Umm, Dewey, Yell leaders are guys. I’d expect even a UT grad to be able to tell the difference, but I guess I’ve overestimated. 
Enjoy,
Steven
On Preview: What Homebrew said.
You have beeh whooshed.
Think about it for a few days, Aggie-boy. Eventually you’ll get the joke.
The only ‘News’ here is that Democrats creatively came up with one effective “dirty trick” the Republicans and all their money didn’t come up with first. (Now That’s a First)
I find it highly amusing and appropriate that all that’s left for Republican Dupes to do is to Bitch&Moan about it: The tactic is Effective and Unstopable until there is legislation against it, which won’t happen until Next session.
Better Luck Next Season, Boys and Girls…
Don’t worry about it. Elvis is like my personal Iraqi Information Minister; “The dog-infidel-Scylla has never posted in this thread. He has committed Suicide in despair. Tonight the Texas democrats will commence martyr operations against the Republican dogs from their invincible Oklahoma stronghold!”
Ok, but all funning aside I truly do not understand this. I understand all the mechanics of the issue, the districts and the house, the redisticting.
What I don’t understand is how this is anything other than running and hiding from the consequences of a legitimate power shift.
The question is if re-districting to spread the votes of a certain population who shares an ideology out to minimize the ability of those voters to be able to vote in a representative who represents their ideology is legitimate. The re-districting being suggested seems to divide the state in a manner so as to disenfranchise the minority as opposed to simply allowing them to be represented as the minority they are. It is the difference between a state with a 60/40 split in ideologies at the popular level having a 60/40 split at the representative level and a state with a 60/40 split at the popular level with a 80/20 split at the representative level. I’d say the power play which took half the representation of the minority view away was pretty illegitimate.
Enjoy,
Steven
Now wait a minute… they are Texas politicians.
That’s sufficient cause to assume “posing a threat to public safety”.
Redistricting is not “the consequences of a legitimate power shift.” Redistricting is a highly contentious political process that, happily, only occurs every 10 years, no matter what happens in the intervening elections. Redistricting now is an unprecedented, unorthodox political power grab. It has been met in kind by the opponents of that power grab, and quite successfully at that.
The walkout will end at midnight tomorrow night, and so will the redistricting plan. Redistricting will occur in the 2011 legislative session, just as the voters of Texas would expect it to.
It’s already been explained; you just didn’t like the explanation and therefore dismissed it. See the advice earlier about a refresher course in democracy.
Redistricting takes place every 10 years. That’s the rule of centuries-long standing here. This is a power grab by people who are looking to take advantage of a temporary situation to subjugate rather than cooperate with the other party. They’ve declared the opposition to be the enemy, somehow illegitimate by the very fact of their “otherness”. By that refusal to act responsibly, within the rules, they have made only one course of action available to the people who are trying to act responsibly, in the service of those who hired them to do so.
If that isn’t clear by now, it’s your own problem. If you understand it but simply don’t like it, try simply switching the party names and see how your attitude changes.
As for the other thing you commented on, you’ve been told essentially the same thing by many others here as well. Perhaps some day you’ll actually consider the possibility. wring, you know damn well what he means.
Thank you. I understand it now.
Do you know what the rationale is the Republicans are using to do the redistricting early in this manner?
The rationale is that they want more Republican seats in Congress. Simple as that.
I’m sorry, I mean their justification for breaking the 10 year redistricting rule.
You know, I though that the Gov sending out the Texas Rangers to arrest them was just a joke. So- now it’s a crime to be a Democrat in Texas?:dubious: What were the charges?
When do the armbands come out and the goosestep marching come in? What’s next- Crystalnacht?
Thier justification is that they now in the majority in both chambers.
And they would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn’t been for those meddling Democrats.
Redistricting out of a census year seems perfectly legal.
That said… it’s a crummy trick. I condemn the Texas Republicans for doing it. While I wish there had been a better way to thwart the effort, there doesn’t seem to have been. I don’t see anything wrong with denying a quorum to the Republicans under these circumstances.
It seems to me the worst kind of hypocrisy to pretend that, had the situations been reversed, the Republicans would not have been doing the same thing – or wishing they had thought of it.
It’s not for me to tell Texas how they should run their state, but my sympathies lie with the Dems on this one.
- Rick
They did so run. They ran so far away. They ran, they ran all night and day. Couldn’t get away.
Although I would submit that Scylla’s non capitalized flock of metaphorical seagulls would be more likely to fly away.
Rick brings up a good point, in case I wasn’t clear earlier: It is not, as far as I can tell, illegal to redistrict outside the normal 10-year intervals.
It is, however, unprecedented and unethical. No Texas voter last November had the slightest idea that the legislature would take up the issue of redistricting this session or at any other time until 2011. The Republicans just decided that, hey, now that we’re here, there’s nothing they can do to stop us from redistricting the state. It appears that they miscalculated.
As has been explained earlier, it is a longstanding part of Texas law that either legislative chamber can use state law enforcement to prevent recalicitrant lawmakers from denying a quorum. It isn’t a “crime” to be a Democrat; it isn’t even a “crime” to prevent a quorum. Rep. Giddings is not in jeopardy of going to jail. The troopers will just deliver her to the floor of the House.
I also note that it isn’t “the governor” that sent out the Rangers. It was the seargeant-at-arms of the House, acting at the direction of that chamber, in accordance with Texas law.
Ok. I also seem to be asking the question that I am poorly. I am clear on your assertion that this is a simple power grab.
Hopefully the Republicans it as such. I can’t imagine they would.
As the veteran of not a few power grabs myself, I know that every power grab, no matter how blatantly self-serving, must have a ruse.
You know like “Rodney King was subdued for his own protection.”
It’s that transparent veneer used to keep up appearances, and nobody perpetrates an atrocity in broad view without one.
Clearly only the strongest and most clear of reasons could justify this crummy and highly irregular move. So, I assume the Texas Republicans must have a doozy.
Or maybe it’s not a ruse at all. Maybe it’s a good reason.
I don’t know. That’s why I’m asking.
Typical Republican response: Do whatever the hell you want for pure political gain without regard for anyone else.
Scylla, I understand your confusion. As a recovering Texan, I have had to grasp the working of the Yankee mind. Comparing legislatures, Texas vs the rest, itsn’t apples and oranges, its apples and orangutans.
Being a Yankee, you naturally think that chicanery and skullduggery comes with a thin veneer of rational purpose, some sort of excuse, as in giving folks with too much money more money will make things better for poor people, 'cause rich folks will tip better.
This kind of thinking prevails north of Texarkana, west of El Paso, and so on. Listen carefully, here comes the punch line:
It has no bearing, whatsoever, in the alternative universe that is Texas. An utterly naked, blatant power grab is not poor form, it is giving 'em the business as usual. Not only will the fuck you over with a straight face, they’ll figure you should buy them a drink to celebrate. I know this seems irrational to you. You’ll just have to trust me.
As part of your ongoing autobiography, you have revealed you are married to a Texas woman. Hence, I am certain you are well acquainted with the correct procedure for surrendering an argument. You have not, to my knowledge, posted anything like “My Most Recent Trip to the Emergency Room.”