"Texas women have someone they can trust"

I'm attempting to find out how out of touch I am. I only knew who five of them were.

I only recognize five as well. Don't know a whole lot about 'em, except they're all tough Texas women!

Wasn't she in the "Dirty Thirty" with Gammage?

She should know that the 1977 vote they reference was about federal funding of abortions, and Gammage voted with both Gore and Gephardt.

Are we to suppose that these ladies don't trust Gore or Gephardt?

I assume like all of us, he voted for Gore, twice for vice-president and once for president. I also know for a fact, that in late 2003, Chris was a staunch supporter of Gephardt for president. All three, honorable men.

Liz Carpenter, Sarah Weddington, and Sissy Farenthold are.

Molly Beth Malcolm is the former chair of the Texas Democratic Party.

Peggy Romberg is the executive director of the Women’s Health and Family Planning Association of Texas (WHFPT), formerly the Texas Family Planning Association, and has held that position since September 1980. Prior to joining WHFPT, she was the first executive director of the Texas Abortion Rights Action League.

Rita Lucido is a Houston attorney and co-founder of Jane's Due Process, an Austin-based organization which legally advocates on behalf of Texas teenagers seeking a judicial bypass in order to obtain an abortion without notifying their parents.

Heather Paffe is the political director of the Texas Association of Planned Parenthood Affiliates.

Susan Hays is the former chair of the Dallas County Democratic Party.

Ginni Mithoff and her husband Richard are Houston philanthropists.

Karen Ostrum George is a Rice University trustee.

Beth Shapiro is an educational consultant and family counselor practicing in Lubbock.

Claudia Stravato is the CEO of Planned Parenthood of Amarillo and the Texas Panhandle, and has guest-blogged at Panhandle Truth Squad.

Especially for adding the links.

:thumbsup:

L-

Susan Hayes, although a good Democrat, lost the respect of many in Dallas county when she had the poor judgement to endorse a Republican nominee for judge ON DALLAS COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY LETTERHEAD. This endorsement, which made it into the Congressional Record, was therefore widely perceived as being an endorsement by the Dallas County Democratic party. Many on the Executive Committee took exception to this endorsement, and the subsequent controversy caused a hurtful rift and a lot of drama in the party, ultimately leading to Susan Hays' resignation.

All I'm saying is, people's credentials cannot be summed up in a line or two.

This thread, as well as other things I have heard this primary season, (NOT about this particular race), has made me realize just how important it is to get the entire story behind an endorsement, and not simply trust somebody because they have Democratic credentials.

That's weird.

before she was county chair? I bet she's hoping to be remembered for that, rather than her stormy tenure.

I don't know about the "lobbyist" part. And I'm sure that's why she signed the letter. But PDittie flagged her as "former chair of the DCDP" so I just wanted to put a little asterisk by that credential. ;)

helping to make my decision easier.

:thumbsup:

Which provided federally funded abortions for women on Medicaid.

If you're not old enough to remember, the issue at the time was not an issue about choice (that was never in question), but rather whether the federal government or state governments should pay for the procedure. Keep in mind that when this vote occurred, Gammage ( who was a liberal) represented the district which now belongs to Tom Delay.

It's the district I grew up in, so I know a little about the people Gammage was representing. A vote that spent money on federally funding abortion would not have been representing his district well. Choice was one thing (that was acceptable) -- spending issues (and the budget) were another.

In addition, I'd like to note that Democrats Al Gore, Richard Gephardt and iconic Texas liberal Jim Mattox all voted the same way Gammage did. Almost of the Texas delegation did too. I guess Sarah W.'s crew hasn't gotten over it.

If Bell is getting desperate enough to try to spin THIS 30-year-old vote his way, I suspect his campaign is suffering badly from lack of (fill-in-the-blank here).

A snippet from the Burnt Orange report:



http://www.burntorangereport.com/mt/archives/2006/01/gammage_critici.html#more

I got the original letter, by the way, from the Bell campaign. And I'm very interested to get this wider context from BOR.

Spare us the ad hominem, Kat. Here's the record. Contend it:



http://www.chrisbell.com/newsroom/010806_gammage_choice

I'm willing to accept -- from the candidate -- an explanation that his position has evolved. That would be an intelligent, logical thing for any thinking person to do.

I'm not willing to accept that the tenor of the times or the 'herd mentality' dictated his votes. That would be similar to the excuses people have made for the KKK membership of Robert Byrd, for example.

It's up to Bob to explain his votes now.

I am female, a Texan, a voter, a Democrat and old enough to remember what the Hyde Amendment actually was about. Old enough to have met and conversed with several of the women on Bell's list.

