Greg_Groogan's Blog

Regardless of which candidate wins in November there will be Americans waging war for the forseeable future.

It's no secret John McCain lifted his stumbling campaign in Lazarus like fashion with an iron clad commitment to a surge of fresh troops into Iraq and a refusal to quit the conflict until American troops could return with honor and a much more substantial sense of "mission accomplished" than that mistakenly claimed by the current resident of the White House.

On the other hand, time after time during the battle for the Democratic nomination Barack Obama called the surge strategy a blunder, a needless sacrifice of blood and treasure in a war we as a nation should never have waged. The Illinois Senator actively courted his party's anti-war wing with firm time tables for troop withdrawl and the promise of a foreign policy long on diplomacy and short on bullets.    

In the time that's elapsed since more American boots hit the ground there's been a lot less dying in Iraq - 85 percent less by one respected estimate.

That's a tough fact to argue, but in a recent interview with ABC's Terry Moran conducted in Iraq Obama insisted the surge was still a mistake.

At least this "surge".

Barack Obama, if elected, plans to order his own surge, this one in Afghanistan. An extension of sheer military force the candidate considers rightous and necessary because it will be aimed at what he considers the real enemy - the Taliban and elements of Al Qaeda.  

He has not ruled out crossing into Pakistan's tribal territories to attack the enemy in the safe havens which have remained largely undisturbed.

Needless to say this proposed Afghan surge strategy, accomplished by veterans battle hardened in Iraq, is not exactly the deal many anti-war Democrats had anticipated.

  It is, Barack Obama insists, the war America should have been fighting, exclusively from the beginning.

In a political sense, the Afghan surge plan allows Obama to keep his Iraq withdrawl commitment but pre-empts those who would attempt to label him as the candidate of retreat and defeat. That's particularly important when you're trying to reel in critical security minded independent voters.

Bottom line - both of these guys, McCain and Obama, plan on waging war.

So, pick your surge. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Senator John Cornyn fielded a few questions after dropping by the Houston Foodbank for an orchestrated opportunity to demand the opening of energy rich but environmentally protected U.S. turf.

From the three dozen or so on-lookers came this query-What relief from food and fuel costs can you offer the single mother of four whose cupboards are bare ?

The Senator's response.

"I think the first thing is that there's hope in organizations like the Houston food bank and all the big hearts and the volunteers that are coming to help her during her time of need."

In other words, the hardpressed will just have to suck it up and accept charity until Democrats come to their senses and let us crack open ANWR and anywhere else we can harvest crude.

That, according to Cornyn, will send a message to oil speculators that we are serious about producing new supplies.

What about a relaxation of the federal gasoline tax ?

Cornyn called the "gas tax holiday idea" "just a patch" on the bigger problem and would slowdown critical maintenance and repairs on highways and bridges.

No - there will be no G-O-P support for pain minimizing relief for American consumers.

That's because Cornyn and Congressional Compadres have their best opportunity in years to open up protected lands for energy development.

And in this debate - PAIN - is good. Pain changes public opinion. Pain equals growing pressure.

Cornyn himself confirmed it.

"Will (the Democrats) reconsider it now that gas is at four, will they reconsider when gas is at five or six or seven or eight ? I think we are going to reach a tipping point here where people are going to say we need to get real about solving the problem and part of the answer to the problem is developing more of America's natural resources."

 The pain factor is already working. Next week we will show the poll numbers to prove it.

 For Cornyn, colleague Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and others who support unleashing the drill bit the clock is ticking.

 That's because BOTH Barack Obama and John McCain are on the record in opposition to opening ANWR and other protected areas.

 It will be truly fascinating to see if moderates bombarded by strapped constituents fold - or as Cornyn and others suggest - see the light. 

It won't take many.

 

  

It's a reality many Democrats don't like to talk about publicly.

It's part of the reason Hillary Clinton drew hordes of Hispanic voters in the Texas primary and Barack Obama did not.

It's known as the Black/Brown Divide and we've already reported that breaching the electoral gap between the two ethnic groups is key to a Democrat retaking the White House.

Here's the hard fact - in many of Texas' largely Mexican-American cities and urban neighborhoods there lingers a degree of unease with African-Americans.

