BOR: - Recent Comments

Silly Blog?

badmcghee — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:49:39 GMT

"Only David Butts and Fred McGhee (with his silly blog) were the only commission members opposed to to the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission."

Do you care to elaborate? What exactly was silly about the blog posts I devoted to discussion of these matters? Have you reached out to me and tried to discuss this issue, before engaging in such a petty and childish insult?

You might try actually speaking to people before engaging in insulting language about them. Especially if those people belong to and are active in some of the same organizations that you are.

It's called respect.

How about an actual argument?

badmcghee — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:43:55 GMT

I certainly respect anyone's right to an opinion, but what exactly--and I do mean exactly--is your empirical basis for claiming that I am "flat out wrong" about the merits of an Independent Redistricting Commission in Austin, Texas?

Please enlighten me. You've read my blog, which I appreciate, so you should know that I have an open mind on this matter. I would appreciate you or anyone else actually crafting an ARGUMENT, grounded in facts, in support of their position, instead of mostly relying on assertions and feelings.

Here is a suggestion to get the conversation started: how many cities (NOT states, that's different) besides San Diego currently have an Independent Redistricting Commission?

A basic and fair question. One that the city council will surely ask.

Please be mindful that as a committee member I am already familiar with the conventional arguments in favor of an IRC, so there is no need to repeat truisms.

Some Catholic groups, not the Catholic Church

LSadun — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 14:12:44 GMT

The Catholic Church is still very much opposed to the policy. It's pretty darn easy to please Catholics for Choice with a pro-contraceptives policy, and not hard to please the Catholic Health Association, which gave its full support to health care reform. Saying that they represent the Catholic Church on this issue is like saying that the Log Cabin Republicans represent the GOP on gay marriage. The position of the Church is set by the Catholic Bishops, and they're still dead-set against the policy.

I'm not criticizing Obama's maneuver, mind you. I'm 100% behind the idea that contraceptives should be freely available. But saying that the "make the insurer pay for it" dodge neutralizes the support of the Catholic Church is nonsense.

Obama's maneuver makes him look reasonable and accommodating, and perhaps gets him some more support from moderates. That's good. It makes it harder for Republicans to demagogue the issue. Good again. But it's never going to win over the real opposition, and we shouldn't pretend that it does.

For that matter, we should be glad that it doesn't. If we're going to fight about social issues, let's make it about contraception, where the middle is solidly in favor. Let's not make it about late-term abortions, where the middle is opposed. Let's have Santorum look like a raving lunatic while he explains that contraception is the source of America's problems. Let's have Romney look like a hypocrite pretending to be a lunatic while he says almost the same thing. Let's have Gingrich look like a hypocrite and a lunatic, as usual.

This may be the first election in memory where Democrats do better running on social issues than on the economy. If the economy continues to improve, we'll win regardless of the campaign's focus. If it doesn't, expect the Dems to use contraception as a wedge issue.

Willie and Lance are wrong

ATXBrad — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 00:13:46 GMT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Ballesteros is exactly what we need!

P.Hill — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:31:13 GMT

Ballesteros is exactly what we need!

Shackleford seems like you must have a horse in this race, I am thinking your horse is not of the democratic party. Your trying to discredit one of the hardest working Constables in Travis County. Now the issues are the same issues Vann used. WHAT ELSE DO YOU HAVE. We read the articles ADAN was right Vann LOST!. I find it amazing that you had the nerve to try it again, Is that really INTEGRITY before POLITICS. A person with integrity would campaign about issues or what your candidate can do better. But your candidate can not do better seems how you will try to win by using information that was proven false. I agree with this Ookla person.

Tell me how can you save Tax Payer Dollars? Do you know an easy way to file civil cases on line, And can you increase school attendance. What programs can you start that will benefit the community. And will you accept that all persons need to be treated with Respect and Courtesy. CAN YOU ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS? BALLESTEROS CAN!

Now, you know readers have access to this same information, But I read so much more information that you did not mention. See I did my research, you posted just SOME of the information, Let see if I can finish this for you.

Ballesteros was cleared! Ballesteros sued DPS, you said he lost, So why did they continue to pay him! I read TWC they said DPS was wrong. You confuse readers about the complaint you listed was in 1991 DOJ complaint, so Why did they promote him to LT. Balleteros, im confused Rshackleford you said to read and I did, your information is not right. This ookla guy said it all.

Im done and Rshackleford you have no grounds to stand on. The old allegation was dumb, and you show your class trying to use the Bob Vann information against Ballesteros. Sounds like a Vann former employee.