Brian Thompson Event Monday, February 18th

Here's what the Austin Chronicle said (0.00 / 0)

About Brian Thompson:

"...the cheap-shot, pseudo-progressive attacks on Dukes' tactical votes on isolated budget amendments (e.g., "against" children's health care when in fact she was sustaining an Appropriations deal to support children's health care) display dangerous ignorance about the actual legislative process and have helped persuade us that rank beginner Thompson knows very little about how the House actually gets things done."

AND

"...Thompson reflexively opposes "toll roads" and proposes instead underwriting new highways with the rainy-day fund - a truly harebrained notion that also betrays his inexperience."

And, for the record, "anonymous" matching funds/funders are illegal.  All contributions or pledges of contributions must be fully disclosed, by law, on any TEC reports.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 18:33:12 PM UTC

More Chronicle Fun (0.00 / 0)

You will find out who the donor is 8 days before the election, but they wanted to help raise an additional $1,000 by promising the money only if we could raise it first. Since putting this up, it looks like it is doing its job by raising $300 already.  I also think its funny that you would question the Thompson campaigns reporting when after 2 months, Dawnna Dukes still hasn't corrected her improperly filed ethics reports.  Will she be paying the $100,000 fine soon?

The same Chronicle endorsement points out some other interesting things:

Dukes too often seems to take her supporters, if not her constituents, for granted. Challenger Brian Thompson's primary beef is that Dukes is "too close" to House Speaker Tom Craddick, because of her explicitly strategic decision to maintain her post on the Appropriations Com­mit­tee at the cost of being considered a "Craddick-crat." We agree Dukes has struck a devil's bargain in order to remain a strong advocate of crucial social programs on the budget committee - and we also think that it's a bargain wearing very thin.

and then there is this too:

We do think Dukes needs to keep a shorter leash on her own campaign staff, pay closer attention to the grassroots feelings rising from her district, and recognize that the district itself has changed dramatically in a decade.

At the end of the day, I disagree with most of the Chronicle endorsements anyway.  I think it is a slap in the face to the Austin community that they either didn't endorse or endorsed contrary to the two dozen community groups that voiced their preferences.  I am working on a much longer piece, but it seems like the Chronicle is out of touch with the voters this election cycle.

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

---

by: Matt Glazer @ Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 19:23:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"this election cycle"??? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Kedron Touvell @ Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 23:37:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm Sure they meant Colin (0.00 / 0)

when they said "Dukes needs to keep a shorter leash on her own campaign staff," but that doesn't seem to have happened.  Another thing, how convenient that Colin chooses to quote the Chronicle the one time in the past few months they've not been completely positive towards Brian Thompson.  From my point of view they seem to be putting disclaimers to their endorsement because they really aren't convinced.  Mcblogger has an interesting take on the matter as well

What they fail to do is even take her to task for possibly profiting from legislation she helped to pass that also happened to benefit the film community. The same film community that helps make the Chronicle publisher Black's year during the SouthBySouthwest Festival.  

---

by: Hangerman44 @ Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 19:59:33 PM UTC

I agree (0.00 / 0)

The Chronicle really disappointed in its endorsements this time.  They are supposed to be alternative, progressive, daring.  It was none of these things.  As for Colin's sad attempt to find anything positive about double D in the news.  I think it is fairly obvious that the Chronicle was indeed referring to him when it expressed the need for her to control staff.  Everyone knows that not only is Colin a poor staffer (beginning with the statement that voters in East Austin were too stupid to know who Speaker Craddick was, we do and will vote accordingly), but that he is a sellout and has zero credibilty in the progressive community due to his work for all things Craddick.  That is why we are going to beat them in HD 46 and gain proper representation for its residents.  Also, it is widely known that Ms. Duke's peers in the House will not be very upset at her exit.  I'm sure they would be willing to help Brian with this supposed issue of "knows very little about how the House actually gets things done."  A statement which seems to have more to do with searching for an angle to make a more compelling story rather than having a basis in reality.

---

by: BJazz @ Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 23:49:50 PM UTC