Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Brown appears headed toward re-election ( In Houston Racist Rat Wins )
Hoston Chronicle ^ | 12/02/2001 | JOHN WILLIAMS

Posted on 12/01/2001 9:18:31 PM PST by KQQL

Brown appears headed toward re-election

JOHN WILLIAMS
Incumbent Lee Brown appeared headed toward re-election today over City Councilman Orlando Sanchez, who had been looking to become Houston's first Hispanic mayor, in a tight race.

With 95 percent of the precincts counted, Brown had 162,751 votes, or 52 percent, to Sanchez's 152,552, or 48 percent

Link


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 last
To: weegee
If it is true that Magik 102 gave Brown free ad space to encourage voters to "vote" (not necessarily "vote for me"), then they may have violated FEC by not offering Sanchez equal time (just to make the same statement).

Are you saying that when Majic 102 Advocates a candidate it is against the law but when Rush Limbaugh advocates a candidate it is not against the law?

81 posted on 12/02/2001 1:58:53 PM PST by Austim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Austim
Name Rush's endorsements. Name Rush's airtime given to candidates.

Do you even listen to his program?

82 posted on 12/02/2001 2:16:13 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Austim
The on air personalities at 700KSEV (the city's conservative station) made a clear effort to keep callers from endorsing any candidate and keeping the encouragement "get out there and vote" to a non-partisan tone (even going so far as to say "I don't care if you vote for Brown or Sanchez, get out there and vote").

Brown did not appear on KSEV although Chris Bell and Orlando Sanchez did. Brown was on another station on the dial (Magik? Hmmm?) and told a caller that he had not appeared on KSEV because he had not been invited which was a falsehood. Even after making that statement, he turned down offers to appear there (up to 3 hours of airtime was offered in "equal time").

83 posted on 12/02/2001 2:22:48 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Austim
But why am I even wasting my time responding to someone who declares their location as "Austin", doesn't listen to the local media (KSEV, KPRC, Magik, KCOH) and doesn't have a player in a local mayoral election.
84 posted on 12/02/2001 2:25:09 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: weegee
Name Rush's endorsements. Name Rush's airtime given to candidates.

Rush openly endorsed George W. Bush for President as well as endorsing his father in 1992 and Viagra Bob Done in 1996. However, Limbaugh never endorsed Ronald Reagan and in fact never even voted for Reagan.

I now live in Austin but worked on political campaigns in Houston and know the political landscape there very well.

By the way, why is it that when Conservative Radio Personalities endorse fellow Republicans their is no objection but when a Black radio station endorses a Democrat conservative throw a hissy fit and Wet their Pants?

85 posted on 12/02/2001 2:37:50 PM PST by Austim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Austim
Rush does not go on the air and say "Vote for Bush". He discusses things but does not make endorsements on air. His show is commentary and that is what he does, make comment.

Magik 102 is primarily music (1430 KCOH has programs of gospel, commentary, music, and more for the black community). When Magik 102 takes an active role endorsing a candidate around the clock (and providing free "Please vote" ads from Mayor Brown while not offering the same to Sanchez), they cross a line. It goes beyond MTV's tilted Rock The Vote campaign.

Tell me more about these conservative radio voices in Houston that made endorsements.

86 posted on 12/02/2001 2:57:18 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Austim
Another liberal Austinite heard from.

Can't believe that you have survived on FR for so long.

87 posted on 12/02/2001 5:56:59 PM PST by anymouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: weegee
weegee, don't feed the trolls. :)
88 posted on 12/02/2001 5:58:28 PM PST by anymouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: JoeMomma; afuturegovernor
Yep -- there are some who think that there's a 'victory in defeat'. No such thing -- if you don't win, you don't govern or set the agenda. The fact that Sanvhez came this/close to winning means nothing. He's politically unemployed, and the only say he'll get in government is when he shows up for open-mic night at the city council chambers.

Hard to argue with that. Playing for a "close" race, or finding encouragement in a "near victory", is just whistling past the graveyard. Finishing second in politics means just one thing: you lose. Brown and the 'Rats will take this "near loss" right to the bank and run the city for another term, and won't worry about how close the victory was. I've seen too many elections where the 'Pubs come close to winning, get all excited and giddy about their close loss, saying how encouraging it was to come so close ("we'll get 'em next time"), then get slaughtered in the next election because they forgot that the 'Rats had the time to prepare, and had their hands on the levers of power to fix things up and grease the skids for the next round.

One thing you have to say about the 'Rats is that they know the operable factor in politics is that first, you have to win. That is not to say that you must win at any and all costs, but you have to have the attitude that being elected is the primary means to enacting an agenda. I'm not sure the 'Pubs, or conservatives, really understand this.

89 posted on 12/03/2001 5:03:34 AM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: hchutch
"Pal, you don't get it. All we gotta do in big cites is run close, and your buddy Terry McAuliffe is screwed. We got the rual areas, we run well in the suburbs. Your butt is grass, and we're gonna be the lawn mower."

