Donna Campbell is on the stump saying all the ‘right’ things; using all the ‘right’ talking points. If you listen to Donna, she talks a good game to Pro-Life Christians. The problem lies with her stance on other matters that she and her corporate backers refuse to acknowledge as right to life issues.
During pregnancy, the mother and fetus need health care. New born infants need neo-natal care. Children need pediatric care. One would presume the moral imperative for a professed Christian would be affordable care for our Children. But apparently it is not for Doctor Donna. She wants to slash care for millions of Texas infants and their mothers. Why? Is it because the deep pocket donors to her Astroturf campaign refuse to render their fair share unto Washington?
Of course, they claim a moral objection to tax money being spent on medically accurate sex education, pre-conception birth control and of, course, abortions. Donna and her cronies are willing to deny medical care to infants all the while preaching: Abortion, NO!
In virtually the same breath, she vilifies the EPA’s endeavor to reduce environmental Mercury levels as “arbitrary rules and regulations hindering business and industry” (From Dr. Donna Campbell Facebook page; if it has not been scrubbed). Dr. Campbell, if you believe these rules to be arbitrary, what safe levels you would establish? If you believe in-utero exposure to increasing levels of Mercury is not detrimental to embryonic development, please share your research. What is the safe level of Mercury for a second trimester fetus? Please tell us. You are quick to dismiss solutions proposed by others, but slow on offering anything in their stead.
Doctor Campbell, why are you willing to subject unborn children to a greater risk of Mercury poisoning?
Every voter in Texas Senate District 25 deserves an answer to this question before they vote. They deserve an honest answer. After all, honesty is on God’s top-ten list.
My guess: Thirty pieces of silver means more to Donna Campbell than protecting God’s creation.
Wake up Texas Democrats. There is no real need to have our primaries before school lets out for the summer. There is no real need to have our primaries before the State convention. A case can even be made that there is no need to have our primaries before the National Convention. It is the Republicans who need to have their primary as soon as possible.
Due to Perrymandering by Republicans in the legislature that precluded Texas from being a part of Super Tuesday, Texas media outlets have lost out on untold millions in Super Pac campaign advertising. Even if the Texas Presidential Primary is held in April, it may be too late. The Republican nomination may be decided and Texas will have lost a chance to benefit from Citizens United. Do you really think GPS-Crossroads will sink money into the Texas General Election for the Republican Presidential Nominee? Hardly.
The Republicans need to hold their Presidential Primary as soon as possible; preferably before their State Convention. Democrats can wait it out. Here is a plan for the TDP to submit in lieu of an agreement on district boundaries.
County/Senate District Conventions will be held either May 12 or 19 without holding Precinct Conventions. Conventions will be open to all registered voters wishing to declare as Democrats for the election cycle. Those attending the Democratic Conventions would be precluded from voting in the Republican Primary.
The boundaries of the most recently implemented District Plan (as used in 2010) will be used. County Conventions will select a slate of delegates to attend the State Convention. If a new map is approved prior the State Convention, and a Delegate is in a new District, that delegate will be added to the slate of delegates of their new District at the same status (Delegate or Alternate). Should a conflict arise due to available slots, Delegates will be determined by those with the most consecutive cycles voting in the Democratic Primary, and if a tie still exists, then the delegate will be determined by a coin toss.
If maps are approved after the State Convention, then the slate of delegates to the National Convention will be adjusted using the same rule.
But wait, don't we need to determine our candidates for Senate, Congress, State House, Judges and other down ticket races? No. More than likely Democratic candidates will be out spent in the General Election. Why give that money more time to have an effect. Democrats should work to limit the General Election Campaign to the shortest time possible. This will go a long way to counter Super Pac spending.
Our candidates can use their Primary funds to raise doubts about the suitability of Republican incumbents and shed light on the Republican agenda. In races with several Democratic candidates, those campaigns should tag team the Republican incumbent; not attack fellow Democrats.
Politics is a contact sport and Democrats need to start playing hardball or get out of the game.
Anytime anyone proposes even the most modest tax increase on multimillionaires, minions of Grover Norquist religiously recite their time worn mantras: "You can't tax the job creators" and "Why do you want to punish success?" Well, I believe the literal interpretation of their doctrine may be sound but there is a disconnection between the theory and practice.
I agree that it is antithetical to the American way to punish those who have achieved success through their own hard work. I enthusiastically advocate prosperity for everyone who creates American jobs. But, if we reward their success we should also penalize their failure.
For more than three decades, we gave disproportionate tax breaks to the top one percent under the guise that they would use their increased liquidity to create jobs. They assured us that we too would benefit from the vague effect they called "trickle-down" and so we paid homage to them. We allowed them to have their dessert as the first course in exchange for a promise that they would eat their vegetables later. However, instead of creating jobs in the United States, they exported our jobs to the Pacific Rim. As the ranks of our unemployed swelled, CEO's grew fat on a feast of Chinese Pizza and Oriental Fries.
