|
Post by anxiousmom on Aug 17, 2014 17:40:12 GMT
Enjoy your movie. And I will state once more, using the executive power of veto in order to ensure your political agenda is achieved is exactly what both Obama and Perry have done. You can agree with the reason for one and not the other, but it doesn't change the bottom line. I guess maybe then I don't understand? I was under the impression that the indictment was based on not the veto in and of itself, but rather that he tied the veto to fund her office on her resignation. As in "if you don't resign, I won't fund," she didn't, he did. As I understand it- yes, he is well within his rights to use his veto power as he chooses, but what he does NOT have the right to do is use the threat of a veto to coerce another official into doing what he wants by threatening to withholding funding.
|
|
|
Post by compwalla on Aug 17, 2014 17:40:49 GMT
Midland? Liberal pocket? You don't know Texas very well. LOL. The blue pockets are in all the big cities and down along the coast. Midland is by no stretch in a liberal pocket of anything unless you're talking about oil.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 16:22:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2014 17:57:08 GMT
Midland? Liberal pocket? You don't know Texas very well. LOL. The blue pockets are in all the big cities and down along the coast. Midland is by no stretch in a liberal pocket of anything unless you're talking about oil. Possibly.
But I definitely remember you saying that the only reason you could tolerate moving back to Texas was because Midland was a more liberal area.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Aug 17, 2014 18:21:14 GMT
I'm in a liberal pocket. It really doesn't matter, though. Our urban congressional districts are gerrymandered to include large pockets of suburban/rural areas to make sure we can't elect too many democratic representatives. Personally, I don't think any amount of corruption in the electoral process is acceptable, and just because it's less than Illinois (or done by the party you agree with) doesn't make it OK.
I agree with Compwalla that many here will vote for any warm body the GOP runs before they'll vote for a Democrat with better experience and ideas they'd actually agree with - if they bothered to learn anything about their platforms.
I'd still like to know which of Bill White's specific platform points were problematic for the Republican voters here, and what made him "sleazy."
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 16:22:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2014 18:32:19 GMT
If that means living in a state where people vote straight party ticket, then so be it. [/p]
[/quote] So you'd rather the citizens just blindly vote for the letter after a person's name instead of doing actual research into that person's platform, political beliefs and qualifications for the office? I can't even find the words to describe how infuriating I find that attitude. I know it's not an uncommon attitude, especially for the ultra - leaning members of both parties, but I have to say, it's exactly why the conservative party loses the vote of this swing voter more often that not. I just simply can't support a party that (in recent years, at least) encourages the dumbing down of America.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 16:22:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2014 18:47:55 GMT
I never said that I agree with blind voting, straight ticket or not.
If someone votes a straight party ticket, it's because the ideals of that party most closely align with their beliefs. Or their most important beliefs. I certainly don't care for the whole conservative platform, but the things that are most important to me run along that party line.
That's not to say that I've never voted third party or even Democrat. I have. But generally speaking, it was for an office where the values that I conservatively hold wouldn't apply or have an impact. Except for when I voted third party for President but that was more of a statement rather than a real hope that he would win.
|
|
lindy
Shy Member
Posts: 29
Jun 26, 2014 0:15:26 GMT
|
Post by lindy on Aug 17, 2014 18:58:48 GMT
Travis County resident here.
Lehmberg was arrested, served a harsh sentence (large fine, 45 days in jail) for a first offense, profusely apologized to the public, and promised she would not seek re-election. Many prominent members of the Travis County legal community spoke out in support for her finishing her term. There was never a serious recall attempt in Travis County to remove her from office (a couple histrionic, low-ball ones, but nothing that gained momentum). She was investigated further by a grand jury to evaluate if her behavior during her arrest warranted additional charges. It was not.
The public integrity unit took down Tom Delay and his cronies. Perry et al were delighted to try to settle the score with Lehmberg by way of forcing her out of office. There's a long history of animosity between Republican state leaders doing business in historically liberal Travis County.
