Burnt Orange Report

Burnt Orange Report From the Floor

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Some highlights from tonight's first Student Government Meeting.

The most interesting announcement in my opinion was that about the idea of a Orange Bike Project where students could pay a deposit for a semester, get an orange painted bike and u-lock for a semester. It would be done in coordination with the Austin Yellow Bike Project.

A simple procedural vote introduced by Laura Gladeny-Lemon to recess for 5 minutes to discuss the general appropriations bill (as it was not labeled as FastTracked by mistake) failed narrowly in what seemed to be a split between the more liberal members and conservative members of the Assembly. I may be mistaken but I think it is an indicator of the more Conservative nature of this year's assembly. (Though apparently, as always, some reps are rumored to already be looking at building tickets for the spring elections and from what I have heard there are more conservatives than not.)

Update: One other point which I would like to point out is that when Graduate Representative Y. Westerband came up to speak about plans for working on a resolution in support of exploration and expanision of Gender Neutral bathrooms across the University Campus (as well as adding a Diversity Training component to the SG Retreat in some fashion) there appeared to be a sincere lack of interest among the representative body (as there was last spring when she first brought the topic up). I don't know if this is due to the body simply not being aware of the issue (likly) or being non-supportive (possible). I think that it shows though, how much an educational diversity component is needed (run by the MIC, Multicultural Information Center, and IGSC, Interim Gender and Sexuality Center).

I would also like to add how impressed I am with President Brent Cheney and VP Rachel McGinity. I was disillusioned during the actual elections but thank goodness those two one in comparison to what the RepreZent ticket had put up (uber conservatives). The Execuative directors are on the ball as well this year, especially those that deal with us Agency and Committee heads. ( I am the co-director for the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, and Ally Affairs Agency (GLBTAAA) for those that don't know.

On more levels than one, I'll say this about our first meeting... It's a Start.

Source of Job Growth Revealed!

By Jim Dallas

Hey there, all you Bush-bashing Democrat pessimists -- believe that there aren't any jobs out there? Just ask state Rep. Ray Allen's staffers about new jobs. They've got two or three themselves!

(The August Consumer Confidence Report be damned! We're turning the corner! Feel the Turn, baby!)

(Via Kuff)

I would of course be remiss if I failed to note that Katy Hubener could use some turkee.

The Set-Up

By Jim Dallas

Could America be one appeal away from declaring "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" unconstitutional?

That, to me anyways, appears to be the upshot of the appellate decision discussed here (on the ACSBlog).

Another GOP Closet Case Hypocrite?

By Byron LaMasters

I dismissed an email last week that attempted to out a Republican congressman on this webpage. That would be Republican congressman Ed Schrock (R-VA). At first the webpage looked unprofessional, and the whole thing looked a little bit far fetched. Well, my causiousness was unfounded. Schrock, a congressman with a 92% rating from the Christian Coalition, has decided to end his campaign for reelection. This is certainly a signal that the he is unable to defend the rumors that are now emerging in his campaign:

When the story of Congressman Ed Schrock (R-VA-2) first came to me, I was quite skeptical. After all, Congressman Schrock's district includes parts of Hampton and Norfolk and all of Virginia Beach, home to no less than NINE military facilities and Pat Robertson’s Regent University! Nevertheless, the activities of Congressman Schrock have been documented and verified as thoroughly as any I have seen come before me and what I have learned is, well, ScHrOCKING!

Congressman Ed Schrock has made a habit of rendezvousing with gay men via the MegaMates/ MegaPhone Line, an interactive telephone service on which men place ads and respond to those ads to meet each other. What makes this story more amazing? Congressman Schrock not only voted for the homophobic Marriage Protection Act, but he also signed on as a CO-SPONSOR of the Federal Marriage Amendment!

Ed Schrock has a voting record that the most right wing conservative would be proud of. The Christian Coalition gave him a 92% rating in their 2003 voting guide.

Schrock's voting record at the Christian Coalition: 92%

His score over at the Human Rights Campaign? ZERO!

Why has Schrock resigned? Well this ought to explain it:

The blogger who triggered yesterday’s resignation of Rep. Ed Schrock (R-Va.) by spreading rumors that he is gay promised “there’s more to come.”

The gossip first surfaced two weeks ago on a Washington, D.C.-based Web log, or blog, Blogactive.com. The site links to an audio recording that it claims is Schrock calling into the MegaMates/Megaphone Line, a telephone service that men can use to meet other men.

After the GOP push to ban gay marriages, Blogactive.com began “outing” political aides and has since targeted lawmakers who voted for legislation on the issue. Schrock was one of 233 lawmakers who this year supported the Marriage Protection Act, which would block federal courts from considering constitutional issues arising from gay-marriage cases.

Mike Rogers, the blogger who is promising more embarrassing revelations, said an anonymous source gave him the audiotape. “[We target] people who say they are Republicans and then use sexual orientation to stay in power.”

Schrock, a 63-year-old second-term lawmaker and retired U.S. Navy captain, did not respond to the allegations specifically, and his office could not be reached for comment last night. Schrock, a cancer survivor, is married and has one son.

In a press release, Schrock said: “After much thought and prayer, I have come to the realization that these allegations will not allow my campaign to focus on the real issues facing our nation and region. Therefore … I am stepping aside and will no longer be the Republican nominee for Congress in Virginia’s Second Congressional District.

“Words cannot express the gratitude I have for all of the people who have entrusted me to be their representative and have shown unwavering support. Together, we have accomplished so much for the people of Hampton Roads and the Eastern Shore.”

Uh, yeah. Closet case. That makes three gay Republican congressmen: Jim Kolbe, Mark Foley (closeted but obvious), and this guy.

German

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

I'm looking at this picture in my German book. It's a bunch of students hanging around the outside of a college talking. And to the right in German, it asks, "What are these students doing?"

a. Sie spielen Tennis.
b. Sie spielen Karten.
c. Sie sagen, "Tag, wie geht's?"

Um, I'll take C as in Captain Obvious there Alex!

Playing Tennis or Cards, seriously. Who do they think I am? A first year German student! Oh wait...

