What's Important at the Austin American Statesman

Front page story (0.00 / 0)

The story wasn't about who Glen might be sleeping with.

The story was about Glen trying to get special treatment from the District Attorney for the convict he was sleeping with.

---

by: Jobu @ Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:16:46 AM UTC

A double standard (3.00 / 1)

Glen Maxey was not trying to get "special treatment" he was simply trying to advocate and do all in his power to help his friend.

What should be more important than the content of the story is how and why the story appeared in the first place. There should be no room for the politics of personal destruction in a Democratic Primary.

There are powerful interests at work trying to keep Glen Maxey out of office. That makes me want to vote for him even more.

---

by: David Mauro @ Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 18:16:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree (3.00 / 1)

I wonder who contacted the Statesman with this information.  Ronnie Earle himself?  Nelda Spears?  If Maxey really did something improper, Earle should have charged him.  Earle has not indicated that Maxey made a threat or offered a bribe, or used the influence of his office improperly.  Earle has only said that Maxey was asking for a lesser charge.  Is there something about being a state representative that would make such lobbying inappropriate per se?

People lobby government officials on behalf of friends and loved ones all the time, and it's not really newsworthy.  Such an approach may have been unusual, but that doesn't necessarily make it improper.  Seems like the Statesman is going out of its way here to drag Maxey's name through the mud with very little to go on.

---

by: Jeff Versteeg @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 04:52:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not a surprise, the Statesman hates Maxey (3.00 / 2)

Anyone remember 2006 when the Statesman made the bizarre move in coming out with an anti-endorsement of Maxey for Democratic Party Chair race? Or pined for a challenger they could endorse when he was uncontested once for state representative in the 90s? Considering no newspaper on the planet has wasted their readers time with editorial space on such a mundane nonsense, I guess we can't really be shocked by muck like this. I mean, this is below even the worst blog standard of journalism.

Should we be looking to the Statesman to give us the details of Mindy Montford and Brewster McCracken's sex life as related to their divorce? She's a candidate and he's a publicly elected official after all!

Should we be looking to the Statesman to research and expose the circumstances surrounding Spears' son going to jail? OMG, that must affect her ability to sell license plates! Is that relevant?

Should we be looking to the Statesman to dig into some of the rumors that have circulated about some of her campaign staff's relationships? Are the actions of third parties relevant?

No. No. & No.

And that's what should have been said when this story was first dreamt up over at the Statesman.  

---

by: sos @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 06:21:48 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Relevance (0.00 / 0)

If Spears had called the DA and asked for special treatment for her son, you're damn right it would be relevant.

---

by: m1ek @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 18:55:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

but neither of them did (0.00 / 0)

And even if so, it's not relevant to this race.

And what exactly was special about the request? Is it unnatural for anyone to try to reduce the sentence for a loved one? And why are we even having this debate in the firstplace about someone who is in recovery in this very city and may be thrown out of whack again because of this story? Did the statesman think to take that into considering before they chose to pry into people's private lives?

---

by: sos @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 19:09:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You asked (0.00 / 0)

You asked SHOULD it be relevant. Yes, it should be, if they actually had done those things. I don't want a public official trying to get special treatment for their favorite people, period.

---

by: m1ek @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 19:39:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

special treatment (3.00 / 2)

I guess what this comes down to is one's definition of "special treatment."  If I call Lloyd Doggett because my grandmother is having problems registering for medicare, and he resolves my problem, is that special treatment?  I'd call it constituent services, myself.  This case is a little different because the beneficiary is a relation (in some sense of the word) to the advocate.  The question then is, was Glen's advocacy something that was unavailable to one of his "generic" constituents?  If he was any kind of a decent representative of the people (and I believe he was), he would be willing to advocate for his constituents, if he believed it was necessary and proper.  As long as no bribe, threat, or any other type of quid pro quo was offered, I don't see the problem.

---

by: Kedron Touvell @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 19:48:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Definition of "special treatment" (0.00 / 0)

To me, it boils down to this: Could I, Joe Nobody, have gotten this same conversation with Ronnie Earle? If not, then it's an attempt to get special treatment, period.

---

by: m1ek @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 19:56:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yep... (3.00 / 1)

It's not like Ronnie lives in a glass house. Of course, you can always pick up the phone.

