The Burka Cannot Cover Perry
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/08/21
No, I am not talking about Perry Hood, the (near?) octogenarian insane socialist from Lewes, Delaware, although I would pay a Philippine Peso to see him in a burqa. No, this is about Texas Governor Rick Perry and the completely out of control, criminal, corrupt, Left-Wing lunatics in Austin. (There’s a reason “they” say “Keep Austin Weird.”)
In case you have been living under a rock, Travis County DA Lehmberg got busted driving on the wrong side of the road with a BAC of .238, or nearly 3 times the legal limit. She then tried to use her position of authority as a bludgeon to get out of her criminality. Among other things, “get me your boss”, spitting at people, kicking things, having to be placed in full restraints while seated all describe Travis County DA Lehmberg’s activities while drunk.
“You’re going to ruin my political career.” Yeah, I think you did that yourself, you belligerent fool, other than the fact you work in Travis County. Keep Austin Weird. “I’m a District Attorney, I’m a District Attorney.” Continuous power-play by the drunk criminal DA of Austin.
And Travis County DA Lehmberg refused to resign her position as chief Law Enforcement Officer in Austin, and head of the “kill the political corruption” unit for the whole of Texas. Governor Perry declared she needs to go, or her office will not get the money for the “kill the political corruption” unit that is normally sent from the budget of the State of Texas to the budget of the DA of Travis County. Imagine that. A convicted criminal is ordered to step aside or money from all the taxpayers of the entire state of Texas won’t be sent to the convicted criminal. And since the convicted criminal doesn’t like when the Governor tells her she is in no position to judge whether other politicians are corrupt, she decides to work to file bogus Felony charges against the person who thinks a convicted criminal is not the type of person who should be looking for corrupt politicians.
I have come up with a solution of my own. Move the “investigate corrupt politicians” unit to neighboring Bell County. It’s right next door to Travis County. And it’s growing rapidly. And it’s not hyper-Left-Wing. Just take the power completely away from those who destroyed Tom DeLay for purely political reasons, and is trying to destroy Rick Perry for purely political reasons. There are multiple years of evidence Travis County (Keep Austin Weird) cannot be expected to have integrity or Honor in their investigations.
So, how did I come up with the title of this article? Where does the Burka come in? Well, now that you asked, Paul Burka is an editor of a dead-tree magazine in Travis County, more notably called Austin, Texas. Keep Austin weird. Two years ago, Paul Burka wrote an amazingly dishonest and agenda-fed article attacking, among others, Governor Rick Perry. Rick Perry, who was the Texas campaign chief for Algore’s campaign to be President. Rick Perry, who just a few short years ago was a card-carrying Democrat. Rick Perry, who dead-tree-magazine editor Paul Burka declared a radical Right-Wing insurgent with no civic interest.
And here’s how I fisked Paul Burka’s article two years ago:
(This article made “Post of the Day” for Monday, July 9 at Le-gal In-sur-rec-tion. Professor Jacobson called it “What’s under that Burka?”)
Paul Burka is the Senior Executive Editor of Texas Monthly, a dead tree magazine with an online footprint. And Paul Burka likes to think of himself as better than us plebes. I’ll show you that very clearly throughout this article. But first, let’s quantify Paul Burka just a wee bit, shall we? In writing about the Ted Cruz/David Dewhurst debate in which Burka declared Dewhurst the winner, Burka had this little gem which gives everyone a glimpse into his heart and soul:
[I just want to point out here that the bailouts worked extremely well, that they kept the American automobile industry alive through the worst of the recession, that most, if not all, of the money has been paid back, not only in the auto industry but also in the financial industry, and that the opposition to them is an example of how ideology can be blinding, even when we know all of the facts. Isn’t it clear to everyone by now that the bailouts saved the international financial system?–pb]
That is indeed the position of the radical Leftist establishment, Liberals, Progressives, Socialists, Communists, Fascists, Mainstream Media, and propagandists (brought to you in triplicate by the Redundant Department of Redundancy). That is not at all the position of Conservatives, mainstream Republicans, or even Ruling Class Republicans. It is also not at all true. Ford did not take any Government bailout and it’s doing just fine, thank you very much. The fact Obama threw the entirety of the bankruptcy Laws in the trash heap in order to feed the United Auto Workers Union meant that grandma and grandpa lost a lot of their retirement investments, permanently. And it is a stone-cold fact that GM paid it’s Government loans with Government money and not its own. And the Government still has tens of billions of dollars stuck in GM today. And, no, these bailouts did not at all “save the international financial system”. It is still a mess, and will be an even bigger mess since Government is still getting in the way of Free Market corrections and eliminations of wasteful and failed agendas. The bailouts only made matters worse.
Now that we’re a bit more clear on just who this clown Paul Burka is (he’s clearly a Liberal), let’s get down to Fisking his article in the July, 2012 print edition of Texas Monthly, which I have in my currently nicotine-stained fingers. *crinkle*crinkle*crinkle* It is available online if you’re registered. I’m not registered, so I’ll use the print version. (I trust it more, anyway, because lamestream media outlets are notorious in stealth changes to their articles, or memory-holing them in their entireties.)
The May primaries proved that Republicans care more about partisanship than they do about governing. That’s not just bad for Texas — it’s bad for conservatives.