Republicans Welcome Vicious Bigot to Pray at Convention

By Andrew Dobbs

I've been referring to the GOP Convention this year as the largest simultaneous crossdressing event ever held in American history. I think it is funny that the only true conservatives speaking in prime time slots (besides Bush and Cheney) are a Democrat- Zell Miller- and a very vocal critic of Bush- John McCain. Still, looks like they shoehorned in a fanatic, just to keep the mouthbreathers happy- Sheri Dew.

Who is Sheri Dew, you ask? Well she's giving the invocation to begin the convention and she is a Mormon activist and speaker. Dew, who is unmarried and has no children, had this to say about homosexuality in a recent speech:

Lining Up With Hitler or Against Him

This escalating situation reminds me of a statement of a World War II journalist by the name of Dorothy Thompson who wrote for the Saturday Evening Post in Europe during the pre-World War II years when Hitler was building up his armies and starting to take ground. In an address she delivered in Toronto in 1941 she said this: “Before this epic is over, every living human being will have chosen. Every living human being will have lined up with Hitler or against him. Every living human being either will have opposed this onslaught or supported it, for if he tries to make no choice that in itself will be a choice. If he takes no side, he is on Hitler’s side. If he does not act, that is an act—for Hitler.”

May I take the liberty of reading this statement again and changing just a few words, applying it to what I fear we face today? “Before this era is over, every living human being will have chosen. Every living human being will have lined up in support of the family or against it. Every living human being will have either opposed the onslaught against the family or supported it, for if he tries to make no choice that in itself will be a choice. If we do not act in behalf of the family, that is itself an act of opposition to the family.”

At first it may seem a bit extreme to imply a comparison between the atrocities of Hitler and what is happening in terms of contemporary threats against the family—but maybe not.

That's right- gay people (who, by the way, were killed by the thousands by Hitler for being an affront to public morals) are like Nazis. If you support the rights of gays and lesbians you are just as bad as those fuzzy-headed Germans who supported Hitler in the 30s. How fucking sick is that? Choosing to spend the rest of your life in a loving, monogamous relationship with a person who happens to be of the same sex versus killing 12 million people, ending anything resembling human freedom and trying to conquer the world for fascism. Seems about the same to me.

Her logic is that homosexuality presents a threat to the family that will undermine our civilization and Hitler also threatened our civilization so we're talking po-tay-to po-tah-to here. But haven't we straight people undermined the family too? I mean, here we have a society with no gay marriage to speak of and our divorce rate hovers in the upper 50% range. We have child abuse and child neglect and kids keeping bombs in their rooms and their parents never know about it. Our society is in trouble already and the idea that letting an entire group that for decades was forced to live secret, often deceptive and dishonest lives finally move into a life where they can be committed and loving in a public way is somehow going to be the straw that breaks the camel's back is lunacy. Sheri Dew is not only mistaken, she is a bigot, and I am sickened to know that a major party in this country would even seat her as a delegate, much less let her petition God for His grace. Shame on the GOP for letting her stand on their stage.

Ralph Nader Sucks... And Always Has

By Andrew Dobbs

Byron wrote a great post on Ralph Nader's recent dalliance with none other than the KKK. I know its fun to think of a guy who is supported by not only unbathed, wooly faced anthropology majors in hemp pants and Che Guevara T-shirts but also white supremacists with a surprising lack of teeth so good job, Byron. But one line in the post kinda irked me, the last one:

He did too much good for America prior to 2000 than to have his entire career be defined by his recalcitrance in hopeless crusades for president in 2000, and 2004 that only serve to dampen his otherwise exceptional career.

This is a frequent, and mistaken assumption- that Ralph Nader was cool but turned bad in 2000. Jonathan Chait wrote a powerful article for the New Republic in February of this year (article only available with paid subscription or on Lexis-Nexis) detailing the myth of a "good Nader." Here are some choice excerpts:

The good-man-who-went-wrong assessment of Nader is virtually unchallenged among liberals. But, if you think about it for a moment, it's awfully strange. Heroes of history do not normally reverse themselves out of the blue. George Washington did not end his days pining for a return of the British monarchy to U.S. shores. George Orwell did not suddenly warm to the virtues of totalitarianism. Nor, for that matter, did Ralph Nader go wrong after decades of doing good. The qualities that liberals have observed in him of late--the monomania, the vindictiveness, the rage against pragmatic liberalism--have been present all along. Indeed, an un-blinkered look at Nader's public life shows that his presidential campaigns represent not a betrayal of his earlier career but its apotheosis.

Nader made his name with the 1965 publication of Unsafe at Any Speed, an expose of the Chevy Corvair... Few realize that Nader's campaign against the Corvair was only the most visible edge of an uncompromising, conspiratorial worldview. Nader believed not only that the Corvair was dangerous but that General Motors (GM) knew it was... Nader hounded liberal Connecticut Senator Abraham Ribicoff into investigating whether GM had lied about what it knew in testimony before Congress.... Nader insisted he had an array of inside sources and documents that would reveal this conspiracy. Ribicoff dutifully assigned a pair of staffers to the case, and they spent two years chasing down Nader's leads. None of them panned out. The investigators found no evidence that GM knew of the Corvair's safety flaws. The failure to confirm Nader's suspicions enraged him. "He could not let go of the Corvair issue," one of the staffers told Martin. "He was fixated. And, if you didn't accept or believe the same things he did, you were either stupid or venal." (...)

In fact, even then his work was driven by ideologically motivated fanaticism. In 1971, Nader pressured one of his associates, Lowell Dodge, to sex up his study "Small on Safety: The Designed-in Dangers of the Volkswagen."... Nader insisted that Dodge rewrite the conclusion of the study so that it began, "The Volkswagen is the most hazardous car in use in significant numbers in the U.S. today." Objecting that "the conclusion is not reflected in the data," Dodge left the project, allowing others to take credit as principal authors. "I have always carried around considerable guilt about what I regard as the extreme intellectual dishonesty of that conclusion," he told Sanford. (...)

Nader's friends recalled that often he would act furtively, speaking in code, always convinced he was being monitored or phone-tapped. When he insisted in 1966 that he was being followed, one of his friends replied, according to Martin, "Ralph, your paranoia has grown to new extremes." Of course, it turned out that in that instance Nader was being followed. But this merely proved the old adage that sometimes even the paranoid have enemies plotting against them.

