Pete Sessions co-sponsors bill to change 14th Amendment

Sure, they swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, but they just want to "tweak" it a bit, and get rid of birthright citizenship--a right guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. For those of you who wondered whether or not Pete Sessions is a co-sponsor, yes, he is. For a look at their editing of the Constitution, check their revisions to the Amendment at the Library of Congress. A list of co-sponsors is available at this Gov Track link: H.R. 1868: Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009

The bill has been referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.

Mitch McConnell is on record as wanting a "hearing" on the 14th Amendment, but not all conservatives agree, namely Lou Dobbs.

In the upcoming debates (unless Pete chickens out), listen for the latest right-wing fringe scare tactic: the "anchor baby" plot to take over America. :)

(And, if you submit a question, ask Pete if he'll considering "tweaking" the Second Amendment to exclude things like armor piercing bullets, since he's into changing the Constitution all of a sudden).

Dems to NRCC: Return your tainted cash

In today's Dallas Morning News, we learned that our new performing arts center is named for someone being investigated by the SEC:

SEC accuses Sam, Charles Wyly of secrecy, insider trading

The suit is the first formal accusation of wrongdoing against the Wylys after more than six years of subpoenas, grand jury investigations, congressional hearings and copious speculation about when the legal shoes might drop.

"The cloak of secrecy has been lifted from the complex web of foreign structures used by the Wylys to evade the securities laws," the SEC said in a statement, calling the Wylys' accounting an "elaborate sham system of trusts and subsidiary companies."

The suit names Wyly attorney Michael C. French of Dallas and stockbroker Louis J. Schaufele III of Dallas as cogs in an intricate global financial network that sold $750 million worth of stock.

And we got lots of email from our readers today alerting us that Pete Sessions and the NRCC were recipients of the tainted funds. From The Atlantic:

These Guys Owned the GOP, writes Marcus Baram at The Huffington Post: "Charles and Samuel Wyly, along with their wives, have donated $2.5 million to more than 200 Republican candidates and committees over the past 20 years, including over $1.3 million to the Republican National Committee, according to an analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics. The top recipients of their largesse have been Texas Republicans. George W. Bush received at least $100,000 raised by the Wyly clan during the 2000 presidential election. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson has received $30,400 from the family; Rep. Pete Sessions, $29,000. Other Republican senators who've received their donations include John Cornyn of Texas, Sam Brownback of Kansas, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, John Thune of South Dakota and Kit Bond of Missouri. Sam Wyly also funded the Swift Boat campaign that torpedoed Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign."

And, from Wall St. Journal:

Friday, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, a national fund-raising arm for the party, said the National Republican Congressional Committee should return $160,000 it received from the Wyly brothers over the past two decades.

The Wylys, now in their 70s, made their name through computer, retail and hedge-fund ventures over four decades. They have been active in Republican political circles and, together with their wives, have donated nearly $2.5 million to more than 200 federal-level Republican candidates and committees during the past 20 years, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

Now that the Wyly Brothers are in trouble, will Pete Sessions send them a love letter?

Pete Sessions parks in fire lane for endorsement interview!

Actually, it was his assistant Emily Davis who parked in the fire lane at the Dallas Morning News, since she drove him to the interview and was there to comb his hair before he met the editors--as reported by David Smith, who reviewed the interview process on his blog: Review: Dallas Morning News Editorial Board endorsement interview.

But, seriously, isn't that just typical of Pete Sessions, allowing his assistant to park in a fire lane, assuming everybody else's rules don't apply to him?

To the Sessions Watchers who've been badgering the Dallas Morning News over the past few days, asking the editorial board if they're planning on ignoring this race, you can stop now. They actually did an endorsement interview, so they should be making their decision in a few days.

From past experience with Dallas Morning News, we expect something along the lines of their half-hearted endorsement of Pete Sessions over Will Pryor in 2006, in which the editorial board had a litany of "wishes" that Pete Sessions would be a totally different person, but endorsed him anyway.

