For the Record . . . Taxes: Pay Up

In case some rightwing bloggers are out there wondering where the outcry is over the Obama cabinet nominees' tax problems, let me go on record that I am angry that several (Daschle being the latest) have not paid their taxes like the rest of us. It's a never ending frustration for me that I worry myself silly (and pay an expert to prepare my taxes) making sure all of my taxes are done properly and that I'm not breaking the law unintentionally, yet people with much, much more money and many, many more connections than me, clearly aren't paying up. These folks can certainly afford to pay their share, while I'm here at my middle class house under the burden of high homeowners insurance, electricity and college tuition costs (that elected officials put on me), yet I am a control freak about being a responsible citizen about paying the taxes I owe. I also am for letting qualified nominees get to work. But, I am on the record as being tired of the tax shenanigans, intentional or unintentional. And, yes, I'm especially disappointed when Democrats are involved.

What's Wrong With Google Search?

Why do I get this page when I click on a search result - every search result?

Warning - visiting this web site may harm your computer!

Suggestions:

• Return to the previous page and pick another result.
• Try another search to find what you're looking for.

Or you can continue to http://www.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/ at your own risk. For detailed information about the problems we found, visit Google's Safe Browsing diagnostic page for this site. For more information about how to protect yourself from harmful software online, you can visit StopBadware.org. If you are the owner of this web site, you can request a review of your site using Google's Webmaster Tools. More information about the review process is available in Google's Webmaster Help Center.

Advisory provided by

Every search result has that warning on the search list.

Thank God for Florida

Texans are always thankful for Mississippi, and sometimes thankful for Louisiana. Those great states often keep us from being first or last in categories such as teen births, electricity rates, and other categories. Now we can be thankful for Florida and their ability to potentially bail out the Johnson Space Center:

The House on Wednesday rejected pleas from pro-NASA lawmakers to include up to $2 billion for space exploration and accelerated construction of the next generation of manned spacecraft. The measure, approved by a vote of 244 to 188, allotted just $50 million to NASA to repair Houston-area facilities damaged by Hurricane Ike, along with a half-billion dollars for non-space activities. ---- The House Rules Committee refused to allow the full House to vote on the proposal to boost spending on the manned flight program by $2 billion.

I guess House members aren't in the mood to reward Clear Lake voters who ousted their Democratic congressman, Nick Lampson, and put in Pete Olsen (R-Unable to Bring Home the Bacon). The Senate may come to the rescue:

NASA’s prospects seem much brighter in the Senate, where astronaut-senator Bill Nelson, D-Fla., succeeded in inserting $1.5 billion in the Senate’s version of the measure, including $500 million for the manned space program to shorten the five-year gap between the shuttle’s retirement and the initial flight of its successor. ---- Senate staffers said Hutchison did not take a direct role in crafting the Democratic-authored Appropriations Committee plan. The Republican senator has backed earlier efforts to boost NASA funding, saying a gap in manned space operations “makes no sense.”

President Barack Obama has not taken a stance on the conflicting proposals.

To restate the obvious:

NASA’s supporters, to win the internal political fight, are relying on lawmakers from Florida, a perennial battleground state in presidential elections, rather than Texas, which has voted reliably Republican for years.

I'm not sure how voters in Houston's Bay Area are ever going to learn. They proudly vote against their own interests, but then they stick their hand out, expecting a government bail out, anyway. If the Democratic senators from Florida are going to do all the work to get money for NASA, one would think most of those dollars would go to Florida.

It seems like Obama has sorta left NASA hanging. As far as I know, no new Administrator has been appointed yet.

Raise your hand if you think that if Lampson was still in the House, there would be $2 million in the House approved stimulus plan right now and we'd only be discussing the difference between that and the $1.5 million Senate proposal? Yes, I see hands.

Praise and Worship on NASA Property

This was sent out by a NASA employee through the NASA email system (at JSC) today:

JSC Praise Worship Club meeting, Thursday Jan. 29 The JSC Praise and Worship club will meet Thursday Jan. 29 from 11:30 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. in Room 217 at the Gilruth Center to sing and play spiritual hymns and songs. All JSC/contractor employees on and off site are welcome.

The Gilruth Center is government property, paid by taxpayers - you and me. While it's annoying if you think separation of church and state should be protected, I wonder if they can get away with this, just like public schools can, by not promoting religion, but allowing a religious group to meet. Here's how case law applies to public schools:

Although government may not promote religion through its educational facilities, it may not bar student religious groups from meeting on public school property if it makes those facilities available to nonreligious student groups.

This looks like an obvious Christian group, (prayer rugs not welcome?). I wonder if NASA employees can start a "progressive" group and meet on JSC property? Or an atheist group? I would think any public person could attend this, since JSC is taxpayer funded. Anyone have any clarification on religious groups meeting on government property? Thanks, in advance.

Banality Kills

That's one way you could subtitle Revolutionary Road. I found it brutal, harrowing . . . excruciating. I can't in good conscience recommend this as "must see" because you really have to be prepared to be very shaken by it. I certainly thought I knew what this movie was about, and that it would be "deep" and "important". But, I wasn't prepared for the absolutely brutal portrayal of dysfunction and sadness, and the loss of every last tiny bit of hope. It forces you to look into the abyss of a very unhappy woman's soul and it makes you gasp. ----- This is an update. Can't quit thinking about this movie. I watched this Charlie Rose interview with Kate and Leo. I recommend it to you. The way she describes the Wheelers, their relationship . . . it's, well, spot on. Quick! Someone recommend a "life is good, relationships can be life affirming, the butterflies fly and the birds sing, there is always a rainbow" movie for me to watch.

From the Comments: A Caution on SBOE and Science Standards

I wanted to promote this comment from my last SBOE post, because the caution is valid. He or she is making a prediction based on a phenomenon that is, unfortunately, reliable (with the science definition of "giving the same result on successive trials.") Seven of the SBOE members have a clear agenda to promote religion in classrooms, and we are just one board member vote away in March from making their dreams come true. Note from the caution below that it is probably board member Agosto who we need to be concerned about. I would take this very, very seriously. BGood is absolutely correct. The ELA standards were worked on for a very long time by experts in the field, and then got to midnight the night of the final vote, where the right wing nutters slipped changes under the doors of the board members, that were subsequently passed - without expert review, without expert testimony. Expect it. There will be last minute sabotage that will adversely affect science education in Texas. We'll be the laughing stock of the nation, even world wide. We need a big firestorm over this, lots of media attention, reporters questioning board members on camera as they leave their hotel the morning of the vote, "did you get papers slipped under your door and are you going to vote based on advice from science and education experts or on the advice of your pastor?" Here's the caution from the comments:

βG∞D said...

“My prediction is that the good sense of the eight members will hold on final vote at the March board meeting.” “My hope is that when the few who didn't really understand the danger and the assault on science of the amendments get to talk to experts, they will change their vote.” I too hope you are correct, but given my experience with the SBOE during the three-year long English Language Arts and Reading TEKS debacle, I wouldn’t place too much hope on the vote holding in March. Watch Mr. Agosto carefully. He was very supportive of real ELAR experts and the workgroup-authored version of our TEKS, until he voted against them in the final vote: 8-7. You’ve already seen McLeroy and Cargill at work with those oh-by-the-way amendments. Be assured; there are more in the works. The Malevolent 7 played all sorts of tricks during the ELAR “tweaking” of grades 6-12, then expanded to revision of 6-12, then expanded again to a full-blown rewrite of K-12 standards. And what did they finally vote for? A set of standards that Cargill and Lowe patched together THE NIGHT BEFORE the final vote and slipped under the doors of board member the following morning before the final vote. Should I mention that those TEKS were never seen by the public until that final vote? All this after spending thousands of dollars on teacher work groups AND an unprecedented, contracted, outside facilitator called StandardsWork. Don’t think for a second that they wouldn’t try similar tactics again. After all, this strategy worked with the ELAR TEKS. The only thing really working in your favor now is media coverage. If you lose that, get ready for the fireworks. As a side note, history teachers in Texas should be ready. It will be their turn to be scoffed at and ignored soon! If anyone knows that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it, it should be them.

