Jamie Dimon from 2013 provides a clue as to what's wrong with everything, according to PDiddie at Brains and Eggs.

Neil at All People Have Value said look at things you see in everyday life because they are interesting, and use as few words as you can. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

===============

And here are some posts of interest from other Texas bloggers.

Grits for Breakfast rounds up news stories about the failure of the latest "border surge".

Unfair Park watched the Dallas mayoral debate, and observed that voters seem to be hip to the Trinity Toll Road con.

Better Texas Blog explains how lower oil prices would affect the state's finances.

Texas Vox calls for strengthening the Texas state senate bill aimed at combating government corruption.

The Quintessential Curmudgeon called out the Amarillo Globe News for its hypocrisy.

Carol Morgan blogged about "potty parity" and other useless bills at the Lege.

Joe Cutbirth wants Texas to stand tall for equality.

Elizabeth Rose saw the signs of discrimination in the Deep South as a child, and she sees them today in Indiana.

RG Ratcliffe rounds up a week of Texas political scandal.

And Houston Matters, in today's radio program, will discuss changing attitudes about football and East Texas church arsons.

Sunday Funnies, Denial of Service edition

Scattershooting contempt

-- The Texas Lege and its budget debate has been just a little too much for me to endure.  Charles has posted and aggregated in full, so if you want to get today's revulsion out of the way early, he's there for you.  Of particular disgust would be the account in the TexTrib regarding the exchange between state Rep. Stuart Spitzer and everybody else, as the Texas House discussed whether his amendment to move $3 million in funding for HIV and STD prevention programs to abstinence-only education was a good idea.  It passed 97-37, which is practically a party-line vote, so that must mean the answer is 'yes' if you're Republican and 'no' if you're a Democrat.

Oh, and RG Ratcliffe has some biography of Dr./Deacon Spitzer.  Yes, he's a surgeon.

The theocracy is strong with this one.  Everybody understood on the night of the first Tuesday of last November that things were going to be just as bad as you could imagine, and Stuart Spitzer is even more terrible than that.  This is "why waste my beautiful mind" territory, and yes, it can get worse.  There's two more months of this legislative session to go.  They're just getting warmed up.

Update: nonsequiteuse makes up for the contempt I can't bear.

-- Much like the Israeli-Palestinian question, I have deferred picking a side in the GMO debate.  My buddy Gadfly thinks it's Luddism to deny or condemn the science -- so does Neil deGrasse Tyson -- but then I read about Monsanto's "discredit bureau", and ask myself why a company producing a safe product would need a such a thing, or have a team of social media activists countering negative GMO data online, or prefer that people eating that food not have it labeled as such.  All of which may suggest the reason the company needs so many lobbyists... even a former lobbyist named Hillary Clinton.

It reminds me of the way the Texas Commission on (Reducing) Environmental Quality is designed to operate.  It's not just Monsanto, of course; Nestle' does this too.  And many other conglomerated food companies, which also are growing larger themselves.

There's a not-insignificant body of evidence that suggests there's a better way.  I wonder if NDG might address some of those specifics.

So since it's all about profit and capitalism anyway, my free market principle is that an apple that won't turn brown might be a wonderful thing, I'm just not willing to pay more for it.  On the other hand, since they're already charging me more for an organic one...

-- What if oil doesn't make a comeback?  This has greater ramifications than just Texas Comptroller Jethro Bodine's tit in a wringer.  The author of that piece concludes with the answer "unlikely" to the question proposed.   So does this analyst.  So does Boone Pickens.  The consensus among the bulls seems to be 70-80 dollar oil by the end of the year, and maybe even this quarter.

For Houston and Texas' sake, they had better be right.

What's wrong with everything

Elizabeth Warren versus Jaime Dimon, from 2013.

A meeting between Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Jamie Dimon deteriorated almost immediately after the JPMorgan Chase & Co. CEO visited the recently elected senator and consumer advocate at her Capitol Hill office in 2013.

In a new afterword for the release of the paperback version of her book A Fighting Chance, Warren recalls that the tenor of the conversation between the two policy adversaries soured when Dimon complained about financial regulations that she has supported:

When the conversation turned to financial regulation and Dimon began complaining about all the burdensome rules his bank had to follow, I finally interrupted. I was polite, but definite. No, I didn’t think the biggest banks were overregulated. In fact, I couldn’t believe he was complaining about regulatory constraints less than a year after his bank had lost billions in the infamous London Whale high-risk trading episode. I said I thought the banks were still taking on too much risk and that they seemed to believe the taxpayers would bail them out -- again -- if something went wrong.

Our exchange heated up quickly. By the time we got to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, we weren’t quite shouting, but we were definitely raising our voices. At this point -- early in 2013 -- Rich Cordray was still serving as director of the consumer agency under a recess appointment; he hadn’t yet been confirmed by the Senate, which meant that the agency was vulnerable to legal challenges over its work. Dimon told me what he thought it would take to get Congress to confirm a director, terms that included gutting the agency’s power to regulate banks like his. By this point I was furious. Dodd-Frank had created default provisions that would automatically go into effect if there was no confirmed director, and his bank was almost certainly not in compliance with the those rules. I told him that if that happened, “I think you guys are breaking the law.”

Suddenly Dimon got quiet. He leaned back and slowly smiled. “So hit me with a fine. We can afford it.”

As Warren noted in a 2014 Senate Banking Committee hearing, Dimon was proved correct: Though his bank was forced to pay $20 billion in fines, he still received a significant raise at the end of 2013.

Now, banks like JPMorgan are directing their anger toward Warren, threatening to withhold campaign donations to her fellow Senate Democrats in protest of her advocacy for Wall Street accountability and greater oversight and regulation of financial services institutions.

Bing, bam, and boom.

I would expect that Chuck Schumer, the next Senate minority majority leader, is going to have to rein Warren in or knuckle under to Dimon -- or both -- sooner than later.  In a different world (hell, even in a different country) things could, and did, go... differently.

Prosecute bankers?!  ShockedIsay.  Would politicians actually go after lobbyists who bribe them?  And not with fines but with handcuffs?  Not even with slaps on the wrist in the Texas Legislature, as we already know, but -- God forbid -- in Congress?

The banks' confidence in their ability to get away with something that smells like bribery is such that they appear to have telegraphed their quid pro quo offer to a major wire service. But even that understates how broken our system has become. Washington pundits are preoccupied with the question of whether the banks' threat to withhold contributions will impact the pending presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton. No one seems to wonder whether it's a problem if the banks, as they appear to, have bought the system.

Our system has become so broken that those participating in it can ignore corruption when it is staring them right in the face. Or worse, they are just waiting to profit from it themselves.

Get. The Money. Out. Of The System.

At Easter season, during Holy Week, as Passover seders are scheduled... even an atheist knows that Jesus said, "Love one another..." and still beat bankers with a whip.