Limited government? What's that?

So, Mr. Limited Government, what should we do about the budget shortfall in Texas?

Cut funding for public education, you say. Really? Is that the best option we can come up with? You want to lay off teachers and ease up on class sizes? What kind of message does that send out?

How about reducing the amount the taxpayers spend on security details for the governor when he's not conducting state business? You know, set an example.

In September 2011, Gov. Rick Perry spent almost $400,000 on security details traveling around the country sticking his foot in his mouth and coming in below "Other" in the polls. Since his reelection in 2010, Gov. Goodhair has racked up more than $750,000 in security expenses for his travels outside the Lone Star State.

If Gov. Perry is willing to be so hypocritical when it comes to spending your money, just what the hell do you think you're in store for if he makes it to the White House? He is more than happy to spend your money chasing a pipe dream but he can't be bothered to find money to restore funding to public schools.

So, Gov. Perry, why don't you take a few minutes and explain to us your vision for limited government?

P.S. I understand how you might need to wait for your speechwriters and press people to stop by and drop off your talking points because God knows it's hard work making George W. look like a genius.

Defending the indefensible

The other night (at yet another televised "debate") three GOP presidential hopefuls, Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann and our own Rick Perry, voiced their support for torture. Mr. Perry even went so far as to say waterboarding was an "enhanced interrogation technique."

Arizona Senator John McCain had the courage to say what few in the GOP (aside from Ron Paul) are willing to:

"Waterboarding is an affront to all of the standards that we believe in and adhere to of humane treatment of people who are human beings, and of course I am disappointed in the statements that were made," said McCain on CNN's "John King USA" Monday.  

McCain argued that waterboarding is illegal, harms the United States’s moral standing in the world and doesn't help gather reliable intelligence. 

Of course no one likes terrorists and who really gives a shit if you torture them to extract information? They're not even human, right?

At least that's the way in which the question is framed. But I don't care how you frame the question. Torture is wrong. It's demeaning, both to the person being tortured and to the person carrying out the torture.

The use of torture is an example of what Jeff Gamso would call "the Law of Rule." It is a fundamental affront to our notion of justice. If it's okay to torture alleged terrorists, how much of a reach is it to justify torture with someone accused of kidnapping a little child?

The use of torture is a violation of a suspect's Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. It violates the Geneva Convention. Members of the German and Japanese hierarchy were hung after World War II for their use of torture during the war.

From the mind of Gene Roddenberry, here is a transcript from the Star Trek: Next Generation episode entitled "Chain of Command, Part 2" that aired in December 1992. In this episode, Capt. Picard was taken prisoner by the Cardassians and taken to a secret location for interrogation by Gul Madred.

MADRED: Oh, you're awake. Have something to eat. I insist. Boiled taspar egg. It's a delicacy I'm happy to share with you.  

(Madred gives Picard a knife to slice the top off the very large egg, but this one isn't boiled. The contents are still alive and moving. Picard downs it in one)  

MADRED: Wonderful. Wonderful. I like you, human. Most people become ill at the sight of live taspar. I remember the first time I ate a live taspar. I was six years old and living on the streets of Lakat. There was a band of children, four, five, six years old, some even smaller, desperately trying to survive. We were thin, scrawny little animals, constantly hungry, always cold. We slept together in doorways, like packs of wild gettles, for warmth. Once, I found a nest. Taspars had mated and built a nest in the eave of a burnt-out building and I found three eggs in it. It was like finding treasure. I cracked one open on the spot and ate it, very much as you just did. I planned to save the other two. They would keep me alive for another week. But of course, an older boy saw them and wanted them, and he got them. But he had to break my arm to do it.  

PICARD: Must be rewarding to you to repay others for all those years of misery.  

MADRED: What do you mean?  

PICARD: Torture has never been a reliable means of extracting information. It is ultimately self-defeating as a means of control. One wonders that it's still practiced.  

MADRED: I fail to see where this analysis is leading.  

PICARD: Whenever I look at you now, I won't see a powerful Cardassian warrior. I will see a six year old boy who is powerless to protect himself.  