While the two groups share challenges, experts say, culturally there is a disconnect.

And it's not just Texas. California Hispanics voted overwhelmingly for Hillary. Of course, part of that landslide of support is certainly attributable to the comfort factor of a long relationship with Clinton's. As a colleague in Arizona recently observed Hispanics tend to support who they know well and will remain loyal unless betrayed.

Which leads to the question - Can Obama do what few, if any African-American leaders have done and overwhelmingly win the  hearts and minds of Hispanics ?       

It's not as if the Democratic nominee gets their support by default. John McCain, by all accounts, has maintained a better than solid relationship with Hispanics in his own state. His war record, experience and position on immigration will also draw respect.

Obama needs Hispanic votes if he hopes to challenge in Florida, keep a steady hold on California and win potential battleground states like Colorado and New Mexico.

At the state Democratic convention last week in Austin I asked longtime State Senator Eddie Lucio from Brownsville whether Obama can draw the kind of Hispanic support that set records in the Texas primary.

His somber answer, "That depends on Hillary."

Or maybe Bill Richardson.  

On the road to Austin to wittness what once promised to be a slugfest but will more than likely be a love fest.

More than 15 thousand fired up Democrats are gathered in the capital city for their state convention.

Diveded sharply between Clinton and Obama during the brutal battle that was the Texas primary Lone Star Dem's must kiss and make up after months of inter-party punishment.

On the floor of the convention I'll be looking for proof that the hard feelings of the primary can truly be forgiven, if not forgotten.

With what promises to be a hell of a fight in fall - there's not much room for pompous victors (obama Folks) or sore losers (clinton loyalists).

Failure to pull together quickly and completely could squander the party's beat opportunity in two decades to wrench back power from Texas Republicans.

 So viewers/bloggers,  I'm going to Austin for you. What do you want to know ? I'll try and get you the facts and the flavor.

500 - that's how many Texans were part of a Rassmussen survey that inspired the pollster to declare incumbent U.S. Senator John Cornyn "vulnerable."

The findings darn sure caught our attention. The May 1st gauge has Cornyn just three percentage points ahead of Democrat Rick Noriega, an Afghan War veteran and state lawmaker, little known outside the city limits of Houston.

With limited name ID and no personal fortune to tap Noriega's task of of unseating Cornyn seems gargantuan in a state that hasn't sent a Democrat to the Senate since Lloyd Bensten.

But the answers of Rasmussen's 500 scientifically selected respondents could just be the kind of spark that can ignite a smoldering insurgency.

The "within striking distance numbers" would seem to be the kind of data Lt. Col. Noreiga's folks can take to big donors here in the Lone Star State and across the country.

The demographics are compelling - Noreiga is a slam dunk to get the lions-share of the Texas Hispanic vote. That's a no-brainer. But Noreiga should also harvest the down ballot benefit of an enormous African-American turn-out drawn by Barack Obama at the top of the ticket.

Consider also that Noreiga, the moderate, probably has more in common politically with John McCain than with the left leaning Senator from Illinois. (Noriega may disagree, but not to vehemently).

It's the kind of positioning that could draw plenty of independents in the "mushy middle" of the Texas electorate, folks looking for a change and comfortable with the idea of a Senator from each party representing the Lone Star State. These are some of the same voters that could comfortably vote McCain for president, Noriega for senate.

What Noreiga doesn't have is much notoriety and that's why money will be so critical. TV ads - lots of TV ads.

John Cornyn will have plenty of bank and a well organized party machine backing him. But he's also been at the helm as foreclosures escalate, rising gas prices eat up a bigger chunk of paychecks, immigration remains an intractable mess and American blood continues spilling in Iraq, for reasons that elude many here at home.

We may well look back at the 500 as nothing more than a foot note.

But maybe not.

 

Oddsmakers rate Hillary Clinton's chances of grabbing the Democratic nomination as a longshot.

 Regardless of how much damage the former first lady does to the political party she claims to love - it's unlikely she'll quit, particularly if she manages to win in Pennsylvania.

