It's crude and it is also premature, but then people say, so are my jokes. Here is how I have crunched the numbers on the Texas primary delegates and the caucus delegates. Subject to change if the winds shift (as we all know they are bound to do around here).
Primary Delegates for Obama: 61
Primary Delegates for Clinton: 65
Caucus Delegates for Obama: 37
Caucus Delegates for Clinton: 30
Total Texas Delegates for Obama: 98
Total Texas Delegates for Clinton: 95
As of now, Obama has a 3 delegate majority on the Texas delegation.
As I said, these are premature results based on a state-wide 46.67% precincts reporting.
UPDATES:
3/06 - With 48.27% of the caucus votes tallied, it looks like Clinton lost another delegate. It's now Obama with 38 of the caucus delegates, and Clinton with 29.
I actually thought it would go the other way . . . really. But we still have a long way to go and those desert tortoises that the TDP has working on this are going as fast as they can.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Rick Noriega is the Democratic Nominee for US Senate
Finishing with a bare majority in a 4-way race, Rick Noriega is now the Democratic nominee to take on junior senator John Cornyn of Texas in November. This means that there is a lot of work to do between now and November. It also means that Team Noriega did a more than excellent job of getting over a million statewide votes for a guy who is locally known in the Houston area. They are getting his name out in a big way.
Compare this to the 2006 primary when Clean Gene Kelly, danced with Barbara Ann Radnofsky into a runoff race that year. That was a typical low-turnout primary, and Kelly won a place in the runoff just by signing his famous name on the election filing form. That fame, however, did not belong to him, but to a corpse.
The Noriega campaign had some concern that the huge turnout would bring many voters to the booth who did not know Rick, or any of the other candidates for that matter. That concern was not unfounded, and Gene Kelly did poll the second highest numbers statewide, at 26.89%. Coming in third was Ray McMurrey, the Corpus Christi private school teacher.
That must be pretty humiliating coming in third place after a corpse.
But, hey, who knows? Maybe McMurrey will take a lesson from this experience and set his sights a little lower next time. Who knows, maybe some day McMurrey will run a strong race in a house district or something.
And I am bound to remember his name when that some day happens.
All the newspapers are saying that Rick faces an uphill battle in his run up against Republican John Cornyn. That Cornyn’s campaign has lots of money, you can count on. At last count he had some $7 million to spend to retain his seat. All I can say is that he better start getting that
checkbook out. Once it gets out statewide and nationally that Texas has a strong candidate with an unbeatable Story to run against George Bush’s rubber stamp, to run against a senator who voted against our troops and veterans in several key funding bills that were set before the Senate, it is going to be like Christmas in July.
And I am ready for that snowball fight.
Why not help to start the old snowball rolling? I have a Rick Noriega donation icon in my lefthand sidebar, click on it and drop off an early Christmas present for John Cornyn. Or click on the snowball.
Or just click here.
Compare this to the 2006 primary when Clean Gene Kelly, danced with Barbara Ann Radnofsky into a runoff race that year. That was a typical low-turnout primary, and Kelly won a place in the runoff just by signing his famous name on the election filing form. That fame, however, did not belong to him, but to a corpse.
The Noriega campaign had some concern that the huge turnout would bring many voters to the booth who did not know Rick, or any of the other candidates for that matter. That concern was not unfounded, and Gene Kelly did poll the second highest numbers statewide, at 26.89%. Coming in third was Ray McMurrey, the Corpus Christi private school teacher.
That must be pretty humiliating coming in third place after a corpse.
But, hey, who knows? Maybe McMurrey will take a lesson from this experience and set his sights a little lower next time. Who knows, maybe some day McMurrey will run a strong race in a house district or something.
And I am bound to remember his name when that some day happens.
All the newspapers are saying that Rick faces an uphill battle in his run up against Republican John Cornyn. That Cornyn’s campaign has lots of money, you can count on. At last count he had some $7 million to spend to retain his seat. All I can say is that he better start getting that
checkbook out. Once it gets out statewide and nationally that Texas has a strong candidate with an unbeatable Story to run against George Bush’s rubber stamp, to run against a senator who voted against our troops and veterans in several key funding bills that were set before the Senate, it is going to be like Christmas in July.And I am ready for that snowball fight.
Why not help to start the old snowball rolling? I have a Rick Noriega donation icon in my lefthand sidebar, click on it and drop off an early Christmas present for John Cornyn. Or click on the snowball.
Or just click here.
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
My Night at the Caucus-Race
Well we here in southeast Texas got wet yesterday, but the storm roared through here to leave us all standing around looking at each other, dripping wet. Why not, we Texans agreed, have a caucus-race? After all, “the best thing to get us dry would be a Caucus-race”.
[For the literate readers out there, yes, you are right, that is a quote from Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland – Chapter 3]
So we did. I met a roomful of my fellow Democrats at my local elementary school’s gymnasium. I had no idea they had gymnasiums in elementary schools. The Republican convention was to meet in the school’s cafeteria. I was expecting to see 12 of us there – the 12 activists that keep showing up on the Texas VAN’s data dump for my precinct.
132 showed up instead. I figured no one would believe me so I took a photograph.
[For the literate readers out there, yes, you are right, that is a quote from Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland – Chapter 3]
So we did. I met a roomful of my fellow Democrats at my local elementary school’s gymnasium. I had no idea they had gymnasiums in elementary schools. The Republican convention was to meet in the school’s cafeteria. I was expecting to see 12 of us there – the 12 activists that keep showing up on the Texas VAN’s data dump for my precinct.
132 showed up instead. I figured no one would believe me so I took a photograph.
After sitting in chairs talking all of this over: surprise at the numbers to show up, amazement at the numbers of younger people taking an interest, the call went out for all to line up and register their presidential choice. The lines inched forward, and everyone was in a very good mood. One gentleman showed his registration card, saw that he was in the wrong place, and resigned himself to not voting, but was urged by those of us around him to find out where his convention was and go. He finally did.
Presenting my stamped registration card, I signed in and registered my vote, again, for Barack Obama. There were provisions for those who hadn’t gotten their cards stamped – they had to find their names on the rosters of those who had voted in the precinct.
We all got to vote.
I stood around afterward talking to a precinct worker. She had been there all day. She mentioned that the Democrats formed long lines in the morning, and Republicans at lunchtime ("...because they have longer lunch hours," she whispered). By evening, she said, several Republicans had heard about Rush Limbaugh’s exhortation for Texas Republicans to go vote for Hillary in order to “mess ‘em up” and showed up at the polls, giving each other high fives.
I told you they were crazy here in Fort Bend.
We all sat back down and elected a convention chair and secretary. Now I know that this is the critical time in the convention that has been discussed in the news and on the blogs, where conventions were going to be “taken over” by one camp or another. I am here to tell you that this didn’t happen in my precinct.
I feel confident of this because we had, at my precinct, two women with Obama T-shirts, the official ones, not the knock-offs, and buttons. They sat right down at the counting table with the chair and the secretary and made sure the count was fair.
I wonder if this is what they mean by Obama’s campaign being better at caucuses than Clinton’s?
The official count came down:
For Hillary Clinton: 61 votes
For Barack Obama: 71 votes
My precinct was allotted 16 delegates to the senate convention, meaning that Barack got 9 and Hillary got 7. They explained that it broke fractionally toward Obama the way the math and rounding went.
Then the room split into caucuses. I counted 12 go to the Obama caucus and decided it was time to go home. A senate caucus, while possibly historic this time around, isn’t really something I want to do.
So I left.
Making my way back to the car, I noticed that the Republican convention was going full swing in the school’s cafeteria: four old white men sitting at a cafeteria table doing God knows what.
Then I got home to find that McCain is the official nominee of the Dark Side.
Talk about an anti-climax.
Presenting my stamped registration card, I signed in and registered my vote, again, for Barack Obama. There were provisions for those who hadn’t gotten their cards stamped – they had to find their names on the rosters of those who had voted in the precinct.
We all got to vote.
I stood around afterward talking to a precinct worker. She had been there all day. She mentioned that the Democrats formed long lines in the morning, and Republicans at lunchtime ("...because they have longer lunch hours," she whispered). By evening, she said, several Republicans had heard about Rush Limbaugh’s exhortation for Texas Republicans to go vote for Hillary in order to “mess ‘em up” and showed up at the polls, giving each other high fives.
I told you they were crazy here in Fort Bend.
We all sat back down and elected a convention chair and secretary. Now I know that this is the critical time in the convention that has been discussed in the news and on the blogs, where conventions were going to be “taken over” by one camp or another. I am here to tell you that this didn’t happen in my precinct.
I feel confident of this because we had, at my precinct, two women with Obama T-shirts, the official ones, not the knock-offs, and buttons. They sat right down at the counting table with the chair and the secretary and made sure the count was fair.
I wonder if this is what they mean by Obama’s campaign being better at caucuses than Clinton’s?
The official count came down:
For Hillary Clinton: 61 votes
For Barack Obama: 71 votes
My precinct was allotted 16 delegates to the senate convention, meaning that Barack got 9 and Hillary got 7. They explained that it broke fractionally toward Obama the way the math and rounding went.
Then the room split into caucuses. I counted 12 go to the Obama caucus and decided it was time to go home. A senate caucus, while possibly historic this time around, isn’t really something I want to do.
So I left.
Making my way back to the car, I noticed that the Republican convention was going full swing in the school’s cafeteria: four old white men sitting at a cafeteria table doing God knows what.