Wrap It Up: Texas SBOE's Assault on Science

So, today the SBOE voted a second time to reject the strengths and weaknesses language in the science TEKS. My prediction is that the good sense of the eight members will hold on final vote at the March board meeting. Of some concern are the Earth and Space Science TEKS and a Biology TEKS that got amended in a sneak attack by a couple of creationists on the board at the very last minute yesterday. Today, the board voted again to accept these amendments, on a voice vote (which made it difficult to tell who voted yes and who voted no). No public testimony was allowed, although a true science warrior, Dr. David Hillis of UT cancelled his classes to be at the meeting in case testimony was allowed. The Chair, Don McElroy gets to decide if anyone speaks, and he was the one who threw the proverbial creationist monkey wrench into the Biology TEKS, so no, no speaking was allowed. The amendments are patently anti-science and pro-religion, and they open the door wide enough to give science teachers permission to put religion (Christianity) in our public school classrooms. The New York Times offers a good overview of what went right and what went wrong today. Two caveats about the amendments: 1. The vagueness they put in the TEKS represent nonsense, so there is no way for it to be taught the way they intend. Here's an example from Steve Schafersman's analysis (he of the awesome liveblogging): Note that the first TEKS is the one the scientific community asked to be approved, and the second is the TEKS with the Cargill amendment language:

(4) Earth in space and time. The student knows how Earth-based and space-based astronomical observations reveal the structure, scale, composition, origin, and history of the universe. (4) Earth in Space and Time. The student knows how Earth-based and space-based astronomical observations reveal differing theories about the structure, scale, composition, origin, and history of the universe.

This revision is scientifically awkward and unacceptable. There is only one scientific theory of the structure, scale, composition, origin, and history of the universe: the Big Bang Theory. There are no “differing theories” and it is unscientific to claim that there are. The purpose is to suggest that there are alternative explanations for these phenomena, but the only one is not a scientific theory but a religious one. An acceptable revision would be “The student knows how Earth-based and space-based astronomical observations reveal how the Big Bang Theory explains the structure, scale, composition, origin, and history of the universe.” So, as you can see, if there isn't a differing scientific theory - and there IS NOT - it can't be taught. Unless, unless, unless . . . a teacher is willing to insert his or her religous "theory" into the classroom. And, it looks like that would be permissable. 2. You have to assume from the 7-8 vote on the "strengths and weaknesses" language that there are 8 people who are willing to ensure real science is taught in Texas classroom, not beliefs of some Christians. My hope is that when the few who didn't really understand the danger and the assault on science of the amendments get to talk to experts, they will change their vote. Email addresses of all SBOE members are here. I'm going to work on something concise that can be emailed to them. The March meeting, where the final vote on science standards will take place is March 26-27 in Austin. UPDATE: Here's the new Biology TEKS that McElroy got inserted to the evolution section:

"7B: Describe the sufficiency or insufficiency of common descent to explain the sudden appearance, stasis and sequential nature of the fossil record."

This is particularly egregious, as there is no scientific basis for "insufficiency". It's pure creationist nonsense and has no place in a science classroom. Common descent is accepted. Period. It's hard to know what to email the SBOE, except for "Hello, you aren't scientists and most of you aren't even educators. Your job is to get the best experts to advise you and then take their advice. There is no place for your small minded Jesus-in-your-pocket religious beliefs in Texas classrooms. Thank you."

I Am Withdrawing My Name For Consideration for U.S. Senate from NY

In attempt to further confuse Governor Paterson, I have notified/not notified him that I am withdrawing my name from consideration for the U.S. Senate seat that John Cornyn (B(oob)-Texas) tried to keep Hillary from vacating. When I saw the rock star reception for Hillary at State today, I looked deep in my heart and counted the many personal reasons I might have for not serving in the Senate. Which are none of your business. Except that they might be about me not paying taxes on my nanny or other assorted employee taxes that confuse me, as well as the guy who is going to run the IRS. Honestly, I thought there were exceptions. Or, that I was exceptional. It's possible the flu that is going around is keeping me from serving. The flu that is felling many of my closest personal friends for personal reasons. It could be, you know, something else entirely that will keep you guessing for years! You know, something else! You know, something personal. I am going to retreat this weekend to my vast family compound in the suburbs and and check to be sure I still have that magical surname that causes people to burst into the soundtrack from The Alamo. That's Texas for Camelot. And to Governor Paterson, I'm sorry for the all the confusion and the bother, as I know for sure you were , or were not, going to appoint me for sure. Or not.

Cargill's SBOE Non-Science Nonsense

In a trick move late in the SBOE meeting today, board member Barbara Cargill (R-Baylor grad, Woodlands mom), slipped in some amendments to the Earth Science TEKS that were pro-creationism, with no basis in science. Steve Schafersman liveblogged it (below). None of this was expected, so there was no testimony for or against it during the public and expert testimony phase yesterday. That Cargill was able to pull the wool over otherwise sensible board members to get some of her amendments passed was astounding. It's good news/bad news. The good news is that the "strengths and weaknesses" language was NOT approved by the board in a 7-8 vote. Bad news is that five out of 13 of Cargill's amendments were passed, BUT the final vote on all of this is not until the March SBOE meeting. So, will the 7-8 vote hold? Will someone show the 8 board members the light and convince them to vote against ALL of the Cargill amendments? There was some serious hilarity in today's proceedings with Cargill proclaiming over and over again about the 6000 emails she has received from consitutents about keeping the strengths and weaknesses language in. Someone slapped her down pretty good when it was pointed out that 5000 of those emails were the exact same email. Anyone want to start a 6000 email campaign to Cargill and company letting them know we expect science to be taught in Texas classrooms, not religious beliefs? Here's the liveblogging. Prepare to be alarmed:

Barbara Cargill now took the opportunity to eviscerate and really damage the new Earth and Space Science TEKS by introducing "qualifying language" to the TEKS in a motion. In typical deceptive SBOE method, she sprung this series of detailed motions on the Board suddenly with no possibility of preview. She said we heard from many of our experts to introduce this language, to add "humility and tentativeness" to the ESS standards. I read all the expert feedback and I want to state that Cargill's claims are absolutely untrue! Her qualifying language was recommended only by Dr. Charles Garner, the chemistry professor at Baylor, and Dr. Stephen Meyer, the Discovery Institute pseudoscientist. There was NOT a lot of feedback from the public or the other four experts to make these changes. The attempt to make the ESS standards more humble and tentative is just ridiculous. This is language that only anti-scientists and pseudoscientists would want. The ESS standards do not make extreme statements that would be unscientific. In fact, the language was weakened by the science panel to satisfy the two stealth Young Earth Creationists on the panel.

Barbara Cargill's attempt to gut the ESS standards is a betrayal of science of the highest order. I spoke to her yesterday and today and asked her to protect the new ESS course. She didn't promise she would, but listened to me. She had appointed two good members of the ESS panel who supported accurate and reliable science and stated their belief that the ESS standards should be adopted without change, and now she is denigrating their contribution. She is, in fact, voting against the product and recommendation of her own two expert. Why would anyone else with integrity want to be appointed to a TEA science panel by her if she deliberately goes against their professional advice and instead listens to pseudoscientists?

The usual suspects--Lowe, Dunbar, etc.--testified in favor of Cargill's motion. Mrs. Miller says she doesn't want to vote on any specific amendments to ESS without input from the experts.

The first item passed 8-7, Pat Hardy voting for the change. The next two failed. The fourth one passed. More to come.

