The Lady In Pink: Clear Choice of Republicans in Texas CD-22

Here she is. The Republican choice to run against Nick Lampson and Libertarian candidate Bob Smither.

Shelley Sekula-Gibbs.

The Pink Lady of ever so many muse postings. I can't wait to see what the muse makes of this.

Republican voters, better get used to the spelling. Shelley will have to file her name without the ever-present hyphen. No eSlate machine has a hyphen on its list of things to select, so best do without it. And that's "ey" not "y".

Well, 85 of the 150 precinct chairs arrived in Pearland to help decide who shall be the anointed one, the savior of the failed Republican effort to hold onto the Texas CD-22 congressional seat. And by an unknown majority (well, after all the meeting was closed to the public and the press), Republicans voted the candidate who they will support for a write-in candidate for US Congress in CD-22.

Thank Krisna. Nick Lampson will not be able to "steal" this seat.

By the way, did you know that the word "sekula" is Indonesian for "school"? True. For about 40 years, the Spanish had control of the East Indies. In that time they introduced the concept of "escuela" or "school" so the word stuck. Indonesians are a very versatile people. The word for gear, in Indonesian is "verschnelling", a Dutch word for gear. Point is, the Indonesians have no difficulty with new rulers, new languages, new anything. I bet the Indonesians would have no problem voting in this election. Americans, however, will be entirely baffled.

And I will bet you DeLay Dollars to doughnuts that this factoid is being overlooked by Shelley and her new support group.

Voters will have to enter dialed letters to give vote counters the idea of who they are to choose. In Pearland, the Republicans opted to support the person with the most incredibly difficult name to dial in on an eSlate ballot. Nice job. Arthritic people will rejoice.

Unless they can enter another person's more arthritis-friendly name like "David Wallace". Nothing has changed there, as far as I have heard. David "Guns" Wallace is the candidate of choice of bug killer Greg Gillen and Judge Hebert.

Whatever happened to Tina Benkiser's man of the hour, Paul Bettencourt? Well, according to Juanita, he folded his tent and went back to Harris County.

Shelley, listen to the words.

Na-na-na-Na
Na-na-Na-Na
Hey-hey-hey- Goodbye

The New Democracy – Republican Style

Yee – haw! It’s the Republic of Indonesia’s Independence Day today – AND – today 150 some odd Republican precinct chairs and various and sundry Texas state and local GOP officials will meet at the First Baptist Church of Pearland to agree to support one write-in candidate. There is also the persistent rumor that some out-of-state Washington lobbyist will be in attendance, also.

The meeting is closed to the public. The smell of this is high.

Didn’t Sam Sparks tell Tina Benkiser et al. that they could not replace Tom DeLay on the ballot? Now here they are organizing Republican support for a Republican write-in. Why oh why doesn’t the TDP file suit to restrain these people from committing what is arguably a criminal act?

I’ll tell you why.

No one down at TDP is strong enough today, having laughed themselves senseless since Monday’s announcement of the meeting, and announcements that have followed, all the way up to today.

The latest? Gary Gillen says that Fort Bend chairs should boycott the meeting, and meet at the Pecan Grove Country Club instead. It’s all in a forwarded memo at muse’s place. Hey, muse, GG specifically wrote these people not to forward the memo to anyone else. These words out of a man who claims to be in favor of meetings that are “open to the public and the press” and that “I don’t intend to participate in anything secretive.”

Apparently the Pecan Grove Country Club has donated its meeting room to the local GOP (you hear that? donated) in exchange for the attendees agreeing to feed on a pasta soup and salad bar dinner for 15 bucks a pop. Well, at least you can go back for seconds, but man, 15 bucks for noodles, soup and lettuce? By comparison, Ashton Glover’s family’s fund raising spaghetti dinner was $8.00 a plate.

Good food there, better cause, better attended too, I’ll wager.

So I imagine that the press is going to flock to Gillen’s meeting because they can’t get in the one in Pearland. At Gary’s meeting, at least, you will have a bunch of Republicans speak as one in praise for their new savior David “Guns” Wallace. Over in Pearland, a blood bath is inevitable, but I guess if Tina Benkiser can get 76 chairs to agree to Paul Bettencourt, then they’ll have a write-in candidate.

Wow. 76 out of 150 votes are all it would take. Well, you know, it’s kind of patriotic. They could say things like “Paul Bettencourt, choice of the people”, where “the people” are a group that they could call “The Spirit of the 76”.

And that, folks is democracy in action, also known as The New Democracy – Republican Style:

Gaming the system
Sneaking around
Disobeying court orders
Accepting non-cash donations from tax-exempt organizations and fat cat establishments.
Paying too much for a buffet dinner.

God Almighty 1, Satan 8

I'm telling you, Satan, through his allies the Liberal Democrats and Nancy Pelosi, is winning his battles on all fronts. Armageddon is nigh (or . . . er . . . was)

First, one of God's home-boys, Tom DeLay former congressman from Texas CD-22, got chased out of town by Liberal Democrat (and Nancy Pelosi's lapdog) Nick Lampson. (That's 1) And he even enlisted the help of Republican-Appointed judges (That's 2).

Then nearly the same thing happened to Bob Ney in Ohio. Earlier this month, Ney announced that he would not seek re-election, to his seat in the US House, even though he is not under felony indictment as is Our Tom. CBS News reported that Ney withdrew "citing the strain of an intensifying corruption investigation that had focused for months on his dealings with lobbyists". (That's 3)

And in an yet another irony, God's attempt to allow Tom DeLay name his successor - foiled by Satan (That's 4) - was foiled again by the dark lord when it was just announced today that Ney's endorsement of Joyce Padgett for his seat - and she was the front runner - is now all for naught as she will be ruled ineligible to run as she has run afoul of Ohio's "Sore Loser Law". (That's 5).

Also today, we learn that Activist Judges in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeal ruled that a copy of the Holy Bible may not be displayed in a monument to William S. Mosher that is located outside of the Harris County Civil Courthouse. (That's 6)

Three Ronald Reagan-Appointed judges ruled 2 for, 1 against removal of The Word of God. No one is immune. Especially men of a lawyerly background, who often find themselves listening to Lucifer's lectures.

And in his most outrageous move to-date, Satan whispered into the ears of unwitting Republican Party officials, and got them to set up a closed-door meeting of party officials and precinct chairs, so they could agree on a write-in candidate to support a replacement for Tom DeLay's seat. Unbeknownst to them, Jesus was all set to reveal Himself at the First Baptist Church of Pearland on Thursday evening, in commemoration of the National Independence Day of Indonesia (Jesus loves Indonesians, especially their batik). Not knowing the secret password, Jesus had to change venues, and millenia. (That's 7)

Thank God Almighty for the Fort Bend County Grand Jury and Judge Brady Elliott. They are alone this week doing God's bidding. Brady Elliott, Republican Fort Bend County District Attorney John Healey and Assistant District Attorney Felipe Rendon got the Grand Jury to hand down a "no-bill" in a criminal charge against Ken "Sword of God" Dexter. In the "no-bill", the jury declined to return indictments against this true blessed of Jesus.

Unfortunately our Sword of God could not do our Lord's business earlier today. Marsha "I Love Nancy Pelosi" Rovai was out again with her hero, Nick Lampson. But the devil protected the news conference by surrounding them with policeman carrying guns and mace.

And That's 8.

Sugar Land Justice. When?

Today, I received a message from my best friend Ann Van that Marsha Rovai's assault case got a "no bill" from the Fort Bend Grand Jury, who heard opposition arguments by Republican DA Jim Healey.

Last April, during a Nick Lampson press conference (Nick is the Texas candidate for the CD-22 seat) Marsha Rovai, a five foot tall 69-year old retiree and Lampson supporter, was assaulted on the steps of Sugar Land's city hall by a Republican goon named Ken Dexter. Dexter is twice her size, and foreman of the Fort Bend County Grand Jury. Sugar Land police stood by as he and another mouth-breathing knuckle-dragging goon assaulted this female senior citizen. Note, I do not, at this point, blame the police for not witnessing the assault. The crime was apparently committed cleverly and secretly. As is their wont.