Then I got home to find that McCain is the official nominee of the Dark Side.
Talk about an anti-climax.
Monday, March 03, 2008
Why I Did Not Vote For Hillary Clinton
I have to say, this primary season in Texas has been unlike no other in my memory. I have never seen such vitriol spewed about one candidate or the other – from people in their own party – than I have this time. It makes me a little uneasy that after having spent weeks working themselves into such a fever, whether some partisans will be able to find closure and regroup for our all out united assault on the White House this fall.
For this and a couple of other reasons, I have stayed away from making any criticism of Hillary Clinton as a candidate or as a possible president. I think it is counter-productive and doesn’t serve the party. Best, I told myself, to celebrate the positive features of Barack Obama than being negative over Hillary Clinton, who is someone I do respect. But here on election eve, maybe it is time for me to come clean and say what is bothering me: what it is about Hillary Clinton’s campaign that prevented me from supporting her.
First, I think I mentioned this before when I switched my allegiance from John Edwards, who bowed out of the race before Super Tuesday, to Barack Obama. The one constant that I found in either Edwards or Obama was their steadfast refusal to accept campaign contributions from lobbyists and PACs. I found their positions laudable and a promise that maybe an Edwards or an Obama presidency would be one where the people weren’t left out of the equation. Where lobbyists and corporations don’t have the first and last word on what is to be.
I didn’t see that in Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. In fact, Clinton made no bones about the fact that she would not refuse corporate PAC money or contributions from lobbyists. In fact, these contributions made up the core of her monetary support. In my mind I cannot erase the one movie scene that I saw last year when I drove into Houston to see one of the few screenings of Michael Moore’s film, “Sicko”. The scene where Moore superimposed the dollar figures given by the Health Insurance lobbies to influential DC legislators on their moving images. This included the figures given to well-known and now discredited legislators like Tom DeLay and Rick Santorum. Only one of the dollar amounts given to these individuals, overshadowed that given to Hillary Clinton by the health care industry organizations. The self same organizations that she fought a fierce battle against during her campaign to bring health insurance to all Americans during her husband’s presidency. Only Senator Rick Santorum received more than Clinton.
Well, you tell yourself that politics make strange bedfellows, and who is your enemy one day is your friend the next. I couldn’t live like that, but on the other hand, I am not running for president.
So is it an integrity issue or just an issue of political convenience? You tell me.
Now here is the other issue that I have with the Clinton campaign. It has been nagging at me for several months now and I just couldn’t put a finger on it. Then all of a sudden I had to ask myself: if Hillary Rodham Clinton is 61, and she says that she is, and she has claimed that the main thing that she brings to the race is her 35 years of experience, indeed comparing her experience with Barack Obama’s, and finding his lacking, I had to start doing some math. The math says that Hillary Clinton embarked on her career of public service right after getting out of law school. Indeed it was during her post-graduate studies that Hillary Rodham worked for the Children’s Defense Fund, a public service that is listed in her vitae. That and a stint on the staff of the House Judiciary committee in the early 70’s was the sum total of her post law school service. The next 5 years she spent in various capacities doing legal aid work. After that it becomes hazy where she was a mother, where she worked for law firms (private practice, not public service) where she was a wife, a first lady of Arkansas, then of the United States, and finally, when she landed her job as a US Senator from New York.
My point is, and I am not the only one to point this out, I don’t think that the Clinton campaign is being completely forthright with this “35 years of experience” stuff. Yes, it has been 35 years since she has been out of school, but that is the extent of it – 35 years-wise.
Truthfully, I have a problem with this exaggeration. I know that the other campaigns have been giving her a pass on this issue for some reason, but when you start hearing the same old saw, over and over, and no one steps up to challenge its veracity, you start to wonder.
That, in the end is why I don’t give Hillary Clinton a pass on the “35 years of experience” thing. The Obama campaign has, and so have all of the other campaigns that have since gone by the wayside. It is an excellent strategy to present oneself against a much younger competitor, but it just doesn’t translate into the fall.
So why didn’t I vote for Hillary Clinton?
In the fall, Democrats will win the White House, I am sure of it. I didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton because I want my president to focus on the people, not the corporations. In this, actions speak louder than words. And I want my president to be forthright with the people and set tendencies to exaggerate aside.
That’s why.
For this and a couple of other reasons, I have stayed away from making any criticism of Hillary Clinton as a candidate or as a possible president. I think it is counter-productive and doesn’t serve the party. Best, I told myself, to celebrate the positive features of Barack Obama than being negative over Hillary Clinton, who is someone I do respect. But here on election eve, maybe it is time for me to come clean and say what is bothering me: what it is about Hillary Clinton’s campaign that prevented me from supporting her.
First, I think I mentioned this before when I switched my allegiance from John Edwards, who bowed out of the race before Super Tuesday, to Barack Obama. The one constant that I found in either Edwards or Obama was their steadfast refusal to accept campaign contributions from lobbyists and PACs. I found their positions laudable and a promise that maybe an Edwards or an Obama presidency would be one where the people weren’t left out of the equation. Where lobbyists and corporations don’t have the first and last word on what is to be.
I didn’t see that in Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. In fact, Clinton made no bones about the fact that she would not refuse corporate PAC money or contributions from lobbyists. In fact, these contributions made up the core of her monetary support. In my mind I cannot erase the one movie scene that I saw last year when I drove into Houston to see one of the few screenings of Michael Moore’s film, “Sicko”. The scene where Moore superimposed the dollar figures given by the Health Insurance lobbies to influential DC legislators on their moving images. This included the figures given to well-known and now discredited legislators like Tom DeLay and Rick Santorum. Only one of the dollar amounts given to these individuals, overshadowed that given to Hillary Clinton by the health care industry organizations. The self same organizations that she fought a fierce battle against during her campaign to bring health insurance to all Americans during her husband’s presidency. Only Senator Rick Santorum received more than Clinton.
Well, you tell yourself that politics make strange bedfellows, and who is your enemy one day is your friend the next. I couldn’t live like that, but on the other hand, I am not running for president.
So is it an integrity issue or just an issue of political convenience? You tell me.
Now here is the other issue that I have with the Clinton campaign. It has been nagging at me for several months now and I just couldn’t put a finger on it. Then all of a sudden I had to ask myself: if Hillary Rodham Clinton is 61, and she says that she is, and she has claimed that the main thing that she brings to the race is her 35 years of experience, indeed comparing her experience with Barack Obama’s, and finding his lacking, I had to start doing some math. The math says that Hillary Clinton embarked on her career of public service right after getting out of law school. Indeed it was during her post-graduate studies that Hillary Rodham worked for the Children’s Defense Fund, a public service that is listed in her vitae. That and a stint on the staff of the House Judiciary committee in the early 70’s was the sum total of her post law school service. The next 5 years she spent in various capacities doing legal aid work. After that it becomes hazy where she was a mother, where she worked for law firms (private practice, not public service) where she was a wife, a first lady of Arkansas, then of the United States, and finally, when she landed her job as a US Senator from New York.
My point is, and I am not the only one to point this out, I don’t think that the Clinton campaign is being completely forthright with this “35 years of experience” stuff. Yes, it has been 35 years since she has been out of school, but that is the extent of it – 35 years-wise.
Truthfully, I have a problem with this exaggeration. I know that the other campaigns have been giving her a pass on this issue for some reason, but when you start hearing the same old saw, over and over, and no one steps up to challenge its veracity, you start to wonder.
That, in the end is why I don’t give Hillary Clinton a pass on the “35 years of experience” thing. The Obama campaign has, and so have all of the other campaigns that have since gone by the wayside. It is an excellent strategy to present oneself against a much younger competitor, but it just doesn’t translate into the fall.
So why didn’t I vote for Hillary Clinton?
In the fall, Democrats will win the White House, I am sure of it. I didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton because I want my president to focus on the people, not the corporations. In this, actions speak louder than words. And I want my president to be forthright with the people and set tendencies to exaggerate aside.
That’s why.
Sunday, March 02, 2008
Fred McMurrey To Get An Obama Bounce?
I keep forgetting. Ray, His name is Ray. Ray is one of the three other guys who is running for the Democratic nomination for one of Texas’ two US Senate seats. I’ve been having a little fun with all their names because . . . it’s fun. Even my guy, Rick Noriega, has not escaped my “Name Game”.
It’s all been about Gene Kelly, though.
Recently a Noriega campaign spokesperson announced that they were fully expecting a runoff election in this race. From the Austin American Statesman:
It’s all been about Gene Kelly, though.
Recently a Noriega campaign spokesperson announced that they were fully expecting a runoff election in this race. From the Austin American Statesman:
“We fully expect to be in a runoff just because of the huge surge in voters,” Lake said. “The number of new voters coming out who have never voted in primaries before, don't know us, and the number of candidates running” are all factors feeding a runoff, she said.
I can see that. Rick has had only a precious few months to introduce himself to Texas’ Democratic voters, and with so many going to the polls in this primary, impelled mainly by the presidential primary, there are going to be a few uninformed people who, rather than leave a vote blank, look for a likely name to put a check against.
Gene Kelly has played that game before when, by virtue of the fact that his name is identical to that world-famous (and now dead) singer/hoofer/actor, you know . . . Gene Kelly, caused a Democratic runoff in the US Senate race in 2006.
But this year Gene has some competition.
That competition will be from Fred McMurrey . . . er . . .Ray. It won’t be huge – only limited to one county precinct in Fort Bend County, but sure as not, some people who go to the polls to vote for Barack Obama may also cast their votes for McMurrey.