During this process, Barbara Cargill is deliberately misleading the SBOE members about what scientists know about the subjects she is addressing. She repeatedly claimed that the "experts she spoke to" recommended the changes she is requesting. Her experts are well-known pseudoscientists (lke Meyer and Garner) and Young Earth Creationists, and she is ignoring the real experts on the ESS workgroup that wrote these standards, including the two she appointed herself. What Cargill is doing is despicable. She is willfully undermining Earth and Space Science education in Texas. I can't believe why a majority of the SBOE are going along with her. They are, in effect, voting about the details of ESS, something which none of them know anything about, simply on the basis of the very false and tiny bits of information Barbara is feeding them. They are relying on repeated untruths and misrepresentations. I was able to tell two of them that this was wrong by getting near them while the Board was in session, but I couldn't speak to all of them. This political process is just amazingly bad for Texas and for science education.

In answer to a wonderful question from Mrs. Miller, Mrs. Cargill admitted that her two "experts" were "Dr. Meyer and Dr. Garner." This is precisely what I thought. She used suggestions from two non-Earth scientists who both have religious and pseudoscientific agendas, but claimed that "all the experts she spoke to" recommended these changes. How profoundly dupllicitous and ultimately damaging to Texas Earth science education. She falsely tried to give the impression that she consulted real experts on her suggested amendments, but in fact she did not. She consulted only ideologues who do not have the interests of Texas students at hear, but only wish to propogate their own pseudoscientific agendas. Barbara Cargill wants students who take this new course to be misled, exactly as she misled her State Board colleagues, and she sabotaged the ESS standards to accomplish this.

Every one of Cargill's amendments affects a standard that deals with origins. Every one is about a topic that obsesses Young Earth Creationists. They are opposed to having students learn about the evidence that supports an ancient Earth, the origin of life, the evolution of fossil life, the demonstrated existence of transitional fossils, the reality of common descent, etc. One of her amended revisions that passed will require that the ESS textbooks include information that is nonexistent, arguments against universal common descent.

Don McLeroy made two motions to amend the science TEKS. Both passed. The first was not controversial. This was to add "Know the definition of science and understand its limitations" to all the science TEKS introductions. The second was more problematic. This was to add a student expectation to the Biology TEKS in section 7 on evolution. This new standard reads: "describe the sufficiency or insufficiency of common ancestry to explain the sudden appearance, stasis and sequential nature of groups in the fossil record." I am not totally opposed to this since it requires that the evolution of fossil life be discussed in biology textbooks. I might have worded it differently since it is scientifically inaccurate. While most fossils show stasis, many do show gradual change, and transitions from one species to another and different taxa to others is quite common. The biology texts would have to discuss these topics, too, to contrast this type of evolution with stasis. I could ask for nothing more.

The really bad language is the inclusion of the "sufficiency or insufficiency of common ancestry." The fact of common ancestry of all living and fossil species is not in doubt. The problem is that common ancestry does not explain stasis, sudden appearance, gradual evolution, and other tempo and modes of evolution. Common ancestry is an inference from analysis of morphological and genetic information and the fact of genetic continuity of all life (life only comes from life, not non-life, except for the origin of life early in Earth's history). The tempo and mode of evolution (i.e. sudden appearance, stasis, gradual change, transitional fossils, etc.) is explained by speciation, fossilization, fossil preservation, the completeness of stratigraphic and fossil records, and other considerations. So the new student expectation, which did pass, is poorly worded in an ignorant and unscientific way. Dr. McLeroy consulted all sorts of evolution books but failed to really understand them because he lacks a basic understanding of evolutionary theory and paleontology. If he had these two, he would have worded his student expectation better. I think the idea behind this new standard has merit, but it really needs to be reworded in a scientifically-acceptable fashion.

Finally, the science standards passed on a unanimous voice vote. The "strengths and weaknesses" language was left, but one or two standards in ESS and the second addition to evolution by McLeroy need to be rewritten.

Here are the five changes to the ESS standards that Barbara Cargill was able to pass with the new wording. She proposed 13 but 8 failed; all were voted on individually and all were very close votes, some a tie vote which meant they failed. Compare this wording to that in the ESS proposed TEKS available on the web.

(4) Earth in Space and Time. The student knows how Earth-based and space-based astronomical observations reveal *differing theories about* the structure, scale, composition, origin, and history of the universe. (5) Earth in Space and Time. The student *understands* the solar nebular accretionary disk model. (5)(B) investigate sources of heat, including kinetic heat of impact accretion, gravitational compression, and radioactive decay, which *are thought to allow* protoplanet differentiation into layers; (6)(D) *evaluate the evidence that the* Earth's cooling led to tectonic activity, resulting in continents and ocean basins. (8)(A) evaluate a variety of fossil types, *proposed* transitional fossils, fossil lineages, and significant fossil deposits and *assess the arguments for and against universal common descent in light of this fossil evidence*;

Some of these were minor changes but others are very unscientific, especially the change to 8A which promotes Creationism. There are no scientific arguments against common descent. The other four have qualifying language which makes the standard less certain and more tentative, something completely unwarranted.

Best Liveblog of Texas SBOE Proceedings

I followed the SBOE meeting and the testimony on science standards online yesterday. The best source, with the most detailed information is at this link. Steve Schafersman is liveblogging Wed., Thurs. and Friday, with very detailed info, as well as photos. While you expect the testimony on the creationist side to be alarming, even more alarming are the remarks by certain SBOE members. Keep in mind, the anti-science board members have the votes to pass science standards which will undermine science education in Texas - science content in the classroom will be inaccurate, and far right Christian beliefs, rather than evidence-based science will be written into the TEKS and textbooks (which will be in place for the next 10 years.) Some highlights and lowlights from yesterday's proceedings are below. I skipped around - you should really read the whole liveblogging. Clearly, some SBOE members do not know the difference between a hypothesis and a theory. This is really sad and inexcusable.:

David Bradley just made the remark that he tried to get Ben Stein to come to Austin and speak in front of the SBOE, but they couldn't afford his fees! This comment is just priceless, since Ben Stein has absolutely no scientific or educational qualifications whatsoever, except his brief appearance as a public school teacher in the movie Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986). His pseudodocumentary, Expelled, has been justly decried as a fascist, ignorant diatribe against evolution. The movie producer used every dirty trick to fool the scientists who were asked to appear in it on camera. Stein himself indulges in despicable tactics to mislead and deceive his audience about the truth. David Bradley wants to do the same. ---- The next speaker, Eric Hennenhoefer, was a member of the business community. He explained to the SBOE members how their political manipulation of the science standards, and their stated intention of voting to return the phrases "strengths and weaknesses" to the standards, would have a negative effect on science education in Texas. He asked that the science standards be adopted by the SBOE in the form they were recommended by the science panels in unchanged form. Next, he strongly challenged the methods used by the Discovery Institute to mislead and confuse citizens and decision makers. He correctly observed that the DI uses PR tactics: they market their beliefs to the public using a series of non-scientific techniquest. He was very critical of the DI's methods and of their book Explore Evolution. ----- Dr. Scott was questioned at length by most of the SBOE members. The Creationists on the Board grilled her about their usual concerns developed from their reading of Young Earth Creationist literature, which they implicity believe. Ken Mercer asked about evolutionary frauds, such as Haeckel's embryos and Piltdown Man. Genie replied that these could be mentioned, but they provide no evidence or reasons against modern evolution. She said the Haeckel vertebrate embryo controversy in no way helps Creationists, and has been used as a bogus "weakness" of evolution that should not be used to misrepresent the scientific theory. Another member, either Terri Leo or Cynthia Dunbar, asked her why there has been no court ligitigation against "strengths and weakneses" if the "Darwinists" claim that it is bad for science and promotes sectarian Creationism as charged. She replied that so far the critics of evolution have failed to get their bogus weaknesses into the biology textbooks, so there has never been a reason to challenge the rule in court. If the "strengths and weaknesses" phrase is kept in the standards, and this standard is used in the future to damage biology textbooks, "you will have problems." She means, of course, that the TEA and SBOE will be sued on Establishment Clause grounds, because the entire history of the political effort to put the language into the standards and force phony "weaknesses" into biology textbooks is religiously motivated. This history and motivation make the rule illegal, no matter what the proponents of the rule state. ----- Textbooks of several science disciplines haved been adopted since 2003 without controversy because they don't cover evolution or the origin of life. If they did, the Radical Religious Right SBOE members would have gone after them. These textbooks discuss hundreds of corrborated scientific hypotheses in several major theories, but there has never been an attempt to force chemistrty, physics, or IPC to contain the "weaknesses" of their theories. In reality, the historical record is clear: keeping and using "strengths and weaknesses" is only used to attack evolution and other subjects that Biblical Literalists object to, so their effort would violate the Establishment Clause if it ever succeeded. ----- Dr. Ron Wetherington, Professor at Southern Methodist University, testified next. He is a physical anthropologist and the director of SMU's science education center. He described the difference between scientific theories and hypotheses, defining both in ways recognized by scientists that would be news to some of the Board members, who think that scientific theories can be criticized by high school students. ----- Dr. Hillis mentioned that intimidation of biology teachers is common in Texas public schools. They are intimidated by the political controversy at the State Board of Education level as well as by parents and school officials. He also said he could not understand why the SBOE members would waste one day of their time hearing testimony about this issue. They gave the task of writing science standards to the scientists and science teachers--the experts--and then they still want to review and edit their work, and not in good ways. Dr. Hillis thought this political manipulation of science is "idiocy." Barbara Cargill said she has 6,000 email messages asking her to make sure that "strengths and weaknesses" stays in the science standards. Also, she said, they ask that the science standards "show more humility" and not be so "disrespectful." Yes, science should respect and be humble in front of the great idol of willful ignorance and abject superstition.

