No Kay Blog

Both Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn have the dishonor to be featured in this short piece from Sierra Magazine, Derricks for Dollars.

The average contribution to the 35 senators who voted with Big Oil was $161,382 between 2002 and '07, while the 58 senators who voted against it received $56,942.

The big pharmaceutical companies are surely celebrating their victory, but Medicare participants aren't. Here's the response from the AARP (emphasis added):

"Working Texans were poorly represented today in the U.S. Senate on this all important issue," said AARP-Texas State Director Bob Jackson. "Score one for the pharmaceutical industry and the power of their lobby."

Jackson said the bill would have put downward pressure on Medicare drug prices. Given the overwhelming support in both Texas and the U.S. for giving Medicare the power to negotiate, he said AARP will continue working so that the will of the people will eventually be heard.

"We are particularly disappointed with Sen. Hutchison's vote as this is a reversal from her previous vote in support of negotiating drug prices. Nearly 11,000 Texans called her offices and another 1,400 sent e-mails or faxes urging her to support the bargaining for lower prescription drug prices," said Jackson.

Sincere, non-snarky credit where credit is due: Sen. Hutchison was one of the 17 Republicans who broke ranks to pass legislation to ease the Bush administration's stem cell limits, with a final roll call vote of 63-34.

Note that Cornyn voted against that bill, though both of them voted for the "other" bill, Republican-sponsored and not veto-threatened legislation that also passed, with a vote of 70-28. When Cornyn tells everyone next year that he "voted for stem cell legislation", please remember it was this limited "sham" alternative.

For your enjoyment, a snarky, lambastic translation of selected quotes from Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison's recent address to a politics class at the University of Virginia. (Bonus: the picture of Kay featured in the story, though scaled down on that page, is an awesome 3,141 pixels wide by 1,902 pixels high. If you're looking for new wallpaper -- not computer desktop wallpaper, but real wallpaper-paste, on-your-house-walls wallpaper -- then this is perfect.)

When asked if she was interested in serving as vice president, Hutchison, responded with an emphatic "no," adding, "Who wants to be vice president?"

"Okay, time's up -- nobobdy? Nobody at all? Okay, I'm in," she kept herself from adding.

"It is the checks and balances, the rule of law ... [and the] resilience of our economy" that has kept our democracy strong, she said.

"Listen kiddies, the only checks and balances that I've ever needed to keep my democracy strong are the kind of checks that have lots of zeros on them, and the kind of balances the bank mails you once a month. And oh yeah, the law totally rules, doesn't it? Can we just say that, and leave it at that? I don't know why all these pesky Democrats want to waste time with nasty investigations and such. Seriously, someone's career could get hurt here."

Hutchison also stressed the "unhealthy atmosphere" and "partisanship" she believes exist in today's politics.

"We need some cooler heads right now," she said.

"Those Democrats are being mean to us. And we never did anything to them! Can't we all just get along? You know, like when we derailed the entire U.S. government to impeach Clinton for being naughty?"

Hutchison offered her opinions of potential candidates for the upcoming presidential election.

While she did not have a position on who will be nominated as the Republican candidate [not even to stress yet again that she won't run for Vice President in '08, which took a lot of willpower - ed.], she did offer some insight into likely Democratic candidates.

"I think Hilary [sic] [Clinton] will get the nomination, but I'm not willing to bet 25 cents on that," Hutchison said. "She has such a powerful infrastructure."

"I'm a woman, and Hillary's a woman. I have more campaign money than I know what to do with, and she has even more than that. Sheeeeit, that chick's loaded. You don't even know. I mean, wow. Seriously."

The senator also discussed frequent speculations that former Vice President Al Gore will make a potential run, and noted Sen. Barack Obama's strong chances.

"Personally, I'm hoping that dude who lost a couple elections ago tries again; that'd be a hoot. And that black guy? That is the only thing the guys up at the RNC are praying for harder than Hitlery to win the Democratic nomination."

Students were invited to ask questions concerning all facets of politics.

One student asked if states' rights were being infringed upon by modern government.

"I think the Federal government is encroaching upon states' rights too much," Hutchison responded. "I think we're going in the wrong direction and I am now a states' righter."

"I know this doesn't make a damn lick of sense, since my buddy George and those crazy-ass friends of his have run most of the Federal government -- except the military, obviously -- into the ground, but I heard some smart-looking people say this at a DC dinner party some years ago, and thought it sounded good.

