Ted Cruz’ Enemies: the Texas Senate Republican Caucus (and Lt. Governor Dewhurst, Governor Perry #TxSen

Did you see how diplomatically the Texas Senate Republican Caucus worded their letter, without mentioning Cruz’ name? They just corrected the distortions he’s spread for a year about their actions in the Senate.

In contrast, Cruz wrote an “Open Letter” addressed directly to Lt. Governor Dewhurst, calling him a liar — which means he’s calling all the other Senators liars, too.

Not only that, but – even though the letter from the Senators was signed by 18 respected Republican Texas Senators —  Cruz went to the trouble of opening the “Properties” folder for the letter (composed in Microsoft Word 97-2003) and publishing a screen shot, accusing the man whose name appears of writing the letter.That may seem a logical assumption to anyone who is already looking for conspiracies  and goes to the trouble to open the Property folder in the first place.

. However, it seems that no one called Mr. Grimes. Mr. Grimes says he didn’t write the letter. He said he used the computer at one time, but doesn’t work for that firm anymore:

I had absolutely nothing to with this letter,” Grimes told Roll Call. “And if the Cruz folks had called me beforehand and asked me, I would have told them, but they didn’t.”

Other sources say that the letterhead was designed by a staffer at a consulting firm called The Eppstein Group. Grimes, who is no longer at the firm, once used that computer and the sources say that is how his name surfaced in the computer software.

Cruz didn’t need to go to all the trouble of working up a conspiracy between the City of Austin and the Lieutenant Governor. (Is he at all familiar with Austin politics? The City of Austin is farther to the left than the cities surrounding his almae matres,  Princeton and Harvard). Erick Erickson of RedState.org has already figured out what happened and wrote that “arm twisting” was going on in the Senate. They, along with everyone else in Austin, are supposedly afraid that they’ll never get another Bill passed if they don’t back up the Lt. Governor.

So, let’s get this straight:18/19 Republican Senators – an easy majority in the 31 member Senate – didn’t mean what they signed their names to — because they are collectively – all 18 of them – afraid of David Dewhurst? They can’t gang up on Dewhurst, but can on Cruz? Without mentioning his name in the letter?

Even Jane Nelson, one of the most poised and competent Legislators in the Nation? Even Florence Shapiro and Steve Ogden who aren’t running again? We’re supposed to believe that Chris Harris, Dan Patrick and John Carona are afraid of anyone? Do they all lie out of fear?

Well, there’s one Senator that Cruz believes. The unnamed “senior Senator,” who was anonymously quoted by that reliable source, the Texas Monthly — and now, Ted Cruz, the Baptist preacher’s son. Now we all know that it’s a badge of Conservatism to be named among their Worst List. We also know that unattributed quotes from the TM are worth less than the paper this blog isn’t printed on.

Nevertheless after listing his distortions once again in the “Open Letter” to David Dewhurst, Cruz gratuitously went farther:

“. . . if the Texas Senators had to vote on whether David Dewhurst should be considered one of the Ten Worst Legislators in Texas, the vote “would be 31 to nothing.”” (link included in original)

So much for diplomacy. Or even Christian decency.

Which Senator lies to support David Dewhurst but can be trusted to tell the Texas Monthly anything truthful?

One thing is certain. He has no idea how much he’s going to need these people, whether or not he wins on July 31. If there’s “fear,” perhaps it should be on Cruz’ part: that they’ll hang him out to dry on Augut 1 and in January if he does get to DC.

Déjà vu, or Repeat as necessary

“We ended up with candidates chosen by the least knowledgeable voters.”

Here’s an older post that I wrote June 1, 2010 and again, last summer? It still applies, more than ever!

We Republicans are the Tea Party. If you look at the Tea Party, you will see the Conservative foundation, the remnant that have opposed “centrists” and “moderates” for years. We are the ones who have known all along what the Dems relearn each election cycle, but some of our own never seem to: Americans are conservative, to the right of center. When all the couch potatoes woke up last year, we were the ones who were here to welcome them and give them somewhere to start.

Some of us sat out the 2006 and even 2008 elections to “teach them a lesson;” that they need to legislate like Republicans if they want us to support them. Where Republicans turned out to vote, we held offices. Where the Republican voters were no-shows, we lost ground and offices. In a few cases, Republicans crossed over in the name of Chaos and strong conservatives were narrowly defeated in the Primaries, leaving us with a choice between a RINO, a Democrat or an under vote. We ended up with candidates chosen by the least knowledgeable voters.

Well, that was successful, wasn’t it? Can’t you just imagine all the true conservative candidates in the Presidential primary of 2008, each wishing the Chaos voters had turned out for them?

The Dems won a majority and then a super majority in the Federal House, Senate and the White House, allowing them to ram-rod their agenda to spread the wealth around, undermine families and threaten the weak and sick at all stages of life. Corrupt and corrupting Chris Dodd, Charlie Rangel, and John Conyers wield Committee Chairmanships when they should be indicted. The media ignored – and continues to ignore – our plainly stated opposition, underreporting our numbers and drowning out our voices as they proclaim that we lost because the Left better represented the voters and the Country was ready for Change! And now, the media and the liberals are crowing about the power of the tea partiers, and asking everyone who will give them a few seconds what we’ll “do” with “them.”

Unfortunately, the “moderate” Republicans and some of our conservatives didn’t learn the lesson we wanted to teach them. Instead, they decided they need to spend more time and money wooing the swing voters and undecideds. The Big Tent is looking more like a Circus. (See CPAC and “gay conservatives.”)

Many who have appropriated the title of “conservatives” – those who have never been active (or even voted) in the Republican Party before and those who spend their “meet-up” time with the Libertarian Party – are using any and all opportunities to infect the Party with their discontent. If they can destroy us for their own political gain and “Revolution,” they will be happy.

If your goal is to throw the bums out for the sake of defeating the old established leadership, if you think it’s your turn at power, even if you’ve never been involved, much less been a leader, then perhaps your motives aren’t as pure as they should be. Please reconsider what your real goal is and how – whether – your actions will achieve your purpose.

