#TXGov : Wendy Davis gets desperate

State Senator Wendy Davis (D-TX) is a very pretty woman with a very ugly personality!

Wendy Davis Plays the Race Card and It Blows Up in Her Face, Will Nets Report?
By Geoffrey Dickens | October 20, 2014 | 4:01 PM EDT

Wendy Davis keeps failing. The one-time media darling keeps whiffing in her attacks against her Republican opponent in the Texas gubernatorial race. On Monday she implied Texas Republican Attorney General Gregory Abbott was against interracial marriage – even though Abbott’s wife, Cecilia, is a Latina. If Abbott were to be elected she would become the first Latina first lady of Texas. The question has to be asked will the networks report this latest gaffe from the abortion advocate they once billed as a “political star?”

Davis most recently got into trouble for depicting Abbott as an empty wheelchair.

Screen capture of the tweet. Click to enlarge.

The following tweet was sent from Davis’s official account on October 20:

Wendy Davis

State Senator Davis parleyed a eleven-hour filibuster against a Texas abortion restriction bill into national fame, and the 2014 Democratic gubernatorial nomination. Along the way, she has made just about every political mistake she possibly could, and trails state Attorney General Greg Abbott with just fifteen days until the election. She threw a desperation pass a few days ago with the empty wheelchair ad, and got it intercepted, and now she’s trying another one. Abortion Barbie’s campaign sale of Wendy Davis onesies, and she has tried to play the race card before, without any appreciable success; her personal life has not exactly been stellar, either.

The lovely Mrs Davis is, at bottom, playing not to Texas voters, but to every liberal caricature of conservatives, and of Texans. The left liked to call themselves the “reality-based community,” but they never were, and are getting further and further away from reality every day.

#KYSEN : The end of the road for Alison Lundergan Grimes?

From The Washington Post:

Why Alison Lundergan Grimes was probably doomed anyway
By Scott Clement | October 17, 2014

In this Aug. 8, 2014 file photo, Kentucky Democratic Senatorial candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes speaks to a group of supporters during a political rally at the Hal Rogers Center in Hazard, Ky. Seated behind Grimes are to left, former President Bill Clinton, and members of the United Mine Workers Association. Grimes will face Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in the general election for U.S. Senate. (AP Photo/Timothy D. Easley) Click to enlarge.

Alison Lundergan Grimes has had a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week in the Kentucky Senate race: The week was dominated by her refusal to say whether she voted for Barack Obama for president, she trailed by four points in a new Fox News poll, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has now pulled its ads from the race.

But a new polling analysis shows the extraordinary headwinds she has faced in trying to unseat Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) this year — and why it might just be too much to overcome.

On Friday, Gallup reported Kentucky Democratic party identification and President Obama’s approval rating in the state fell to record lows in the first half of 2014. The share of Kentuckians saying they identify with or lean toward the Democrat Party dropped from 45 last year to 39 percent, giving Republicans their first edge in leaned party ID.

You might ask, “How much does party identification matter if Democrats had an edge on it in 2012 but Obama still lost the state by 33 points?” Party identification is indeed more complicated in southern states, with many older diehard Democrats holding conservative political views and voting Republican in federal elections. As these Democrats get older and exit the electorate (or finally convert to the GOP), we should expect Kentucky to become more Republican.

But the shift in this year’s Gallup surveys shows an acceleration in Democrats’ falling party identification, suggesting the party’s brand has taken a hit above and beyond the aging southern Democrat dynamic.

More at the link.

In one of my first political science classes at the University of Kentucky, Malcolm Jewell, the professor, pointed out the difference between party registration and party identification. Registration is pretty obvious, but party identification is the general sense, by the individual, of which political party he favors, to which party he feels closer. The Bluegrass State has a closed primary system, and there are plenty of places in which all of the action takes place not in the general election, but in the Democratic primary. In the first election in which I was eligible to vote, in 1971, I found out that I had no voice at all in who was going to be on the Mt Sterling city council, because the eight candidates had all been selected in the Democratic primary; as a registered Republican, I could not vote in that primary the previous May. That’s anecdotal, to be sure, but it was also a common story, not only in Kentucky, but throughout the South.

