#TXLEGE: Sarah Davis does what she does

"Her feet go down to death,
Her steps lay hold of hell."
Proverbs 5:5

What can you say about Sarah Davis?!?  We attended this morning's Trib event...and it didn't break new ground.  She's who she is.

Evan Smith did a thorough job discussing the numerous policy differences between Davis and the majority of her party (including the Governor).  Topics included Abortion, Property Taxes, Hurricane Harvey, and Davis' welfare expansion bill from last year's special session.  This ground is well-tread, and everybody knows where everybody stands.

During Q&A, we asked Davis about the debacle on the Coaching Staff for the U of H football team.  Davis replied that she was "saddened" by the decision and didn't try to defend U of H's decision in any way, shape, or form.  We were satisfied by Davis' answer.

View the event for yourself below:



Highlights:

• Abbott letting lots of other's who opposed him off the hook.
• Note: See here and here.

• Plays the feminist card: "I'm a woman [Abbott] can't control."

• Argues semantics over late-term abortions: "We're not allowed to have thoughtful or nuanced positions."

• "I'm not pro-death."
• Evan Smith: "if you're explaining, you're losing."

• Has an obvious chip on her shoulder against Jonathan Stickland.

• Doesn't disclose who she voted for for President.
• Evan Smith: "Not disclosing is disclosing."

• Inside baseball crosstalk re: Spending and Ethics.

• Endorses Larson's unconstitutional bill to restrict the Governor's appointment powers.

• Long discussion of her welfare expansion bill from the special session.
• Sob Stories....

• Evan Smith makes several points about how Abbott has been talking out of both sides of his mouth on numerous issues.

• Uses the same cliches as Jen Sarver.

• "I think I'm necessary" in the legislature.

• Refuses to commit re: Speaker's race.
• "I adore Dr. Zerwas."

• In response to our question about the Kendal Briles hire: "Saddened by that decision."

CD-21: Nobody Stands Out in Cliche Filled Candidate Forum

"For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him."
Colossians 1:16

Last we, we wrote a blog post discussing the lack of creativity or intellectual bandwidth in the various races for open congressional seats across Texas; unfortunately, last night's candidate forum for the CD-21 race sponsored by the Travis and Hays County Republican parties was a textbook example of what we're talking about.

The forum was loaded with boilerplate Republican rhetoric: "Founding Fathers," "Constitution," "Cut spending [without specifics]," "Reduce regulation [without specifics]," "Strong Christian," "Rebuild the Military," "Ronald Reagan," "Servant Leadership," "Drain the Swamp."  Everybody hit their talking points.  But we hope you'll forgive for saying that, after hearing them repeatedly over the past decade, those talking points have become rather stale.

Instead, the candidates seem to be differentiating themselves based on resume and endorsements.  If we're going to play the resume/endorsement game, Chip Roy will win.  The man spent a decade in D.C., yet managed to escape with his soul and his integrity intact.  As for the others, nobody stands out.

Honestly, the most interesting candidate in this race is the worst one.  Jen Sarver is a loathsome political hack (aka. Bush crony) who made a name for herself several years ago by the depths to which she was willing to stoop to carry water for the UT Politburo.  What makes her interesting in this race, however, is that she's running as an unapologetic RINO.  In a race where 15 candidates are attempting to cram into the "conservative" lane, Sarver has the "moderate" lane to herself.  In a divided field in a district that includes Joe Straus' San Antonio stomping grounds, that might be enough to make the runoff.  This website does not support Jen Sarver's candidacy in any way, shape, or form...but we are nevertheless VERY curious to see how she ends up doing.

In terms of policy, the only candidate who (kinda, sorta) stood out was Matt McCall.  Matt endorsed using Article 3, Section 1 of the constitution to remove abortion and marriage from the Supreme Court's jurisdiction.  He also vaguely alluded to the need to abolish full cabinet departments.  On the other hand, Matt also supports placing immigration related sanctions on Mexico, a move that would be DOOMED to backfiring spectacularly.

We will also confess to a soft spot for Sam Temple, a longshot borderline-Anarchist who chided the other candidates for various stupid acts of fearmongring.

Bottom Line: Meh....