MADRED: Be quiet.  

PICARD: In spite of all you've done to me, I find you a pitiable man.  

MADRED: Picard, stop it, or I will turn this on and leave you here in agony all night.  

PICARD: Ah! You called me Picard.  

MADRED: What are the Federation's defence plans for Minos Korva?  

PICARD: There are four lights. (Madred uses the agoniser.)  

MADRED: There are five lights. How many do you see now?  

PICARD: (in agony) You are six years old. Weak and helpless. You cannot hurt me.  

MADRED: How many?  

PICARD: Sur le pont d'Avignon, on y danse

Fear has never been an effective tool of control. In order for it work, the level of fear must be ramped up constantly. In regimes across the Middle East and Africa, those dictators who held onto power through their use of fear have either been force out or are hanging on by their fingertips. All the use of fear did was fuel dissent - and once that dissent reached a critical mass, the game was up.

We're better than torture. Those who defend it are appealing to the lowest common denominator in our electorate. In the race to the bottom, Cain, Bachmann and Perry have the inside track.

New members appointed to Texas forensic science panel

It's out with the old and in with the new on the Texas Forensic Science Commission as the Fair-haired One appointed three new members and reappointed an existing member.

The new members are Tarrant County ADA Richard Alpert who replaces the governor's bagman, Williamson County DA John Bradley; Dr. Vincent DiMaio, former Bexar County medical examiner who replaces Dr. Norma Farley, chief forensic pathologist in Cameron and Hidalgo counties; and Mr. Bobby Lerma, a criminal defense attorney from Brownsville (and former president of the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association) replacing Tarrant County defense attorney Lance Evans. Tarrant County medical examiner Dr. Nizam Peerwani was reappointed and will serve as the commission's chairman.

It's a damn shame, as Grits for Breakfast points out, that the commission has been emasculated by the governor in his quest to prevent any public proclamations that the State of Texas murdered an innocent man when Cameron Willingham was put to death.

Unless the commission is allowed to reopen old cases to determine whether proper safeguards were taken to prevent people from being convicted on the basis of junk science, there is little purpose for the body. I understand Gov. Perry's reluctance to allow the commission to look into old cases because news of another innocent man sent to his death as a result of bad science would be the final blow to his sinking presidential campaign.

There is no doubt that there are men and women behind bars who were convicted on the basis of junk science that should never have seen the inside of a courtroom. That is something that should never be allowed to happen again. There are too many "experts" in pseudo-scientific pursuits who are allowed to sit in the witness chair and tell a jury why they should convict the person sitting next to the defense attorney. This needs to stop now.

A properly functioning commission can educate judges on what distinguishes good science from bad science.  But, in order to do so, the commission must be allowed to investigate old cases and non-accredited disciplines - after all, most of the junk science issues involve such "sciences" as bullet material analysis and tire track analysis.

Welfare: Rick Perry-style

It would appear that our local leader of the limited government movement, Gov. Rick Perry, has a bit of 'splaining to do over the travel and security bills taxpayers have been asked to pick up.

At the same time Rick Perry and his minions slashed state spending on education, forcing local districts to lay off teachers, the fair-haired one has racked up over a quarter million dollars in travel expenses. We have paid for security for Perry and his family while on vacation in the Bahamas. We have paid for security for his wife's trips to Amsterdam, Madrid and New York - what official business the wife of the governor can have overseas is beyond me as the Constitution forbids states from entering into treaties with other countries.

We've also paid for security so that Rick Perry could promote his book in New York, California, Las Vegas and Washington. Excuse me, but wasn't that book written on the state's time? If we're paying for the promotional tour, shouldn't the state reap the revenue the book generates?

And how ironic is it that his book, Fed Up!, is an anti-Washington diatribe while Mr. Perry stumps the country begging for votes and greenbacks to become the next president?