Do Over

Oh, good grief. Obama and CJ Roberts did a do over of the oath of office today. This was after Obama sent Roberts into a corner of the Oval Office this morning and had him write 100 times, "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." I feel safer.

Muse's Inauguration In List

The new year always brings lots of "what's in" and "what's out" lists. Here's my Inauguration In List: dresses color cute kids parenting family curiousity hard work ambition opportunity leadership responsibility rebirth of science death of cynicism Please add others in the comments!

Cornyn Holds Up Hillary's Nomination

Texas' own Cornyn, the Republican lapdog, thinks he's cute and fluffy by being the ONE Senator who refuses to agree to Hillary's unanimous consent today as Secretary of State. Several cabinet nominees are going to be confirmed that way this afternoon. Did he sit around with some buddies around the campfire last night, chewing on his cud, contemplating "how can we jack with Hillary one more time? Hahahahaha! I'll show her. I'll cowboy up and won't agree to unanimous consent!" You know, whatever Big Bad John. She'll be confirmed tomorrow. Jerk.

Full Text of Obama's Inaugural Address

My fellow citizens:

I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.

Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents.

So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.

That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.

These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land - a nagging fear that America’s decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights.

Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America - they will be met.

On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.

We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things.

The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.

In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted - for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.

For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life. For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth.

For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sahn. Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction.

This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions - that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.

For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act - not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.

Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions - who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.

What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them - that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account - to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day - because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.

Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control - and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous.

The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our Gross Domestic Product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart - not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.

As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake.

And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more. Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort - even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society’s ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world’s resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.

As we consider the road that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratitude those brave Americans who, at this very hour, patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us today, just as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages. We honor them not only because they are guardians of our liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service; a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves. And yet, at this moment - a moment that will define a generation - it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all.

For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter’s courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent’s willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.

Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends - hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism - these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility - a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.

This is the price and the promise of citizenship.

This is the source of our confidence - the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.

This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed - why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent mall, and why a man whose father less than sixty years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.

So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America’s birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people:

“Let it be told to the future world…that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive…that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it].”

America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children’s children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God’s grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.

A New Day for My Children

I got a twitter from a reporter I respect in Austin saying that it seemed strange to her that this was Bush's last day in office and that he had been the President her whole adult life. That got me to thinking who was the President when I was a young adult. Well, I campaigned for Carter to win a second term when I was at college. At Baylor. In Waco. That's the short version of why I didn't really fit in well there. Would you believe Carter campaigned in Texas? He flew into the small airport in Waco and I was there. We know who won that round, so yeah, nearly my entire 20's were spent with Reagan in office. I thought it was simply awful, and an immoral time, with the rise of the Christian right and their hating on the least and the last and the lost. I taught public school in a district that was minority majority. The kids came from homes where parents hadn't gone to college and they needed someone to inspire them to dream of something better for themselves. Instead they had Reagan ranting on welfare moms (which were many of their moms). What I heard from my President and his Galliano dressed wife did not match my experience in the real world. It dawned on me while I was thinking back on it, that my 18 year old son is about to spend his young adult life with Barack Obama as his President. What a wonderful gift this is to him. I wish our new president much success and that the sense of hope so many feel today will last for eight years. Kids my son's age deserve this. They've had the spectre of war over their heads as they've grown from being children eight years ago to adults today. One of the saddest and upsetting days I've had with my children was four years ago after Bush was re-elected. It hit my young daughter hard. She came home from school very angry the day that Kerry conceded saying she would never like Wednesday's at one o'clock again (which was the day and time he conceded). The child was nine years old. And, yes, she is her mother's daugher. That wasn't the worst of it, though. The bad moment came when we went out to eat soon after that and she burst out crying, "I don't want Bush to send my brother to war!" I'm so happy for my wonderful children, who I love more than I can express, who are everything to me, that they are embarking on the next eight years of their lives with a President they can admire and who will help them see the world as a place of opportunity, and yes, hope. May God bless you and our great nation, Barack Obama.

Looking Forward, Not Backwards

I'm avoiding all things W - just changed the channel off of CNN which is doing a "How Bush Screwed Up" retrospective, am not reading blog posts about him and don't want to discuss him. He became completely irrelevant on Nov. 4th. I'm reading up on and watching all things Barack and Michelle, and following my friends who are in DC on Facebook and Twitter. I'm excited about moving on and participating in getting things done for our country! Anyone else in the same mood? Obama 2.0, U.S. 2.0 - Let's celebrate! UPDATE: Although I do agree with Pelosi on this: ""I think that we have to learn from the past, and we cannot let the politicizing of, for example, the Justice Department, go unreviewed," Pelosi said. 'Past is prologue.'" (emphasis mine - speaking of her desire to investigate Bush's actions to fire federal prosecutors two years ago. Obama does not want investigations.) Maybe my mood is just to put W aside at least for the time being while my mind totally shifts to the promise ahead for our country.

Evan Smith to Texans: Paint the State Red

Evan Smith, editor-in-chief at Texas Monthly, writes in Newsweek that Texas isn't turning blue any time soon. While some think that the flipping of Colorado and Virgina from red to blue means that Texas could be next, Smith is not convinced. Some of his reasons: Hispanics: while we are headed to a Hispanic majority population, they don't all vote Democratic. Statewide R's typically get 30% of the Hispanic vote due to their social conservatism and being pro-military. Influx of young people: In other states, this might favor Dems, but "John McCain beat Obama 74 to 25 percent among white Texas college students, while Obama fought him to a draw elsewhere. In the suburbs, Obama won nationally, but McCain won in Texas 61-37." (ouch) Statewide Dem problem: No D has won statewide since 1994. Where is the strong D candidate for governor? There isn't one. Without a strong statewide D slate, it makes it hard for downballot D's. We are still red: Making progress (the 76-74 TX House for example) doesn't mean we aren't still red. Red is red. "McCain's percentage of the Texas vote in '08 lagged behind Bush's in '00 and '04—but he still topped 55 percent and beat Obama by 950,000 votes. NBC News noted that in '08 exit polls, 46 percent of Texans identified themselves as "conservative," compared with only 34 percent nationally. (In Virginia and North Carolina it was 37 and 33 percent, respectively.) Bush's approval rating in Texas was 41 percent versus 27 percent elsewhere" There's lots to chew on here and it's worth a read. Thanks to Felicity for pointing me to this article.