"Also, if people wind up actually believing me about not wanting to run for Vice President, then it looks like I'll have to settle for Governor. So I better start saying things about, you know, states and stuff."

The guest lecture was not all business, though. Hutchison acted as a guest star in an episode of "Walker Texas Ranger" in 1997, prompting one student to ask about her experience working with Chuck Norris.

"Acting is a whole lot harder than it looks," Hutchison responded as the crowd laughed. "It was fun."

"It was hard, but since then I've had, um, lots of practice, uh, you know, acting. Almost every day, in fact. Apparently, I'm pretty good at it." [winks]

Via "Avenging Angel" on Daily Kos, a link to this short Crooks And Liars video clip of Sen. Hutchison on MSNBC. In it, she's discussing the political difficulties faced by leaders who drag their countries into tragic, unnecessary and never-ending wars, even when "the economy is going as well as it has been."

Her pro-war cheer continues:

We've got to see the progress, and know that we have done the right thing, that America has stayed strong, and that we are fighting for freedom for our children, every bit as much as in any war we've ever been in.

The Crooks And Liars post is titled "Kay Bailey Hutchinson hitting the mini-bar", and includes these snarky comments: "Sen. Kay Bailey must have had a few cocktails before she went on MSNBC," and "They will say anything, really—anything at all."

But I think this is really just clever wordsmithing on Kay's part. Replace "freedom" with "wealth, privilege and power", and replace "our children" with "my children". See? From that standpoint, it's an absolutely sober and 100% true statement.

I'll be the first to admit: I'm usually not very complimentary of Sen. Hutchison. I do tend to be critical of the way she represents some Texans (e.g., rich oil dudes, Halliburton, etc.) more than others (e.g., you, me, most people we know).

But today is different! Today Google News Alerts has brought these two gems into my inbox. Let it never be said that I never had kind words for Kay.

From the Galveston County Daily News, columnist Cathy Gillentine has this glowing review of our senior Senator's participation in the recent Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo Parade:

Our own Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison went riding down the street on a beautiful horse, looking every inch the Texan she is, superbly dressed in Western attire, superbly hatted.

In equitation parlance, she would be described as “having a good seat.” Which is not at all disrespectful, even of a senator. Especially not of a senator from Texas.

She looked very comfortable on a horse. According to the TV commentators, she comes down to Houston every year to ride in the parade.

Good for her. She is a doll, and we all ought to be proud of her.

See there? What could possibly make us more proud of our representative to the upper chamber of the world's lone superpower than, "she is a doll"? (Fits in neatly, actually, with those who think of her as a prom queen/cheerleader/sorority girl...)

Today's other bit of high praise has to do with more weighty policy issues:

The National Petrochemical and Refiners Association[1] praised efforts by Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison today to urge the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury to finalize implementation of the expensing tax provisions for refinery expansions contained in the 2005 energy bill.

..."The Energy Policy Act of 2005 has important tax provisions that will encourage refinery capacities expansions," said NPRA Executive Vice President Charlie Drevna. "These important regulations have been in the pipeline for more than 20 months. Refiners need these regulations in place to be able to make important investment decisions that will increase gasoline supply, provide additional energy security and reduce the potential stress for consumers in the future."

"In the pipeline"! Did you catch that? What a stitch! ROFLMAO!

But seriously, thank GOD for Sen. Hutchison's work on this. Those poor little oil companies, so close to bankruptcy, will now finally be freed of some of that onerous tax burden, and can start cranking up new refineries. Go ahead, breathe a sigh of relief. We'll soon have additional energy security. Plus, we won't have all that extra tax revenue to have to figure out what to do with. Whew. That was a close one.

__________________________
1. For the record, "NPRA members include more than 450 companies, including virtually all US refiners and petrochemical manufacturers. Our members supply... products includ[ing] gasoline, diesel fuel, home heating oil, jet fuel, lubricants and the chemicals that serve as "building blocks" in making everything from plastics to clothing to medicine to robber barons[2]."

2. Okay, maybe I changed that description a tiny bit.

Sen. Hutchison continues to faithfully toe the party line:

Without embracing Gonzales, Republicans pointed out that presidents are free to replace U.S. attorneys at will. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) noted on MSNBC that some of those who were replaced "haven't whined or complained about it" and added, "I think that there's a lot of politics, but I don't think it's just on one side."

As Glenn Greenwald amply argues, this is bull.

To suggest, then, that this controversy has arisen by virtue of some "double standard" -- prompted by nothing more than routine firings of U.S. attorneys which "Clinton did, too" -- is frivolous on its face. When Bush engaged in the routine matter of replacing all U.S. attorneys at the start of his administration, nobody objected.