I cite this anecdote, as told to me tonight by my friend Charles.
It seems that he and several others were talking to voters as they were leaving the polls. One of them was running as a Republican for Precinct 1 Constable. His name is James Murray. Mr. Murray was speaking with a couple that had just left, and asked them if they voted for him. “Yes,” they exclaimed, “We did, right there after we voted for Obama.” “No,” Murray explained. “You couldn’t have voted for me, I’m on the other ballot.” But the couple swore up and down that they had voted for Murray, and left.
Leaving the rest of them scratching their heads.
So when Ray and his campaign manager are checking their numbers on Wednesday, and see a little blip in their numbers from Fort Bend County precincts with numbers beginning with “1”, that’s why.
Ray got an Obama Bounce.
Gene Kelly has played that game before when, by virtue of the fact that his name is identical to that world-famous (and now dead) singer/hoofer/actor, you know . . . Gene Kelly, caused a Democratic runoff in the US Senate race in 2006.
But this year Gene has some competition.
That competition will be from Fred McMurrey . . . er . . .Ray. It won’t be huge – only limited to one county precinct in Fort Bend County, but sure as not, some people who go to the polls to vote for Barack Obama may also cast their votes for McMurrey.
I cite this anecdote, as told to me tonight by my friend Charles.
It seems that he and several others were talking to voters as they were leaving the polls. One of them was running as a Republican for Precinct 1 Constable. His name is James Murray. Mr. Murray was speaking with a couple that had just left, and asked them if they voted for him. “Yes,” they exclaimed, “We did, right there after we voted for Obama.” “No,” Murray explained. “You couldn’t have voted for me, I’m on the other ballot.” But the couple swore up and down that they had voted for Murray, and left.
Leaving the rest of them scratching their heads.
So when Ray and his campaign manager are checking their numbers on Wednesday, and see a little blip in their numbers from Fort Bend County precincts with numbers beginning with “1”, that’s why.
Ray got an Obama Bounce.
Saturday, March 01, 2008
John Cornyn Robo-Calling For McCain
Guess who just called me? Texas Senator John Cornyn. My first thought was that he was calling about his own re-election campaign, but that thought flew out the door very quickly as he announced his true intention: to ask me to vote for his best friend forever, John McCain.John McCain? Cornyn? Is this the same John McCain who uttered the most offensive curse word in the English language in the general direction of Cornyn last year? Last May when Cornyn jumped off the Bush/McCain immigration bandwagon?
Starts with F, rhymes with “Huck” (abee) and is usually (and was, in this case) followed by a “You” for good measure.
Well, it follows, I guess, when the race has dwindled to two contenders, the winner and Mike Huckabee, that Cornyn would have to endorse someone. And why not endorse his BFF John McCain, if only because Mitt Romney announced his pull-out from the race a mere two hours before.
Well, I guess Cornyn has gotten over that word. That and being called, in the same exchange, the fecal production of a chicken.
You really do have to hand it to John Cornyn. He really knows how to choose his friends.
Texas Early Voting Ends With A Democratic Turnout Rout
I’ve been keeping a tally on my original piece that I posted on the day I showed up for Early Voting here in Fort bend County, on the second day.
I have two important tips on early voting: 1) Never show up to early vote on the first day. They are just starting up and getting the cobwebs swept off the voting machines, and they need a day to get into the rhythm. 2) Never show up to early vote on the last day. Yes, they have a smoothly oiled machine in place now, but now you have to contend with lines that, while looking reasonable compared to Election Day lines, are still pretty long.
Here are the Fort Bend County early voting stats that I kept adding to for the past 11 days:
Democrats on Tuesday 2/19: 1710
I have two important tips on early voting: 1) Never show up to early vote on the first day. They are just starting up and getting the cobwebs swept off the voting machines, and they need a day to get into the rhythm. 2) Never show up to early vote on the last day. Yes, they have a smoothly oiled machine in place now, but now you have to contend with lines that, while looking reasonable compared to Election Day lines, are still pretty long.
Here are the Fort Bend County early voting stats that I kept adding to for the past 11 days:
Democrats on Tuesday 2/19: 1710
Democrats on Wednesday 2/20: 1515
Democrats on Thursday 2/21: 1827
Democrats on Friday 2/22: 2511
Democrats on Saturday 2/23: 4139
Democrats on Sunday 2/24: 1644
Democrats on Monday 2/25: 2786
Democrats on Tuesday 2/26: 3067
Democrats on Wednesday 2/27: 3319
Democrats on Thursday 2/28: 4421
Democrats on Friday 2/29: 7448
Total Democrats voting in 2008 primary: 34,387
% total Democratic turnout increase over 2004 presidential primary 1634%
Democrat to Republican ratio: 2.40: 1
Did you see that second-to-last statistic? More than 16 times as many people came out to early voting in the Democratic primary than came out for the early voting in the last presidential primary in 2004.
But wait, there’s more. The 2004 Democratic primary drew a total of 10,689 voters to the polls that year. This is exceeded by the 2008 Early Vote alone, by over 300% (321.7% to be exact).
These voting trends are simply following what has become a statewide phenomenon. Not only are record numbers of “November voters” showing up to vote in the primary, but they outnumber Republican voters by anywhere between 2 to 1 and 4 to 1. Even in heavily Republican counties.
Both the Clinton and Obama Democratic campaigns are taking credit for the huge numbers of early voters. Rally goers were being told by both candidates to go and vote early to avoid long lines.
Well, OK, some of that has to be crossover voting. Some of it is from Independents and Republicans who are simply fed up with their party or uninspired by the candidates running for office. Then there are people like the Republicans for Obama organization who see Obama as the clear choice between Democrat and Republican candidates. And then some of it is most definitely Anti-Hillary Clinton crossover voting. The logic for this given to me is that they don’t want to have a McCain/Clinton election in November, where there is a risk of another Clinton presidency. These are Republicans who have resigned themselves to a Democratic victory in the fall, and simply don’t want that Democrat to be Clinton.
But I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, only if this election is a real squeaker will these latter crossover votes really count for anything. In New York, which has a closed primary, 1,891,000 Democratic voters registered their votes in 2008 as opposed to 720,000 in the 2004 presidential primary. So in that closed primary, where only registered Democrats vote, 2008 voter turnout was 260% of what it was in 2004. Delaware had a 285% voter turnout jump between their 2004 and 2008 primaries. Both of these states are “Super Tuesday” states where the stakes were high, certainly, but not as high as they are now here in Texas.
So the question is, will we be able to maintain this 1600% jump in Democratic primary voters on March 4th? I actually doubt it. Mainly because if you do the numbers, that is a total that exceeds the registered voters in Fort Bend County.
I know, that is not unheard of here in wild and wooly Texas, where hundreds of registered voters still vote in Alpine County, despite the fact that they are dead.
Hey you know? It just hit me why we have precinct conventions here in Texas (unless Hillary Clinton’s campaign succeeds in putting a stop to them in court). Dead people have a little trouble making it to precinct conventions, let alone signing their names.
Democrats on Thursday 2/21: 1827
Democrats on Friday 2/22: 2511
Democrats on Saturday 2/23: 4139
Democrats on Sunday 2/24: 1644
Democrats on Monday 2/25: 2786
Democrats on Tuesday 2/26: 3067
Democrats on Wednesday 2/27: 3319
Democrats on Thursday 2/28: 4421
Democrats on Friday 2/29: 7448
Total Democrats voting in 2008 primary: 34,387
% total Democratic turnout increase over 2004 presidential primary 1634%
Democrat to Republican ratio: 2.40: 1
Did you see that second-to-last statistic? More than 16 times as many people came out to early voting in the Democratic primary than came out for the early voting in the last presidential primary in 2004.
But wait, there’s more. The 2004 Democratic primary drew a total of 10,689 voters to the polls that year. This is exceeded by the 2008 Early Vote alone, by over 300% (321.7% to be exact).
These voting trends are simply following what has become a statewide phenomenon. Not only are record numbers of “November voters” showing up to vote in the primary, but they outnumber Republican voters by anywhere between 2 to 1 and 4 to 1. Even in heavily Republican counties.
Both the Clinton and Obama Democratic campaigns are taking credit for the huge numbers of early voters. Rally goers were being told by both candidates to go and vote early to avoid long lines.
Well, OK, some of that has to be crossover voting. Some of it is from Independents and Republicans who are simply fed up with their party or uninspired by the candidates running for office. Then there are people like the Republicans for Obama organization who see Obama as the clear choice between Democrat and Republican candidates. And then some of it is most definitely Anti-Hillary Clinton crossover voting. The logic for this given to me is that they don’t want to have a McCain/Clinton election in November, where there is a risk of another Clinton presidency. These are Republicans who have resigned themselves to a Democratic victory in the fall, and simply don’t want that Democrat to be Clinton.
But I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, only if this election is a real squeaker will these latter crossover votes really count for anything. In New York, which has a closed primary, 1,891,000 Democratic voters registered their votes in 2008 as opposed to 720,000 in the 2004 presidential primary. So in that closed primary, where only registered Democrats vote, 2008 voter turnout was 260% of what it was in 2004. Delaware had a 285% voter turnout jump between their 2004 and 2008 primaries. Both of these states are “Super Tuesday” states where the stakes were high, certainly, but not as high as they are now here in Texas.
