No more Texas governors for president
In yesterday’s oral argument in Shelby Co. v. Holder, Justice Kagan raised the broad support in Congress in 2006, including in covered jurisdictions, for the extension of section 5 for another 25 years.
Well, that sounds like a good argument to me, Justice Scalia. It was clear to 98 Senators, including every Senator from a covered jurisdiction, who decided that there was a continuing need for this piece of legislation.
So how did members of the Texas delegation vote in 2006?
Well, on the Senate side, as Justice Kagan noted, both Senator Hutchison and Senator Cornyn voted in favor of the extension (as did 96 of their colleagues for a 98-0 vote).
On the House side, 6 members of the Texas delegation (all Republicans) voted ‘no.’ In all, Texas accounted for 18% of the 33 House members opposing the extension.
The members voting ‘no’ were Congressmen Joe Barton, Mike Conaway, Jeb Hensarling, Sam Johnson, Ron Paul, and Mac Thornberry. In addition, Congressman Pete Sessions did not vote on the bill.
GOODBYE Todd Akin, Allen West, and Ron Paul!
The Lampson for Congress campaign has filed a formal complaint with the FEC against its opponent Randy Weber for taking more than the maximum amount from seven donors. According to his FEC filings Weber took over $22,500 in excess contributions which brings his actual cash on hand total down to $32,540 from his initial report of $55,040. Lampson’s report showed over $420,000 in cash on hand. Weber’s campaign contends that it does not need to correct the report or return the money until after the election.
That last one is from Clayton Williams, former candidate for Texas governor. The Alumni Center at Texas A&M University is named after this asshole.
Not a funny post, but an important one. Real candidates actually said these things in the year 2012. Hard to believe, but true. NO MORE RAPE APOLOGISTS! -via Electablog
Nick Lampson/Randy Weber debate (CD-14, TX) to replace Ron Paul. Some observations from an attendee:
The debate was well moderated and timed. They had 4 minutes to introduce themselves Then each got 1.5 minutes to answer 14 good questions. The first person to answer got to do a follow-up and they alternated who got the question first. The end of the debate consisted of 5 yes or no questions and then both provided a 2 minute summary.At the end, it was obvious that Weber was running AGAINST President Obama and Nancy Pelosi, and that Lampson was running FOR his constituents. It was also obvious that Lampson was knowledgeable and well prepared for this debate.My impression was that audience support favored Lampson by a noticeable margin. Nick just outperformed Randy on all counts.Here is what Jim Vogas observed:
Nick was armed with facts and spoke with thoughtfulness and reason. Nick knew detailed information about the subject areas and offered specifics about how to make real improvements in the subject areas.Weber was arrogant and a pure ideologue. Weber’s answer to nearly every question on every issue was to somehow mention Obamcare and Pelosi. It got to the point where some audience members couldn’t help but laugh at Weber’s outlandish remarks. Weber showed a lack of knowledge on the issues, but it was also evident that he doesn’t care about facts because he just opposes everything having to do with Democrats. It was clear that he will be another obstructionist adding to the gridlock.Weber was even in opposition to the current NASA space program, even though he could not say anything that was specifically wrong with it.Weber said it was okay to send the oil from the Keystone XL pipeline to overseas countries like China. Nick wants it refined in our district, adding to local jobs.
Like Nick Lampson on Facebook
Follow Nick on Twitter @nlampson
Visit his webpage and sign up for e-mail updates: www.lampson.com
Regarding Nick’s opponent:
What Weber fails to mention as well is he is the co-author of the horrendous Trans-Vaginal Sonar for Abortions bill in Texas. Sadly, this is one of the “nicer” things he had done for women in Texas and his record over-all is rather shocking, even by Texas GOP standards, if one can call them standards at all.
Rape (re)Defined. Courtesy of Paul Ryan, Ron Paul, Todd Akin, and Barack Obama.
Any questions?
(via thisiswhiteprivilege)
I wanna meet Ron Paul, shake his hand, lean in real close and whisper “no one cares” in his ear.
HAHAHA!
HAHAHA II! :)
(via brashblacknonbeliever)
Ron Paul’s Convention Tribute Could Bring Israel Problems For GOP
Mitt Romney’s campaign announced Friday that Ron Paul would receive a video tribute at the convention — part of an effort to appease Paul supporters and to highlight Romney’s supposedly warm relationship with the Texas congressman. But Paul’s opposition to aid to Israel, his dismissal of Iran’s nuclear program and his newsletters’ shout-outs to antisemitic conspiracy theories could complicate the GOP’s outreach to Jewish voters.
“Queen of Porn” Jenna Jameson, making perhaps one of the most honest endorsements of Mitt Romney one can make.
Mediaite nails it: “What is particularly strange about a Jameson endorsement of Romney is that earlier this year the Republican candidate officially stated that he believes in ‘strict enforcement of our nation’s obscenity laws, as well as the promotion of parental software controls that guard our children from Internet pornography.’”
Basically, Romney would like to do away with the industry that made Jameson rich. I wonder if she’ll make appearances on his behalf like Kid Rock.
I just need to quote Shep Smith:
Shep Smith: Pimps and prostitutes for Ron Paul, Donald Trump for Mitt Romney, we still don’t know about Shakira and Big Bird but we’ll learn in the next hour.
Judge Napolitano: Isn’t it great being in this business?
Shep Smith: It’s the weirdest election season I’ve ever lived through and I’ve been here for what feels like 130,000.
True story.
(via cognitivedissonance)
- STEIN: A bit of a personal question then, are you on Social Security? Do you get Social Security checks?
- PAUL: I do.
- STEIN: Well, I mean, is there — you just told younger generations that they should ween themselves off this social contract.
- PAUL: That is true.
- STEIN: But you haven’t done it yourself…Don’t you think you chould have set a good example for the future generations. You’re not the wealthiest man in congress, I know that, but you have enough means to take care of yourself in retirement…Couldn’t you have set an example?
- PAUL: No. I think the programs are so designed, just as I use the post office too, I use government highways, I do that too, I use the banks, the federal reserve system, but that doesn’t mean that you can’t work to remove this in the same way on Social Security.
If you think about it, presidential debates are just as bad. They aren’t really debates, they’re more of group interviews with vaguely debate-ish rules. The moderator asks questions, the candidates answer with crazy lies, and we’re supposed to get something out of it. If we rules similar to high school debate team debates, things would be a lot different. Candidates would have to cite sources and prove what they say. (via quickhits)
(via quickhits)
A not-so-well-kept secret is that Ron Paul runs for president to raise money for his congressional campaign. So how well or how poorly he does in polling is irrelevant — he’ll keep campaigning until people stop giving him money.
So when’s Ron Paul going to wake up and smell the doom?
The Army Times reported in February that anti-war GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX) was at that time, “by far,” getting the most in campaign contributions from members of the United States military. According to a review of Federal Election Commission data, Paul received nearly $250,000 in donations from servicemembers, President Obama, $130,000 and GOP presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney just $23,000. But now that Paul’s campaign is all but over and presumably, Romney will be the Republican nominee, the military’s donation trend is beginning to shift: away from Paul and toward Obama, the Open Secrets blog reports…
A not-so-well-kept secret is that Ron Paul runs for president to raise money for his congressional campaign. So how well or how poorly he does in polling is irrelevant — he’ll keep campaigning until people stop giving him money.
And it looks like that’s beginning to happen now. How long Paul will stay in is anyone’s guess, but at a certain point the effort isn’t going to be worth the payoff.