BY PAUL BURKA
(above the title appear the words “Behind the Lines” so Paul Burka is at least honest in declaring himself in enemy territory, with his “extreme militaristic language” that we Conservatives are not permitted to use)
Let’s not worry about the dishonorably suggestive header and the way it tries to lead the reader into thinking like a Big Government lackey. Let’s look, instead, at that byline. The Primaries “proved” what, again? Republicans are more interested in partisanship than righting the ship? Honestly? Where’s your proof, Paul? Where’s the research backing that up, Paul? Just because the Country Club Democrat Lite “me too” Ruling Class Republicans got beat up during the Primaries? That Paul Burka sure is full of emotionalism and light on Truth and Facts.
And Conservatives telling the Statists “Not on my watch!” is “bad for Conservatives”? Really, Paul? How did you come by that conclusion? Aiming for the goal is now a bad thing if you want to reach your goal, according to Paul Burka. It is better to be a rudderless ship at the mercy of the ocean’s currents than to have any, you know, principles upon which to stand. It is better to build your house on shifting sands, according to Paul Burka, than to build it upon Solid Rock. No thanks, Paul. I’ll stick to a Principled aim at returning the US to its Foundation, returning the Government to its Constitutional limits. But you’re free to continue espousing the trashing of the Declaration and the Constitution and Liberty if that’s your bag (and it is).
Back to the article.
Elections are clarifying events. The 2010 cycle, for instance, confirmed that the Democratic party was no longer a force in Texas politics. The lesson of the 2012 primary, which will become clearer after the runoff elections on July 31, is even more dramatic than the death of the Democrats: the Republican party in Texas is in danger of breaking into factions as it moves inexorably to the right. Its candidates are increasingly representative of two types — call them insurgents and moderates, or ideologues and mainstream conservatives, or tea partiers and civic leaders. They coexist though they have nothing in common, and the future course of the party favors the insurgents.
What a convoluted, hacktastic mind you have, there, Paul, with all that drivel. Let’s break it down a bit, shall we? According to Paul Burka:
- TEA Partiers are ideologues.
- Tea Partiers are insurgents.
- Moderates are Mainstream Conservatives.
- Moderates are civic leaders.
- TEA Partiers are not civic leaders.
- TEA Partiers are not Mainstream Conservatives.
Did you get that? Moderates are Conservatives now. What? Are you serious, Paul? Have you always written this fallaciously or did you have a terrible brain injury? I mean, seriously.
And that whole “TEA Partiers are not civic leaders” garbage? Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint, Michele Bachmann, John Kasich, Allen West, Mia Love, Mark Levin, Scott Walker, Ted Cruz, Richard Mourdock, I could go on. Oops, you already dishonestly answered the part about Ted Cruz in this article (as we’ll see later) by your careful exclusion of his own record of civic leadership while declaring Dewhurst’s record.
We’ll talk later about this idea of what “mainstream Conservative” actually is, as there will be plenty of opportunity in this Paul Burka article, as you will see in this next hactastic paragraph.
The May 29 primary revealed itself to be, in part, an exercise in purification. One of the most significant aspects of the election was the increasing numbers of ideologically driven political operatives — former county chairs and staffers for high-profile politicians, for example — who were running for office against mainstream conservatives. And the results were decisive: seven incumbents knocked off, including three House committee chairs (with two others forced into runoffs).
Hey, Paul! When a new batch of politicians arrive at the scene, from whence do they come? “Political operatives”? Really, Paul? Aren’t elected officials “political operatives” by definition, Paul? And how, in your twisted mind, are the Heads of the County Republican Party boards “insurgents”, Paul? It is rather difficult (read impossible) to surge into that which you are already the head of. Your leading language shines a very bright light on your own soul, Paul. And since seven incumbent Republicans lost their bids for re-election in the Primaries, with two more in danger of losing their bids for re-election in the Primary Run-Off, that means they were most definitely outside the mainstream of their own Party. QED, Paul. QED. Oh, by the way, Paul, everyone worth his salt has a grounding ideology, so your “ideologically driven” attempt at literarily destroying people (called “poisoning the well” in college textbooks) is an epic fail on your part.
I’ll have more to say about “Mainstream Conservative” as Paul Burka has given me a great many opportunities to do so in this hacktastic article of his. On to the next paragraph.
Consider the battle for an open House seat in Fort Worth. The ideologues, led by the Young Conservatives of Texas, mounted an all-out attack against Susan Todd, a former nurse, a volunteer for such charities as the local food bank and the American Heart Association and a past president of the Texas Medical Association Foundation. Her opponent Craig Goldman, a Washington lobbyist who had worked for U.S. senator Phil Gramm and Congressman Jeb Hensarling, immediately target Todd’s conservative credentials. Goldman’s supporters claimed she wasn’t a “real” Republican because she had voted in Democratic primaries over the years and criticized her for having supported Tony Sanchez for governor in 2002 (more precisely, the Texas Medical Association PAC backed Sanchez). Though Todd was a member of the Fort Worth Republican Women’s Club, the attacks worked, and Goldman beat her with 55 percent of the vote.
So, Young Conservatives of Texas, you are evil ideologues. You also have no civic leadership whatsoever. Paul Burka made that painfully clear earlier in this article, as my bullet points show. There’s nothing mainstream about you, Young Conservatives of Texas, nothing at all. And look at how Paul Burka wrote his heavily biased, agenda driven propagandastic rant. First you have this eeeevil Washington Insider, career political hack, and a Satan-filled lobbyist to boot. Next you have this wonderful woman who saves lives (probably even rescues starving puppies that got stuck in trees on her days off) and is busy helping wonderful charities. And that evil man and all his evil helpers were all mean and nasty to that wonderful, sweet lady. You sure do lay it on thick, don’t you, Paul?
