Showing posts sorted by relevance for query retreat. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query retreat. Sort by date Show all posts

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Pete Sessions to Co-Chair GOP Retreat

Well, I'm disappointed--when I saw an article that Pete Sessions was leading a GOP House Retreat, I thought it meant they were leaving. No such luck. It's a marketing thing. From Real Clear Politics:

To Avoid Further Losses, Republicans Need 'Re-Branding'

The co-chairmen of the 70-member Suburban Caucus, Reps. Mark Kirk (Ill.), a moderate, and Pete Sessions (Texas), a conservative, are scheduled to present the agenda -- and polling data backing it up -- at the House GOP retreat beginning today in West Virginia.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) has been talking for more than a year about the need for Republicans to "re-brand" themselves or remain in the minority.

Look, people, I've got a piece of advice that serves for everyone, not just those in Congress. If you want to keep your job, do your job. Showing up for work, for instance, is a good way to keep your job. That shouldn't have to be said, but some people in Congress seem to have trouble in that area. Instead of taking time off for a marketing seminar, how 'bout staying at work?

And if you are a Congressman, please meet the people you represent and find out what they want. It may be that a sizeable percentage of people in your district don't want a right-wing extremist who votes with the Republican Party 91% of the time. Pete Sessions votes as if he won a landslide victory--he didn't. To date, he has ignored the 42% of constituents who voted for his opponent.

As Peggy Noonan said, George W. Bush destroyed the Republican Party:
On the pundit civil wars, Rush Limbaugh declared on the radio this week, "I'm here to tell you, if either of these two guys [Mr. McCain or Mike Huckabee] get the nomination, it's going to destroy the Republican Party. It's going to change it forever, be the end of it!"

This is absurd. George W. Bush destroyed the Republican Party, by which I mean he sundered it, broke its constituent pieces apart and set them against each other. He did this on spending, the size of government, war, the ability to prosecute war, immigration and other issues.

Were there other causes? Yes, of course. But there was an immediate and essential cause.

And this needs saying, because if you don't know what broke the elephant you can't put it together again...

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!

Monday, January 12, 2009

Pete Sessions names Greg Walden as Deputy Chair of NRCC

From Oregon Public Broadcasting:
When NRCC chair Pete Sessions wanted someone to manage the party's regional strategy for 2010, he called on his long-time friend Greg Walden...

...So what about all those rumors that Walden might run for Governor in 2010?

Here's what Walden's spokesman Andrew Whelan says.

Andrew Whelan: "Chairman Sessions is a good friend, and asked Greg if he would be interested in helping him tackle this new responsibility. But as for running for Governor, there's a time and place for that conversation, and we're not there yet."
Like Pete Sessions, Walden is one of these inconsistent bailout voters; Greg Walden voted for the original taxpayer-funded federal bailout, then voted against the auto industry bailout. Now, Greg Walden wants an investigation of AIG's taxpayer-funded spa retreat:
These are exactly the kinds of abuses that drive me up a wall and are infuriating to taxpayers across the country. The Treasury Department needs to get to the bottom of this quickly to find out if taxpayers were taken for a ride. After accepting $85 billion in taxpayer money to keep their company afloat, the AIG executive brain trust was so fatigued they took a luxurious spa vacation on the company dime. With judgment like that, no wonder they needed taxpayers to bail them out. If public funds were used to bankroll this preposterous getaway, taxpayers must be repaid every cent.
Like Sessions, Walden can't complain that voters didn't try to warn him:
A majority of Portland-area residents oppose a government bailout to resolve the financial crisis, and an even larger number say they are “angry and resentful” about Wall Street, according to a new Portland Tribune/Fox 12 News poll.

Forty-one percent of Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas county residents agreed that a bailout or rescue “is necessary to keep the economy from going into what could be a very serious downtown.” But 52 percent agreed that “people on Wall Street got us into this mess, and they should figure out how to get us out without sticking it to the taxpayers...”