So the question is, will we be able to maintain this 1600% jump in Democratic primary voters on March 4th? I actually doubt it. Mainly because if you do the numbers, that is a total that exceeds the registered voters in Fort Bend County.
I know, that is not unheard of here in wild and wooly Texas, where hundreds of registered voters still vote in Alpine County, despite the fact that they are dead.
Hey you know? It just hit me why we have precinct conventions here in Texas (unless Hillary Clinton’s campaign succeeds in putting a stop to them in court). Dead people have a little trouble making it to precinct conventions, let alone signing their names.
Friday, February 29, 2008
How Craddick Was My Olivo?
Just as in the novel How Green Was My Valley, where the main protagonist, Huw (Hugh) Morgan is the smarter brother who wants to rise above his condition, Ron Reynolds is the smarter candidate who wants to rise above Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick’s machine politics.
Early on, after Ron Reynolds made his announcement that he was going to run for his party’s nomination for State Representative for Texas House District 27, before his opponent, Dora Olivo, indicated her desire to run for another term, Reynolds received a telephone call from Texas House leadership probing the possibilities of his support for a 4th Tom Craddick Speaker’s term for the 81st Legislature.
At that time, Reynolds stated categorically to his caller that he was opposed to the dictatorial tactics of Tom Craddick and would oppose his candidacy for Speaker.
Tom Craddick dearly wants to be speaker of the Texas House for another term. He cherishes the power, the prestige and the perquisites that go with the job. Not to mention the fact that he can order money thrown at or withdrawn from anyone he wants.
And because of this, and the fact that Craddick is running out of friends in his own party, and may lose some allies next week from primary challenges within the party that opposes him, Tom Craddick is looking for some new friends.
Some new Craddick D’s.
And where better to look for new friends and allies than in a primary where a progressive Democrat has mounted strong opposition against a moderate Democratic incumbent? A Democratic incumbent whose campaign contributions have lagged behind her upstart opponent’s war chest?
We have been talking about these campaign contributions for awhile. In this piece, I made some noise about Olivo’s acceptance of a $1000 contribution from one of Tom Craddick’s favorite PACs whose disbursements he is said to control: HillCo PAC. This is a very exclusive club of Craddick’s most loyal friends. The club includes, but is not limited to the following Republican State Representatives: Phil King, Betty Brown, John Davis, Mike Jackson and Mike Krusee.
Nice bunch of bedfellows, don’t you think?
Reference to this funding was also made in this piece which reproduced a Ron Reynolds flyer that was circulated in order to beat back a smear campaign that had been mounted against him by the Olivo people.
I have also been watching contributions from the Texas JOBS PAC, a Craddick-run political action committee that got a huge cash infusion from Tom Craddick’s campaign early this year. The next day the PAC made huge cash contributions to several state representatives, all of them former supporters. Only Dawnna Dukes, a Craddick D who is fighting a primary challenge in her district returned the $50,000 wad of cash.
And now, to Dora Olivo, a check for $2,500.00.
Perhaps to keep things below the radar, Texas JOBS PAC made a very recent (recent as in February 26th recent) contribution to State Rep. Dora Olivo’s campaign fund, a not so insignificant $2,500 donation. One wonders why this entry was placed in the TEC campaign report form with the PAC’s full name (Texas Builds Jobs & Opportunity For A Secure Future PAC INC), to confuse and befuddle people?
To hide something?
No, what we have here is an incipient Craddick D. Vince at Capitol Annex, who has written, in the past, some uncomplimentary words about Ron Reynolds, is also somewhat alarmed at these events. He asks the question “So, what is the deal? Is Craddick trying to buy her love (and her vote)…”?
My question is rather, since these contributions have not been turned away by Olivo, when did Dora Olivo start becoming a Craddick D?
And if you have not voted yet, it’s time to get off the dime and vote for the man who will not be Tom Craddick’s pawn in the next session.
Ron Reynolds.
And, oh yeah, vote for Barack Obama, too.
Early on, after Ron Reynolds made his announcement that he was going to run for his party’s nomination for State Representative for Texas House District 27, before his opponent, Dora Olivo, indicated her desire to run for another term, Reynolds received a telephone call from Texas House leadership probing the possibilities of his support for a 4th Tom Craddick Speaker’s term for the 81st Legislature.
At that time, Reynolds stated categorically to his caller that he was opposed to the dictatorial tactics of Tom Craddick and would oppose his candidacy for Speaker.
Tom Craddick dearly wants to be speaker of the Texas House for another term. He cherishes the power, the prestige and the perquisites that go with the job. Not to mention the fact that he can order money thrown at or withdrawn from anyone he wants.
And because of this, and the fact that Craddick is running out of friends in his own party, and may lose some allies next week from primary challenges within the party that opposes him, Tom Craddick is looking for some new friends.
Some new Craddick D’s.
And where better to look for new friends and allies than in a primary where a progressive Democrat has mounted strong opposition against a moderate Democratic incumbent? A Democratic incumbent whose campaign contributions have lagged behind her upstart opponent’s war chest?
We have been talking about these campaign contributions for awhile. In this piece, I made some noise about Olivo’s acceptance of a $1000 contribution from one of Tom Craddick’s favorite PACs whose disbursements he is said to control: HillCo PAC. This is a very exclusive club of Craddick’s most loyal friends. The club includes, but is not limited to the following Republican State Representatives: Phil King, Betty Brown, John Davis, Mike Jackson and Mike Krusee.
Nice bunch of bedfellows, don’t you think?
Reference to this funding was also made in this piece which reproduced a Ron Reynolds flyer that was circulated in order to beat back a smear campaign that had been mounted against him by the Olivo people.
I have also been watching contributions from the Texas JOBS PAC, a Craddick-run political action committee that got a huge cash infusion from Tom Craddick’s campaign early this year. The next day the PAC made huge cash contributions to several state representatives, all of them former supporters. Only Dawnna Dukes, a Craddick D who is fighting a primary challenge in her district returned the $50,000 wad of cash.
And now, to Dora Olivo, a check for $2,500.00.
Perhaps to keep things below the radar, Texas JOBS PAC made a very recent (recent as in February 26th recent) contribution to State Rep. Dora Olivo’s campaign fund, a not so insignificant $2,500 donation. One wonders why this entry was placed in the TEC campaign report form with the PAC’s full name (Texas Builds Jobs & Opportunity For A Secure Future PAC INC), to confuse and befuddle people?
To hide something?
No, what we have here is an incipient Craddick D. Vince at Capitol Annex, who has written, in the past, some uncomplimentary words about Ron Reynolds, is also somewhat alarmed at these events. He asks the question “So, what is the deal? Is Craddick trying to buy her love (and her vote)…”?
My question is rather, since these contributions have not been turned away by Olivo, when did Dora Olivo start becoming a Craddick D?
And if you have not voted yet, it’s time to get off the dime and vote for the man who will not be Tom Craddick’s pawn in the next session.
Ron Reynolds.
And, oh yeah, vote for Barack Obama, too.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
The Fighting 22nd: Shelley is Conducting Another Push Poll
I was just writing tonight’s piece on all the Clinton supporter defections to Obama when I got a phone call from a pollster. I stayed on and didn’t brush the young man off because he said he would ask only three questions. I said “OK, fire away”.
“If you were to vote today for the Republican candidate for Texas Congressional District 22, which of the following would you vote for: Shelley Sekula Gibbs, Pete Olson, John Manlove, Dean Hrbacek, Bob Talton or Jim Squier”?
I said “What? You didn’t name all of them!” He laughed and offered that maybe I was looking at his screen.
“No," I said. "I know there are ten of them running and you only named six”.
He laughed again and then asked me which one would I vote for, so I hemmed and hawed a bit and came up with “’Crazy Bob’ Talton”.
“OK [I could hear a click in the background as my vote was recorded], now if there was a runoff election, which of these two candidates would you vote for, Pete Olson or Shelley Sekula Gibbs?”
I thought and thought for a bit, then said what can be construed as a factual statement: “I wouldn’t vote in the runoff. I wouldn’t vote for either of those jokers”.
Oddly enough, they had a place to record that vote, too.
Home stretch. Third question:
“If you were to vote today for the Republican candidate for Texas Congressional District 22, which of the following would you vote for: Shelley Sekula Gibbs, Pete Olson, John Manlove, Dean Hrbacek, Bob Talton or Jim Squier”?
I said “What? You didn’t name all of them!” He laughed and offered that maybe I was looking at his screen.
“No," I said. "I know there are ten of them running and you only named six”.
He laughed again and then asked me which one would I vote for, so I hemmed and hawed a bit and came up with “’Crazy Bob’ Talton”.
“OK [I could hear a click in the background as my vote was recorded], now if there was a runoff election, which of these two candidates would you vote for, Pete Olson or Shelley Sekula Gibbs?”
I thought and thought for a bit, then said what can be construed as a factual statement: “I wouldn’t vote in the runoff. I wouldn’t vote for either of those jokers”.
Oddly enough, they had a place to record that vote, too.
Home stretch. Third question:
“Now if someone were to tell you that one of the candidates had not lived in the congressional district until just recently, what would you think about that? Would you be inclined to vote for that candidate?”
Busted.
I started laughing. “Oh! It’s a push poll.” Pollster said “What?” Reply: “A PUSH poll!” I laughed again and then said “Tell Shelley I said ‘Hi’.”
And I replaced the receiver.