Of course, Kentucky Democrats tend to be more conservative than Democrats at the national level, and even today Democrats have a significant registration advantage in Kentucky; as of May 20, 2014, there were 1,672,664 registered Democrats (53.9% of all registered voters) compared to 1,196,183 registered Republican voters (38.5%) in the Bluegrass State, and Democrats control both the state House of Representatives and the gubernatorial seat; the GOP has the majority in the state Senate. But if a plurality of respondents identifies as Republicans, and only 39% as Democrats, and the poll results are accurate, then the GOP is going to move ahead in state politics as well, though it may take a few more years.

Economics 101: In the end, only results matter, and the results of liberal economics are failure

From the Sacramento Bee:

Census Bureau: California still has highest U.S. poverty rate
By Dan Walters | dwalters@sacbee.com | 10/16/2014 11:25 AM | 10/17/2014 9:46 AM

California continues to have – by far – the nation’s highest level of poverty under an alternative method devised by the Census Bureau that takes into account both broader measures of income and the cost of living.

Nearly a quarter of the state’s 38 million residents (8.9 million) live in poverty, a new Census Bureau report says, a level virtually unchanged since the agency first began reporting on the method’s effects.

Under the traditional method of gauging poverty, adopted a half-century ago, California’s rate is 16 percent (6.1 million residents), somewhat above the national rate of 14.9 percent but by no means the highest. That dubious honor goes to New Mexico at 21.5 percent.

But under the alternative method, California rises to the top at 23.4 percent while New Mexico drops to 16 percent and other states decline to as low as 8.7 percent in Iowa.

More at the link.

The formerly Golden State, blessed by God with a long coastline and mild climate, the most populous state in the union, used to be among our wealthiest states, and affluence is on vivid display there. But this now heavily Democratic state — it wasn’t that long ago that the Republicans controlled California — demonstrates an exceptionally brutal contrast between the haves and the have nots, precisely the thing that the left say they are trying to fight. It isn’t all that far from the glamor and opulence of Hollywood to the barrios of East Los Angeles, and, despite it’s high-end appearance, the San Francisco Bay area is considered among the poorest areas under the new methods due to its high costs of housing.

And then there are taxes. WalletHub ranked the fifty states and the District of Columbia in tax burden, and the Pyrite State, with an average annual state and local tax burden of $9,509, 36% above the national average, was number 50, with only New York’s $9,718 rate being worse.

Yet, with all of the oh-so-well-intended taxes and state services being provided, so very many Californians are poor. Of course, we have previously noted that states that emphasize redistribution above growth have a wider gap between lower and higher incomes, and that California among other  business unfriendly  states have  negative impacts on business, costing states jobs.  That’s what happens when you let liberal Democrats run things!

The point is obvious: liberals simply don’t understand economics, or reality, and the further to the left that you go, the worse it gets.   The Freedom Socialist Party, based in Seattle, another Left Coast hotbed of liberalism, has been advocating a minimum wage of $20.00 per hour, but has been offering $13.00 an hour for a “Web Content Manager.”1 Nearby SeaTac, Washington, has a minimum wage of $15.00, but the Freedom Socialist Party couldn’t even offer that much! Seattle itself has a $15.00 an hour minimum wage, but that is being phased in over time, so the Freedom Socialist Party isn’t in violation of the law . . . yet.  A conservative might think, well, that little irony ought to teach them that their political wishes and views have little to do with the actual economy, but then, that same conservative would realize that the left are blind to their own irony, and impervious to actual logic and introspection.