Village Republican Women tell Senate candidates: No negative campaigning at forum

The Houston Area Village Republican Women are saying what a lot of us have been saying for a while:

“We don’t want to hear from them about their opponents,” Ingersoll said. “We want to hear about themselves …We don’t want to hear anymore why we shouldn’t vote for their opponents. We want to hear how they’re the best ones to represent us in Texas.”

via Village Republican Women forum features Cruz, Dewhurst – Your Houston News: News.

Open Letter to Texans from Senate Republican Caucus

Tonight, the Texas Senate Republican Caucus, 18 of the 19 Republicans in the Senate,  took the unprecedented step of writing a letter to refute some of the stories you’ve been hearing about Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst.

The letter pretty much speaks for itself and is an example of the consequences when Republicans forget who the opposition is and begin attacking the record of one of our own.

Setting the Record Straight:

An Open Letter to Texans Dear Fellow Texans: In the U.S. Senate primary race, statements have been made that are untrue regarding the records of Lt. Governor David Dewhurst, the Republican Texas Senators, as well as Governor Rick Perry. This letter is to set the record straight.

The Anti-Sanctuary Cities Bill

Many members of the Texas Senate and the Lt. Governor felt strongly about outlawing the practice of sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants. During the Regular Session, the Anti-Sanctuary Cities Bill was blocked by the Democrats through the use of a parliamentary procedure. The Lt. Governor asked Governor Perry to call a special session, removed the parliamentary block, and the bill then passed the Senate along party lines early in Special Session on June 14th. The bill was sent to the House early in the Special Session where it failed to move and died. We are confident that the Senate will again pass the bill in the upcoming 2013 Legislative Session.

Controlling & Cutting State Spending

Governor Perry, Lt. Governor Dewhurst and the Republican-led Texas Legislature have always been committed to balancing the state budget without raising taxes, and have repeatedly done so since 2003. Most recently, the state budget was balanced in 2011 by cutting $14 billion in overall spending. Budget watchdog groups have repeatedly praised Texas for being a low tax, low spending state and specifically for keeping state spending lower than the rate of population and inflation growth since 2003. To characterize the Texas record as one of reckless spending is simply untrue.

The TSA Anti-Groping Bill

The Senate Republicans and the Lt. Governor wanted to protect travelers from unwanted and unlawful intrusion, so Lt. Governor Dewhurst requested that Governor Perry add the TSA Anti-Groping Bill to the agenda for the Special Session. The Texas Senate passed S.B. 29, the TSA Anti-Groping Bill, with enough time remaining in the Special Session for the House to take up and pass the bill. The bill was a tougher version than that of the House, but ultimately died as a result of opposition on the House side.

State Income Tax, Wage Tax and Payroll Tax

We the undersigned, and the Lt. Governor, have always opposed a state income tax for Texas, as well as a wage or payroll tax. Newspaper fact checks clearly confirm this.

Texans deserve to know the truth in this important election.

Signed by Senators John Nichols (Chairman),  John Corona, Bob Duell, Robert Duncan, Kevin Eltife, Craig Estes, Troy Fraser, Chris Harris, Glen Heger, Joan Huffman, Mike Jackson, Jane Nelson, Steve Ogden, Dan Patrick, Kel Seliger, Florence Shapiro, Jeff Wentworth, and Tommy Williams.

Not signing was Senator Brian Birdwell – I’m sure we’ll read the story on that, soon.

Medicine vs. “Health”

Medicine is the diagnosis and treatment of disease and injury, while the World Health Organization defines “health” as “a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.”

Doctors practice medicine, but is “health” even possible?

The hassle factor in “health care” costs

Most docs know the history of medical finance and the creep of health care payments with tax dollars. We know that the costs of chronic, much less catastrophic, health care are high. Nevertheless, most doctors look at history and know that changes in government health policies will likely mean that we will be burdened with regulations and that any talk about “savings,” means a cut in pay for what we do, on top of increased regulations.

At least as often as I hear complaints about payment for our services, docs express urgent concern that aren’t able to care for our patients due to limitations on services, requirements for prior authorizations with limited, sometime under qualified, personnel approving necessary treatments, limitations on numbers of prescriptions per month, and the inability to find sub-specialists when patients need them. And that it is only going to get harder. In my opinion, the “hassle factors” introduced by bean-counters and government bureaucrats are responsible at least as much for the increase in costs as increased definitions of health and improved technology.

A well-known cliché’ about of the cost of regulations is the ridiculous bill for an aspirin in the hospital. My own experience with regulations is another example. In 2003, when HIPAA came into force, requiring compliance, the vendor for my billing software wouldn’t support my old Linux software. They demanded that I buy the new Windows program, requiring all new computers, with the resulting cost of installation, training and the inevitable lag (and error) in billing. At least for some of us, there comes a point when the hassles aren’t worth borrowing the money to keep the office open.

Extrapolate these cascades of costs across the entire system and add in the regulations we know about, much less the ones we don’t know about – yet. Who can calculate the true cost of the Federalization of medical care?

New England Journal of Medicine: “The Health Care Jobs Fallacy”

Attempts to justify increasing intrusion of the Federal government into health insurance and health cost distract from the purpose of the practice of medicine, which is to treat patients.

Remember when doctors talked about “medical care” of individuals, not “health care” for populations?Remember when medicine was an “art,” not an “industry?” People aren’t machines with interchangeable parts and neither medicine nor “health care” are amenable to assembly line production, except in very rare instances.

The bottom line is that employment in the health care sector should be neither a policy goal nor a metric of success. The key policy goals should be to achieve better health outcomes and increase overall economic productivity, so that we can all live healthier and wealthier lives. Our ability to ensure access to expensive but beneficial treatment is hampered whenever health care policy is evaluated on the basis of jobs. Treating the health care system like a (wildly inefficient) jobs program conflicts directly with the goal of ensuring that all Americans have access to care at an affordable price.

via The Health Care Jobs Fallacy — NEJM.

David Dewhurst endorsed by Eagle Forum’s Pat Carlson

” David has worn the uniform of his country, built a business and has been the driving force behind the most social and fiscal conservative accomplishments in the nation.”

Pat Carlson could be found at the Texas State Capitol for at least the last two Legislatures, tirelessly advocating for Conservative causes for the Texas Eagle Forum.

