Rick Noriega rocks. He's the Democrats' best chance of taking back this seat that we're ever going to get. A Hispanic in a state that is 37% Hispanic. A war veteran, and not Vietnam but Afghanistan. He is still an active officer in the reserves. He's solid on the issues, and he's running against the only politician stupider than Bush. It's a no-brainer. Give him money. We need it. Corn on the cob has got $13 million and counting.
It's a little disappointing to see the DSCC not doing very much to target the Texas race. I can tell you from the ground that we are so close, but we need help, especially money. The Texas Democratic Party isn't much help either. They seem to only be able to focus on one county at a time. So we need help from every blog we can get.
I can use that money a helluva lot more than her campaign can, but donating that money represents unity for me. It's time we all move past the primary wars. And I want those small business vendors to get their invoices paid. I think I'll write a restriction on my donation (if that's allowed) that in no way can this money pay for any debt owed to Mark Penn. I loathe that guy.
I respect this question, and it's a fair question, although I don't believe that Obama's campaign not being sexist is dependent on Clinton's surrogates not being racist.
I still believe that the Cintons are RACIAL, which is different from being racist. Racist is believing that blacks or other minorities do not deserve the same treatment as whites or the majority race. I don't by a long shot believe the Clintons are like this. They have marched in civil rights movements and fought valiantly for civil rights. However, many of their comments recently have pushed me to believe that they are racial, which basically in layman's terms means that they still have hang ups with black people. A lot of people still have unfounded hang ups with black people. But this type of attitude is something we should work towards getting past as a society. (And stating this does not mean that I don't deny that many men and women, while not necessarily sexists, are genderists, which means they support traditional gender roles or have hang ups about people going outside their traditional gender roles.)
I hope this comment doesn't offend you. I'm trying to take a stab at genuinely answering your question.
How are these comparable? Did you even read the diary?
If Hillary were to pick Ford in a lame attempt to pacify the black community, yes it would be pandering. If Barack picks Sebelius in attempt to pacify women, yes it is pandering.
Do you understand the flaw in your argument? The whole point of this diary is that Barack would not be picking a woman for Veep simply because of her gender. He would be picking her based on her qualifications. I thought that was the whole fucking point of Hillary's campaign. Experience. Or was it only about gender?
2. Your first action should have been to file a challenge in your precinct back in March. You can report that challenge to your respective candidate's campaign, but they have no recourse. They can provide campaign lawyers to help you with the challenge, but it is your responsibility to detail the challenge to your county party. If you neglected to file a challenge, then you have no recourse. An "incident report" filed to a campaign is not a recognized challenge in the Democratic Party, let alone the Texas Democratic Party.
You don't even live here. No, I'm sorry, let me say that in a different way.
YOU DON'T EVEN LIVE HERE!
I'm so tired of your diaries trashing Texas based on hearsay. No, a blogger's reputation is not deemed as evidence. We have a process to address alleged abuse. Someone in the precinct or the SD files a challenge and it is heard by the state credentials committee, which is completely balanced in terms of partiality towards Obama and Clinton. There is a deadline to file a challenge. If they didn't file the challenge by the deadline, then it's not admissible. Period. And even if they alleged abuse happened, no laws were broken. Court precedence clearly indicates that political parties settle their own disputes within their own rules of governance.