(09-20-2018 10:09 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I was going out of my way not to use 'Ted', which *is* the nickname mind you. Thought his middle was Theodore. I guess next time I'll use Rafael to make you happy....

And, as we have spoken before, I am perfectly comfortable using Robert's name the way I have known it for a long, long, long, long time. But I guess that is par for the course with a scumbag blowhard.

You keep doing you - I just thought it was funny situation.

By the way, Ted's middle name is Edward, not Theodore. I did some extra Googling to confirm and couldn't find any reference to Ted's middle name actually being Theodore. The only time I saw that name referenced was in an article that said W often called him Theodore, but it seems like W just decided to do that.

(09-20-2018 11:48 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 10:56 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  And to be honest the Rafael campaign (happy now Lad?) engages in the same unicorns/fairy dust issue framing as Robert's campaign does.

Agreed. The campaigning in the media so far has been strange, to say the least. Beto seems to want to speak in 90+% vague generalities and "feel-good" messages/plans (not unlike a Texan version of a 2008 Obama), while Cruz seems insistent on making bizarre comments that all have food in them: Beto is either a triple meat Whataburger (excellent choice for a meal, IMO) liberal, advancing the cause of tofu (poor choice for a meal, IMO) or banning bbq (also an excellent choice for a meal). I think Ted is just really damn hungry and O'Rourke has watched too many 2008 Obama videos.

Give Beto some credit - he does actually put forward some specific policy goals. See this op-ed for an example: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion...181472.php

In the op-ed he proposes:

1) eliminating private prisons
2) ending the federal prohibition on pot and expunging the records of those who have been locked up for possession
3) stopping mandatory minimum sentencing for non-violent drug offenses
4) ending bail bonds
5) strengthening rehabilitation and counseling services for people who are released from prison after committing non-violent crimes

Those goals are fairly specific, and my guess is that he has the details of how to write the legislation if asked.

(09-20-2018 09:32 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I find it a little funny that Tanq used Betos full given name, yet extends the nickname given to Cruz instead of using his full given name, Rafael. Cruz’s middle name is Edward, not Theodore, btw. That does go hand in hand with the humor in a white guy using a Hispanic nickname and a half-Hispanic guy using a white nickname.

I find it a bit funny that a guy would likely take offense at somebody calling Obama half black or half white uses half Hispanic as a descriptor.

This partially hispanic guy uses a real nickname which is used by people of all races, but I guess you could call it a white nickname. It is not spanish, but plenty of black people use the same nickname.

My Dad's favorite cousin was Ted G----Z. (name partially redacted for privacy concerns). Ted used that name in the advertising for his business. You would not believe the nickname Ted's wife used.

Funny how the unconscious racism pervades all sides of the political spectrum.

I have no objection to Irish guys using spanish nicknames. He can be Paco or Chuy for all I care. People can use any nickname they want. Up near Denison there is a billboard for Stinky's auto parts. It wouldn't be my choice...

I do question the motivation for it. Is it to fool some voters into thinking they are voting for a Hispanic? Is that important? Should it matter if he is hispanic or Irish background? IMO, no. I don't care if a candidate's name is Freddy Garcia or Brenden O'Malley, what matters is the ideas he espouses and the programs he would push. I find Beto to be a bit comical. I wonder how many votes he will get from people who think he is part Hispanic. George P. Bush is more Hispanic than Beto. Maybe some people will vote for "George' thinking he purely anglo.

(09-20-2018 12:13 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 09:32 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I find it a little funny that Tanq used Betos full given name, yet extends the nickname given to Cruz instead of using his full given name, Rafael. Cruz’s middle name is Edward, not Theodore, btw. That does go hand in hand with the humor in a white guy using a Hispanic nickname and a half-Hispanic guy using a white nickname.

I find it a bit funny that a guy would likely take offense at somebody calling Obama half black or half white uses half Hispanic as a descriptor.

This partially hispanic guy uses a real nickname which is used by people of all races, but I guess you could call it a white nickname. It is not spanish, but plenty of black people use the same nickname.

My Dad's favorite cousin was Ted G----Z. (name partially redacted for privacy concerns). Ted used that name in the advertising for his business. You would not believe the nickname Ted's wife used.

Funny how the unconscious racism pervades all sides of the political spectrum.

I have no objection to Irish guys using spanish nicknames. He can be Paco or Chuy for all I care. People can use any nickname they want. Up near Denison there is a billboard for Stinky's auto parts. It wouldn't be my choice...