Yet Texas, home to the former President that the left blame for everything, and home to a conservative economic approach of lower taxes and fewer regulations, has not only been leading the nation in job growth, but, to answer the complaints of the left, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas reported that the Lone Star State has been leading the nation in job creation at all pay levels.2

When it comes to economics, your Editor is concerned about only one thing: results! He has been involved in production, in the ready-mixed concrete industry, for almost three decades now, and real world, real time results are the only things which matter; you produce and make money, or you go broke. If the economic policies of the left had produced good results, he would support those policies. But the cold and sober facts are that it has been the economics of the conservatives which have yielded the greater real world results. In the United States, those states which have lower taxes and fewer regulatory burdens have, generally speaking,3 had better economic outcomes than those which have been governed by liberals. Worldwide, the nations which have been more capitalist have grown the fastest, taking a significant share of what used to be American industrial jobs, by producing more, for lower costs. The two Koreas, sharing an ethnic background and history, are a whole world apart, with capitalist South Korea being an economic powerhouse, while the unfortunate subjects of the Kim dynasty in North Korea suffer widespread malnutrition, while socialist Venezuela, with the world’s largest proven petroleum reserves but a government-run oil industry, is in desperate shape economically.

In the end, only actual results matter, and the results of conservative economics, of capitalism, have been far greater than those produced by the left, by socialism. Politics being what it is, the promises of the left, of socialism, certainly do have a greater visceral appeal, promises of greater wealth for everybody, promises of increased fairness, along with the wealthy getting their comeuppance, and thus we have seen, in California as in other places, the poorer voters voting for the people who make such promises. Mitt Romney, in an unfortunately-made-public video, said that there was a solid 47% of the electorate which would vote Democratic because they are “dependent upon government,” because they believe that they are entitled and have been unfairly treated by businesses and corporations and the wealthy, and he was right. But the promises made by the left for their economic policies have not been kept, have never been kept, and can never be kept, because they are based on a complete failure to understand economics. We’ve said it before: if liberals actually understood economics, they wouldn’t be liberals any more.

  1. The position is part-time, 20 hours per week, which keeps it below the 30 hour per week threshold for having to provide health care benefits, and such benefits are not mentioned in their help wanted ad.
  2. This isn’t all recent; the report states that “The data show Texas has experienced far greater growth of ‘good’ jobs than the rest of the nation has since 2000.”
  3. Different states face different economic conditions.

Rule 5 Blogging: Strange Bedfellows!

It’s the weekend and time, once again, for THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL’S version of Rule 5 Blogging. Robert Stacey Stacy McCain described Rule 5 as posting photos of pretty women somewhat déshabillé, but, on this site, our Rule 5 Blogging doesn’t put up pictures of Yasmine Hamdan in her summer clothes, but women, in full military gear, serving their countries in the armed forces. The terribly sexist authors on this site celebrate strong women, women who can take care of themselves and take care of others, women who have been willing to put their lives on the line in some not-so-friendly places, women who truly do have the “We can do it!” attitude.

This week, an ally we never expected to have. President Obama said that he wanted Syrian President Bashar al-Assad overthrown, and was going to send weapons to the “moderate” Syrian opposition forces, but now, since part of the opposition has metastasized into الدولة الإسلامية‎ ad-Dawlah al-Islāmīyah, the Islamic State, we are conducting air strikes, some of them in Syria, against some of President Assad’s enemies. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, I suppose. So, without further babbling, women from the Syrian Army, who are fighting for our frenemy, President Assad!

Syrian soldier; click to enlarge.

Syrian soldier; click to enlarge.

Continue reading ‘Rule 5 Blogging: Strange Bedfellows!’ »

I Will Flat Out Say It

Ebola spreading is Obama’s Fault. Once known, he did what he always does – NOTHING. That is until people are screaming. This now is BO’s 9-11.

More than 100 monitored for Ebola symptoms in Ohio

They are NOT saying the 100 have it, but the nurse from TX is the reason. My feeling the Government is NOT on top of this and all this is doing is spreading fear. A rumor moves at the speed of light, the Truth crawls, and BO blames everyone else. Beat me up, I’ve been through more shit than I would wish on anyone. The Editor can CONFIRM.