Let’s find out a bit more about this wonderful lady you castigated the Republican grass roots for their “all-out attack” and their evil statements that she voted Democrat in Primaries before, shall we? Let’s do that little thing called research. There’s this little internet device out there, Paul, that helps out in researching. It rhymes with “shmoogle”.
SUSAN TODD CLAIM: “Active Tarrant County Republican Voter since 1980”
FACT: Susan Todd has a History of Voting for and Actively Campaigning for Democrats.
While Susan Todd falsely claims she has been an “active Tarrant County Republican Voter since 1980,” records on file with the Tarrant County Elections Office document that she has voted in 5 Democrat primaries since that time, including 2 Democrat runoffs. Throughout her many visits to the Democratic voting booth, Mrs. Todd has had the opportunity to support candidates such as Bill Clinton, Ann Richards, Mark White, John Sharp, Dan Morales, and Jim Mattox, among others.
Furthermore, in 2002, Susan Todd joined with Democrats such as Ann Richards, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Eddie Bernice Johnson on a statewide “Women for Sanchez” committee supporting ultra-liberal Tony Sanchez against Governor Rick Perry. Susan Todd was quoted in a press release, stating, “Tony Sanchez will have my vote!”
What do we have here? That little thing about Susan Todd voting in Democrat Primaries in the past didn’t come out of the blue? It was, in fact, pointing out Susan Todd’s lies? Imagine that. Imagine what a little research will show you, Paul. She had claimed to be a Republican voter since 1980, but she wasn’t. Oh, look! Your parenthetical got absolutely destroyed by that very same piece of research, Paul! Oh my! Two birds with one stone. “… and criticized her for having supported Tony Sanchez for governor in 2002 (more precisely, the Texas Medical Association PAC backed Sanchez).” No, Paul, “more precisely” Susan Todd loudly proclaimed her support for Tony Sanchez, your obfuscations, muddying of the waters — oh, what the heck, your outright lies notwithstanding.
Now I wonder what “rhymes with schmoogle” will do with Craig Goldman. Shall we find out, Paul? Shall we do a little research, Paul? His name sounds rather… Jewish, Paul. You’re not being mean to a Jew are you, Paul? You’re not being deliberately deceptive about a Jew are you, Paul? What? You don’t like when I play by your rules, Paul? Then maybe you and your ilk shouldn’t, either.
Oh, look at that! The very first thing I found out about Craig Goldman is that Governor Rick Perry endorsed him. Does that mean that Governor Rick Perry is an insurgent, Paul? Does that mean that Governor Rick Perry is not a civic leader, Paul? By your own words, Paul, that is indeed what you have declared — as I have clearly shown earlier in this article. Now, who else endorsed Craig Goldman? Obviously insurgents, TEA Partiers, ideologues all, and none of them civic leaders, as Paul Burka’s prologue decisively declared. Let’s see now. Former US Senator Phil Gramm, definitely no civic leader him, definitely an outsider surging in, definitely an ideologue sending the Republican Party ever rightward, right Paul? Former Fort Worth Mayor Bob Bolen. Ah, another insurgent ideologue who has no history of civic leadership. Benbrook Mayor Jerry Dittrich and former Benbrook Mayor Jerry Dunn. Yep, no civic leadership among that pair. Just a couple fringe insurgent ideologues. Debrah Coffey, Texas Federation of Republican Women 1st Vice President, longtime member of Fort Worth Federation of Republican Women. Yep, an insurgent ideologue for sure, and definitely not a civic leader. Looks like your “Fort Worth Republican Women’s Club” card just got aced by the “Fort Worth Federation of Republican Women” card and the “Texas Federation of Republican Women 1st Vice President” card. Yowza! That must’ve hurt you, Paul!
And the information about Craig Goldman that you worked feverishly to hide keeps coming. Goldman is a lifelong Republican. He didn’t take 5 different trips into the Democrat Primary voting booth after 1980 while claiming to be a Republican voter. And he spent time as a businessman in Texas. Many years, in fact. You think that maybe, just maybe, Goldman knows a thing or two about how to help businesses help themselves? You think that maybe, just maybe, your little victim mantle just doesn’t fit the liar Susan Todd’s shoulders? You think that maybe, just maybe, someone who is busily voting in Democrat Primaries and declaring an intention to vote for the very Liberal candidate for Texas Governor disqualifies her as a “mainstream Republican”, Paul? Yeah, thought so.
You’re not doing so well so far, Paul. But maybe you redeem yourself later in this article. Let’s see, shall we?
Other veteran leaders have been driven out of politics by, well, the politics. Addressing a meeting at Texas A&M in February, retiring Republican state senator Steve Ogden summed up the situation this way: “You’re lecting people who tend to be very, very extremely conservative and very, very extremely liberal,” he said, “and the middle is getting left out in the cold.” In a nutshell, that is the problem facing the Republican party today. There is no middle, and the people on the extreme ends of the political spectrum don’t want one to exist.
“Other veteran leaders”, Paul? Try “career politicians”. It’s a far better fit for what you really mean. Besides, Paul, “veteran leaders” need to retire or be retired at some point in their lives, unless, of course, you prefer the British House of Lords, where they stay in office until they slump over in their government offices. But that’s not America, is it, Paul? That’s not what the Founders and Framers wanted for America, is it, Paul?