The Smoking Wine Glass

Like Perry Mason, attorney Rusty Hardin, in closing arguments, pointed out a detail in a piece of evidence that caused the Borris Miles jury to quickly exonerate him. He picked up a 18x24 photo that showed Miles with a wine glass in his hand. Miles' accusers had previously testified that moments after the photo was taken, Miles pulled out a gun with his right hand, while grabbing David Harris with his left hand. How could he do that (use both hands) if he was holding a wine glass?

“The testimony just didn’t jibe a lot of the time,” said juror Bob Casson. “And the final thing was when he brought in that large picture showing the wine glass in the bottom of his hand. (Miles) couldn’t have handed a gun to somebody.”

Jury foreman Forrest Peugnet said there wasn’t enough evidence to convict.

“There just wasn’t a smoking gun,” Peugnet said.

No, but that wine glass was one smoking piece of evidence. And Rusty Hardin is a killer attorney.

This Old House

It's sad that Sen. Mario Gallegos is having to bascially say on the floor of the Texas Senate that prior to today, at least the Senate could say, "well at least we aren't the Texas House" with their chaos and in-fighting last session. Sort of a "thank God we aren't Mississippi" moment. Except for that now, the Texas Senate is Mississippi. The worst legislative body in Texas. Zaffirini is now saying the same thing. She is wondering what the media will say about the Texas Senate tomorrow. I can tell you what the new media is saying in real time (along with the twittering "old" media): chaos, tumoil, partisanship. Watson and many other Democrats have clearly said over and over again today: the real issues that are important to Texas families are public educaiton, college tuition, health care, electricty rates, insurance rates and the economy. Instead the Republican Party can just go ahead and live (for a day) then die on this silly voter ID non-issue. The math is the math: 19-12, the Republicans can do whatever they want to do to trick Texans. But, can they be so stupid to not understand that what goes around comes around? The voters get to vote for these characters again, and my guess is that their tolerance is going to (eventually) be low for folks who are so politically selfish as to not put Texas families first. UPDATE: Oh, my goodness, Ellis is reviewing what's so idiotic about voter ID - and that the motivation is to discriminate against minorities , and reminding everyone that tomorrow would be Martin Luther King Jr.'s 80th birthday. UPDATE: The Dallas Morning News has already expressed how unimpressed they are with Dewhurst's lack of leadership over the 2/3 rule change.

Olson Votes No On Reauthorizing SCHIP

Yep, my new congressman just voted to not reauthorize the State Children's Health Insurance Program. I hope everyone is happy. Who's good side is he trying to get on with this vote? Besides the base(ment). Culberson apparently had a conniption fit over the re-authorization. Is Olsen Culberson's lapdog? Lampson was a SCHIP supporter, in case your memory is short. The great news is that the U.S. House not only voted to reauthorize SCHIP, but it was expanded to cover more children. Read more about that here. The Senate is expected to pass the bill and Obama will likely sign the legislation within days of taking office. And, here we go, this is the type of change we can believe in with a Democratic president! Shame on Olson for not wanting to put women, children and healthcare first. (Interestingly, the Democrats in the Texas Senate are valiantly trying right at this very moment to shift the discussion away from the non-issue of voter ID to children's healthcare.)

Follow the TX Senate Craziness with Vince and Texas Monthly

On twitter: here. And we have Patricia Kilday Hart on Burkablog following it also: here. Van de Putte has had to re-explain to some Senators how the upper chamber works. An excerpt:

“Are we really going to prioritize into special something that is just partisan. Are we really going to spend this special time for a partisan issue”

“I want to say we are the upper chamber and we are family and we do care about what is best for Texas.

This is the first step in the opposite direction.”

The Senate Republicans are trying to pull a rule change that requires only 3/5 vote on certain issues such as voter ID (a non-issue, a total non-issue) and redistricting.

It seems that a Craddick poltergeist has entered Lite Gov David Dewhurst's body and is causing him and his cronies to try and hijack the Senate. Van de Putte had to run down the list of issues that are at the crisis point and are the real issues for Texas families: education, health care, insurace rates.

What are we trying to do here, save the butts of the lobbyists and special interest groups that aren't going to have an easy time getting their way in the House this session?

Dispicable.

Rick Noriega's Birthday Party: You Are Invited!

Note from the Noriega's: Everyone is invited. There is no charge. If you want to contribute to House Floor Chair fund, that is completely optional. I hope to see you there!

You're Invited to a Birthday Party! for The Honorable Rick Noriega in (belated) recognition of his 51st Birthday! January 15, 2009 5:30pm - 7:30pm at Marbella's Banquet Hall, 6632 Harrisburg Boulevard, Houston, Texas (From I-45, exit Wayside Drive: Northbound, turn Right on Wayside, Southbound turn Left. Go to Harrisburg and turn Left 1.5 blocks, Marbella's is on the Left. Parking in rear, off Capitol St.), The event also is a tribute in appreciation for Rick's Legacy of Leadership 10 years of public service to the East End, South Houston and Pasadena in the Texas House of Representatives Please join us to honor Rick's service and to thank him for his dedication to our communities. A fund has been established to purchase Rick's House floor chair as a fitting and meaningful remembrance for his years of service. Anyone wishing to contribute toward the purchase may send a check to the treasurer: "Billy Kelly for Rick", 1105 Avenue M, South Houston, TX 77587.

Richard Morrison: Blogging Fort Bend County Commissioner's Court

My friend, Richard Morrison, is a blogger! And, he's our new Fort Bend County Precinct 1 Commissioner. The blog is called As the Court Turns and you really should bookmark it. :) The photo is from about a week before the Primary, when I went blockwalking with Richard in Greatwood. It might possibly be overstating it to say that couple of hours knocking on doors with Richard won the Primary. But, the effort Richard made all the way to Nov. 4th to talk to an enormous number of Precinct 1 voters at their doors, surely made the difference for him on Election Night. His win was a huge bright spot that night. He's a deserving guy, and he brings some real balance to a GOP heavy Commissioner's Court. On As the Court Turns, in his second post, Richard answers the burning question on everyone's mind . . . what does a County Commissioner do? I'm looking forward to following Commissioner Morrison's public service on the world wide web! What about Facebook, Richard?!

Always Do What's Best For The Body

Full of fervent desire, I present to you Joe and Clyde:

Straus names his chief of staff

House Speaker-apparent Joe Straus today named former state Rep. Clyde Alexander as his chief of staff.

Alexander, a Democrat who represented Athens from 1989-2001 in the House, was chairman of the House Transportation Committee under former Democratic Speaker Pete Laney. He is a rancher and businessman and may bring a rural perspective to the urban-oriented Straus speakership.

As transportation chairman, Alexander recommended a nickel increase in the gas tax to pay for highway construction.

"I am honored that Clyde has accepted to return to his beloved House, in a fulltime role at my side. Clyde's insights and advice are essential to me," Straus said in a statement. "Clearly, Clyde shares my fervent desire to do what is best for the body."

I think this is pretty cool - a Democrat as Chief of Staff to our Republican Speaker of the Texas House. Joe the Speaker is off to a good start.

Minimal Boomer Sooner Hullabaloo

Fortunately, we heard very little of this tonight:

Boomer Sooner, Boomer Sooner Boomer Sooner, Boomer Sooner Boomer Sooner, Boomer Sooner Boomer Sooner, OK U! Oklahoma, Oklahoma Oklahoma, Oklahoma Oklahoma, Oklahoma Oklahoma, OK U! I'm a Sooner born and Sooner bred and when I die, I'll be Sooner dead Rah Oklahoma, Rah Oklahoma Rah Oklahoma, OK U!

That's a one-song college band, kinda like the Aggie band and that hullabaloo caneck, caneck nonsense. You would think it would be the Aggies who would have basically three words in their fight song to memorize. In other news to make alumni proud, Rice has released the results of its research on normal sweat vs. sexual sweat.

Is this the next NASA Administrator?

"A former astronaut who has made four trips into space is reportedly a leading candidate for the top job at NASA.

If selected by President-elect Barack Obama, Charles Bolden Jr., 62, a retired Marine Corps general who makes his home in Houston's Bay Area, would be the first black to head the space agency.

The former test pilot left NASA in 1994 after 14 years of service to return to the Marine Corps, where he rose to the rank of major general. He retired in 2003.

But Bolden has remained familiar with NASA's workings and personnel. He currently serves on NASA's Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, one of nine experts who advises the administrator. He is also an adviser to the four high-ranking NASA officials who are overseeing the upcoming space shuttle reconditioning flight to the 18-year-old Hubble Space Telescope. Bolden piloted the shuttle Discovery in 1990 that flew the observatory into space."

More here.

Of note, others mentioned in the article who are being considered for the job:

Garver; Sally Ride, American's first female astronaut; Scott Hubbard, a Stanford University professor and a former director of NASA's Ames Research Center; Pete Worden, Ames current director; Ed Weiler, NASA's science chief, and Alan Stern, the agency's previous science chief.

Notice that Mike Griffin is not mentioned. Looks like the campaigning on the internet and the pleas from Mrs. Griffin are falling on deaf ears. Maybe it's time for him to stencil the shuttle.

To Coleman: Do the Gore Thing

Dear Norm Coleman, It's time to do the right thing and put your country over your political aspirations. With today's Minnesota state Supreme Court ruling, it's clear you are toast. No matter how burned (on both sides) you feel, the right thing to do is to let the country move on. Let poor John Cornyn move on. He has a lot of soul searching to do along the lines of What Would Bush's Lapdog Do (WWBLD)? He really doesn't have time to organize a filbuster and delay the important work of the Senate. Here are some Al Gore cheat notes you can use in your concession speech. As it was for Al Gore in 2000, the overwhelming response of Republicans will be positive. They will be especially pleased you did not continue to fight your cause in front of liberal judges. I give you plenty of Al Gore to choose from: "what remains of partisan rancor must now be put aside" "now it has ended, resolved, as it must be resolved, through the honored institutions of our democracy" "Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the court's decision, I accept it" "I know that many of my supporters are disappointed. I am too. But our disappointment must be overcome by our love of country." "This is America. Just as we fight hard when the stakes are high, we close ranks and come together when the contest is done. And while there will be time enough to debate our continuing differences, now is the time to recognize that that which unites us is greater than that which divides us. While we yet hold and do not yield our opposing beliefs, there is a higher duty than the one we owe to political party." "Now the political struggle is over and we turn again to the unending struggle for the common good of all Americans and for those multitudes around the world who look to us for leadership in the cause of freedom."

"Thank you, and good night, and God bless America."

TEC: List of Top 50 PACS With Most Contributions in 2008

From the Texas Ethics Commission website, here are the top 50 PACS in Texas ranked by the amount of contributions received in 2008 (the first dollar figure). The second dollar figure is political expenditures. Any surprises here? The entire list is on the TEC website. I was a little surprised that 1 and 2 beat out 3 and 7. And that 5 beat out 7. But, hey, there's a reason that Dems are making gains! Anyone else surprised that John Davis cracked the top 50? By the way, this list is as of Dec. 12, 2008. 1 $4,486,398.00; $4,881,531.66 Texas Democratic Party 2 $4,028,701.41; $4,080,384.25 Texas Democratic Trust 3 $3,116,890.49; $3,846,461.89 Republican Party Of Texas 4 $2,905,441.73; $3,725,719.95 David Dewhurst Committee 5 $2,679,500.00; $2,468,319.26 Texans for Insurance Reform 6 $2,514,574.22; $2,379,181.14 Texas Association of Realtors Issue 7 $2,433,510.00; $3,870,449.50 Texans For Lawsuit Reform PAC TLR PAC 8 $2,180,860.09; $2,426,599.67 Texas Assn. Of Realtors PAC TRE PAC 9 $1,962,347.96; $1,836,593.79 Harris County Republican Party 10 $1,933,165.05; $1,502,828.86 Texans For Rick Perry 11 $1,583,100.00; $1,308,941.09 EStars Over Texas PAC 12 $1,412,424.65; $1,425,383.03 House Democratic Campaign Committee 13 $1,377,100.75; $1,838,099.67 Texans for Joan Huffman 14 $1,217,442.96; $384,366.40 Texans for Greg Abbott 15 $1,165,613.14; $159,611.71 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp. BNSF RAILPAC 16 $1,155,798.22; $296,378.54 Union Pacific Corp. Fund For Effect 17 $1,135,202.36; $1,341,748.16 Valero Energy Corporation PAC 18 $1,070,688.66; $984,122.15 Annie's List 19 $1,031,936.65; $1,279,934.26 Friends of Michael Williams 20 $991,856.42; $541,526.93 Texas Medical Assn. PAC TEXPAC 21 $905,800.00; $886,189.64 First Tuesday 22 $890,541.48; $927,841.89 Texas Parent PAC 23 $746,611.22; $190,664.49 United Services Automobile Associat USAA Employee 24 $725,874.57; $984,454.06 Wallace Jefferson For Texas Supreme 25 $648,685.50; $592,951.94 Empower Texans PAC 26 $639,710.67; $919,989.52 Blue Texas 27 $605,481.53; $407,284.61 Texans for Dan Branch 28 $599,047.43; $618,926.31 Texans for Tommy Williams 29 $593,941.22; $159,149.44 Texans for Elizabeth Jones 30 $566,506.30; $491,812.80 ETravis County Democratic Party 31 $564,830.83; $517,820.27 ActBlue Texas 32 $558,316.77; $483,500.00 Border Health PAC 33 $552,416.55; $569,568.91 HillCo PAC 34 $547,131.40; $627,828.63 AT&T Inc. Texas Political Action Co AT&T Texas 35 $515,475.96; $453,019.26 Vote Texas 36 $487,117.75; $270,410.52 Friends Of Susan Combs Committee 37 $486,197.38; $698,545.43 Committee to Elect Patrick Rose 38 $474,582.62; $766,017.44 Justice Phil Johnson for Supreme Co 39 $466,678.59; $567,673.58 Friends of Austen Furse 40 $456,341.19; $364,435.80 Dallas County Democratic PAC - Stat DCDP 41 $451,341.10; $63,416.46 Texas Deer Association Political Ac TDA - PAC 42 $442,681.56; $381,503.48 Texas Trial Lawyers Assn. PAC 43 $405,815.00; $528,403.90 Associated Republicans Of Texas Cam 44 $391,722.87; $138,332.00 Atmos Energy Corporation PAC 45 $382,205.89; $455,259.22 Texas Friends Of Time Warner Cable TWCT 46 $382,134.26; $197,730.00 The American Electric Power - Texas 47 $378,760.68; $287,996.39 Texas Dental Assn. PAC DENPAC 48 $357,076.80; $300,242.63 Texans for John Davis 49 $349,487.45; $316,051.91 Texas Farm Bureau Friends Of Agricu AGFUND 50 $345,000.00; $396,067.35 Texas Builds Jobs & Opportunity For Texas J.O.B.S

Ross Ramsey: 57 Republicans Back Smithee

Which clearly is not enough for a win and is way short of Straus' (now) 88. The Texas Weekly posting is below in its entirety (link to Smithee is mine, not Ramsey's). Note that Truitt was not considered in the final vote. These were the 57 that were at Craddick's Last Supper. I'm betting there was something stronger than ice tea served. The names of the 57 have not been released yet. We have five House members unaccounted for. Straus 88; Smithee 57 - Total: 145.