Nader sued GM and won $425,000, which he used to found activist organizations that helped push through a staggering series of consumer and environmental reforms, most of them in the late '60s and early '70s. Nader rightly wins credit for spurring progress during the era. And yet, even during his heyday, Nader habitually denounced liberals and their work, sabotaging the very causes he claimed to believe in... In 1970, Nader championed a report by his staff savaging Ed Muskie, the liberal senator from Maine. Muskie, who helped engineer the Air Quality Act of 1967, had a reputation as an environmental ally, but Nader's report called the act "disastrous," adding, "That fact alone would warrant his being stripped of his title as `Mr. Pollution Control.'"

That same year, the Senate overwhelmingly passed a bill to create a Consumer Protection Agency (CPA), what Nader called his highest legislative goal. But, just days after praising the bill, Nader turned against it, saying that "intolerable erosions" had rendered the bill "unacceptable."... Without Nader's backing, the bill lost momentum... and died in committee. The pattern repeated itself, as the CPA passed either the House or the Senate five more times over the next six years, but Nader rejected every bill as too compromised. "Ralph could have had a consumer agency bill in any of three Congresses," liberal consumer activist and former Nader associate Mike Pertschuk told Martin. "But he held out" (...)

The final defeat came in 1978... He maligned Washington Representative Tom Foley as "a broker for agribusiness"-- despite the fact that Foley had bucked agribusiness to pass a bill regulating meatpackers. He attacked... Pat Schroeder, who had supported earlier versions of the CPA but had minor reservations this time, as a "mushy liberal" selling her vote to corporate contributors. He so alienated Democrats that, as the measure went down to defeat, one reportedly said as he voted no, "This one's for you, Ralph." House Speaker Tip O'Neill told The Washington Post, "I know of about eight guys who would have voted for us if it were not for Nader."

For Nader, it was almost axiomatic that anybody who disagreed with him was a corporate lackey. "Nader sees critics as enemies," wrote Sanford, a former ally. "Those who do not serve him serve the evil elements of corporations." This Manichaean worldview came through in everything Nader did. In the 1970s, he worked to establish automatic funding for Public Interest Research Groups (pirg) on campus--proto-Naderite outfits to train the next generation of like-minded activists. Nader's preferred funding mechanism was for every student to automatically contribute $1; those who objected could go to the college administration for a refund. But the administration at Penn State University in 1975 opted instead for a positive checkoff, whereby each student would check a box if he wanted to pitch in $2 for the pirg. Nader attacked Penn State as "a citadel of fascism" and threatened one Penn State board member (...)

In the summer of 1980, Jonathan Alter (now a Newsweek columnist) worked on Nader's voting guide for the presidential election. Alter came away amazed by Nader's fury at Carter. "He didn't seem overly distressed at the idea of Ronald Reagan becoming president," Alter later told Martin. As Nader addressed a gathering of supporters in 1981, according to The Washington Post, "Reagan is going to breed the biggest resurgence in nonpartisan citizen activism in history." (...)

In his 2002 memoir, Crashing the Party, Nader alleges that Bill Clinton leaked the Gennifer Flowers adultery revelations himself to avoid having to address Nader's agenda. "I'm almost certain that [Clinton] and his supporters knew [the Flowers scandal] was coming," he posits. "Clinton knew how to stay on message, and nothing was going to get him to take a stand on President Bush's nafta proposal before Congress, or on nuclear power, or on the failing banks in New Hampshire." This assertion neatly encapsulates Nader's style of thinking--the fevered conspiracy-mongering, the moral righteousness, and the laughably outsized role he assigns himself in world events. (...)

As Nader embarks upon his fourth protest run against the Democrats in as many elections, there is something slightly ridiculous about the shock of his liberal critics. They still don't know who they're dealing with. Nader is not a heroic figure tragically overcome by his own flaws; he is a selfish, destructive maniac who, for a brief historical period, happened upon a useful role. (...)

Like other liberals, the people behind the website seem to think, if they could only persuade Nader that his candidacy might help reelect Bush, it would dissuade him from running. More likely, it would have the opposite effect. The real mystery is not why Nader would do something so destructive to liberalism. It's why anybody ever thought he wouldn't.

Sorry for the long excerpt but the article has a lot of good information. Essentially, Ralph Nader is a megalomaniacal egocentric psycho who sees his own reputation as far more important than the progressive reforms he claims to support. Yeah, he has passed some important bills, but even Mussolini made the trains run on time. Ralph Nader is nothing more than a very sad man with a very paranoid and cynical vision of the world who is sees himself as something far more important than he really is.

Ralph Nader claims he is building a progressive movement for the future. But where's the beef? Very few progressives are lining up behind him this year and it is the far Right that is doing more to promote his candidacy than anybody. He claims that the two parties are morally bankrupt, but is a movement built on cynicism writ so large that help from even the KKK is acceptable any more morally solvent? I would argue no- his movement is about him and not his ideals.

Independent and third party movements are not all bad- in fact they can be very good for our Democracy when the movement is about ideas and not any single individual. But for better or for worse because of the party system these movements typically form around an individual and die off when that person leaves the political arena- George Wallace, John B. Anderson and Ross Perot are a few examples. Ralph Nader goes a step lower than them even by now completely jettisoning his (deceptively) good reputation in order to up his honoraria in the next four years. Shame on Ralph Nader and let us not forget that this recent destructiveness isn't in spite of his previous work, it is the character of it.

Moving on during the RNC

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Right now MoveOn.org is fundraising to run their set of 5 real people ads in states during the Republican National Convention. Deborah Wood from Wimberly Texas is one of the five and I have to admit, I really like these ads. They remind me of a blend between the infamous Dean White Screen ads that were so bad in Iowa and the grassroots Switch to Dean ads that were in Wisconsin. Of course, these are much better.

My favorite line, which sounds great when you listen to it, is Rhonda Nix's "I'm still a Baptist but no longer Republican" in southern drawl.

Go ahead and listen and donate.

The Alan Keyes drinking game

By Jim Dallas

DailyKOS: Alan Keyes is not making sense.

Every time he says the word "corrupt", take one shot.