To quote Jim Dallas (a Bell supporter, BTW) who concludes is very interesting, specific and well-researched post at the BOR report:



I do disagree with the BOR poster that Gammage was a 'moderate conservative'. Maybe compared to a Massachusetts Democrat, but not for a Texas Dem. He lost the seat to now semi-famous and still crazy Libertarian/Republican Ron Paul. Since that time, the district has been redistricted to split portions into both Tom Delay's district and Paul's district. He was apparently NOT conservative enough to keep the seat.

As Jim Dallas points out in his piece, the Democrats were in charge of the House and the Leadership could have certainly seen this measure passed if they'd wanted to. Sort of indicates to me that MOST of the Democratic Party didn't agree with Sarah and the crew.

Mr. Dallas lays out a much more complete picture of all of the votes made during that session re: the Hyde Amendment than the cut and paste job you've offered. I think we've all learned to be wary of quotes/votes/comments taken out of context for the advancement of a personal or political agenda. The Republicans have been killing the Democratic party at the polls in Texas with the same tactics for years. It's sad to see Bell resorting to the same tactics as the corruption we're trying to get rid of.

All of this hype and innuendo sort of begs the question:

Does Chris Bell support federal funding of abortion or is it his position that states should be responsible?

Assuming that there is a point to this attack piece other than to be just an attack piece, it never actually says what Bell's position on the issue is. From this, I'd have to assume that he DOES support federally funded abortion.

And this is a political campaign, where the differences between the candidates are being appropriately pointed out so that the voters can make an informed choice.

A candidate's voting record is not 'hype' or 'innuendo'.

While the aforesigned make quite clear their opinion of Bob Gammage's voting record, their opinion is worth at least the same as everyone's else, including yours. Some people may consider the weight of their opinion significantly greater than yours -- and some less -- but that's for each of us to choose.

The record is posted so that everyone can arrive at their own opinion, and that includes the obnoxiously condescending Jim Dallas. "Ladies"? Twice? And inappropriately capitalized in the middle of a sentence? At a time when the US Senate might confirm a vicious misogynist to the Supreme Court, paving the way for overturning Roe, I would think that he could find more appropriate verbiage than "Ladies" to refer to the letter's signers.

And if you want to know Chris Bell's position instead of assuming it, it's published at his website.

Do your own research, and get the definitions of the words you use better understood. Because what you are now doing is attacking with hype and innuendo.

I got the Chris Bell email, too. And, another copy from a friend who said that this info on women's rights was important. Especially coming from the women listed. I only knew 5 of the names, too, but those 5 women are very big to me.

I, also, read the BOR. I was leaning toward Chris Bell before this letter. I am now firmly in his camp.

Thanks for posting this info. The DU discussion is great!

Your political insight is staggering. I'm convinced.

Let's see (by the numbers) why this is a swiftboat attack by the Bell camp:

1. The Ladies (what would you prefer that I call them?) complain that 30 years ago (or so) Gammage didn't vote their way on an issue that even the Democratic Leadership of the House didn't want passed.

2. The Ladies opt to send a letter castigating Bob Gammage for a position he held 30 years ago on a single issue (federal funding of abortion) that purportedly, Chris Bell doesn't hold today either. (When should we expect a letter from those same Ladies demanding Chris Bell support their position?) Otherwise, it's just an ad hominem attack, not an 'endorsement'.

3. The Bell campaign talks about 'pointing out differences', Now THAT's EXACTLY what Republicans called swiftboat attacks. I know that Chris's wife was a Republican political operative before she became ill, but I didn't think there were Republicans actually running his campaign. It's sure their style though.

4. The Bell camp throws out a list of procedural votes as though they are votes on the substance of the bill. Didn't we learn any lessons from the recent Murtha controversy on the House floor? Yes, that's when a "no" vote was in support of the Democratic position and a "yes" vote was the Republican position on an issue that intuitively should have been supported by the Democrats. All backward seeming, but hey, that's what procedural votes often are. Unintelligible unless you were there at the time to understand the intent of the procedure. Jim Dallas' analysis at the Burnt Orange Report was both fair and comprehensive, unlike the amateur, Republican-like swift-boating attempt made by the Bell campaign. (An aside: I honestly am astonished that you'd treat your friends like this. I should be glad you're driving them away, but it makes me sad for Democrats as a whole).

5. The Bell Camp has tried over and over to turn this into a negative campaign. First, snide little comments early on, then this egregious, over-the-top attack. Seems that maybe there ARE Mosbacher Republicans in the campaign.

Gammage has managed to resist the impulse to fire back (Good for him). He seems to understand that the enemy isn't other Democrats--something Bell can't seem to fathom. He's delivering an effective message to Texas voters, while Bell seems to think he can snark his way through the primary.

He's had a year to get his campaign in gear. It hasn't happened. He's had a year to deliver the Democratic message. He's managed to personally weaken the Democratic party in Texas so that traditional donors have turned to Carol 4+ names. He's finally committed the last bad act. Twisting the past to suit his own personal agenda (or ambition).