There is not another candidate that can top Rick Perry for hypocrisy in the election preseason. First he suggests that Texas should secede from the United States -- then he announces he's running for the White House. Then, at the same time he's telling the citizens of Texas they must be prepared to make sacrifices, he orders the DPS to provide security for family vacations and trips having nothing to do with the running of the state.

Of the course the tea-baggers and wingnuts don't care. Intellectual consistency has never been a problem with either group. They will blindly raise the flag without a care as to what's going on behind the curtain.

Hey, if at first you don't secede, try running for president.

Cheering on the state death machine

That's right. You heard the audience cheer when Brian Williams stated how many inmates have been murdered by the State of Texas. You heard a group of right wing Republicans preaching the virtues of limited government cheer because the state carried out 234 murders under Rick Perry's "watch."

Limited government means the citizenry has the right to be left alone. What could possibly violate the principle more than arming the state with the tools to kill its own citizens?

And, even more to the point, Rick Perry knows he sat and allowed an innocent man to be killed by the apparatus of the state when he refused to halt the murder of Cameron Willingham. Rick Perry knows he allowed an innocent man to be killed in the name of Texas and his appointment of Williamson County D.A. John Bradley to emasculate the state forensic science committee is evidence of his guilty mind.

Rick Perry calls himself a Christian yet he gladly boasts about the number of people killed by the state while he's been in Austin. And the sickest part is that folks in the audience cheered him for doing it.

Rick Perry isn't in favor of limited government. Rick Perry wishes to extend the power of the state to meddle in our lives. Rick Perry wants to give the state more authority to intrude upon our right to be left alone.

On statistics and the death penalty

Doug Berman over at Sentencing Law and Policy presents us a new statistic to measure the efficiency of state death machines - "Executions per Death Sentence" or EPDS as the sabermetricians would say.

The Death Penalty Information Center calculated the number of death sentences handed down by state and the number of inmates each state murdered since the death penalty was reinstituted in 1976. Contrary to what you might think, Texas and Ohio do not head the list.

The old commonwealth, Virginia, heads up the list with an EPDS of .725, meaning that for every 100 death sentences handed down, 72.5 executions are carried out. Texas does pop up at number two on the list with an EPDS of .498, however. The national rate, by the way, is .150.

At the bottom of the list of states that have murdered at least one inmate since 1976 are Pennsylvania (.008), California (.015) and Idaho (.025).

If we look at the murder rates by state in 2009 we find that Virginia had a murder rate of 4.4 homicides per 100,000 people while Texas had a murder rate of 5.4 homicides per 100,000 people. Pennsylvania's murder rate was 5.2 homicides per 100,000, California's was 5.3 and Idaho had a rate of 1.4.

Since 1976, New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire and Kansas are alone in not murdering inmates. New York's murder rate was 4.0. New Jersey's was 3.7. Kansas rate was 4.2 and New Hampshire brought up the rear with a murder rate of .08.

So, based on the data at hand, there would appear to be little or no correlation between the number of executions carried out and the homicide rate in any given state. But, of course, having a reputation as a killer works wonders for the candidates on the right running for the White House.

Just ask George W. Bush or Governor Goodhair.

Taxpayers subsidizing Perry's White House bid

So Rick Perry is running for president.

How long had he been contemplating his navel running for the White House? How many of those out of state trips he's taken this year were to build up support for his campaign? How much money have we spent so that Gov. Goodhair can travel around the country looking for suckers voters who will support him? How many bodyguards are we paying for to accompany him? (And just keep in mind that they are from the same agency that couldn't even prevent the governor's mansion from getting torched.)

Rick Perry already has a job. He's the governor. He's paid by us to be the governor. He's not being paid to fly around the country pimping himself out for votes. With the number of teachers that Mr. Perry threw out of work this year by cutting the amount of money the state spends on education, the last thing we need is for our tax dollars to kickstart his presidential campaign.

Now that Mr. Perry has tossed his hat in the ring for the GOP nomination, it's time for him to do the honorable thing (there is, after all, a first time for everything). It's time for Perry to resign as governor and turn the keys over to someone who is going to look out for the best interests of Texas, not the best interests of a presidential candidate.

