Replies

esarlls3, I guess Patterson will be dismissed a RINO now?

Seriously, it's kinda perverse that McCaul is being attacked here for recieving the endorsements of the Republican leadership WE elected. Sure, they all have faults, some more than others. And I happily bash some of them on these boards.

But this effort to lump them all into some massive, nefarious, Karl Rove-orchestrated pro-amnesty conspiracy is just getting into the black helicopter range.

Incidentally, I made it for part of the Katy debate Tuesday. Won't bother with a play-by-play since most here have made up their minds, but I did leave with the impression that Streusand had rehearsed his red-meat applause lines. McCaul, though equally unexciting, came across IMO as a little more humble and serious about the job. Regardless, attendance was pretty low.

If people thought turnout was low in March, just wait to see how far we dip in the runoff. I think at least part of the explanation for the low-turnout and low-interest in general is the excessively negative, ad hominem tone to the campaign - largely, again IMO, launched by Johnny Dee-vine and Streusand. Sorry if all the very macho people here consider that "whining," but that's the reason Harris County is sitting out the election.

I guess Patterson will be dismissed a RINO now?

There is one endorsement that Streusand would like to have.

There are a couple of others that can't support Streusand because he gave a little money to some dimocraps before he was serious about politics. Like McCaul when he worked for Reno (I think I would have quit rather than have to spit on her to put her out if she was on fire, the Waco butcher, the Castro appeaser). McCaul also seemed to be apolitical until recently.

But how about State Sen. Lindsay? Would love to see him replaced. Voted for hate crimes law. Treated those people trying to reform property taxes like they were pan-handlers begging for a free drink. Endorses McCaul.

On the other hand, Paul Bettencourt has endorsed Streusand. One of THE MOST tireless fighters in the state against higher taxes and tax waste. Leading the fight for property tax reform. Streusand has led on tax reform and every other issue (except terrorism).

If McCaul is the guy to fight terrorism, then maybe he should stay (or is it go back to?) the US AG's office, or to Homeland Security, or FBI, or CIA, or "Chief, Terrorism and National Security Section within the Criminal Division of the United States Attorney's Office for the Western Judicial District of Texas"? Either way I hope he is more succesful than he was under Clinton/Reno:

1. Brags about Johnny Chung. Guess what, the bag man for Communist money (appeared to be bribing the bent US President) walked with probation.

2. Clinton walked, no charges

3. The Waco ButcheReno walked.

4. As "Chief, Terrorism and National Security Section within the Criminal Division of the United States Attorney's Office for the Western Judicial District of Texas". ...Investigate the porous Mexico border (any arrests, any changes in porosity of the border?) and work actively with the Mexican law enforcement officials to prevent terrorist activities (like others work actively with the Mexican law enforcement officials to catch coyote's and drug smugglers? ) Well, how successful has that been for him, for us?

I guess you just have to remind me of McCaul's accomplishments. Not where he worked. Not how long he was there. Not who he knows. Not what he investigated. Not who he coordinated with. Not what he was wishing for. Not what he was worrying about.

But what did he make happen that he was directly responsible for?

Tough guy, being "Chief, Terrorism and National Security Section within the Criminal Division of the United States Attorney's Office for the Western Judicial District of Texas". But so sensitive, too...

Seriously, it's kinda perverse that McCaul is being attacked here for recieving the endorsements of the Republican leadership WE elected.

I reluctantly voted for Perry and Cornyn because there wasn't any better choice and because I vote to mitigate the evils of government by electing the candidate who will inflict the least harm to myself and my wallet, not to gain control of the ring of power. I won't be making that same mistake ever again with Perry, and if somebody better will challenge him in 4 years I'll work against Cornyn too.

My point: That we elected those officeholders doesn't mean we have to approve of their endorsements. A soldier on the battlefield wields his sword at his attacker not because he personally desires to harm him among untold thousands of other attackers on that same field but rather because his failure to do so will result in his attacker rendering the same in reverse upon him. He therefore fights of necessity to preserve himself against a percieved evil in the enemy. He uses the sword because it is a tool to mitigate against the harm that others will inflict upon him. Just the same, the ballot box is our tool to mitigate, however small a degree it may be in, against the harm inflicted upon us by government.