Honestly, it has been really quiet here at my place since my vote has been registered on Fort Bend County’s Early Vote tally sheet. Apparently Shelley Sekula Gibbs’ campaign has not been clued in to the fact that you can really trim your call lists if you get a list of people who have already cast their ballot. A poll is one thing. It gets an idea of who is ahead. But this was a push poll designed to persuade voters. A call wasted on me, for more than one reason.
So it is as I suspected, and Pete Olson, the DC insider, the golden-haired boy sent to the district to derail Shelley from getting on the November ballot again, is the one the Sekula Gibbs campaign fears most.
And well they should. Here’s what I get from my personal lawn-sign-at-residences poll. I’ve seen 4 Taltons, 2 Manloves, 2 Bazzys, 1 Hrbacek, 2 Squiers and 8 Olsons. I have seen NO Sekula Gibbs signs anywhere. And more importantly, where I saw those annoying maize and blue Sekula Gibbs signs in October/November 2006, there are Olson signs planted there now.
This is the absolute truth. Swear to Jesus.
So even with Tom DeLay gone for now going on to 19 months, Texas Congressional District 22 has not lost its daffiness. Everyone’s pointing their fingers at Olson, calling him an outsider. Threats of lawsuits for defamation have been made, heads have been photoshopped onto a slimmer, trimmer body, one vet is being accused of exaggerating his military record, and Sekula Gibbs is still conducting push polls.
Well, my Republican neighbors, there are 5 more shopping days until the March 4th primary.
I would say “choose wisely”, but since that’s not an option in your case, choose the best person to give us all a big laugh in the fall.
You guys are getting pretty good at that.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Noriega Releases His Military Records: Let the Swifboating Begin
As promised, Texas State Rep. LTC Rick Noriega has released a complete set of his military records. Anyone can download them from the Noriega campaign website.We now know what is going on in the Cornyn campaign. They are going through these records with a fine-toothed comb, searching, searching, for anything that they can use to skewer Rick in a television ad that will make the Swiftboaters for Truth smear campaign against John Kerry in 2004 look like a child’s tea party.
Heading this off, the Noriega campaign still wants you to sign this petition to “tell John Cornyn and his cronies that we won't stand for a smear campaign in our great state.” Two thousand have already signed. If you haven’t yet, there’s still time to make your voice heard. Click here to sign Rick’s petition.
Now go ahead, take a look at the records. If you don’t come away impressed, there is something deeply wrong with you. Something akin to being John Cornyn, for instance.
OK, need a taste? Try these on for size:
LT Noriega is an exceptionally dedicated officer. He sets high standards and sees to it that they are obtained and maintained through example.
Comments on Professional Competence (received all 1’s on a
1 to 5 scale, 1 being highest):
Outstanding in dedication to his job and mission.
Unexcelled in loyalty
Integrity is above reproach
Selflessly gave of his time and energies
Officer’s integrity and high moral standards have been significant factors in his success.
LT Noriega has unlimited potential. He should be given every opportunity for further training and upon completion of this command assignment be given an opportunity to serve as a battalion or brigade staff officer. With experience and training, he will soon be able to serve with distinction as a battalion commander.
I could go on and on, but it ALL reads like that. Honest to God, the man is so outstanding it becomes boring to read about it. Reading plaudit after praise, you start to WANT to find a comment like, “Noriega showed up to inspection with scuffed shoes”.
But you just don’t.
How is John Cornyn is going to twist this into an attack? Only time will tell. OK let me give you an example of how this is going to go. What about the comment “Unexcelled in loyalty”? Doesn’t “un” mean “not”? Isn’t that like “unsportsmanlike”? OK, unexcelled could mean that no one excels him, but couldn’t it also mean that he does NOT excel?
Hmm. Yesssssss. The possibilities are ENDlesssss.
But you just don’t.
How is John Cornyn is going to twist this into an attack? Only time will tell. OK let me give you an example of how this is going to go. What about the comment “Unexcelled in loyalty”? Doesn’t “un” mean “not”? Isn’t that like “unsportsmanlike”? OK, unexcelled could mean that no one excels him, but couldn’t it also mean that he does NOT excel?
Hmm. Yesssssss. The possibilities are ENDlesssss.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Crossover Voting For Obama, Blip or Scale Tipper?
I don’t think it is a secret anymore that Texas Republican voters are showing up at the polls to vote in the Democratic primary, and doing so to vote for Barack Obama. A small article in the Houston Chronicle had some anecdotal evidence to back this up.
Bennet Roth, in this Chron article, interviewed individuals in an Austin barbershop, Republicans who claim that they have voted, or will vote for Barack Obama. One thing he did not uncover was a vast Republican conspiracy to stack the deck against Hillary Clinton: there just wasn’t a unity there. Yes, some voters were definitely going out there to vote for Obama in order to, as one pollster put it “get rid of Clinton once and for all.” And some of these voters fully intend to turn around and vote for the Republican candidate in the fall. Yet, on the other hand, the same poll reports that 15% of these voters are disenchanted with the Republican party, or their choices, or both, and will continue on in the Fall to vote for Obama.
The first thing that comes to my mind, though, is the record turnout at the early vote polling sites, and how Democratic early voters outnumber Republican voters by anywhere between 2 and 4 to 1. Is the effect we are seeing a result of mass Republican cross-party voting? I really doubt it. First, look at the trend nationwide. In every state where a primary has already been held, Democrats have outnumbered Republicans at the polls, and this took place long before the Texas primary. Here and now in the Texas primary, the race for the Democratic nomination seems to have developed into Hillary Clinton’s last stand. So if early vote turnout numbers in Texas reflect a special effort by Republicans trying to “get rid of” Hillary, why do these turnout numbers match what we have seen in other states?
The Chron article exposed a fractionated Republican party. There appears to be no single-minded monolithic effort to send Republicans to the polls in droves to vote in the Democratic primary, despite what seems to be the case from an email being circulated last week and this week. This email, in short, would confirm the Clinton campaign’s worst fears, that Republicans are showing up at the polls to “get rid of the Clintons”. From the email:
What this campaign is not, by all indications, is an Obama campaign attempt to torpedo Clinton’s chances in Texas. There is no evidence for it, and to suggest that it is part and parcel of the Obama campaign strategy, as some have suggested, is paranoid in the best of all worlds, and lunatic in the worst.
In the end, all this is going to do is further weaken the Republican Party. Let’s say that the party loses an invariant 15% of its moderate voters in all of their primaries as they vote for Democrats. Any Republican primary contest in Texas, with a moderate and a conservative in the race, will be favored toward the conservative. The resulting candidate pool of the Republican Party then, becomes skewed to the right as the rest of the nation goes left. Making the Republican Party of Texas even more of a national oddity than it already is.
But let’s add to the pile. If their fractious plan comes to fruition, Republicans in Texas will have helped to put Barack Obama over the top in his race, possibly tipping the scales in his favor for the nomination. All this does is put a statistically stronger candidate in as their opposition in November. So much for long-range thinking Republicans. By “getting rid of the Clintons” they will have had played a role in the creation of a Democratic presidency.
What the H-E-Double Hockey Sticks? A win’s a win.
Bennet Roth, in this Chron article, interviewed individuals in an Austin barbershop, Republicans who claim that they have voted, or will vote for Barack Obama. One thing he did not uncover was a vast Republican conspiracy to stack the deck against Hillary Clinton: there just wasn’t a unity there. Yes, some voters were definitely going out there to vote for Obama in order to, as one pollster put it “get rid of Clinton once and for all.” And some of these voters fully intend to turn around and vote for the Republican candidate in the fall. Yet, on the other hand, the same poll reports that 15% of these voters are disenchanted with the Republican party, or their choices, or both, and will continue on in the Fall to vote for Obama.
The first thing that comes to my mind, though, is the record turnout at the early vote polling sites, and how Democratic early voters outnumber Republican voters by anywhere between 2 and 4 to 1. Is the effect we are seeing a result of mass Republican cross-party voting? I really doubt it. First, look at the trend nationwide. In every state where a primary has already been held, Democrats have outnumbered Republicans at the polls, and this took place long before the Texas primary. Here and now in the Texas primary, the race for the Democratic nomination seems to have developed into Hillary Clinton’s last stand. So if early vote turnout numbers in Texas reflect a special effort by Republicans trying to “get rid of” Hillary, why do these turnout numbers match what we have seen in other states?
The Chron article exposed a fractionated Republican party. There appears to be no single-minded monolithic effort to send Republicans to the polls in droves to vote in the Democratic primary, despite what seems to be the case from an email being circulated last week and this week. This email, in short, would confirm the Clinton campaign’s worst fears, that Republicans are showing up at the polls to “get rid of the Clintons”. From the email:
“Since Texas has on open primary, Republicans and Independents should sign in at their polling place and request a Democratic ballot. They should then vote for Barack Obama. Even James Carville admits that if Hillary loses Texas, "she's done!" Republicans can help make this a reality!!! Just think, no more Clintons in the White House!”It purports to have come from the website Republicans for Obama, and makes a specific reference to this URL, but nowhere on that URL is the message to be found. Indeed, if you check the website here, you will see reference to the email message, and this enigmatic explanation:
“It is not, nor has it ever been, the goal of this organization to support Barack in order to keep Hillary out of office. You can see the official statements of support for Senator Obama under the "About Us" and "Why Obama" tabs at the top of the page.”So it looks like the Republicans for Obama are disavowing this email, but don’t go as far as to say they don’t know where the email came from.