Every time he implies Barack Obama "can't win", take two shots.

Nader in bed with KKK Apologists

By Byron LaMasters

Further proof that Ralph Nader will do anything to screw Democrats in 2004, just as he did in 2000:

Texas Democrats, led by two prominent black senators, called on Ralph Nader on Saturday to step down as the Reform Party's presidential candidate after it was disclosed that the party's leader once defended a murderer from the Ku Klux Klan.

The Democrats, still angry about losing votes to Nader in the 2000 presidential election, issued the call as he formally accepted the party's nomination in a small conference room at a hotel in Irving.

Nader was introduced by Shawn O'Hara, national chairman of the Reform Party of the United States of America. O'Hara is also an outspoken defender of Samuel Bowers, former Imperial Wizard of the KKK in Mississippi.

Bowers was convicted in 1998 in the fire-bombing death of Vernon Dahmer, a black civil-rights activist from Hattiesburg, Miss. Prosecutors said Klansmen shot up and bombed Dahmer's home in 1966 because he helped blacks register to vote by letting them pay their poll tax at his grocery store.

On Saturday, O'Hara sat next to the podium, nodding approvingly as Nader gave his customary stump speech, accusing Democrats and Republicans of being in the clutches of corrupt corporations. He also said he planned to sue the Democratic Party for working to keep him off the Nov. 2 ballot in most states, including Texas.

So what did Ralph Nader have to say after learning that the leader of the party that has given him ballot lines in seven states is a Ku Klux Klan apologist?

After his speech, Nader appeared stunned when asked about O'Hara's relationship to Bowers and the KKK.

"That's false. I think that's propaganda," he said as supporters quickly ushered him onto an elevator.

But O'Hara, also of Hattiesburg, acknowledged that he actively worked on Bowers' defense team. The political activist, who is not a lawyer, said he began defending the Klan leader after failing to find hard evidence of his guilt.

Ralph Nader doesn't care. He'd probably take the Nazi Party line if it gave him ballot access in more states. He doesn't care about winning this election, or doing anything for democracy in America. Ralph Nader is a pathetic disillusioned activist who needs to hang up his boots, and call it a career. He did too much good for America prior to 2000 than to have his entire career be defined by his recalcitrance in hopeless crusades for president in 2000, and 2004 that only serve to dampen his otherwise exceptional career.

Katy Hubener in Final Dean Dozen

By Byron LaMasters

I missed this last week, but Katy Hubener was endorsed by Howard Dean in the final "Dean Dozen".

Katy's campaign is one of the races that has surprised a lot of people by emerging as one of the top Democratic pick-up opportunities in the Texas House, and Dean's help is certainly welcome. Katy is running against a corrupt, right-wing Republican in a moderate district. Texas has no Anglo, Democratic women in the state house, and along with Kelly White and Robin Moore, Katie Hubener will change that come November.

Donate to Katy's campaign, and learn more about her race here.

RNCC Violates Code of Military Conduct

By Byron LaMasters

The RNCC is bragging about the number of veterans and active military personell serving as delegates at their convention this week (emphasis mine):

Americans who served in the military will be well represented at the upcoming Republican convention, more so than at last month's Democratic convention or in the U.S. population overall, according to the GOP.

About 15 percent of the 4,800-plus delegates and alternates to the convention in New York are veterans, organizers said Monday. An additional 3 percent are active military personnel.

Census Bureau estimates show that roughly 12 percent of U.S. residents in 2002 were military veterans. About 11.5 percent of delegates at the Democratic convention in Boston were veterans, a record high, according to the Democratic National Committee.

That's great that active military personnel are supporting President Bush. There's just a slight problem with that. As Eric Alterman points out, it violates the military code of conduct for active military personnel to participate in a political campaign or convention:

Is the Republican Party in violation of the US military’s rules on the participation in party politics by active duty military?

It sure looks that way. The RNC convention week is boasting that it has 144 active duty military delegates at the convention or three percent of the total. That information can be found here.

Meanwhile, according to DOD Directive 1344.10, which can be found here this is a violation of the code of military conduct. It explicitly says:

A member on active duty shall not...
Participate in partisan political management, campaigns, or conventions (unless attending a convention as a spectator when not in uniform).

But the Republican Party itself is claiming that the active duty personnel are not spectators but delegates. What’s going on here? Why are the Republicans encouraging our soldiers to violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice and its stated rules of political engagement? And why for goodness sakes, aren’t these rules being enforced? Hey MSNBC.com, can we put a reporter or two on this story please?

Why do Republicans support violating the code of military conduct on political participation, but not on "Don't Ask, don't Tell"? I'll wait patiently for their response.

Stop it.

By Jim Dallas

TAPPED has a little ditty implying that John O'Neill should be disbarred.

There are lots of things which ought right to be done to John O'Neill (one of the Swifties), but disbarment, at least for the reasons cited in the TAPPED post, is probably not one of them. To begin with , 8.02 seems to apply strictly to judicial candidates - judges, district attorneys, and attorneys general. Why drawing the line there would make sense ought to be obvious. But if it doesn't consider the reasoning in comment 8.02.1 - "Assessments by lawyers are relied on in evaluating the professional or personal fitness of persons being considered for election or appointment to judicial office and to
public legal offices, such as attorney general, prosecuting attorney and public defender. Expressing honest and candid opinions on such matters contributes to improving the administration of justice." It is this duty to uphold the administration of justice that creates a special obligation for attorneys not to engage in gutter-campaigning against judges and other attorneys.

Second, 8.04 would, I believe, is extremely general, almost a sort of catchall "don't do bad stuff." And the thrust of it, as far as I can tell, is that it is aimed at stuff that lawyers do in their capacity as lawyers, or that would reflect upon their lawyering. That said, I think the Swifties stuff makes O'Neill look hackish, but that doesn't necessarily change my opinion on his other professional activities.

If you're going to start pulling rules out of thin air, oughtn't the Bar ignore you?

This is just silly. Stop the "hunting of the Bush lawyers" on flimsy grounds.

UPDATE: On the other hand, the case against Ben Ginsburg is looking pretty solid.