This is not the end. As Juanita says, "more to come".

How Irregular - An Anointment in a Baptist Church

It was rumored this weekend that Republican precinct chairs would be called to a meeting in a “central location” to select a single unified (but not officially Republican) write-in candidate . Well, an hour ago, FortBendNow broke the news that it will indeed happen.


Who: Republican CD-22 Precinct Chairs from Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston and Harris Counties, RPT Executive Committee members within CD-22, maybe other Texas state GOP officials, Republican elected officials from the four counties within CD-22, and the original cast of Jonathan Larson's "Rent".

What: Perform a miracle on the order of the loaves and fishes.

When: 7:30 PM, Thursday, August 16, 2006.

Where: First Baptist Church of Pearland (I guess that’s in Pearland).

Why: Nobody knows for sure . . . just can’t give the seat to Lampson without a fight.

How: Everyone brings food (thank God Talton’s out, no cookies), straw votes are cast into one of those Post Office plastic bins, votes immediately counted, and then all hell breaks loose.

It’s not an official party function, they say, because that would be a violation of Judge Sparks’ order, wouldn’t it? Nevertheless, the public is not invited, nor is the press. Another exhibition of the opacity of Republican politics in action? Really I just don’t think they want to show the amount of blood and gore that is going to be thrown around inside that House of God on Thursday. From the photo, I'd say leave your stones at home.

And when will the CD-22 Republicans choose their Savior? Well the picture at the top gives you some indication of my opinion.

And David Wallace: if you plan on attending, bring Kevlar.

Was Juan Garcia a Jet Pilot or a Swift Boat Commander?

Gene Seaman, the Republican incumbent Texas HR district 32 representative, said Juan Garcia, naval aviator, is not a jet pilot. My response to Gene Seaman is just this:

So What!

No one ever said he was.

Oh, I see, Clean Gene is addressing the fact that he is pictured, on his campaign website, giving a smooch to his wife with a jet in the background. Well, actually he said this:

"He is not a fighter pilot even though he takes his picture behind a jet."

Does that statement even make sense? In the photo, which is also part of the background on his campaign website, Juan is laying a rather huge smacker-oo on his wife, Denise. You don't see him holding a camera. But somehow he took a picture behind a jet. I've seen that picture Gene, and it looks like Juan and Denise are beside a jet. Gene, it is pretty foolhardy to position yourself behind a jet.

So let me autocorrect for you.

Juan Garcia posted a picture of himself kissing his wife and there was a jet in the background.

Implying what?

That he flies that jet? Folks, I have a picture of myself standing in front of the USS Constitution. Does that picture imply that I am the ship's captain?

On his campaign website, Gene Seaman has a picture of himself standing in front of a military version of what looks like a Piper Cub. Is that the plane that you flew during your term of military service, Gene? A Piper Cub? Is that why you think that Juan Garcia is falsely claiming that he flew jets? Because you had a picture taken of you standing in front of your plane?

By the way, nice job in your choice of military service to your country. You and The Prez, have something in common. You joined the National Guard during the Korean War and had fun not going overseas. Dubya joined the Air National Guard during the Vietnam War, and had fun doing the same thing.

Obviously Seaman is taking Bob Perry's money, and a page from his Swift Boat Campaign strategy, and trying to besmirch the military record of an accomplished P-3 Orion driver. You think that flying a propeller driven plane isn't as sexy as flying a jet? Consider this Gene:

Propeller driven planes are slower than jets. They make easier targets.

Juan Garcia, naval aviator, flew one of these flying targets. Used in a variety of missions, it can be a tool in anti-submarine warfare as well as gatherer of battlefield intelligence. P-3 Orions not only carry weaponry, they carry equipment to gather very valuable battlefield intelligence:

"The Harpoon Stand-Off Land Attack Missile (SLAM) launched from the P-3C Orion aircraft provides commanders with the ability to immediately deploy a long range responsive platform that can remain on-station for extended periods of time,
retask targets in flight, and deliver up to four over-the-horizon precision weapons in minutes. The same aircraft can then remain on station and continue to target other platforms' missiles by the use of its Electro-Optical, Rapid Targeting System (RTS) and real time data link capabilities."

The Piper Cub, I hear, has an unique ability to drop spitwads on the elusive enemy.

Gene Seaman, you're an idiot.

Anyone who doesn't see through this weak attempt to besmirch the war record of Gulf War and Balkan War veteran Juan Garcia, is likewise, an idiot.



Treat yourself to Juan Garcia's video. It was released last month. I just get all weepy and proud every time I watch it.

And by the way, you can send a message to Clean Gene Seaman by contributing to the Juan Garcia campaign through TexRoots. Click on the icon on the left and leave a few bucks off. Shane Sklar and Hank Gilbert also need support.

For Fort Bend County District Clerk, Veronica Torres is the Clear Choice

You know, most people don’t really and truly care about such down ballot races like District Clerk, and that’s just the truth. Mainly it’s because they are unaware of just what the office does. I have had to explain to potential voters on my block walking tours just how important that office is. As it turns out, it is a pivotal job in county government.

The District Clerk, in Fort Bend County, Texas, is the records keeper for the county court system. Currently the District Clerk has 40 full time and 6 part-time employees, and has a budget of over $1.7 million. Among other things, the District Clerk’s office files and assigns “causes of action” in civil, criminal, and family matters, including divorces, name changes, serious personal injury, child support and custody, delinquent taxes, product liability, contracts, real estate, felony indictments, revocations, bond forfeitures, and expunctions. The District Clerk maintains all court records, and handles all funds paid to the courts.

And I hear the pay sucks.

So who would ever want a job like that? Well, like every other kind of county job, it comes down to two different types: people who really care about the job, and people with an agenda that has nothing to do with doing the job well.

Glory Hopkins, the Republican District Clerk, is of the first type. She has served the county and her party for 20 years. Of late, she has been working to edit out personal information that is available in documents that can be accessed by anyone on-line. No one told her to do that.

She is also not running for re-election this year. Not because she doesn’t want to. And that is a sad sordid tale reminiscent of the machinations of a former congressman in Texas CD-22.

Glory Hopkins became a thorn in the side of quite a few people. Among other things, she actively fought against buying an integrated computer system that would serve the county’s entire justice system. She often ran afoul of other Republican elected officials. She wasn’t a team player. Paraphrasing Dubya, if Glory was not with them, she was with the terrorists (or Democrats, whichever fits).

Enter from stage right, Annie Rebecca Elliott.

What? A Republican stepping up to challenge an incumbent Republican with name recognition? An easy re-elect? Yep.

What a waste of time and money. You know the voters aren’t going to be voting out an experienced person in favor of a Court Coordinator working for the County Clerk?

Unless . . .

Unless you find a way to keep Glory Hopkins off the ballot. Well, Eric Thode, former Fort Bend County Republican Party Chair, apparently had a look at Tom DeLay’s playbook. He sent an email to Glory giving her the address to which she could submit her filing papers, and gosh darn it all, put the wrong zip code in the address. So when Glory used the address Thode sent to her, sent her filing papers (due January 2nd at 6 PM) using that address, and picked up the certified mail receipt which showed a postmark of Dec. 27, it was all copacetic. After the close of the business day on January 2nd, Thode called Glory’s daughter and told her that he had not received the filing. She later found out that her registered mailing to Thode was deemed undeliverable on December 29th.

So even though the filing was hand delivered to the Republican Party Secretary on January 3rd, Thode, regretfully, could not accept it. You snooze, you lose. Glory’s name would not be put on the ballot. Thode must have been relieved, though, that at least there would be one Republican candidate for the office on the ballot.

Glory filed a writ to to the 14th Court of Appeals get her name on the ballot. Of the process FortBendNow posted this:” Hopkins, her campaign officials and Thode all say they believe a good-faith effort was made to get the application to Thode by deadline.”