The scandal derives from the highly unusual effort to cherry-pick prosecutors for firings, in the middle of an administration, for blatantly political purposes (as well as the subsequent false statements, including by top DOJ officials to Congress, about what occurred). It is true that Bush did what Clinton did -- back in 2001, when nobody objected. What he has done now is manifestly not what Clinton did (or any President other than, perhaps, Richard Nixon), which is what accounts for the scandal.

An opinion piece by Dave Fisher, a disabled veteran from Waco: VA chief mute on unbelievable claim.

All is not Oreos and milk, as you are being led to believe.

My question: Secretary Nicholson, where did you actually spend that money? Out of a $36.6 billion health care budget line item, the question is about $2.8 billion for vets’ mental health care. Where is it?

We veterans, as the sorry record shows, did not receive what was desperately needed in Waco.

Communications with Waco’s sister psychiatric hospital in Canandaigua, N.Y., show it didn’t either.

Further examination of VA budget information that I have, but which wasn’t easy to get, indicates a recurring bleeding off of veterans medical care funds.

Medical care took the biggest hit in proportion to an already inadequate VA budget under VA Secretary Anthony Principi. Small wonder he quit.

Waco is living proof of this.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Sen. John Cornyn had to know what was going on all this time. Yet they presented themselves as veterans’ champions in every dog and pony show down at Waco VA.

According to TVTechnology.com, Sen. Hutchison was named to the Science, Technology, and Innovation subcommittee of the Commerce Committee, now chaired by Democrat John Kerry.

According to the L.A. Times, New Congress leery of Bush's Iraq plans. Amazingly, that includes our own staunch warmonger, Kay Bailey Hutchison:

Many Republicans, who until recently have overwhelmingly backed his foreign policy, fretted that the administration's plans to significantly reduce sectarian violence in Iraq remained unclear.

"We need to know what the mission is and what it will take to do the mission," said Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Texas Republican close to the president.

A few months ago, Hutchison called for more troops in Iraq; on Thursday, she said she was unsure that would be the wisest course.

"This is a hard call right now," said Hutchison, who added that she had not had any conversations with the White House about Bush's announcement.

Those are wise words, which few would argue with. Too bad they're four years too late. Shouldn't we have known "what the mission is and what it will take to do the mission," before we started the mission?!

Well, even if it's because of the political pressure of a Democrat-controlled Congress, I guess it's better that she pull her head out later, rather than never.

An op-ed in The Washington Times, Senators should have shown them the money, has plenty of blame to go around to for the Republicans' loss of the majority in the congress that convenes next week. Concerning our two Texas Senators, these stats:

Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison won her 2006 election (62-36) and finished her campaign with $7.3 million in the bank. All she gave the NRSC was a $115,000 donation. Fellow Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn, who had $2.8 million in the bank on Sept. 30 in preparation for his likely cakewalk in 2008, gave the NRSC $50,000 in 2006.

Funny, isn't it, how Kay kept all that money? Because she's sworn up and down she won't run for Senate again. And she's also claimed that she's not interested in a spot as a Vice Presidential candidate. So... what's she saving up for?

Update: Looking back over previous posts, I see that I have been over this ground before (and with The Washington Times, no less), in an Oct. 25 post. Well, anyway, $115,000 is the amount they reported then, so we learn that she didn't make any last-minute contributions, either. Also, based on their numbers, she must have spent about $2.2 million on her own campaign.

Well, as expected by pretty much everyone who bothered expecting anything, Kay Bailey Hutchison won her latest popularity contest. I was not sitting down when I heard the race called, but that was okay - I didn't faint dead away. I knew it was going that way; you knew it was going that way; no surprise. But if Kay had turned up in a secret tax-dodging, land-for-teenage-boy real estate swap deal, funded by Jack Abramoff to build an al Qaeda training camp on the site of an orphanage and former Indian burial ground, well, we would've been ready for her.

I don't mean to be flip, and I certainly don't want to take away from Barbara Ann Radnofsky in the slightest. She's awesome. She's much, much more than an "anybody-but-Kay" candidate, she ran an admirable first-time statewide campaign and she'll hopefully still be my Senator someday.

I'll probably write a more detailed post-mortem of my NoKay.org efforts later. But for now I'll say this about my plans for this site. At the very least, I'll keep it up and available. The blog posts and new material will dwindle a great deal, but it will be here. If you have any feedback about the site or its future, or if you're interested in helping to keep it current with Kay's latest escapades, let me know.