I do question the motivation for it. Is it to fool some voters into thinking they are voting for a Hispanic? Is that important? Should it matter if he is hispanic or Irish background? IMO, no. I don't care if a candidate's name is Freddy Garcia or Brenden O'Malley, what matters is the ideas he espouses and the programs he would push. I find Beto to be a bit comical. I wonder how many votes he will get from people who think he is part Hispanic. George P. Bush is more Hispanic than Beto. Maybe some people will vote for "George' thinking he purely anglo.

Not sure what your first sentence means. Are you referring to Beto or me? In either case, I'm not sure either would take offense to describing Obama as being half black or white when his mother was white and his father was black. What is there to be offended about there?

And Edward is used by people of many races, but it's an Anglo name. Is there really a reason to argue about how I described it?

And I would understand having a cynical perspective about Beto's nickname if it wasn't for the fact that he's had that nickname for decades. The most cynical might say that the nickname was given to him by his parents early on because they wanted him to go into politics, but boy is that playing the long game...

Anyways, it's not really important to me, I just find the situation funny.

Look, I think Rafael (happy again, Lad?) is by far the most Constitutional-involved politician I have ever seen. In 2003-ish, I had a break back in Texas and heard Cruz speak at a very small CLE, and had the opportunity to interact with him in a very small setting for half an hour or so. I was blown away at that time about his knowledge level re: Constitutional issues.

The problem I have with him is he is probably one of the most creepy people I have encountered --- and it shows through media wise. The is zero warmth that exudes from him; the photo ops with his kids are just excrutiating to watch. But his viewpoints and policies are amazingly deep and well thought out --- kind of the polar opposite of his Texas brother in the US Senate.

And dont get me wrong, Robert has done well for his district. And he has an awesome smile and persona. If you could combine the persona of Robert and the acumen of Theodore (I failed there Lad) that imo would be a perfect political person. If you combine the persona of Rafael and the deep acumen of Robert, it would be the absolute worse ever political combination. And apologies, paraphrasing an old joke about French, Germans, and Brits when comparing cooking, engineering, and comedians.

(09-20-2018 12:07 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 11:48 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 10:56 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  And to be honest the Rafael campaign (happy now Lad?) engages in the same unicorns/fairy dust issue framing as Robert's campaign does.

Agreed. The campaigning in the media so far has been strange, to say the least. Beto seems to want to speak in 90+% vague generalities and "feel-good" messages/plans (not unlike a Texan version of a 2008 Obama), while Cruz seems insistent on making bizarre comments that all have food in them: Beto is either a triple meat Whataburger (excellent choice for a meal, IMO) liberal, advancing the cause of tofu (poor choice for a meal, IMO) or banning bbq (also an excellent choice for a meal). I think Ted is just really damn hungry and O'Rourke has watched too many 2008 Obama videos.

Give Beto some credit - he does actually put forward some specific policy goals. See this op-ed for an example: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion...181472.php

In the op-ed he proposes:

1) eliminating private prisons
2) ending the federal prohibition on pot and expunging the records of those who have been locked up for possession
3) stopping mandatory minimum sentencing for non-violent drug offenses
4) ending bail bonds
5) strengthening rehabilitation and counseling services for people who are released from prison after committing non-violent crimes

Those goals are fairly specific, and my guess is that he has the details of how to write the legislation if asked.

And 2 of the list are explicitly pablum when you stop and think about what the Federal government can and cant do as an 'overall' actor.

Eliminate private prisons? Neat goal. Too bad 95 per cent of them are state prisons (or jails operating under state power).

Ending bail bonds? Interesting. I dont think the California model is exceptionally bright. But notice the actor the in the previous sentence. If he wants to 'end bail bonds' kind of hard to do nationwide under the concept of Federalism. Ahhh, but who's counting.....

Thank you for making my point with almost half of his policy goals having close to zero interaction with the duty of US Senator.

(09-20-2018 12:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Look, I think Rafael (happy again, Lad?) is by far the most Constitutional-involved politician I have ever seen. In 2003-ish, I had a break back in Texas and heard Cruz speak at a very small CLE, and had the opportunity to interact with him in a very small setting for half an hour or so. I was blown away at that time about his knowledge level re: Constitutional issues.