Former Texas Eagle Forum President Endorses David Dewhurst
July 3, 2012 – 9:46am – Team Dewhurst

Dewhurst for Texas announced today that Pat Carlson, former president of the Texas Eagle Forum, has endorsed David Dewhurst for United States Senate. In her endorsement, Carlson says Dewhurst “put conservative principles into practice and delivered” for Texas, just as he will do in Washington as the next U.S. Senator from the Lone Star State.

“Throughout his life in public service, David Dewhurst has put conservative principles into practice and delivered countless conservative victories for Texans,” said conservative activist Pat Carlson. “That is why I’m proudly and enthusiastically endorsing David Dewhurst for U.S. Senate. David has worn the uniform of his country, built a business and has been the driving force behind the most social and fiscal conservative accomplishments in the nation.”

“David has balanced every budget since taking office without raising taxes, slashed state spending, killed liberal attempts at imposing a state income tax, defunded Planned Parenthood, and passed the Sonogram Bill, Photo Voter ID and the largest tax cut in Texas history. Conservatives in Texas know that David has fought for them in Austin, and he will fight for them in Washington,” Carlson said.

“It is an honor to have the endorsement of such a dedicated Texas conservative activist,” David Dewhurst said. “For more than a decade, Pat has been a loud and prominent voice for conservative values and beliefs in Texas, and she has stood up and volunteered time and again to serve on behalf of Texas. I greatly value and appreciate her support in my bid for U.S. Senate.”

Pat Carlson served as the statewide president of the Texas Eagle Forum from 2009-11. In addition to her role in that capacity, she has also been actively involved in the Republican Party serving as precinct chair, election judge, Senatorial Convention Temporary Chair, Congressional Caucus Chairman at the state Republican convention, a delegate to 10 state Republican Conventions, a delegate or alternate to four national Republican conventions, ultimately serving as Tarrant County Republican Party Chairman from 2000-2005. Continue reading →

Comments on the Cruz-Patrick Debate

An advocate for Ted Cruz has commented on the June 30th WingRight review of the confrontation between Texas State Senator Dan Patrick and Ted Cruz, here.

My reply:

“Cruz is a champion of the advice from the Sun Tsu’s Art of War:   “Call your enemy what you are.” That’s not my favorite lesson from the book, and it’s not an upright, ethical philosophy for life except in life and death struggles.

“Cruz shouldn’t have gone on the offensive right off the bat. He sure shouldn’t have said flat out that Senator Patrick, a respected and respectable radio news commentator, has been fed questions from the Dewhurst campaign. He impugned Patrick’s honor and his journalism. He then claimed to have “seen” the Senator repeatedly acting as a “surrogate” for Governor Dewhurst.

“The occasions in which Patrick said negative things against Dewhurst were said in anger, between May 24 and June 2 – all from a single episode on May 24. As he said, he is not angry at Dewhurst anymore. He’s probably regretting words he said in anger in the presence of a reporter. While “all’s fair in love and war,” Cruz should remember Patrick’s advice: he needs to learn to ask advice and that, come August, we will all have to learn to work together as Republicans.

“Everyone may listen to the interview/confrontation for themselves, so we’ll let them decide whether or not Cruz “handled himself well. I obviously think he showed us a side of himself that he’s been trying to conceal – the angry, conspiracy-weaving side that will not accept any criticism.

“Senator Dan Patrick has said that he won’t endorse in this race, although he could be forgiven after the accusations by Cruz in this interview. Why do you accuse him of not meaning what he says?”

Ted Cruz Debates Dan Patrick (#TxSen)

“Every time I go on the radio, you ask the questions that the Dewhurst campaign want you to ask.”

This, from the guy who got caught red-handed trying to influence debate questions by a fellow candidate in order to team up against Lt. Governor Dewhurst!

Listen to the radio confrontation between Ted Cruz and Texas Senator Dan Patrick on Patrick’s “The Bell and Patrick” radio show, for yourself:

Mr. Cruz argued with Patrick for 30 minutes on the Baker and Patrick Radio Show that airs on KSEV  radio in the Houston area at 4 PM, week days. He unfortunately began with the flat statement that Senator Patrick had endorsed Dewhurst in the Senate race. You would think that a man would know that sort of thing, right? As Patrick said, if he’d done so, it would be public knowledge.

Cruz actually claimed that all Republicans and Democrats play a “game” with legislation they don’t want to pass, by entering into a conspiracy to pass a bill in one chamber in Session, and then in the other the next, but cheat to keep them from passing to law.

Senator Patrick spent quite a bit of time explaining the complicated workings of the Texas Senate, especially the work on the Sanctuary Cities Bills (SB 29 and HB 41) during last Summer’s Special Session of the 82nd Texas Legislature.

The two discussed the “Rose Bush Rule,” which requires 21 members of the Senate to vote in favor of bringing any issue up for a vote. Patrick reminded Cruz that the Senate members, not the Lieutenant Governor, vote on the rules of the Senate. Patrick also explained that the Lieutenant Governor has the authority to suspend that rule in a Special Session, but not in a Regular Session.

Cruz asked Patrick whether Patrick would have been able to pass Sanctuary Cities if he had been Lt. Governor. Patrick said, “No,” because “the only thing you can do is pass it out of the Senate.” Patrick said that Dewhurst had warned the Democrats in the Regular session that if they blocked the bill in the Regular Session, he would suspend the 21 vote rule in the Special Session. Patrick reported that Dewhurst did suspend the rule as he said, in order to pass the Sanctuary Cities Bill with over two weeks left in the SS and spoke of the frustration of having the Bill sit in Committee in the House.

He also told Cruz that all 19 Republican Senators had met on the issue and decided to pass SB29 as a separate Bill, rather than to try to tack HB41 as an amendment to the School Finance Bill. They were concerned that the school funding bill would be held up, preventing schools from knowing their budget until August.

Cruz ignored Patrick’s admonition to campaign on his own merits and plans, returning again and again to statements about what people “intend,” “know,” or ” believe.” Cruz accused Patrick and others of working against him, assigning underhanded motives to them, such as how much “better” for Patrick it will be to get Dewhurst out of Austin.

The creepiest bit of Cruz’ argument was this line, delivered with a strategic lowering of the voice at the last: “You have been acting as a surrogate for Lt. Gov. Dewhurst and I have seen you do it.”