The grand jury investigation started before the border crisis heated up. The investigation was prompted by a watch dog group, not Lehmberg's office.
Perry's arrogance and smug, smarmy attitude put a target on his back long ago. He finally lept over his authority with such audacity that he should have seen this coming. To quote Rick Perry from a news conference a couple years ago, "Adios, MoFo."
|
|
|
Post by kamper on Aug 17, 2014 20:25:31 GMT
I voted for Bill White too and he is not sleazy.
I'm not sure how Perry can claim this was politically motivated when the special prosecutor and the judge in this case are Republicans.
He tried to coerce an elected official (whose office was investigating one of his pet programs) into resigning with a threat. If he had just shut his mouth and vetoed the funding it would have been no problem. He didn't do that because he wanted to appoint one of his cronies. This is a classic Perry administration move to get around the will of the voters.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 16:22:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2014 20:26:45 GMT
What I find laughable is the head of the Texas Democratic Party says that by stating what would determine his decision to fund the Public Integrity Group or not "Governor Rick Perry has brought dishonor to his office, his family and the state of Texas." But the woman who was abusing officers and being belligerent and throwing around her position to get her out of being held accountable for endangering lives while driving drunk apparently has not brought dishonor to her office, her family and the state of Texas.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 16:22:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2014 20:33:50 GMT
We're working our asses off. You might have to move again soon. Nah. You are in a liberal pocket of the state. Believe me, the red is strong around here. Nah. Most Texas Dems figured out some time ago that it was only socially acceptable to call themselves Repubs - so they did and they ran on those platforms. Bascially, Dems in Republican clothes if you get the analogy. It's swinging back the other way, though. Dallas and Houston are in the final stages of the switch back to Dem - so much so that it's being called 'Republican flight' - because inside the city limits is majority Democratic. Also, except in a few counties, backlash against Tea Party candidates is beginning to set in and the R party is moving back from the far right. That's the thing about politics, it's always a moving target.
|
|
lindy
Shy Member
Posts: 29
Jun 26, 2014 0:15:26 GMT
|
Post by lindy on Aug 17, 2014 22:25:17 GMT
What I find laughable is the head of the Texas Democratic Party says that by stating what would determine his decision to fund the Public Integrity Group or not "Governor Rick Perry has brought dishonor to his office, his family and the state of Texas." But the woman who was abusing officers and being belligerent and throwing around her position to get her out of being held accountable for endangering lives while driving drunk apparently has not brought dishonor to her office, her family and the state of Texas. Rosemary Lehmberg served the voters of Travis County. She may have been an obnoxious drunk when she was arrested, but in the light of day, she accepted a particularly harsh sentence for a first-time offender with no resistance. She served her sentence, she paid a fine, she apologized, and she went to rehab. She agreed not to seek re-election. And with that, no one in Travis County mounted a recall election campaign or demanded she resign. Except Rick Perry.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 16:22:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2014 22:38:23 GMT
That's why it's laughable. She endangered lives and wasn't asked to step down. He's being askd to step down for announcing that he doesn't think someone lacking integrity should be heading the Public Integrity Group and won't fund it if she does.
|
|
|
Post by *KatyCupcake* on Aug 17, 2014 23:32:13 GMT
Every veto ever made is politically motivated. The threat to veto bills because a governing body inherently disagrees with the bill's contents is not an abuse of power. Threatening to veto bills in order to try and force a person to resign his/her job is an abuse of power. That is why Perry was indicted and Obama has not. (Special note: executive orders are not the same as vetoes, and whether Obama should be indicted for his use of those is a separate issue from this thread.)Signed - A centrist who agrees with Perry that the DA should have resigned but thinks he was an idiot to try and blackmail her using the funding bill and deserved to be indicted. I see both uses of veto as a means to a political agenda. Perry disagreed with the bill to fund the group as long as it was chaired by the woman who had broken the law and endangered lives. Obama disagrees with passing any bill that might make Republicans look successful in doing their jobs in Congress.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 16:22:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2014 23:34:57 GMT
Enjoy your movie. And I will state once more, using the executive power of veto in order to ensure your political agenda is achieved is exactly what both Obama and Perry have done. You can agree with the reason for one and not the other, but it doesn't change the bottom line. I guess maybe then I don't understand? I was under the impression that the indictment was based on not the veto in and of itself, but rather that he tied the veto to fund her office on her resignation. As in "if you don't resign, I won't fund," she didn't, he did. As I understand it- yes, he is well within his rights to use his veto power as he chooses, but what he does NOT have the right to do is use the threat of a veto to coerce another official into doing what he wants by threatening to withholding funding. You understand it perfectly and explained it well and succinctly. I highlighted the main point.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 16:22:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2014 0:22:02 GMT
Every veto ever made is politically motivated. The threat to veto bills because a governing body inherently disagrees with the bill's contents is not an abuse of power. Threatening to veto bills in order to try and force a person to resign his/her job is an abuse of power. That is why Perry was indicted and Obama has not. (Special note: executive orders are not the same as vetoes, and whether Obama should be indicted for his use of those is a separate issue from this thread.)Signed - A centrist who agrees with Perry that the DA should have resigned but thinks he was an idiot to try and blackmail her using the funding bill and deserved to be indicted. I see both uses of veto as a means to a political agenda. Perry disagreed with the bill to fund the group as long as it was chaired by the woman who had broken the law and endangered lives. Obama disagrees with passing any bill that might make Republicans look successful in doing their jobs in Congress. Yes, both are means to a political agenda. But only one is illegal (attempting to force the resignation of a public official in exchange for signing a bill). FTR, I am not particularly a fan of Obama's performance this term - I just recognize the difference between illegal abuse of power and being a jerk.
|
|
lindy
Shy Member
Posts: 29
Jun 26, 2014 0:15:26 GMT
|
Post by lindy on Aug 18, 2014 0:30:19 GMT
That's why it's laughable. She endangered lives and wasn't asked to step down. He's being askd to step down for announcing that he doesn't think someone lacking integrity should be heading the Public Integrity Group and won't fund it if she does. Perry's not being asked to resign to my knowledge. He's simply under indictment at this time for using coercion to attempt to remove an elected official. He made good on his threat not to fund the unit when Lehmberg did not resign. Perry did ask Lehmberg to resign when she was arrested, as did plenty of Republicans. However, a bipartisan group of Lehmberg's colleagues came forward in her support, and the people of Travis County did not pursue a recall election. It's very simple: the State of Texas doesn't run our county and may not attempt to bully us into removing our officials from office.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 16:22:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2014 1:44:16 GMT
That's why it's laughable. She endangered lives and wasn't asked to step down. He's being asked to step down for announcing that he doesn't think someone lacking integrity should be heading the Public Integrity Group and won't fund it if she does. Perry's not being asked to resign to my knowledge. The Texas Democratic Party called for his immediate resignation.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Aug 18, 2014 1:49:35 GMT
Perry's not being asked to resign to my knowledge. The Texas Democratic Party called for his immediate resignation. And do they have the power to de-fund the governor's office if he doesn't comply? We could only hope ...
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 16:22:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2014 1:55:13 GMT
The Texas Democratic Party called for his immediate resignation. And do they have the power to de-fund the governor's office if he doesn't comply? We could only hope ... ROTFLMOA ---and wiping my drink off the screen!!! That was funny, I don't care who you are. I know, 'case I'm not even a Democrat and I'm trying not to snort my drink out of my nose.
|
|
lindy
Shy Member
Posts: 29
Jun 26, 2014 0:15:26 GMT
|
Post by lindy on Aug 18, 2014 2:08:10 GMT
I stand corrected. Perry has been asked to resign.
|
|