The grassroots are pretty steamed, and this is gaining traction as the days go on and more people find out about the Rose fundraiser
Note: The following is from the conservative "blue dot blues" blog of Travis County. See the whole report here: http://blue-dot-blues.blogspot.com/
It's hilarious that Mr. Samuelson describes State Rep. Patrick Rose as "a proven Liberal Democrat." Samuelson should spend a little time talking to constituents inside Rose's district, including here in Hays County, where Rose is known for his robust support of private business and developer interests, his (well hidden) opposition to more county control over development, and his steadfast opposition to nearly all things the Hays Trinity Groundwater District has done to try to conserve our groundwater and find a stable funding source. (That may change now that the district has 3 developer-friendly board members). There is one thing Rose is good at, and that's playing both sides against the middle.
The fundraiser was held yesterday at 5 p.m. at the Mandola Estate Winery.
Here's more from Dallas Morning News Reporter Robert T. Garrett: http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/05/straus-helps-democrat-with-gop.html
This comment arrived yesterday around 5:30 p.m. from an alert Driftwood area citizen: Hmm. Why is there a group of pickets [right now] protesting to "Fire Patrick Rose!" in front of a certain Italian Restaurant on FM 150 in Hays County? Could it be that our fair-haired boy pissed-off someone else? Or, could it be that more people are finally coming to their senses?
by MJ Samuelson
Published: May 12, 2010
Despite recent claims to the contrary, HD 45 erstwhile Democratic representative is no friend to Texas taxpayers or Texas business. The Right Side of Austin did some great digging on Rep. Rose, which you can find here (and yes, it's true - Speaker Straus, a Republican from San Antonio, is lending his name and presence to a fundraiser for Rose tonight (Wednesday May 12) in Driftwood. Say it with me people: SIGH).
[snip]
Why is Republican Speaker Straus appearing at a fundraiser for proven liberal Democrat Patrick Rose? The complicated answer has to do with speaker politics. Straus is in the position he holds today because of Democratic support - if you doubt that, take another look at the committee appointments, especially the chairmanships, from the 81st session. Some of the arguments in defense of this fundraiser have been "he's also doing this for Republicans" (true - he's doing one for Lubbock Republican John Frullo in Austin), "Craddick supported Rose" (true again - Rose was a well-known "Craddick D" until the ship began to sink), and that he's "speaker of the whole House."Rose has consistently rated low from Young Conservatives of Texas during his tenure in the House. His composite score is a 36 - this last session, he dropped to 29 from 46 in the previous session . . . .
14 comments:
Straus just confirmed what many Hays County Democrats have known all along.
Rose ain't one of us, he is just out to win at all costs and he will throw whoever he needs to under that proverbial bus in his quest.
I disagree with the belief that working with the other side makes you less of a Democrat. We need a legislator who can get things done. Strauss is a moderate Republican who is supporting a moderate Democrat because of his hard work on cancer research and Health and Human Services. This is my take: http://hayscountyforbillwhite.blogspot.com/2010/05/bi-partisan.html
What can you say about Rose. He sucks for us locals but still gets voted in no matter what his legislative voting and actions tell us about him.
Most thinking people know that Rose is a Republican running as a Democrat. He learned how to play the poltical game very well since leaving Princeton University. For many years the Hays County Democrats supported this "wolf in sheep's clothing" even though the members knew what Rose is.
We are stuck with legislators like Rose, Sen. Jeff Wenworth, and most of our current local political herd because people vote for them each reelection and because there are few quality and ethical candidates running against them.
Texas politics will remain stuck in the mud until we get a better class of leaders at the state and local levels. We need more balanced visionaries and NOT the usual brigade of opposite-extremist, mindless, inept and/or special interest motivated lost souls we currently have.
We have the Republican and Democrat Parties, but what we really need is an Intelligent & Ethical Party or to do without parties completely.
More money for Rose's fall campaign, as if he needs more money! Maybe it's to replenish the 300 hundred grand he spent in the primary against Backus. I suggest that all you voters not interested in tons more glossy campaign junk mail from Rose contact the USPS to request stopping all junk mail deliveries to your mailboxes. What a racket.
The Rose spin is that he is fostering bipartisanship, when in fact Rose will introduce or vote for any bill that personally benefits his political career, not introduce needed bills, or introduce (for show) bills that are sure to die in committee.
You have to hand it to him---the boy has gotten really good at feathering his nest these past eight years.
So Rose's voting record counts for nothing, is that it?