At Sessions Watch, we have our own set of "wishes" for the Dallas Morning News in their coverage of Pete Sessions, starting with our wish that they would comment in print on his inability to give a straight answer to anything.

In debates, when Pete Sessions is speaking to a bipartisan group that isn't packed with his supporters, his roundabout answers actually get laughs from the crowd. So why does the Dallas Morning News constantly give him passes on his obvious lack of knowledge on the issues?

According to David Smith, Sessions performed as we've come to expect him to in the interview:

And to be honest, I'm not sure that Rep. Sessions answered a single question he was asked! He used words like "leadership" and "reducing spending," even referring to my bringing up the Allen Stanford affair as--I have to make sure to get this right--I LOVED this term!--"a political characterization by a political opponent." Totally blew off the issue....

Readers of Sessions Watch may not agree with everything David Smith proposes, but at least he would be able to conduct an honest debate, using actual facts to back up his ideas instead of throwing the word "freedom" around for a cheap applause line.

C'mon, TX-32 Republicans, you've been campaigning for a GOP primary challenger since you first got stuck with Sessions back in 2004. Vote now, or forever hold your peace.

NRCC fundraising down under Sessions' leadership

From Politico:

If Republicans hope to make a play for dozens of Democratic-held House seats, they’ll need a well-stocked campaign account to fund all their candidates. But right now, after spending money in two contentious off-year special elections, the National Republican Congressional Committee has a long way to go to raise enough money to compete across the national map.

The National Republican Congressional Committee ended September with just $4.3 million in the bank, less than one-third of the $14.7 million banked by its Democratic counterpart. So far this cycle, NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions hasn’t improved the fundraising fortunes of the committee — he’s raised $10 million less than his predecessor, Rep. Tom Cole, did at this same point in the past election cycle.

And the committee took an additional financial hit in the New York 23rd District special election, spending nearly $1 million on a race in which the GOP nominee, Dede Scozzafava, ended up quitting and then endorsing the Democratic candidate. Worse, the NRCC’s decision to support Scozzafava’s campaign has played a role in alienating conservative donors.

In related news, Florida Republican State Senator Eric Eisnaugle has decided not to run against Alan Grayson for his seat in Congress (FL-8). The other Republican contender in that race is Armando Gutierrez, who is causing the GOP to be "concerned":

But GOP operatives in Washington and the district say he is running a destructive primary campaign, and national and local leaders are doing just about anything they can to avoid having him as their nominee.

“He’s offending a lot of people,” said attorney Will McBride, who opted out of the race last week. “He’s rubbing people the wrong way. He needs to be a little more professional in his approach to reaching out to local leaders in our party.”

Numerous others confirmed the widespread bristling at Gutierrez’s early maneuvers.

“He’s pissing people off a lot,” said a leading local GOP operative...

Pete Sessions and Poker, Part 2

On our way to looking up stuff about Dede Scozzafava, the Sessions Watch team found something interesting--Pete Sessions' top donor for the 2010 cycle so far is Poker Road, which leads us back to a question D Magazine asked last election cycle "What's the Deal With Pete Sessions and Poker?"

Take a look at Pete Sessions' list of individual contributors--of the top 20, the first 9 are connected in some way with poker. Five in the $2300-3000 donation range list their occupations as "Self Employed/Professional Poker Player, and list their residences in Las Vegas. Among others in the top 9 include the Poker Room Manager for the Bellagio in Las Vegas, who gave him $2,500, and Joe Sebok, CEO of Poker Road, an internet gambling site.

And poker benefits our district because...? And gambling fits in with Pete Sessions' Eagle Scout image because...?

UPDATE: Speaking of Las Vegas, Sessions Watch would like to thank a reader (who prefers to remain anonymous) for sending this picture of Pete Sessions enjoying himself at Forty Deuce strip club in Las Vegas.

