Burnt Orange Report


News, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas






Ad Policies



Support the TDP!



Get Firefox!


January 30, 2006

Stee-rike!

By Jim Dallas

Although I'm biased as all get-out in favor of Chris Bell, I can still call the balls and strikes fairly, just like Chief Justice John Roberts. In today's episode,Greg tells us (with documentation!) that Bob Gammage wanted to revive the House Un-American Activities Committee in the 1970s. A lot of people change their minds over the course of thirty years, but one surmises that something like this that would have been right considered malicious, conniving, or boneheaded at that time as well. By framing this as a character issue Greg gets a gold star and a cookie from this fairly unbalanced scorekeeper.

Posted by Jim Dallas at January 30, 2006 05:35 AM | TrackBack

Comments

Hey now! I'll be collecting on that cookie, you know.

Posted by: Greg Wythe at January 30, 2006 07:12 AM

I don't know enough about this particular issue to offer a comment but I think it's important to point out that the story says the majority of Gammage's district supported the legislation. Isn't that the responsibility of an elected representative--to push for laws and measures that his/her constituents want?

My "representative" (and I use that term very loosely) is Joe Barton. He was recently asked about a vote and said something to the effect that, "My vote is between me and my God." Ummmm...no, Joe. It isn't. That's why you are called a REPRESENTATIVE. Because you REPRESENT the people who voted for you. You were not annointed by God to carry out His wishes nor were you selected to push your own agenda and do whatever you want to do based on your value system. Whatever you and your God want to chat about is fine, but don't push your own religious agenda to the detriment of your constituents, please.

That's the real question here...do you think that a REPRESENTATIVE should perform his job based on his own value system (whether it's liberal or conservative) or should he actually REPRESENT the wishes of the people who voted for him...who chose him to carry out THEIR wishes--the wishes of the majority in that district.

I know Bob Gammage and I know that his primary interest and concern is to represent the people of the state of Texas--the people who voted for him--not to push his own agenda and do what HE wants to do. Not something that can be said about our current crop of "our way or the highway, we know what's best for you" leaders.

Posted by: dfwdem at January 30, 2006 09:36 AM

Here's what I posted up on Greg's site... in the interest of full disclosure, I'm a Gammage supporter here in Travis County.

There's no hemming and hawing about abortion, Greg, and to say otherwise is as much of a distortion of the truth as that letter from the Dirty Dozen.

Bob Gammage has been pro-choice since BEFORE Roe v. Wade. During his time in Congress he had problems with federal funding for abortions, NOT a woman's right to choose. He has since, PRIOR to this campaign, changed his position and admitted the mistake. We finally have a politician who will admit mistakes and you want to beat him up?

As for this HUAC nonsense, you've got the wrong chamber, Greg. McCarthy was in the Senate and if you're going to try to paint someone with the same brush try something that's a little less of a reach. McCarthy and Gammage is about as believable as Barney Frank dating Trent Lott.

Why are we discussing a bill the entire TX delegation supported (Bob didn't write this, nor did he introduce it) when you've made no mention of Chris' support for the Bankruptcy Bill. That's my reason for not supporting Joe Biden in anything he does in the future, AND THAT'S MY REASON FOR NOT SUPPORTING DINO CHRIS BELL.

Posted by: original TREY at January 30, 2006 10:58 AM

Trey,

So you forgive Gammage for his attempt to infringe on civil liberties due to the "fact" that every other Texas Rep. was doing the same thing (a fact wholly unsupported by reality, btw), but you consider Bell a DINO due to his support of a bankruptcy bill that had the support of 25 to 3 by the Texas delegation?

Gee, it's nice to know there's a double standard that goes along with the reinvention of Bob Gammage as a true-blue Democrat.

Ref: Vote #20 ... http://www.pirg.org/score2003/texas.html

Posted by: Greg Wythe at January 30, 2006 11:32 AM

So should Sirhan Sirhan be let out of prison because McCarthy's top committee staffer (Bobby Kennedy) at HUAC was a tad too zealous some 50 years ago? Let's have a little perspective here, folks.

Bob Gammage was out winning elections before Chip Staniswalis was eligible to vote.

Posted by: notgonnatell at January 30, 2006 12:02 PM

No double standard, I'll vote against anyone who voted for that bill whether they have an R or D next to their name. I sent letters and made phone calls to McCaul warning him not to vote for that bill.

As for the HUAC thing, I still don't know what it was about. My point was that the entire TX delegation, 9 Democrats and 2 R's, signed on as co-sponsors. I therefore have some questions as to what the purpose of it was. I'm also a little suspicious how this information was released, especially the manner in which is disclosed. I mean, Joe McCarthy? Greg, that was way over the top. What's next... are you going to try to tie him to Roy Cohn?

I'd like to know where Chris is on a Clean Air, Clean Water amendment as well. I know where Bob is on it, it's in his platform.

Posted by: original TREY at January 30, 2006 12:08 PM

This is as shameful as the "Governor Perry Found in Bed with Gay Lover" garbage and just reflects a belief by some that if you tell a lie long enough, people will believe it.

In the end, most people don't. In the end, most people just take a look at who spread the lie. In this case and as in the case with the gay governor rumor, Chris Bell. In both cases, the mark of a loser lashing out.

This does little for the credibility of those who maintain there is basis to it. It does great damage to the credibility of BOR that it allows it to be continued to be even debated.

This committee was created in 1937 and was created for the sole purpose of investigating subversive activity including treason by government workers. This committee was not involved in the McCarthy hearings. To maintain that it was, again, just points to the only fact in any of this which is that some refuse to accept facts and instead choose to distort them.

To frame the point, every Democrat who voted for the Patriot Act should be removed from office if the rationale of Greg Wythe and now Jim Dallas is to be followed. The purpose of both, no matter how both may have been abused by some, was to protect the national security.

Some of you remind me of a pack of rabid dogs that are foaming at the mouth and biting at anything you can. In desperation.

Chris Bell has never served any true Democratic purpose. His voting record reflects instead that he has served his own purpose. And his own agenda. And it crossed party lines when it suited his purpose. He only represents himself. And he is driven solely by the taste of power that public office affords him. He likes it. And obviously likes to abuse it as reflected by the admonishment he received from the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.

I don't know the man. I only know of him. And I know he is not someone I would want in any public office. And this latest attack on Bob Gammage is just further reason why.

Posted by: Baby Snooks at January 30, 2006 01:08 PM

Orig Trey, the "entire" Tx delegation was much larger than 11 members in the fall of '77 when Gammage signed on to that HUAC bill. They did not "all" sign on to a bill to restart a House Unamerican Activities Committee.

In '77, Gammage had just defeated Ron Paul, narrowly. He was a progressive in a relatively conservative district. I suspect some political consultant/adviser suggested this as a good idea because the crazy libertarian Dr. Paul may not have supported this idea, but I have ni evidence or recollection about that.

I do recall Billie Carr and a lot of Harris Co. D's being displeased about the HUAC bill. And Trey, in addition to McCarthy in the Senate, there also was a House Unamerican Activities Committee - a Cold War relic from the likes of J. Edgar Hoover - which was first Chaired in the House by the colorful Rep. Martin Dies of Southeast Texas, a man who later ran statewide after toying with a "pro-America" Presidential campaign in 1940 which featured a huge, widely publicized rally at the Hollywood Bowl.

The point of this historical sketch is to illustrate why Gammage's move aroused some negative passion at the time from some Democrats who'd been around. That said, Gammage lost narrowly to Paul in the next election and went on to serve on the Tx Supreme Court and support Democrats in state and national races.

Posted by: getitright at January 30, 2006 01:19 PM

Orig Trey, the "entire" Tx delegation was much larger than 11 members in the fall of '77 when Gammage signed on to that HUAC bill. They did not "all" sign on to a bill to restart a House Unamerican Activities Committee.

In '77, Gammage had just defeated Ron Paul, narrowly. He was a progressive in a relatively conservative district. I suspect some political consultant/adviser suggested this as a good idea because the crazy libertarian Dr. Paul may not have supported reinventing HUAC, but I have no evidence or recollection about that.

Trey, in addition to McCarthy in the Senate, there also was a House Unamerican Activities Committee - a Cold War relic which was first Chaired by the colorful Rep. Martin Dies of Southeast Texas, a man who later ran statewide after toying with a "pro-America" Presidential campaign in 1940 which featured a huge, widely publicized rally at the Hollywood Bowl.

The point of this historical sketch is to illustrate why Gammage's move aroused some negative passion at the time from some Democrats who'd been around. I recall Billie Carr and other Harris Co. Dems being displeased about Gammage's support for the HUAC bill. That said, Gammage lost narrowly to Paul in the next election and went on to serve on the Tx Supreme Court and support Democrats in state and national races.