Rule 8.02 Judicial and Legal Officials (a) A lawyer shall not make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge, adjudicatory official or public legal officer, or of a candidate for election or appointment to judicial or legal office. (b) A lawyer who is a candidate for judicial office shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct. (c) A lawyer who is a candidate for an elective public office shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Texas Election Code. Comment: 1. Assessments by lawyers are relied on in evaluating the professional or personal fitness of persons being considered for election or appointment to judicial office and to public legal offices, such as attorney general, prosecuting attorney and public defender. Expressing honest and candid opinions on such matters contributes to improving the administration of justice. Conversely, false statements by a lawyer can unfairly undermine public confidence in the administration of justice. 2. When a lawyer seeks judicial or other elective public office, the lawyer should be bound by applicable limitations on political activity. 3. To maintain the fair and independent administration of justice, lawyers are encouraged to continue traditional efforts to defend judges and courts unjustly criticized.

Rule 8.04 Misconduct
(a) A lawyer shall not:
(1) violate these rules, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the
acts of another, whether or not such violation occurred in the course of a client-lawyer
relationship;
(2) commit a serious crime or commit any other criminal act that reflects adversely on
the lawyers honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;
(3) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;
(4) engage in conduct constituting obstruction of justice;
(5) state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official;
(6) knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable
rules of judicial conduct or other law;
(7) violate any disciplinary or disability order or judgment;
(8) fail to timely furnish to the Chief Disciplinary Counsels office or a district grievance
committee a response or other information as required by the Texas Rules of
Disciplinary Procedure, unless he or she in good faith timely asserts a privilege or other
legal ground for failure to do so;
(9) engage in conduct that constitutes barratry as defined by the law of this state;
(10) fail to comply with section 13.01 of the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure
relating to notification of an attorneys cessation of practice;
(11) engage in the practice of law when the lawyer is on inactive status or when the
lawyers right to practice has been suspended or terminated, including but not limited to
situations where a lawyers right to practice has been administratively suspended for
failure to timely pay required fees or assessments or for failure to comply with Article
XII of the State Bar Rules relating to Mandatory Continuing Legal Education; or
(12) violate any other laws of this state relating to the professional conduct of lawyers
and to the practice of law.
(b) As used in subsection (a)(2) of this Rule, serious crime means barratry; any felony
involving moral turpitude; any misdemeanor involving theft, embezzlement, or fraudulent
or reckless misappropriation of money or other property; or any attempt, conspiracy,
or solicitation of another to commit any of the foregoing crimes.

Posted by Jim Dallas at 04:30 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

"Spill those Texas-sized beans"

By Jim Dallas

Mydd.com remains firmly on top of the Ben Barnes - Bush TANG story.

Democrats Protest Bob Perry

By Byron LaMasters

Texas Democrats are protesting Bob Perry - the major donor to the Swift Boat Vets for Lies.

The Bay Area New Democrats protested at Perry's home today, and they have pictures!

So check them out.

RNCC worried about Sessions

By Byron LaMasters

Six Republican congressmen will speak at the Republican convention. Typically, the congressmen given these spots are the most endangered incumbents, and among them? None other than Pete Sessions:

From a NRCC release on 8/26, these are the candidates addressing the GOP convo:

NRCC Chairman Rep. Tom Reynolds (NY-26)
Rep. Jim Gerlach (PA-06)
Rep. Pete Sessions (TX-32)
Rep. Bob Beauprez (CO-07)
Rep. Jon Porter (NV-03)
Rep. Rodney Alexander (LA-05)

Not only is Sessions one of the six, but Alexander is only given a spot because he's a turncoat, and Reynolds because he is chair of the NRCC. Thus, Sessions, along with Gerlach, Beauprez and Porter are four of the Republican incumbents that the NRCC considers the most vulnerable.

Other Texas Republican congressional candidates to speak at the RNC are Louie Gohmert, Ted Poe and Becky Armendariz Klein. Since Republicans have no non-Cuban Hispanic congresswomen, Klein serves as a token Hispanic female, even though she has no chance in hell. Poe and Gohmert, meanwhile are locked in tough races with Democratic incumbents. I am surprised though. Where is Arlene Wohlgemuth? She could talk about real Republican values, like throwing a temper tantrum after her bill got stuck in the Calendar Committee, or working to take thousands of kids health care away by knocking them off the CHIP program. But I forgot. This convention isn't about real Republican values. This convention is about showing off the dying breed of moderate Rockefeller Republicans who have zero influence in policy, yet for the next week will represent the face of a party that has abandoned them.

I'm a minority, and I'm feeling hipper already.

By Jim Dallas

Kuff: Non-hispanic whites are no longer in the majority in Texas.

Gosh darn it to heck!

By Jim Dallas

Looks like I'm gonna have to endorse Barack Obama after all.

They're giving me no choice.

At least in high school they had an "election" so nerds like Alan Keyes (and me) could get trounced by the popular kids the old-fashioned way.

Yet another fountain of undiluted foolishness

By Jim Dallas

No, I'm not talking about Bob Jensen, who (regardless of your politics) is a pretty nice guy.

Rather, I'm talking about another UT Journalism prof who Josh Marshall has caught acting like (a) a grade-A hack and (b) an anti-Catholic.

True, said prof has (so I've heard) been a wonderful educator, although I've never taken any of his courses. But I'm waiting for Faulkner to, you know, treat other goofy faculty members the way he's treated Bob.

Annoy Zigzag Zell

By Byron LaMasters

The good folks at Zellout spell it out for anyone who isn't already convinced that Zell Miller has turned into a not-so-closeted Republican. His office staff should have done what Rodney Alexander's office staff did when he switched parties, and resigned. They didn't, so take this opportunity to annoy his office staff by flooding Zell's email account in response to his nomination of George W. Bush.

Ben Barnes Got Bush in the National Guard

By Byron LaMasters

Then, Texas Lt. Governor Ben Barnes speak out in this video that he helped pull strings to get Bush in the National Guard. The video is at: Austin4Kerry.org. It's up on kos diaries and Drive Democracy right now. We'll see if this gets any traction.

Update: Well, Jim beat me to it by three minutes (see below). I guess I'll have to be quicker next time.