Lastly, now that this election is over, I can reveal my true identity, and my true connection to the candidates: I'm really Karl Rove. Seriously, what I said from the start is true.

Whether it's completely accurate in every case, few would argue that popularity is a key trait in young women who are prom queens, cheerleaders and sorority girls. And in the case of a woman who was all three, like Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, there's certainly a common personality thread worth examining.

Think for a moment of a fictitious young woman, just graduated from the University of Texas, who has had all three titles. She was prom queen in high school, and a cheerleader at UT, and a member of Pi Beta Phi. After graduation, she's about to start a job as a TV news reporter. Now ask yourself: is this the type of person you would envision being a U.S. Senator?

If she did become a Senator, how do you imagine she'd act? Would she be strong and independent, or would she go along with everyone else? If she had an old buddy in the White House, would she blindly support everything he wants? Can you imagine her coming up with very many bold or innovative ideas? For that matter, do you figure she'd make much of a splash at all? Or would she quietly blend in with and file behind all the smart people, trying not to make a fool of herself? Socially, on the other hand, she's no dummy - she'd make some good, powerful friends, and she'd be sure to be nice to everybody. She'd cover the whole state with little pork-barrel presents. And she'd probably even be so nice to members of the other party, to ensure her popularity, that they'd be hard-pressed to criticize her.

Of course you can picture it, because that's what we have in Kay. You can hardly read anything about her in the press that doesn't rave about how she's gotten the highest number of actual votes ever cast in Texas for one candidate (never mind that it was against that damned idiot, perennial non-candidate Gene Kelly). And no article would be complete without naming her "one of Texas' most popular statewide officeholders".

And that's my point: she's still running a popularity contest. She still wants to be crowned with a tiara, voted Most Likely To, and have the party at her house. She isn't a leader. She isn't a Senator. She's Miss Popular.

The U.S. Senate is the deliberative chamber of Congress. It doesn't decide whether to have a DJ or a band at prom; it decides whether to send American soldiers to fight, kill and die in far-off lands. It doesn't argue which cheer will get the Longhorn fans pumped; it sets federal budgets that affect every man, woman and child in this country. It doesn't debate whether two kegs will be enough for the Spring Fling; it works to protect our national interests from every threat imaginable, from hurricanes, to terrorists, to greedy corporations, to a power-hungry Executive Branch.

Here's a telling quote from a typical Hutchison love-letter article:

"I've been able to help all of our cities and counties get the help they need in whatever is their highest priority," Hutchison said. "Sometimes that's drought relief or wildfire relief or hurricane relief. Sometimes it's a major public works project that's important for their particular area."

It's all fine and good to get Texans the federal money and help they need; that's certainly part of our Congressional delegation's job. But it's only part of their job. There's a heck of a lot more to it than favors and little bribes to "all of our cities and counties".

So here we are, two days before the election. If the polls are right by half, then Kay's going to be one of Texas' Senators for another six years. I've been writing this blog and this site since April, and I'm just now getting it. This is it - this is the lens that makes Kay make sense.

This is why she broke her own strident term-limit promises: she can't bear to walk away from a popularity contest, especially when she's expected to win easily again. This is why, even though she's a "senior Senator", she's never heard of nationally. This is why she votes so badly on all the issues: because all the other kids in her clique do. And this is why everyone likes her - because her full-time job is making everyone like her.

Well, not to get to eloquent here or anything, but that sucks. I want a Senator who knows her stuff, and is smart, and tough, and will work for the interests of all Texans. She should get along with people, sure; that's great, too. But it's not enough by itself, not for a U.S. Senator. What I want, really, is a Senator very much like Barabara Ann Radnofsky.

Semi-interesting and slightly ironic postscript: The very first post on the No Kay blog inadvertently nailed this. I even called it a "tenuous connection", but now I see it's the perfect symbol of Senator Hutchison.

There's a lot of information on NoKay.org about the job Kay Bailey Hutchison has done representing the people of Texas and the U.S. in her career. This new scorecard of scorecards shows all the averaged, career scores from all the ratings referenced on the site. See at a glance what a poor job Sen. Hutchison has done for us in the U.S. Senate.

Not all American workers are represented by a union, but they still represent the workers of this country. And according to three of the biggest and most influential, the AFL-CIO, the IBEW and the AFSCME, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison is not representing the working men and women of Texas and the U.S. All three of these unions give her a career rating of 7.5% or less.