From Around the Blogroll

You really can’t make up stuff like this; hat tip to Sister Toldjah:

Wendy Davis Is Selling Baby Onesies
12:24 PM 10/17/2014

For a contribution of $20, you can own a “Wendy Davis for Governor” onesie. The onesie is available on Wendy Davis’s campaign store.

The description of the onesie states: “Let everyone know that you’re raising the next generation of Texas Democrats with this Wendy Davis onesie. Union made in the USA.”

You can also choose a size for the appropriate age from 3-6 month year-old, 6-12 months, 12-18 months and 18-24 months.

Wendy Davis was propelled into the national spotlight by filibustering for 11 hours against a bill restricting abortion access.

She now faces Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott in the general election for Texas governor.

Maybe the right caption should be, “Whew! I made it out alive!”

State Senator Wendy Davis’ (D-TX) claim to fame is that she filibustered a Texas abortion restriction bill for 11 hours, and, as a reward, the good Democrats of the Lone Star State nominated her to be their next Governor. Well, she’s trailing fairly badly in the polls, and ran a desperation ad attacking Greg Abbott, the Republican nominee, pointing out that he’s a paraplegic in a wheelchair; even some of the (more honest) Democrats called that a ridiculous, desperation ploy, while the rest of them just cringed and kept their mouths shut.

And now this.

The good news is that the lovely Mrs Davis’ state Senate term expires in January, so after she is thoroughly trounced by Mr Abbott she’ll be out of public office completely.

And now, on to the blogroll!

If ANYONE in the BO Maldministration Opens Their Mouth, WILL WE HEAR THE TRUTH??

Posted on Oct 3rd. It’s clear the Semi-News Presser held on Oct 3rd was a joke

My vote is never. Around past 4:30PM Today, Friday, a group of mouth movers trotted out on the White House Briefing Room stage to ASSURE there are NO PROBLEMS in Obolama Land (One thing I read from the Book BO learned from as a child in Indonesia, if a lie is necessary, by all means tell it). Which leads to the statements from the mouth movers that ALL Former Obolama outbreaks were conquered and stuffed out from the 70′s to last year. “Reassurance flowed from these jaw jackers. Then as is everything Obama, it didn’t quite ring TRUE. Yes, there were outbreaks in the years the mouth breathers said, but they quite haven’t matched today’s outbreak. (I know, what’s a small difference? Just semantics.

But our fellow Bloggers at the “Modern Survival Blog” did some research to challenge the Jaw Jackers. Here in part of an item from the MSB is this:

There’s Something Very Different About This Ebola
October 3, 2014, by Ken Jorgustin
Modern Survival Blog

The first case of Ebola was during 1976 which infected 318 people (280 died).
The second major Ebola outbreak was during 1995 with 315 cases (killing 254).
During 2003 Ebola infected 143 and killed 128.
In 2007 Ebola affected 264 individuals resulting in 187 deaths.
This time, in 2014, as of this post date, Ebola has been confirmed to have infected 7,000 and is expected to rise to 20,000 by November and perhaps 1.4 million by January 2015.

Continue Here PLEASE for the full article: (It’s worth it)

Ken’s policy on “borrowing” his info is this
Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to ModernSurvivalBlog.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Anyway, the podium standers wanted DESPARATELY to DOWNPLAY this Obomala Issue. They cited with high dudgeon of reassurance this Obolama will be licked 1-2-3. But they stated the following:
The 1st case of Ebola was during 1976 and it was wiped out. But neglected to tell us it infected 318 people (280 died).
The 2nd case of Ebola was during 1995 and it was wiped out. But neglected to tell us it infected 315 people (254 died).
The 3rd case of Ebola was during 2003 and it was wiped out. But neglected to tell us it infected 143 people (128 died).
And the last case of Ebola was during 2007 and it was wiped out. But neglected to tell us it infected 264 people (187 died).