Most Republicans Back Smithee

A group of 57 Republicans who had backed House Speaker Tom Craddick agreed after a dinner meeting to support John Smithee of Amarillo to succeed him.

They didn't release the list of names, but said they considered five candidates before voting to support Smithee, including Reps. Warren Chisum, Dan Gattis, John Otto, and Vicki Truitt.

It came down to Smithee and Gattis and the group voted unanimously, according to several members.

Craddick told the group he got out of the race when he realized he couldn't win. And he realized he couldn't win, he told them, when he lost the support of a handful of Democrats who had supported him in the past.

Afterwards, Smithee repeated his argument that members who have committed their support to Joe Straus should reconsider now that Craddick is out of the race and Smithee has taken his place as the competition. He and others in the Craddick group said they were concerned that most of Straus' initial support comes from Democrats. Their fear is that he'll be beholden to them rather than to Republicans.

Smithee said he'll release the list of people who voted to support him on Monday; no copy was available for public consumption after the Sunday night dinner meeting, he said. Straus, meanwhile, plans to release copies of signed pledges from his supporters on Monday. He claims 88 votes to Smithee's 57. That leaves five members unaccounted for, but if the numbers hold until January 13, Straus is well past the 76 votes it takes to win the job.

Alexis DeLee's Farewell Address

Shortest communique on record from her: "Tonight, Tom Craddick released his pledges for speaker." (Elise Hu is rocking the breaking news!)

Did Vicki Truitt File for Speaker?

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram says so:

The speaker’s race already has been a free-for-all for months, but it opened wider than ever tonight as word spread about Craddick’s decision. Rep. Vicki Truitt, R-Southlake, has joined the race, Tarrant County District Clerk Tom Wilder said.

"If Vicki Truitt were elected, she would the first female Speaker of the House in the history of Texas," Wilder said. "Many of us locally stand behind Vicki in this effort."

Truitt is currently serving her fifth term and is the current chairwoman of the Committee on Pensions and Investments, and she is a member of the House Committee on Public Health.

"A lot of Republican voters will like Vick’s strong conservative record, and she has quite a bit more experience than Rep. Straus on important committees," Wilder said.

I find this a little hard to believe. To say the least. If it did happen, when did she file? And, why?

Public Debate, My A$$

Hubris, thy name is John Smithee. This from Craddick mini-me: ". . . I think this (speaker's race) is an important enough issue that it deserves some public debate and public discussion." Give me a break. The only "public" these Craddick Cronies have ever had a discussion or debate with is Bob Perry or TLR . . . and, of course, Stars Over Texas. All of a sudden, since the Goodbye Ship Craddick is going down, and Robert Wagner has released his list of 85 supporters, Smithee wants to involve the PUBLIC? All 8 of us who actually understand the speaker's race. Because, yeah, the Speaker is a statewide officer . . . . And now, for an eye roll.

Craddick Spokesmodel Not Talking - Last Supper Commences

For once, Craddick's spokesperson lacky, Alexis DeLee, is not talking. Craddick has arrived at Sullivan's, an Austin steakhouse to "thank his supporters and support new leadership in the House." Follow the drama on KXAN.com. Craddick supporters are rumored to be jumping on the Smithee ship, creating a rural vs. urban race. Does John Davis think Clear Lake is rural? Because he's not on the Straus list. Clear Lake could possibly be renamed "Screwedville" since the NASA rocket scientists couldn't do the math on the importance of re-electing their congressman who was slated to be the chair of the space subcommittee. Now, their state rep has been found as a stowaway on the sinking Goodbye Ship Craddick.

Straus' List

I've replace this with Vince's list. Wow. Look at the Craddick D's on here! Per Vince: * indicates Craddick D and ^ indicates current or former speaker candidates:

Dan Branch Byron Cook^ Rob Eissler Gary Elkins Charlie Geren Delwin Jones^ Jim Keffer^ Edmund Kuempel^ Brian McCall^ Tommy Merritt^ Doug Miller Jim Pitts (^ in 07) Burt Solomons^ Todd Smith Joe Straus^

Democrats Alma Allen Roberto Alonzo Carol Alvarado Rafael Anchia Valinda Bolton Lon Burnam Joaquin Castro Norma Chavez* Ellen Cohen Garnet Coleman Yvonne Davis Joe Deshotel* Dawnna Dukes* Jim Dunnam Craig Eiland Kirk England Joe Farias David Farabee Jessica Farrar Kino Flores* Stephen Frost Pete Gallego^ Helen Giddings* Veronica Gonzalez Yvonne Gonzalez Toureilles Roland Gutierrez Joe Heflin Ana Hernandez Abel Herrero Scott Hochberg Terri Hodge Mark Homer Chuck Hopson Donna Howard Carol Kent Tracy King* David Leibowitz Eddie Lucio* Diana Maldonado Barbara Mallory Caraway Marisa Marquez* Armando Martinez Trey Martinez Fischer Ruth Jones McClendon* Jim McReynolds Jose Menendez Robert Miklos Joe Moody Elliott Naishtat Rene Oliveira Dora Olivo Solomon Ortiz Aaron Pena* Joe Pickett Paula Pierson Chente Quintanilla Richard Raymond Tara Rios Ybarra* Allan Ritter Eddie Rodriguez Patrick Rose* Mark Strama Kristi Thibaut Senfronia Thompson^ Chris Turner Allen Vaught Marc Veasey Mike Villarreal Hubert Vo Armando Walle

Speaker Watch: Craddick Out, Straus to Name Names

From Quorum Report and Burkablog come the first rumblings that Craddick has taken himself out of the Speaker's race and that Straus will release the names of 80+ pledges within the hour. (UPDATE: confirmed by Republican House member Sid Miller. Also, Dawnna Dukes supporting Straus.) Smithee is still in. Will Craddickites give their pledges to him? Senfronia Thompson has stepped out of the race and has asked her supporters to go with Straus. Whatever happens, if Craddick is really out, it's a good day for Texas. I worked hard for over a year - and made a ton of personal sacrifices - to end Craddick's regime. My goal was to be a part of a D takeover of the House. We didn't get that done. So, barring that, I have to be for whatever gets rid of Craddick. Yes, I know, a stronger R Speaker could make it harder for the D's to make an issue of Republican leadership in 2010, but I have believed so strongly for so long that Craddick is bad for Texas, that any change in Speaker gives me a tiny glimmer of hope that something - anything - just one thing maybe? - will come out of this session that will be positive for Texas families. I didn't believe that was possible under Craddick. Now, what will John Davis do? He's Craddick's boy. When Craddick sprinkled magic fairy dust over mediocre R members to give them some power and make them his serfs, Davis got a pretty good sprinkling. In a debate this past fall with his Democratic opponent, Davis boldly stated that his litums test for Speaker was him or her being anti-choice. Straus is on record as being anti-abortion except for "rape, incest and harm to the life of the Mother." I think those exceptions make it impossible for Davis to vote for him. So, I'm muching on popcorn while I watch where Craddick's lackeys land as they jump ship.

Richardson Withdraws

Governor Bill Richardson is withdrawing from consideration for Commerce Secretary. There's a grand jury investigation into possible pay to play with a California finance company who gave $$ to Richardson's campaign and got a contract with the state of New Mexico. Richardson states that he and his administration "have acted properly in all matters" but is withdrawing his name from consideration because the grand jury investigation would cause a long delay in the confirmation process. Obama has accepted Richardson's withdrawal. I have a lot of questions, starting with did Richardson know about the grand jury investigation when he allowed Obama to announce him as his nominee for Commerce? Bye, bye and let's move on to the inauguration without this distraction.

Town Hall Meetings with Rep.-elect Armando Walle!

I'm going to make my best effort to attend one of these and I hope you will too. If you haven't met Armando Walle, this would be a great opportunity to meet a representative-elect who is dedicated to his community. I met Armando during the Melissa Noriega campaign (he volunteered in our field effort) and I was very impressed. I paid him back with a little volunteering one afternoon during his campaign. I got on the phones for him as he was headed out blockwalking.

