Kay Bailey Hutchison Sides With Evil

When you see pictures of Kay Bailey Hutchison, they show a benign presence: a fun-loving, caring woman. Nothing could be further from the truth, which is why I post images of her that more correctly reveal what is going on beneath the surface.

Kay Bailey Hutchison sides with Evil. In all of 2005, Hutchison cast votes, 95.6% of which were in support of Bush policies. We like statistics like that, don’t we? I think they are a little cold, though, as they don’t convey the evil that is behind those 3 significant figures.

Here are the cold hard facts about Kay Bailey Hutchison:

Kay Bailey Hutchison wants our daughters to die on back alley abortionists’ tables. She wants Roe vs. Wade overturned so we can return to the glory days of butchery of the fairer sex. She wants to make double sure that this is going to happen by voting against a bill to provide funding for family planning, contraception, and education programs concerning emergency contraceptives.

Kay Bailey Hutchison wants our poor to starve and live in hovels. She made sure of it by voting against a bill to raise the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 over a two year period. She votes for Fat Cats, and against poor people.

Kay Bailey Hutchison doesn’t give a rat’s behind about the victims of terror attacks. She voted against a bill to provide funds for insurance policies that would provide relief to victims of terrorism.

Kay Bailey Hutchison favors the status quo on campaign contributions. Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff notwithstanding. Kay thinks that if the current corrupt campaign contribution system gets the Right people (pun intended) elected to office, let’s let the old mazooma keep rolling in. When will right-wingers see how bad it looks for them to take money from the Fat Cats?

Kay Bailey Hutchison wants to repeal your 1st Amendment rights to free speech. Burning an American flag (while contributing to the smog problem) is a valid expression of disagreement with policies of the Bush Regime, but Kay wants to make it a crime.

Kay Bailey Hutchison is sick and tired of the whining Hurricane Katrina victims. She voted against a bill to increase financial aid to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. She and Ebeneezer Scrooge would have gotten along famously: “Are there no prisons, are there no workhouses?”

Kay Bailey Hutchison wants Iraq War to continue unabated. She doesn’t care about our soldiers (more on that later), and she doesn’t want to know about what’s going on there, giving Cheney and Rumsfeld free rein to continue the rapes, tortures, and murders of Iraqi citizens.

Kay Bailey Hutchison is an enemy of the education community. She doesn’t think Special Ed students deserve an education. She votes against bills that fund Special Education programs. She also doesn’t think the underprivileged should attend college. She voted against increasing Pell Grants maximum award.

Kaye Bailey Hutchison is an environmental rapist. She consistently votes in favor of opening ANWR, a federally protected area that has a fragile ecosystem, to oil drilling. Halliburton especially would like to see that happen. Cha-Ching for Cheney. She has also voted against a bill that promotes renewable energy sources, and for a bill that would establish yet another nuclear waste dump in Nevada.

Kay Bailey Hutchison is a homophobe. She hates gays. She doesn’t want them to marry. Or is it this, Kay? The insurance industry doesn’t want to have to insure gay spouses. You know they all have AIDS. Gay marriage will destroy the insurance industry. She also doesn’t want to help AIDS victims get medication. What, Kay, it’s God’s will that they got the disease? Kay wants people to attack gays with impunity. She voted against the Hate Crimes bill that would provide assistance in prosecution of hate crimes.

Kay Bailey Hutchison wants to make it easier for bad people to kill other people with guns. She voted against a bill that would require background checks of people buying guns at gun shows. She also wants to protect gun manufacturers from being sued when someone uses their product to kill someone else. So not only aren’t we going to prevent, say insane people, from buying guns, we want to protect Fat Cats when they sell weapons to loonies.

Kay Bailey Hutchison liked Tom DeLay’s Medicare Prescription program, she voted for it. You know, the one that Tom offered political favors and doled out $100,000 on the floor of Congress to get it passed?

Kay Bailey Hutchison hates Mexicans. She voted against the less punitive Senate Immigration bill, and voted for a bill that would make English the official language of the United States. Que lastimas.

Kay Bailey Hutchison wants our mentally and physically wounded veterans to just shut up and suffer. She voted against three bills that would help out our veterans. Two bills would at least keep the level of medical care at the same level as in the past, and one bill to fund mental health programs for veterans who return from Iraq, Afghanistan (and ?) with mental scars. Like George Patton, Kay would just slap the sniveling cowards.

If you’re still with me, congratulations on your staying power.

Vote for Barbara Ann Radnofsky

Kay’s opponent in 2006, for US Senate is long-time lawyer Barbara Ann Radnofsky. You may have seen my war of words with The Umpire on FortBendNow over this fine woman's candidacy. Ump says we shouldn't vote for her because she has no significant previous experience in political office. I had two points to make on this: first the argument is specious. There have been others elected to high office that have not held other offices. Take for example this guy, and this guy , both of whom ran for governor of California, and won (Republicans!). My other point is that a vote for Kay is a vote to approve the actions of the Bush Regime. That Bush has a 35% approval rating and Kay Bailey Hutchison has a 54% approval rating defies all logic and reason. Obviously these people don't know the facts. From her voting record, Kay Bailey Hutchison is not a nice lady. She's on the Bush Bandwagon 95.6 percent of the time.