I’ve described Cruz’ reactions to me when I was still a supporter asking him to cut back on the negative campaigning. At our County forum in February and then in New Braunfels. At the New Braunfels meet, he couldn’t walk away so he engaged me in debate. He kept coming at me for twenty minutes although others had questions.

Here’s a news report about another episode of over-reacting to questioning by another woman in Fort Worth at the RPT convention.

Cruz is not a “fighter” in any good sense of the word. Rather than a champion or defender, he’s a bully and a brawler. When faced with even mild opposition, he goes out of his way to prove the other person absolutely wrong. As Patrick said, he can “make numbers lie,” and has no problem with stretching the truth if it has what he calls “a basis in fact.” He sprinkles his speeches with dramatic descriptions of imagined conspiracies such as the ones above, and the notion that “Austin” Republicans had all agreed to make sure that “no one with a ‘z’ in his name is elected to State-wide office.”

For other summaries of the episode, each with their own twist, see the Houston Chronicle and Texas Tribune. But listen to the actual recording if you want the real story.

Penumbra of a tax

It’s not tax enough to invoke the Anti-injunction Act of 1987, but it will be collected by the IRS so it’s a legal, Constitutional, tax?

Maybe it’s just a shadow of a tax?

The Roberts decision on the mandate to purchase health insurance, is more confusing to me than most legal decisions. I keep looking for a way to untangle what appears to be circular contradiction, rather than logic. Here’s the best summary I’ve found that seems to say that the money the IRS collects is a tax, not a penalty for breaking the law:

Such an analysis suggests that the shared responsibility payment may for constitutional purposes be considered a tax. The payment is not so high that there is really no choice but to buy health insurance; the payment is not limited to willful violations, as penalties for unlawful acts often are; and the payment is collected solely by the IRS through the normal means of taxation. Cf. Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co., 259 U. S. 20, 36–37. None of this is to say that payment is not intended to induce the purchase of health insurance. But the mandate need not be read to declare that failing to do so is unlawful. Neither the Affordable Care Act nor any other law attaches negative legal consequences to not buying health insurance, beyond requiring a payment to the IRS. And Congress’s choice of language—stating that individuals “shall” obtain insurance or pay a “penalty”—does not require reading §5000A as punishing unlawful conduct. It may also be read as imposing a tax on those who go without insurance. See New York v. United States, 505 U. S. 144, 169–174. Pp. 35–40.

Many of us have complained that laws and regulations have become too complicated, that no one can keep up or even avoid inadvertently breaking laws here and there. But this law is even worse because it forces action and taxes or penalizes the failure to act according to the Government’s determination of what is for our own good, rather than punishing an action or inaction that infringes on the rights of another.

To repeat hundreds of others, including the Justices who wrote the dissenting report, what are the limits of the Government once it can charge me for not doing some act?

All I can say is, vote to overturn the ObamaTax.

Praise for a centrist (#TxSen @DavidHDewhurst on @teDCruz)

In a two page letter in a November, 2008 mailer from The National Law Journal, Ted Cruz (then a new partner in a global law firm)  wrote a letter endorsing John McCain for President.

Many of us supported Senator McCain in 2008.  Like Cruz, we may have commended McCain for his military service, for voting on principle, and for his efforts to fight the war on terror. Some of us may have cast our vote for Sarah Palin or against Obama.

However, Mr. Cruz specifically praises John McCain for his “moderation,” for being a  “centrist,” and for his avoidance of “divisive” issues: abortion, marriage, tort reform, free trade, and union “bosses.”

National Law Journal: Why I Choose McCain (By Ted Cruz)

Obama, to his credit, speaks often of bipartisanship. But there are virtually no issues of consequence where he has dared to part with the far left of his party. Trial lawyers, union organizers, protectionists, and advocates for gay rights and abortion rights make up some of the core constituencies of the modern Democratic party. And, predictably, Obama has pledged to oppose tort reform; to abolish secret elections for union organization (which would render workers vulnerable to being strong-armed into voting for union bosses); to oppose free trade with allies like Colombia and to “renegotiate” NAFTA; to oppose a federal Marriage Amendment; and to sign legislation repealing restrictions on “partial-birth” abortion, parental notification, and government funding of abortion.

McCain’s record, in contrast, reflects far greater moderation. Rather than advocate on these divisive issues, McCain has focused his passion on fighting and winning the global war on terror.

I’ll admit that the only reference I can give is a link posted in a “hit piece” on the David Dewhurst for Texas Senator campaign website. Nevertheless, the letter is reproduced in full and says what it says. He doesn’t pull punches when it comes to Islamic terrorism or the importance of naming Supreme Court justices. Why does he focus his praise, his whole endorsement, on what many of us on the right would consider Mr. McCain’s weaknesses?

Ted Cruz RUSE #8: TEDCRUZ THE DECEPTIVE POLITICAL WEATHER VANE

Spinning his “whole life”

I was reading an amateur pop-psychology post on the differences between Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst and would-be-Senator-for-life, Ted Cruz.  After dispensing with the body language voodoo, the author inserted the obligatory quotes that I’ve heard Cruz repeat for four years.

Or should I say, “all my life?”

What always gets me is Cruz’ “my whole life” line, as in, “I’ve been fighting for the Constitution my whole life.”

•  As though law school and law clerk are equivalent to service in the Air Force and CIA;
•  As though debate club is the same as World class cutting horse competition in your 60’s; or
  
• As though becoming one of 1200 partners in what he calls a “global law firm” while running for first one, and then another office is the same as scratching out a $200+ Million successful energy business and then running for and winning first one, and then another, State-wide elective office.
  

Of course, there’s also Cruz’ claim that Dewhurst is a “career politician,” although the Lieutenant Governor didn’t run for office until he was 10 yrs older than Cruz is now and after accomplishing all of the above. Does Cruz truly believe that running for two different offices for the last 4 years makes him any less a “career politician” than actual service in two different elected office for 13 yrs?

Vote @DavidHDewhurst 4 #TxSen for life of service, not spin.

@DavidHDewhurst knows Obama Administration is his real opponent #TxSen

In stark contrast, Ted Cruz, who has never served a day in the military or elected office, used his announcement to make false charges against Lt. Governor Dewhurst.