Posted by: getitright at January 30, 2006 01:23 PM

I use to be a Bell supporter. When Gammage entered the race, I looked closely at both men and it was obvious, the choice had to be Bob Gammage. Because of my previous support for Chris and because I liked him personally, I decided to focus on other races and my support for Gammage would come on primary day.

Thanks to the direction TeamBell, led by Jason Stanford, started to take, I decided to come out and actively support Gammage. It took only another week or so, when I had my name removed from the Bell e-mail list. I no longer cared to even know what Jason had to say, since it was all typical Stanford garbage.

Well today, speaking of garbage, I just took my Chris Bell t-shirt I got when I went to Austin for his announcement last August and dumped it in the trash, because that is just where Chris has allowed his campaign to go. He is not the man I thought he was. He is either what Jason is or he's too weak to stand up to his own team.

Hopefully, Stanford will finish sinking Chris by the primary, rather than us having to watch what has become of Chris and his team going into a November Titanic.

To those of you, to whom I sent e-mails over the past year, telling you Chris was a great candidate, please accept my apology.

Posted by: merci_me at January 30, 2006 01:33 PM

My mistake... on the delegation.

Posted by: original TREY at January 30, 2006 01:34 PM

"Well today, speaking of garbage, I just took my Chris Bell t-shirt I got when I went to Austin for his announcement last August and dumped it in the trash, because that is just where Chris has allowed his campaign to go."

Maybe liberated Texas Democratic women should follow your lead and burn their bras AND their Bell T-shirts.

I'll not support Planned Parenthood in Houston, or any organization associated with the Dirty Dozen, until it gets a new executive director and a new board.

Did anyone find out which organization the $500 sponsorship that Alison Bell was reimbursed for from campaign funds went to? Or is that just another stupid Baby Snooks question that answers itself?

Maybe not as stupid is the question of whether it was legal. It certainly doesn't seem ethical. Which is an important question since Chris Bell has made such a point of ethics and law. Or does Chris Bell simply believe ethics, like law, only applies to everyone else?

Posted by: Baby Snooks at January 30, 2006 01:58 PM

"This is as shameful as the "Governor Perry Found in Bed with Gay Lover" garbage and just reflects a belief by some that if you tell a lie long enough, people will believe it.

In the end, most people don't. In the end, most people just take a look at who spread the lie. In this case and as in the case with the gay governor rumor, Chris Bell. In both cases, the mark of a loser lashing out. "

I thought it had been Carole 4Names behind that rumor (maybe only 3Names at the time).

Same garbage, different loser.

Posted by: Dave In A Cave at January 30, 2006 02:58 PM

Let's talk about Chris Bell's record in congress..... among other things, he's an anti-environmentalist who voted to drill for oil in the ANWR! That wasnt 30 years ago either! Chris is a slime-ball with a Republican past. He's not fooling anybody. It takes a fat nerve to critisize when Chris himself is the dirty one.

Posted by: Treehugger at January 30, 2006 03:19 PM

I thought it had been Carole 4Names behind that rumor (maybe only 3Names at the time).

No doubt that was put out by the two Democratic sleazeballs in Houston, both Bell supporters, who put the rumor out on the internet to begin with. And put that out when they were caught and called on it.

Posted by: Baby Snooks at January 30, 2006 03:36 PM

As has been discussed here before, Carol's campaign staff, Bell's campaign staff and even Perry's campaign staff are all buddies.

(Remember the, "Alison Bell got a phone call..... from Strayhorn's campaign aide....?"

If you don't recall, we can look it up together in BOR's December Archives....

I guess they all became friends (and passed rumors like playing 'telephone') when many of them were working for Bush Pioneer Rob Mossbacher.

Bell's campaign has always seem too cozy with that crowd. I guess that's why the Nau's (see the Perry Bahamas vacation trip for reference if you're not sure who THEY are) contributed to him in 2002 and 2004 - must have been on the advice of Mrs. Bell's republican contacts.

John L Nau III and his wife (Babs, I think) clearly show up on Bell's FEC reports for 2002 and 2004. Look it up... it's a real adventure .....!

Posted by: RedStateDem at January 30, 2006 04:25 PM

There's lots of Republican money behind Chris Bell. Most don't take the time to look at his campaign finance reports. Not only John Nau but lots of others whose contributions the Republicans probably question even if the Democrats don't.