Accompanying a recent Houston Chronicle article on the Radnofsky/Hutchison race, this picture:



The Chronicle's caption reads, "Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, center, mingles with President George Bush and District 22 candidate Shelley Sekula-Gibbs during Bush’s visit to Sugar Land on Monday." Somehow they managed to write that without any terms such as "lickspittle", "toady", "sycophant", "brown-noser" or "doormat" - and congratulations to them on their restraint.

So if you ever wondered what the face of a U.S. Senator who rubberstamps the Bush Administration 96% of the time looks like, well, now you know. At a time when Bush is so unpopular and toxic that he practically glows in the dark, here is Texas' senior Senator, openly fawning all over him.

Truly, if you like Dubya, you'll love Kay.

Kay Bailey Hutchison is Chairman of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Subcommittee, as well as a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee. But it seems that veterans themselves don't think much of the job she's done.

The first exhibit is an editorial by Dave Fisher, a disabled veteran in Waco, So generous, Madame Senator.

To Hutchison's claim in her debate with Radnofsky that "Bush has increased veterans spending by 20 percent since he was elected," Fisher is skeptical:

That’s hard to believe. In fiscal 2001, Bush ordered a 28 percent cut in discretionary spending. By review, that includes us veterans. If we were somehow excluded from that directive — with such things as defense and entitlements off the table — then whatever veterans were getting in additional funding was getting carved away by 3 percent inflation each year.

And then there’s the matter of the staggering numbers of veterans and disabled veterans being created by wars on two fronts in the Bush years.

Take wars and inflation out of the equation and Hutchison’s claims still don’t add up.

Fisher ends his article about Hutchison's performance on veteran issues in disgust: "I am sick and tired of twisted and manipulated Republican statements and policies that skirt the debt owed to those who have sacrificed so much."

And he isn't alone in his criticism of Madame Chairwoman. The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) just released a Congressional rating guide, covering more than 300 votes over the last six sessions of Congress "on issues that matter to America's men and women in uniform, our new veterans and our military families." Sen. Hutchison received a score of "D+".

"Every member of Congress claims to support the troops, but this guide shows us that more often than not, the rhetoric does not match the reality," said Paul Rieckhoff, an Iraq War veteran and the founder and executive director of IAVA: Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. "A legislator's low score can be directly linked to the unnecessary hardship that US troops, Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans, and military families often face. There is no excuse for a low score."

"Our nationwide network of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans have expressed overwhelmingly consistent positions on issues ranging from VA funding, to body armor, to TRICARE health insurance for National Guard and Reserve troops," Rieckhoff said. "IAVA used those positions to determine whether each member of Congress has been a friend, or foe, of our men and women in uniform."

While a D+ is a lot better than some of Kay's other scorecard scores, it still sounds like more of a "foe" than a "friend" to me. And given her high-ranking involvement on these committees, shouldn't she be getting an "A+"? And if she's doing this poorly representing this one particular group that she has special responsibility for, you can just guess how she's doing for everyone else.

San Antonio's MySA.com has a full-on Kay Bailey Hutchison love fest article up, Republicans glad Hutchison is atop ticket. If you can stomach it to the end, you'll find some interesting non-answers from Kay on her future political career. It's a different story than her recent insistence that this third term would be her last (emphasis added):

After settling in for the short drive to the Marriott Rivercenter, Hutchison talked about her future after Nov. 7, if she wins.

Hutchison said her third term almost certainly will be her last.

"I'm not taking a firm position," she said, "but I don't think (seeking a fourth term) is in the cards."

Allow me to translate - "I realize now that I really put my foot in it 12 years ago by being so blunt about term limits. No time like the present to start sowing the seeds for Hutchison in 2012! Also, better leave some wiggle room in case the White House '08 people call."

In the meantime, Radnofsky has taken Hutchison to task for running this time, noting that in 1994 she said she'd serve no more than two terms.

Hutchison said Sen. Phil Gramm's retirement in 2002 changed her plans.

"A lot of the reason is we had a new senator and I wanted Texas to be a strong position with one senior person," Hutchison said. "And if things go as I think they will, Texas will have Sen. (John) Cornyn and have a strong, more senior person, and be in good shape."

I'm not sure what to make of that last statement. Does she just mean Cornyn will be "more senior" by then? Or if "things go as she thinks they will", will Texas have Cornyn and some other "strong, more senior person"?!