 This insistence on fighting to the bitter end is exacting a painful political price of one of the New York Senator's most loyal lieutenants.  

I'm talking about Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee.

An early, vocal and tireless supporter of the presumptive favorite, Jackson Lee admits she was among those convinced the nomination would be wrapped up well before March.

Instead, Jackson Lee found herself campaining in her home state AGAINST the most formidable African-American presidential candidate in American history .

At the Democratic Senatorial convention she endured a barrage of boos and catcalls from folks who once counted themselves her loyal constituents.

She responded with courage and poise. But you just know it hurt and hurt bad.

80 percent of the delegates voted for Obama and many deeply resented the Congresswoman's refusal to reflect the clear preference of those she represents.

The hard feelings have spawned plenty of speculation that Jackson-Lee is now vulnerable to challenge.

Scuttlebutt has it two (and perhaps more) attractive candidates are actively organizing.

Which brings us back to Senator Clinton's desire to slug it out, as they say," 'til the last dog is dead."

The hard fact is Jackson-Lee may become collateral damage. What she desperately needs to do (and likely wants to do) is shed herself of obligation to Hillary and get to work for Team Obama (albeit a good bit late). The sooner, the better.

If past performance is any indication - Jackson Lee will be relentless. What better way to close wounds and dim memories of a high percentage play that went south.

I'm guessing the fallout would be even worse if Clinton completes an unlikely end-run with super delegates. Outrage in Jackson Lee's district (and across the country) would be swift, fierce and lasting.

No, at this point, the best possible political scenario for Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee is for her candidate to surrender.  

One wonders if the Senator from New York cares that every additional day she answers the bell, it's Jackson Lee enduring the punches ? 

 

Better than 70% of Americans believe politicians lie about their accomplishments.

It's a conclusion THEY come by honestly.

I reported the Rasmussen Report findings and provided two examples of truth-challenged politicians seperated by 15 years in an effort to provide context.

In 1992 as a protege of Governor Ann Richards few had brighter political prospects than Texas Railroad Commissioner Lena Guerrero.

But then her political opponents first uncovered than strategically leaked the fact that Guerrero's claim of having graduated from University of Texas ( Phi Beta Kappa no less) was a lie.

Despite a hasty resignation and an earnest apology the public career of the talented woman from the Rio Grande Valley was crushed and crushed for good.

Fast forward to the rough and tumble run for the presidency in 2008.

One time frontrunner Hillary Clinton claims, repeatedly to have landed in Bosnia under "sniper fire" and scampered to safety.

Noone even questioned what the heck she was doing landing an aircraft carrying her teenage daughter anywhere near hostile gunfire.

Video tape and a slew of eye-wittnesses have since confirmed the extraordinary degree of exaggeration committed by the former first lady.

At first, she blamed the mistake on fatigue. That lasted until the same peril-filled account was recalled at other campaign events.

Did the lie end her career ? Hardly. Damage sure, but the story lasted only a few news cycles.

Could it be the Rasmussen numbers explain why ? They tell us Americans have come to expect their leaders to play fast and loose with the facts. Hillary just confirmed what they already believed.

And so the candidate stumps on. Worst case scenario - a return to the United States Senate and perhaps another shot at the big prize in 2012. 

Lena Guerrero should be so lucky.

    

As I was logging political highlights I came across this soundbite from Hillary Clinton at a Democratic debate last November.

"For him(John Edwards) to be throwing this kind of mud and making these charges really detracts from what we're trying to do here tonight."

Off the top of my head, since that night Hillary Clinton or representatives of her campaign have launched the following wet dirt at challenger Barack Obama.

1. Obama will be a weaker candidate because of his self-confessed drug use as a young man. (Clinton's New Hampshire Co-chair)

2. Obama made big bucks lawyering for a Chicago "slum lord".

3. Obama is a plagiarist who rips off the speeches of political allies.

4. Obama has broken federal election rules and should be "ashamed".

5. Back to the drug abuse well with surrogate Robert Johnson saying to a pro-Clinton crowd "Obama was doing something in the neighborhood he shouldn't of been doing"

6. High ranking Clinton campaign supporter Geraldine Ferraro's sudden revelation that if Obama were white or a woman he wouldn't be in position to win the nomination.