But faith doesn’t cut it. The court turned down Glory twice, and then the State Supreme Court refused to hear the case. Case closed, Glory’s out.

You know, when Eric Thode was heard to say that it was a big mistake for Tina Benkiser’s lawyers to have the Tom DeLay Eligibility case moved from state to federal courts, could he have had Glory’s try at justice in mind?

Enter from stage left: Veronica Torres.

On January 4th, Veronica Torres, a Democrat who also works in the County Clerk’s office, announced her candidacy for the office of District Clerk. Commenting on the premature end of Glory Hopkins public service, Veronica said:

”After 20 years of serving her County and her Party, her party has turned their back on Glory Hopkins. I am sad for Glory and our Democratic process. This whole episode demonstrates the confusion, disarray and division in the other party.”

“I wish Glory well and salute her for her many years of public service.”

Veronica, in working in the County Clerk’s office, was well-aware of the issues in regard to the aforementioned new software being bought by the county, and Glory’s error in not supporting it. You can read it all on her campaign website, but let’s just say that Veronica knows the job and is the kind of person that is committed to doing it right. I have even heard, through muse, who gets to hear it all, that Glory Hopkins is of the opinion that Veronica is the more qualified candidate.

A great wrong has been done to Glory Hopkins and, as Veronica says, to the Democratic process. We will never know for certain whether Thode sent the wrong address to Glory intentionally or not. That is between Eric Thode and Jesus. Krisna knows I have done similar things with that handy tool, "cut and paste". However, I am ever the skeptic, and cannot separate, in my mind, these shenanigans from those of Our Tom.

Anyway, why am I writing about all of this ancient history today? Yesterday I went down to the Fort Bend Democrats Headquarters in Rosenberg and had some of the best barbecue that I have ever had. It was a fundraising event for Veronica Torres’ campaign. Of barbecue, an old friend of mine used to say “Good is lots, more is better”. This certainly qualified. I will be feeding on this $6.00 purchase for a couple more days. muse was there (yes, I have learned my lesson) and took the picture with the muse camera that I have reposted here. The barbecue and beverage went down well. I was thinking about it all day while I was walking blocks in Lake Olympia, with Tom (Pat couldn’t make it).

Life is good when you are a Fort Bend Democrat.

Having Some Barbecue With a Galaxy of Texas Candidates

Things are looking up for this Blogger. Tonight I was asked by Juanita to come to a fundraising barbecue dinner and meet and see a whole host of Democratic candidates, past and present I left my notebook at home, so what you're going to read are the more memorable (to me) things that transpired tonight.

First, it was held on Old South Plantation, a very genteel place in Richmond that has its own church right on the premises. The place is to die for. The house, above, was built in 1890 by descendents of Jane Long, "Mother of Texas". What can I say, white buildings and columns. The barbecue itself was in an outbuilding.

Now you expect a fundraiser dinner of this caliber to be with linen table cloths and napkins with white coated servers. Well, that's what you would expect at a Republican Do. What we were treated to were bare wooden tables, barbecue dinners in Styrofoam trays - you know - the kind you use to take home the carne asada that you couldn't finish, plasticware and beverages in an ice chest. This is why I like Democrats. No pretense, just solid down to earth people.

Who were there:

Nick Lampson, the only major party candidate on the Texas CD-22 ballot
Jim Sharp, running for Justice on the First Court of Appeals
Albert Hollan, running for Judge in the 268th District Court
Farhan Shamsi, running for Justice of the Peace in Precinct 3
Rudy Velasquez, running for Judge, County Court at Law #1
Veronica Torres, running for Fort Bend District Clerk
Neeta Sane, running for Fort Bend County Treasurer

Also present, though not running for anything (this year) were:

Gerry Birnberg, Harris County Democratic Party Chair
Richard Morrison, former Democratic candidate for Congress for CD-22 in 2004.

Albert Hollan spoke about how he was proud of the American judicial system in the decisions of the past month-plus. Republican-appointed judges ruling not in a partisan way, but following the rule of law. He's running against Brady Elliott, who, Albert says, is a judge who doesn't allow you to speak more than 2 or 3 minutes before cutting you off, having already made his decision about you.

Farhan Shamsi told a perfectly charming tale of his immigration as a 4-year old, and about how his parents were naturalized in 1976, the bicentennial year, and that his parents voted as Americans for the first time that year - their first vote being for Jimmy Carter.

Rudy Velasquez. Now you have to know that Rudy Velasquez is a very calm soft spoken man, but he brought the house down with a comment that goes something like this: People ask me why run for judge in Fort Bend County? You're just wasting your time and money and no lawyer in the county is going to vote for you because they are Republicans. To which Rudy responded. Well, I have lots of time and no money. Besides, there are only 200 lawyers who can vote against me. But you know, I am Hispanic, and we Hispanics have large families. I have 47 first cousins on my mother's side, and 62 first cousins on my father's side. And they're all registered to vote and they are all going to vote in November.

Jim Sharp is running for Appeals Justice in an area that stretches across 9 counties in southeast Texas. He's as sharp as they come (sorry). To Rudy, who spoke of running for judge of some kind of lowly court, Jim said: You're lucky. You're running against 1 candidate who has never seen the inside of a court, I am running in a field of 9 candidates.

Veronica Torres is really starting to come on strong. I heard her speak at a house party last February, and she came across as a quiet but earnest candidate. Tonight I saw a Veronica Torres with strong convictions in her abilities with fire in her voice. She is going to make her opponent, a Republican, propped up, under-qualified candidate sorry she ever agreed to run.

Neeta Sane is always fun to watch. She's maybe 5 feet tall, and you have to keep telling yourself not to tell her to stand up when she speaks - because she is standing. The woman has more energy than Exxon-Mobil and Chevron-Texaco combined. Neeta argued very forcefully that she will be the watchdog of taxpayer money, seeing that it is properly invested, and above all running a transparent operation. No more shady deals in our County Treasurer's office.

Nick got up last and threw out perhaps the best line I have heard out of him, and that's saying something because the man can turn a phrase. I hope I do it justice: We got rid of Tom DeLay! We buried him! Then we resurrected him and then we buried him AGAIN!

Although not running for office this year, the entire crowd turned to Richard Morrison and gave him a loud standing ovation for being the pioneer running an underfunded campaign against a well-monied powerful Republican congressman in 2004, and making a more than respectable showing in that race. He demonstrated that DeLay was vulnerable, even in his own gerrymandered district.

It was a great evening.

And you know what? Richard Morrison reads my blog!

TexRoots Update

We're now up to 31% of our goal for Juan, Hank and Shane. C'mon guys. These are tremendously important races. We Bloggers have "primed" the fund with our hard-earned dollars. I did as well, and I am a public school teacher. You must know that I can ill afford too many contributions. The time is now upon us. If you can, please contribute to the campaigns of these very deserving candidates. They will turn it around for us, but they need your support. Do what you can for them, OK? If you are a CD-22 voter, then you can now consider a contribution to Shane Sklar. He is running against a Libertarian, as is Nick. We can use Shane's campaign to show potential Smithers voters what they will reap if they vote for a Libertarian. That is, NOTHING. I especially want to see Hank win. The Agricultural Commish has been for too long a path to higher office. A vote for Hank Gilbert is a vote to make that office work for US again. Juan Garcia? The man's record speaks for itself. You can't NOT support this gentleman. He is too cool for the room.

Nick Lampson: Nothing Has Changed

There were at least 50 attendees tonight at the Nick Lampson Campaign’s Fort Bend County Volunteer meeting at the First Colony Library.

A good turnout on a good week for the Texas Democratic Party.

Nick was running late so several people gave accounts of the week’s events, including the latest news that Tim Turner, one of the replacement candidates that I forgot about in my previous posting (gimme a break, there were so many of them), has announced that he too will run for Tom DeLay’s vacant seat. Well climb on board, Tim.

Now we know of at least 3 Republicans who won’t be voting for Bob Smither.