Aside from this is what 'special treatment' was requested. From what Glen said, it seemed pretty clear he was trying to get help for Eager's condition as part of the prosecution. Earle may have interpreted that as asking for 'special treatment'. I see it as trying to get help for a very troubled loved one.

---

by: McBlogger @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 20:53:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Really? (0.00 / 0)

"It's not like Ronnie lives in a glass house. Of course, you can always pick up the phone."

That's ridiculous. You really think I, Joe Nobody, could get Ronnie Earle to meet with me about the prosecution of a criminal case? Really?

---

by: m1ek @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 20:56:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Maybe, I don't know (3.00 / 1)

I have found that Austin is a small city in a lot of ways. I ran into Robin Cravey in front of Whole Foods yesterday and Judge Nancy Hohengarten at Central Market before Christmas. Over 4 years in Austin I've probably run into most every elected official in a non-political capacity just be being downtown a lot. I chat with them off handedly and have taken some of those opportunities to chat about relevant issues going on in Austin or in our lives. It's one of the things I like about this city.

I'm not sure if that's answering your question. It's more just a social commentary on my part.

* shrug *

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 21:01:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Mark Strama (0.00 / 0)

I ran into him and his wife while buying my first mattress when I moved off-campus. That's when he told me and my parents (off the record) that they were expecting what would would later be their beautiful baby girl.  

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 21:10:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sure... (3.00 / 1)

I don't see why he wouldn't.

---

by: McBlogger @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 01:59:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think (0.00 / 0)

a better definition would be: Could I, Joe Nobody, have gotten my elected representative to intervene on my behalf with the relevant governmental authorities?  It's not like this kid actually talked to Ronnie Earle (AFAIK), it was elected State Rep Glen Maxey interceding on his behalf.

---

by: Kedron Touvell @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 22:54:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why is this wrong? This is a very common practice. (4.33 / 3)

If you had access to the DA and you knew someone that might go to the can, you would pick up the phone and ask for leniency.

This is not unusual. Now, if you go and bribe the DA, then you would be violating the law and would be a republican.

Did the article say he was bribing the DA?

---

by: johncoby @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 13:31:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

For your information, (3.00 / 1)

which really should not be anyone's business, I met Brian in 1996.   He moved in with me in 1997, and from that point forward we had no ongoing "intimate" relationship as characterized by the newspaper.   The conversation in question was in 2000.

---

by: Glen Maxey @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 08:03:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

"Special Treatment" (3.00 / 2)

Maxey was not trying to "get him off", he was trying to help a very mentally sick man get help with his mental illness instead of being put in a prison environment where he would surly get worse.  Trying to spin this off as some kind of corrupt corrupt influence is absurd.

To quote the article:
"Maxey, who said his relationship with Eager ended several years ago, said he was afraid that if Eager was incarcerated without proper care and medication, "in the very vulnerable state he was in, he might die."

In other words, Glen believed he was SAVING HIS LIFE.  I believe the fact that Glen invested so much into helping a mentally sick man like this, including spending 100,000 dollars, is a testament to Glen's character and his commitment to doing what he can to make the world a better place and helping people.  What he did was very ADMIRABLE.

"I love America more than any other country in this world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually."- James A. Baldwin

---

by: Timothy @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 09:58:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Doesn't look like a conspiracy (0.00 / 0)

to hush the voter reg story.  It ran in the Statesman on January 17, at least their on-line edition.  See here:

http://www.statesman.com/news/...

---

by: hatfulofhollow @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 13:24:39 PM UTC

Similar, but not (3.00 / 1)

Marty Toohey's Jan 17th story was referenced in my press statement.  I'm calling it TEAM vs Travis Count (TvTC).   It's actually an entirely separate story.

It dealt with data comparison problems between the State of Texas TEAM system run by the Secretary of State, and the registry that is still run independently by the Tax Assessor's office in Travis County.

The Statesman story ended with a recommendation for anyone who moved from Travis County to somewhere else in Texas, and then returned, to check their registration.

I already had discovered significant numbers of voters that had not moved at all, and had been purged by a separate SNAFU regarding Suspended Voters and other clerical erros.   Considering there were two weeks left before voter registration (make that one, now) we felt compelled to get the word out as widely as possible.