Let’s Take Back America. Vote for Barbara Ann Radnofsky.

Tom DeLay and the California Connection

What's the latest buzz on the Jack Abramoff/Tom DeLay connection? Anything? Nothing? Now how could that be? In early January the DeLay camp seemed to be encircled by federal prosecutors who were investigating the connection between Abramoff and Tony Rudy, Tom DeLay's 2nd in command. Much could be made of the statement that DeLay filed in regard to his Abramoff-sponsored golfing vacation in Scotland. Stanley M. Brand, who was a general counsel to the House investigating Abramoff's dealings, described DeLay's legal problems as "extreme."

Extreme.

One example of a case to be made was outlined by Brand:

"It is . . . a federal offense to file false statements on official travel records", Brand said. "On the Scotland trip, DeLay listed the purpose of the excursion as 'educational.' Abramoff and Scanlon could say otherwise", Brand said.

But we haven't heard very much about any connection or any investigation of a connection, since Tom formally stepped down from his leadership position the day before the story broke about the Abramoff probe reaching his second in command, also known at the time as "Staffer A".

Oh . . . I get it now.

It never was about the money laundering indictments, was it?

From what I can see, all of the Abramoff issues seem to have gone away. Even the cartoon at the top of this article has dashed lines between Abramoff and DeLay. Does Tom have more than one reason than "God wills it", for saying that if elected he will just quit again?

The California Connection

Ronnie Earle isn't going away, is he? A very curious turn of events occurred last week.

Does anyone remember former congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.) who was recently sent up to a low security federal prison in North Carolina to serve 8 years 4 months for tax evasion, conspiracy to commit bribery, mail fraud and wire fraud? Local Democratic voters in northern San Diego County remember Duke as not being the sharpest tool in the shed. He was fairly easy pickings. Not our Tom. Tom, to paraphrase the famous quote of Muhammad "The Greatest" Ali, floated like a butterfly and stung like a bee. But just as Ali had his Frazier, maybe DeLay has his Wilkes.

Wilkes? Yes, Brent Wilkes.

Brent Wilkes is the founder of ADCS a California software company. In return for bribes to Duke Cunningham totalling 2.4 million dollars, ADCS-owned subsidiary companies were awarded over 100 million dollars in government contracts in the past decade.

So what does this all have to do with our Tom? Read about it here, but I will summarize. Travis county prosecutors have recently subpoened Wilkes along with companies owned by him, and his business associate Max Gelwix in regard to Wilkes' $15,000.00 donation to DeLay's PAC Texans for a Republican Majority PAC, and Gelwix's $10,000.00 donation to DeLay's other PAC Americans for a Republican Majority. Now why would California software contractors care about whether Texas had a Republican Majority? This question is aptly answered by Chris Feldman, a lawyer who recently won a $196,000 judgement against Tom's PAC:

"It is very rare for an out-of-state company to make a donation to a Texas political action committee. I'm not familiar with PerfectWave, but this type of donation shows why we have our law. We don't want powerful politicians shaking down corporations outside the state, especially when the corporations are seeking favors in Washington, D.C., that have nothing to do with Texas."

Is that as far as it goes? Maybe not. The North County Times also reports this:

"Wilkes' company also hired a consulting firm that employed DeLay's wife to lobby for acoustic technology for the Navy".

So here we have a guy who is being questioned in several bribery and corruption cases, and a guy named by Cunningham himself as his personal benefactor in exchange for contract awards, also intertwined with Tom DeLay, through his PACs, and through the consulting firm that employs DeLay's wife.

One hand washes the other.

Jeez, I need a shower.

David Van Os : One Feisty Son-of-a-Gun

I recently attended some hustings on the steps of the Fort Bend County Courthouse in Richmond. It seems David Van Os (that’s pronounced Os as in “most”, not Os as in “cost”), who is running for Texas State Attorney General, was in town on his “whistle stop tour” of every county in Texas. Yes, you read that correctly, every county. Considering the time of day, 3-ish on a work day, attendance was fair – attracting the paper press.

Standing there in the hot sun, looking dapper in his cobalt blue long-sleeved shirt, bolo tie, dark brown vest, and tan cowboy hat, Van Os looked the essence and image of a Texas politician. Height-wise, he falls below the state average, but what he lacks in altitude he makes up in attitude: the man is one feisty son-of-a-gun.

I didn’t really know what to expect, having never attended a political event for this kind of office. What I definitely did not expect is a lesson in civics, but that’s what we all got: he quoted the Texas State Constitution, and told us all to look it up. I did. It floored me. Understand this: Texas has an anti-trust law written right into its constitution. I quote:

Article 1 - Section 26 : “Perpetuities and monopolies are contrary to the genius of a free government, and shall never be allowed, nor shall the law of primogeniture or entailments ever be in force in this State.”