7. "Not as far as I know." Clinton's nuanced response when asked if she believes suggestions that Obama is a closet Muslim.

While Obama campaign has tossed back a few stones of it's own there has been no use (that I can recall) of  truly muddy Ammo like:

Questionable, enormously profitable Arkansas commodity trades

Whitewater

Travelgate

Vince Foster's suicide

Character assasination of women linked to the former president

Obama has apparently chosen to leave this well trodden turf in the dark corner of history's closet where most have decided it belongs.

 One has to wonder if the the candidate whose "tested and ready" but trailing would excercise the same restraint ?

The term "kitchen sink" comes to mind. Going negative helped the former first lady win Texas and Ohio.

 The clock is ticking.

 

 

 

Train Wreck. That's what many Democrats are deathly afraid of if Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama stand in the middle of the ring pounding each other for a few more months.

Only one can recieve the coronation. Only one can go on to compete for the grand prize.

Hillary went ugly in the final four days before ST-2. It worked ...and  that means there's more to come.

Obama has promised to retaliate.

The pounding could indeed polarize the party. If the nomination gets brokered - healing won't be quick and for some, even possible.

Some analysts say this is acutally healthy - more issue based debate, more media coverage.

I don't buy it.  Their platitudes of public respect and affection for one another ring hollow. The same game of "gotcha" the Clinton's are so fond of criticizing when practiced by reporters, is a tactic they have no problem employing themselves when it suits their purpose. Hypocrisy ? Make your own call.

What would make it all go away in a giant Democratic group hug ?

A high-stakes game of winner-take-all  Rock-Paper-scissor,. with the loser altruistically stepping aside.

Fat chance.

 What's more likely - a star-chamber session in which Mr. Obama at some point is promised the nomination somewhere in the future along with the unshakable support of the party elders. Senator Clinton who claims "she's tested and ready" will offer her younger, less seasoned VP the guidance he'll need..and of course her blessing.

You want real change Barack ? They'll suggest, "Jump on board, and maybe just maybe, a Democrat can command for the next 16 years." 

All you have to do is fall on the sword for the team - and fall in line.

Possible ? I guess anything is possible.

 

 

 

 

Draw a line starting five miles south of San Antonio extending west to the Mexican border and east to to the Gulf.
I'm not a census taker but my educated guess as a journalist and a Texan is that African-Americans comprise less than 2% of the population of South Texas.
The point of this excercise. A good chunk of Texas' Mexican American population has little or no contact with African Americans. This abscence of intermingling offers a partial explanation as to why Hillary Clinton will recieve 75 percent of the Democratic vote in this region of the state.
University of Houston sociologist Nestor Rodriguez confirms the seperation, sub-surface anti-black sentiment and the sizable disadvantage it's produced for Barack Obama. In combination with the "comfort" factor of Hispanics long association with the Clintons - South Texas will vote heavily for Hillary. Just how heavily could be the key to capturing the state.
African-Americans in the state's major urban areas will vote just as heavily for Obama. There's a chance when all is said and done that the two groups - Clinton supporting Hispanics and Obama supporting Blacks could essentially cancel each other out. That would leave the decision in the hands of white party regulars, left leaning independents and the wild card, a yet to be determined number of Republicans who meddle in the enemy primary.

It's gonna be fun to watch - especially that funky caucus process. Look for things to get heated if precinct votes are tight - and by all indications, they will be.

Some call it a "softball" - a question tossed slowly into a politician's wheel-house so they can CRUSH an opponents position or action.

Today on the trail with Mike Huckabee I made referenece to John McCain's recent flub when he insisted he was a "proud, LIBERAL, conservative republican".

The former pastor took a pass - saying he didn't want to find fault with "slips of the tongue" (even the freudian kind) because others would certainly do the same when he botched a line.

So what do you think - is the good former governor living by the Golden Rule or is he angling for a veep-slot and just making nice with the inevitable nominee ?

 

 

 

There's an old saying valiant losers use to offer themselves consolation.

"I didn't lose....I just ran out of time."  Had Hillary Clinton held on to what was once a monster lead in Texas, the previously mentioned phrase could have easily been  used and used fairly by Barack Obama.