“This makes clear that sanctuary cities exist only because of state and local decision-making; it highlights that we have sanctuary cities in Texas only because Lt. Gov. Dewhurst killed the bill that would have ended sanctuary cities. Had the Texas Legislature passed that bill—had Lt. Governor Dewhurst not run from the fight and prevented its passage—then today’s decision would have upheld that Texas law as well.”

While the Supreme Court’s ruling does not prove anything about Sanctuary Cities. And, in fact, the Sanctuary Cities Bill passed in the Senate in the Special Session on June 15, giving the House 2 weeks to address it.

This press release was not the time to attack a fellow Republican. He doesn’t seem to understand that on August 1, we’ll all be Republicans working to vote out Obama.

But then, that’s been the Cruz’ campaign’s problem all along and why I switched from Cruz to Dewhurst.

teDCruz Ruse #6: Ted Cruz deceives about being a fighter @DavidHDewhurst for Texas

Description of a fighter and doer, vs. a talker, from the Dewhurt for Texas website:

In his early 20s, his son, David Dewhurst, entered the United States Air Force. In his early 20s, Ted Cruz was the 1992 North American Debate Champion while matriculating at Ivy League universities.

In his mid-20s, David Dewhurst entered the Central Intelligence Agency, serving abroad during the Cold War. In his mid-20s, Ted Cruz began his career as a lawyer and bureaucrat in Washington, where he has spent nearly half of his career.

In his 30s, David Dewhurst founded Falcon Seaboard from scratch, a company that created hundreds of American jobs. Ted Cruz spent the overwhelming majority of his 30s as a bureaucratic staffer or running for public office. One of the most significant “fights” that Ted Cruz lost as a result of his incompetence was Kennedy v. Louisiana, which gutted Jessica’s Law. When his ineptitude was discovered by the New York Times, his first instinct was to find excuses so he did not “look silly.”

In his 40s, David Dewhurst continued growing his successful business located in Houston, Texas. In his 40s, Ted Cruz began running full time for political office and recruiting reprehensible yet highly lucrative clients across the globe, and enabling a foreign company to destroy jobs here in America.

Not until his 50’s, after a very successful business career that David Dewhurst entered public service. After years in Washington, Ted Cruz refused to pledge to limit himself to two terms in the U.S. Senate, and seeks to spend the rest of his life as an elected official in Washington, D.C.

Ted Cruz may claim to be a fighter, but David Dewhurst knows that freedoms aren’t defended in the court rooms. They are defended by the men and women serving our country in the Armed Forces.

@DavidHDewhurst and the “Payroll Tax” Press Release (False Charge)

During the Friday night televised debate between Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst and Ted Cruz, Cruz asked the Lieutenant Governor whether he had ever “supported a payroll tax.” The Lt. Governor answered “No.” This “When did you stop beating your wife” tactic has been the subject of much crowing from Cruz supporters who accuse the LG of lying.

In fact, the LG was telling the truth and the whole issue is baseless spin, resulting from cherry picking  two words out of hundreds in a Press Release from May 12, 2005, reproduced in part, here:

That highlighted sentence says, “Texas businesses will have a choice of paying either a low-rate revised franchise tax or a payroll tax.”

The LG definitely praised parts of HB 2 and HB 3, but the release doesn’t mention “payroll tax” until a brief note in the 4th paragraph about alternatives for calculating the tax owed by the businesses.The word “payroll” is not found in the Bill passed out of the Senate. It is not found in “quotes” in this document, so is not part of a statement made by the Lt. Governor.

The falsehoods don’t stop there. Early last Fall, Cruz has used a Wall Street Journal editorial to blur the line between the Business Franchise Tax and a State “income tax.” Editorials are simply opinion, they are not news reports and are not sufficient evidence of anything except someone’s opinion.

Cruz himself, admitted in New Braunfels last month that the “payroll tax” is in reality a hundred-years-old business tax and that he knows that Attorney General Greg Abbott successfully defended against the claim that it is an income tax on businesses, in front of the Supreme Court last November. Anyone who wants to understand the tax, could just read the AG’s response to the lawsuit, submitted to the Court in August, 2011.

Cruz’ supporters go even farther than Mr. Cruz and claim over and over on Twitter and in blogs that the LG supported or proposed not just a “payroll tax,” but a “personal income tax.”

Neither the “gotcha” question from Mr. Cruz nor this press release is something that the Cruz campaign should have based its criticism on. It certainly is not support for the false claims – beginning in the Fall of 2011 – that Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst supported either a “payroll tax” or an “income tax.”

NYT Article on @DonnaCampbell (Texas Senate District 25)

“We have a great grassroots movement, and that’s what did it.” Texas Tribune, June 22, 2012

That article by the TT was also published in the New York Times. Take a look!

The author points out that Dr. Campbell was out-spent by both of her opponents, but she garnered enough votes to win her place in the July 31, 2012 runoff against incumbent Jeff Wentworth.

Senator Wentworth is quoted in this article as saying he wants to consolidate support from those who don’t want SD 25 leadership to leave Bexar County, while at the same time he hopes to win over voters from outside of Bexar County.

The dichotomy is not that hard for Wentworth, who calls himself “pro-life” because he doesn’t approve of abortion in the 3rd trimester.  24 weeks or 6 months? During second trimester, abortion is just fine with Jeff.

Petition: “Fire Eric Holder” via @DavidHDewhurst 4 #TxSen

Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst first called for the resignation of Eric Holder last Fall because one of Texas’ sons was killed  with guns in the hands of criminals, due to “Fast and Furious.”

Now, he has this excellent video and a petition up on Dewhurst for Texas demanding that President Obama not only answer Congress’ subpoenas for information on F&F, but that Eric Holder be fired.