The problem I have with him is he is probably one of the most creepy people I have encountered --- and it shows through media wise. The is zero warmth that exudes from him; the photo ops with his kids are just excrutiating to watch. But his viewpoints and policies are amazingly deep and well thought out --- kind of the polar opposite of his Texas brother in the US Senate.

And dont get me wrong, Robert has done well for his district. And he has an awesome smile and persona. If you could combine the persona of Robert and the acumen of Theodore (I failed there Lad) that imo would be a perfect political person. If you combine the persona of Rafael and the deep acumen of Robert, it would be the absolute worse ever political combination. And apologies, paraphrasing an old joke about French, Germans, and Brits when comparing cooking, engineering, and comedians.

Cruz is a brilliant man, but a total awful person. There's a reason Lindsay Graham said what he did about Cruz being murdered in the Senate and no one telling...

It's his intelligence, and his understanding of the Constitution, that made one of his recent responses about the potential ability of the POTUS to pardon themselves so hilarious. He was asked about a tweet Trump made about POTUS' being able to pardon themselves and he basically froze and then went with "That is not a constitutional issue I have studied, so I will withhold judgement at this point."

Lol.

And Tanq, you keep calling Beto and Ted whatever you want to call them. Just cus I said I found something funny doesn't mean you have to change what you're doing - sorry that me mentioning that seems to have caused some mild consternation. Mea culpa.

(09-20-2018 12:46 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 12:07 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 11:48 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 10:56 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  And to be honest the Rafael campaign (happy now Lad?) engages in the same unicorns/fairy dust issue framing as Robert's campaign does.

Agreed. The campaigning in the media so far has been strange, to say the least. Beto seems to want to speak in 90+% vague generalities and "feel-good" messages/plans (not unlike a Texan version of a 2008 Obama), while Cruz seems insistent on making bizarre comments that all have food in them: Beto is either a triple meat Whataburger (excellent choice for a meal, IMO) liberal, advancing the cause of tofu (poor choice for a meal, IMO) or banning bbq (also an excellent choice for a meal). I think Ted is just really damn hungry and O'Rourke has watched too many 2008 Obama videos.

Give Beto some credit - he does actually put forward some specific policy goals. See this op-ed for an example: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion...181472.php

In the op-ed he proposes:

1) eliminating private prisons
2) ending the federal prohibition on pot and expunging the records of those who have been locked up for possession
3) stopping mandatory minimum sentencing for non-violent drug offenses
4) ending bail bonds
5) strengthening rehabilitation and counseling services for people who are released from prison after committing non-violent crimes

Those goals are fairly specific, and my guess is that he has the details of how to write the legislation if asked.

And 2 of the list are explicitly pablum when you stop and think about what the Federal government can and cant do as an 'overall' actor.

Eliminate private prisons? Neat goal. Too bad 95 per cent of them are state prisons (or jails operating under state power).

Ending bail bonds? Interesting. I dont think the California model is exceptionally bright. But notice the actor the in the previous sentence. If he wants to 'end bail bonds' kind of hard to do nationwide under the concept of Federalism. Ahhh, but who's counting.....

Thank you for making my point with almost half of his policy goals having close to zero interaction with the duty of US Senator.

I don't know his policy details, but regarding the private prisons, my guess is that the fed could tie federal subsidies (which I assume exist) for prisons to a requirement that either they do not go towards funding private state prisons or that they do not go to states that fund private state prisons.

Just spit balling here about ways to make his policy goals reality. It doesn't seem too outlandish, but it is a very off-the cuff thought.

Consternation? Im not the one harping on using whatever names, Lad.

No consternation at all. I find Robert's change from a childhood name to one more in line with his native electorate to be rather charming.

(09-20-2018 12:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Consternation? Im not the one harping on using whatever names, Lad.

No consternation at all. I find Robert's change from a childhood name to one more in line with his native electorate to be rather charming.

What name did he go by as a child and when did he start using Beto?

Don't know exactly when the change occurred.

I have been acquainted with the O'Rourke family since I was tiny. We went to the same elementary and high schools and he was quite a bit younger than me. Not a close relationship, more of friends of friends (I know a lot of people whose younger siblings he hung with), but the families at Mesita and El Paso High all kind of knew of one another.

I kind of lost touch with EP when I went to Rice. His pop was county judge, and the next thing I heard about Robert was that he jonesing to follow his deceased pop into politics. So somewhere between his early high school and his run to EP City Council Robert had turned into Beto.