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Pete Sessions "cuts and runs" after debate with Eric Roberson

Probably the most difficult thing about being a SessionsWatcher is actually seeing Pete Sessions in person. It's kinda like hanging out in the rain forest with binoculars, trying to catch a glimpse of a rare bird that only shows up every two years, then flits away into the night.

After last night's debate--which only lasted half an hour--Sessions made a hasty retreat out the door of the elementary school cafetorium, instead of hanging around with constituents, enjoying cookies and coffee and listening to the other debates of the evening. Granted, it wasn't an ideal format; it was a town hall meeting, with the congressional debate followed by the county sheriff debate and a Texas house district race, but the whole thing was over in under two hours. Congress is not in session at the moment, there's no urgent business that needs attention. Would it have hurt Pete Sessions so terribly to hang out with us for a couple of hours, pose for pictures with constituents, shake hands, work the room--you know, stuff that politicians do?

Democratic challenger Eric Roberson, on the other hand, stayed through the other debates and spent time afterward answering people's questions, calming their anxieties about these tough economic times. If he'd done nothing more than that, he would have won the debate, but he also bested the 6th-term incumbent in answering questions from constituents. As an attendee posted this morning in the comment box:
Anonymous said...

I attended the debate yesterday and I must say that Eric won a decisive victory. Pete was out of touch with the audience... Go Eric Roberson!

October 9, 2008 5:04 AM
That just about says it all--our congressman is out of touch.

Last night's debate was co-sponsored by the Republican and Democratic precinct chairs of a precinct at the far north end of the district, which voted 68.7% Republican in 2006 (75.9% Republican in 2004). So it's not like we asked him to come all the way down to my "scary" neighborhood 25 miles to the south where people vote predominately Democratic. He was in friendly territory, where usually the candidate has to do nothing more than say "I'm the Republican" to get people's vote.

But times have changed since 2006.

On Wednesday, the Dow closed at 9,258; those of use who have retirement plans received our statements in the mail this week. Some of those envelopes remain unopened on our desks, because we're afraid to see how far our savings have plummeted.

The mix of people seemed to be fairly evenly divided politically, though it was difficult to tell from audience response, which favored Eric Roberson. People are scared, they want to know how our economy got into such a mess, what our representatives are going to do to fix it, and what they're going to do to make sure this doesn't happen again.

Before the debate, organizers distributed 3x5 cards to attendees in advance of the debate; we wrote our questions, which were collected and taken to the two precinct chairs moderating the debate. The candidates began with 4-minute opening statements, then proceeded to answer questions chosen by the moderators, who took equal turns posing the questions.

Pete Sessions lost the audience with his opening statement. He began with telling us his name, reminding us how long he's been in office, and said he went to D.C. to "grow the economy and provide jobs," a statement which received a rumble of groans and one "boo" from a man in the audience. He didn't even stop to thank the debate sponsors before launching into a partisan statement:
The first vote in the House of Representatives is to elect the Speaker of the House, so you're either voting for me, a Republican, or Nancy Pelosi...
More grumbles from the audience. No one wants to hear that stuff. We want to know if we're going to have any savings left for retirement, if there are going to be foreclosures in our neighborhood, if our favorite local coffee shop is going to be there in the morning when we stop by for donuts and coffee before work, if our job is going to still be there when we get to work, or if we'll find the doors chained shut.

No one cares about Nancy Pelosi.

But Pete Sessions ignored the groans in the audience and just plowed right ahead with canned Republican talking points about cutting taxes and creating jobs; he berated Democrats for "tax increase after tax increase," giving no specifics, seemingly unaware that Republicans were in control of the House and Senate--hence, the budget--until January of 2007. He concluded with a statement I couldn't quite follow, how we should cut taxes and have more money for us instead of the government. I didn't understand that, because tax money is our money and we're the government--as in "we, the people."