Guess who gets to oversee this anti-trust provision? Another quote from the Constitution:

Article 4 Section 22: "The Attorney General shall…especially inquire into the charter rights of all private corporations, and from time to time, in the name of the State, take such action in the courts as may be proper and necessary to prevent any private corporation from exercising any power or demanding or collecting any species of taxes, tolls, freight or wharfage not authorized by law."

Van Os pointed out the use of the word "shall". "It doesn’t say may or might"; also the word "especially" – it is a priority item. That’s why David Van Os says that he is "coming after" Big Oil. He says that we are paying such high prices for gasoline because the oil and gas industry has essentially become a monopoly because of all of the corporate buyouts of the past few years

Hmmm.

Come to think of it, I was watching Meet the Press a few weeks ago. Tim Russert interviewed the CEOs of ConocoPhillips, Chevron Corp., and the president of Shell Oil. They all sounded as if they were talking from the same cue cards.

I’m not an expert on the oil business, and it looks like those three aren’t either, but there’s something fishy about these record profits. Looks like David Van Os is saying that he wants to do something about that.

How About a Nice Game of Chess?

Jeez I'd love to be a fly on the wall at a Nick Lampson campaign strategy confab. Fascinating stuff going on now that Tom DeLay is in, then out, then back in . . . maybe.

A game of chess is afoot, and the stakes are high.

Chess is a game best played knowing what is going to happen at least 4 moves ahead. I'm better at looking backward than forward, but let me give it a try:

Scenario 1: 5th Court of Appeals comes through for Tina (and Tom) and the seven sad sacks of sycophancy are whittled down to one in a smoke-filled back room (better not be a bar in Austin -because Judge Sparks won't let them light up). Bob Talton, the declared winner, the "choice of the people" a la Gary Gillen, and archetypal "angry white man" madly scrambles for money. In addition to "megaphoning the issues", Lampson campaign plays a "follow the money" game because time is short for Bob - corners are bound to be cut. And after all, laws don't apply to Republicans. More Money Monkey Business. End Game: Nick wins. He's going to beat anyone the Republicans put up anyway. People in CD-22 (even some Republicans) are fed up with their leadership, the sleaze, and the corruption.

Scenario 2: 5th Court of Appeals doesn't play ball. Tom officially withdraws and Nick faces off with Bob Smithers (Libertarian). Nick wins - no one votes for Libertarians unless the candidates call themselves Republicans - then it's OK.

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.

Scenario 4: 5th Court of Appeals doesn't play ball. Tom "The Hammer" DeLay girds his loins to do battle. National attention is riveted on this race. Money pours in to both campaigns from everywhere (except from Abramoff, he's sitting this one out). Seeing his numbers are further south than Tierra del Fuego, Tom challenges Nick to debate the issues. League of Women Voters moderates. DeLay plants thugs with airhorns throughout the audience. Little old ladies with megaphones are leveled with roundhouse punches. The debate eventually happens, but only infront of TV cameras. End Game: Nick wins (see last part of Scenario 1).

Scenario 5: 5th Court of Appeals doesn't play ball. Tom "The Hammer" DeLay girds his loins to do battle. All of the above (in Scenario 4) occurs except there is an inexplicable "malfunction of the electronic voting machines" at several precincts. Nick doesn't win. 5th Court of Appeals rules in Tom's favor (judges rotated, Tom gets a more favorable panel). Tom refuses to take the oath of office, quits again (once a quitter always a quitter). Rick Perry calls a special election (at the cost to Texas voters of 1.67 million dollars). Nick runs, along with Bob Smithers, David Wallace, Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, Tom Campbell and Kristna knows who else - all candidates have their names on the ballot. Republicans split the vote, Lampson wins, but the vote totals of all his opponents combined are less than Nick's (because all voting machine technology is being guarded by federal troops - I know, not something that Dubya would do, but he receives massive pressure from the media, Tony Blair, and newly elected Mexican president, Manuel Lopez Obrador).

Well, that's only 5 scenarios and anyone who knows anything about "Superstring Theory" knows that there are a total of 11 concurrent universes, so there are 6 more out there. I just can't fathom the other 6.

One thing's for certain though, no matter what scenario happens, the checkmate move will always be Nick's to make.

Run Tom, Run

An open letter to Tom DeLay

Run Tom, run. And I'm not talking about the running you did last April when you abandoned your constituents by running off with your million plus dollar war chest. I'm not talking about the running you did when you finally got your story straight with Governor Perry's help, and laid out lucre to get various official documents to prove you were a Virginian (what's a fishing license go for these days in Virginia, anyway?). No, Tom, I want you to RUN (and not necessarily like a rabbit).

Run, Tom. Prove to us that you are still "The Hammer".

Put your website back together. Bob Talton has more on his website than you do. At least you can post an "Under Construction" image, like Bob. Tom, these seven sad sacks who still seem to be trying to replace you don't hold a candle to you and you know it. Pick up the phone, Tom. Pick up the phone and call Tina. Tell her to tell her lawyers to drop the appeal. Appealing to a federal appeals court looks so weak. Tom, you yourself had issues with activivist judges. Don't let them go looking for some judges' robes to hide behind. The Texas Democrats did you a huge favor. You're the man, Tom. You can pull this one off.