Nick finally showed up and got a standing ovation. He gave a short speech, a kind of “Nick Lite” speech that quickly summarized the issues facing voters, and some of the things going on at the campaign.

Emphasizing and underlining throughout the evening is this key thought: Nothing Has Changed. Nick is still going to run an aggressive issue-based campaign with no let up until November 8th. Nick has said time and time again that he will run against anyone and there will be no change – the issues are the same, Bob Smithers is still there, yes we have some new faces on the block, but NOTHING HAS CHANGED.

“Nothing has changed with Nita Sane [Democratic candidate for County Treasurer], nothing has changed with Farhan Shamsi [Democratic candidate for Justice of the Peace], and nothing has changed for Albert [Albert Hollan, Democratic candidate for 268th District Court]”.

Then he moved on, but it took only a couple of sentences for Nick to see Rudy Velasquez,
Democratic candidate for Judge of County Court at Law #1, sitting in the back row. He recovered nicely.

“And nothing has changed for Rudy Velasquez . . . let’s see if there’s any body else out there . . . “

I really like this about Nick. He knows how important his race is for the down-ballot candidates.

There was lots of discussion on plans for the 90 days left before November 7th. As with every Lampson meeting, we were updated with the current door/call tally. As of now, 18,000 doors have been knocked on by a Lampson campaign worker or volunteer, and 27,000 people have been contacted by phone. The data base is being fine-tuned.

We are going to be awesome as we come down to the wire.

And then I got the best news (personally) that I had all night. The campaign reads my blog! [Hey, guys]. My friend Ann said “Told ya”. But you know me . . .ever the pessimist.

I tell you, working with these people - it changes your outlook. I may have to change the name of this blog to Half Full.

And then there was one . . . er, two?

What a day in old Texas CD-22. Here we had a galaxy of candidates all set to replace Our Tom on the ballot, but like the old campfire song, “100 bottles of beer” they each seem to have been taken down and passed around in considering a write-in campaign.

Tom Campbell, as a primary candidate, is forbidden by law from participating. Imagine that, he won’t even be running against his foe on the primary ballot, but that’s the law.

Robert Talton and Charlie Howard would have to give up their state legislature seats to be write-in candidates, and that won’t happen anytime.

Andy Meyers doesn’t have any of the above to consider, but says he won’t run and doesn’t think anyone else should either as he was heard to say:

“There’s no way anybody can run a credible campaign as a write-in candidate. What are you going to say – ‘I’m a write-in candidate, send me money’? How are you going to do that?”

I’ll bet Our Tom could have figured out a way.

We haven’t heard from Mike Jackson or John Devine these past few months, but they are also in the same boat as Talton and Howard, so another two are off the table.

Let’s see, Eckels took his Stetson out of the ring ages ago, so that leaves . . .

David Wallace and Shelley Sekula-Gibbs.

Well, now, just about anyone who has written about a Sekula-Gibbs write-in candidacy has made the comment about the length of her name and how hard (actually nigh to impossible with that there hyphen) it would be to dial her name in on an eSlate voting machine.

FortBendNow says that a meeting occurred today among state and local Republican Party officials, and the word is that they will lock themselves in a room – at an undisclosed location – until they come out with one name.

Prediction: If they come out with one name, and that is a reach, it will be She of the Pink Leggings and Hyphenated Name. Why? There is such a rabid dislike of David Wallace among them that it will be either Shelley or no one.

So the GOP officials' choice will be Shelley Sekula-Gibbs . . . or no one.

But wait, there’s more. David Wallace has already said that he will launch a campaign in the 2008 election, in this case now as it seems most certainly to be, to reclaim the seat from Congressman Nick Lampson D-Sugar Land. Wallace will most certainly run a write-in campaign this year, GOP endorsed write-in candidate or not. It’s inevitable. Not only inevitible, it just happened. Guess David read the same FortBendNow article that I did and moved up his announcement.

Now where do I go to sign his nomination petition? But alas, I voted in the primary. Juanita tells me that I only get to watch. Poop. That's my life in a nutshell.

So look for at least one and maybe two write-in candidates. Or maybe more. X Swami X might run if he hits on the Lotto. Or maybe . . . a dark horse.

A Write-In Campaign in Texas CD-22? Tom Withdraws!

Early this morning, Time Magazine correspondent Mike Allen broke the news that Tom DeLay is seriously considering stepping aside and selecting a write-in candidate to replace him. He was given this information from a Republican insider who says things are not final, but that he “more likely than not” will go that route, adding as a caveat “with DeLay you never know.”

You might recall that I had a posting suggesting several different scenarios as a result of Sparks’s ruling on July 6th. Score! We are now considering Scenario 3.

“Scenario 3: 5th Court of Appeals doesn't play ball. Tom officially withdraws and Nick faces off with Bob Smithers, David Wallace, Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, Tom Campbell and Kristna knows who else - all candidates but Smithers and Lampson are write-in candidates. GOP vote is split, Lampson wins, but the vote totals of all his opponents combined are less than Nick's.”

Will Durst, at AlterNet, contemplated this scenario three weeks ago. His conclusion? Doable, but only in the world of a paranoid schizophrenic on speed. He wrote

“Or the Republicans could decide to put together a write-in campaign. Which might prove to be a mite ticklish, especially when you consider voters in Texas 22 are about as bright as a buried 15 watt bulb to begin with, which can be verified by their perpetual requited love affair with Mr DeLay. So, teaching an entire district to learn how to write is going to be about as easy as untying the shoes of a greased up centipede while wearing oven mitts.”

Have you actually ever seen how to effect a write-in vote on eSlate voting machines? It makes working a Qwerty keyboard look like a snap. Here is a link to Hart Intercivic, the company that markets eSlate machines. Curiously enough, though, they don’t seem to have any instructions on how to use the machines in a write-in race. I found this site, a simple PDF made available by Boulder County, Colorado. What you do to enter a write-in candidate’s name, is turn the little finger wheel so the cursor highlights a letter, then select the letter, then turn the wheel to the next letter. There is a place for a space, and a backspace key, but woefully, no hyphen. So Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, your name is not only horribly long for those of us with arthritis, we can’t even spell your name correctly.

Who does Tom select to succeed him? Well, it needs to be someone with some name recognition. And someone stupid enough to accept the challenge. Does the name David Wallace come to mind? Mike Allen writes:

“The write-in candidate has not been chosen, but Republican officials in Washington said they have a good chance of retaining the seat if it is a credible candidate like a mayor, judge or state legislator. Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace has expressed interest in running.”

Trouble is, which David Wallace are we talking about? There are four (4) individuals named David Wallace in Fort Bend County, and I haven’t even looked at Brazoria, Harris or Galveston possibles. We could be back to the 2004 CD-22 election where Tom DeLay squared off against Richard Morrison, a Democrat and Tom Morrison, a Libertarian.

This is not lost on others in the Grand Old Party. The best summary of that feeling is found in the opinion of Bill Miller, a GOP consultant:

"This would be met with ridicule and scorn. This strategy would be like handing the seat to the Democrats on a silver platter. Tom Delay will be remembered for the craziest end to his political career. Anointing a candidate never works. Voters are likely to say, 'The hell with 'em' and write in their own name, their kid's name."

And apparently according to the Texas Election Code, chapter 146, it is fairly easy to be certified as a write-in candidate. All you need is $3125.00 and a list of 500 signatures, and get that filed with the Secretary of State on or before August 29th. Not bad. My old favorite write-in candidate, X Swami X, could always get the signatures, but could never pan-handle the filing fee. So when we wrote his name in, the vote never recorded as he wasn’t officially certified. But heck, it was fun to vote for that character.

Levity aside, I have two questions for Republicans who are considering this move.

First, how can they expect the local Republicans to unite behind a DeLay-Anointed write-in candidate when they have been so willing, this year, to air their dirty laundry in public? Replacement candidates have been eyeing each other suspiciously since April. The blood-letting has been all over the media.

