Seriously, why? I don’t understand it. It seems as though every single media outlet in Texas is willing to help Sen. Dan Patrick’s opponent in the election for Lt. Gov. and I keep asking myself why is that? What is so scary about Dan?
I’ve “known” Dan and his public personality longer than probably 99.9{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of the people that are going to be voting in this election. I met him at a Luv Ya Blue rally back in ’79 and have followed his various adventures since. And there have been some adventures! When he first started 700 KSEV, he did morning sports talk, had the vasectomy on the air, took his dog Barney out to use the restroom leaving dead air, all kinds of wacky stuff. He was innovative and took risks – have you ever heard Rush Limbaugh thank Dan for having the courage to put Rush on in Houston? I have.
But he has never scared me. I just don’t understand that. His performance as chair of the Senate Education Committee last session should be proof to everyone that he can and will work with others to improve Texas.
Look, I’m voting for David Dewhurst and rooting for him to win. But if Dan gets into the runoff and then defeats David, Texas is going to be just fine. I promise!
The fact is that Dan has run an almost flawless race and since I pick on him and his team, it’s only fair to point that out. His general consultant is Allen Blakemore and his media guy is Vincent Harris. They have designed a path and Dan has been very disciplined in executing it.
I don’t know who produced it and can’t find it online but I heard Dan in a radio ad yesterday that just destroyed the slimy attack that Jerry Patterson threw at him about some dude working at a bar Dan owned in the early ’80’s. Like I said, I can’t find the audio online but I did find this on Dan’s website that is pretty much word for word what I heard:
The Curtain Pulled Back to Reveal Opponents Working with Trial Lawyers
Dan Patrick under coordinated attack by opponents and Democrats
HOUSTON – Ethics reports filed yesterday reveal trial lawyers and Democrats have donated heavily to Texans for Accountability PAC and Jerry Patterson in an effort to defeat authentic conservative Dan Patrick. Todd Staples and David Dewhurst are acting in concert, echoing the false attacks in statements and in advertising.
Texans for Accountability PAC finally had to come out of the shadows and reveal their financial supporters in an ethics report. Not surprisingly, it shows that the PAC is funded by Trial Lawyers and Democrat donors [http://204.65.203.5/public/605605.pdf] who have already given Jerry Patterson nearly $100,000.
Texans for Accountability was created with the sole purpose of opposing Dan Patrick. On a tip from a Democrat politician in Houston, Patterson attacked Dan Patrick on false claims about knowingly hiring illegal immigrants and helping them gain citizenship. The facts turned out to be that Dan did not personally hire the worker and that the worker presented fraudulent documents in order to be hired.
The letter that Patterson accused Dan of sending to the federal government in order for the employee to gain citizenship turned out to be a handwritten letter documenting the workers years of service. The letter was not addressed to anyone, does not provide any context for its purpose and is not signed or written by Patrick.
Joining the cabal, Todd Staples and David Dewhurst have echoed these false claims in newspapers and in their own recent commercials. At the same time, both candidates deny their record of supporting or expanding social programs for illegal immigrants. Now the Texas Democrat Party is actively pushing their voters to work against Dan.
“I reject the corrupt political games by opponents and I am shocked that they would work with trial lawyers and democrat donors for their personal gain,” said Patrick. “I will continue to focus on my record and my conservative agenda and let my opponents suffer the consequences of an electorate that is tired of politics as usual.”
###
And here are some more facts about that slime:
Lie #1: Dan Patrick knowingly hired illegal immigrants.
Truth:
– Dan Patrick never hired an illegal immigrant.
– Media outlets only provide the story of Miguel Andrade; they do not make any claims of their own regarding Dan Patrick’s knowledge of Andrade’s immigration status.
– Andrade also admitted that it was a restaurant manager who hired him, not Dan Patrick.
– Further, Andrade admitted to providing the hiring manager a fake Social Security card and Green card to complete his W4.
– Additionally, media outlets reported that Patrick did not himself hire anyone illegal.
Lie #2: Dan Patrick wrote a letter seeking amnesty for an illegal immigrant.
Truth:
– The letter was not written or signed by Dan Patrick.
– Furthermore, the letter supplied to the media does not request amnesty for Andrade. It only verifies that he was employed at Dan Patrick’s restaurant from 1983 through 1985. There is no recommendation that he be granted citizenship or a request that he be granted amnesty (Patrick Letter).
– Patterson admits it may have been someone else who was attempting to help Andrade. Dan Patrick never wrote a letter seeking amnesty. Plain and simple.
If I can find the audio, I’ll put it here because hearing it really drives the point home that this is a phony “scandal”.
As a Dewhurst supporter, I’m anxious because I see him slipping back into negative mode instead of focusing on his positive record. That didn’t work out so well in his last race and it won’t work here. Hopefully, he’ll get back in focus and win the race.
But if he doesn’t, and if Dan wins, relax. The worst that can happen is that he cuts the budget more than David. Oh wait. That’s from a Democrats perspective. Hmm. Let’s see. What’s the worst that can happen if Dan wins? Secure the border? Wait! That too is from a Democrats perspective, although I suppose you could add Patterson supporters to that. What then? What’s the worst that could happen?
Like I said, relax. Take a chill pill. Texas will be just fine under Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick if that is what the voters want.