"Patrick Rose has been able to work with the opposition on issues that matter to all sides. He has done this in the legislature through Health and Human Services committee and cancer research"
This is the kind of statement that serves only Rose by perpetuating his political propaganda.
Bi-partisanship is working for consensus on divisive issues---NOT on issues with broad agreement---consensus already exists!
Rose did NOT write the cancer research bill or provide any leadership in its passage. The bill was written by others and was so popular that its passage was never in doubt. Few voted against it.
As chair of the Health and Human Services committee Rose was given a bill that was required as part of the statewide agreement in the suit DOJ filed against Texas regarding abuse in state run schools. Rose did NOT write the bill and provided NO leadership in its passage, other than a perfunctory role as committee chair. Like the cancer bill, this bill was a no brainier and was required to settle the DOJ suit against Texas.
Rose has become a master of bi-partisan illusion. Rose rides with those who feather his nest. Self-promotion is his driving principle. That’s why he takes credit for the work of others and markets himself with false advertising.
"So Rose's voting record counts for nothing, is that it?'
Can you be more specific?
There is a committee voting record.
There is a floor voting record.
There are bills Rose authored.
There are bills Rose co-authored.
There are bills Rose sponsored (from the Senate)
There are bills that Rose introduced but died in committee.
There are bills Rose refused to introduce.
I summarized all of these Rose bills in a spreadsheet.
Which ones do you particularly support?
MJ, if you want to recruit a young, ambitious, conservative, pro business, pro development, anti-environmentalist politician into your ranks with a fund raiser's midas touch, Rose is your boy. Please, go for it. It appears the Speaker of the House knows a good special interest back scratcher when he sees one.
Rose is a smart guy, Amanda, but he is not a moderate Democrat. He is either a very conservative Dem or a moderate Republican. Yes, these days bipartisan efforts are admirable, but in Rose's case they are pretty much just a label - to raise money and walk the fence. This is why he keeps getting elected.
More importantly, I applaud the visibility of those here who list your name and/or blog moniker with your comments.
Personal courage to put one's self out there and the integrity to do so are admirable qualities. We need to see more of it.
Charles - I don't agree with Rose's voting history, that's my point. Rose is a political opportunist. Not a centrist, or a moderate, or even an ideologue.
It's interesting to see that he's not particularly beloved by any side.
"Bi-partisanship is working for consensus on divisive issues---NOT on issues with broad agreement---consensus already exists!"
I disagree, I think that of course it's easier to work in a bi-partisan way on something like cancer but it is still bi-partisan. When you have hyper-partisanship plaguing our politics right now it's important to notice when Democrats and Republicans come together to work on issues of mutual interest.
also,
"This is the kind of statement that serves only Rose by perpetuating his political propaganda."
The question must be asked just because Rose does things that look good on the news does that mean that he does them for the news and his career or could he could be doing these things because he actually believes in them and they are issues he holds to be important?
When our State Rep. is well liked by both sides doesn't it generally make things better for us, his constituents?
Amanda D - Rose takes credit for the good work of others and pushes his way to the front of the line after others have done the heavy lifting.
Case in point - PEC management reform. Rose accomplished NOTHING in that matter but crows on his web site how he got it done. That goes beyond political propaganda - it's a bald face lie.
As Rose's colleagues in the Legislature would say, "The voters have been Rosed." Anyone who trusts Rose or believes what he says does so at their peril.
See the John Sharp letter.
Rose is about Rose.
Rose is NOT bi-partisan. He is opportunistic. He does NOT work for the community. He works for the special interests who buy him with campaign contributions and other perks.
I said he is more Republican than Democrat because his voting record show he approved, supported and co-sign most bill desired, supported or sponsored by the likes of Rick Perry, former Speaker Tom Craddick, former toll road czar Mike Krusee and others like these.
Rose is an opportunist, plain and simple and he is on a roll. We need to stop him, but there is no way to do it. He will be reelected just as the other dirt bags will be elected in November.
The cancer related bill is nonsense in thinking or believing that Rose did this solely for the community good. The contributors and supporters of the cancer program/hospital are also Rose contributors and supporters. Rose is a dog with too many fleas.
I will never forget how Rose and Karen Ford stood by at the meetings re: the inferior repaving job of FM 1826 and never verbally or publically spoke up in union with the community against TxDOT's refusal to repave the road using a hot mix.
It took a few of us "loudmouths" who for one year never gave up on contacting the Senate Committee on Transportation and demanded the new repaving, which finally was done, but we paid twice to do the job correctly.
Post a Comment