Some politicians go whichever way the wind blows. Chris Bell goes whichever way the money blows. Particularly the Republican money. His votes in Congress reflect that.

Most apparently don't look at his voting record either. They just listen to whatever Jason Stanford tells them.

Chris Bell is proof positive that PT Barnum was a very wise man. There's a sucker born every minute.

Posted by: Baby Snooks at January 30, 2006 04:55 PM

You know, Babe.... I'm pretty much a blog skeptic ("believe 'em at your own peril") , but you've been on the money on many, many things.

While it's true that some people believe what they want to believe (true or not), you've often raised enough red flags to slow down the spin a bit. There are quite a few grateful for the insight.

Posted by: RedStateDem at January 30, 2006 05:02 PM

Hey you all from Houston......I just had a friend tell me that Chris Bell got an award from the Harris County REPUBLICAN PARTY a few years ago! What the heck is that all about?? Anybody know? Citizen

Posted by: Citizen at January 30, 2006 05:31 PM

Not insight so much as just simple observation and a good memory coupled with a strong distaste for "revisionists." But thanks for the compliment.

Posted by: Baby Snooks at January 30, 2006 06:31 PM

It was probably the Harris County Republican Party's "PT Barnum Award."

He was a common sight at quite a few Republican functions, always merely accompanying his Republican wife of course, until he decided to run for Congress although obviously he kept his hand open for the Republican checks that continued to pour in that should have gone to the Republican candidate but didn't. That in itself should have raised questions among Democrats. It did raise questions among some Republicans. Just didn't look right. Or smell right. Then or now.

Posted by: Baby Snooks at January 30, 2006 06:37 PM

Look, I remain undecided, except that I know I will enthusiatically vote for and contribute to the Democratic candidate. That said, I continue to lean more and more strongly to Gammage, mostly due to Bell's voting record in Congress.
But I dont think there is anything wrong with this "attack" and certainly dont think its anywhere near the ludicrous "Perry rumors."

Gammage sponsored a piece of legislation. That legislation was controversial. Bell supporters are arguing that the legislation was a bad idea, and that Gammage should be rejected for it. Whats so dirty about this? That they identified it with McCarthy? The committee was designed to investigate treason -- isnt there a reasonable argument that starting such a committee posed the same risks as the McCarthy hearings, even if Gammage would have preferred that the committee perform a more limited role? Is it dirty because it happened a long time ago? That lessens its value to me, but it doesnt make it dirty -- much of Gammage's record happened a long time ago.

Sure, there are benefits when our primary opponents focus on Perry. Gammage, who, again, I think I will probably support, is to be commended for steadfastly adhering to this strategy. But there is a big difference between personal attacks and analyses of the records of the candidates.

Posted by: Joel at January 31, 2006 09:44 AM

That's the thing, there no reason to mention McCarthy's name other than shock value.

Posted by: original TREY at January 31, 2006 09:49 AM

So would be fair game to describe the dangers of Bush's domestic spying in terms of Watergate or COINTELPRO? Or is that merely "shock value" because the relationship is one of analogy?

Sure, its a little hyperbolic to associate so closely with McCarthy, and it doesnt change my mind, but its relevant. Politicians and their supporters hype their claims. Woop-de-doo. Gammage can defend himself.

Posted by: Joel at January 31, 2006 10:23 AM

That's the thing... McCarthy never served in the House.

As for comparing current illegal surveillance to COINTELPRO, I'm not sure since it was a far more extensive program than just wiretapping. However, both were illegal.

Posted by: original TREY at January 31, 2006 01:04 PM

And this is why we lose elections. We don't NEED Republicans, we are more than capable of defeating ourselves. Does anyone really, honestly, in their heart of hearts believe Judge Gammage is a closet McCarthyite? Of course not. Then why bring up 30 year old crap like this in a desperate bid to win the nomination? I freely admit I am supporting Gammage and for purely selfish reasons--I think he can win, and Bell (who seems like a great guy despite voting for the bankruptcy "reform" bill) can't. We already have trial lawyer money going to Strayhorn; Gammage knows where the money is and how to get it. This race will be BRUTAL, and Gammage is already a veteran of nasty political brawls. Support whoever you want, but for God's sake, let's stop ripping each other apart. This ain't 1990; there aren't enough of us left to engage in a primary bloodbath.