Town Hall Video and Commentary

Sessions Watch would like to thank regular commenter and Republican precinct chair John Peterson for his video of Pete Sessions' introductory remarks at Thursday's town hall meeting; John also wrote an article about the meeting, which provides a good summary for those who missed it.

John's working on activating the comments section of his blog; if you comment, please be respectful--John's putting his real name out there, unlike Sessions Watch, which is a group of what we refer to as "Congressional mystery shoppers."

Until John's comment box is activated, please feel free to comment here.

The video and article are available at this link: Pete Sessions Town Hall Meeting Summary.

UPDATE: Another report from Richardson is available at Ed Cognoski's blog:

And, for the benefit of the Republican club in Park Cities who requested it, here's the video clip of another Texas Republican, Joe Barton, asking the insurance industry execs if they felt bad that people die because of their policy of rescission. It's worthwhile viewing, and a reminder that the real fight for reform is not between Democrats and Republicans, but between the American people and a for-profit health care industry that's become too greedy:

The complete list of articles about last night's meeting are as follows:

CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? Sessions town hall report by David Smith, The Examiner

Sessions uncommitted to reading all legislation before votes

by David Smith, The Examiner

Sessions discusses health care proposal in Richardson by John Nielsen, Dallas Morning News

Last Night, Pete Sessions Turned Health Care Debate Into an Easy-to-Swallow Pill by Kimberly Thorpe, Dallas Observer

Pete Sessions embarasses GOP (again)

Shortly after Pete Sessions became NRCC Chair, he caused a nationwide uproar by comparing the Republican Party to terrorists (See blog posts from Feburary, 2009).

Now, he's at it again, even causing ultra-conservative GOPer John Cornyn to say, "I’d like some sort of clarification about what he meant."

At issue are comments Pete Sessions made to New York Times, concocting some sort of conspiracy theory that the Obama Adminstration is trying to diminish employment and diminish stock prices as part of a divide and conquer strategy to consolidate power.

Read more about it at Lone Star Project: Pete Sessions' Credibility Stock Hits New Low: Shaky Republican Campaign Chairman now just making things up, at Dallas Morning News: Sen. John Cornyn rejects Dallas Rep. Pete Sessions' Obama accusation and at The Moderate Voice: Did You Know That Obama’s “REAL” Objective Is To Create Unemployment?

Another Risqué Fundraiser For Pete Sessions

From The Sleuth:

Sessions, the Sleuth has learned, held a fundraiser in February at a racy venue in Las Vegas whose Web site features come-hither looking women scantily clad in lingerie slithering all over each other...

...The establishment - the Tao nightclub and restaurant on the Strip - isn't as risqué as the fundraiser Sessions held last year at the Forty Deuce burlesque club in Vegas. Still, Tao isn't exactly a paradigm of conservative family values. And it's doubtful such a fundraiser is what GOP leaders have in mind when they talk about rebranding the party...

...The Web site also boasts: "Tao Las Vegas is frequented by celebrities on a regular basis, such as Paris Hilton, Jessica Simpson, Tommy Lee, Britney Spears, Jamie Foxx, Janet Jackson, Bono andMadonna."

Who could have predicted five years ago, after Sessions scolded Super Bowl half-time entertainer Janet Jackson for forcing her "liberal values upon the rest of the country" that he and the pop star would wind up hanging at the same hot spots in Sin City?

"Sessions' Taliban strategy"

From Sunday's letters to the editor, Dallas Morning News:

Re: "Talking Points," last Sunday Points.
My congressman, U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions, wishes to emulate the Taliban rather than help put the country back together that his ilk ran into a ditch over the past eight years. He bemoans what he calls the classic liberal doctrine of "tax and spend," but what is the GOP doctrine? Cut taxes and spend?
If only we had half the money Republicans squandered in the past decade we would not have such a bitter pill to swallow today.