The latest congressional scorecard is out from Human Rights Campaign (HRC), "to inform the public about where congressional leaders stand on policies important to the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community." The Dallas Voice reports on the results for the Texas delegation: Few Texas lawmakers score well on gay issues.

The Senate bills and votes included:

• S.J. Res. 1 — the Federal Marriage Amendment
  
• confirmation of Judge William Pryor
  
• confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito
  
• S. 403 — the Lautenberg Amendment to the Child Custody Protection Act
  
• S. 311 — the Early Treatment for HIV Act (co-sponsorship)
  
• S. 1278 — the Uniting American Families Act (co-sponsorship)
  
• S. 1145 — the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act (co-sponsorship)

As my headline already gave away, our senior Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison got a big, fat zero. Not her first, either: she scored zero in 2004 as well. (Contrary to the Dallas Voice article, she actually didn't get a zero in 2002, although the 29% she received instead isn't much better.)

The HRC website has copies of the 2002, 2004 and 2006 scorecards.

It's like a hot new dance craze: Sen. Hutchison continues to be in the news for her attempted backpedaling from the disastrous invasion of Iraq in last week's debate.

The Washington Post is one of many outlets that picked up the Associated Press story.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, one of President Bush's most ardent loyalists on the war in Iraq, voiced her strongest criticism yet of the administration's reasons for going to war.

In a debate with her challenger in the Nov. 7 election, Hutchison, R-Texas, said she would not have voted for war had she known there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. But she also made it clear she does not support troop withdrawal.

"If I had known then what I know now about the weapons of mass destruction, which was a key reason that I voted to go in there, I would not vote to go into Iraq the way we did," Hutchison said.

There's more coverage in this week's Austin Chronicle, which does a nice job of cutting through Kay Bailey's BS. In response to her claims that Bush was also misled by bad intelligence, the Chronicle says:

We might recommend our senior senator read Ron Suskind's biography of former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, The Price of Loyalty, wherein O'Neill exposes how the Bushites were planning the invasion eight months before 9/11, or even the infamous Downing Street memo, wherein British senior ministers secretly expressed concern that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy" of the Bush administration.

They also call her on the claims that weapons inspectors didn't have access to Iraq after 1998, and label her reference to 9/11 a "perfunctory invocation of That Horrible Event That Had Nothing to Do With Iraq".

According to The Washington Times, Kay Bailey Hutchison is being pretty stingy with her massive campaign warchest.

Mrs. Hutchison, one of the top Republican leaders in the Senate, has $9.5 million on hand, and polls in Texas show her trouncing her opponent by 20 points or more. She has given $115,000 to the NRSC, a little more than 1 percent of her campaign holdings.

But golly, if this is her last term (wink wink!), and she's just not interested in shooting for Vice President in 2008 (nudge nudge!), then what on earth is she keeping all that cash around for?

This article on KHOU, Hutchison race puts Texas Democrats in a bind, is from a couple weeks ago, but it still has me steamed. It details the spinelessness and lack of party support of several members of the Texas delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives.

According to the article,

Ms. Radnofsky said she's gotten "good help" from Texas Democrats in Congress and alleged that Ms. Hutchison has privately chewed out several who expressed support for their own party's nominee... "They have to be more than diplomatic," Ms. Radnofsky said. "The fact that they won't go on record criticizing someone who may take out her annoyance at them by punishing their districts is understandable. It's an interesting way to govern, isn't it?"

Here is the roll for next session's Kay Bailey Ass-Kissing Caucus. I include the "D" for each representative, so you don't forget that these are actual quotes by actual Democrats, not, as you might otherwise think, pro-Hutchison campaign ads.

• "Senator Hutchison is very involved in the state of Texas and is keenly aware of Texas' needs and works collaboratively with House members on delivering to Texas on some of our crucial concerns." - Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Houston
  
  
• "She's doing a really good job, works with us." - Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-El Paso (When asked who'll get his vote, Reyes laughed, said, "I've got a committee hearing," and walked off.)
  
  
• "I won't be out campaigning against her... I've known her a long, long time. And I am really not one that wants to go out and work against colleagues I work with, unless they have committed something really serious." - Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Dallas
  
  
• "It's no surprise to anyone that as a Democratic officeholder I'm voting for Democrats on the ticket, but I'm not getting directly involved in the Senate race." - Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco
  
  
• Rep. Rubén Hinojosa, D-Mercedes, when asked whom he's voting for: smiled, gave a thumbs up – and walked away, wordless.
  