Here’s a #TxSen…

From Texas Representative Debbie Riddle’s FaceBook comments on last night’s debate:

Just fininshed listening to the debate with Dewhurst and Cruz – We have 2 very good candidates – Dewhurst is not a lawyer – Cruz is a lawyer & it shows – he is great with words & debate. Dewhurst is a very successful businessman in the oil & gas business – started it from scratch. I know Dewhurst personally & he has served w/ me on the board of Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs out of Wash D.C. – I know he WILL stand strong for Israel & that is important – if we turn our back on Israel we are toast. I know Dewhurst knows how to make successful business decisions & has helped to make Texas the most business friendly & family friendly state in the nation. We need to elect someone who understands our military (David has served), we need someone who understands our need nationally for good national intelligence (David served in the CIA) We need someone who knows oil & gas (David is an oil & gas business owner) – David may not be as glib as his opponent – but he knows how to get the job done. Though both candidates are good – David Dewhurst has my vote.

via Here’s a #TxSen….

teDCruz Ruse #5: Attack @GovernorPerry for endorsing @DavidHDewhurst

Governor Rick Perry released the following statement last night in response to Ted Cruz’s false attacks:

“Earlier this evening Ted Cruz falsely characterized my rationale for endorsing my friend and conservative colleague David Dewhurst for the US Senate. David Dewhurst championed and passed multiple tax cuts, billions in spending cuts, major tort reform and strong pro-life measures. David will build on that Texas conservative success in the US Senate to overhaul Washington, block President Obama’s socialist agenda and restore the 10th amendment of the US Constitution. Making false statements about my motives or David Dewhurst’s conservative record is a disservice to Texas voters.”

via teDCruz Ruse #5: Ted Cruz attacks Gov. Rick Perry for endorsing David Dewhurst | Dewhurst for Texas.

Together, Governor Rick Perry and Lt. Governor David Dewhurst worked to:

• Defund Planned Parenthood
• Pass 51 tax cuts for a savings of over $14.5 billion for Texas taxpayers
• Pass the largest tax cut in Texas history
• Pass Photo Voter ID
• Pass landmark tort reform to make the trial lawyer agenda obsolete

Governor Perry, integrity, Texas Senate Race

That doesn’t sound like a man who is being “expedient.” He isn’t just praising Texas’ success in general. No, Governor  Perry is giving credit to Lieutenant Governor Dewhurst for his conservative leadership.

And yet, Ted Cruz, “fighter,” believes he knows the Governor’s real motive.

From the press conference after the debate:

DALLAS — U.S. Senate candidate Ted Cruz is questioning Gov. Rick Perry‘s support for opponent David Dewhurst, saying Perry only supports Dewhurst to “get him out of Austin.”

Cruz saved his sharpest comments for reporters after he and Dewhurst exchanged words in an hour-long KERA/Channel 13 debate, dominated by Cruz’s criticism of Dewhurst for “negotiating” and “cutting deals” with Democrats in 10 years as the presiding officer in the Texas Senate.

First, Cruz told reporters the “Texas political establishment” is opposing him because “there are a lot of folks in Texas who would very much like to get him out of the state legislature and send him to Washington.”

Later in the press conference, Cruz named Perry, saying Perry and Dewhurst “have fought tooth-and-nail” over state budgets but “It is in [Perry’s] political interest to get rid of David Dewhurst and get him out of Austin and send him somewhere else.”

Compare Dewhurst and Cruz as Candidates for Senate

My husband received this in the mail yesterday from a fellow Texas Republican and his wife. The only problem I can find is the description of the law firm as “Democrat.” Cruz calls it a “global law firm.”  I might have added a comparison of their charity giving, but maybe some of that is covered in the “Republican Activity.”

Ted Cruz spin, spin, spin

At work on Monday morning, I received a call on my cell phone from Jessica with the Ted Cruz campaign, stumbling over “Mrs. Nuckols” and offering me the chance to be a “host” at their fundraiser next week.

I guess someone didn’t get the memo that I switched my support to Texas’ Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst for Texas Senator months ago. Or that after being invited by several emails and phone calls – two on my cell phone, a couple at home – I challenged Mr. Cruz at a “meet and greet” here in New Braunfels back in May. Jessica’s call inspired me to revive this post I’ve been editing, on and off, since June 1.

Why would I change from one candidate to the other, even after donating money?

It comes down to principles.

As I’m sure is true for many of you, I don’t just listen to what candidates and those who endorse them say.  I look at how candidates make their decisions and conduct their campaigns.

The Conservative reveals his principles by how he reaches his conclusions every bit as much as  by his decisions and the end results of those decisions. Evaluating the decision process is especially important when the candidate has no voting or legislative history to back his rhetoric.

Ted Cruz’ problem is not only that he can’t match David Dewhurst’s solid record of Conservative victories in the Texas Senate. It’s that he hasn’t demonstrated that he acts from solid principles. In fact, rather than basing his campaign on a solid ground of philosophy, talent and plans for reform that would have strengthened the Conservative movement, Cruz set out to destroy the reputation of a good Conservative Texas Legislator by spinning half-truths and lies into campaign issues.

Mr. Cruz doesn’t even take responsibility when proven wrong or when called out for trying to cheat.

Perhaps one of the most out of control moments of Cruz’ spin – at least until the recent attack on a veteran by one of his supporters – was the day last September 9, 2011 when he exchanged snide remarks about Dewhurst with the Texas Tribune’s Evan Smith.  Both ignored the fact that the Lt. Governor was Acting Governor dealing with the wildfires in Bastrop   and in other areas of Texas. Evidently, lost lives and homes don’t trump campaign ops or opportunities for Mr. Cruz.

At that meeting in New Braunfels, Cruz gave us example after example of his spin:

• Cruz told the group that he had raised more money than David Dewhurst, forgetting that we had known the rest of the story for a week: “The Cruz campaign later clarified to the Dallas Morning News that the $6.1 million included money raised in the nine days beyond the May 9 deadline, which was the cut-off date for Dewhurst’s numbers.”
• Several times he claimed that the Dewhurst campaign had called him a “yellow Chinese Communist” because one email from a Dewhurst staffer called him “Red Ted.” (This was repeated in his speech to the Republican Party Convention. Mr. Cruz ought to talk to my friend, “Red Sonja.”)
• He once again claimed that Lt. Governor Dewhurst had proposed a fictitious State “income tax” that never was (although, when confronted, he admitted to our group that the tax was actually a business franchise tax that was “a hundred years old”) and made the false charge that the Lt. Governor “killed” both the TSA Anti-Groping Bill (passed in the Senate June 27, 2011) and the Sanctuary Cities Bill (passed by the Senate June 15th) in 2011.
•  He doubled down on his ads’ claim that Jordan Fishman is not an “American manufacturer,” and then criticized Mr. Fishman for not paying enough taxes, as though the money he earns belongs to the American government.
• He charged that endorsements and donations from Texans to Dewhurst were due to fear of retaliation.
• Perhaps worst of all, he made a dramatic show of cupping the microphone and speaking in a breathy voice when claiming that the “Austin” Republicans had determined that “no one with a ‘z’ in their name” would be elected to State-wide office.