Armando was born and raised in the House District - graduated from MacArthur High School, was on staff with Congressman Gene Green and has been involved in many community projects. He knows his district needs someone who is concerned about family values - education and healthcare for starters. Below is a letter from him about the town hall meetings next week.

Dear Friend: On January 13, 2009, I will be sworn-in as the next State Representative for House District 140. I feel greatly honored to represent Northside and Aldine -- the community where I was born and raised. Before I take the oath of office, I will be holding three Town Hall Meetings in early January. I look forward to seeing you at one of the following meetings and hearing your concerns. Monday, January 5th - 6:00 PM MacArthur High School Cafeteria 4400 Aldine Mail Route Tuesday, January 6th - 6:00 PM Sam Houston Math, Science & Technology Center Cafeteria 9400 Irvington Blvd. Tuesday, January 6th - 7:30 PM Aldine-Greenspoint YMCA 10960 North Freeway I hope that you will join me at one of these meetings so that we can discuss the issues that are important to our families and our community.

Please RSVP for any of the meetings by sending an email to representativewalle@gmail.com. Sincerely,

Armando Walle State Representative-elect

Craddick-Straus (Wagner)-Gattis?

Quorum Report is saying that all speaker candidates from the ABC11 have notified the Texas Ethics Commission that they are withdrawing their names for speaker. Really? So that leaves: 1. Robert Wagner (Joe Straus) 2. Gattis 3. Craddick And some D's who will or will not get some token votes.

Speaker Robert Wagner?

Robert Wagner, Hollywood actor: Rep. Joe Straus, Texas Speaker candidate: Or, is it the other way around?

Joe Straus Bio

I found this bio online. Some interesting stuff - an award from the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club.

Elected to the Texas House of Representatives in a special election in February 2005, Joe Straus represents District 121, which includes the communities of Alamo Heights, Olmos Park, Terrell Hills, Windcrest, and northeast San Antonio. During the most recent legislative session, he was appointed to the Committee on Economic Development, where he serves as vice-chairman, the Committee on Regulated Industries, and the Local and Consent Calendars Committee. As a member of the Regulated Industries Committee, Representative Straus chaired the Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and Efficiency, which developed a major bill that puts Texas on the cutting edge of energy efficiency. Representative Straus has also been appointed to the Select Committee on Electric Generation Capacity and Environmental Effects, which will study the state’s energy demand and expected growth for the next 50 years in order to develop long-term energy plans for Texas.

In the summer of 2007, Representative Straus was presented the Texas Public Power Association’s Public Official Award for leadership and contributions to public power. He was also given the Legislative Service Award by the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club for his work in the area of energy efficiency. Additionally, Representative Straus received the Defender of the American Dream Award in 2008 from Americans for Prosperity for his record of commitment for protecting taxpayers.

As an active Republican, Representative Straus has previously served on the Management Committee of the Bexar County Republican Party, as a precinct chairman, and on numerous campaign committees for federal, state, and local candidates. He served in the administration of President George H. W. Bush from 1989 through 1991 as Deputy Director of Business Liaison at the U.S. Department of Commerce and also in the Reagan administration as Executive Assistant to the Commissioner of Customs. In 1986, he was U.S. Representative Lamar Smith’s campaign manager in Smith’s first race for Congress. In the Texas House, Representative Straus serves as a member of the House Republican Caucus Policy Committee.

Representative Straus was selected by the Speaker of the House to attend the National Conference of State Legislatures’ 2006 Leadership Institute for legislators who show outstanding leadership promise and the ability to effect change. In 2008, Texas Monthly selected Representative Straus as one of the 35 Texans who will shape the future of the state.

Representative Straus is a principal in the insurance and executive benefits firm of Watson, Mazur, Bennett & Straus, L.L.C. He is affiliated with National Financial Partners, a leading financial services company in the insurance, investments, and benefits industry.

A lifelong San Antonian, Straus currently serves on the Board of Governors of the Cancer Therapy and Research Center as well as on the Texas Cord Blood Bank. Previously Mr. Straus served on the Board of Directors of the San Antonio Zoological Society, the Texas Nature Conservancy, the Southwest School of Art and Craft, and the Winston School.

Representative Straus is a graduate of Vanderbilt University with a B.A. in Political Science. He is an avid sportsman with a lifelong passion for Thoroughbred horseracing and breeding. He is married to Julie Brink Straus. They have two daughters, Sara and Robyn.

Speaker Joe Straus?

According to the Quorum Report, the ABC's picked Joe Straus, R-San Antonio as the consensus candidate for the next Speaker of the Texas House. (click on his name - his photo makes him look like a greedy corporate guy on some show about greedy corporate guys) And - haha - some said they would pick someone out of left field who we knew very little about. OK, so they did. Wow, the D's must have said no way to a whole bunch of more recognizable folks. Somebody give me a primer on this guy. Here were his committee assignments last go-round:

Committee Assignments Economic Development, Vice Chair Local & Consent Calendars Regulated Industries Electric Generation Capacity and Environmental Effects, Select

Uh. Oh. Is he one of the main characters responsible for our out of control electricity rates? They should call that committee Deregualted Industries.

Click here for the bills he authored last session and here for those he co-authored.

Next up, I'll be taking a look at his TEC reports.

UPDATE: Well, Burka is shocked, so that's something:

Maybe he will be a Republican Laney, who presides with a light hand and lets strong chairmen carry the workload. But if this goes south, and Craddick somehow survives, this will be one of the ghastliest mistakes I have ever seen in Texas politics.

Solomons was the safe play. If the ABCs choose him, the deal is done. They take a knee, run out the clock, and on Tuesday they own the House. The ABCs have 48 hours to get a bunch of Republican names who are commited to Straus. If they don’t get them, it’s going to be chaos.

I’m shocked.

UPDATE: The Houston Chronicle reports:

Straus quickly filed his official paperwork after the group unanimously turned to the San Antonio lawmaker, who arrived in the state House after a 2005 special election.

"It's gratifying to have the support of fellow Republican members who are committed to moving past this difficult spot that all House members have been in for a long time," Straus said. "We are going to be making calls over the weekend to show our solidarity. and our commitment.

There's been some commotion that putting Straus forward as a candidate prior to him filing violates the Speaker's Statute (Chapter 302 of the Government Code). It's probably this part of the code that will cause folks to ask who said what when in that ABC meeting:

(c) Except as provided by Subsection (e), a speaker candidate may not knowingly accept a contribution, loan, or promise of a contribution or loan in connection with the speaker candidacy or make or authorize a campaign expenditure at a time when a declaration of candidacy for the candidate is not in effect.

Basically, what I get out of it, is that you are not supposed to be running for Speaker before you file for Speaker with the Texas Ethics Commission. UPDATE: Oh, my, my, my. Straus got a 100 rating from NARAL in 2007. That's the highest pro-choice rating they give. Only 5 Republican legislators got above zero in 2007. Bust out the popcorn, because this is going to get crazy! TEXAS MONTHLY interview with Straus - read the whole thing. Excerts that give me hope:

. . . he’s no friend to hectoring social conservatives—and he’s all for lowering the level of anger at the Capitol. He’s also one of the rare pols who see their time in office as public service. [---] "Any party that aspires to majority status or wishes to retain its majority needs to find a balance. This is very true for the Republican Party right now. We need to be an inclusive (“big tent”) organization and one that keeps its focus on specific principles in a way that doesn’t drive away centrists. It’s this balancing act that is difficult to pull off that will make or break the future for the party. At the end of the day, we have the responsibility to govern. And governing requires compromise, which too often in our political dialogue is disregarded." [---] "I think we are getting to the point where renewable energy represents such a promising market that the large energy companies no longer view it as a small research investment, but a serious source of energy that will help power the energy economy. I see the day fast arriving when alternative energy is a mainstream source to power Texans’ lives."

This may be change I can believe in.