At this writing, there are 5 comments on the blog, and Sessions is losing 4-1.
Add your comment at the Dallas Morning News opinion blog.

Sessions makes Olbermann's "Worst Person" list

Commentary on "Mullah Pete" begins at clip position 1:18.

Pete Sessions on Colbert Report

Pete Sessions' comment was the topic of "The Word" on Tuesday night's edition of The Colbert Report. Check it out!

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c

The Word - Loyal Opposition

Colbert Report Full Episodes
Funny Political News

Christian Bale Parody
Joke of the Day

Joe Scarborough Shuns Taliban-linked GOP

Floridians who've been asking Joe Scarborough to run for the Senate may have to wait a bit. In an interview with White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, Scarborough dismissed the rumor by alluding to Sessions' recent remark:

“Here’s my problem, Robert,” Scarborough said. “I don’t really think it would be good to run in 2010 with a party that is actively associating itself with the Taliban.”

Read the entire article at The Hill.

Kansas to Pete Sessions: What's the Matter With You?

Over the past few years, Kansas has been held up as an example where voters have fallen for right-wing talking points, such as abortion, gay marriage and gun control, and end up voting against their own interests; they elect politicians who they think best represent "family values," only to be disappointed to find the poltician working for the benefit of the lobbyists and well-funded special interest groups.

Apparently, Kansas is waking up. Though still a "red state," John McCain didn't break the 60% margin in 2008 (McCain received 57% of the vote to Obama's 41%); from the following blog posts in the Wichita Eagle, it appears they're looking for a different GOP model than Pete Sessions has to offer, too. The article GOP feeling good about insurgency drew the following blog posts from readers:

It’s a nice change. Conservatives have gone from supporting terrorists to openly admiring them.

The core principal that is behind the Republicans is to crush the middle class.

The Republicans have always had a master/slave mentality and they see their opportunity to further enslave those “undeserving” masses.

NOW they’re voting for fiscal responsibility?!? Where were they the last 8 years?

I believe that we should whole-heartedly support Republics in their desire to stick to their “core prunciples” - by keeping them OUT OF POWER! After all; it is whan Republics are in power that their “core principles” suffer.

The parallel between the taliban and the gop has long been recognized on this forum. They are both terrorist and a threat to the well being of America.

The last real republican was Barry Goldwater.

And the winner of the Sessions Watch Best Comment award goes to this one:

I expect bin laden will release a statement that they are in no way affiliated with the gop. Who’d want to own that?

More fallout for "Taliban Pete"

Ken Sury of Waco Tribune takes offense at Maureen Dowd's mention of the fact Pete Sessions is originally from Waco:

My first reaction was, “Maureen, do your homework!” Sessions represents District 32 in Dallas, which includes the new home of former President George W. Bush.

However, Sessions did grow up in Waco, as his biography on his Web site states, and he is the son of William Sessions, former FBI director and a past resident of our city.

But usually when you refer to someone as being from somewhere, it’s where they reside today. Sadly, Waco to most people outside Texas, remains one of those touchstone names that generally evokes a less-than-desired response. I think that’s Dowd’s intent here. Sessions is from Waco, therefore he is pro-Bush conservative Republican dolt.

Nice broad paintbrush you’re using, Ms. Dowd.

The offending passage from Maureen Dowd's Column is at this link: Potomac’s Postpartisan Depression:

Pete Sessions, a conservative from Waco, Tex., and the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, warned that they could become an insurgency, having learned more about insurgencies “because of the Taliban.” (Yes, that’s the same Taliban that was allowed to regenerate by bumbling Republican leaders.)

New York Times columnist Bob Herbert uses the controversial statement to draw comparisons between President Obama and the nay-saying Republicans, in this assessment last night's press conference:

Mr. Obama is like a championship chess player, always several moves ahead of friend and foe alike. He’s smart, deft, elegant and subtle. While Lindsey Graham was behaving like a 6-year-old on the Senate floor and Pete Sessions was studying passages in his Taliban handbook, Mr. Obama and his aides were assessing what’s achievable in terms of stimulus legislation and how best to get there.