So here's the body count thus far
. 8,500 TvTC per Statesman
+ 1,027 Purged Dec 2004, despite voting Nov 2004
+   855 Purged Dec 2006, despite voting 2004-2006
--------
12,382 Voters who did everything right, but purged.

btw for those that say "They can vote provisionally".   My audits of past PVs that these voters have attempted show that all of their votes were Rejected!   That judgement is made on the advice of the Tax Office.

---

by: mikeconwell @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 13:41:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bad math (3.00 / 1)

Yikes! - 10,382 voters who did everything right but were purged.   That's what I get for NOT using the computer to generate that posting.

Have questions about my other numbers?   I invite all skeptics, including Nelda's treasurer, to review the data and process I went through to generate these findings.

You can find my contact information at http://www.mikeconwell.com.

---

by: mikeconwell @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 15:11:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Provisional ballots are never the answer (3.00 / 1)

Provisional ballots rarely count. 75% of the time they don't count.  Texas has one of the lowest rates of counting provisional ballots.

The biggest issue with provisional ballots is that they're cast in the wrong precinct and under Texas law, they don't count period.  That is such a bad law.  We should at least be able to vote for the common higher ticket races, for example all state races and presidential races.

A bill to correct that problem in the election code failed again to make it out of session.

---

by: sonia @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 23:00:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Snakesman Tips The Scales (3.00 / 1)

The Austin American Snakesman is a part of the special interests problem in Central Texas.

The Snakesman often endorses positions unpopular with the public, and then fails to produce investigative reporting that would make it's endorsements look foolish. Such as it's endorsement to shift our freeways to tollways in 2004, and then it's failure to cover any of the NO BID contracts given out by the toll authority (CTRMA) to themselves and their friends.

The Snakesman editors are vindictive and they place the Chamber, RECA and other pals who pay for expensive ad space, above the real story.

The Statesman even deleted my Statesman blog when they didn't like the facts I printed about their pals:
http://salcostello.blogspot.co...

---

by: salsal @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 14:32:09 PM UTC

Groupthink is bad (0.00 / 0)

The fact that so many people are saying the exact same thing here is distressing - this is the kind of groupthink that infects the other side more often than not.

As an outsider who doesn't personally know Maxey but always liked him, this whole thing stinks to high heaven. The idea that there's nothing wrong with getting a meeting with the DA that a normal person probably wouldn't have gotten and then advocating for special treatment for a loved one is the kind of thing y'all would be rightfully castigating if it were Rick Perry doing it.

But even if this is just a tempest in a teapot, the fact that nobody here really seems to think this ought to even be discussed is shameful. I, for one, want to know that the people I vote for aren't the kind of people who would use their position for personal gain - or for the gain of their family or friends, so I want to know WHY this is no big deal, not just hear conspiracy theories about the Statesman.

---

by: m1ek @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 18:54:18 PM UTC

re: (3.00 / 1)

I, for one, want to know that the people I vote for aren't the kind of people who would use their position for personal gain - or for the gain of their family or friends.

Then I assume you are very much opposed to Rep. Dawnna Dukes? :)

---

by: sos @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 19:12:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Of course (0.00 / 0)

The key is: do you want to be better than the Republicans, or do you just want to be a different brand of the same stuff?

---

by: m1ek @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 19:38:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Instead of pointing fingers or speculating, shouldn't we go straight to the source? (3.00 / 1)

The fact is, we don't have to ask Glen, he has already answered all questions related to this unconscionable story on his web site here.

The reason that people have come together in support of Glen is that this story should never have been written. Especially not with such hostile tone, or in such a public attack on a non-public figure that has fought so hard to overcome such odds.

Read Glen's response, I feel confident your questions will be answered.

A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy.

- Theodore Roosevelt

---

by: Doug Mayeux @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 19:49:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Just read it (0.00 / 0)

and didn't like it - especially the playing of the gay card here:

"Would anyone else expect to be asked about their private sexual relations in an interview? Would I have been asked these questions if I were a heterosexual man?"

Yes, I would expect a heterosexual man to be asked as to the nature of his relationship with a woman in a case like this. If you think otherwise, you're ignorant - this kind of thing gets politicians in trouble ALL THE TIME, and has nothing to do with the gender of the person they slept with.