You Drop the Bomb on Me

By Jim Dallas

Texas Nate: Ben Barnes allegedly says he pulled strings to get Bush in the National Guard.

Pick the Picks

By Jim Dallas

Which newspapers in Texas will endorse Kerry? Which papers in Texas will endorse Bush?

My predictions here.

There really is no end to this, is there?

By Jim Dallas

A DailyKos diarist reports that at least one International Olympics Committee member was so angry about the Bush-Olympics flap that he'll be voting against New York's bid for the 2012 summer Olympics.

Really, if America loses the 2012 bid due to presidential petulance, that ought to be the definitive sign that all of the good will which the rest of the world felt for New York City and the USA after 9/11 has been totally squandered on behalf of the president's domestic political ambitions.

Shameful.

Reminder

By Jim Dallas

The Presidential Prayer Team (as noted by Belle Waring) requests prayers for Attorney General John Ashcroft this week.

You know, a strict reading of 1 Timothy doesn't say you have to pray for your leaders to keep on doing what they're doing, but rather that "that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty." So you know, if you're cranky (as I am), about the utter dishonesty and abuse of power in Washington, you might want to consider praying even harder.

At the very least, consider a humble request that the door not smacketh their ass on the way out.

Try the salmon.

By Jim Dallas

Brad DeLong presents us with a socratic dialogue at a buffet with the ghost of Daniel Webster (need I say more?).

And I ran... I ran so far awaay...

By Jim Dallas

Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-Texas) on why he loves New York City:

Favorite NYC Memory: "Going to see the band Flock of Seagulls in 1983 for only $1.00. After the concert we saw David Bowie walking down the street. It was a great night and great memory."

Via TAPPED.

UPDATE: The Stakeholder notes something a little more interesting about NYC-loving Republicans Rep. Richard Pombo (Calif.) and Gov. Linda Lingle (Hawaii).

If it Smell like a Rat...

By Byron LaMasters

Two days ago, I posted that Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has filed a Freedom of Information Act Request in order to find out if Karl Rove is lying when he said that he hasn't spoken with major Bush and Swift Boat Vets for Truth donor Bob Perry. Not surprisingly, the White House claims that they are exempt from the FIOA request:

Earlier today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) received a letter from the Executive Office of the President denying CREW's Aug. 24 request for records detailing White House contacts with individuals connected to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT). As grounds for the denial, the White House claimed that it was exempt from having to disclose the information.

CREW had asked the White House to release information regarding contacts between the Executive Office of the President and members of SBVT and others associated with the group, including public relations, advertising, detective and fundraising organizations.

CREW decided to file the FOIA after learning that President Bush's political advisor Karl Rove had claimed not to have spoken with his longtime friend and primary SVBT donor Bob J. Perry, in over a year. Yesterday, Rove had changed his tune, telling FOX news: "I don't want to leave any misimpression. But he's (Perry) not somebody that I've had, you know, any extended conversation with in years . . ." Rove denied, however, speaking with Perry about SBVT.

Rove's comments were made the same day CREW discovered that a Republican party Committee website in Collier County Florida was soliciting donations for SBVT and showing the group's ads, something clearly not allowed under the Federal Election Campaign Act.

Upon receiving the denial of the FOIA request, CREW's Executive Director Melanie Sloan stated "If the White House really had nothing to do with SBVT or its ads, then there was no reason for it to deny CREW's request. The White House could have released the records and silenced its critics. Its refusal to respond suggests that there is information the White House would prefer not become public."

If it smells like a rat...

Republican National Covention Schedule

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION SCHEDULE

New York, NY

6:00 PM Opening Prayer led by the Reverend Jerry Falwell

6:30 PM Pledge of Allegiance

6:35 PM Ceremonial Burning of Bill of Rights (excluding 2nd Amendment)

6:45 PM Salute to the Coalition of the Willing

6:46 PM Seminar #1: Katherine Harris on "Are Elections Really Necessary?"

7:30 PM Announcement: Lincoln Memorial Renamed for Ronald Reagan

7:35 PM Trent Lott - "Re-segregation in the 21st Century"

7:40 PM EPA Address #1: Mercury: It's What's for Dinner

8:00 PM Vote on which country to invade next

8:10 PM Call EMTs to revive Rush Limbaugh

8:15 PM John Ashcroft Lecture: The Homos Are After Your Children

8:30 PM Round table discussion on reproductive rights (men only)

8:50 PM Seminar #2: Corporations: The Government of the Future

9:00 PM Condi Rice sings "Can't Help Lovin' Dat Man"

9:05 PM Phyllis Schlafly speaks on "Why Women Shouldn't Be Leaders"

9:10 PM EPA Address #2: Trees: The Real Cause of Forest Fires

9:30 PM break for secret meetings

10:00 PM Second Prayer led by Cal Thomas

10:15 PM Karl Rove Lecture: Doublespeak Made Simple

10:30 PM Rumsfeld Lecture/Demonstration: How to Squint and Talk Macho Even
When You Feel Squishy Inside

10:35 PM Bush demonstration of trademark "deer in headlights" stare

10:40 PM John Ashcroft Demonstration: New Mandatory Kevlar Chastity Belt

10:45 PM GOP's Tribute to Tokenism, featuring Colin Powell & Condi Rice

10:46 PM Ann Coulter's Tribute to "Joe McCarthy, Great American Patriot"

10:50 PM Seminar #3: Education: A Drain on Our Nation's Economy

11:10 PM Hilary Clinton Pinata

11:20 PM John Ashcroft Lecture: Evolutionists: A Dangerous New Cult

11:30 PM Call EMTs to revive Rush Limbaugh again

11:35 PM Blame Clinton

11:40 PM Newt Gingrich speaks on "The Sanctity of Marriage"

11:41 PM Announcement: Ronald Reagan to be added to Mt. Rushmore

11:50 PM Closing Prayer led by Jesus Himself

12:00 PM Nomination of George W. Bush as Holy Supreme Planetary Overlord

History Repeating Itself All Over Again

By Jim Dallas

Let's face it, these have been incredibly slow news weeks. True, the Olympics are fascinating, we had a hurricane hit Florida, and there has been serious news abroad (in Iraq and Russia). These are all very serious for the people involved. But they're not really moving "stories" that capture the attention of the whole country.