I'm actually beginning to believe that the biggest enemy of Chris Bell is his own campaign staff.

Comparisons to Swift boating and Republicans are waaaay out of line.

(An aside: I honestly am astonished that you'd treat your friends like this. I should be glad you're driving them away, but it makes me sad for Democrats as a whole)

And that's just plain nasty.

Rather than to respond to this series of rather ridiculous judgments -- such as blaming Chris Bell for Grandma's campaign war chest -- I think I'll leave the conversation at this:

Texas Democrats have an embarrassment of riches from which to choose in the March primary, and not just at the top of the ticket. Whichever candidates are selected by us will be representative of a worthy general election battle in the fall against the real foe.

I met Bob Gammage just this past weekend and found him to be an honest and genuine person, something lacking in lots of politicians. He answered all of the questions I previously posed, and did so straightforwardly. I don't think this is his race to win, and I really wish he had run for Lieutenant Governor, but if he wins the primary, I will wholeheartedly support him for Governor of Texas.

Chris Bell has endured ten times more ad hominem from Democrats so far in this campaign, and I see it as only getting worse. That's OK, because Bell can fight -- and win -- his own battles.

I am anxious to see the Gammage supporters express the same support for him as I have for Bob just now. And I wish I could say with confidence that I'm counting on it.

Smacks of the kinds of swift-boat tactics that the Repubs used against Kerry in 04.

1. Worse: The false implication that the vote in question was about "choice", when it was about funding.
2. Worser: The idea use of multiple procedural votes to leave a false impression that Gammage has not been a strong supporter of choice, rather than admitting it was a one-issue (federal funding of abortion) issue.

3. Worst: Denial of responsiblity by the 'campaign' that sent the email out that it was only an 'endorsement' for Bell when the exact same message was sent out by this exact same group of ladies (yes they are still ladies) when Bob ran statewide the last time. Rather than an endorsement for Bell, it's just another opportunity for them to take a swipe at Gammage for not voting their way 30 years ago. Sounds like a grudge on their part to me, not that they care about Bell one way or the other. Or didn't you know about that?



Well, you were the one who attacked Jim Dallas at BOR (who is a Bell supporter) because he rained on Bell's little smear campaign, not me. Maybe he's okay with that, I think it's low.



The Texas Trial Lawyers (a fundamentally DEMOCRATIC organization) is providing a huge portion of the Strayhorn war chest. In their estimation, Bell never stood a chance in November, regardless of the numbers game Bell's people kept trying to play with poll percentages. Thank God they haven't abandoned the down ballot Democratic candidates.



I've known Gammage for years and you're right, he's as straightforward as they come. Bell and his team of snarky campaign staffers can't and won't change that. Maybe that's something to keep in mind when you hear from those guys next time--take it with a grain of salt. It likely to only be half-true.... just like most of the rest of the things they've told you.



If you think Democrats have been mean to Bell, wait till the Republicans get hold of him. That is, if they don't ignore him altogether.

....Gammage supporters express the same support for him as I have for Bob....

If Bell wins the nomination, I'll vote for him. Kerry won the nomination in 04 and even though I thought it was the wrong choice, I worked to get him elected. Bob Gammage has made every effort not to engage in the same sorts of attacks that have been leveled at him by Bell. (Guess he doesn't feel he needs to)

So far, I haven't seen any reason to think that Bell cares one way or the other that I work for him come November. In fact, he seems (with these negative/snide attacks) to be doing everything he can to piss Gammage supporters off. Oh well, I suppose it's a tactic -- just not a winning tactic.

And now there's a pattern. Gammage's record is questioned; I get ad hominem directed at me from Gammageites.

You people are seriously the nastiest I've encountered online who aren't Republican.

Kat, when Bell whens, I promise I won't rub it in your face, and you can go vote for Kinky or Carole with a clear conscience.

I did notice that you didn't answer any of the questions I've asked or addressed any of my points

"rub it in my face...."

how..... adult of you....

You have personal attacks on me and other nasty shit. That's it. No points, just insults.

And you ought to be able to Google it up (unless you're just making it up). And who's posted the same unsubstantiated thing over at BOR? You or someone else?

I haven't made a personal attack towards you, I've been refraining in the interest of party unity.

I have been asking some pointed questions that you choose not to answer.....

Okay.... that's an answer too.

You must have had your memories of the 2004 primary season completely erased.

And I'd rather be referred to as a "Gammageonian", if you please.

Bell or Gammage, whoever wins the primary has my full support.

that you call them women. Since that's what they chose to call themselves.

no right to a say in what women -- or ladies or girls -- choose to call themselves, just as we do not as it regards a woman's right to choose whether to continue her pregnancy.