And if you don't believe me, just ask around. Ask your personal friend and confidante. You know, God. I know He told you that you should leave congress because He has other plans for you, but even God can change His mind (Jer. 31:31).

Tom, let me help you out with something that seems to be working here in Fort Bend County. Here is an outline for a radio ad you can put out. You can have it gratis. My pleasure:

[Evil sinister music plays, preferably something spine chilling like Carmina Burana (wait for it to load). Announcer in a low hushed voice that sounds like he is talking into a box comes on]. "Nick Lampson is stealing Congressional District 22 from the good people of Texas by going to court. Will he never learn that The People have a right to a REAL choice?" [Patriotic music rising in background, announcer takes his head out of the box] "Tom DeLay is The Hammer. He doesn't run whining to the judges like some sniveling Liberal Democrats do. Tom DeLay is back. Democrats can take their law suit and shove it. Tom DeLay can win! Tom DeLay will win! God wills it!" [Patriotic music is now played fortissimo]. Close out with a sound bite from Tom himself: "I'm Tom DeLay and I approved this ad, paying for it with money that my lawyers would have gotten". Well, OK, you might want to drop that last bit . . .

Run Tom. Don't wimp out on us.

It's Not Just Strange Anymore, It's Surreal

What's that Gary? You hope that Fort Bend County voters are allowed to vote for the candidate of their choice? Did someone leave a can of bug spray open? I can only think that something like that just must have happened. Here is what Gary Gillen, Chairman of the Fort Bend Republican Party said to the Fort Bend Herald when asked to comment on the ruling of Judge Sparks (my new hero), in regard to the "in-ineligibility" of Tom DeLay:

"I think it's a sad day for the voters of the 22nd District. The Republican Party will appeal this to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which will obviously slow the entire process down. I hope voters will prevail and will be able to vote for the candidate of their choice, rather than being denied an opportunity by the courts."

Come again? Too much bug juice or an exercise in "the big lie"?

Now, it has been a few months since we had the primary elections (4 months ago, tomorrow) but I distinctly recall that the voters had 4 candidates to chose from on the Republican primary ballot, and they chose Tom DeLay by a 62% majority - no run off required. Then, in an outrageous move, the Republican State Chairman, Tina Berkiser, sought to remove our Tom from the ballot, a move that not only exceeded her purview but also violated the United States Constitution (Republicans are becoming ever so adept at doing that lately, you know). The Texas Democratic Party sued and won. Tom DeLay is back on the ballot, and Tina B. has been told not to do that again. The democratic process has been preserved, thanks to the (aptly named) Texas Democratic Party.

Oh, no . . . wait. You weren't talking about Tom DeLay when you used the words "candidate of their choice"? You were talking about "the candidate to be named later", the one that the Gang of 4 will meet (or is it would have met) to pick out?

Now I have trouble with that. Explain to me how a Republican candidate picked out by 4 Republican precinct chairs is "a candidate of their choice". Is it because the "their" in "their choice" doesn't refer to "the voters", but to the "Gang of 4"? Maybe . . .but if so I suggest a remedial course in grammar because you aren't properly referencing your pronouns.

So who precisely is the "candidate of their choice"? Tom DeLay? Never fear, TDP took care of that. Or is it "the candidate to be named later"? If it is the latter, I am afraid some synapses misfired, because no voter will have (would have had) a say in who that will be (would have been).

Good thing they outlawed Chlordane (but man, how that stuff could kill bugs).

[Note to reader: I am sorry for all the parentheticals, I am dealing with alternative universes here.]

He's Baaaaaack

As if on cue, out comes Judge Sparks' decision on Texas Democratic Party vs. Tina Benkiser, and what does he find? Not only did Sparks find that Tom DeLay withdrew from the race in CD-22, he ruled that his name stays on the November ballot as the GOP nominee.

Holy bat turds. Republicans are in deep guano.

You can bet that the lawyers representing Tina et al. are, at this writing, on their way down to file their appeal at the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals - the one that they have, in all probability, been working on since Sparks' hearing was adjourned on the 26th of June. That's what I would have done, leaving blanks in the appropriate places to be filled in later after reading the decision.

Nice one. The ink is not yet dry on ballots cast yesterday evening to elect the Fort Bend GOP Decider, Terese Raia. Now what does she decide? Does she decide to enter a vote to replace her former demi-god, Tom DeLay, on the ballot anyway? How's that going to look when the Court of Appeals fails to reverse Judge Sparks' ruling?

Republicans are falling all over themselves announcing to the world that they don't think their candidate of record is electable. They're contributing to the Lampson campaign with such vigor, maybe they might consider coming out block walking for Nick this weekend.

Looks Like a Wayang Kulit

Every time I see a map of Texas CD-22 I say to myself, what does that remind me of? Forms like this are common after district boundaries are gerrymandered. Indeed, the term "Gerrymander" comes from a combination of the last name of a politician who drew district boundaries to the disadvantage of his political opponents, Elbridge Gerry, and the word "Salamander" which is what the outline of the tortuous district boundaries looked like.

