I am twenty years old and I live just north of the Texas border in Bryan County which is across the river from Denison/Sherman. I have been active in county politics for a very long time and I was the area coordinator for Obama's campaign here in southeastern Oklahoma.
Last night, I ventured into Grayson County to attend a forum at the courthouse to meet with the local candidates. After making some calls, I realized that the event had been cancelled but the Grayson County Democratic Party was meeting at a local restaurant for their monthly meeting. I ventured over to the restaurant and I walked in and I was just thinking there would be about twenty people. I was wrong. The whole banquet room was full with probably sixty people in attendence.
"We need a leader who has the strength and experience to lead on day one," said Barrientos, who served 30 years in the Legislature before retiring in 2006. "Hillary doesn't just talk about change, she delivers change."
Also in with his endorsement is Former State Attorney General Jim Mattox:
Former state Attorney General Jim Mattox also came out for Clinton. "In Texas we have a phrase: 'She's earned her spurs,'" said Mattox, attorney general from 1983 to '91. "Hillary has spent more than 35 years earning her spurs, and she is the best leader for our country."
I've read a few articles and comments about Democrats whom are worried about Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama attracting conservative Republican voters and what it really means. My question is why? In my opinion, I believe it's an asset Obama will be able to use to his advantage.
Obama is the type of candidate that can bring back the Reagan Democrats, Independents, and Republicans whom no longer have a voice in the Republican Party that is now controlled by right-wing religious fanatics. Not true conservative Republicans. If they were conservative, they would've voted against the tax cuts that put this country deep into debt. I believe there are two reasons why conservatives are attracted to Obama.
Let me first state that despite his age and his lack of skill as a politico, I'm voting for Dale Henry for RR Commissioner. He knows the oil and gas industry from the ground up and will do an excellent job both for industry and consumers. The RR Commission regulates the oil and gas industry in Texas and we've had nothing but industry rubber stamps on it. It's time that we have someone there who'll actually do a good job for Texans and our environment.
That said, I didn't have much of problem with his opponent. Until now. Last night in Decatur, during a candidate forum, Art Hall was asked a direct question about a possible conflict of interest should he win. Specifically, he was asked if it was a conflict of interest for his wife to work for Valero Energy, one of the companies he would be regulating if elected. He stated that it wasn't and he knew it wasn't because he contacted Valero and asked them.
Wait... Art, you contacted Valero and asked them, the company you'd be regulating, if it was a conflict of interest?
If Rick Noriega continues to refuse to debate Ray McMurrey on the issues facing Texas voters this Election cycle, not only will he have done a disservice to Democratic voters, but he'll be a weaker candidate for it.
The campaign trail does exactly what it is supposed to do, and that is to make the candidates sharper and better prepared. Democratic groups in Texas should stop treating Noriega as the presumptive nominee and hold him to account on the areas where he is vulnerable (accepting contributions from registered lobbyist Bob "Swift Boat" Perry, and his own connections to the energy lobby).
In July of 2006, Vince Leibowitz, who runs a blog that I love, Capitol Annex, had this to say about Kay Bailey Hutchison's refusal to debate Barbara Ann Radnofsky:
"...the thought of debating Barbara Radnofsky evidently scares Kay Bailey Hutchison so bad that she hasn't accepted a single debate invitation that's been extended to date. What is Kay Bailey Hutchison afraid of? That Barbara Radnofsky is smarter than she is? That Barbara Radnofsky knows more than she does? That Barbara Radnofsky has her finger on the pulse of Texas voters more than she does?"
I agreed with Vince completely at the time, and now I think it's fair to say that the same questions could be asked of Rick Noriega. But still, the Texas Progressive Alliance, which Leibowitz chairs, endorsed Noriega saying that Texans have a clear choice.
I don't mean any disrespect to Vince. I've followed his blog for years and I appreciate what the TPA is doing, but as Hugh Stearns has said, the Draft Noriega effort may have been a mistake and it seems that people may be loathe to consider that.
Consider a recent post on BOR about the Texas Environmental Democrats of Austin endorsements:
"Ray McMurrey impressed a lot of people, but it didn't show up in the vote totals. He was the second-to-last candidate to speak, and before he went on over 95% of our ballots had already been cast. But later, I heard a couple of people say they would have changed their votes if they had waited until after he spoke to vote."
Even an informed reader who knows about both candidates and feels that Noriega is a better candidate must agree that the inevitability with which his campaign is being treated is simply a mistake.
I'm personally looking forward to voting for Ray McMurrey on March 4th, and if you're planning on voting in the primary I strongly urge you to take a close, fresh look at the candidates in this race.
There is a lot to look forward to this year. The national political scene will be intense with the opportunity to elect a new president, elect 5-10 more Democratic Senators, or a more progressive US House. And here in Texas we have the chance to win back the state house, maybe even pick up a state senate seat, and see our urban metros finally turn blue.
While I'm not making any resolutions (other than working to turn Texas blue), here are a few from U.S. Senate candidate Rick Noriega.
Rick Noriega's New Year's Resolutions:
Put Texas First
Rick will put Texas families first. He will bring Texas priorities and values to Washington, not the other way around. Rick is a straight shooter who speaks honestly and in plain language about the issues that matter to Texans most. Rick will stand up to special interests and provide a voice in Washington for Texans who go unheard everyday. Rick believes every Texan counts, and he will run a campaign that reaches out to every single voter in every single community.
Provide Real Leadership for Real Problems
As a Lt. Colonel in the National Guard, Rick will use first hand military experience to pursue a responsible plan to get us out of Iraq, and secure our homeland, and ensure our veterans have the health care and benefits they have earned. Rick believes patriotism is a Texas value, not a partisan value. Rick has served on the front lines to protect our individual freedoms, and he will continue to protect them by speaking out against illegal wiretapping and by protecting property rights.