Don’t we get tired of the combative political campaign spin that’s all jargon and no judgement?  The way out of the stall that causes a plane to spin is to turn out of the spin and regain thrust, rather than continue to corkscrew into the ground.

Moran, Pierson, and Twitter

Have y’all been following the insult to Former Marine Dan Moran by Katrina Pierson? She called him “deformed” and said he is being exploited because he endorsed Lieutenant David Dewhurst for Texas Senate. Here’s the archived page.

(I received the whole thing through retweets, since I blocked Pierson on Sunday, before all of this happened.)

Follow @danmoran on Twitter to see his side of the conversation. Pierson deleted the “offening” comment on her account.
The Twitter debate continued for a few hours, and caught the notice of Texas’ press, including the Austin American Statesman and the Texas Tribune, where Cruz is now demanding that the Dewhurst campaign apologize to Pierson. He posted similar comments on his website, claiming that it’s paid staffers, rather than those of us who are voluntarily supporting Dewhurst. Like Captain Moran and Katrina, we are all independent agents able to decide what we do, without being “exploited.”

Here’s Dan’s tweet: “”Daniel Patrick Moran ‏@DanMoran_ My face might be “deformed” but not my character & honor! MT“@KatrinaPierson: Dewhurst exploits deformed disabled vet in intro video”#txsen””

Here’s Katrina’s “apology:” “”Katrina Pierson ‏@KatrinaPierson @DanMoran_ I apologize if my comments toward Dewhurst offened you. This is not about you, however. Have we lost the 1st amendment? #txsen “”

Liberty Movement 101 (or Re-love-ution 10.1)

Check out the ongoing comments on my post at TexasGOPVote.org, if you’ve wondered about the philosophy of the Ron Paul supporters who are trying to win control of the Republican Party. They reaffirm my conclusion after years of flirting with (capital L)ibertarian philosophy: the Libertarian Party is not compatible with conservatism. Conservatism advocates small government, with a few rules, while utilitarianism, and especially objectivism, celebrate license rather than liberty and all too often de-volve into nihilism.

I can sympathize with the proponents of Libertarianism, having spent years participating on the Libertarians for Life list-serve in the ’90’s and early 2000’s. I even tried out to justify “Christian Libertarianism,” which I’ve concluded is an oxymoron. (Check out the blog, Vox Popoli, which, unlike most Libertarian groups, supports traditional marriage.)

The comments at TexasGOPVote.org by one man on marriage were probably the most enlightening:

If two men or women want to get into a contract we see as morally wrong, who are you or me to tell them no?? They don’t have to accept our definition of marriage, and we don’t have to accept their definition of marriage, but neither one of us have the right to use government force to make the other accept our values. That would be Statism. Additionally, faith is a gift, and not all are blessed with it. You, nor I have the right to claim we know that which is unknowable. We can speculate, and we can have faith, but we cannot judge others who may have different beliefs.

These aren’t the first time we’ve heard/read/countered these arguments. Remember the calls for “open marriage” and “do your own thing” in the ’60’s? Demands for restructuring marriage and the family are pervasive in virtually every historic “revolution” EXCEPT the American Revolution, which was based on Judeo-Christian principles:  from the enclave that gave us the Enlightenment, to the French Revolution, to the Soviet Revolution and the various social experiments of the 20th Century.

Legion II: “Liberty Movement” Monitored RPT Committee Members, Votes

My WingRight post about a group of delegates and the odd actions of one particular boy at the Republican Party of Texas 2012 Convention was published at Texas GOP Vote, also. There were interesting comments at both sites.

While I wasn’t surprised that there would be objections to my report, I was surprised to find that one man from SD 25/ CD 21 (where I cast my votes), who posted at Texas GOP Vote, claims that I was “monitored” by “the Liberty Movement” and/or Ron Paul supporters, along with “all” my votes on the Platform Committee. It seems I was good enough not to be challenged in my SD for Permanent Platform Committee member.

The group that wanted to video-tape the meetings weren’t quite so transparent themselves, were they?

If any group wants to make changes in the conservative Republican Party of Texas, they will have to do it the same way as all of the rest of us: make contributions of time and energy in order to build up and support, rather than tear down and undermine. The “Liberty Movement,” if it includes any move to change the legal definition of marriage or dismisses the scientific definition of the beginning of all organisms that reproduce sexually, is not Conservative.

“Expect us” to object to call for change in our core beliefs.

Donna Campbell recognized by Governor at RPT Convention

You can watch the video at WFAA
Then, from my hometown paper, the New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung:

Perry salutes Campbell at convention

From staff reports | Posted: Friday, June 8, 2012 11:25 pm

FORT WORTH — On Thursday, New Braunfels’ Donna Campbell made her first public appearance since her strong finish in the primary election, attracting the attention of Gov. Rick Perry at the Texas Republican Convention, her campaign said.

In a spontaneous exchange, cameras caught the governor, with reporters in tow, giving a congratulatory hug to Campbell after his keynote address.

“Donna, congratulations. Well done,” Perry told the New Braunfels physician and tea party favorite.

Campbell has received a lot of attention ever since her grassroots campaign upset Elizabeth Ames Jones in Senate District 25, her campaign said. She faces longtime incumbent Sen. Jeff Wentworth in a runoff on July 31.

“It’s exciting,” Campbell said of the experience. “To know people are rooting for you because they believe you can change the political culture and bring fresh ideas to government.”

Campbell received another warm welcome later in the day when she addressed the delegates of District 25 at a caucus meeting, her campaign said.

 

Comal County Republican Stars at Republican Party of Texas Convention #RPTCon

Comal County Republicans leading our State and Party, again!

We have two Delegates and two Alternate Delegates going to the National Republican Convention to represent Congressional District 21.