As I have shown so far, Paul Burka has absolutely no idea who qualifies as an extremist, but he does his darndest to paint a lot of Conservatives into that category. Just take a look at who he called a “mainstream Conservative” (which, as we found out is the same thing as a Moderate). One lying Susan Todd who has a history of voting Democrat and declaring a Liberal has her vote for Governor, all during the time she now claims she was a voting Republican. And the “extremist”? A life-long Republican who has worked to get Republicans elected and has spent many years as a businessman. You see, Paul, this is what lying Liberals do. They declare Conservatives to be “extremists” and mushy Moderates and Liberals to be Conservatives. Just like you just did. So no, Paul, your claims that the extremists don’t want Moderates to exist is not at all backed up by your falsehoods. You have not provided an example of even one person on the extreme right, yet. Or is Phil Gramm, co-author of Gramm-Rudman, an extremist now? Or is Rick Perry an extremist now?
So, I guess that paragraph did not do anything to rehabilitate your biased, agenda-driven Leftist image. Perhaps this next one will. I’m betting not.
The result is that, with each successive election cyle, the GOP becomes more and more the party of ideologues, who entered politics in the age of hyper-partisanship, and less and less the party of Main Street business leaders, who cared about fiscal responsibility but also focused on improving public education and building better roads. This puts the party on a dangerous course, because excess is typically followed by backlash. The local leaders who have always been the foundation of the Republican party are not going to follow the ideologues over the cliff. They will leave first.
Wait a dang minute, Paul! First you say the ideologues/insurgents are the leaders of the County Republican Parties who are running the civic leaders out of office (the leaders of the County Republican Parties not being civic leaders by your very own definitions). Now you say the leaders of the County Republican Parties won’t follow the ideologues. Make up your mind, Paul! You cannot have it both ways. And, oh by the way, Paul, you really need to keep up with current events. Multiple politicians who are currently in office as Democrats have chosen to run for re-election in 2012 as Republicans, Paul. So politicians are, indeed, leaving the Party run by hyper-partisan extremist ideologues and joining the Party of We the People. And if you would have done that little thing called research and used that little online tool that rhymes with schmoogle, you would have known about it.
And about Main Street business leaders. Sarah Palin is one. Craig Goldman is one. Remember him? The person you deceptively painted as one of the nasty Washington Insiders who is simultaneously an evil insurgent? Yeah, that Craig Goldman. He’s a Main Street business leader person. Herman Cain is a Main Street business leader. So far, Paul, you’re batting a perfect .000 in all your convoluted ranting. But wait! There’s more! If a businessman goes into politics and becomes a politician, wouldn’t he be someone from the outside surging in? That would make him an insurgent and not the career politician you have declared to be “mainstream Conservative” and “Moderate” in the same breath. You don’t look well, Paul. A bit green, in fact. Are you well?
I have produced a chart (right) from Open Secrets.org, providing a short list of the top Corporate political contributors. Do you see what Liberal ideologues like Paul Burka work so feverishly to hide? That’s right. Corporations are not monolithically Republican. In fact, they’re not even strongly Republican in and of each of themselves. That means the GOP is decidedly not the home of the business world. In fact, that chart proves the business world does not even have a political home; they work both sides of the street rather well.
As for that worn out “Conservatives hate education” canard, Paul, there’s a reason it’s worn out. Part of the reason is it’s a hyper-partisan-for-hyper-partisan-sake bald-faced lie. Conservatives are for high quality education and not for the failed propaganda-filled non-education Public Education provides. Conservatives are for healthy alternatives which, when set loose, will force Public Education to become higher quality. Since you very clearly don’t do any research before you write your rants, Paul, I don’t know if you have heard of this little fact: Private schools outperform public schools in the field of education while expending less money per student. And home schools outperform private schools while using far less money and using less educated educators. It’s a documented fact, Paul. It is the Democrats who have consigned DC youth to abysmally failed schools, taking them out of quality, successful schools. It is the Democrats who want to destroy private schools and home schools, where the students outperform their public-educated peers. You don’t have a problem with home school parents wanting what’s best for their children and educating them better than can be found in the failed public schools, do you, Paul? Do you?
And of course, Paul Burka is busily claiming we TEA Partiers, we “extremists”, we insurgents, we outsiders want our roads upon which we drive every day to crumble. And everyone has to stop us from destroying our bridges! Oh noes! More hyper-partisan propaganda without an ounce of factual evidence to back it up. Because the facts say the exact opposite. Boy, that Paul Burka is throwing the kitchen sink into his all-out carpet-bombing attack against Conservatives.
And so far, the Truth has not been found in his article. But it’s early yet. There’s plenty more article to go. Let’s soldier forward and see if Paul Burka redeems himself in the next paragraph. As the Magic 8-Ball says, “odds are not good.”
Of course, the reshaping of the party will not occur all at once. As Karl Rove once said of the rise of the Republicans in the eighties, “It’s not an event, it’s a process.” The Republican Party of Texas has been fracturing along ideological lines for a decade now, starting with Rick Perry’s election as governor in 2002. Indeed, Perry has remade George W. Bush’s big-tent Republican party into an organization that is obsessed with who is and who isn’t a true conservative. Perry has aligned himself with the tea party, the right-to-life groups, the homeschoolers, the movement conservatives, and the scorecard-keepers who get to define who has been naughty and nice. As this faction grows stronger, it has less use for mainstream Republicans and their résumés listing their civic activities. If anything, such credentials are a black mark for those who care only about partisan politics. Just ask Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst, who now faces a runoff in his U.S. Senate race against Ted Cruz.