Second, how do they plan on handling Tom’s fanatic base? Those squealing, squirming, ladies and back-slapping gentlemen that we saw at Tom’s Thank You Event at the Sugar Land Marriott last month? What’s to keep them from dialing in “TOM DELAY” on the eSlate machine?

So in this, Tom has a distinct advantage among the arthritic that have trouble turning that eSlate dial. Like his most recent poll numbers, the number of letters in his name is also low.

Flash Update:

CNN correspondent Dana Bash has just reported (1:52 pm) that Tom DeLay will not run for re-election, this from three GOP sources. An announcement from DeLay is expected later today.

And now just in Tom DeLay's withdrawl announcement at FortBendNow. Left out? Any direction of what Republicans are to do:

“I strongly encourage the Republican Party to take any and all actions necessary to give Texas voters an up-or-down choice this Fall between two major party candidates"

[Emphasis mine]

What? Did someone misplace the holy oil?

TexRoots Update:

As of this posting, we have achieved 26.2% of our goal in an amazingly short amount of time. Those of you who haven't chipped in yet, go here.

Scalia Rejects Arguments in Application for RPT DeLay Stay

Antonin Scalia has denied the Republican Party of Texas' application for a stay of enforcement of Judge Sparks' July 6 decision. It seems to be the end of the road for the litigation portion of this affair.

Earlier today, lawyers representing Tina Benkiser and the Republican Party of Texas filed an application for a stay of enforcement of the judgement that the Texas Democratic Party obtained In TDP vs. Benkiser et al. That judgement, among other things, enjoins Tina Benkiser from removing Tom DeLay’s name from the November ballot for the CD-22 race.

But late this afternoon, Justice Antonin Scalia, who reviews appeals of 5th Circuit Court rulings, denied the application.

Final door slammed in the collective faces of Tina Benkiser, the Republican Party of Texas, and Tom “I’ll be back” DeLay.

There is no where else to go with this. Tom DeLay cannot be replaced on the ballot. Said James Bopp, the RPT’s lawyer in the case:

“The efforts to get relief through the courts prior to the election have been exhausted. Obviously the party is considering their options.”

Options? They have options?

The only person in this whole mess that has an option here is Tom DeLay. Now Tom will have an option to come back and run, or to exercise the other option, to announce what we all know he will announce.

That he is withdrawing from the race.

FortBendNow holds that Scalia denied the application because he disagreed with the arguments presented:

“The denial by Justice Scalia indicates he disagreed with the GOP argument. As a result, no replacement candidate will be allowed to be named.”

Now I think that’s possible, but I also think that he must have thrown up his hands after the first read of the 51 page long application, especially after seeing such whiney rhetoric like

“This application seeks to protect Republican Party of Texas’ First Amendment right of association by protecting its ability to nominate a candidate of its choice free from the intrusion of those with adverse interests, the Texas Democratic Party (“TDP”). As a result of TDP’s intrusion into RPT’s nomination process, RPT is forced to retain as its nominee, a nominee who has announced that he will be ineligible to take office if elected, because he has moved to Virginia and plans to live there indefinitely, even though Texas Election laws allow political parties to replace ineligible candidates as their nominee with someone who would be eligible to serve if elected. The Fifth Circuit’s decision condones this intrusion by holding that RPT’s exercise of its statutory right to require a candidate to reaffirm his eligibility for office, once he has taken steps fundamentally incompatible with his previous promise that he would be eligible for office if elected, unconstitutionally adds a qualification for office."

[All the emphasis mine]

That’s three sentences boys and girls. Three long, whiney sentences. Intrusion. Where can their whiney little heads be? Obviously they were making a run at political bias. While Scalia’s politics run just left of Benito Mussolini’s, he is not a man to mess with the constitution.

I also want to point out an outright lie within that paragraph. “he will be ineligible to take office if elected, because he has moved to Virginia and plans to live there indefinitely.”

On July 6, in Sparks’ court, when DeLay was asked by TDP lawyers where he would be on Election Day, Chad Dunn, a TDP lawyer said that “[DeLay] stated he didn’t know where he was going to live on election day,” Actually, according to muse, DeLay’s exact words were "Uh, I dunno, dude. Where do you want me to be?".

Oh well, it’s over for now. I would expect a withdrawl announcement very soon, probably after Tom talks it over with his good friend and confidante, Almighty God.

Texas Progressive Alliance Launches ‘TexRoots’ Fundraising Initiative

The Texas Progressive Alliance today launched ‘TexRoots,’ an online fund-raising campaign designed to raise funds for Democratic candidates in Texas via the internet. The launch of ‘TexRoots’ is the first major coordinated fund-raising effort of its kind by Texas blogs.

The Alliance will begin with an appeal to our readers to contribute to the campaigns of three Texas candidates:

Hank Gilbert: candidate for Commissioner of Agriculture
Juan Garcia: candidate for the Texas House of Representatives in District 32
Shane Sklar: candidate for the US House of Representatives in Congressional District 14.

You may have seen my post for Shane Sklar. This guy really needs some serious help. He’s running against a Libertarian who poses as a Republican. All that the incumbent has going for himself is name recognition. Expect to see future posts on Hank and Juan, and again on Shane as we move along toward Election Day.

TexRoots works with the nationally-recognized fund-raising tools of ActBlue.com.

Candidates selected for this solicitation were picked after a considering a number of factors, including the strength of the candidates and their Republican opponents, the candidate’s use of the internet and blogging, and the demographics of the candidates’ districts.

The Alliance hopes to have as many as five total groups of candidates before November 7th. Anna Brosovic of Arlington, founder of the Alliance and author of Annatopia said of this group of candidates:

"This first group of candidates comprises a good cross-section of regions, ideologies, and ballot races. We have a statewide candidate, a congressional candidate, and a candidate for Texas House of Representatives which we believe are worthy of the attention of the Texas Netroots.”

Charles Kuffner, of OffTheKuff, another founding member of the Alliance, writes

“We are pleased that we have been able to raise the funds necessary to activate this important fund raising tool. Netroots money has made the difference between being competitive and winning in races all across the country.”

TexRoots follows a formula similar to the popular national Netroots Candidates fund raiser launched earlier this year by blogs such as DailyKos and MyDD. However, TexRoots focuses only on Texas candidates.

So click HERE or click on the TexRoots logo at the top of this posting, or click on the sidebar icon and go help these guys out. Better yet, go over to Muse and click on one of the paths to TexRoots found there and contribute that way. Reason I say this is that Muse wanted to try it out this morning through musings but discovered that the Muse Card was left at a restaurant last night.

Why Tom Won’t Run

In an Opinion/Analysis piece filed this weekend at FortBendNow, Bob Dunn ponders the seemingly risky and foolhardy run at the Supreme Court on the part of the Republican Party of Texas. Five judges have already found for the TDP, time is short and funds need to be raised to counter the Lampson war chest, and shorter if you have to wait until October for the Supremes to hear the case. So Dunn asks:

“what does the Grand Old Party hope to achieve by making this move?”

Well, he says, it comes down to this.

Benkiser and the RPT are doubting that Tom DeLay will run. They think he’s going to withdraw no matter what. So what do you do? Hold out for an 11th hour finding by the Supreme Court that

“the GOP will suffer “irreparable harm” if it isn’t allowed to field a replacement candidate for DeLay”.

Why doesn’t that surprise me? Here Tom and his cronies conspire to game the system, get caught, and then come back and say that they simply cannot be “punished” for committing this fraud because the punishment will not be upon them but upon the voters who won’t have a candidate to vote for in November.

Where was their concern for the voters when Tom decided to quit and choose his successor?

It makes you wonder why it isn’t more obvious to people to realize why our children think that there should be no consequences for poor behavior. They have such rich and powerful role models.

But getting back to the main subject, from the title, why is it so obvious to Benkiser et al. that Tom is going to withdraw, leaving them with no one on the ballot?

Well really, there are several reasons, some of them would, individually, be reason enough for Tom to quit. Taking most of these reasons together, it positively screams out that he is going to withdraw.