Of course, I'm not holding my breath on this. Despite his claim of supporting limited government, Mr. Perry doesn't seem to have any problem with the taxpayers of Texas subsidizing his flights of fancy. He'd much rather steal from the taxpayers and abdicate his responsibilities in this state so he can hoodwink try to convince voters across the country to support his campaign.

There is no statute of limitations for murder

Texas Penal Code § 19.02. MURDER. (a) In this section: (1) "Adequate cause" means cause that would commonly produce a degree of anger, rage, resentment, or terror in a person of ordinary temper, sufficient to render the mind incapable of cool reflection. (2) "Sudden passion" means passion directly caused by and arising out of provocation by the individual killed or another acting with the person killed which passion arises at the time of the offense and is not solely the result of former provocation. (b) A person commits an offense if he: (1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual; (2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual; or (3) commits or attempts to commit a felony, other than manslaughter, and in the course of and in furtherance of the commission or attempt, or in immediate flight from the commission or attempt, he commits or attempts to commit an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual. (c) Except as provided by Subsection (d), an offense under this section is a felony of the first degree. (d) At the punishment stage of a trial, the defendant may raise the issue as to whether he caused the death under the immediate influence of sudden passion arising from an adequate cause. If the defendant proves the issue in the affirmative by a preponderance of the evidence, the offense is a felony of the second degree.

James Jones is the senior warden at the "Walls" Unit in Huntsville (TX)  that houses the Texas execution chamber. He is the man in charge when the State of Texas decides to murder an individual. He is the one who decides when it's time to pump the lethal drug cocktail into the arm of a prisoner strapped down to a gurney.

Mr. Jones knowingly and intentionally caused the death of Mr. Martin Robles on Wednesday night. Mr. Jones committed a first degree felony.

Texas Penal Code § 9.21. PUBLIC DUTY. (a) Except as qualified by Subsections (b) and (c), conduct is justified if the actor reasonably believes the conduct is required or authorized by law, by the judgment or order of a competent court or other governmental tribunal, or in the execution of legal process. (b) The other sections of this chapter control when force is used against a person to protect persons (Subchapter C), to protect property (Subchapter D), for law enforcement (Subchapter E), or by virtue of a special relationship (Subchapter F). (c) The use of deadly force is not justified under this section unless the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is specifically required by statute or unless it occurs in the lawful conduct of war. If deadly force is so justified, there is no duty to retreat before using it. (d) The justification afforded by this section is available if the actor reasonably believes: (1) the court or governmental tribunal has jurisdiction or the process is lawful, even though the court or governmental tribunal lacks jurisdiction or the process is unlawful; or (2) his conduct is required or authorized to assist a public servant in the performance of his official duty, even though the servant exceeds his lawful authority.

Mr. Jones could argue that his conduct in causing the death of Mr. Robles was justified through the public duty defense to criminal conduct. However, look closely at section (c) - the conduct is only excused if the actor has a reasonable belief that deadly force is "specifically required" by statute.

There is no criminal offense in the State of Texas that specifically requires the state to cause the death of the actor. In the case of Mr. Robles, there was another man who was convicted of the murders -- and he wasn't put to death. Therefore, one cannot have a reasonable belief that deadly force is "specifically required" when two men can be convicted of the same murders and given different sentences.

I find it interesting that section (d)(2) would seem to allow Mr. Jones to claim he was only carrying out orders. Funny, that defense didn't cut it at the Nuremburg Trials. Of course, since Mr. Jones can't justify his use of deadly force, he can't rely on the "just following orders" defense.

Texas Penal Code § 7.02. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONDUCT OF ANOTHER. (a) A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another if: (1) acting with the kind of culpability required for the offense, he causes or aids an innocent or nonresponsible person to engage in conduct prohibited by the definition of the offense; (2) acting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense, he solicits, encourages, directs, aids, or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense; or (3) having a legal duty to prevent commission of the offense and acting with intent to promote or assist its commission, he fails to make a reasonable effort to prevent commission of the offense. (b) If, in the attempt to carry out a conspiracy to commit one felony, another felony is committed by one of the conspirators, all conspirators are guilty of the felony actually committed, though having no intent to commit it, if the offense was committed in furtherance of the unlawful purpose and was one that should have been anticipated as a result of the carrying out of the conspiracy.