So much vitriolic ad hominem in a single paragraph! You really outdid yourself with that one, Paul. I bet you had a cigarette after typing that out! Hoo boy! It’s a shame you have such little use for this little thing called Integrity. But apparently you do consider Governor Rick Perry to be an extremist, insurgent, TEA Party ideologue without any civic leadership on his résumé. And you do have it in for home schoolers and their over-performance on standardized tests on a dearth of funding. Bless your little black heart. And you have a serious problem with people who hold the value of innocent human life over the expediency of sacrificing innocent virgins on the Altar of Convenience and Societal Decadence.
You know that Republican-building process of the 1980s? The Democrat’s favorite evil bogeyman — Ronald Reagan — was responsible for that, not the Country Club Statist Ruling Class “me too” Democrat Lite Republicans who fought tooth-and-nail to defeat him. And this current movement you so despise harkens to Reagan, and before him, to Coolidge, and before him, to the Founders and Framers. And we’re waiting with bated breath for the day we can Party Like It’s 1773. (Look it up, Paul.) And George W Bush, far from building that “big tent”, worked feverishly to dismantle the Conservative Republican Party that Reagan built, the Party that was so successful at growing and healing the nation’s woes. Bush wanted nothing to do with the Conservative wing of the Republican Party and worked to ostracize them. For that effort, he got 2006 and 2008.
Speaking of civic-mindedness, I’m not sure if you know this little fact (since you’re “not that into” research): Michele Bachmann has cared for not a few foster children. Sounds pretty civic-minded to me. Here’s another little fact you won’t be able to get your tiny brain around: Conservatives are more generous with their own time and money than are Liberals. That’s a fact, too. Again, very civic-minded, that.
The average percentage of household income donated to charity in each state tracked closely with the percentage of the popular vote it gave to Mr. Bush. Among the states in which 60 percent or more voted for Bush, the average portion of income donated to charity was 3.5 percent. For states giving Mr. Bush less than 40 percent of the vote, the average was 1.9 percent. The average amount given per household from the five states combined that gave Mr. Bush the highest vote percentages in 2003 was 25 percent more than that donated by the average household in the five northeastern states that gave Bush his lowest vote percentages; and the households in these liberal-leaning states earned, on average, 38 percent more than those in the five conservative states.
People living in conservative states volunteer more than people in liberal states. In 2003, the residents of the top five “Bush states” were 51 percent more likely to volunteer than those of the bottom five, and they volunteered an average of 12 percent more total hours each year. Residents of these Republican-leaning states volunteered more than twice as much for religious organizations, but also far more for secular causes. For example, they were more than twice as likely to volunteer to help the poor.
Oh, that evil little word “research” is totally destroying your dishonest Liberal memes, Paul. No wonder you hate to actually do any research. Your viewpoint keeps getting shredded by facts found when doing research and “rhymes with schmoogling”. From the video at the above link, comes more facts harmful to Paul Burka’s vitriolic false claims.
Q: [W]ho gives and who doesn’t? Is there a political component?
A: There is a political component. It’s primarily a religious component and a component that has to do with people and how they view what the Government is supposed to be paying for. So, for example, if we find that somebody believes that the Government should be doing more to equalize incomes in our society, that chances are they’re going to give a lot less than somebody who disagrees with that statement. And that has a lot to do with politics these days. Religion has a lot to do with politics as well, so we find for example that, on average, Conservative families give more dollars to charities than Liberal families, in spite of — according to some data — making slightly less income. But it has more to do with religion and attitudes about Government than anything else.
That’s gonna leave a mark. Poor Paul Burka, getting hit over the head with a clue bat. And who are these Religious Conservatives who do not believe the Government should do more to “equalize incomes”? Those who give more money despite having less? Why, they would be the TEA Partiers, the insurgents, the extremists! Ouch, Paul! There goes your lie about “civic-minded” being a “black mark” on a politician’s record.
“Just ask Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst, who now faces a runoff in his U.S. Senate race against Ted Cruz.” Are you serious, Paul? Did you just do that? It’s now a battle royale between the “mainstream Conservative” LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR DAVID DEWHURST and *little mouse voice* ted cruz? Really? You’re painting FORMER TEXAS STATE SOLICITOR GENERAL TED CRUZ who argued cases at the US Supreme Court — and won — as a little pipsqueak nobody outsider surging in to destroy the Party? Couldn’t you have at least used Dewhurst’s lies that Ted Cruz is somehow beholden to Washington Insiders? Can’t you even get on the same page as the Republican candidate you in your Democrat easy chair are supporting for the Republican Primary Run-Off (all the while you won’t be voting for the Republican in the General anyway)? Or maybe Ted Cruz is such an extremist TEA Party insurgent outsider that he’s fully entrenched in DC politics like the Ruling Class Republican leadership, as you so clearly detailed those insurgents like Craig Goldman are? Yeah, that doesn’t look so good when typed out. So why did you do that to Craig Goldman, hrmmm?
Painstakingly omitting the facts, like you did with Ted Cruz, does you no good among the informed people, Paul. It only adds to the truth of the matter: that you will lie and propagandize your way through anything if you believe it will serve your Liberal cause the most successfully.