First, let’s take the most innocuous reason: he’s been there, done that and can’t go back. Rick Casey at The Chron wrote way back in April that DeLay will quit for the same reason Newt Gingrich quit.

“Already nervous about President Bush's poll numbers, the last thing Republicans would want to do is return to leadership a man who has a hard time holding onto a district that he himself drew.”

“Even if he held on to his seat in November, he wouldn't have the office of majority leader or the infrastructure of DeLay Inc. He has decided that if he can't be at the center of the action in the House, he can have more influence on the outside.”

It’s sort of like a star UT quarterback being suspended for taking steroids, but being allowed back on the team if he remains on the 3rd string. No thanks.

Next let’s look at the false reason, the one I call the "self-serving reason". Tom DeLay, by virtue of the fact that he has been in the news with his wheelings and dealings under scrutiny by the House ethics panel and federal prosecutors, decided to take himself out of the race to help his fellow Republicans. Nationwide, Democrats were planning hours and hours of television ads linking their local candidate to DeLay. Now with him out of the way the ads won’t have play.

That one just doesn’t work for me. It doesn’t matter if Tom is running or living in a cabin in Idaho this fall, his name and photograph WILL be tied to any other Republican who got in on his crimes and misdemeanors. First to go will be the candidates who still have Tom’s ARMPAC or TRMPAC money in their campaign funds.

Way back when, I wrote a posting where I suspected that having the indictments looming over his head was not the real reason that he quit. I still think so. And I am now completely convinced that the ongoing Abramoff investigations are a very good reason why he doesn’t want to run. In a July 17th article posted in The Washington Times, by Christina Bellantoni, it seems obvious that he will not seek to reclaim his vacant seat because in doing so, the House Ethics Panel would again take up their investigation of his dealings with Abramoff and his crew. This based on this quote:

” The panel … said it would have investigated former Majority Leader Tom DeLay had the Texas Republican not resigned his congressional seat last month.”

Another reason? Tom’s Money. This from a July 18th article in “TheRawStory” although you can find it anywhere you look:

“A report in today's Roll Call indicated that the former Texas Congressman and House Republican Majority Leader has spent $1.7 million on legal fees, leaving him with only $641,000 in his campaign reserves.”

That being the case, and the fact that he still has his money laundering case ahead of him, Tom simply doesn’t have the funds to mount a campaign AND defend himself against the onslaught of Ronnie Earl.

And I leave the best for last (or worst, depending on your point of view). As seen in a posting in Juanita’s, citing the very same “Roll Call” article, Tom can’t run because if he runs and wins he would be “restricted to $5,000 donations to his legal defense fund”. As a private citizen he can accept any amount of financial help that his friend Bob Perry would want to give him, and not have to report it to anyone – well, maybe the IRS, but that’s only if you don’t game the system.

So still Tom DeLay continues the façade. It’s obvious to anyone who cares to look that he is planning to withdraw. But by not withdrawing, he keeps Tina and others in his party pounding on the Supreme Court’s front door in the hopes that their disingenuous argument for the rights of “disenfranchised Republican voters” will find a sympathetic ear.

My suggestion is to try this sympathetic ear on the right, Tina. She looks like she will give your lawyers' arguments her full attention and a guaranteed successful outcome. But then, she's an anime drawing.

Signs of the Times

While the entire population of Sugar Land, Texas was at the First Colony Mall today taking advantage of the sales tax holiday, Don, Charles, Bryan, and I put up campaign signs in strategic locations in Richmond and Rosenberg.

I’ve never done anything like that before, so I was curious to find out about the process. One thing that did not surprise me was that when you do that kind of physical labor outside in August on the Texas Gulf Coastal Plain, you sweat a little. Well . . . you sweat a lot, more than when you go block walking.

We were able to hit ten sites.

The process, Don told me, is much easier than it was in times past. Before, campaign signs were set in wooden frames and mounted on fence posts that were set into the earth after digging a deep hole with a post hole digger.

Back when men were men.

Today we use “T-posts” and plastic ties, you know, the kind that the police use when they run out of handcuffs. Tools: Door keys are good for poking holes for the ties, and big 20-pound steel drivers to ram the “T-poles” into the (thankfully) soft grass-covered earth. We all took turns with the drivers. They really eat your lunch.

I had trouble with the plastic ties at first. I kept putting them on backwards, don’t know why. But I finally self-corrected.

We started off slowly. The first site on 90A near the Rosenburg-Richmond boundary took a long time. I multiplied the time it took us to put that one together and figured we would be out all day. But it got better as time went on: we molded ourselves into an well-oiled efficient machine, anticipating each other’s moves. The work went very quickly after awhile.

At one point Muse came by with the Muse Camera and snapped a few shots of us putting up the “Had Enough? Vote Democratic . . . for a change” sign, and the combined campaign sign for Veronica, Neeta, Rudy and Albert. They were put up on land owned by a Democrat-owned fast food place. One of the photos is on the right. If you look very closely in the background you can clearly see another sign on the white building announcing the offices of Gillen Pest Control. Yes, that’s Gary Gillen’s place. Gary Gillen, as you know, is Fort Bend County Republican Party Chairman.

So you could say that these signs are in a prime location . . . as it were.

Juanita tells me that these prime location signs will have a special place in her “Adopt-A-Sign” Campaign. Go here and see if you can be there first to adopt them. They’re bound to go fast.

By the way, the word is that the “Adopt-a-Sign” Campaign has been a huge success. People are calling in from all over the country to get their names or their high schools and mascots written on the signs.

So now I sit here in the comfort of my air-conditioned blog portal, and am slowly rehydrating, although I have a long way yet to go. I got a cramp in my left index finger a few minutes ago.

Need more electrolytes.

And yes, I’d do it again. It’s not as fun as block walking but you do get this weird sense of satisfaction when you drive by one of the sites that you helped to create.

"No one votes for Libertarians unless the candidates call themselves Republicans - then it's OK"

That was a statement from one scenario in the Lampson campaign in a posting of mine last month. I stand by that, but I have to qualify the statement in that I have to exclude the 0.5% of the voting public that votes a straight Libertarian ticket.

Libertarians are a weird radical fringe group. When you look at the things that they support vs. the things they don’t, you are left scratching your head unless you realize that the core of their belief system, and that’s exactly what it is, is that people should be free to do whatever they want as long as they don’t infringe on the liberty of anyone else.

Gee. That sounds like something Jesus would have said.

A necessary ingredient, however, is also central to the belief system: Libertarian ethics favor strong self-responsibility. When people take responsibility for their own actions, the system works because everyone else also take responsibility for theirs. You don’t do right by others because it is the Christian thing to do, you do it because it is in your own self-interest to do it.

And therein lies the flaw to the argument. People should be self-responsible, but as a rule, people are not. The other 99.5% of the voting public would agree to that. Jesus had his work cut out for him in urging people to “do unto others . . .”. Libertarians have a similar chore.

Why bring all this up? No, it’s not because Nick Lampson and Bob Smither are about to square off after Tom withdraws. It’s because, in the western portion of Fort Bend County, there is another battle for a Texas congressional seat being waged. Shane Sklar, a moderate Democratic 4th generation Texas rancher, is running against Dr. Ron Paul, a Libertarian posing as a Republican, and a sometimes Ob/Gyn.

How does a Democrat run against a Libertarian? You can’t run on itemized issues because almost half the time you will find Dr. Paul on your side. This is why liberal democrats in CD-14 like him. He wants to legalize marijuana. He was one of the few who voted against going to war in Iraq.

But how does that square with his vote Against any government relief for Hurricane Katrina victims? Why did he vote against the Child Obsenity and Pornography Act? Or why did he cast the lone No vote to award Mother Theresa a congressional gold medal of honor? (or Ronald Reagan or Rosa Parks?).

Again, you need to filter all of this through a Paulian Libertarian sieve, then it all makes sense. Dr. Paul is against any government spending unless it is to put the US economy back on the gold standard, against any statutes that interfere with the liberties of others (unless we’re talking abortion here), and against any waging of war anywhere. And there it is in a nutshell.