Now in 2014 as of Ken’s posting date, Ebola has been confirmed to have infected 7,000 and is expected to rise to 20,000 by November and perhaps 1.4 million by January 2015. It seems the earlier dated infected and eradicated in total is much smaller. A total of under 1,000 combined. It was just that little item left out of a LATE FRIDAY AFTERNOON PRESS CONFERENCE. But with all Campaign speeches of BO, Everything is OK, and we are much better off now than 6 years ago. (wink) OOOPS, but Obama does lie as he was taught when the Truth Becomes INCONVENIENT as his “Book” learning in Indonesia taught him.

I’m sure someday, if this doesn’t wipe us out, we might find the truth. (Or maybe the Border crashers brought it like the respitory disease that can paralyze people)

I think he inherited his father’s intelligence

From CNN:

Biden’s son discharged from Navy after testing positive for cocaine
By Eric Bradner, CNN | updated 7:51 PM EDT, Thu October 16, 2014

Washington (CNN) – The Navy Reserve discharged Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter this year after he tested positive for cocaine, U.S. officials confirmed.

The discharge of Biden, a 44-year-old lawyer and managing partner at an investment firm, was first reported by The Wall Street Journal on Thursday. He confirmed the report in a statement to CNN.

“It was the honor of my life to serve in the U.S. Navy, and I deeply regret and am embarrassed that my actions led to my administrative discharge. I respect the Navy’s decision. With the love and support of my family, I’m moving forward,” he said.

Biden was commissioned as an ensign in May 2013 and assigned as a public affairs officer in a Norfolk, Virginia-based reserve unit. A month later, he tested positive for cocaine, and he was discharged in February, according to the report.

Robert Hunter Biden and Vice President Joe Biden

A bit more at the link; emphasis mine. But Hunter Biden was privileged enough to have attended Georgetown University, where he earned his Bachelor of Arts, and was graduated from Yale Law School. He is a partner at Rosemont Seneca Partners, LLC and is Counsel to Boies, Schiller, Flexner, LLP, a New York based-law firm, and received an appointment to the board of the Ukrainian Energy Company Burisma Holdings, which is part of the vast business empire of Ihor Kolomoisky. He is, or has been, a member of all sorts of boards of advisers, a way for the well-connected to be funneled extra cash without doing any actual work, just in case. Quick translation: he’s making a clear pile of money, at least some of which is due to his father’s Senate career, and now Vice Presidency. Yet he was dumb enough to use cocaine. The son of privilege, who knew, knew! that the Navy tests everybody for illegal drug use, decided that snorting coke was somehow a wise decision.

And we aren’t talking about some kid here: Mr Biden was 43 years old when he tested positive for cocaine.

Drugs make you stupid, but it’s stupidity that leads to drug use.

Where are the liberal professional media when it comes to the government trying to shut down free speech?

Hat tip to Gretchen!

City subpoenas pastors’ sermons in equal rights ordinance case
By Katherine Driessen | October 14, 2014 | Updated: October 14, 2014 3:46pm

Mayor Annise Parker

Houston’s embattled equal rights ordinance took another legal turn this week when it surfaced that city attorneys, in an unusual step, subpoenaed sermons given by local pastors who oppose the law and are tied to the conservative Christian activists that have sued the city.Opponents of the equal rights ordinance are hoping to force a repeal referendum when they get their day in court in January, claiming City Attorney David Feldman wrongly determined they had not gathered enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot. City attorneys issued subpoenas last month during the case’s discovery phase, seeking, among other communications, “all speeches, presentations, or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuality, or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved by you or in your possession.”

The subpoenas were issued to several high-profile pastors and religious leaders who have been vocal in opposing the ordinance. The Alliance Defending Freedom has filed a motion on behalf of the pastors seeking to quash the subpoenas.

Plaintiff Jared Woodfill said the subpoena impinges on protected religious freedoms.

“This is the city trampling on the First Amendment rights of pastors in their churches,” Woodfill said.