And that little “obsessing with who is and who isn’t a true conservative” bit is a bit over-the-top in vitriolic, inflammatory rhetoric, doncha think Paul? If the Democrat Party is the Liberal party, shouldn’t the Republican Party be the Conservative party, Paul? Of course, you’re far more comfortable with “me too” Democrats Lite, as the Republicans of the 1950s through 1970s were, and as the Republicans in the latter years of George W Bush’s Presidency were — resulting in your party taking over Congress in 2006 and the Presidency in 2008, and the Republican Party atrophying. The fact of the matter is, Paul, you cannot stand the thought of the Republican Party actually returning to its roots and working to return the United States to its Constitutional roots and limits. That scares the tarnation out of you, doesn’t it, Paul?
And let’s get back to that “mainstream Conservative” you like to bandy about, when you actually mean Establishment Republican (not at all the same thing). Care for some more research, Paul? I know, I know. It will hurt, Paul. But let’s do it anyway, Okay? For years, the Republican Base has declared the Republican Leadership to be to the Left of and out of touch with the Republican base. In the neighborhood of 70 percent or more, in fact, have held that position for years. Even the majority of independents have declared the same thing. Only among the Liberals will you find a plurality declaring the Republican Leadership of being representative of the Republican Base. And there goes Paul Burka’s “mainstream Conservative” meme, all shot to Sheol. The Republican Leadership has not been representative of “mainstream Conservative” positions or values in literally decades (with the brief exception of the Reagan years, which were themselves decades ago).
And now for a little musical interlude as I turn to the second page of Paul Burka’s propaganda-filled rant.
Was that good for you? It was good for me. Very soothing.
But let’s get back to Paul Burka, and onto the second page.
If the pattern sounds familiar, it is because a similar thing happened to conservative Democrats several decades ago. They ran the state for generations after the Civil War, and then all of a sudden they vanished, in part because they were out of step with the prevailing ideology in their party. Attorney General John Hill’s defeat of Dolph Briscoe in the 1978 Democratic gubernatorial primary marked the end of the conservative Democratic era, and Ann Richards’s triumph over Jim Mattox in the 1990 gubernatorial runoff sealed the deal. There was no longer any room for conservatives or apostates in the party.
Woah there, Paul. You’re changing horses far to quickly. And those last couple weren’t even horses. At least they didn’t bray like horses. You’re saying the TEA Party un-civic-minded insurgent extremists are throwing out the “mainstream Conservatives” (who are simultaneously Moderates) just like the … Liberals threw the Conservatives out of the Democrat Party? For this thing to work, Paul, you need to show how the fringies threw the Liberals out of the Democrat Party. That would be the proper comparison, not this shell game you tried to pull. Hee Haw. And remember, Paul, you already pointed out how the Republican Party was growing in the 1980s and I showed you who was President at that time. Here’s a hint: George H W Bush and the Establishment Republicans whom you support despised and feared him, as did the Democrat Leadership. Because he was a true Small Government Conservative and not a “me too” Democrat Lite. So, clearly, Ronald Reagan and the Conservative wave had a great deal to do with Conservative Democrats leaving the Party.
And you’ve got your time-line a bit messed up there, too, Paul. By the magic of research and “rhymes with schmoogle” we can find out a big piece of pertinent information. I’ll even quote a Liberal rag (Time magazine) for the nitty and the gritty.
There’s an inconvenient political truth for Texas Governor Rick Perry: he was his state’s 1988 campaign chairman for then U.S. Senator Al Gore’s first run at the presidency.
A decade later, Perry said the 1988 presidential primary election helped push him to his party switch. In the fall of 1988, he voted for Bush over his party’s nominee, Dukakis. “I came to my senses,” he told the Austin American-Statesman in 1998.
It was 1988 when the Liberal wing of the Democrat Party essentially got rid of the Conservative Democrats (who were simultaneously Moderates (How does that work, exactly? All these Conservatives of both Parties who are also Moderates in both Parties?)), much to your lament, Paul. But wait, what name did I just see? Could it have been… Yes. Yes, indeed. There’s Rick Perry, Democrat, campaigning for Al Gore for President in 1988. And now in Paul Burka’s book, Rick Perry is an out of control fringe Right-Wing extremist, busily destroying “mainstream Conservatives” (who are simultaneously Moderates, but lose 70 percent of the support of the base when asked if they’re mainstream). That’s a pretty neat bit of sophistry there. Fully hacktastic. And more proof Paul Burka eschews research before writing.
Paul Burka isn’t doing very well to rehabilitate his image, which he trashed early on in this article (for those of us who hadn’t even heard of him before reading this article of his). Let’s see if he cleans his image up any.
And now history is repeating itself in the Repubican primaries, as the dominant hard-right faction seeks to weed out the so-called RINOs (“Republicans in Name Only”). No one has pushed harder for this transformation than Perry. In a conference call with the Texas Right to Life PAC before the primary, Perry played the role of ideological enforcer, saying that any Republican who isn’t pro-life is a RINO. One of the most bizarre TV spots of the election was an attack against Dewhurst by an outside group that labeled the lieutenant governor a “moderate,” which has become one of the ugliest insults a conservative can hurl at an opponent.
Yeah, not so much rehabbing going on there. Rick Perry, the Texas Democrat who campaigned for Al Gore, is now a “hard-right” extremist, destroying the Moderates (who are simultaneously “mainstream Conservatives” despite the fact that 7/10 to 3/4 of the Republican base has declared them to be to the Left of and out of touch with the mainstream). Obviously, a Liberal like Paul Burka, who cannot bother to do any research, has absolutely no idea what a Conservative is, much less a “hard-right” one.