I finally figured it out the other day when I decided to take a district boundary outline and rotate it around until it made sense to me. The final result I have posted on the right. It's a Wayang Kulit. Translated from Malay (or more correctly from the country bumpkin dialect of Malay known as Bahasa Indonesia), Wayang Kulit means roughly Leather Theater - leather being the material that they use to create the puppets. Here in the US, the term "Leather Theater" takes on a whole new meaning, doesn't it?

But anyway, that's just my opinion, and like belly buttons, everyone's got one. So what do y'all think? Put the image on your image viewer and rotate it around if you need to. Leave a comment if you have an opinion to share.

Nick's First Television Ad

Well it's finally out. I have the TV set in the other room tuned to CNN most of the day. On comes a 30 second spot with Nick standing outside on a street holding a hand-lettered placard with bulleted talking points. I got up out of my chair and sprinted to see the ad, but immediately spent too much time trying to identify where they were standing. It looked like an older community, and not a squeaky clean newly developed area. So I missed some of the lines in what appears to be a fast-paced and very clever ad. Individuals and small groups of people appear and disappear to Nick's left as they go through the list of issues. Real salt of the earth types. One of them is a "cute-as-a-bug" granny with a megaphone. It's all really upbeat and light, with Nick mugging all over the place - the man's a natural and exudes both humor and integrity.

And what a contrast to David Wallace's negative radio ad. This blog, by the way, has by far the best analysis of that misbegotten ad.

I went to the Lampson campaign website to see it the ad is posted there yet but at this writing it's not there. Hopefully they'll put it up.

Sparks Watch Update: Nothing is out yet, but Juanita has a fine analysis and proposed timetable of when we'll see a decision. GOP precinct chairs are not only going to waste gas money getting to the meetin', but according to Juanita, they are likely to claw each other to bloody masses on their fool's errand.

On a Fool’s Errand

Paraphrasing Judge Sparks’ comment in regard to extending the temporary restraining order enjoining CD-22 GOP precincts from carrying on any activity to name a replacement for ex-Congressman Tom DeLay’s candidacy (because I can’t relocate the URL where I originally read it), the judge allowed that extending the TRO would not be necessary because “they would not be so foolish as to proceed”. Well, welcome to a fool’s paradise.

As described in FortBendNow in exquisite detail, Harris County precinct chairs have already exercised their 41 opinions, but for whatever reason, and I can think of several, the votes were not tallied. Voting in Fort Bend, Brazoria and Galveston counties aren’t slated until the later this week, but one would hope that Judge Sparks will deliver his ruling in time for some of them to save their gas money for another day.

But that won’t help 4 out of the galaxy of personalities who have already expended time and energy to get themselves nominated to a candidacy that may never exist. I googled all of the named candidates and found the candidate websites that I already knew about: those of Campbell, Sekula-Gibbs and Wallace.

Unlike the other two, Campbell’s is a holdover from his days as a candidate in the primary, but also has a statement in regard to a special election that never happened. I really like it. It has an effect of a flag waving in the breeze, and the navigation bar has a nice sound effect. If you put your cursor on one option and click once, it makes a nice dull thud sound come out of your speakers. For the truly bored, go there click once on the bar and then run your cursor left and right really fast, or see if you can get it to play “Louie Louie”. I also like it because it echoes many views of the Lampson Campaign.

On the other hand, the website put up by Shelley Sekula-Gibbs is post April 3rd. It’s a really clean site with simple navigation. She has page showing a huge list of supporters. I hope at least a few of them live in district. But alas, it could be all for naught.

David Wallace’s website, also post April 3rd, is a nightmare. David, most people can’t read type that small. I had to put my nose 5 centimeters from the screen to see what you wanted to say about yourself. It was either that or change my screen resolution to 800 x 600. And you know, as Nick gets his message out, and he is, people are going to look at you askance: “Liberal Democrat Nick Lampson”? He seems kind of moderate. And David, Nick Lampson didn’t file suit against anyone. Where did you read that?

And both you and Shelley need to put “fun stuff” on your site, like Tom Campbell did.

But wait, there’s one more. I happened on an entry at domaintools.com where it looks like Robert Talton has reserved a website on April 26th. All you see at http://www.taltonforcongress.com/ is an “Under Construction” notice. That’s smart. Reserve the name before some other guy named Talton runs for congress, but don’t let it all hang out there in cyberspace, bidding for a position on a ballot that 1) may be already taken or 2) may never exist.

And that’s it. I couldn’t come up with any reference to websites for any of the other guys who are looking to fill the vacancy. It's worth noting that Mike Jackson got the most hits of any of the candidates, bar none. But I think most of them had to do with a discredited singer/pederast, and not the one I was looking for.

Starting tomorrow: Sparks Watch.

Texas CD-22: A Fulfillment of an Ancient Chinese Curse

We are living in interesting times. What a mess in Texas CD-22. To better understand it, I tried to diagram it all out in a concept map but it looks like a bird’s nest now (complete with defecation). I even left out a few of the players.