I knew the incumbent he won against on City Council fairly decently, and remember him being pissed that some 'punk Irish kid with a changed name' beat him (his words not mine.) But Cobos ended up in the pokey after resigning as El Paso County Judge under an ethical cloud, so, take those words with a big grain of salt.

(09-20-2018 12:50 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 12:46 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 12:07 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 11:48 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 10:56 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  And to be honest the Rafael campaign (happy now Lad?) engages in the same unicorns/fairy dust issue framing as Robert's campaign does.

Agreed. The campaigning in the media so far has been strange, to say the least. Beto seems to want to speak in 90+% vague generalities and "feel-good" messages/plans (not unlike a Texan version of a 2008 Obama), while Cruz seems insistent on making bizarre comments that all have food in them: Beto is either a triple meat Whataburger (excellent choice for a meal, IMO) liberal, advancing the cause of tofu (poor choice for a meal, IMO) or banning bbq (also an excellent choice for a meal). I think Ted is just really damn hungry and O'Rourke has watched too many 2008 Obama videos.

Give Beto some credit - he does actually put forward some specific policy goals. See this op-ed for an example: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion...181472.php

In the op-ed he proposes:

1) eliminating private prisons
2) ending the federal prohibition on pot and expunging the records of those who have been locked up for possession
3) stopping mandatory minimum sentencing for non-violent drug offenses
4) ending bail bonds
5) strengthening rehabilitation and counseling services for people who are released from prison after committing non-violent crimes

Those goals are fairly specific, and my guess is that he has the details of how to write the legislation if asked.

And 2 of the list are explicitly pablum when you stop and think about what the Federal government can and cant do as an 'overall' actor.

Eliminate private prisons? Neat goal. Too bad 95 per cent of them are state prisons (or jails operating under state power).

Ending bail bonds? Interesting. I dont think the California model is exceptionally bright. But notice the actor the in the previous sentence. If he wants to 'end bail bonds' kind of hard to do nationwide under the concept of Federalism. Ahhh, but who's counting.....

Thank you for making my point with almost half of his policy goals having close to zero interaction with the duty of US Senator.

I don't know his policy details, but regarding the private prisons, my guess is that the fed could tie federal subsidies (which I assume exist) for prisons to a requirement that either they do not go towards funding private state prisons or that they do not go to states that fund private state prisons.

Just spit balling here about ways to make his policy goals reality. It doesn't seem too outlandish, but it is a very off-the cuff thought.

When one believes that the heavy hand of the Federal government should be involved in those issues I am dead sure one can always find an avenue for it.

The long and short of it as those two policies are strictly state police power issues.

Leave it to the pablum politics to make it into a Federal level issue. But then again, you should have at least a clue on what my stance is on federalism, the Federal governments powers under the Constitution, and the limit on them also under the Constitution.

If the Feds want to stop bail -- no prob. If the Feds dont want to use private prisons -- no sweat. If the Feds want to legalize pot as a Federal offense -- again, great move.

The flip side is that the states are the ones with *their* feet on the ground for all the issues on his list.

If he feels so strongly abut them he wishes to do an op-ed on those, I would suggest he actually run for fing state office where the impact on those issues is far greater. Smoke and mirrors to put a feel good sound good position in front of ignorant voters is what that list tells me....

(09-20-2018 12:07 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 11:48 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 10:56 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  And to be honest the Rafael campaign (happy now Lad?) engages in the same unicorns/fairy dust issue framing as Robert's campaign does.

Agreed. The campaigning in the media so far has been strange, to say the least. Beto seems to want to speak in 90+% vague generalities and "feel-good" messages/plans (not unlike a Texan version of a 2008 Obama), while Cruz seems insistent on making bizarre comments that all have food in them: Beto is either a triple meat Whataburger (excellent choice for a meal, IMO) liberal, advancing the cause of tofu (poor choice for a meal, IMO) or banning bbq (also an excellent choice for a meal). I think Ted is just really damn hungry and O'Rourke has watched too many 2008 Obama videos.

Give Beto some credit - he does actually put forward some specific policy goals. See this op-ed for an example: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion...181472.php
In the op-ed he proposes:
1) eliminating private prisons
2) ending the federal prohibition on pot and expunging the records of those who have been locked up for possession
3) stopping mandatory minimum sentencing for non-violent drug offenses
4) ending bail bonds
5) strengthening rehabilitation and counseling services for people who are released from prison after committing non-violent crimes
Those goals are fairly specific, and my guess is that he has the details of how to write the legislation if asked.

