Get Kinky

I am writing to you as a Texan and as a voter. As such, I offer my congratulations to all of you for campaigns well run and political careers that have brought all of you to within shouting distance of the state’s highest office. Each one of you has much to be proud of. That said, polls close less than 24 hours from now, and it’s time for all of us who care about Texas do what’s best for its future. It is my hope that, after reading this letter, you will drop out of the 2006 gubernatorial race and join millions of Texans from across the political spectrum in casting your vote for Kinky Friedman.

It has been my privilege (55%) and my pleasure (45%) over the past few months to work with a talented (45%) and scarily committed (55%) army of volunteers and comically underpaid staffers in support of Kinky Friedman’s bid for the Governor’s mansion. I make no exaggeration in saying the following: these Kinky supporters have renewed and redirected my faith in politics, particularly Texas politics, in a way I would have told you was impossible a year ago. It is my belief that much the same is the case for disaffected voters statewide, that Kinky Friedman’s campaign has awakened something in the people of Texas: the kind of politics y’all practice has long since given up on awakening.

In a political climate too often characterized by divisive rhetoric, Kinky’s campaign has knocked down partisan barriers and wreaked unholy havoc upon conventional wisdom that defines Texas politics as an ugly, unattractive beast best left to the pathologically insincere and the criminally well-funded. For too long, we – and by “we” I mean “you” – have waged elections in entirely the wrong way, crafting messages for a given “base” and hoping that your small, unrepresentative sample of the population shows up in greater numbers than the other guy’s small, unrepresentative sample. A Kinky Friedman victory would entirely demolish the myth that this is the way to run for office. Imagine how much time y’all could save on micro-targeting and pollstering if your campaigns focused on all Texans, not just a small, pre-identified corner of an increasingly unhappy populace. Seriously, imagine it.

Two ringing (but hidden) endorsements from the Houston Chronicle-

According to an article in the Houston Chronicle, the evidence is laid out as to who the largest donors to each candidate are and their motives behind such donations. Rick Perry’s donors range from corporations like SBC, who received their own special legislative session to pass favorable regulations. Chris Bell’s donors are mostly lawyers seeking abundant face time and priority tobacco legislation as well as an energy executive. Carole Strayhorn, perhaps the equal in unethical donations to Rick Perry, has accepted MILLIONS of dollars from donors who just so happen to have tax cases pending in regards to her current office, Texas Comptroller.

In regards to Kinky Friedman, the article proclaims:

“Kinky Friedman is truly independent, and his top four contributors show it… if your sole criterion is that you want a candidate the lawyers and car dealers aren’t backing, Friedman’s your only choice.”

(read more)

This our earth is a beautiful place full of good feelings and memories worth holding on to. If you’re like me, most of those good feelings come from Jane Seymour, star of Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman. One non Jane-Seymour-smiling-alluringly-at-me feeling I’ve found I like is handing out a bunch of bumper stickers and buttons and junk to supportive Longview residents, including a cop who said he didn’t know anyone on the Highway Patrol who liked Rick Perry, then driving off from a relatively subdued-seeming crowd assembled for another candidate with people yelling “Go Kinky!” at us at every corner, passing Stella, Chris Bell’s anxious, lonely seeming bus on the way out of town, then driving to a rally that had twice as many people each of whom was four or five times as enthusiastic as the Bell supporters we had left behind and somewhere on the order of ten times as attractive. There was a moment of incalculable anxst as we passed the Chris Bell Sleepwalking To November 7th Express in which a dozen Dire Straits songs were written, performed to rapturous applause, and retired to the quiet desolation of a pair of broken hearts permanently missing vital pieces – the pieces they lost to each other.

At the end of the night, you dance with the person who brought you to the dance. Even at a time of unparalleled mudslinging in Texas politics, this is one rule of etiquette virtually every politician follows.

This is why it makes sense that Rick Perry and Chris Bell and Carol Strayhorn have spent much of the campaign bickering over whose financial backers are more detestable. Is it more dangerous to have one trial lawyer backing a candidate, as is the case with Chris Bell, or a whole platoon of them? Who’s worse, ethically speaking, the guy who’s major investors are profiting from the Trans-Texas corridor he helped implement, or the guy whose entire candidacy is predicated on big money from one source?

The answer, of course, is that we shouldn’t have to choose between these sort of candidates and these sort of backers. We don’t want any special interests purchasing our leaders – the idea that our major party candidates (and Grandma) think we should vote for them because the other guy’s buyers are worse is laughable. When Chris Bell (correctly) calls Rick Perry a hypocrite for attacking the man propping up the Bell campaign, he ignores the fact that Rick Perry can be hypocrite without Chris Bell being much better.

Kinky Friedman’s the only candidate in this race who’s drawn the vast majority of his support from average citizens. And he’s the only candidate, once the election’s over and he’s elected Governor, who’ll be loyal to those citizens come dancin’ time.

[...] In reality Chris Bell is no more a “true progressive” than Rick Perry is a “true conservative.” Both are politicians first, and leaders [some number much bigger than one] – as a result, they run to and from various voting blocs according to the demands of their re-election strategy. That’s why you can’t name an issue Chris Bell stands firmly behind – no such issue exists; modern party politics are not designed for visionaries, for people willing to take stands on truly progressive (or truly conservative) issues.

I’m not saying you have to be against equal rights for gay Texans to vote for Chris Bell. I’m just saying it doesn’t hurt. The Democratic party’s response to a candidate who outflanks them on issues important to Democrats is to try to suppress the voice of the very base they demand absolute loyalty from. It’s easy for progressives to make fun Log Cabin Republicans, but it seems the Democratic party has just as little respect for gay Democrats as their sister party does for gay Republicans. [...]

According to this Dallas Morning News article, Chris Bell’s considering maybe sorta taking another element of Kinky’s policy platform:

“In a perfect world we probably wouldn’t be talking about casino gambling, but ours is not a perfect world. We desperately need new revenue,” Mr. Bell said in Dallas. “We can either do that by requiring more businesses to pay their fair share, or we can seek the revenue from increased legalized gambling here in the state of Texas.”

Those of you who’ve been keeping score at home can add this to Chris Bell’s slightly altered version of Kinky’s renewable energy plan, his not-quite-what-Kinky-had-proposed-earlier pay increase for teachers, and his late-arriving support for Kinky’s plan to enforce immigration laws by going after those who employ illegal immigrants.

(more)