“That said, there are many Republicans who have strong negative feelings toward both the Clintons, and toward Hillary in particular. While posters are free to express their feelings in our forums, those posts should not be considered representative of the membership of RFO as a whole, nor of the RFO leadership team itself.”
What this campaign is not, by all indications, is an Obama campaign attempt to torpedo Clinton’s chances in Texas. There is no evidence for it, and to suggest that it is part and parcel of the Obama campaign strategy, as some have suggested, is paranoid in the best of all worlds, and lunatic in the worst.
In the end, all this is going to do is further weaken the Republican Party. Let’s say that the party loses an invariant 15% of its moderate voters in all of their primaries as they vote for Democrats. Any Republican primary contest in Texas, with a moderate and a conservative in the race, will be favored toward the conservative. The resulting candidate pool of the Republican Party then, becomes skewed to the right as the rest of the nation goes left. Making the Republican Party of Texas even more of a national oddity than it already is.
But let’s add to the pile. If their fractious plan comes to fruition, Republicans in Texas will have helped to put Barack Obama over the top in his race, possibly tipping the scales in his favor for the nomination. All this does is put a statistically stronger candidate in as their opposition in November. So much for long-range thinking Republicans. By “getting rid of the Clintons” they will have had played a role in the creation of a Democratic presidency.
What the H-E-Double Hockey Sticks? A win’s a win.
Monday, February 25, 2008
For Texas HD 27: Reynolds or Olivo?
When it comes down to it, people should decide for themselves. Newspapers and other mainstream media can weigh in on who you should vote for . . . and even blogs.
Like mine. My recommendation is to vote for Ron Reynolds. I know the man and I know the people who support him. But don’t just take my word for it. Take a look at this list for a sample of the people who support this young up and comer.
My blogging colleagues have all been silent on their support for Reynolds, but I basically view this as a victory in that it is most often the case, unless there are extenuating circumstances, an endorsement goes for an incumbent. In the two blogs I have monitored, both declined to make an endorsement for the incumbent in HD 27. I find this to be not surprising. They apparently are doing what I am doing here: inviting the voter to take a look for themselves.
Like mine. My recommendation is to vote for Ron Reynolds. I know the man and I know the people who support him. But don’t just take my word for it. Take a look at this list for a sample of the people who support this young up and comer.
My blogging colleagues have all been silent on their support for Reynolds, but I basically view this as a victory in that it is most often the case, unless there are extenuating circumstances, an endorsement goes for an incumbent. In the two blogs I have monitored, both declined to make an endorsement for the incumbent in HD 27. I find this to be not surprising. They apparently are doing what I am doing here: inviting the voter to take a look for themselves.
And choose for yourself.
First, take a look at Ron Reynolds’ introductory video.
Yeah, I know, Election Day is March 4th.
Now I have just discovered Dora Olivo’s campaign video. Take a look and judge for yourself. Use your own criteria in coming to a conclusion. I won’t help.
Now go and vote.
First, take a look at Ron Reynolds’ introductory video.
Yeah, I know, Election Day is March 4th.
Now I have just discovered Dora Olivo’s campaign video. Take a look and judge for yourself. Use your own criteria in coming to a conclusion. I won’t help.
Now go and vote.
Texas Progressive Alliance Presents: Cool Blogs We Wrote Last Week
It's Monday, and in eight, count 'em, EIGHT days the primary will be upon us. Members of the Texas Progressive Alliance continue to nudge and jab each other for reader traffic for their respective candidates. As things get close, it is getting bloody out there.
So will March 4th be the day that Democrats crown their standard bearer? Who will be in the CD 22 runoff election? For answers to these questions and more, don't look here. I'm a spectator just like the rest of you.
This week's round-up is compiled by Vince from Capitol Annex.
TXsharon has a broken modem so Bluedaze is suffering but she managed to post about The RRC's approval of Atmos Energy's extravagant spending--bendover Texans. Also read about howPhil King meets Karma in Wise County and hear the horrendous sounds of the Barnett Shale.
Off the Kuff offers his incomplete list of endorsements for the Democratic primaries, and for his birthday rounds up his complete list of candidate interviews.
Gary at Easter Lemming Liberal News has blogged an eventful week or two climaxing with Paul Burka becoming a believer in the Obama Borg - Democrats can take back Texas. Wow.
Over at McBlogger Mayor McSleaze commemorates Kirk Watson's Deer In The Headlights Moment while McBlogger, beverage in hand, watches the Debate and puts the smackdown on wingnuts still drinking the school voucher Kool-Aid
The Texas Cloverleaf makes it back safely from Oklahoma City and discusses the National Stonewall Democrats meeting there, as well as the upcoming LGBT Presidential Town Hall in Dallas on Monday night.
PDiddie at Brains and Eggs had a report on Obama's visit to Houston last Tuesday, and also noted the end of the Fidel Castro era in Cuba. Open Source Dem had part three of his "Texas in Play" series, entitled "Jim Crow Lives".
Hal, who writes Half Empty, went to early vote last Wednesday and has some poll observations and some Fort Bend County stats.
Bill Howell of StoutDemBlog reminds us of some Texas election history that is relevant for this year's Democratic Primary, in Don't Be Confused By Names.
Muse was at the Bill Clinton fundraiser in Houston this week where she fulfilled a lifelong dream to touch him – handshake! She notes that not all college students are for Obama – witness the Daily Texan endorsement for Hillary. And, she receives an email where Obama encourages Republicans to crash the Democratic primary, to vote against the bad, scary Hillary. More Hillary stuff coming this week on musings!
WhosPlayin tries to explain the "Obama Movement", and has a run-down of which Texas blogs are endorsing Clinton or Obama.
Vince at Capitol Annex notes that the Texas Democratic Party has instructed county and precinct officials not to interpret election results for the media or political campaigns, and asks if national Democrats will still respect us (or call or visit) after March 4.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Endorsements? We’re Doing Endorsements?
You know, time was someone might have asked me who I was voting for and I might have, or might have not told them. It’s a secret ballot, you know. But all the Texas bloggers around here are Endorsing candidates.
Like the Houston Chronicle.
Or the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
Last election cycle I did not endorse candidates because I felt that anyone who reads this blog for any length of time pretty much knows where I stand on the candidates. But then I thought today, there might be the occasional reader, or even the accidental reader who might encounter this blog through some Google accident, much like the 2 or 3 hits a day I get on my Susan Combs piece of some time ago. These hapless individuals are all googling the keywords “giving head” or something like that. So they all get to learn about Susan Combs, our State Comptroller.
These occasional readers need to know which candidates I support, don’t they?
So anyway, I thought I’d give this endorsement thing a whirl. I am only making endorsements on contested races so if you wonder why I am not endorsing any of the uncontested ones, that’s why. Also, if you disagree, I just don’t want to hear about it, OK?
I voted already.
President of the United States:
Democratic Party: Barack Hussein Obama
U.S. Senate:
Democratic Party: Richard “Rick” Noriega
U.S. Congress:
Republican Party: Don’t Bother (CD 22)
Railroad Commissioner:
Democratic Party: Dale Henry
Texas House of Representatives:
Democratic Party: Ron Reynolds (HD 27)
Republican Party: Paula Stansell (HD 26)
Justice Supreme Court:
Democratic Party: Sam Houston (Place 7)
Democratic Party: Susan Criss (Place 8)
Fort Bend County Sheriff:
Republican Party: Billy Frank Teague
Precinct 1 Fort Bend County Commissioner:
Democratic Party: Richard Morrison
Republican Party: Pick anyone (Richard will beat any one of them in November)
Precinct Chair No. 1040:
Democratic Party: Marsha Rovai (if you don’t she’ll make everyone’s life miserable)
Republican Party Referendums:
Like the Houston Chronicle.
Or the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
Last election cycle I did not endorse candidates because I felt that anyone who reads this blog for any length of time pretty much knows where I stand on the candidates. But then I thought today, there might be the occasional reader, or even the accidental reader who might encounter this blog through some Google accident, much like the 2 or 3 hits a day I get on my Susan Combs piece of some time ago. These hapless individuals are all googling the keywords “giving head” or something like that. So they all get to learn about Susan Combs, our State Comptroller.
These occasional readers need to know which candidates I support, don’t they?
So anyway, I thought I’d give this endorsement thing a whirl. I am only making endorsements on contested races so if you wonder why I am not endorsing any of the uncontested ones, that’s why. Also, if you disagree, I just don’t want to hear about it, OK?
I voted already.
President of the United States:
Democratic Party: Barack Hussein Obama
U.S. Senate:
Democratic Party: Richard “Rick” Noriega
U.S. Congress:
Republican Party: Don’t Bother (CD 22)
Railroad Commissioner:
Democratic Party: Dale Henry
Texas House of Representatives:
Democratic Party: Ron Reynolds (HD 27)
Republican Party: Paula Stansell (HD 26)
Justice Supreme Court:
Democratic Party: Sam Houston (Place 7)
Democratic Party: Susan Criss (Place 8)
Fort Bend County Sheriff:
Republican Party: Billy Frank Teague
Precinct 1 Fort Bend County Commissioner:
Democratic Party: Richard Morrison
Republican Party: Pick anyone (Richard will beat any one of them in November)
Precinct Chair No. 1040:
Democratic Party: Marsha Rovai (if you don’t she’ll make everyone’s life miserable)
Republican Party Referendums:
Referendum 1: Federal, state and local officials should be required to enforce U. S. immigration laws in order to secure our borders.