Earth to Paul Burka. Paul Burka, are you receiving? The Republican Party is Pro-Life. It has been a heavy plank in the Republican Party for years. Decades. Consequently, a Republican who is not Pro-Life is, indeed, a RINO. Nothing wrong with stating the obvious, is there, Paul? And nice usage of that violent mob-related rhetoric. “Enforcer” indeed. Have you met the Union bosses and their henchmen? How about the New Black Panther Party? Or the shake-down artists Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton? Maybe you’ve heard of Babette Josephs or Janis Baird Sontany or Eva Longoria. Or, how about Julian Bond or Spike Lee or Carl Rowan or Willie Brown or Manning Marable or June Jordan or Haywood Burns or Julianne Malveaux or Joseph Lowery or William Clay or all manner of other names? I’ll tell you what, Paul, since “Moderate” is the worst insult in the repertoire of Conservatives, I’ll take it! Much better than demanding Conservative women are really “men with breasts” or demanding an up-skirt check to ensure they’re really women or demanding that women cannot vote Republican. And definitely far better than being called Oreos, Uncle Toms, race traitors, Benedict Arnolds, Judas, ventriloquists’ dummies, assassins, wandering negroes looking to kill blacks, frustrated slaves, minstrels, counterfeit heroes, punk-asses, David Dukes, and more for the sin of being Conservative While Black.
No, Paul, when it comes to virulent and violent attacks on people who don’t toe the line, you Liberals have a monopoly. And Paul Burka goes from bad to worse, as this next paragraph shows.
Perry’s defeat of Kay Bailey Hutchison in the 2010 gubernatorial primary was to the GOP what the Richards-Mattox race was to the Democrats in 1990. It established that there was little room for the nonideological [sic] politicians in the Republican party. Hutchison was the most popular Republican in the state at the time, but personality was no match for ideology. Perry ran a campaign against Hutchison based on national issues: the bank bailout of 2008, earmarks, and pork (which is nothing more than Texas getting back some of the tax dollars it sends to Washington). Combine this with the rise of the tea party, and it becomes clear that Republicans emerged from the anti-Obama fever of 2010 fully radicalized. I doubt Bush could be elected to the Legislature today, much less become governor.
I told you, he was going to get even worse. Remember, Rick Perry was Al Gore’s Texas campaigner in the 1998 DEMOCRAT Primary for President. And now, Perry is evidence of a “radicalized” Republican Party? Watch out for that inflammatory rhetoric, Paul. It might catch your pants on fire. It might also get people assassinated, just like you Liberals tried to falsely claim Sarah Palin did. Well over 2/3 of the Republican Base has, for years, deemed the Republican Ruling Class to be out of touch with and to the Left of the Republican Base. That’s not radicalization. That’s righting the ship. And pork is “nothing more than Texas getting back some of the tax dollars it sends to Washington”? You really let the cat out of the bag on that one, Paul! You have let it be known to the world that you’re a big spender of OPM (other people’s money) in your quest to buy votes.
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money. ”
― Margaret Thatcher
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.
[attributed to Alexander Tytler]
Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage.
[attributed to Benjamin Disraeli or Henning W Prentis Jr]
“It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the Government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the Government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right: to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive, what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.”
“So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.”
— Congressman Colonel Davy Crockett, quoting Horatio Bunce
So you see, Paul, earmarks and pork are very much more than merely throwing tax-payer money at other people. They are devastation for the Nation as a whole, and they are violations of the US Constitution, that thing to which we TEA Partiers want the Government to return.
And this whole rant about ideologies being a bad thing is rather nonsensical. Ideologies are nothing more than Principles; your core set of beliefs and standards. A man without principles, a man without a core, has no business leading others or governing others. He is a soulless man.
“Consensus: The process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values, and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects; the process of avoiding the very issues that have to be solved, merely because you cannot get agreement on the way ahead. What great cause would have been fought and won under the banner: ‘I stand for consensus?”
― Margaret Thatcher
And “anti-Obama fever”? Being against Obama’s Socialist agenda is an illness now? Paul Burka’s political agenda is very clearly visible. And guess what. Paul Burka is a radical Leftist ideologue. The proof is everywhere. Especially here. That Paul Burka even believes his nonsense will actually win over the minds of the electorate is mind-boggling.
But now, another musical interlude as I once again turn the page on Paul Burka’s rantings and ravings.
I hope you enjoyed that piece. I hope it allowed you to decompress a bit. It allowed me to decompress. But let’s get on with shredding Paul Burka’s ravings.
Still, when the Main Street conservatives get defeated or leave the party, it creates a problem for everyone. The local business and civic leaders are the ones who know how to govern and build coalitions. The tea party types have a different skill set: they know only how to make demands. That lesson was learned during the Eighty-second Legislature, in 2011, a session that featured a feeding frenzy of state budget cuts, which was essentially obeisance to the tea party.
Still at that “Mainstream Conservatives” gambit, eh? Only this time you called it “Main Street Conservatives” to change up the flavor of your disconnect from reality, Paul. I have already proven that well over 2/3 of America’s Republicans have declared the Establishment Republicans to be out of touch with and to the Left of “Main Street”. And I have already shown Corporate America to be at home with either the Republicans or the Democrats. Corporate America is not at all a Republican organism, no matter how you try to portray it as such. I have provided proof that Conservatives are clearly more generous with both their own time and their own money than are Liberals, thus clearly more civic-minded, much to your consternation, Paul. And Lady Margaret Thatcher absolutely destroyed your “consensus building” hooey. (Why is it that Conservatives always have to sacrifice their principles for sake of “consensus” but Liberals never do? Could it be the oh so obvious lack of integrity on the part of the Liberals?)
