Texas Trainwreck

Joshua Micah Marshall is all over the Homeland Security/Texas Department of Public Safety scandal. Here's today's installment; scroll down for more.

Comments

[Kevin Carson]

Hey, the Constitution requires Congress to guarantee every state a Republican form of government. De Lay just takes his oath seriously.

[Horseman]

The only passengers aboard that train are politicians. Here in Texas, we don't really give a flying fox. And we wished that all of them would walk out of Austin, every 10 years, every legislative session, every year -- heck, forever! (Demopublicans and Republicrats alike.)

Two-party system, my foot. This two-headed monster has ONE body, and it's just sitting up there in Austin, biting itself, wasting your money, hogging your time.

[DANEgerus]

Hear hear...

Marshall is so biased he and the machine are splitting hairs seeking moral equivalency for a bunch of Dummocrit whiners who subverted the process illegally to get their way...

Like that's new for them...

[And I'm Not a Democrat Either]

Opinion writers are *supposed* to be "biased," you dope. Marshall actually supports his biases with loads & loads of data. You, on the other hand, offer *absolutely no* reason to suppose he's wrong -- not one fact, not one counterargument -- just tons of clich?s: "splitting hairs," "whiners" (as though the Republicans didn't whine like babies while the Democrats were heading to Oklahoma), "subverted the process" (even if that were true, DeLay's subverting something far more important) -- even "moral equivalency." (Equivalent to *what*, you fucking moron? Do you even *think* about what you're typing, or do you just toss off a handful of phrases you half-remember hearing from Limbaugh or one of his blowhard clones?)

[Kalifornian]

Get ready. Get used to it: Homeland Security is going to "serve" Amerika by handling EVERYTHING -- from the smallest, picayune little problem, to the largest, news-breaking scare tactics.

But at least the legion of pencilnecks are now employed, aren't they?

[Anonymous]

Well gaw-lee. Guess ol' Just Me can't handle more than one outrage at once. If he discovers a rat in his pantry, he might stop worrying about the Department of Education, too.

[Just Me]

I somehow find the "scandal" of this possible use of Homeland Security resources to be of less moment than finding out in my paper this morning that at the change of administrations, the Education Department had $450 million that was gone through fraud, abuse and waste.
I'll gin up greater outrage over the waste of nearly half a billion taxpayer dollars.

[Fred App]

DANEgerus: Rant all you want, but get your facts straight. What the Democrats did wasn't illegal. There's no law against it. In fact, it's a tact that's been used a couple of times before -- by Republicans.

As for "moral equivalency" -- I think that's an accusation you should reserve for Tom DeLay, who was trying to equate absent Democrats with terrorists. Is this really why we set up a Department of Homeland Security? To act as Republican bagmen? For some odd reason, that doesn't make me feel any safer.

[JDM]

"elected officials that were getting in the way of their legislative agenda"

Somehow I think that if the Republicans had violated a parlimentary rule and fled a Democrat controlled legislature your phrasing would be different. The words "thwarting democracy" come to mind.

[James]

Hey Fred, can you cite those 'couple' instances of Republicans preventing a quorum to thwart a vote on mid-term redistricting? Or to thwart any vote for that matter? When were they? What were the circumstances? What State or Federal precedents can you offer?

I am not doubting you, or the fact that it may have happened, just curious.

I know there was a quorum dust-up over supremecy/reconstruction in Tennessee post Cival war...but that is not particularly applicable- I think.

Enlighten us?

[joe]

A fair enough point, JDM, but there is a difference between using parliamentary bullshit to thwart substantive legislation, and using it to thwart more parliamentary bullshit. If the Democrats did this to stop, say, a tax cut, I would have a problem with their behavior.

[T. Hartin]

So I guess what Joe is telling us is that the means justify the ends.

I am curious, though, as to why the Democrat gerrymander of 2001 is so all-fired sacred that it must be preserved against the Republican gerrymander of 2003 by means that are only acceptable in relation to the most sacred of ends.

[Andy]

From the other side of the atlantic this whole Texas thing is just really funny. The image (if the Republicans had got their way) of a bunch of politicians handcuffed to their seats in the voting chamber whilst laws are passed willy-nilly is one that makes me smile...

It's the sort of thing we'd expect in some backward country run by a tin-pot dictator, not the US. It even made the national news here in the UK!

Andy

[omnibus bill]

The headline on this developing scandal in today's WashPost is "Democrats Demand Accountability." I'd be happy to give 'em some. Where should I send it? Oklahoma? Perhaps Mexico?