Contra
Referendum 2: The Texas Legislature should make it a priority to protect the integrity of our election process by enacting legislation that requires voters to provide valid photo identification in order to cast a ballot in any and all elections conducted in the State of Texas.
H-E-Double Hockey Sticks No
Referendum 3: Every governmental body in Texas should be required to limit any annual increase in its budget and spending to the combined increase of population and inflation unless it first gets voter approval to exceed the allowed annual growth or in the case of an official state of emergency.
You’ve Got To Be Kidding!
Saturday, February 23, 2008
A Night With The Future Speaker of the Texas House
It came off without a hitch. The Fort Bend Democrats’ annual winter fundraiser purred at idle like a finely tuned Maserati, and then revved to a thundering conclusion as the fundraiser honoree, State Representative Senfronia Thompson, in her concluding remarks, brought her audience to their feet in thunderous applause.
Or something like that.
Actually it was a rather sedate evening, punctuated by moments of raucous laughter, loud cheering and hooting as good news on Texas early voter turnout numbers were announced. In case you have been hibernating for the past week, you probably don’t know that the Democratic turnout in Texas’ primary has been stunning. A fact repeated over and over again through the evening.
Candidates were as thick as . . . as thick as molasses. Precinct 2 Commissioner Grady Prestage was in one corner, and Precinct 2 Constable Ruben Davis in another. Two candidates for Precinct 1 County Commissioner were present: Richard Morrison and Sharon Wallingford. Albert Hollan and Milton Flick, candidates for district judges (434th and 400th, respectively) were there, as were James Sharpe (1st Court of Appeals, Place 3), Leslie Taylor (1st Court of Appeals, Place 5), Bert Moser (14th Court of Appeals, Place 4) and Susan Criss (Justice, Supreme Court, Place 8). Dorothy Bottos (Texas HD 28) was there with her husband, Richard, as was Ron Reynolds (Texas HD 27) with his wife, Jonita. Art Hall, running for Texas Railroad Commissioner was also working the room.
CD 22 Congressman Nick Lampson got there late and upon his arrival, was immediately called to the podium for a brief speech. Nick did that thing with his voice to get people roused and excited about the primary, and the rosy prospects that we Democrats have in the coming year. On a sober note, Nick dropped the bomb that America’s 9 trillion dollar debt pales in comparison to the 50 trillion dollars that it has in overseas debt.
Rick Noriega, sitting near the very top of the ballot, was in Laredo last night, but his wife, Houston City Councilwoman Melissa Noriega, was there in his place, sitting at the front table with her parents, both longtime Fort Bend Democrats.
Melissa was asked to introduce the guest speaker, State Representative and soon-to-be speaker Senfronia Thompson.
In her opening remarks, Melissa said that Senfronia Thompson was “a force of nature” who believes that “sometimes you have to grab the mike to take over”. Melissa, who served in her husband’s place in the state house while he was deployed in Afghanistan, characterized a female state rep’s style as being a little different than they were expected to be. Where other state reps expected them to “be good girls”, Melissa said, Senfronia Thompson’s approach was to “get out there and get it done”.
The tone was set, and State Rep. Thompson sought to explain why anyone would want to take a job for 36 years that pays $7 a day by explaining that the Texas state legislature is “the only place where I can raise hell without getting arrested. I . . . can . . .RAISE. . . HELL”.
Rep. Thompson touched on the variety of issues that came through the 80th Legislative session including the costs of education versus incarceration: it’s cheaper to educate our youth to be useful in our society than to hold them under lock and key for years on end, the need for state funding of stem cell research, and health insurance for all.
She spent a good bit of time recalling the days when the Democratic caucus, minus a few, who took flight across the state line instead of allowing the passage of Tom DeLay’s 2nd in a decade redistricting, an act that later cost the seats of several Texas Democratic congressmen. She recalled that Tom DeLay sought to have them all arrested by FBI agents for violations of the US Patriot Act. She recalled the actions of fellow state reps, gentlemen who she called WD-40s (white Democrats over 40), who were concerned how their actions in Ardmore, Oklahoma were starting to look back home as Tom Craddick’s political machine unleashed television ads that criticized them for their actions. There was a whimsical story of Willie Nelson’s gift of a case of Jack Daniels Black Label to the Ardmore Democrats, along with a bunch of red and blue bandanas, and about how soon after receipt of both, the WD-40’s went on television sporting the bandanas announcing that “We will stand our ground”.
This became important later on in her speech, as Ms. Thompson urged us all that it is important that we stand our ground as Democrats, especially now as Democrats are going to the polls in numbers that range up to 3 to 1 higher than the Republican showing. She urged us to stand up, to stand our ground and to “get them out to vote on Election Day” “From the courthouse to the White House, leave no stone unturned.”
Or something like that.
Or something like that.
Actually it was a rather sedate evening, punctuated by moments of raucous laughter, loud cheering and hooting as good news on Texas early voter turnout numbers were announced. In case you have been hibernating for the past week, you probably don’t know that the Democratic turnout in Texas’ primary has been stunning. A fact repeated over and over again through the evening.
Candidates were as thick as . . . as thick as molasses. Precinct 2 Commissioner Grady Prestage was in one corner, and Precinct 2 Constable Ruben Davis in another. Two candidates for Precinct 1 County Commissioner were present: Richard Morrison and Sharon Wallingford. Albert Hollan and Milton Flick, candidates for district judges (434th and 400th, respectively) were there, as were James Sharpe (1st Court of Appeals, Place 3), Leslie Taylor (1st Court of Appeals, Place 5), Bert Moser (14th Court of Appeals, Place 4) and Susan Criss (Justice, Supreme Court, Place 8). Dorothy Bottos (Texas HD 28) was there with her husband, Richard, as was Ron Reynolds (Texas HD 27) with his wife, Jonita. Art Hall, running for Texas Railroad Commissioner was also working the room.
CD 22 Congressman Nick Lampson got there late and upon his arrival, was immediately called to the podium for a brief speech. Nick did that thing with his voice to get people roused and excited about the primary, and the rosy prospects that we Democrats have in the coming year. On a sober note, Nick dropped the bomb that America’s 9 trillion dollar debt pales in comparison to the 50 trillion dollars that it has in overseas debt.
Rick Noriega, sitting near the very top of the ballot, was in Laredo last night, but his wife, Houston City Councilwoman Melissa Noriega, was there in his place, sitting at the front table with her parents, both longtime Fort Bend Democrats.
Melissa was asked to introduce the guest speaker, State Representative and soon-to-be speaker Senfronia Thompson.
In her opening remarks, Melissa said that Senfronia Thompson was “a force of nature” who believes that “sometimes you have to grab the mike to take over”. Melissa, who served in her husband’s place in the state house while he was deployed in Afghanistan, characterized a female state rep’s style as being a little different than they were expected to be. Where other state reps expected them to “be good girls”, Melissa said, Senfronia Thompson’s approach was to “get out there and get it done”.
The tone was set, and State Rep. Thompson sought to explain why anyone would want to take a job for 36 years that pays $7 a day by explaining that the Texas state legislature is “the only place where I can raise hell without getting arrested. I . . . can . . .RAISE. . . HELL”.
Rep. Thompson touched on the variety of issues that came through the 80th Legislative session including the costs of education versus incarceration: it’s cheaper to educate our youth to be useful in our society than to hold them under lock and key for years on end, the need for state funding of stem cell research, and health insurance for all.
She spent a good bit of time recalling the days when the Democratic caucus, minus a few, who took flight across the state line instead of allowing the passage of Tom DeLay’s 2nd in a decade redistricting, an act that later cost the seats of several Texas Democratic congressmen. She recalled that Tom DeLay sought to have them all arrested by FBI agents for violations of the US Patriot Act. She recalled the actions of fellow state reps, gentlemen who she called WD-40s (white Democrats over 40), who were concerned how their actions in Ardmore, Oklahoma were starting to look back home as Tom Craddick’s political machine unleashed television ads that criticized them for their actions. There was a whimsical story of Willie Nelson’s gift of a case of Jack Daniels Black Label to the Ardmore Democrats, along with a bunch of red and blue bandanas, and about how soon after receipt of both, the WD-40’s went on television sporting the bandanas announcing that “We will stand our ground”.
This became important later on in her speech, as Ms. Thompson urged us all that it is important that we stand our ground as Democrats, especially now as Democrats are going to the polls in numbers that range up to 3 to 1 higher than the Republican showing. She urged us to stand up, to stand our ground and to “get them out to vote on Election Day” “From the courthouse to the White House, leave no stone unturned.”
Or something like that.
Gonna Be Wars
Three little words. Three little words from the Republican nominee-apparent.
Gonna be wars.
How can Americans even be contemplating a vote for a man – the oldest white man that the Republicans could find – a man who promises us that there will be 100 years of war?
I don’t care who you support, whose campaign button you wear, or whose bumper sticker you have on your car, anyone that the Democrats nominate to face this man in November will be better than this warmonger.
Want more war? Vote for this guy.
Gonna be wars.
How can Americans even be contemplating a vote for a man – the oldest white man that the Republicans could find – a man who promises us that there will be 100 years of war?
I don’t care who you support, whose campaign button you wear, or whose bumper sticker you have on your car, anyone that the Democrats nominate to face this man in November will be better than this warmonger.
Want more war? Vote for this guy.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Was I At the Wrong Meeting or Was The Chron?