Posted by: The Local Crank at January 31, 2006 03:35 PM

Primaries involve some comparison of records. Gammage voted for abortion funding restrictions, and sponsored legislation that would have created a house committee on internal security. Thats not a blood bath, its an appraisal of his recorded public positions: it doesnt suggest anything unethical on his part, it doesnt pry into his personal affairs, and it doesnt really offer ammunition to the right (Rick Perry attack Ad Voice Over: Bob Gammage likes to SAY he is for choice, but he voted against tax-payer subsidy of abortion for poor women. Vote Perry...)
I think both candidates should be focused on Perry, but there has to be some room to compare to each other if we are to make an intelligent decision about which to back.
I appreciate the efforts of both sides. Lets rebuild the party

Posted by: Joel at January 31, 2006 05:04 PM

A little perspective...
Last go round, Perry accused our candidate of complicity in the MURDER OF A FRIGGIN LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER for cryin out loud. If this is what counts for "dirty" in democratic primaries, then I am proud (because we arent stooping so low) and scared (because the repugs are going to teach us what dirty really is)

Posted by: Joel at January 31, 2006 05:11 PM

Joel, to clear up your misapprehensions. Gammage sponsored NO bill, he signed a discharge petition to get a bill out of committee. It never went further than that.

The Bell people have tried every way they can to smear him and twist reality into a shape that doesn't resemble the truth. The tactics of the Bell campaign so closely resemble 'swiftboating tactics' that Republicans often use that it has fueled speculation that the ties Bell (and his campaign staff) have with the Republican party in Texas are more than 'skin deep".

I know that that trashy piece of 'oppo' and the spin on it was floated to almost every blog owner in Texas about 3 weeks ago. The only ones to post it are hard-line Bell supporters. The ONLY reason it hasn't been nastier is because they really don't have anything significant to bitch at Gammage about.

This isn't about 'issues'... it's about smears. It isn't about anything other than that the Bell campaign has had a year to stop flopping and floundering around and organize grassroots Democrats to help EVERY DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE IN TEXAS.

Instead, they intended to skate to the general election only caring about their own campaign and to hell with everyone else. They chose the easy way out, they gambled and they've lost.

Gammage is working to help every downballot candidate in Texas that he can. Has Bell even offered?

Bell supported Bush's tax plan for the wealthy (though he said he wasn't sure whether they should be 'permanent' or not). Bell voted FOR the bankruptcy bill. Bell voted FOR drilling in ANWAR (via Bush's energy package).

Those all happened less than 30 months ago. Those votes are both relevant and revealing, and not in Bell's favor.

Posted by: Texas Kat at January 31, 2006 06:47 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






BOA.JPG


January 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        


About Us
About BOR
Advertising Policies

Karl-Thomas M. - Owner
Byron L. - Founder
Alex H. - Contact
Andrea M. - Contact
Andrew D. - Contact
Damon M. - Contact
Drew C. - Contact
Jim D. - Contact
John P. - Contact
Katie N. - Contact
Kirk M. - Contact
Matt H. - Contact
Phillip M. - Contact
Vince L. - Contact
Zach N. - Conact

Donate

Tip Jar!



Archives
Recent Entries
Categories
BOR Edu.
University of Texas
University Democrats

BOR News
The Daily Texan
The Statesman
The Chronicle

BOR Politics
DNC
DNC Blog: Kicking Ass
DSCC
DSCC Blog: From the Roots
DCCC
DCCC Blog: The Stakeholder
Texas Dems
Travis County Dems
Dallas Young Democrats