So let’s try again with a new motif – a timeline. It’s horribly simplistic because you can’t see the synergy and interplay of events, but at least it keeps things in perspective.

2002 – Tom DeLay moves PAC funds into individual Republican Texas legislature campaigns. Slick glossy Republican tracts paper the state. Result: Both of Texas state houses have a Republican majority.

2003 – Led by Tom DeLay, Texas redraws its congressional district boundaries for the 2nd time in a decade. Gerrymandered districts abound. (Democrats file suit - see post script)

November, 2004 – Election Day. Texas’ congressional delegation is now 21 Republicans and 11 Democrats. 4 term incumbent Nick Lampson loses his seat to a Libertarian posing as a Republican who under spent Lampson by $709,683.00 in his campaign. Lampson moves to CD-22.

May 4, 2005 – (Happy Birthday, Sara) Nick Lampson declares his candidacy in CD-22 opposing the architect of his loss at the polls in 2004.

Sept 28, 2005 – Grand Jury hands down indictments saying that Tom DeLay conspired to violate Texas election laws by money laundering, to provide corporate PAC money to fund individual campaigns (see 2002 ) in violation of Texas state election law. Conspiracy indictments are eventually withdrawn.

Sept 29, 2005 – DeLay “temporarily” steps down as Majority Whip

October 19, 2005 – A warrant for Tom DeLay’s arrest is issued. Bail is set at $10k. DeLay flies out on an Abramoff jet for booking, fingerprinting and the famous mug shot.

January 7, 2006 – DeLay permanently steps down from his leadership position in the House at the urging of Charlie Bass and Jeff Flake.

January 8, 2006 – Tony Rudy, a DeLay aide, is investigated for his role in the Abramoff scandals.

“Early January” 2006 – DeLay staffer calls FB GOP chairman Eric Thode and tells him that DeLay was “contemplating the possibilities” with regard to his 2006 congressional race, and the effect that his indictment will have on giving him “less than a solid showing” in the primary.

March 7, 2006 – DeLay wins Republican primary, outpolling his nearest competitor by 2:1. The 62% win, however, cast a pall on the campaign: the “less than a solid showing” became a reality. Nick Lampson also wins in the primary, although he was running unopposed (Democrats agree on something, tide begins to turn).

April 3, 2006 – DeLay tells Chris Matthews that he will not seek re-election. Quoted in Time Magazine, DeLay used these words: "It was obvious to me that the 22nd District deserved more than an election that was turning into a referendum on me rather than what was important to the district”

April 6, 2006 – Nick Lampson holds a press conference on the steps of Sugar Land City Hall, to call for a special election on May 13 to replace Tom Delay (an election that would have Lampson’s name on the ballot). Press conference is interrupted by thugs and hacks from DeLay’s fan club. 69-year old Democratic supporter is assaulted by a 55 year old Republican thug (and Fort Bend County Grand Jury foreman) twice her size.

April 7, 2006 – Governor Rick Perry says that a special election will not be held to replace DeLay, as he has not formally resigned from his office. Governor’s office issues a “White Paper” (also known as a “Y’all Messed This One Up, Tom Paper”) spelling out the difference between withdrawl from a race (candidate’s name is dropped from the ballot) and being declared ineligible to serve (a 4 member committee in CD-22 nominates someone else to oppose Nick Lampson). If no one is selected by the 70th day before election day, the YMTOUT Paper holds, the State GOP Election committee gets to choose someone. Local Republicans begin to study each other suspiciously.

April 7 to April 18, 2006 – Local Republicans throw hats (one of them hot pink) into the ring. In alphabetical order they are: Paul Bettencourt, Robert Eckels, Shelly Sekula-Gibbs, Charlie Howard, Mike Jackson, Robert Talton and David Wallace (and who knows, maybe someone else).

April 19, 2006 – Robert Eckels checks out saying that he could win but wants to “live in the same zip code” as his daughter. A collective sigh of relief is heard amongst his competitors.

April 26, 2006 – GOP Chairman Gillen says he wants to fill 38 vacant precinct chairs who are “willing, active participants for the office, nothing more or less”. It is pointed out by FortBendNow that a “voting bloc" in the Fort Bend part of CD22 could easily be organized, as the precinct chairs will nominate one person to serve on the CD22 Gang of Four who will nominate a congressional candidate.

May 5, 2006 – County Commissioner Andy Meyers finds a hat to throw, and it lands in the ring in the exact same spot that Robert Eckels' was placed, and then retrieved. Andy says that his name is the only one with “district-wide recognition” since Eckels withdrew. Andy who?

May 6, 2006 – Harris County holds a “candidates forum”. Wallace and Campbell miss the boat because they were not properly networking and were unaware of the forum, but after belated protests both are allowed in. Campbell shows, but Wallace begs off, having a “long-standing prior committment”.

May 11, 2006 – Ton DeLay tells Congress he will resign on June 9th, and reveals that he intends to become a legal resident of Virginia rendering him “ineligible to serve in Texas Congressional District 22”. Now has his story straight.