Another publication to join the pile-on is the magazine The Week, which used the reference as a starting place from which to criticize today's GOP: The Taliban GOP

Republican Pete Sessions of Texas has cited the Taliban as a “model” for his party’s conduct in Congress. The Republican purpose is clearly to destroy the Obama Presidency, to frustrate economic recovery and then blame the Democrats—and so recapture the Congress and the White House on the backs of a broken middle class...

Sessions Watch would just like to take this time to remind the Republican Party that we did try to warn you last year, when you picked Pete Sessions to lead a GOP retreat:

The elephant is broken, and now they're relying on Pete Sessions to help put it together with his "re-branding" effort? Good lord, they're in worse trouble than Peggy Noonan imagined!

Dallas Morning News, Free Republic comment on "Taliban Pete"

Today's Dallas Morning News picked up the story from yesterday, about Pete Sessions comparing the GOP with the Taliban. Most of the article was just a rehash of previous articles, but the writer included this gem:

In the past, comparisons of conservative Republicans to the Islamic fundamentalist Taliban have sparked outrage. It may be a first, though, for a politician to invoke the comparison on his own colleagues.

Commenters on the conservative blog Free Republic also weighed in, pretty much agreeing with sentiments posted yesterday on liberal and centrist blogs. Sessions Watch chose the following comments as a measure of how Pete Sessions is received by the GOP "base":

What an idiot.

That’s a pretty ignorant statement, no matter what point he was trying to make.

The Taliban?
Nice analogy.

NOT.

Please tell me Sessions is a RINO.

Sessions should lose his posts over this if not outright resign. What the hell was he thinking?

And the Sessions Watch award for Best Comment from the Free Republic blog goes to commenter Force of Truth, who asks:

So where do the 72 virgins fit in to this equation?

Congressman compares Republican Party to terrorists

Good grief. Some idiot congressman just compared the Republican party to the Taliban. Check out this quote:

Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban...they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person's entire processes. And these Taliban -- I'm not trying to say the Republican Party is the Taliban. No, that's not what we're saying. I'm saying an example of how you go about [sic] is to change a person from their messaging to their operations to their frontline message. And we need to understand that insurgency may be required when the other side, the House leadership, does not follow the same commands, which we entered the game with."

Who could have said such an idiotic thing?

If you guessed Pete Sessions, give yourself a gold star.

MSNBC's First Thoughts column offers this comment:

Wow, we can think of plenty of other examples of insurgencies (American Revolution, Indian resistance to Great Britain), but the Taliban? Imagine what Drudge would do if a Democrat said this.

Their headline: At least he didn’t use a Nazi metaphor.

Hat tip to the two Sessions Watchers who found the article in Huffington Post and National Journal this morning. The Sessions Watcher who found the National Journal article says:

This is a major leader of the House Republican Caucus, the chairman of the National Republican Campaign Committee. Sessions is in charge of the strategy and tactics he thinks are necessary to win more seats for Republicans in the House.

And he's a fan of the Taliban's tactics.

The Sessions Watcher who found the article in Huffington Post comments:

So let me get this straight, the GOP is taking strategy from Joe the Plumber and the Taliban? I seriously don't understand what the hell Democrats find to be so scary about Republicans.

UPDATE: More commentary from National Journal:

To be sure, Sessions isn't comparing GOPers to the Taliban. But ... wow. His poor choice of words is instructive. Defining differences w/Dems isn't the problem. In fact, it's the only choice they have. But if voters feel like the attacks are too heavy-handed or over-the-top, they won't work. This may be the kind of election where a scalpel will be more effective than a sledgehammer. How do you attack Dems if Obama's still popular? Answer: Carefully.