So once again, YES, YES, YES, I would expect the same question to have been asked had Glen been heterosexual. This was a particularly weak argument.

---

by: m1ek @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 19:59:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rather than get bogged down... (3.00 / 1)

...on the subject matter that should be avoided anyway, ok ask the nature of the relationship but it ends there (and they should never have asked details of the relationship), take a look at McBlogger's post. He makes a great argument:

All that aside, are there any of us who can say we wouldn't ask for something similar for a loved one if we knew the DA? How much respect would you have for someone who didn't? For me, the answer is 'not much'. Despite the Statesman's sledgehammer attempt to paint Maxey as a politico demanding special treatment, all it really does is show that the man actually cares enough about people to try and get them help. I can't think of any better quality for candidate who, if elected, will have the power to foreclose on people.

I will step out after this, but I have one last comment. Look at the numbers from the APC endorsement meeting on Saturday. The UDems endorsed Glen unanimously after a moving speech that was part response to the article, and part laying out his vision for the Tax Assessor Collector Office. His life experience has prepared him to be very successful in this office, all one has to do is look at his accomplishments and this becomes apparent. He is the best candidate for modernizing the office, and bringing it fully into the 21st century.

A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy.

- Theodore Roosevelt

---

by: Doug Mayeux @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 21:06:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"special treatment" is too simplistic and false (3.00 / 1)

"Special treatment" is a convenient way for those trying to demonize Maxey to make this simplistic and bad without considering the circumstances of the case.  If this was just a regular guy who had a committed a crime and Maxey had gone to try to reduce his punishment, than it would be unethical.  

However, that's not what Maxey was doing.  He was trying to help a mentally sick man get treatment and be placed somewhere appropriate for his condition, a man whom Maxey thought might DIE if he was put in prison.  Maxey wasn't trying to "get him off" he was trying to save his life by getting him the treatment he needed.

"I love America more than any other country in this world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually."- James A. Baldwin

---

by: Timothy @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 19:58:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's the problem... (3.00 / 1)

you're looking at this as if Glen had access to Ronnie that no one else had. That's just not true.

---

by: McBlogger @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 20:55:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Earle (3.00 / 1)

My understanding is that Nelda's treasurer Bill Aleshire leaked this "story." My main concern is that someone who was only guilty of drug addiction and mental illness just had his personal life splattered across the front page of the Statesman. Political reporters should stick to writing about politics.

Judges advocate to D.A's for offenders who need mental health treatment all the time. If more people did the same for their loved ones with special needs, maybe there would be some room left in our jails.  

---

by: NatAtCap @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 19:46:35 PM UTC

I agree (0.00 / 0)

We're Democrats: we should have a lot more compassion for someone with mental health and drug abuse problems than to use him as a political tool.

For those of you asking, "How could Glen do this?" I ask, "How could he not?"

How could Glen NOT do everything he could to help his friend? He did what anyone else would have done in the same situation.

What a joke of a story.

---

by: David Mauro @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 20:05:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Equal treatment (0.00 / 0)

So should Ronnie Earle or the future DA be required to take a meeting from every family who requests one on behalf of getting mental health treatment for their indicted loved one?

---

by: Jobu @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 20:16:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes (0.00 / 0)

Why shouldn't families ask the DA's office for other options if their loved one is a suicide risk or requires special treatment.  It's up to the DA whether to listen or to ignore them.

---

by: NatAtCap @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 20:45:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't minimize this guy's crimes (0.00 / 0)

"My main concern is that someone who was only guilty of drug addiction and mental illness..."

The incident in 2000 which Maxey met Earle for involved cocaine possession and Eager's second DWI.  If you've ever had a loved one injured or killed by a drunk driver, you wouldn't be minimizing this guy's crimes.

One DWI may be a terrible mistake, but multiple DWI's indicates a person with a reckless disregard for other people's safety.

---

by: Jobu @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 20:28:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Brian isn't running for office (0.00 / 0)

I just thought I'd point that out.  

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 20:49:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

re (0.00 / 0)

"...but multiple DWI's indicates a person with a reckless disregard for other people's safety."

Or they indicate someone with mental illness. If you want to make him out to be a malicious criminal fine, but the facts show that he was just someone who needed a lot of help.