The Campaign Desk hits political journalists for focusing so heavily on the Swifties, which is only a notch above Kobe Bryant, and various human interest stories.

Three years ago, I was working down in The Daily Texan basement, and I got a great kick out of reading a comic strip that was tacked up on the wall bemoaning the lack of real news the summer before (it was all shark bite stories and bear maulings, if I remember correctly). It was funny because it was true. Nothing really "big" had happened.

This was two days before 9/11.

Normalcy doesn't last long. I start to get skittish when the CJR starts bemoaning the reportage of silly stories like the Swifties, because it's usually not too long before the press corps have real news to report.

Hard Science is Easy

By Jim Dallas

From CNN, we learn that a 4 inch telescope discovered a new extra-solar planet.

You know, you can get a four-inch scope for a few hundred bucks, and all the necessary equipment to replicate this observation for a few thousand.

The truth is out there, eager beavers.

DFA Recap of Dean Rally in Austin

By Byron LaMasters

Austin SDEC member Fran Vincent has a post (along with photo) of the Dean rally on Sunday on the Democracy for America blog, so check it out.

DeLay Embarrassed, Heckled

By Byron LaMasters

You'd think it were Austin. The protesters for the DeLay event outnumbered supporters. Kuff has all the details.

Of course DeLay tried to make it a successful event, but no one really wanted to see him, except the protesters that is. Taking on Tom DeLay reports:

What an embarrassment for Tom DeLay. After sending 7500 invitations paid for by the University of Houston, for a reception honoring Tom DeLay, less than 100 attended, 50 of which were staff or worked at the university.

Outside in the hot sun were 150 enthusiastic protestors chanting "Don't DeLay. Indict today!" and "Tom DeLay has got to go". Three times as many protested Delay than those that honored him.

[...]

On the inside there were 3 large tables filled with food for 400-500 people that was left untouched. Name tags of about 100 people were left on the table, from those who didn't bother to attend after making reservations.

And DeLay only spoke for about 3 minutes including taking time to address students who were distrubed his speech by singing.

This was to be an event to "introduce DeLay to his new district" according to an email sent from the University. Many believed this was a misuse of state funds and will be filing a complaint tomorrow in Austin.

Instead it turned out to be an embarrassment for DeLay. He later went to Deer Park where again there were more protestors than those attending the event.

Meanwhile, while Tom DeLay was heckled by his new constituents, according to friends in Dallas, there were 2000 people at Gilley's last night to support Martin Frost.

Heflin talks one way, and votes the other

By Byron LaMasters

I'm pleased that State Rep. Talmadge Heflin (R-Houston) has cared for an African-American child from a home that couldn't care for him. But why does Heflin lament over the problem of the shamefully high incarceration rate of young Black males, but votes against programs to help remedy the problem?

The Austin American Statesman has the story for you:

Just as Rep. Talmadge Heflin, R-Houston, is running for re-election in a district that is increasingly minority, he got into an adoption battle over a youngster the Heflins felt they cared for more and better than his parents.

And it produced a comment in court from Heflin that drew some stinging remarks from people who indicated that if Heflin was right, he’s part of the reason.

“We all know the terrible problem that black male children have growing up into manhood without being in prison,” Heflin told the judge in the court hearing, as he and his wife fought for custody of the American-born son of African immigrant parents.

Heflin’s Houston House colleague, Democrat Garnet Coleman, who is African-American, said he felt for the parents and the child, and the Heflins – to a point.

“I hate to see anyone go through an emotionally wrenching situation like the one that the Heflins and their former employee are dealing with,” Coleman said in a press release. “Clearly, everyone involved cares deeply for the child.

“However, Rep. Helfin’s paternalistic remarks about black males clearly contradict his record as a legislator. If he truly wants to do something to keep young people out of prison, why did he pass a budget that cuts at-risk youth prevention programs by more than $27 million? Rep. Heflin’s actions do not match his words and his testimony can only be viewed as hypocritical grandstanding.”

Coleman went on to list a litany of other programs that had been cut as a result of the tight budget overseen by Heflin, in the face of Gov. Perry saying he’d veto any new taxes.

Typical Republican hypocrisy. They do a lot of talk about the problems that the poor, the downtrodden, racial minorities and working class families face, but their votes don't back up their talk.

Give the people of House District 149 representation in the state house that will back up the talk. Donate to Hubert Vo today.

How to be Popular on Campus

By Byron LaMasters

The Reliable Source column of the Washington Post weighs in on what I blogged the other day - the intent by the College Republican National Committee to exploit the 9/11 anniversary to sign up Republicans and bring conservative speakers to campus:

How to be popular on campus: Despite claims from both sides of the political fray that the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks should never, ever be politicized, the College Republican National Committee hopes to build membership in the new school year by promoting 9/11 observances. "You can ensure your CR chapter starts the new year as the leading group at your school," the group's Web site states, "by becoming involved with Young America's Foundation's 9/11: Never Forget Project." Past participation with the nonprofit conservative organization has helped chapters "boost [their] standings" and get better speakers, such as conservative loyalists Bay Buchanan and Dinesh D'Souza.

Young America's Foundation suggests, among other things, holding a moment of prayer at home football games to mark the anniversary and will provide free posters, buttons and other materials. But it's in no way, shape or form political, Patrick Coyle, director of campus programs, assured us.

"We're using this in a way to get the members active," he said. "The reason why we started this program in the first place is that a lot of schools weren't doing anything for the anniversary."

This year, the foundation Web site says, its 9/11 speakers include Dave Bossie, a certified Bill Clinton antagonist who has written a book called "Intelligence Failure: How Clinton's National Security Policy Set the Stage for 9/11." A nonpolitical title if we've ever heard one.

Of course, the other side has rushed to defend the CR's, calling me a hypocrite for condemning the CR's, but not F 9/11. I'm sorry Chris, but that's about the silliest argument I've ever. Chris Elam managed to twist my words, because of my conclusion in my original post:

If either the UT College Republicans or the UT Young Conservatives of Texas chapter exploits 9/11 for partisan political purposes, I'll be there with a lot of others to call them out on it.