U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett
State Sen. Gonzalo Barrientos
State Rep. Dawnna Dukes
State Rep. Elliott Naishtat
State Rep. Eddie Rodriguez
State Rep. Mark Strama
Traffic Ratings
Alexa Rating
Marketleap
Truth Laid Bear Ecosystem
Technoranti Link Cosmos
Blogstreet Blogback
Polling
American Research Group
Annenberg Election Survey
Gallup
Polling Report
Rasmussen Reports
Survey USA
Zogby
Texas Stuff
A Little Pollyana
Austin Bloggers
D Magazine
DFW Bogs
DMN Blog
In the Pink Texas
Inside the Texas Capitol
The Lasso
Pol State TX Archives
Quorum Report Daily Buzz
George Strong Political Analysis
Texas Law Blog
Texas Monthly
Texas Observer
TX Dem Blogs
100 Monkeys Typing
Alandwilliams.com
Alt 7
Annatopia
Appalachia Alumni Association
Barefoot and Naked
BAN News
Betamax Guillotine
Blue Texas
Border Ass News
The Daily DeLay
The Daily Texican
DemLog
Dos Centavos
Drive Democracy Easter Lemming
Esoterically
Get Donkey
Greg's Opinion
Half the Sins of Mankind
Jim Hightower
Houtopia
Hugo Zoom
Latinos for Texas
Off the Kuff
Ones and Zeros
Panhandle Truth Squad
Aaron Peña's Blog
People's Republic of Seabrook
Pink Dome
The Red State
Rhetoric & Rhythm
Rio Grande Valley Politics
Save Texas Reps
Skeptical Notion
Something's Got to Break
Southpaw
Stout Dem Blog
The Scarlet Left
Tex Prodigy
ToT
View From the Left
Yellow Doggeral Democrat
TX GOP Blogs
Beldar Blog
Blogs of War
Boots and Sabers
Dallas Arena
Jessica's Well
Lone Star Times
Publius TX
Safety for Dummies
The Sake of Arguement
Slightly Rough
Daily Reads
&c.
ABC's The Note
Atrios
BOP News
Daily Kos
Media Matters
MyDD
NBC's First Read
Political State Report
Political Animal
Political Wire
Talking Points Memo
Wonkette
Matthew Yglesias
College Blogs
CDA Blog
Get More Ass (Brown)
Dem Apples (Harvard)
KU Dems
U-Delaware Dems
UNO Dems
Stanford Dems
GLBT Blogs
American Blog
BlogActive
Boi From Troy
Margaret Cho
Downtown Lad
Gay Patriot
Raw Story
Stonewall Dems
Andrew Sullivan
More Reads
Living Indefinitely
Blogroll Burnt Orange!
BOR Webrings
< ? Texas Blogs # >
<< ? austinbloggers # >>
« ? MT blog # »
« ? MT # »
« ? Verbosity # »
Election Returns
CNN 1998 Returns
CNN 2000 Returns
CNN 2002 Returns
CNN 2004 Returns

state elections 1992-2005

bexar county elections
collin county elections
dallas county elections
denton county elections
el paso county elections
fort bend county elections
galveston county elections
harris county elections
jefferson county elections
tarrant county elections
travis county elections


Texas Media
abilene
abilene reporter news

alpine
alpine avalanche

amarillo
amarillo globe news

austin
austin american statesman
austin chronicle
daily texan online
keye news (cbs)
kut (npr)
kvue news (abc)
kxan news (nbc)
news 8 austin

beaumont
beaumont enterprise

brownsville
brownsville herald

college station
the battalion (texas a&m)

corpus christi
corpus christi caller times
kris news (fox)
kztv news (cbs)

crawford
crawford lone star iconoclast

dallas-fort worth
dallas morning news
dallas observer
dallas voice
fort worth star-telegram
kdfw news (fox)
kera (npr)
ktvt news (cbs)
nbc5 news
wfaa news (abc)

del rio
del rio news herald

el paso
el paso times
kdbc news (cbs)
kfox news (fox)
ktsm (nbc)
kvia news (abc)

fredericksburg
standard-radio post

galveston
galveston county daily news

harlingen
valley morning star

houston
houston chronicle
houston press
khou news (cbs)
kprc news (nbc)
ktrk news (abc)

kerrville
kerrville daily times

laredo
laredo morning times

lockhart
lockhart post-register

lubbock
lubbock avalanche journal

lufkin
lufkin daily news

marshall
marshall news messenger

mcallen
the monitor

midland - odessa
midland reporter telegram
odessa american

san antonio
san antonio express-news

seguin
seguin gazette-enterprise

texarkana
texarkana gazette

tyler
tyler morning telegraph

victoria
victoria advocate

waco
kxxv news (abc)
kwtx news (cbs)
waco tribune-herald

weslaco
krgv news (nbc)

statewide
texas cable news
texas triangle


World News
ABC News
All Africa News
Arab News
Atlanta Constitution-Journal
News.com Australia
BBC News
Bloomberg
Boston Globe
CBS News
Chicago Tribune
Christian Science Monitor
CNN
Denver Post
FOX News
Google News
The Guardian
Inside China Today
International Herald Tribune
Japan Times
LA Times
Mexico Daily
Miami Herald
MSNBC
New Orleans Times-Picayune
New York Times
El Pais (Spanish)
Salon
San Francisco Chronicle
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Slate
Times of India
Toronto Star
Wall Street Journal
Washington Post



Powered by
Movable Type 3.2b1