Dr. Paul doesn’t have political views, he has a system of principles and beliefs. That the outcome of these principles more often than not overlap with Republican politics, allows him to be a Republican.

But he’s not.

Dr. Paul's votes are based on uniquely held principles and beliefs that are way out of the mainstream of American politics. And voters in Texas CD-14 are starting to figure that out. And as they’re finding this out, as Sklar mentioned in a Kuffner interview,

(Shane Sklar has gotten) "Democrats, Independents and Republicans supporting this race. And I get those supporters even though they know that I may not be with them ideologically. They’re supporting me because they want an effective representitive bringing back jobs to the district and can actually have a conversation with his collegues in congress. Because if you are the one “no vote” out of 435 you’re not getting anything done. [District 14 voters] have no representation.”

So that’s how you run against a Libertarian. Dr. Ron Paul casts each and every one of his votes to make his Libertarian point, not for the good of his constituents. Shane Sklar says that he will work for the people in CD-14 in contrast to Paul, who only wants to continue to “make a point” that only one half of one percent of Americans care about.

5th Circuit Court Says DeLay Stays on the Ballot

Not a “Frivolous Candidate”

In a unanimous opinion written by Pete Benavides for himself, James L. Dennis, and Edith Clement, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Judge Sam Sparks' July 6 ruling that Tina Benkiser’s act to declare Tom DeLay ineligible on the November ballot was unconstitutional.

You have to read the opinion. There is NOT ONE argument made by the RPT lawyers that didn’t fail. Not one. It’s rather like what the Romans did to the Carthaginians after the last Punic War – total destruction followed by sowing salt in the earth.

You can bet there will be further action by RPT lawyers. Tom REALLY doesn’t want to run. He really doesn’t. This was underlined by the lawyers for the Republican Party of Texas in one of their many arguments, this one more on the ludicrous side, that Tom DeLay was a frivolous candidate, and as such, “removing frivolous candidates from the ballot constitutes “protection of voters” under Supreme Court precedent”

The court observed that that precedent was “in the context of a candidate that will only receive minimal support in an election”, further observing that “there is no evidence that DeLay, the incumbent candidate of a dominant political party, will receive only minimal support.”

It’s just a small footnote in the overall opinion, but I just love it. The GOP’s own lawyers argue that Tom DeLay is a frivolous candidate, like “X Swami X” was in the days of my youth, and the court saying in essence, “no, the Republican nominee will probably get more than a few votes”. Muse has a great commentary on this frivolous candidate. Check this out.

The court ruled that Tina Benkiser’s action was unconstitutional in that her act “created a pre-election inhabitancy requirement” in violation of the US Constitution. Citing cases going back to 1808, and even discussions of the framers’ original intent in including the phrase “when elected” in the Qualifications Clause, the court effectively slammed the door in RPT lawyers’ faces.

Intersecting the US Constitution’s Qualifications Clause with the Texas Election Code, the court even ruled that Tina Benkiser wrongly applied the Texas statute in the TEC in ruling DeLay ineligible. Judge Benavides wrote that to declare a candidate ineligible, it must be “only when the record conclusively establishes the candidate’s ineligibility”. The fact that DeLay could move back to Texas immediately before the election negates “conclusively establishes”.

And the “standing” issues raised by RPT lawyers? Where they claimed that the Texas Democratic Party couldn’t file suit because they themselves weren’t the injured party? Their ruling was essentially this:

No . . .No . . .No . . . and NO!

The amici briefs filed by David Wallace’s lawyers and Texas Secretary of State Roger Williams were handled thusly by the court:

To Williams (who was put up to it by AG Greg Abbott) the court said this: "An amicus curiae generally cannot expand on the scope of an appeal to implicate issues that have not been presented by parties to the appeal . . . Therefore we will not consider this issue."

Ouch.

To Wallace, in whose brief he simply sought to enlighten these federal appeals judges on points and precedence of law in regard to the Qualifications Clause: A very polite silence. Nada. Nothing.

They were kind . . .

What the Future Holds

CNN political correspondent Candy Crowley reports that the party will appeal to the US Supreme Court, where they generally don’t overrule decisions that have gone through this judicial process, but adding that “surprising decisions have happened in the past.’

And so it goes. Another afternoon in the CD-22 circus.

____________________
Footnote: Harvey Kronberg's Quorum Report announced that the The justice assigned to hear emergency petitions from the 5th Circuit is Antonin Scalia. Scalia is widely known to be a strict constructionist of an "Originalist" bias. Originalism (from Wikipedia) is, "in the context of United States constitutional interpretation, . . . a family of theories which share the starting point that a Constitution (or statute) has a fixed and knowable meaning which is established at the time of passage or ratification." My thought? Like Clement, Scalia will be bound by his strict constructionism. Unless, of course, we have an activist judge here. But, you know? I think we won't, not here.

DCCC Reserves $51.5 Million of TV Ad Time For Fall Congressional Races

But no funding for Texas

Having a funding advantage over the National Republican Congressional Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has reserved television advertising time for 27 key congressional races throughout the nation.

Funding ranges between $147,000 for an open seat in an Ohio Democratic-partial district to $3.07 million to unseat Republican Congressman Jim Gerlach (PA-06). Click here to see Gerlach’s website where the headline touts his vote to raise the minimum wage. Gerlach’s race is considered a squeaker as his last two wins were by a 2% majority. He is also under fire for accepting, and not returning, $30,000 in campaign contributions from Tom DeLay’s ARMPAC.

Notably absent from the list of campaigns that the DCCC is helping this year, so far, are any of the congressional campaigns in Texas.

Not one.

What? Not even TX-22? No help for Nick Lampson’s bid to unseat Tom “The Hammer” DeLay?

Well, for now, the DCCC is going to sit on the fence and wait to see what happens in TX-22.

“The campaign committee has also avoided reserving airtime in the suburban Houston district of Republican ex-Rep. Tom DeLay, where a federal court will decide if the former majority leader must remain on the ballot despite his resignation from Congress.”

“The Democrat running for his seat, former Rep. Nick Lampson (Texas), had $2.1 million on hand at the end of June, and if DeLay is not on the ballot, his replacement will have fewer than 100 days to boost his name identification among district voters before they go to the polls.”

Interesting, isn’t it? How far we have come in this congressional race.

Earlier this year we had the battle in CD-22 as THE congressional race to watch in the mid-term election. Now, as far as the DCCC is concerned, it’s a ho-hum race that does not deserve as much funding as the 6th congressional district of Ohio where one pollster has placed a 5 point lead on the Democratic candidate. The district is currently represented by Democrat Ted Strickland who is running for governor in this November’s election.

So the DCCC has let down its guard in CD-22. I’m not so sure that is a wise thing to do. Sure the GOP is in disarray, at least in the Fort Bend part of CD-22; but now is not the time to be popping corks. There’s work to do, blocks to walk, votes to win.

And 96 days left to do it.

Band of Brothers Veterans Support Congressional Candidate Mary Beth Harrell

The Texas"Band of Brothers" candidates and incumbents in 7 congressional races, will call a temporary halt to their own congressional campaigns tomorrow, August 3, in Georgetown when they assemble to support and defend Mary Beth Harrell, who was the object of a scathing false claims last July 6 by John Carter in a fundraising letter to supporters. While not worth the electrons to quote, let's just say he played fast and loose with the truth in regard to her residency and views on the Iraq War.

We really have to do something about that liar.

The 7 gentlemen in question, all veterans, will assemble to support Harrell, mother of Rob Harrell, who is currently serving his country in Iraq.

The press conference is set to begin at 2 PM at Pavilion at Legacy Hills Park in Sun City, 200 Del Webb Blvd Georgetown

Minimum Wage Vote: Texas Delegation's Splintered Vote Breakdown

The vote over raising the federal minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 over a 3 year period passed, but only after Republicans added a provision to drastically cut inheritance taxes – a move that only benefits the super-rich (unless you are Warren Buffet, and it doesn’t matter since he gave all his wealth to Bill Gates).