What Delay did warrants censure; but what the Texas Dems did warrants impeachment. They characterized their flight as a justified action to avoid "the tyranny of the majority" -- in other words to thwart democracy and avoid losing on a legislative vote. Fair enough, but what next? Surrounding the Texas Governor's mansion with armed Pinkertons after the next Republican win, in order to prevent the "tyranny of the majority" of Texas voters from installing a new governor?

The Dems have a great way of spinning majority rule and rule of law. When they win, they say it's the result of democracy, apple pie, mom, the majesty of rule of law and America. When they lose, it's the result of the tyranny of the majority, unruly Rethuglican mobs, the conservative capture of the judiciary and the anger/racism/sexism of the angry new face of America.

Face it -- the Dems only like Democracy if they are running it. Yeah, Delay screwed up and deserves censure, but the Dem talking points are aimed at deflecting attention away from the crooked (and now lionized) Dem walkout in Texas.

[joe]

So when a story that's deeply embarrassing to the Republican Party comes out, Just Me's response is to jump in front of Milhouse, waggle his pelvis, and sing "Do the Bartman!"

Tool.

[son volt]

Quorum-busting has ample precedent in Texas: GOP in 1971, Dems in 1979. But off-year gerrymandering has no precedent, in Texas or anywhere else.

Oh, and leave it to you guys (the blog, not the peanut gallery) to spin the hot pursuit of the Killer D's, not as a partisan matter, but as an example of executive power run amok. Not that you don't have at least half a point.

[Dan]

This is the second time the Democrats have utilized this tactic in Texas. The first time was May, 1979.
What could drive Democrats to such a drastic action? What the Democrats, and every party other party except the Republican party, should do is drop out of all political contests. Just quit. Then the Republicans will have gotten what they want, absolute power. Then, without an opposition, they would be unable to blame others for the messes they create. You can substitute the word Republican for the word Democrat in this post if you wish. To me one party is no better than the other. As long as we allow corporations to buy and sell these people like prized cattle, we will continue to have taxation without representation.

BTW: Good post Kalifornian

[Just Me]

I seem to be psychoanalyzed by a lot of people who don't know me. I wonder what that says about them? Could it be that in not responding to the point I made (that I am *more* concerned about half a billion dollars than I am about HS being used improperly) they want turen me into someone I am not?
OTOH, my concern is off topic for the Tejas Dems. So I apologize for that.
So let me say this, if we are to be bunch-pantied over misuse of government agencies, will some independent body please investigate the consistent and persistent use of the IRS during the Clinton years to audit non-FOB organizations.
Immoral equivalence works in so many ways.

Calling me Milhouse and tool, Joe. I'm so hurt! Thanks for the addition to rational and polite discourse.

[joe]

Actually, I called you Bart. And when your response to the abuse of the federal security apparatus for partisan ends is to say, "Hey, look over there," damn straight I'm going to call you on it.

Texas Republicans, including the House Majority Leader, used a federal law enforcement agency set up to thwart terrorist attacks on our homeland to try to chase down elected officials that were getting in the way of their legislative agenda. That is the topic of this post. Would you care to comment on that?

Or is there a radar trap on Elm Street that you really, really need to write about instead?

[W. Nelson]

Son Voltage, what you said about "Quorum-busting has ample precedent in Texas: GOP in 1971," isn't entirely correct.

That was NOT Quorum-busting. Twenty house members played hookie, but the Quorum was still intact. They could have (legally) voted without them, according to Robert's Rules of Order.

But can you say as much for the opposition?

Still, both parties have their flaws, I know -- with the Dems being the smellier of the two. That's why I can't wait till we have Lbertarians running the legislature, with Ron Paul as Governor.

[joe]

Yes, T, I believe that the result of a fair and decent process has more legitimacy than the outcome of a corrupt one. Shocking, I know.

"I am curious, though, as to why the Democrat gerrymander of 2001 is so all-fired sacred that it must be preserved against the Republican gerrymander of 2003." Because gerrymandering gets done once per decade, after the census population figures are released, to make sure the gerrymandering is done as accurately as possible. This way, both parties have a fair shot at being able to gerrymander the districts their way, and there is rough parity. The violation of this tradition would open up new gerrymandering, and its associated legislative agony and court cases, every two years, and who needs that? The system is far from perfect, but that doesn't make violating it in a biased, self-serving manner an improvement. There may be better ways to divvy up districts, but "we'll change them whenever we gain power" isn't one of them.

[DANEgerus]

Fred App

Texas law specifies the remedy for legislators that fail to show... arrest and forcible delivery... my facts are most certainly straight and understood by the Dummocrits as demonstrated by their technique... eg. they left the State to avoid arrest.

[Donover Sandra Corsover]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 62.213.67.122
URL: http://free-digital-photo.online-photo-print.com
DATE: 01/20/2004 11:32:33
The best solution against abortions is education, not snipers.