The city attorney’s office has not responded to requests for comment.

The Houston Chronicle is the largest circulation daily newspaper in Texas; we’re not talking about some low-circulation rag here. And lest you think that this doesn’t really mean sermons, from another Houston Chronicle story:

City subpoenas sermons in equal rights case
By Katherine Driessen | October 14, 2014 | Updated: October 14, 2014 10:11pm

Houston’s embattled equal rights ordinance took another legal turn this week when it surfaced that city attorneys, in an unusual step, subpoenaed sermons given by local pastors who oppose the law and are tied to the conservative Christian activists who have sued the city.

Opponents of the equal rights ordinance are hoping to force a repeal referendum when they get their day in court in January, claiming City Attorney David Feldman wrongly determined they had not gathered enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot.

City attorneys issued subpoenas last month as part of the case’s discovery phase, seeking, among other communications, “all speeches, presentations, or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuality, or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved by you or in your possession.”

More at the link.

The Bill of Rights

Now, let’s be clear here: a pastor, or anyone else, could state, openly and in public, that Mayor Annise Parker is a degenerate lesbian and that all queers are degenerates who are not only going to Hell but that he hoped that they’d get there very soon, and that would be speech which is fully protected by the First Amendment. It does not matter whether someone else does not like the speech, it does not matter whether someone else is offended by the speech, and it does not matter if someone else thinks that the speech encourages hatred; unless a speech is a plain, realistic and explicit threat to physical violence, it cannot be censored or prosecuted.

The First Amendment states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The Fourteenth Amendment has incorporated the First Amendment to apply to state and local government action, so Houston’s actions are clearly unconstitutional.

There is, of course, no greater advocate for the freedom of speech and of the press than The New York Times, right? Our major professional media — ABC, CBS, NBC, and the major daily newspapers — all depend upon the protection of the First Amendment to keep the paws of government from interfering with what they wish to say. Yet, oddly enough, when I googled Houston subpoena pastor, at 1:51 PM EDT today, I somehow couldn’t find any references to The new York Times or to the major networks, or to CNN, though Fox News was listed prominently. The Washington Times story was the second one listed, but the larger, more established Washington Post was not shown as having a story on the subject, nor did a site search produce a result. A site search on The New York Times’ website also turned up nothing. A local ABC station covered the story, but not ABC’s national news.

Well, maybe the whole story isn’t true, I thought, so, when I happened across the snopes.com story, I opened that one up, and found this:

According to the Houston Chronicle, both the City and the ADF face significant legal hurdles in proving their respective cases. South Texas College of Law professor Charles Rhodes told the paper that the city’s action was “unusual, but not unprecedented” and explained the burden of proof Houston will likely be forced to meet to be successful:

This is unusual to see it come up in a pure political controversy. The city is going to have to prove there is something very particular in the sermons that does not come up anywhere else.

City Attorney David Feldman told the outlet that if “someone is speaking from the pulpit and it’s political speech then it’s not going to be protected” by the First Amendment. Rhodes pointed out that the ADF will have difficulty arguing that sermons intended for broadcast or livestream fit the criteria of privileged communications, as anyone could attend or view the speech.

So while the City of Houston indeed subpoenaed pastors’ sermons, it appears it did so to investigate whether the churches engaged in political organization activities under the guise of preaching.

Except, of course, there is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about sermons including calls to political action. Mr Feldman’s statement that if “someone is speaking from the pulpit and it’s political speech then it’s not going to be protected” is simply false; it is certainly protected speech. A case could be made that such would disqualify a particular church from its tax-exempt status, but the speech itself is still protected.

There are plenty of conservative sites covering this story, but I have to wonder: where are the left, where are the people who are (supposedly) the intellectual heirs of the free speech movement of the 1960s? Apparently, they are nowhere to be found. It’s almost as though the left is perfectly happy with the government trying to suppress or intimidate speech, as long as it’s a government run by liberals, and the speech in question comes from conservatives.