That accounts for the curious vote distribution that I have posted here for you to peruse. In black are votes that would have gone along party lines had there been no inheritance tax provision added, where Republicans would have opposed the bill (8 total), and Democrats would have favored the bill (8 total). In purple are Republican votes in favor of the bill (11 total), and in green are Democratic votes against the bill (3 total). Two votes were not cast (CD-22, of course, is unrepresented).

The Purple vote is a no-brainer. Nationwide, Republicans voted overwhelmingly in favor of the bill, 196 for to 21 against. Compare that to the Texas delegation’s Republican vote: 11 for to 8 against. More than a third of the total Republican votes against the bill were cast by Texas Republicans. Very, very angry white men.

The majority of Republicans, you see, were voting a win-win-win scenario: By voting for it, it looks like they are doing something that they normally would never do: vote to give impoverished constituents a raise in pay (and maybe, in so doing, obtain their vote). The inheritance tax reduction part of the bill is very much something Republicans have wanted to give the super rich - some say $732 billion in tax breaks. In return, Republicans would hope, part of the tax savings will go toward campaign contributions. More to the point, though, the estate tax provision was a poison pill. It negates all of the good, as pointed out by Harold Meyerson of the Washington Post:

“The shortfall could well lead to offsetting cuts in programs that benefit the same working poor that the minimum-wage increase would help”.

The amendment will guarantee killing the bill in the Senate, where democrats have vowed to vote against it. Another feather in the Republican cap: they can point fingers at democrats and say that they voted against raising the minimum wage in an election year.

Also not reflecting state totals, where Ayes outdid Nays by 8 to 3, nationally, Democrats overwhelmingly voted against the bill by 34 for to 158 against. Reps Cuellar, Doggett and Edwards voted with the majority of their fellow democrats. The eight Texas Democratic Aye votes are attributable to the fact that these are votes from districts with high poverty levels, and their votes were cast in the interests of their constituents.

This vote is an excellent example of how and when this Republican majority “do-nothing” congress does something. Meyerson writes further:

“Their tone was best captured by Tennessee Rep. Zach Wamp, a Mayberry Machiavelli if ever there was one, who could not restrain himself from telling House Democrats, ‘You have seen us really outfox you on this issue tonight.’

"Wamp's taunt can serve as the credo for this entire Republican Congress, which legislates only when, and because, it can outfox the Democrats”

But I think that the Republicans are in for a surprise this year. All these machinations are just going to further alienate voters who are already showing signs of disaffection with this increasingly radical right-wing dominated party.

Why do I have this uncharacteristic optimism?

They screwed up.

As if the inheritance tax addition wasn't enough, another thing that they added to the bill was a charge against tips. In seven states where the minimum wage is higher than the federal limit, workers who receive tips (you know, those waitress fat cats) are allowed to collect the tips over and above their minimum set wage. A provision added by Republicans actually reduces minimum wage in those states, as they say the tips are included in their total wage. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif said this:

"Only this Republican Congress could figure out how to turn a minimum wage increase into a pay cut for hundreds of thousands of Americans, including thousands of Californians”

Senator Boxer, said she is planning amendments to the proposed bill.

So the issue will remain in public view for quite awhile, and the true intent of Republicans in the House and Senate will become very apparent. Why? They can’t let the minimum wage bill pass.

Ever.

Historically Republicans have hardly had a president in power where a minimum wage increase was passed. Look at the graphic I post on the right. It shows the minimum wage, in 1996 constant dollars. Almost every upward trend took place during a democratic presidency or a democratic majority.

Republicans, you see, will never allow a minimum wage increase bill to land on Bush’s desk. They can’t. He would veto it, and you don’t veto a bill like that during an election year.

Susan Combs Giving Head . . . the Cold Shoulder

Aw come on, you can’t have circumstances like these in the Texas State Comptroller race, and surnames like these, and not come up with a few ironies. This is the cleanest one I could come up with. Anyone else who has an idea can post them in the moderated comments.

Fred Head and Susan Combs are the Democratic and Republican candidates, respectively, for State Comptroller. Usually I am able to insert links to campaign websites, but oddly enough only the monied candidate has a campaign website up. Here is what I could find for Fred Head, a bio posted on Texas Kaos and a transcript of his convention speech on the Austin American-Statesman website. Here is Susan’s site. Here is her “Unofficial Site”.

Fred Head is a veteran Democrat, a former representative in the Texas state house, and one of the bipartisan “dirty thirty” group who, in the ‘70’s worked to pass landmark reform legislation that we all take for granted today (one of which, the now infamous Section 143 that was used by Tina Benkiser to rule Tom DeLay ineligible). Head is still a populist, still a reformer, and is now running on the steamroller that is gaining momentum to retake the state legislature and every other office held by a Republican. At the state convention Fred said:

“On all of the issues, [Republicans] tell the public what they want the public to hear because they think it’s popular and then they go and do what helps the special interests, the influence peddlers, and their big money friends. And that’s why we’ve got to prevail…to change the situation in Austin."

And he also said this:

“Now, I believe it’s unprecedented, ladies and gentlemen, to have a candidate for a state wide office in the state of Texas who has written and sold a trashy romance novel that glorifies premarital sex and arouses sexual desires.”

And then he held up the paperback to show the delegates. It’s called “A Perfect Match”. For those of you who wonder how deeply she penetrates into the sex stuff, you can’t easily pick up a copy because it is out of print and the publishing house has folded. I couldn’t even find a used copy on Amazon.com. But here is a synopsis of some of the more titillating passages that don’t exactly go as far as, say, Jean Auel's did in her Earth’s Children series (I own all 5 of them).

I have a theory on why Susan chose to write the novel. As Fred says, she wrote it when she was in her mid-40’s. That sets off alarm bells in me. It’s an age when women (and men) are beset by mid-life crisis, but also when women, as Professor Kinsey found, are at their sexual peak. Here they are at their peak, and they look at themselves in the mirror and wonder if they are still desirable. So I think this was Susan’s outlet. It could have been worse. She could have run off to live with a bearded 25-year old living on an Oregon commune.

So I can understand why Susan wrote what she wrote. Seriously.

But Reggie Bashur, Combs’ spokesman dismissed Head’s comments as ". . . a non-issue, The comptroller's office is serious, a lot of weighty issues, and it's strange that Mr. Head would pick this as his issue to discuss."

Fred Head says that Susan Combs is a hypocrite because she wrote the sex book, but also supported SB1 way back when. SB1 was “the re-write of the state education code that promote[ed] abstinence. The amendment, by Rep. Warren Chisum (D-Pampa), [said] that any course on human sexuality must devote ‘substantially more attention to abstinence from sexual activity than to any other behavior’ and ‘emphasize that abstinence from sexual activity is the only method that is 100 percent effective in preventing pregnancy [and] sexually transmitted diseases.’)”

Well, yeah, there’s something to that. You can’t be writing a sex book one year, and then later on advocate emphasis on sexual abstinence in sex education books, can you?

But then there's that Sexual Peak/Midlife Crisis thing . . .

And THAT is how Susan Combs’ campaign should handle it. To dismiss Head’s remark as “a non-issue” doesn’t strike me as intellectually honest. Susan should just come out and say it: “Hey, I was 45 and horny. I’d get worked up watching people put gasoline nozzles in their cars’ fill spouts. So I wrote a book about having extra-marital unprotected sex. Either you write a book about it or you go off and do it. So I wrote a book”

And let that be that. God knows she’ll have the middle-age female vote all locked up.

And then they can all step back on solid ground and discuss the issues, of which there are many.

Update 11/05/06

And one other thing. We Democrats here in Fort Bend County have a County Commissioner, Andy Meyers, who is single-handedly putting out trashy 4 X 8 signs that are very inflammatory to minorities, chiefly Hispanics and South Asians. See Mark's blog for photos of them, then go to the Fort Bend Democrats website and support us in our efforts to fight off this neocon racist attempt to intimidate voters with the politics of hate and fear.