And this is where things get interesting. The medical personnel who assisted in the execution (and turned a blind eye to the oath they took upon finishing medical school) are just as responsible as Mr. Jones for the death of Mr. Robles. I just wonder if they will inform future patients of the role they played in state-sanctioned murder.

And let's not forget the black-robed prosecutors who gladly signed the paperwork ordering the death of another person. Each and every judge who sentenced a defendant to death, or affirmed a death sentence, is culpable as well. They all had the opportunity to prevent a murder, and they all sat there and let it happen.

There is another person who bears responsibility for this murder. That would be the fair-haired one, Governor Rick Perry. His signature is on the death warrant. Gov. Perry knew what he was doing when he signed the death warrant. His intention was for the state to cause the death of Mr. Robles. Gov. Goodhair caused Mr. Jones to engage in conduct that caused the death of another - Mr. Jones would never have presided over the killing of an inmate without being ordered to do so by the governor.

Rick Perry is a murderer, and there's no way to sanitize or sugar coat it.

See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil

What do you do when you're tired of the Texas Forensic Science Commission keeps sticking its nose into whether or not an innocent man, Cameron Willingham, was murdered by the State of Texas? You have the Attorney General issue an opinion that investigating evidence that the fire was not deliberately set is outside the scope of the Commission's duties.

The Commission was created under the authority of Art. 38.01 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 4 lays out the duties of the Commission:

Sec. 4. (a) The commission shall: (1) develop and implement a reporting system through which accredited laboratories, facilities, or entities report professional negligence or misconduct; (2) require all laboratories, facilities, or entities that conduct forensic analyses to report professional negligence or misconduct to the commission; and (3) investigate, in a timely manner, any allegation of professional negligence or misconduct that would substantially affect the integrity of the results of a forensic analysis conducted by an accredited laboratory, facility, or entity. (b) An investigation under Subsection (a)(3): (1) must include the preparation of a written report that identifies and also describes the methods and procedures used to identify: (A) the alleged negligence or misconduct; (B) whether negligence or misconduct occurred; and (C) any corrective action required of the laboratory, facility, or entity; and (2) may include one or more: (A) retrospective reexaminations of other forensic analyses conducted by the laboratory, facility, or entity that may involve the same kind of negligence or misconduct; and (B) follow-up evaluations of the laboratory, facility, or entity to review: (i) the implementation of any corrective action required under Subdivision (1)(C); or (ii) the conclusion of any retrospective reexamination under Paragraph (A). (c) The commission by contract may delegate the duties described by Subsections (a)(1) and (3) to any person the commission determines to be qualified to assume those duties. (d) The commission may require that a laboratory, facility, or entity investigated under this section pay any costs incurred to ensure compliance with Subsection (b)(1). (e) The commission shall make all investigation reports completed under Subsection (b)(1) available to the public. A report completed under Subsection (b)(1), in a subsequent civil or criminal proceeding, is not prima facie evidence of the information or findings contained in the report.

When the law was passed in 2005, the act was to apply to evidence tested or offered into evidence after September 1, 2005. The point, presumably, was to provide a safeguard against junk science being admitted into evidence after the effective date of the act by giving the Commission the power to regulate and investigate forensic facilities to ensure that proper scientific procedures were being followed.

The Attorney General takes this to mean that the Commission may not investigate any items or analysis entered into evidence prior to the effective date of the act.

Section 4 limits the scope of the Commission's inquiries to "accredited" entities - but does not define what constitutes an accredited entity. The acts also fails to state whether it mattered if the entity was accredited before or after the effective date.

The Attorney General then refers to Article 38.35(d)(1) to limit the scope of the Commission to entities that were accredited at the time the analysis took place.