But turns out Barack WILL have enough time. Our Rassmussen poll indicates the Illinois Senator has caught the former first lady here in the Lone Star State.

Understand this, if Obama's run is truly an irresisistable force both Clinton's high-powered number crunchers and her politically astute husband ALREADY know it.

I've spent enough time with insiders on major campaigns to know - they often know - long before we do.

Watch the one-time frontrunner closely over the next couple of days - if she dons a grind-it-out fight to the finish game face, chances are she understands her fate and is already thinking about what, if anything, she needs to do next.

But if there's a prayer of a photo finish - she'll be spending every available resource to pull off a win, including a partial triumph in the funky Texas Caucus process.

Just my opinion. Blogs are great that way.

 Hillary could sure use George Parr, in South Texas. A boss shrewd enough to scrape up enough voters, living and date, to off-set whats happening for Obama in the state's big cities. 

 

Rows to hoe don't  get much tougher.

Hillary Clinton needs a Herculean effort to de-rail the O-train - O as in Obama. It's pretty much common knowledge now that electoral surival for the Senator from New York demands a big victory in Texas.

Can it happen ? Yes. Will it ? I'm guessing not.

Senator Clinton will need an inspired performance in Thursday's Austin debate. If she attacks too hard she runs the risk of looking desperate. If she chooses to dwell on previous themes with nothing new she will do her cause little good.  There's precious little middle ground here - and Clinton has to find it, own it and establish the foundation of a desperately needed reversal of fortune.

Hillary Clinton also needs to hold the lion share of the Lone Star State's Hispanic voters - potentially 36% of the available ballots.

That's doable in South Texas and El Paso - but in the major population centers Houston, DFW, San Antonio and Austin - reporters are sensing drift among Hispanics - drawn to to Obama's bright star and the momentum of his ten consecutive primary wins.

Cocaine use, alleged plagerism, lawyering for slum lords - the Clinton camps negative attacks have all bounced- off Barack.

One wonders whether the former first lady has more devestating ammo to launch - and perhaps more critically - the inclination to use it .

 

 

 

 

 

IS EXPECTED. Having vaulted to the the top of the Republican heap in Iowa, the genial ordained Baptist minister and former governor of Arkansas will now face an ordeal reserved for frontrunners. Scrutiny ? You better believe it and when it gets down to the lick-log there's plenty to look at in Huckabees past.

For instance I'd like to ask him why he reportedly ordered the hard drives of 83 state computers and four servers destroyed as he left office in Arkansas. Was there something to hide ? His critics suggest plenty. 

I'd like to know more about Huckabee's role in the parole of a convicted rapist who upon release raped and killed again. He's denied involvement, but his critics say there's plenty of evidence he played a big role in the release.

According to a Little Rock newspaper Pastor Huckabee was sanctioned for ethics violations at least five times. The same paper says back in the early 90's Huck wrote himself a paycheck from campaign funds as his own political consultant and had sticky fingers when it came to thousands of dollars worth of furnishings at the governor's mansion.

There's more....enough for those who covered Huckabee's years of public service to warn voters not to judge a book by it's aw-shucks cover.

Huckabee may have strong answers for these and other concerns. The point is - as a serious player he must now answer, something he largely avoided in his months as an apparent also ran.

That's the process. Ask Rudy, whose been wrung through the wringer (and it ain't over).

 

 

I've taken a little break from blogging...but it's time to get back in the game.

The struggle is heating up. Stretch run, you could call it, in the pitched battle that is the primaries.

Just watched tape of Oprah stumping for Obama.

If ever there was a "civilian" endorsement to be envied by those unfortunate enough to be passed over - Oprah's public blessing is certainly it.

But will it make a difference ? Do people really value an entertainer's personal opinion so highly they are willing to offer their own vote as a sort of homage ?

Perhaps.

Some may think it's as good a reason as any. Much of what Ms. Winfrey has touched has turned to gold.

But Can Oprah "magic" erode a 20% gap in the polls ?

It will be fascinating to see in coming weeks if her there are indeed limits to the power of her persuasion.