May, 2006 – Eric Thode mails out postcards to 18,000 households known to be Republican (hah, I got one, too), to get voter input on who should be nominated to run in the CD-22 race. (Author’s note: I sent mine in – one of the 5 who voted for Lampson).

May 19, 2006 – CD-22 Precinct Chairs enter a motion “that the results of the survey (mentioned above) the party sent out be shredded.” Apparently the survey did not include all of the candidates, and apparently David Wallace won, beating out the nearest competitor, Charlie Howard, by a greater than 2:1 margin.

May 20, 2006 – GOP releases survey results. Votes for Nick Lampson are equal to those cast for BOTH Tom and Christine DeLay. . . together. Survey is labeled as inconclusive because some of the candidates were not listed in the survey.

May 29, 2006 - Sugar Land celebrates Memorial Day with a keynote speech by quitter Tom Delay. Also present were several GOP CD-22 candidate wanna-bes, notably Shelly Sekula-Gibbs (wait, what's a Houston councilman at large doing at a Sugar Land event?) dressed to kill in a solid hot pink ensemble.

June 8, 2006 – Tina Benkiser determines that Tom DeLay is officially ineligible to run for the CD-22 seat. The detemination came from an official letter from DeLay that contained copies of documents proving that DeLay was a legal resident of the state of Virginia. It is rumored that a copy of his valid Virginia fishing license was among those presented.

June 8, 2006 – Democrats file suit in Travis County to keep Tom DeLay’s name as the Republican nominee on the November ballot. A temporary restraining order is granted by Judge Darlene Byrne preventing GOP officials from taking any measures to replace Tom DeLay on the ballot. If Republicans aren’t a bunch of “angry white men” before, they sure are now.

June 9, 2006 - Tom resigns. Yawn.

June 16, 2006 – Republicans, arguing that the suit filed against Berkiser relies on federal constitutional issues, successfully move the suit to federal district court, that of Republican U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks or as we are wont to call him “Rhymin’ Sam”. The suit actually addresses both Texas Election Code and the U.S. Constitution which reads that a congressman must be at least 25 years of age, a citizen/resident of the US for 7 years, and reside in the state he represents on election day. Oops. Tom, Tom, Tom, didn’t you ever read it?

June 20, 2006 - David Wallace announces that he has a million dollars (well, $200,000 anyway) to fight Liberal Democrat Nick Lampson. His meaning I take it, is that he has gone ahead and done something his competitors haven't thought of doing yet. David seems to be quoting the famous line that the character that Ernie Hudson played in Ghostbusters uttered:"We have the tools and we have the talent".

June 23, 2006 - Oddly, David Wallace launches a radio ad campaign. The ad opens with the announcer's description of a sinister effort on the part of that "Liberal Democrat Nick Lampson" to steal CD-22's congressional seat - accompanying music makes you want to hide under the bed. Next he describes a "new conservative leader" in David Wallace, again with accompanying music that makes you want to hug the first person you see on the street.

June 26, 2006 – In Judge Sparks’ courtroom, Tom DeLay swore under oath that he resided in Virginia (although his wife still lives in Sugar Land) and that he didn’t know where he would be living on Election Day. Sparks asked both DeLay and Tina Benkiser why she had received a draft copy of his official notification days before the official determination. Neither could explain why. Unofficially (before final ruling) Sparks labeled DeLay’s action as a “de facto withdrawal”. Dismissing DeLay from the hearing, Judge Sparks told him he could stay or he could go, but that his recommentation was to "run like a rabbit".


Final ruling is to come in early July. Three possibilities exist:

1. The judge will find for the GOP and they will go ahead and nominate their candidate in what is shaping up to be the biggest example of opaque democracy since the election of Hu Jintao to Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party.
2. The judge will find for the Democrats and Nick Lampson will be running against an indicted money launderer.
3. The judge will split the difference and go with Governor Perry’s “YMTOUT Paper” finding, which would take Tom DeLay’s name off the November ballot with no replacement. Nick will then have to run against another Libertarian.

Which will it be? My money is on number three. But Sparks is absolutely correct. No matter what the decision is, an appeal is most certainly in the offing.

Post Script: a sideline to all of this is the suit filed by the League of United Latin American Citizens against Governor Perry et al. seeking to throw out the 2nd in a decade redistricting of congressional districts in Texas. The Supreme Court ruled partially in favor of Republicans, and partially against, ruling that CD-23 district boundaries violated provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. But now we have a new paradigm that may change the political landscape of the nation. We can redistrict any old time we want to, especially when state houses develop a majority one way or another. Further polarization is the only foreseeable outcome. Maybe we need national standards? Term limits? Dream on.