  
• [When asked if his praise of Kay Bailey amounted to an endorsement:] "No, no, no, no, no, no," he said, adding, however, "I don't even know who Barbara is." - Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo
  

It's just politics, right? Having to work with Sen. Hutchison, getting along with her, respecting her - that's all fine. I'm sure she's really very nice. The problem is, she's approximately 100% wrong on approximately 100% of issues that matter to Democrats. And you can bet that neither she nor any other red-blooded Republican would pull any punches if the roles were reversed.

Anyway, is it really that hard to support your own party's candidate without going out on some kind of "Kay-is-the-devil" limb? Of course not. In fact, there are some good guys in the story who manage it just fine. Allow them to demonstrate how one maintains political civility without giving aid and comfort to a general in the opposition army:

• San Antonio Rep. Charlie Gonzalez said "I have a good relationship with Senator Hutchison," but he also donated $500 to Radnofsky's campaign in March. He went on record saying Ms. Radnofsky has "great intelligence, keen insight," and they share a political philosophy.
  
  
• Austin Rep. Lloyd Doggett expressed "wholehearted support [for Radnofsky]," saying: "I like Barbara. It's clearly a very difficult race for her, and I think she's handled herself admirably."
  
  
• Houston Rep. Gene Green, said he will vote a straight Democratic ticket, and that his party shouldn't hesitate to work for Ms. Hutchison's defeat.
  
  
• Rep. Solomon Ortiz of Corpus Christi, the longest-serving Texas Democrat in Congress, was the most outspokenly critical, expressing "respect" but complaining that Ms. Hutchison worked against him on some funding he tried to win for his South Texas district.
  
  "We've had our differences," he said. "I think since the Republicans have taken power and control of everything, they think they don't have to talk to Democrats. They think they can do it on their own. This is not good for Texas."
  

This week's issue of the Austin Chronicle lists their endorsements. These include, of course, an endorsement in the U.S. Senate race. Good ink for Barbara Ann; bad ink for Kay Bailey. What's not to like? I'll just swipe that whole part of the article, and highlight my favorite parts.

Newcomer Radnofsky is exceptionally qualified – welcome news for those of us in the "anyone but Hutchison" camp. The Houston attorney-mediator has done an exceptional job of laying out solutions. She advocates a timetable for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. She stands ready to support our troops after they come home, aggressively pushing for greater VA care. She promotes energy independence and pushes for renewable energy. She opposes the enormous Perry boondoggle that is the Trans-Texas Corridor. She supports a sensible immigration policy. And she's also run a dedicated and energetic statewide campaign, with too little help from her party.

Republican incumbent Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison has accumulated plenty of powerful seniority since 1993 – but in the service of an agenda that is completely wrong for Texas and the nation. While Hutchison is considered a GOP "moderate" (largely on abortion), she largely marches in lockstep with the radical Republican right. She continues to help promote the Great Lie – that the U.S. invasion of Iraq had something to do with fighting terrorism. Closer to home, Hutchison not only voted for the irrational border fence but supported a nonsensical proposal to allow peace officers from any community to enforce immigration law. On the environment, Hutchison's record is abysmal: According to the League of Conservation Voters (hardly a radical group), on key green votes during her Senate tenure, she has taken the pro-environment position only 4% of the time. She stood staunchly by Tom DeLay, praising him to the end, denouncing his prosecution on "technicalities," and donating $5,000 to his legal defense.

This is not the record of a moderate. Hutchison needs to go.

Well, that was pretty good! It's sure a shame there aren't going to be more.

It certainly showed that Barbara Ann is a very serious candidate. Viewers who don't want to vote for Kay Bailey (aka, My Favorite People In The World) now realize they have a great alternative that they can be excited about. And with Barbara Ann clearly on the offense about a wide range of issues, hopefully that will help shape the campaigns over these last few weeks.

Though as with most debates, I'm afraid it probably didn't change many minds that were already made up (except perhaps for people who were going to vote for that poor, hapless Libertarian guy). I have to grudgingly admit that Kay held together pretty well under the onslaught.

My personal favorite moment? That's a tie. One was when the panel asked Sen. Hutchison about her broken term limit pledge, even quoting back to her the t-shirt quote. The other was when Barbara Ann said, "For anyone to say that Rhode Island has the same infrastructure needs is not from this planet," echoing the exact same thought, with the exact same example, that I had shouted at the TV mere seconds before.

Lastly, thank god I didn't play the debate drinking game where you drank every time Kay said "cut & run". I'd have been dead of alcohol poisoning before the thing was half over.

Update: C-SPAN has now has the debate video (RealPlayer format).