Except as provided by Subsection (e), a forensic analysis of physical evidence under this article and expert testimony relating to the evidence are not admissible in a criminal action if, at the time of the analysis, the crime laboratory conducting the analysis was not accredited by the director under Section 411.0205, Government Code.

Well, that's all well and good, Mr. AG, but we're not talking about whether any item of evidence is admissible. We're talking about reviewing an old case to determine whether an innocent man was executed as the result of junk science. Now I understand that Gov. Goodhair is worried that when the world realizes he sat on his hands while an innocent man was murdered by the State of Texas it might cause a bit of a problem for his presidential campaign -- but Gov. Perry's political aspirations are secondary to whether or not an innocent man was murdered.

Gov. Perry began his assault on the Commission when he placed Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley in charge of the Commission on the eve of a hearing in which an arson expert was going to testify that the fire in question was not deliberately set. Through Mr. Bradley, Gov. Perry did everything he could to prevent the Commission from hearing evidence, in public, that Mr. Willingham was innocent. The last thing he wanted was a public record of the murder of an innocent man. Now Greg Abbott is providing cover for the fair-haired one.

Let's think about this for a second. The Commission may only investigate evidence analyzed by forensic facilities that were accredited at the time the evidence was offered. The two bozos who investigated the fire that killed Mr. Willingham's children weren't accredited by the DPS. They had no scientific background at all. Yet, they were allowed to testify that (based on their "gut feeling") Mr. Willingham set the fire that killed his children. So, because the state was permitted to put junk science before a jury that didn't know better, the Commission is not allowed to examine whether or not the evidence should have been admissible.

The purpose of the Commission should be to seek the truth, not to provide political cover for a governor who wants to be president.

Victim sues to halt execution

Today is the day the State of Texas is scheduled to murder Mark Stroman.

Rais Bhuyian is fighting to save Mr. Stroman's life. Mr. Bhuyian filed suit in Travis County seeking a stay of Mr. Stroman's execution. Gov. Rick Perry, who once said Texas should consider seceding, filed a petition asking that the case be removed to federal court. Mr. Bhuyian's attorney found that action to be quite ironic considering the amount of vitriol Mr. Perry has spewed about keeping los federales out of Texas' business.

Mr. Bhuyian was shot and left for dead by Mr. Stroman in a murderous rampage that left two other men dead. Mr. Stroman claimed he was seeking revenge for the attacks on 9/11.

Mr. Bhuyian was left blind in his right eye and still has shotgun pellets in his face. But he seeks reconciliation and understanding rather than blood. 

"This campaign is all about passion, forgiveness, tolerance and healing. We should not stay in the past, we must move forward."

"If I can forgive my offender who tried to take my life, we can all work together to forgive each other and move forward and take a new narrative on the 10th anniversary of 11 September." -- Rais Bhuyian

He sees Mr. Stroman as a man who can be a spokesman about ignorance and hate. He thinks Mr. Stroman can be redeemed. He sees value in a life that not many others see.

Meanwhile, the only value Gov. Goodhair sees in Mr. Stroman's life is the potential for more votes from the "hang 'em high" crowd.

Texas court prevents disclosure of governor's travel vouchers

Rick Perry is the governor of Texas. He is the chief executive (a weak one thanks to the drafters of the Texas Constitution) of the state.

But, Gov. Perry likes to take out-of-state trips. When he travels out of the state he is accompanied by officers of the Texas Department of Public Safety. Some of these trips have something to do with governing the State of Texas while others are just junkets. More and more of Gov. Goodhair's trips are tied to his campaign for the Republican nomination for President.

But, whether a trip is necessary for the carrying out of his duties as chief executive or whether it's just an excuse to take a vacation, the taxpayers of Texas foot the bill. We foot the bill for travel. We foot the bill for security. And, during a time of austerity - when we are whacking billions of dollars from education - doesn't the public deserve to know where their hard earned dollars are going?

Two newspaper conglomerates thought we did and filed Open Records requests for travel vouchers for the governor's security detail.

