Laughably, the self-described liberals on the Dallas Morning News editorial board have published a piece giving Texas Republicans advice on choosing the next speaker of the Texas House of Representatives.
Putting aside that their advice is like letting Hamas advise Trump on our policy toward Israel, we can take a few items from the lecturing editorial and make worthy points.
The entire idea of these editors being neutral observers is blown to pieces by this early paragraph:
“Republicans face a potentially precarious decision. Will they select a pragmatic leader similar to Straus, who stressed the interests of Texas and all Texans, or will they go for someone more like Lt. Governor Dan Patrick, who puts reactionary politics first?”
To these folk Republicans are “pragmatic” when they work against issues supported by overwhelming majorities of Republican Party voters. Additionally, anyone who generally backs Republican principals with any effort “puts reactionary politics first.”
“In the 20th Century, proponents of socialism and communism used the term reactionary polemically to label their enemies.”* The Dallas Morning News editors are keeping up the tradition and pulling such into the 21st Century.
Even more laughably ignorant is the idea the editors posit that it was Joe Straus as speaker who is responsible for increasing the GOP House majority during the Obama years.
Straus owes his tenure to the large Democrat numbers that came about off the coattails of Obama in 2008. The idea that it was Straus’ liberalism that helped grow Republican numbers in the House after the Obama spike is devoid of any evidence or understanding of Texas politics.
These liberal editors call conservative priorities “wedge issues” and want Republicans in the House to select a liberal-friendly speaker. Of course they do, they are liberal Democrats.
DMN editors want Republicans to select liberal-friendly speaker of the Texas House
Putting aside that their advice is like letting Hamas advise Trump on our policy toward Israel, we can take a few items from the lecturing editorial and make worthy points.
The entire idea of these editors being neutral observers is blown to pieces by this early paragraph:
“Republicans face a potentially precarious decision. Will they select a pragmatic leader similar to Straus, who stressed the interests of Texas and all Texans, or will they go for someone more like Lt. Governor Dan Patrick, who puts reactionary politics first?”
To these folk Republicans are “pragmatic” when they work against issues supported by overwhelming majorities of Republican Party voters. Additionally, anyone who generally backs Republican principals with any effort “puts reactionary politics first.”
“In the 20th Century, proponents of socialism and communism used the term reactionary polemically to label their enemies.”* The Dallas Morning News editors are keeping up the tradition and pulling such into the 21st Century.
Even more laughably ignorant is the idea the editors posit that it was Joe Straus as speaker who is responsible for increasing the GOP House majority during the Obama years.
Straus owes his tenure to the large Democrat numbers that came about off the coattails of Obama in 2008. The idea that it was Straus’ liberalism that helped grow Republican numbers in the House after the Obama spike is devoid of any evidence or understanding of Texas politics.
These liberal editors call conservative priorities “wedge issues” and want Republicans in the House to select a liberal-friendly speaker. Of course they do, they are liberal Democrats.