Rape as a Weapon of War

Well, the news is out. America is a nation of unprincipled infidels who feel so superior to the conquered Iraqi people that their soldiers stalk and rape Iraqi women whenever the "opportunity" arises. Does that sound like an extreme view? It would from the American side of the world, but right now you can bet that the view is widely held in the Middle East. After all, was it not the case in Bosnia where Muslim women were intentionally raped so that they would produce Serbian babies? These things go through peoples' minds, and memories don't fade in these kinds of things. Click on the title above and read the BBC article posted on 22 June if you don't believe me

The rape of an Iraqi woman and subsequent murder of her and her family this past March has been labeled by by an unnamed official as a "crime of opportunity" on the part of 5 soldiers in the 502nd Infantry Regiment. A "crime of opportunity" differs from "crime" in general, it seems, when criminals deliberately stalk their prey and attack when conditions are favorable.

One would hope that this, like the My Lai Massacre in Vietnam, was an isolated occurrence. I am characteristically unhopeful. The fact is, the rape/murder occurred in March, and only came to light on 22 June, reveals tacit complicity among others in the platoon who knew of the incident. No one is saying that the kidnapping, torture and murder of 2 soldiers from the same platoon is connected to the earlier incident - maybe because there is no direct proof of it. I am not a huge fan of coincidence. I think that we are looking at an act of sheer retribution.

In Iraq, America is its own worst enemy. If there was hope on the horizon for bringing the insurgency to an end with physical force and American presence, you can forget about it now. America (and Americans) have no credibility in Iraq now. It's time to redeploy out of country. No good can be accomplished by US forces in Iraq now.

US out of Iraq, now

Joseph Could Have Learned a Thing or Two from GOP Master Debaters

By Joseph I am referring to Joseph Goebbels, Adolf Hitler's master propagandist. Now why do you think I would go to the extreme of comparing some Republican commentators to a sworn NAZI? Too many parallels, for one.

Have you ever heard this mantra: "Tax and Spend Democrat". Or how about this one "Liberal Democrat". It has become almost a reflex for Republican commentators to tack on those descriptive words to the word "Democrat". If you have no problem with this, then my point is proven as you are a victim of what was once called "the big lie". Originally described by his mentor Adolf, Goebbels honed the technique to a fine edge that is best described in an OSS report on Hitler's psychological profile:

". . .never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it".

Does any of this strike a familiar chord?

One thing is certain, there is active application of the above credo nationwide this year, and closer to home, in my congressional district. In Texas Congressional District 22, Democrats nominated a moderate Democrat, Nick Lampson, to oppose conservative extremist Tom DeLay (oops, did I just do it too? Nah, if the shoe fits . . .). Whenever Republican commentators describe Nick's politics, they inevitably reach in and pull out "Liberal Democrat". Anyone who has heard Nick speak knows that is an outrageous lie. Nick knows that working with the opposition through negotiation is best done in the center, not by shouting and pointing from the extremes of the party. Another outrageous lie is that Nick is a "Tax and Spend Democrat". Here, Nick has 8 years of congressional experience where he is on the record as a fiscal conservative. Recently he has even decried the pay raise that "Borrow and Spend Republicans" have given themselves (and their peers across the aisle).

And no, by comparing Republicans to a NAZI, I am not saying that they are all a bunch of murderous, nationalistic expansionists - well not all of them anyway (it's a joke, dummy). But NAZIs were very effective, in their time, at bringing a lot of people to come around to an extremist view of the world. And there are some familiar chords in all of that, too, don't you think?

Why not Half Full?

Because it was already taken. Apparently there are lots of optimists out there. So pessimists don't blog?

Anyway, why am I doing this? Maybe it is so I can cybervent.

So here goes:

I want to go on record that I am anti-war and have been since I was of draft age. Yes, a pessimist pacifist. It's a special new kind of pacifism though. Being Anti-War in the "old days" meant that you objected to taking of human life for whatever reason. Now, I think it means being against a War of Choice. I want to see a paradigm shift take place in the United States. We should be a nation that goes to war when we have no choice, when all alternatives have been exhausted. Only then should we put our soldiers in harm's way.

I really think that it speaks volumes to the world that US public opinion on the war in Iraq has shifted radically since just early this year. What drives a shift like that? Realization that Americans have been misled? Casualties? Government misconduct and mismanagement? Probably all of that and more. Amazing isn't it? It took a decade for Americans to start to come around and realize that the Vietnam War was illegal and immoral (and unwinnable besides). In my pessimistic fashion, I credited the turn of the tide back then to the fact that there was a draft and people were more concerned about self preservation (or that of their sons), than the fact that the Vietnam War was a War of Choice that was forced on people who were unschooled in the issues. In my pessimistic fashion, I thought that it would take a reactivation of the draft to get people in this country off the dime. Not so, not so.

So in a quite uncharacteristic optimistic fashion, I now have some hope that we can bring this foul and immoral war to a swift conclusion.

We have opened a Pandora's Box over there, and unleashed some demons who were held at bay by Saddam's repressive regime. These demons were there before America invaded, and will be there for the forseeable future. But we added to the pile - America created another demon. Anyone who has spent any time in a Muslim culture knows this is true: our mere presence in that country is the catalyst that stirs up the demons. You need to look at it from their point of view: Americans are infidels, you see? Iraqis are a proud and (sometimes) religious people who have been disgraced and defiled by the continued presence of an infidel invader.

US out of Iraq, now.