Apparently, that's hypocritical, because I haven't criticized Michael Moore for doing the same thing. Perhaps, I should have spelled it out for Chris and said:

If either the UT College Republicans or the UT Young Conservatives of Texas chapter exploits the 9/11 anniversary for partisan political purposes, I'll be there with a lot of others to call them out on it.

Ok, so I should have included those two words in the original post, even though I thought that it should have been assumed, given the title (and thrust) of my post, "College Republicans to Exploit 9/11 Anniversary". Hello. If Michael Moore exploits the 9/11 anniversary to increase his book or F 9/11 sales, I think that would be inappropriate. If conservative groups use the anniversary for political purposes, I'll also feel that that is inappropriate.

Both the left and the right has appropriately questioned the months and years leading up to 9/11/2001, and the actions by the Bush administration following that day. The left has attacked Bush for his failure to take our security threats seriously before 9/11, and his actions following 9/11 that have made America less safe and secure by dividing America and alienating our allies, whose help we need to fight international terrorism. The right has questioned President Clinton's approach to fighting terrorism, and the Bush campaign has run ads touting Bush's leadership following 9/11. Agree or disagree with it, but it's fair game. However, using the anniversary of 9/11 to advance a partisan political agenda is inappropriate for either side.

Conservative Student Paper to Begin in Austin

By Byron LaMasters

Because ya know, the Austin Review and Contumacy just aren't enough for the other side. They need a conservative daily to counter the liberal Daily Texan. Whether the Daily Texan is liberal depends almost entirely on that year's editor. I'm causiously optimistic about this year, but the past couple of year's the Texas has had libertarian or conservative-leaning editors. Calling the Texan liberal when they had assinine editorials supporting third-party candidates against Elliott Naishtat and Lloyd Doggett - both of whom have been champions for UT. They also endorsed State Sen. Gonzalo Barrientos's Republican opponent that year, when Barrientos has been the leader in the state senate for a student regent.

Anyway, here's what the Austin Chronicle has about the new paper:

On Sept. 2, the ex-advertising director of The Daily Texan will launch a new weekly broadsheet newspaper called The Austin Student, which will go forth to do battle with the Texan and other area student publications. It will be distributed free on the campuses of UT, Austin Community College, Concordia University, St. Edward's University, and Huston-Tillotson College, according to publisher Evelyn Gardner, who spent 16 years pitching ads for the Texan. (Though the Texan editorial staff is made up of students, its business side is not.)

Gardner resigned from the Texan in May after butting heads with Texas Student Publications director Kathy Lawrence (who declined to comment on Gardner's departure). She was soon joined by Texan account executive Donna Settle, who is the advertising director of the new paper, which hopes to "offer advertisers a one-stop shop to reach the college students of Austin."

While Gardner emphasizes that the Student is not targeting the Texan or any other publication, she also makes it clear it will attempt to set itself apart from the political coverage and opinion, particularly of the left-leaning variety, that has long been a hallmark of student papers. "We're going to cover issues that relate more to students on a personal level," Gardner said.

That would include everything from first-person stories from students to a religion page, spotlighting features and columns by local religious leaders. Students are "begging" for a more conservative voice on campus, Gardner says. "UT has a reputation for being a liberal school, and I think that is unfounded."

To help emphasize the new choice for this underserved legion of Bush-loving free thinkers, the Student's red, white, and blue boxes with the Texas star will soon appear next to every one of the Texan's campus news racks. "We will cover every site the Texan has, all 70 locations," Settle said. By the end of September, Gardner says, the Student, between all its distribution points across Austin, will reach 35,000 in free circulation – which would, perhaps not coincidentally, push it past the circulation of the Texan, renowned as the most widely read college newspaper in the country.

At the very least, Gardner vows the Student will do a better job of covering student government, the Greek scene, and on-campus issues than does the Texan. The Student also won't rely on news wire services, an oft-touted criticism of the Texan, she says.

I'll be sure to check it out with a critical eye when it appears on the scene.

Personal note

By Jim Dallas

Since basically, my time now belongs entirely to (in order), my civil procedure class, my contracts class, and my torts class, I will be blogging on such material since I really have no other frame of reference from which to blog. Feel free to read and to leave me helpful comments about why I should be pre-emptively barred from the Bar because I am an "evil-doer."

Although hopefully I will still regularly pop my head in here and say silly things.

Soon to be Published

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Scott Goldstein is someone whom I have come to know through the Dean campaign. I met him at the National Convention in Boston as he was coordinating the Dean Delegates. He's asked to publish part of my original writings from the Winter Wanderlust in Iowa and such.

I'm sending in the permission for it to be used in his latest book "The Tea is in the Harbor" to be published this October. This from the letter explains how it will be used...

The format chosen was to tell the stories of some of the “New Revolutionaries” or the “Sons of Liberty” following chapters or sections in the book. Your stories are interspersed throughout the writing.

So keep an eye out. This is Scott's Second Book, the first having been written about the 2000 election which is available here. It's an interesting feeling being published in a book, granted it's not My Life by Bill Clinton but hey, you try where you can. :)

Sadun on the Ballot

By Byron LaMasters

It'll be nice to have a congressman to vote for, even if only as a write-in. Lorenzo Sadun is turning in his signatures to get on the ballot today:

At 2 p.m. today, Lorenzo Sadun, professor of mathematics at the University, will deliver the 500 signatures needed to place him on the November ballot as a write-in candidate for the 10th Congressional District of Texas. To celebrate this success, Sadun held a gathering for supporters Monday at his recently acquired campaign office on Cameron Road.

I'm one of those 500. I signed Sadun's petition back at our Travis County Democratic convention back in April.

Sadun Blog.

Donate to Sadun.

Does Cheney Support his Daughter or his boss?

By Byron LaMasters

Or does he just flip flop?

He couldn't seem to make up his mind today:

Vice President Dick Cheney, whose daughter Mary is a lesbian, spoke supportively about gay relationships on Tuesday, saying "freedom means freedom for everyone."

At a campaign rally in this Mississippi River town, Cheney was asked about his stand on gay marriage - an issue for which his boss, President Bush, has pushed for a constitutional amendment to ban such unions.

"Lynne and I have a gay daughter, so it's an issue our fami