Via the Austin Chronicle, news that the League of Conservation Voters (LCV) has released their scorecard for the just-finished 2nd session of the 109th Congress.

Sen. Hutchison has received a zero.

Too bad, too; she'd really been climbing the last few sessions - why, she almost broke double digits there a couple years ago. I haven't updated the environmental votes page yet, but that brings her career conservation voting percentage to 3.4%.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the universe, we have her challenger, Barbara Ann Radnofsky, and her Sierra Club endorsement.

It's finally here - the one and only Senate debate between Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Barbara Ann Radnofsky is today, Thursday, Oct. 19.

It will be taped and broadcast at 9:00 PM (Central Time) on every PBS affiliate in the state, as well as C-SPAN.

There are debate-watching parties around the state; the one in San Antonio will feature Barbara Ann in person.

Tell a buddy and bring a friend!

Speaking of TV - if you're looking for the KHOU "Connection" footage I wrote about in a previous entry, you now have to go to YouTube to find it. (I'm not sure why they moved it off of RadnofskyVideo.com; bandwidth costs maybe? And I sure don't know why they don't at least have a link to YouTube from there!)

Via Texas Kaos, a nice write-up on Barbara Ann Radnofsky in today's Austin American-Statesman (use BugMeNot if they bug you for a registration).

Radnofsky is bold in her independence, too. She said if she had made up her mind to vote one way, it would stay that way even if the political winds changed.

"You've never met anyone as independent as I am," she said. "I've done what I've done in this campaign independently. And the progress I have made is thanks to the hard work and grass-roots efforts and not due to the intercession of major lobbying."

"She would not be a rubber stamp for anybody, including her own party," Stallings said.

This one's worth forwarding to anyone you know who might swing their vote or some cash her way. Also a nice opening for letters to the editor about the candidates stands on the issues.

From a Radnofsky campaign press release, a link to video (Windows Media) of a recent interview of Barbara Ann on "The Connection", a show on KHOU, the Houston PBS affiliate. It's split into two thirteen-minute halves, and is labeled "BAR's appearance on PBS", dated Oct. 9.

Apparently The Connection's two hosts are supposed to represent a right-wing and left-wing pair. I personally found them both such dopey buffoons that they were hard to watch. Thankfully, however, Barbara Ann is given a good amount to time to speak.

And boy, does she. She is very confident, in control, firm and knowledgeable. It really is a first-rate performance, and I was very impressed. I think the figure she cuts here lends credibility to assertions that Sen. Hutchison is afraid to debate her in front of an audience, or even more than once. It's conventional wisdom that incumbents who are ahead in the polls have nothing to gain and lots to lose in debates with challengers. But in this case, I think Kay's campaign knows she'd get pounded.

This site and this blog are all about Kay, not focused on Barbara Ann. But if you'll watch at least a few minutes of this performance, you'll see that voting for Barbara Ann Radnofsky for U.S. Senate on Nov. 7 is much, much more than a "no Kay" vote - it's a chance to have a strong, smart Senator who represents the interests of Texans and Americans far better than Kay ever has. And please, pass this along to as many people as you can.

As you read accounts and analysis on every website under the sun today about North Korea's nuclear test, please keep in mind what Kay Bailey Hutchison and the administration she obediently follows did to stop it. Jack squat.

Or maybe that should be, "Iraq squat".

The folks in McAllen don't seem to think too highly of Kay's "border fence". That's according to this article on Themonitor.com: Local leaders trash border fence.

Plans to build a more than 200-mile border barrier from Laredo to Brownsville could do more social, economic and environmental harm for the Rio Grande Valley than it will do good for the nation’s border security.

That seemed to be the prevailing view among political leaders, economic boosters and local residents here in the McAllen area Sunday, two days after the Senate approved the measure.

...The fence measure passed the Senate with overwhelming support Friday, sailing through on a vote of 80-19 with help from Texas Sens. John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison.

..."I’m just amazed at what's happening," the mayor said. "I'm reminded of when Jesus Christ was sitting on the cross and he looks up to the Father and says, 'Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.' And I think that’s where we are here."

...[Executive vice president of the McAllen Economic Development Corp. Mike] Allen said he doesn’t know a single business leader or elected official anywhere from the Lower Rio Grande Valley all the way up to El Paso who supports the measure.

“It’s just unthinkable in terms of relationship with Mexico, our second largest trading partner,” he said. “I think we’re all for limiting immigration and having people follow the law, but this is just the wrong way to go about it.