Now I understand that some security is necessary -- but, for the most part, the security provided for the governor of Texas is just an exercise in ego-massaging. As important as Gov. Perry may think he is - most folks outside the state don't give a rat's ass who he is. But, in order to prove that he is a Very Important Person, the governor, and his wife, are always surrounded by a security detail. Think about that while your children sit in classrooms with 30 or more students for each teacher.

The Attorney General told the newspapers to take a hike because the information they requested was too sensitive and, if it fell into the wrong hands, harm could befall the Fair-haired one. The newspapers then took the matter to a judge who decided that the AG was wrong and that the information was subject to disclosure. An appeals court upheld that ruling.

Not satisfied with having to explain the expenses, the state begged the Texas Supreme Court to protect them from the public. The AG announced that releasing the details of past security details would have a detrimental effect on future freeloading travel by the governor and his family.

On Friday, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that the information requested was exempt from disclosure on the theory that disclosing travel vouchers for security details on past junkets trips would expose the governor to ridicule harm.

Let's be honest about this. The governor's reluctance to release the information had nothing to do with his safety (or that of his family). Gov. Perry didn't want the information released because he didn't want the taxpayers of Texas to know just how much of our money he spent making himself feel important.

Gov. Perry's all for limited government and reduced government spending -- as long as it doesn't affect him. Gov. Perry wants to keep his travel expenses secret at the same time he's telling the taxpayers that we can't afford to continue to fund education.

You see, that's Gov. Perry's idea of limited government -- we'll limit the services the government provides to the citizens of Texas while I travel around the world on the taxpayers' dime.

Odds and ends

Perry signs bill compensating Anthony Graves

Gov. Rick Perry signed a bill on Tuesday authorizing the state to pay Anthony Graves $1.4 million in compensation for spending 18 years in prison for a murder he did not commit. In 2006, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Mr. Graves' conviction. As there was no finding of actual innocence, the State Comptroller refused to compensate Mr. Graves for his years behind bars.

I guess, Ms. Combs, that it's somehow Mr. Graves' fault that he was arrested, charged and convicted despite the prosecutor's knowledge that the state's star witness recanted the night before trial.

God knows the state has more important things to spend money on -- such as the more than $10,000 a month the state is spending for the house the fair-haired one is renting while the Governor's Mansion is renovated.

Is ATS blackmailing the City of Houston?

ATS, the operator of the red light cameras in Houston, has issued a letter to the city saying that all will be forgiven if the city turns the cameras back on by August 1. If the city chooses to honor the will of the voters, the city may be on the hook for up to $20 million for breach of contract.

The city attorney, David Feldman, made the odd statement that statistics indicate an increase in accidents at intersections since the cameras were turned off after last November's referendum. Of course, Mr. Feldman has never let the facts get in the way of his pronouncements.

We're about to see where Mayor Annise Parker stands when she must decide between money and the will of the populace. I'm not holding my breath.

Asleep on the watch

So Texas state senator Dan Patrick (R-Houston) is a poseur after all.

Governor Goodhair has decided to take up the reins for everyone opposed to groping at the airport. So what if los federales are threatening to cancel flights in and out of Texas as a result. The fair-haired one has found an issue that's dear to the hearts of libertarians everywhere.

I applaud Gov. Perry for his stand against the groping fingers of the TSA but I also wonder why his sudden love of personal freedom and privacy doesn't extend to anyone outside an airport. At least we have a choice whether we wish to subject ourselves to the groping hands or X-ray eyes of airport security. We don't have a choice when confronted by a police officer on the side of the road.

Rep. David Simpson, R-Longview, sent a letter to Perry on Sunday urging him to defend the "privacy, dignity and constitutional rights of our citizens."

Where's the hue and cry for an end to the legal fiction of informed consent? Where's the outrage over the violations of the Fourth Amendment in the procurement of search warrants for blood? How about the coercive effects of "No Refusal" Weekends?