---

by: David Mauro @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 20:52:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

you're right (0.00 / 0)

drunk driving is awful but all I'm saying is that he has the wrap sheet of an elected official, not a hardened criminal

---

by: DukeBlueD @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 20:54:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You're Wrong - NatAtCap (0.00 / 0)

Some folks sip Maxey's Kool-aid; others just gulp it down.  Don't believe every lie you hear Maxey tell.

At the Central Austin Democrats/University Democrats endorsement meeting this morning, Glen Maxey "congratulated" me, Bill Aleshire, for allegedly manipulating the American Statesman into publishing its story about Glen trying to influence Ronnie Earle in prosecution of Glen's companion.  He also accused me of putting Ronnie Earle up to criticizing Glen.

I did no such thing.

The truth is that I did not even know about the incident reported by the Statesman before the story was written and I haven't spoken with Ronnie Earle since before this campaign started last Spring.  I did not, and could not have, provided this information to the Statesman or taken any other part in its publication.

Nelda Spears does not consider this story to be an issue in this campaign and she has instructed everyone in her campaign that we have no comment about that story.  She demands the right to run a positive campaign.

Voters have more to worry about Glen's reaction to the story--more lies--than they do about the story itself.

---

by: Justice @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 00:27:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hey Justice (0.00 / 0)

I don't know if I was in the room at the same time as you (or if you were there, I don't think we've ever met in person) but I wanted to ask a question since you could probably give the best answer.

This is in regard to...

Nelda Spears does not consider this story to be an issue in this campaign and she has instructed everyone in her campaign that we have no comment about that story.  She demands the right to run a positive campaign.

During the Q&A, Nelda's first question was from an audience member who wanted to give her the opportunity to respond to the Statesman story in which she agreed to condemn the Statesman's story. Later, she told the questioner in the hallway that she would submit a letter to the editor saying as much.

I think a lot of people would appreciate that. Do you know if she is doing that (or has already done it)?

---

by: NatAtCap @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 03:20:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Appreciation for Nelda? (0.00 / 0)

I don't know whether Nelda has sent a letter to the Statesman.  I have.  The treatment Nelda receives on BOR does not indicate that anything she does will be viewed factually or fairly.  You aren't allowed by the Maxey cling-ons to show any appreciation for anything Nelda does.  If Glen hands out Kool-Aid, you gulp it down.

He's allowed to lie, even to you all, and then use those lies--like he did last Saturday--to demogogue his way into getting your pity instead of your objective scrutiny.  He told a bald-faced lie about me at the CAD/UD meeting and he knows it.  He's done the same thing to Nelda Spears, the best Tax Collector and Voter Registrar in Texas.

Thank Goodness the mass of voters have higher standards.

---

by: Justice @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 12:09:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bill (0.00 / 0)

I have never received anything from the Spears campaign, but if i were to get press releases or Nelda were to write on BOR, we would try as hard as possible to give her some front page time too.

This is an open offer to every campaign in  Texas.

Help build a progressive movement in Texas. Join Progress Texas.

---

by: Matt Glazer @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 17:50:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"She demands the right to run a positive campaign" (0.00 / 0)

Then she should demand her campaign staff stop calling Glen Maxey a liar.

---

by: David Mauro @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 18:15:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

An answer to the original question (2.00 / 1)

In his original post, Mike ends with:

The Statesman appears to have made it's priorities known.   What are yours?  

Of the 36 comments posted so far, I would estimate (because I'm definitely not counting) that 30 of them are about the Maxey story, not the voter purge story.  If "Amount of Commentary Generated on an Online Forum" is a reliable metric of what our priorities are, then I'd say the Statesman has a pretty solid handle on what people want to hear/talk about.

Of course, Mike may have done himself a disservice by describing the Statesman's alternate coverage in a way that immediately provoked a response trying to correct him, but it's clear that people are intrigued by the Maxey story.  It is also clear that people don't see the Maxey story as one about "who [he] might be sleeping with," but instead see it as an exploration of whether or not a public official engaged in favoritism - a very worthy discussion, if you ask me.

I'm not saying that those are the correct priorities, just trying to answer the question posed to the group.

---

by: TexasAdam @ Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 22:12:29 PM UTC

Glen Maxey (0.00 / 0)

---

by: persiancowboy @ Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 03:55:53 AM UTC