My personal experience was that 'ladies' was the condescension and 'women' the respectful term, and that comes from being raised by a strong, professional woman (a university professor and textbook author, now 80 and long retired) who was raised by a strong, professional woman (also a professor, of English at Loyola of Chicago, RIP).

If she wants me to call her 'lady', I'll call her 'lady', and with all respect and sincerity intended.

This vote does disturb me. And I agree with you PDittie on this, that herd mentality voting does not fly with us. You can't hide behind the votes of the rest of the Texas delegation. You have to be able to defend your votes.

I have a lot of respect for Sarah Weddington and Liz Carpernter, and telling us "older women" that we should just get over it? That's the absolutely WRONG thing to say to a Democratic woman. You won't win any votes over with that Texas_Kat.

A lot of us are still evaluating the candidates. I like them both. I do want Bob Gammage to explain this vote.

Sonia

I was saddened to see the Texas Democratic women's letter only because those are great women and I'd hate to see the governor's race dominated by a 30 year old vote on a federal funding for abortion.

Gammage has laid out his agenda:

* Raise the state minimum wage from $5.15 an hour to $6.50 an hour.
* Pass a state constitutional amendment guaranteeing every Texan the right to clean air and clean water.
* Pass an Ethics Reform Act to make it illegal for any state legislator or high agency official to become a lobbyist for at least two years after leaving state service.
* Pass a Corporate Responsibility Act to strengthen Texas regulatory and consumer protection agencies to stop price gouging in gas and utility prices and protect our citizens from corporate fraud.
* Pass a Texas Tax Reform Act. No more state taxes on the middle class unless we close the special corporate loopholes that save Rick Perry's yachting friends billions while ordinary families have to pay and pay.
* Work for a Prescription Drug Price Relief Act to regulate prescription drug costs and stop the gouging of consumers.
* Work for Affordable Health Insurance for all families in times of catastrophic illness and injury.
* Pass a Texas Excellence in Education Act to guarantee fair funding for every school district in Texas-with the standard set at "excellence" for all, not just an elite few.

<http://www.gammageforgovernor.com/>

Bell has laid out his agenda:

* Rebuilding Public Education (by creating a Bipartisan Commission on Public Education)
* Reducing Barriers to Higher Education (by ending tuition deregulation and making higher education a higher state funding priority)
* Honoring our National Guardsmen (by granting tuition exemptions and low-interest loans to guardsmen)
* Protecting Kids (by making the Child Protective Services system a higher state funding priority)
* Fighting for Rural Texas (by canceling Perry's Trans-Texas Corridor and banning over-the-counter sales of pseudophedrine to cut down on methamphetamine abuse)
* Healing the Sick (by promoting research on stem cells)
* Expanding Home Ownership (by opposing a real estate transfer tax)
* Finding Common Ground (by taking partisan politics out of the redistricting process to end gerrymandering)

<http://www.chrisbell.com/issues>

Both of these candidates have good ideas, and while both candidates are pro choice, neither campaign is narrowly focused on reproductive freedom or public funding for abortions. I am strongly pro choice, but I hope that people will support a candidate based on a broader range of issues instead of deciding the race based on one vote from 30 years ago.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/3584359.html

Perfectly handled, sir. That's good enough for me.

I'm feeling faint with excitement . . .

That does answer the question. It was a valid question. To me the issue of funding is where we started to lose the debate in Congress. Once we set the bar that poor women were not entitled to the same medical care that women with means did, we strayed from the path of protecting reproductive freedom. That was their strategy and you can see where it has gotten us. We have to stand up for what we believe for for everyone.

Sonia

I'll keep this one short, what about Felix Alvarado? I haven't heard anyone mention him as someone they could possibly trust to run our state. He is NOT a millionaire or a Lawyer, he is an educator in Ft. Worth. Shouldn't you give him a chance as well?

You can read more about him Here.

Thank you for your time.
FA3

We welcome all Democrats to this board. I actually met Felix and his sister Maria Luisa here in Austin in December. Both great folks. You are welcome to tell us more about Felix on this board. We do know he's running, and we have his web site linked in our Campaign Texas 2006.

Research Forum for Texas
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_oet&address=358x1727

Sonia

I think Felix will very likely force a runoff in the Democratic primary. It's a shame that as a full-time educator, he can only politic on weekends.

Do you have a contact within the campaign? There are lots of events over the next 45 days in Houston that he and Maria Luisa could attend on a weekend; two I will point out are a candidate rally on Saturday, February 25, featuring dozens of Harris County Democrats (at Drexler's BBQ downtown) and the State Senate District Meetings on March 25 -- also a Saturday -- with a big campaign rally and fundraiser for David Van Os that evening also.

These are both on the Harris County Democratic Party's events calendar, found in the sidebar menu here. It's a Yahoo planning calendar and can be opened as new window by clicking here.