It's quite ironic that the law and order set has their panties in a wad over airport security considering TSA's license to grope was the result of the right wing's assault on the Fourth Amendment following 9/11. No one on the right seemed to mind the erosion of privacy at the airport while Bush the Younger sat in Washington torturing the English language. Would this even be an issue had it begun under W's watch?


Few folks on the right have raised any concerns about the steady erosion of the Fourth Amendment over the last 50 years. Maybe it was because that Fourth Amendment was for those who ran afoul of the law. As long as it was affecting them it didn't matter how intrusive the long arm of the law became. But guess what? Shredding the Fourth Amendment for those accused of criminal conduct allowed the state to take away everyone's right to be left alone.

A little of this and a bit of that

Here are a few odds and ends you might find interesting:

Bradley out as chairman of forensic commission

Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley's stint as chairman of the Texas Forensic Science Commission has come to an end as the senate concluded its session without voting on whether to accept Gov. Perry's nomination of Mr. Bradley.

Gov. Perry appointed Mr. Bradley to chair the commission in 2009 prior to a scheduled hearing in which the commission was to take testimony from Craig Beyler about the flawed science used by arson investigators that led to the execution of Cameron Willingham.

During his time as chairman, however, Mr. Bradley accomplished the fair haired governor's wishes to delay the release of the committee's findings until after the 2010 gubernatorial election.

Patrick cowers in fear

Texas State Senator Dan Patrick has once again proved himself to be a big bag of hot air as he withdrew his bill that would have criminalized groping by TSA personnel in airports. Mr. Patrick ran and hid in a closet after receiving a letter from the United States Attorney for the Western District of Texas threatening that TSA might cancel flights in Texas should the legislation pass.

Every year on the Fourth of July, Mr. Patrick rides in a car at the Memorial Villages 4th of July parade; and every year my wife gives me an ugly face when I mock Mr. Patrick in front of my daughters. Certainly my lack of civility and uncouthness is far worse than Mr. Patrick's demagoguery.

One wonders, was Mr. Patrick worried that the bill might actually pass?

If Mr. Patrick is so concerned about privacy issues for airline passengers, why isn't he concerned with the steady erosion of the 4th Amendment?

Wanted man

John Joe Gray is on the lam for allegedly assaulting a peace officer in December 1999. He was bonded out of jail a few days later and never appeared in court. He has lived on his armed compound in Henderson County, Texas with his family ever since.

Years ago he warned local law enforcement officials to bring extra body bags if they wanted to capture him. The local sheriff has said he's not risking the lives of any officers to bring in Mr. Gray.

Limited government, Perry-style

I guess this is why I'm not a legislator in Austin. I just don't see the connections that these geniuses do. With school districts being forced to lay off teachers due to the budget crisis in Austin, a couple of folks seem to think they've found the answer to our problems.

State Rep. John Davis (R-Houston) says Texas charges luxury yacht buyers too much sales tax. That 6.25% is a real bitch, apparently, to the scads of Texans looking to buy multi-million dollar boats to play around in. The sales tax is the most regressive tax the state has yet to devise yet the yacht-buying set thinks it's too much to be asked to pay more than $18,000 in sales tax for a boat worth over a million dollars. Boo, freaking, hoo.

And the fair-haired one, Gov. Rick Perry has determined that an emergency exists and that the only way to fix it is to pass tort reform with a "loser pays" provision. State Rep. Brandon Creighton (R-Conroe) has proposed legislation that would force the loser in a lawsuit to pay the other side's legal fees. Now let's just forget the fact that most tort litigation is brought by folks who can't afford to hire an attorney on anything other than a contingency fee basis. Let's also forget that in a "pro-business" environment, the only check on the corporate world's unending quest for maximizing profit is the courtroom. This proposed legislation will shut the doors of the courthouse for all but those who could afford to hire an attorney.

This is the theory of limited government espoused by Gov. Goodhair. Limit the ability of the government to serve the vast majority of Texans, shield corporations by cutting off access to the courts for millions of Texans and increase the tax burden on poor Texans by providing tax relief to millionaires.