Apparently a Houston Chronicle reporter also attended Wednesday's S.T.O.P. meeting and came away thinking that every candidate had a huge problem with the Grand Parkway toll road to nowhere. I was there and as reported yesterday, came away with the distinct impression that Republican challengers Greg Ordineaux and Bill Dostal were not exactly saying they were against it, or for it either.
Dostal merely said that the existing free access portion of the Grand Parkway should never be converted to a toll road. Then he went on in another direction.
Ordineaux was even cagier. Ordineaux simply said that either the road would be built as a toll road or that the Fort Bend residents could vote for or against it in a bond election, and then pay for the bonds in increased taxes.
That last bit, "increased taxes", is Republican newspeak for "nuclear war", as in "we can have a road built using toll road fees or we can have nuclear war".
Just so you know.
But I have to agree with S.T.O.P. member Geri Wells, quoted at the end of the Chron article. You really don't know what they are really thinking, especially the ones who either used to support the notion of another tollway in Fort Bend, or have been quietly working behind the scenes to enable the eventuality of a tollway.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Candidates Forum In Richmond, Texas: A Whole Lot Of Agreein’ Goin’ On
Despite the crummy weather we had last night, I kept my promise to myself to go to the S.T.O.P. candidates’ forum at the River Pointe Church in Richmond. I got there early because all of the problems that I anticipated getting there, with the weather and road conditions. They failed to materialize, affording me a most pleasant surprise. But then I had to suffer through a 45 minute wait, a half-hour past the reported 6:30 start time, before things began in earnest.
Yes, there was plenty of visiting going on in the atrium, but I never go to these things to schmooze.
The sponsors, S.T.O.P. a recently-formed citizens grassroots organization whose single purpose is to Stop Tolls on [the Grand] Parkway, put the forum together to give local, countywide and state legislature candidates a chance for public exhibition and to let them hold forth on their opinions on TxDOT’s plans to build Section C of the Grand Parkway (aka Texas 99) as a toll road extending south from Highway 59 in Sugar Land to Brazoria County. See the map at S.T.O.P.’s website.
And what a surprise, almost to a man, and woman, the candidates all came out firmly opposed to construction of the Grand Parkway. Some qualified their stance with an “at this time”, but for the most part they all stood shoulder to shoulder against TxDOT’s plans to plop a ribbon of elevated concrete through several master planned communities in Fort Bend County.
Yes, there was plenty of visiting going on in the atrium, but I never go to these things to schmooze.
The sponsors, S.T.O.P. a recently-formed citizens grassroots organization whose single purpose is to Stop Tolls on [the Grand] Parkway, put the forum together to give local, countywide and state legislature candidates a chance for public exhibition and to let them hold forth on their opinions on TxDOT’s plans to build Section C of the Grand Parkway (aka Texas 99) as a toll road extending south from Highway 59 in Sugar Land to Brazoria County. See the map at S.T.O.P.’s website.
And what a surprise, almost to a man, and woman, the candidates all came out firmly opposed to construction of the Grand Parkway. Some qualified their stance with an “at this time”, but for the most part they all stood shoulder to shoulder against TxDOT’s plans to plop a ribbon of elevated concrete through several master planned communities in Fort Bend County.
What a surprise.
First to speak yesterday evening were the county sheriff candidates. Billy Frank Teague is challenging Sheriff Milton Wright on the Republican ballot. Neither of them said that they favored a toll road, Neither claimed that the sheriff would have any voice or sway with TxDOT, and both pointed out that increased traffic on these roads due to growth, and growth in the county itself (something that the toll road will enhance) will impact the department’s ability to respond to service calls. Wright then embarked on the grand tour of his domain and all of his good news. Teague then spent his time acquainting the audience with his experience and his impressive grasp of several local issues.
Focus was then shifted to the Precinct 1 Fort Bend County Commissioner’s race. County Commissioner Tom Stavinoha, and the 7 people standing to oppose him either in March (two other candidates on the Republican ballot) or later on (should he win the primary) in November by one of five candidates on the Democratic primary ballot was asked his opinion on the toll road. Stavinoha, while allowing that “growth will happen”, and that there is “nothing to stop it”, made the observation that the Segment C extension of the Grand Parkway is “not needed right now”. He observed that since Brazoria County, is “not doing anything” with their proposed Sections A and B of the parkway, he is opposed to its construction “at this time”.
Dittos could be heard up and down the table on the stage. The lone holdouts were Richmond City Commissioner Bill Dostal, and former Treasurer of the Fort Bend Toll Road Authority Greg Ordineaux. Dostal said that he simply opposed making existing free portions of the Grand Parkway a toll road. He then embarked on an opinion that gasoline tax revenues ought to be restored to TxDOT so it could repair existing roadways. Ordineaux, while pledging that candidates must listen to the voters, then said that if Fort Bend County wanted a Section C limited access highway, it should be built with bonds and those bonds paid for with county taxes, or it would be a toll road. Period.
Democratic candidates Anderson, Carreon, Morrison, Rocha and Wallingford were all in solid opposition to the tollroad.
I liked Gerald Anderson. He looks young but says he has been married for 31 years. His opposition to the toll road was matched by his citizen advocacy of neighborhoods in the Arcola area that still have no running water. Rodrigo Carreon was his usual fighting self, opposed to the toll road, to the Blueridge Landfill expansion, and promoted the notion that citizens need to attend more public meetings and voice their concerns. Marty Rocha came fully dressed in his sheriff’s deputy’s uniform, the only fully armed candidate in the room (that you could easily observe, at least), Rocha was against the toll road, preferring that the county address a less expensive rail system. He stressed his years of public service and his strong ties to the community. Sharon Wallingford always impresses me with her grasp of facts and details. She has an anecdote for umpteen meetings she has attended, and quotes TxDOT officials verbatim from memory. Wallingford stressed her experience with the proposed road going back to the years before it was ever proposed as a toll road. Wallingford stressed her belief in mobility, but that mobility should be all about safety, and not about tolling.
I saved Richard Morrison for last because he stood out, and stood up. Morrison is well-known in Fort Bend County, and will have no problem with name recognition on the primary ballot. Morrison stood up, handled the microphone like a pro, and then lit into Commissioner Stavinoha. Morrison stood out as the scrapper – everyone else was fairly sedate and courteous – Morrison said in several verbal assaults, pretty much the same thing: “If you want a Grand Parkway Toll Road,” said Morrison, pointing, “vote for him” [Stavinoha].
Last but not least, candidates for state legislature, most of whom were seated on the stage, were asked to say a few words. District 27 State Rep. Dora Olivo, asked to speak first, voiced her support of the original 4 lane highway, and parted with the words “I’m here with you to fight for you”.
Steve Host, the Richmond coffee shop owner, commiserated with the business owners who stood to lose their businesses if Section C of the Grand Parkway is built. As an owner of a business along Highway 90A in Richmond, he explained how TxDOT wanted to eliminate his business as they widened 90A in Richmond. Apparently the lesson to be learned here is if you don’t want your business bulldozed by TxDOT, have it in a Texas Historic District. Host opposes the toll road, and says that TxDOT has too much power.
Ron Reynolds, challenging Dora Olivo in District 27, stated that he was proud to be a member of S.T.O.P. He agreed with Host and Olivo on the toll road, but in a gentle chide to Olivo, said that the legislature must not let lobbyists “run them”. Legislators have to be neutral when they are being asked to support a development project (more on that at a later date).
District 26 State Rep Charlie Howard weighed in on the toll road, first saying that TxDOT, as a government agency was “out of control” and will be reigned in, in a “sunset review” currently ongoing in Austin. Using his hand with emphasis, Howard proclaimed that “TxDOT doesn’t build roads unless we give them money”. I’m pretty sure everyone in the audience wondered if Howard knew that they were planning to build the road without taxpayer money.
Challenging Howard in the Republican primary, Paula Stansell got up from her seat in the audience and commented that “I sit with you in the audience”, and proclaimed that she was “not a politician”. In the second gentle chide of the evening, Stansell sent one across Howard’s bow, in reference to his inaction on these matters until citizens organized a grassroots protest movement. “We wait too long and wait for community uproar before we act”.
You go girl.
That brought the forum to a conclusion except for the question and answer period. I stayed for a bit of this, but frankly I was getting hungry and needed to leave. I did stay for one question addressed to Sheriff Wright and Richmond Police Lt. Billy Frank Teague. The question dealt with the Precinct 1 Constable’s contract with the Greatwood community: would that be continued?
Wright answered first, and simply said that was up to Constable Dorr. Teague took the microphone, stood up tall and solid, and expounded on the service of the constable, identified the patrolling deputy constables by name, and talked at length of the cooperation and purviews of both law enforcement agencies. A fine exposition. Then Sheriff Wright asked to hear the question again, as the audience did a fine job of suppressing their laughter.
I have to say this about Billy Frank Teague: he’s a lot smarter than he looks. This is no slouching doughnut-chomping beat cop. This guy is the real deal.
Billy Frank Teague and Paula Stansell are the only two reasons that I regret not voting in the Republican primary.
There, I said it.
Rick Noriega’s First TV Ad Being Aired on CNN During Debate
Well, since you aren’t going to be doing anything else tonight but watching the Austin Obama/Clinton debate, keep the sound up during the commercials so you won’t miss Rick Noriega’s first TV ad. It’s short but sweet, and hits the high points; just right for an introductory piece. It’s a big day for the campaign, and a great day for Texas.
In case you miss it, it’s embedded below and also at YouTube
In case you miss it, it’s embedded below and also at YouTube
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)