Out of three Delegates and three Alternate Delegates elected by CD 21, Larry Nuckols has Delegate Place 1, Lisa Allmon Roper has Delegate Place 3 and Sonja Harris will go as Alt. Delegate 3. Our Mary Lou Erben was selected by the National Delegate Committee as one of the Alternate Delegates At Large, representing the CD 35 part of Comal County.

In addition, Patti Johnson was elected to the College of Electors to go to Austin in the Electoral College for our Congressional District’s Presidential candidate, as chosen in November.

For our County to be recognized by the election of so many of our stars in a meeting of the entire CD21 delegation to the RPT (seven Counties!) and by the National Delegate Committee for CD 35,, shows the strength of our Comal County Republican Party. It is the fruit of the labor of all of you who spend hours and days fighting the Conservative fight!

Lt. Governor David Dewhurst: A Record of Results

Why do I support David Dewhurst for Texas Senator?

From the Preamble to the 2010 Platform of the Republcan Party of Texas: The embodiment of the conservative dream in America is Texas.”

The result of conservative government in Texas is clear. Our State’s direction with the leadership of Lt. Governor David Dewhurst and Governor Rick Perry is a Conservative example for the Nation. Their policies and achievements demonstrate the results of action based on the belief that true liberty is Pro-life, Pro-Family, Pro-business, holds the line on taxes, spending, torts, and Washington, DC interference and regulation.

Texas leads the Nation in the creation of jobs. Our unemployment rate went down to 6.9% in May, in spite of legal US immigrants that average close to a thousand a day. Lt. Governor Dewhurst has balanced our budget in Texas, even when it meant cutting $10 million in 2003 and $15 million in 2011. In fact, the 82nd Legislature  cut Texas’ dollar amount spending below the previous biennial amount for the first time since WWII. Adjusted for inflation and population, Texas spends less than when Dewhurst took office.

And there is no contest when it comes to legislative victories on social issues. Texas’ Defense Of Marriage Act was passed not once but twice under Lt. Governor Dewhurst; the second time amended our State Constitution. Thanks to his leadership, Texas passed our own Prenatal Protection Act and the “Woman’s Right to Know” informed consent law in 2003. This year, we not only added sonograms to the informed consent law, we also managed to move all of our State health care funding away from abortion providers and any of their corporate affiliates. Yes, that’s right, Texas de-funded Planned Parenthood.

The 2011 Texas 82nd Legislature was also incredibly effective on protecting our State’s borders and Sovereignty;  banning drivers’ licenses for illegals, getting Voter ID, allocating $400Million for border security, and changing the law to allow Texas authorities to turn illegal aliens over for timely deportation after they’ve served their jail time. And yet, Lt. Governor Dewhurst’s opponents ignore these victories, claiming that the Lieutenant Governor “killed” two Bills in 2011: the Transportation Security Agency Anti-Groping Bill and the Sanctuary Cities Bill. However, both the TSA and Sanctuary Cities Bills were passed by the Senate at different times. The problem was coordination with the House, where the Speaker refused to allow timely consideration of the Bill and opposition by some strong conservatives, including Steve Hotze and Norm Adams.  In the Special Session, the TSA bill was passed by the Senate, along with the biennial budget and a landmark omnibus medical finance bill.

In fact, even the “failed” passage of the TSA Bill in the Senate during the 82nd Legislature’s Regular Session was an example of the power of Dewhurst. He is said to have “twisted arms,” along with Governor Perry, to get the vote to the floor, even going so far as to try to “suspend the rules” to bring it up out of order. The Democrat Senators block-voted to prevent the 2/3 vote necessary while every single Republican voted for it. It is likely that had the Lt. Governor not pushed for the suspension of the rules on the TSA Bill, the budget would have passed in the Regular Session if it hadn’t come down to the midnight filibuster by the Dems.

Finally, I support Lieutenant Governor Dewhurst because he’s proven that he believes that  “The government has no money, it’s the people’s money.”

Conservatives respect experience and history

Contrary to what many seem to believe, the Founding Fathers didn’t spring full grown from the Liberty Bell on July 4, 1776. They had served in their various Colonial legislatures for years before the Declaration and held other offices, both elected and appointed. George Washington served in the Virginia House of Burgesses for 15 years before his two terms with the Continental Congress. Jefferson served 7 years alongside Washington in the Burgesses, two terms as Virginia’s Governor, two terms on the Continental Congress, body and then became the “establishment”  Secretary of State, Vice President, and President for two terms in the nascent United States.

However, the anti-establishment cry to “throw them all out” –  that men and women who have served the public for years should be replaced with untried political neophytes for no other reason than that they have served for years and are now considered “establishment”  – has become an emotional, knee-jerk reaction that has nothing to do with any other quality or qualification of the candidates.

For example, my email is full of pleas to help Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin, who faces a recall election this week, alternating with demands to defeat Lt. Governor David Dewhurst of Texas in his race for US Senator. The complaint against Dewhurst is that he is “establishment” and a “professional politician.”  There are no similar complaints against Governor Walker who has been in political office of one sort or another most of his adult life. In contrast, Dewhurst served in the Air Force, worked for the CIA, and built a very successful business before running for office in his 50’s.  In addition, he’s no more “establishment” than Governor Walker, having led the Texas Senate to passage of the Defense of Marriage Act, Voter ID, de-funding Planned Parenthood, Jessica’s Law, defending our State and Nation’s border and cutting relative and actual dollars from the State budget.

When all the newly political activists got tired of yelling at their TV’s and jumped up off their couches and recliners to join our Taxed Enough Already (TEA) Party over the last 4 years, who welcomed them and gave them somewhere to start? It was the more seasoned of us in the Republican Party, since, at least until recently, virtually every Conservative was a Republican.  If you look at the Tea Party, you will see the Conservative foundation, the remnant that have opposed “centrists”  and “moderates” for years. We are the ones who have known all along what the Dems re-learn each election cycle, but some of our own never seem to: Americans are conservative, to the right of center.

In politics, as in the rest of life, “new” is not always “improved.” New candidates are not better than the incumbent just because they’re new any more than the old guys earn their promotions by merely sticking around.  By the same token, long time Conservative leaders may or may not be more able to judge policy and candidates than newer or younger members of our group. But a record of experience and training is – or should be –  considered an advantage, not a “dissed”-advantage.

Or, as my husband says, “Age and cunning trump youth and enthusiasm.” Every time.