The following is a link to HTML/JAVA Clock, which counts deaths from lack of Health Insurance. The count is based on 44,789 deaths per year from the American Journal of Public Health; the study Representative Alan Grayson cited on the House floor.
It may seem ironic for a Progressive to give a Republican advice on how to defeat Democrats, but hey, it is becoming a mixed up world and as they say, politics makes strange bedfellows. Call it a bipartisan compromise.
Do I want Kay Bailey Hutchinson to be the next Governor?
No and Yes.
No. I still hold out hope that a strong viable candidate will emerge from the democratic wing of the Democratic Party. However, in my opinion, as of this post, I do not see that person in the race. Don't get me wrong, several Democratic Democrats have thrown their hat in the ring. But, in your heart of hearts, do you really believe they have a snowballs chance of winning the General Election? Let's be honest with ourselves, even with the gains we have made across the state, I don't think the Democratic Nominee will win this race.
If I knew my only choice was between Kay Bunny and Ricky Goodhair, I would swallow my progressive pride and opt for the lesser of two evils. After all, she is Pro-Choice. At least she is right now; she has yet to start pandering to the base.
So, how can she lock up the Governors race? The only thing she needs to do is vote for Health Care Reform that includes a robust, comprehensive and affordable public option. Single payer would be better but that would be stretching it. Her support for a pubic option would suffice.
I know, you're saying, "You're crazy Progressive in Texas. She would alienate her entire party. She would never win the Primary."
The circus sideshow that has surrounded the President's planned talk with students and the decision by the NEISD Superintendent to censor him is disgraceful. When Dr. Middleton made his unilateral decision to banish President Obama from the classroom, did he stop and consider the Civics lesson he would be teaching. As a consequence of his capitulation to the racist rabble, children will accept as doctrine that an uninformed intimidating marginal minority armed with fear and bigotry trump the ballot box.
Without citing existing policy or precedent, Dr. Middleton yielded the Districts standards to single-minded ideologues bent on denouncing and destroying the lawfully elected President of the United States. What reasons did the alarmed citizenry present as dire need to protect everyone's children from such an evil person? Let me guess, they claimed the President would use the address as a political vehicle to indoctrinate the young minds to his socialist agenda.
Many Born-again Evangelical Christians have an acute ability to articulate a first-rate game. Their dogma displayed ubiquitously on their sleeve. Incessantly, they impose their ideology upon those around them. Persistently the proselytize their canon, "I have accepted Jesus as my Lord and Savior". For these modern day crusaders, the first rule of Christianity is "Always talk about Christianity".
There are those claiming to be Compassionate Conservative Christians who rarely, if ever, practice the teachings their Savior preached. They believe following Jesus is merely bearing witness, repeating prayers and converting the heathen. Christianity means more than spouting platitudes. Christianity means more than simply shouting, "Jesus is Great" from the rooftops.
Why are the actions of many Conservative Christians contradictory to the words of Scripture? Are the Jesus' ethical lessons lost because of literalism? Do they deliberately discount those parts of Scripture that diverge from their insular worldview?
In his town hall meeting Tom Coburn, when confronted with a woman who desperately needs help, said: "But the other thing that's missing in this debate is us, as neighbors, helping people that need our help".
Mr. Coburn, why do you think over 200 years ago a group of neighbors banded together and formed OUR Government? You know, WE THE PEOPLE.
"BurnLounge is operating a pyramid scheme. Such schemes have an intolerable capacity to mislead," the FTC said in its lawsuit.
"That's news to me," Wentworth said Thursday.
What was it that surprised Jeff? Was he surprised that BurnLounge was a scam or that he got caught? One would think that a competent attorney and proficient legislator could discern the difference between a legitimate investment and a fraudulent scheme.
According to the interview, Wentworth said he was brought into BurnLounge by a lobbyist for the Texas Automobile Dealers Association.
This raises three questions:
Did this lobbyist also make a substantial donation to Jeff's war chest?
What other lobbyists bought "memberships" from Jeff?
What else does Jeff do for Lobbyists without reading the fine print?
I heard a snippet from CSPAN earlier today (Aug. 11, 2009). It was coverage of a town hall meeting where a questioner asked what part of the Constitution gave Congress the authority to force health care on him. This is a common talking point with Republicans and Libertarians.
The representative holding the meeting was at a loss to give a coherent answer.
The Constitution stipulates both explicitly and implicitly that Health Care is a Right and the requisite for Universal Health Care became a part of the Supreme Law of the Land in 1948.
It is the Insurance Companies, with their practices or rescission and denial of coverage, who are infringing on the Constitutional Rights of millions of Americans.
Preamble of the Constitution:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Article VI of the Constitution:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The United States is a signatory on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Treaty from 1948.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
My Question: Why has the vaunted Democratic Rapid Response team not provided representatives with sufficient ammunition to counter Republican Talking Points?