Invest in Texas
Rick will continue to lead the fight for quality public schools, affordable higher education and access to health care for our children. Rick has created jobs in Texas, and he will focus on the creation of economic security and job opportunities for all Texans. He will work to keep Texas on the leading edge of innovative technologies to keep us competitive in a global marketplace.
I see Marc Campos has picked a side in the upcoming primary fight between State Rep. Jessica Farrar and her opponent.
Commentary's friend Jose Medrano is running for State Representative, District 148 in the Dem Primary. Jessica Farrar is the incumbent. Commentary votes in District 148. Jose used to work for Jessica. The conspiracy folks think Commentary is behind this race. Sorry pals. Jose has his own pros and friends involved. I like Jose, will vote for him, and tell others to support him because I think he would make a great public official.
Well that's nice, but speaking as someone else who votes in District 148, I say we already have a great public official serving us, one with a proven track record of doing the right thing. The single most important issue for any legislator or legislative candidate going into 2009 will be where they stand on House Speaker Tom Craddick and his notion of a divine right of Speakers. I know exactly where Jessica Farrar stands on this, because she's been voting against Craddick since 2005, back before most people realized how important it was to do so. She paid a price for it, too. Maybe her opponent will oppose Craddick, as all Democrats (and most Republicans) should. But why should I wonder about that when I have certainty with Farrar? I'll stick with the person who has demonstrated her courage when it counted.
More than that, Jessica Farrar represents my beliefs as well as any member of the House. I thought she had a great session this past year, standing up time and again for things that needed a champion. She fought for the HPV vaccine, after many of her colleagues suddenly and temporarily became concerned with the Governor overreaching his powers and used that as an excuse to demagogue against women's health. She was a leader in the fight against a genuine and pernicious power grab by the Governor on Homeland Security. She fought for clean air. On issue after issue, she voted the way I would have voted, and was up front about it.
Now, maybe Farrar's primary opponent believes the same things she does, and maybe he doesn't. If he doesn't, then for sure I wouldn't vote for him. But even if he does, why would I want to replace someone who's been doing a good job and voting the way I like for as long as Jessica Farrar has? Why wouldn't I want to keep the person who's been there and done that and has the record to prove it? I can't think of any reason at all. There's plenty of need and room for change in the Texas Legislature, but I want to change the parts that don't work. Jessica Farrar represents what does work. She belongs in the Lege, and I intend to help keep her there.
The choice could not be clearer. If you live in HD148, I hope you'll make a point of voting in the Democratic primary, and then again in the November general, for State Rep. Jessica Farrar. Thanks very much.
By now I think most of us have read Obama's statement:
Part of the reason that we have had a faith outreach in our campaigns is precisely because I don't think the LGBT community or the Democratic Party is served by being hermetically sealed from the faith community and not in dialogue with a substantial portion of the electorate, even though we may disagree with them.
This is cross posted at The Huffington Post and posted here for your convenience in case you missed it yesterday.
Truly ending the war in Iraq will only come about when our troops are no longer targets. That is why Governor Bill Richardson believes that we should not leave behind any of our troops. --Joaquin H. Guerra, Bill Richardson for President.
It's Time to Make a Choice in Iraq
By Governor Bill Richardson
Yesterday,twelve former Army captains wrote that short of reinstating the draft, "our best option is to leave Iraq immediately." In an extraordinary editorial in the Washington Post, these captains--all of whom served in Iraq--made it clear that we need to end this war and we need to end it now. They wrote that a " scaled withdrawal will not prevent a civil war and it will spend more blood and treasure on a losing proposition."
I strongly urge every American to read this important report from those who served in the failed conflict in Iraq. Army captains are the staff officers who plan operations against insurgent strongholds. They are the company commanders who lead our soldiers through the streets of Baghdad. And they are the soldiers who will direct our withdrawal from Iraq.
These men and women know the score. They know that we must leave Iraq. As they put it, "It's time to make a choice." Americans are fed up with the President's stalling and Congressional failure to act. Frankly, it is well past time we make a choice. And the only responsible choice left to us is to get all of our troops out of Iraq, with no residual forces left behind--no combat forces, no non-combat forces. As President, I will do it. I will get all of our troops out within a year after I take office - sooner if we can get it done safely.
The other major candidates in this race have said--again and again--that they will not. Senators Edwards, Obama, and Clinton have all refused to commit to getting all of our troops out of Iraq by 2013. None of them are willing to be clear about removing all troops - combat and non-combat. It's unbelievable. Are they looking at the same war the rest of us are? Furthermore, they are all advocating precisely the sort of scaled withdrawal that these twelve captains are warning against. It doesn't make any sense. Real leadership is about making the tough choices, and knowing when it is time to make bold moves. Now is the time for action, not hesitation. Ending this war requires real change, not more incrementalism.
Ending this war is the most important issue of our time. And it is the fundamental difference between me and Senators Edwards, Obama, and Clinton. I will end the war; they will not. I will get all of our troops out; they will leave troops behind indefinitely. I will order a safe and rapid withdrawal and have our troops out within a year. They have proposed a long, protracted withdrawal that will only increase the danger to our fighting men and women and drag out the war.
2013 is six years from now - six years. In six years, will we have lost 6,000 men and women in Iraq? 10,000? More? In six years will this be a $2 trillion mistake? Or $3 trillion? The war has been going on for four and half years already. Six years from now, we will have been there for more than a decade. Are you okay with that? I'm not.
The choice in Iraq is clear. We need to get all our troops out quickly. We need to end this war for real. Go to getourtroopsout.com to join Americans across the country in calling for a quick, clear, responsible end to the war in Iraq.