And we TEA Partiers only knowing how to make demands? Not being civic-minded? Not being able to govern? You must be outside your John Brown mind! The TEA Party harkens back to the days of much higher-minded and much more morally strong Men of Integrity than we have in politics today. What’s wrong with actually putting Government back within the strictures of the US Constitution and the US Declaration of Independence? It’s what made America the greatest, wealthiest, most successful, most charitable nation in the history of the world, after all.
And this “feeding frenzy” of not being fed is so much silliness on your part, Paul. Who ever heard of a politician feeding frenzy of staying within Budget and letting the tax-payers keep more of their own money? That’s not a feeding frenzy. That’s proper stewardship of property that doesn’t belong to you. But you wouldn’t understand that, would you Paul? You’re too busy throwing Other People’s Money around at people to win their gratitude and support come election day. Who cares how much carnage it wreaks on an already anemic economy. Who cares how many tax-payer carcasses the politicians have to eat. It’s a feeding frenzy of abstinence! The world’s going to end because we’re not allowed to overtax the little guy even further!
No. The TEA Party knows the path back to prosperity and greatness for the US. It’s through the Liberty-enabling US Constitution, the oldest active Constitution in the world. It is the Liberals and the Statist Republicans who are full of demands and light on proper governing ability.
I am skipping over a rather large paragraph (I believe that makes three paragraphs I have skipped) to examine the final paragraph of Paul Burka’s blather.
All of these crosscurrents in Texas politics are in play: the fracturing of the GOP, a governor who has lost his mojo, a Democratic party that yearns to be relevant, and a Speaker under fire by outside groups. As if that weren’t enough, several races for the state Senate will shift the ideological balance of the body rightward and likely empower Senator Dan Patrick in his quest to dominate the upper chamber. It is a fascinating time in Texas politics, but not a fulfilling one. As long as the majority party is fixated on waging ideological warfare instead of addressing the state’s needs, governing is going to continue to take a backseat to politics, though eventually the hard-line conservatives will lose support. If you don’t believe this is possible, I suggest you ask a conservative Democrat — if you can find one.
No, Paul, the GOP is not fracturing. We the People are putting our feet down and forcing the GOP to finally listen to us, to finally do the will of the governed, as the Founders and Framers required. And I don’t know how much of this “mojo” stuff — is that an ejumakated word, mojo? — that former Democrat and current Republican Rick Perry has lost, if any.
That Republican Speaker of the House, Straus, he surely hasn’t acted all that Republican while holding his gavel, has he Paul? And your inflammatory declaration of what you claim to be Senator Dan Patrick’s deep dark desires is nothing more than fodder for Liberals. You want to see domineering tyrants, Paul? Look at Harry Reid. Look at Barney Frank. Look at Nancy Pelosi. Look at Barrack Obama. Look at Eric Holder. Look at Kathleen Sebelius. Look at the racist and misogynist Democrat Party. That is where you will find the domineering tyrants. Not among the TEA Party mainstream commonsense Constitutional Conservatives.
And there you go again, falsely accusing we TEA Partiers of not wanting what’s best for Texas (and the Nation as a whole) but only wanting to play partisan politics just like the Democrats have been doing for the past 40 years or more. You sure like to project a lot, Paul. You really need to learn to stop doing that. I seem to remember one of your Liberal ilk declaring that if ObamaCare got upheld in the US Supreme Court, we TEA Partiers would riot in the streets. Upon further research (that thing Paul Burka is incapable of doing), it was former Rhode Island Representative Patrick Kennedy who said “If the Court upholds the law, dangerous Tea Party extremists will go on a rampage.” That was some serious projection coming from the loony toons addict. We TEA Partiers are not Occupods. We’re not Union thugs. We’re not anarcho-terrorists. We’re not environmentalist wackos. We’re not illegal aliens. Those are your people, Paul, not ours.
And Paul Burka ends his exercise in rhetoric fallacy by declaring the “mainstream Conservatives” (who are simultaneously Moderates) will vanish from the Republican Party, and for proof, the vanishing of Conservatives from the Democrat Party. Yeah, that’s the ticket, Paul. The ideological (I know you think that’s a curse word, but it really isn’t, Paul) base of one Party will vanish because the ideological outsiders of the other Party already have. Bdiuh, bdiuh, bdiuh, that’s all, folks!
And, in honor of the quivering gelatinous mound of goo on the floor once known as Paul Burka, I leave you with one more tune (turn off the speech bubble at the bottom).
This has been an exercise in FAIR USE as I have informed and educated while using research and facts to debate the hopelessly unarmed and over-paid journalist Paul Burka.
Now, is there any reason, any reason at all, to accept anyone with a public voice in Travis County, TX as a voice of reason about anything, anything at all? I think not.
This entry was posted on 2014/08/21 at 16:23 and is filed under 1st Amendment, Character, charitible organizations, Conservative, Constitution, Constitution Shredded, Culture, Elections, funny business, history, Insanity, Law, Liberal, media, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politically correct, Politically Incorrect, politics, Socialists, society, TEA Party, truth. Tagged: civic leaders, Governor Rick Perry, mainstream Conservatives, mainstream media, Paul Burka, Republican Party fracturing, Rosemary Lehmberg, Texas Monthly magazine, Texas politics, Travis County, Travis County District Attorney. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.