I agree totally with 2, 3, and 5. 1 and 4 are show stoppers. Absolute drop dead show stoppers for me.

I agree: 2, 3, and 5 are laudable goals.

1 and 4 I would be opposed to.

Stupid to have a 'policy' for US Senate candidate for what many of these are: the police power issues of the individual states.

Btw, for those not knowing, in federalism issues, 'police power' doesnt mean guys in blue uniforms throwing gangbangers around. It means the issue of the inherent sovereign power of a state as opposed to the power of the Federal government.

Federal government has every right to define, or end for that matter, their use of private prisons. It is idiotic for someone to campaign for Federal office saying that he wants to end the practice everywhere en toto. Unicorns and fairy dust.

Or it is an indication who thinks that the the power of the Federal government should be responsible for defining each and every inherent state power everywhere. Thats well beyond idiotic.

(09-20-2018 01:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  So somewhere between his early high school and his run to EP City Council Robert had turned into Beto.

So Beto was not always the name he was known by.

Thanks.

In my case, my parents called me by my nickname from day one.

(09-20-2018 04:15 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I agree: 2, 3, and 5 are laudable goals.

1 and 4 I would be opposed to.

Stupid to have a 'policy' for US Senate candidate for what many of these are: the police power issues of the individual states.

Btw, for those not knowing, in federalism issues, 'police power' doesnt mean guys in blue uniforms throwing gangbangers around. It means the issue of the inherent sovereign power of a state as opposed to the power of the Federal government.

Federal government has every right to define, or end for that matter, their use of private prisons. It is idiotic for someone to campaign for Federal office saying that he wants to end the practice everywhere en toto. Unicorns and fairy dust.

Or it is an indication who thinks that the the power of the Federal government should be responsible for defining each and every inherent state power everywhere. Thats well beyond idiotic.

To be fair, Beto was not clear in his op-ed if he wanted to push for changes in a federal or state level. I just provided a short summary of a rather short op-ed. It might be beneficial to google a bit more to see if he wants to target federal prisons or state prisons.

Based on th title of the op-ed, I actually think he’s taking his personal positions and lobbying for state officials to make those changes. But like I said, it would probably behoove us all to actually look into this a bit more.

(09-20-2018 04:37 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 01:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  So somewhere between his early high school and his run to EP City Council Robert had turned into Beto.

So Beto was not always the name he was known by.

Thanks.

In my case, my parents called me by my nickname from day one.

I’ve already posted a photo of Beto as a young child wearing a sweater with the nickname Beto embroidered on it.

(09-20-2018 05:49 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 04:37 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 01:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  So somewhere between his early high school and his run to EP City Council Robert had turned into Beto.

So Beto was not always the name he was known by.

Thanks.

In my case, my parents called me by my nickname from day one.

I’ve already posted a photo of Beto as a young child wearing a sweater with the nickname Beto embroidered on it.

I have a picture of myself at age 4 with the name "Stinker" on it. I guess that is proof positive that has been my moniker since then. Got it. Glad to know. Funny, for some strange reason I thought I was called something else. Perhaps 'dumbbag' (or something that sounds strangely like it...)

Hey believe what you want. No skin off my back. I'll just go with what I know first hand. Sound like a deal to you?

(09-20-2018 05:49 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 04:37 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 01:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  So somewhere between his early high school and his run to EP City Council Robert had turned into Beto.

So Beto was not always the name he was known by.
Thanks.
In my case, my parents called me by my nickname from day one.

I’ve already posted a photo of Beto as a young child wearing a sweater with the nickname Beto embroidered on it.

Knowing his family, my guess is that was calculated so that photo would be available when he sought to enter El Paso politics later in life. "See, I've always been Beto."

(09-20-2018 06:13 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 05:49 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 04:37 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 01:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  So somewhere between his early high school and his run to EP City Council Robert had turned into Beto.

So Beto was not always the name he was known by.
Thanks.
In my case, my parents called me by my nickname from day one.

I’ve already posted a photo of Beto as a young child wearing a sweater with the nickname Beto embroidered on it.

Knowing his family, my guess is that was calculated so that photo would be available when he sought to enter El Paso politics later in life. "See, I've always been Beto."

If I were a betting man, I would wager that first hand relationships and knowledge wont matter with this subject. It sure is fun seeing people kind of getting a little 'rile' on with calling him Robert....