Eric Roberson looked relaxed and happy to be there, welcoming the chance to talk to people in the district. He began by thanking the debate co-sponsors--which Sessions failed to do--and started with his biography, how he graduated from Richardson High School before serving in the Navy and returning back to the district to start a family of his own. He spoke briefly about his military service, and how the GI bill helped him attend college. Roberson, while respectfully referring to Pete Sessions as a "great guy: with whom he has some "disagreements," launched into some obvious differences between himself and the incumbent, namely Pete Sessions' vote against the G.I. Bill. Roberson went on to explain that he was raised in a Republican household, but that "extremists" in the party have driven away moderate people like himself. Eric Roberson's just about the only speaker I've heard who can say the word "extremist" in a way that doesn't sound like a radical. With a smile on his face, he said it with an attitude of jovial camaraderie guys have when they're hanging out together, saying something like, "C'mon, Pete, you brag about being at the far right of the Republican Party and I disagree with you on that." Roberson was interrupted several times for applause, as he talked directly to constituents about how government should work on behalf of us, our kids, our parents, and how politicians should be loyal to the people in the district, not to the President or to the political party.

Following opening statements, the moderators read questions from the audience, ranging from the economy to term limits for members of Congress.

On taxes, Pete Sessions advocated "across the board" tax cuts and delivered more standard conservative fare on lowering corporate taxes.

On the economy, Pete Sessions actually blamed "community organizers" for the sub prime mortgage crisis, implying that organizations like ACORN actually write NINJA ("no income, no job, no assets") loans.

Okay, I have to take a pause here and interject something on that topic. I almost laughed out loud when he blamed ACORN and "community organizers," the latest in a long line of Republican-fabricated boogeymen, frequently employed to scare us into voting for them instead of for our own best interest. Mortgage brokers were talking people into lying about income to get loans, and I know a little about it from a friend, who's employed as a teacher. A well-respected mortgage broker tried to talk my friend into lying about her income to qualify for a bigger loan. This broker wasn't the "liberal wacko community organizer" who exists only in Pete Sessions' imagination, but a nicely dressed professional, working in posh upscale office building--probably a Republican. My friend told me about the meeting afterward, about telling the broker that she wanted what she could afford and didn't think lying about her income sounded like the right thing to do. My friend ended up walking away, deciding not to buy a house after all. But how many other people were taken in by the nice office, the expensive suit, the professional sales job; how many people bought the lie that they could do better than just a "starter home," that they could have a "nice" house with every kid in his or her own room?

One person who promoted this type of loan was Pete Sessions' favorite president, George W. Bush. Check out this video of President Bush saying that "deserving families with bad credit histories" should be able to get "just as nice a house as anybody else," then tell me he's not part of the problem!

But I digress.

Eric Roberson countered that we don't need "across the board" cuts in taxes, we need to take a smart look at everything, cutting taxes where it will do the most good in stimulating the economy and leaving other taxes as they are, instead of coming in with a "one size fits all" tax plan.

The final question from the audience concerned a constitutional amendment on term limits for members of Congress. This question was read by the Republican precinct chair, and she got a laugh from the audience as soon as she said the words "term limits." For a few seconds, it sounded like we were at a comedy club!

Pete Sessions said that he supports term limits and has voted for them (I seem to remember him talking about term limits about 10 years ago, but a google-search of "pete sessions term limits" didn't yield much of anything).

Eric Roberson said that he does favor term limits, but would want members of Congress to have enough time in office so the people have experienced members representing them, saying that if there was constant turnover in the House, the people back home wouldn't be very well served.

After both candidates had made their closing statements, as the audience applauded and the moderators thanked them for being there, Pete Sessions slipped out the back. "He's leaving!" said a man across the aisle from me. "He's going out the back door...come out this way," he said, indicating a door behind the seating area. Actually, to be fair, the main entrance to the cafetorium was the one off the parking lot, where we all came in, and where Pete Sessions headed out after the debate. But the visual effect was the same; it looked like he was "sneaking out the back" to avoid talking to us. The applause hadn't even stopped before Pete Sessions was out of sight.

"Was it something we said?" another debate attendee joked, to no one in particular. Another laugh from others in the audience.

Well, I can't blame Pete Sessions from leaving--we didn't have the kind of venue he likes. No strippers, no high stakes poker game in the back room, just coffee, cookies and a lot of questions about what he's been doing for us for the past 12 years. Where's the fun in that?

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

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!