Tell that to Virginia Republicans, who lost the Governor and Lt Governor's seats due to ultraconservative candidates. Henrico county, Virginia, is a Republican stronghold in Virginia that went for Warner.

There are some Democratic inroads back into rural areas and suburban areas. Virginia and New Jersey showed us that, especially when the GOP candidate is a RIGHT-WINGER. The only win the GOP really picked up was Bloomberg, whom extremists call a RINO.

90 posted on 12/03/2001 7:15:14 AM PST by JoeMomma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: chimera; afuturegovernor
"Playing for a "close" race, or finding encouragement in a "near victory", is just whistling past the graveyard. Finishing second in politics means just one thing: you lose."

There are too many on the far right who believe in a 'victory in defeat' if they bring up their "issues". Attaining power to actually implement their issues isn't in the game plan for many ultraconservatives. That's the good news for Democrats -- the more really conservative Republicans go up for election in relatively moderate-to-liberal areas (like NJ), the more Democrats win. Even in conservative Virginia, a very conservative Mark Earley was unemployed as of election day.

As Vince Lombardi said -- winning ain't everything -- it's the ONLY thing. Some conservatives don't quite understand that.

"That is not to say that you must win at any and all costs, but you have to have the attitude that being elected is the primary means to enacting an agenda. I'm not sure the 'Pubs, or conservatives, really understand this."

They don't have a clue about this. And until they do, they will continue to nominate people popular among conservatives but popular among no one else.

Winning is the only thing. You have to have power to enact an agenda. Thanks to Republican losses, Mark Warner and Jim McGreevey have 4 years to endear themselves to the vital centrists of their states -- McGreevey already did with his landslide.

There is no such thing as a 'victory in defeat'. I challenge any Pubbie to refute that ...

91 posted on 12/03/2001 7:31:28 AM PST by JoeMomma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: JoeMomma
Pal, I'm not going to argue, you and I both know that the only way the Dems even have a prayer is to run up margins in urban areas. Your buddy in VA had to run FROM the Democratic platform.

Where were his calls for abortion-on-demand, gun control, and tax increases? There were none. Did your buddy Bill Clinton show up? Nope. All Warner had was money and a budget fight in Richmond, and he ran against someone who put up a second-rate campaign.

Look at New Jersey. McGreevey had to flat-out lie about Schundler. Yes, lie. There was not a dime's worth of difference between Schundler's positions and those of the President of the United States. Schundler made his mistakes, and put up with back-stabbing. But he'll be back, and he'll kick McGreevey's butt the next time around.

All your left-wing buddies have are the race card, lies, sleaze, and a double-talking game plan that's not going to last forever. Hispanics are already bolting part of the time. We just need to figure out how to make them bolt more consistently for our side.

Oh, by the way, I don't think that the average guy on the street is going to appreciate Pat Leahy obstructing the war effort.

92 posted on 12/03/2001 7:40:43 AM PST by hchutch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: seeker41
Two-year terms. First elected in 1997. Next elected in 1999. Re-elected AGAIN in 2001. That makes three. (Dammit.)
93 posted on 12/03/2001 10:38:46 AM PST by Xenalyte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: weegee
Maybe the mayoral voters were confused by the ballot. Certainly it doesn't seem right that they would differ in their votes so much (even the "hispanic" named Shelly Rodriquez beat the black candidate for the at-large city council seat).

I'm not entirely sure Shelley Sekula Rodriguez is Hispanic. I do know that she's a dermatologist from Clear Lake.


Shelley Sekula Rodriguez
94 posted on 12/03/2001 10:53:21 AM PST by Xenalyte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: weegee
Maybe the mayoral voters were confused by the ballot. Certainly it doesn't seem right that they would differ in their votes so much (even the "hispanic" named Shelly Rodriquez beat the black candidate for the at-large city council seat).

I'm not entirely sure Shelley Sekula Rodriguez is Hispanic. I do know that she's a dermatologist from Clear Lake.


Shelley Sekula Rodriguez
95 posted on 12/03/2001 10:53:32 AM PST by Xenalyte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte
I believe that the last name has only recently come into use and that it came from her spouse. There was no "Rodriguez is not Hispanic" campaign from the mayor like the posters his staff placed that said "Sanchez is not Hispanic". If she is considered more Hispanic (while Republican) than Sanchez by the mayor, who am I to question this.
96 posted on 12/03/2001 2:21:59 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: JoeMomma
From a political strategy viewpoint, the viability of a particular candidate will vary from region to region and race to race. I'm convinced that a mainstream conservative probably doesn't have a snowball's chance in h*ll of getting elected in any of the NE states, except perhaps NH. Still, I'd rather have a 'Pub in office, even if they are moderate or left-leaning, because I think conservative viewpoints will at least have a better chance of being heard than if a 'Rat is in office.

There are some issues that conservatives should not compromise on. Specifically, individual initiative and moral responsibility, the importance of personal integrity and character in officeholders, honesty, and commitment to constitutional principles is what separates us from the 'Rats. For myself, I just can't bring myself to compromise on the abortion issue. Its just too horrible a practice to contemplate.

97 posted on 12/04/2001 6:36:57 AM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson