Tag Archives: Greg Abbott

Uncategorized

That was some ‘apology,’ Ted

Ted “The Motor City Madman” Nugent issued the kind of so-called “apology” a lot of us figured he would.

Which is to say he didn’t apologize to the target of some amazingly hateful remarks.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/21/ted-nugent-apology_n_4832012.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000013

Nugent had called President Obama a “subhuman mongrel.” Today he went on a radio talk show and said he was sorry for using that terminology on the president.

But he put it this way: “I do apologize — not necessarily to the president — but on behalf of much better men than myself,” Nugent said, calling the comments “streetfighter terminology.”

I’ve been spending a little bit of time trying to parse those remarks. It seems now that he’s saying “sorry” to others who have criticized the president, only using more dignified language than that which flies out Nugent’s mouth.

So, there you have it.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., called on Nugent to apologize. Gov. Rick Perry, R-Texas, said he had “a problem” with Nugent’s remarks. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, who has enlisted Nugent to appear with him in his campaign for governor, so far hasn’t said anything about the remarks Nugent made a month ago.

And they get a non-apologetic apology.

This is the kind of fare we can expect, apparently, from The Madman.

Uncategorized

Will Greg and Ted stay together to the finish?

How long will it take — or should it take — for Republican Texas gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott to throw rocker Ted Nugent overboard?

Nugent’s appearances on behalf of Abbott have drawn considerable attention from those who oppose the loudmouth and those who endorse him. Count me, of course, as one of the former.

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/politics/2014/02/18/bts-wolf-nugent-subhuman-mongrel-slater.cnn.html

Nugent — aptly nicknamed The Motor City Madman — is prone to say some highly disgusting things about his political foes. He has called President Obama a “subhuman mongrel” — and that’s just one of the things he’s uttered.

He was in Denton this week and introduced Abbott to a crowd as “my friend.” Friend? Really?

I’ve known and covered Abbott for a number of years. I have interviewed him in his capacity as a candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, as a sitting justice, candidate for attorney general and as the incumbent. I’ve always considered him to be a gentleman.

It utterly astounds me that he would align himself with the likes of Nugent, the flaming pro-gun rights advocate who seems to take great personal pride in offending as many people as he can with his horrendously hyperbolic hysteria.

Why the alliance? Political observers think Abbott is trying to energize his GOP “base,” as if it needs energizing these days, particularly from someone who’s reprehensible rhetoric drowns out whatever message he’s trying to deliver.

Texas politics has long been considered a contact sport. If the Madman is going to stay on the campaign trail with his good friend Greg Abbott, we’d all better put on plenty of armor.

Uncategorized

Abbott invites ‘Madman’ onto campaign trail

Let’s call it “Greg and Ted’s Excellent Adventure.”

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, the shoo-in Republican nominee for governor, has invited Ted “Motor City Madman” Nugent to campaign for him across the Lone Star State.

I hardly can wait to hear what’s going to fly out of Nugent’s mouth once he hits the ground and campaigns on behalf of Abbott.

Actually, yes I can.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/greg-abbott-ted-nugent-texas-103597.html?hp=l7

This is an astonishing development in the budding campaign to see determine who will succeed Rick Perry in the governor’s office, a post Perry has held longer than anyone in state history.

Nugent is known these days for far more than his legendary guitar licks. He’s become an avid spokesman for political causes, ranging from gun-owners’ rights to anti-gay policy. He also is prone to utter some remarkably hateful things about those with whom he disagrees. Consider these remarks, which he spewed out a month ago:

“I have obviously failed to galvanize and prod, if not shame enough Americans to be ever vigilant not to let a Chicago communist-raised, communist-educated, communist-nurtured subhuman mongrel like the ACORN community organizer gangster Barack Hussein Obama to weasel his way into the top office of authority in the United States of America.”

This, I submit, is the kind of rhetoric that awaits likely Democratic nominee Wendy Davis as she campaigns against Abbott.

Honestly, I do not mind hearing people speak out intelligently on issues even when they disagree with my own world view. I do mind the frothing nonsense that proponents too often bellow forth.

Texas Democratic Party Chairman Gilbert Hinojosa said it well: “Texans deserve better than a statewide office holder and candidate running for governor who welcomes Ted Nugent and his repugnant comments. I can’t help but recall the old saying, tell me who your friends are, and I’ll tell you who you are.”

Is this really you, Mr. Attorney General? Really?

Uncategorized

Abbott-Davis race gets ugly early

Oh my.

Is this what we can expect for the next, oh, 10 months in the campaign for Texas governor?

The two major parties already have their presumptive nominees: Republicans will nominate Attorney General Greg Abbott while Democrats will nominate state Sen. Wendy Davis. This will occur in March during the party primaries. Then we’ll get to watch these two bright individuals hammer at each other over things that likely will have little to do with public policy.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/02/03/democratic-spies-overhear-abbott-davis-controversy/

The latest is this: An audio recording has surfaced that suggest Abbott urged his supporters to keep stirring the pot over a controversy involving Davis’s rather fuzzy personal history. You know the story by now, right? Davis said she was a single mother, divorcing her first husband when she was 19. Turns out her divorce wasn’t finalized until she was 21. Then came other details about who got custody of her children and some other things. These details were revealed in a Dallas Morning News article written by veteran political reporter Wayne Slater.

The recording says this, according to the Texas Tribune: “We’re going to heat up this campaign, and it’s going to turn red hot as we keep Texas red.” That reportedly is Abbott speaking in January at a fundraising event in Wimberley.

The problem with the recording is that Abbott had clammed up when the controversy broke, maintaining a statesmanlike silence in public.

So, the question is this: Which Abbott are we going to see as the campaign unfolds further? The circumspect AG or a GOP gutfighter?

Uncategorized

Good news and bad news about governor’s race

The campaign for Texas governor has a good-news, bad-news feel about it.

First, the bad news: The campaign has hit the low road early on.

Now, the good news: The end of this campaign is still a long ways off, meaning that it will arrive with the general election, not the primaries that are just a little more than a month away.

I refer to the parties’ presumptive nominees: Republican Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott and Democratic state Sen. Wendy Davis.

As the Texas Tribune’s Ross Ramsey points out, it’s becoming a war of words already, and the words have little to do so far with policy differences.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/01/27/contest-governor-war-about-words/

Abbott and his team are taking Davis to task for some fuzziness in her personal story. Davis and her team are responding with cries of “sexism!” in Abbott’s criticism and some ill-chosen words about whether Abbott has ever “walked in my shoes.”

Davis’s personal story involves divorce and her struggles as a single mother. It turns out she hasn’t been quite as forthcoming about the details of her marriages and her economic struggles.

Meanwhile, the senator said something about Abbott having never “walked” in her shoes. Well, it turns out Abbott doesn’t walk at all, given that he has been crippled since his 20s when a tree fell on him as he was jogging in Houston.

Both sides are trading barbs and jabs and are calling each other all sorts of unkind names.

We’re still awaiting some serious talk about how they would govern Texas.

The primaries are all but decided already. Abbott and Davis will be the nominees. It’s time to start talking about education, about state spending priorities, about job growth, water management, energy development, the environment … you know, the kinds of policy matters that should concern Texans.

We’re waiting for the name-calling to cease.

Uncategorized

Let’s take care when talking about hardship

My sincere hope for the budding Texas campaign for governor is that the major parties’ presumptive nominees put to rest questions about personal histories.

Presumptive Democratic nominee Wendy Davis is having to answer questions about some fuzziness in her story, about the timing of her failed marriages. Her campaign is now going on the attack, accusing Republican foes of sexism by criticizing the success of a female candidate.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2014/01/21/264579414/critics-seize-on-blurry-details-in-wendy-davis-story

This counter-attack launched against presumptive Republican nominee Greg Abbott can go too far.

Abbott is the state’s attorney general, a former trial court judge and a former state Supreme Court justice. He, too, has endured some hardship in his life.

Back when he was in his mid-20s, Abbott took a break from preparing for his bar exam and went jogging. A tree fell on him, breaking his back — and confining him to a wheelchair, where he’s been ever since.

Abbott also has had to overcome considerable difficulty to achieve the heights he has reached.

With that in mind, the Davis campaign will need to be careful about how it portrays the criticisms against her and how it characterizes the attorney general’s life story.

It’s one key reason why Davis needs to set the record straight once and for all and do it early so we can focus instead on the issues that ought to decide this first campaign — since 2002 — for Texas governor that does not include Rick Perry.

Uncategorized

Let’s just skip Texas governor’s primary

Can’t we just move right into the Texas general election campaign for governor?

How about just skipping these meaningless primaries? We know who’s going to be nominated: Republicans will pick Attorney General Greg Abbott; Democrats are going to nominate state Sen. Wendy Davis.

The Texas Tribune notes that the new year will see a significant spike in campaign activity from both candidates. Rest assured, they won’t talk about the primary. They’re going to talk — a lot — about each other.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/01/01/texas-governors-race-getting-more-heated/

I’m ready for a rumble.

Abbott has been the prohibitive favorite to become the next governor ever since he announced his candidacy. Davis is the underdog, given the state’s decidedly Republican tilt.

Some folks have wondered where Davis has been lurking in recent weeks. She hasn’t been as visible as some have said she should be. Never fear, says Jim Henson, a Texas Tribune pollster. She’ll get in the game quickly, as will Abbott.

He told the Tribune: “I’m looking for both of the campaigns to get very aggressive as soon as they find it strategically sound. I would expect that ethics and character are going to be big parts of both of those efforts.”

Henson told the Tribune that Abbott will focus on Davis’s private law practice and her connection with firms dealing with the Legislature; he adds that Davis will train her sights on Abbott’s role in a cancer research outfit’s involvement with someone indicted for allegedly lax tax procedures.

Who needs primaries when you have two candidates many voters know already and who are loading up for a donnybrook that won’t end until — gulp! — next November?

Uncategorized

Education becomes Texas campaign issue

I’m glad to see Wendy Davis and Greg Abbott arguing in public — more or less — about education.

One of them is going to be the next Texas governor and public education must remain at the forefront of the cluster of issues that need intense public discussion.

So far, though, only Davis — the presumptive Democratic nominee — seems willing and/or able to talk about it openly. Abbott, the Republican state attorney general who is defending the state’s school funding system in a court battle, has been mum.

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2013/12/wendy-davis-prods-greg-abbott-on-education-cuts/

You need to speak to us, Mr. Attorney General.

Davis is attacking Abbott over the state’s $5.4 billion education cutbacks made three years ago. They were made allegedly on some faulty revenue forecasts. The state ended up being more flush that economists had predicted.

Davis is trying to smoke Abbott out on the cuts. Abbott, meanwhile, is representing the state in a lawsuit challenging the Texas public school funding system that a judge has ruled to be unconstitutional.

Abbott says he can’t talk about it because he’ll be in court soon to argue on behalf of the state. He’s scheduled to appear in court in another month. Perhaps after that he’ll be able to tell voters what he really thinks about the way Texas pays for public education.

Abbott is a smart lawyer. He’s experienced enough to parse his language carefully if he is truly concerned about whether he could jeopardize the standing of his client — the State of Texas.

Davis isn’t encumbered by job requirements. She’s free to speak her mind.

“Greg Abbott’s refusal to answer basic questions on the $5 billion in cuts to neighborhood schools he defends in court has revealed a ‘me first’ leadership style,” according Bo Delp, Davis’s communications director.

Both candidates say they place public education as a top priority for the next governor.

Fine. Then tell us, Mr. Attorney General, how you intend to maintain the health of our public education system.

Uncategorized

Red-light cameras become campaign issue

Republican Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, who’s running for governor, had this — among other things — to say to a North Texas tea party group: “Both the advocates of red light cameras and their detractors have a point. One emphasizes safety, and the other emphasizes privacy.”

Let’s hold it right there.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/12/05/governors-race-draws-spotlight-red-light-cameras/

I am an advocate of red-light camera technology, which is being deployed in many cities across the state, including Amarillo. I see it as a safety issue. It is making it safer for people to drive without getting clobbered by idiots who ignore street lights instructing them to stop.

The other side, I am presuming from Abbott’s remark, suggests that the cameras are “invasive” and that they intrude on people’s “privacy.”

I’ve had this argument with more anti-red light camera residents in Amarillo than I care to count.

My point about the so-called privacy issue simply is this: Motorists driving vehicles on public streets, putting other people’s health and their very lives, by ignoring traffic laws have no inherent right of privacy. Period.

Some of those foes suggest that government is overreaching by allowing cities to implement these devices. They stand behind some bogus conservative political theory that says government has no right to intrude in this manner.

My answer? That is pure crap.

The state used to prohibit cities from deploying these cameras. Then the Legislature changed part of its collective mind by allowing the cameras, but then requiring cities to dedicate revenue raised from fines to traffic safety improvements. That’s all fine. The state also takes a significant cut of the revenue raised. That’s OK too.

The people elected to govern cities deserve the chance to determine what’s best for the communities. Amarillo’s elected commission (now city council) decided in 2008 that it was in the city’s best interest to deploy these cameras at selected intersections. Have the cameras stopped red-light runners? No. They have, however, deterred some folks from doing it and they have raised revenue to pay for improvements in traffic signalization around the city.

I am tiring rapidly, though, of the argument that the anti-camera crowd keeps harping on regarding privacy. These clowns aren’t protecting anything except their bogus “right” to break traffic laws.

Tom Pauken, another GOP candidate for governor, opposes the cameras. He says they’re intent is to raise money, not make streets safer. Democratic state Sen. Wendy Davis of Fort Worth — which has the cameras deployed — also is running for governor; she favors the cameras.

Let us have this debate. I want to hear candidates for governor explain rationally how privacy matters when it involves motorists traveling along publicly owned streets.

Uncategorized

Hold the crime-fighter ads, AG candidates

I’ll be waiting during the next few months for someone running for Texas attorney general to pop off one of those “tough on crime” spots.

Then I will be mortified.

The Texas Tribune has an interesting story about three leading Republicans running for the GOP nomination for state attorney general. The guy who’s in the job now, Greg Abbott, is giving it up to run for Texas governor.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/12/01/primary-race-attorney-general-slowly-taking-shape/

The three leading Republicans are Barry Smitherman, who is now serving on the Railroad Commission; Dan Branch, a state representative from Dallas and Ken Paxton, another state rep, from nearby McKinney. They all brand themselves as conservatives — although it’s not yet clear whether they’ll brand each other that way.

What happens occasionally in races for this office is that someone misconstrues — either deliberately or by mistake — what this office is all about.

The AG is the state’s top lawyer. The attorney general represents the state in litigation. His or her office argues for the state in court. The AG, in effect, is a civil litigator.

Every now and then, though, you see an attorney general or someone who wants the job stepping way out of bounds.

Exhibit A has to be the late Jim Mattox, a fiery Democrat who was AG in the 1980s. In 1989, Mattox decided to create a ghastly photo opportunity when the body of a University of Texas student was found in a grave in Matamoros, Mexico. In 1989, Mattox trudged through the mud at the death scene, declaring something to the effect that he would bring whoever committed the crime to justice.

It made for great pictures, except that it was irrelevant. The attorney general’s office would have next to zero influence in determining the outcome of that heinous act.

Of course, that was the year before Mattox launched an unsuccessful run for the Democratic nomination for Texas governor, a race won by then-state Treasurer Ann Richards.

Judges do the same thing all the time. They say they’re “tough on crime,” “tough on criminals.” I always thought judges are supposed to be totally without bias for or against either side. They’re supposed to be neutral when they try cases, aren’t they?

Whatever. I still will be waiting for some attorney general candidate along the way in this election cycle to make some kind of grand declaration about what he’ll do to fight crime.

I hope these fellows prove me wrong.