The Texas political media is obsessed with Sen. Dan Patrick these days because he’s run a very good campaign and is poised to be in a runoff with Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst if Dewhurst can’t get to that magic 50% +1 number. It was interesting watching several of these esteemed media members sending out Tweets about a new PAC that has formed with the sole purpose of defeating Sen. Patrick. The PAC isn’t FOR anything, mind you, they are against Dan. Change scares some folks.
The interesting thing about the media’s response was that they didn’t bother fact checking the simplest of all facts in Dan’s bio. You know, like when he came to Houston, Texas?
Since I’m a native Houstonian, I stopped reading at the second paragraph on the website – why read further if they can’t get something this simple correct? Here, take a look:
Apparently not a single one of these awesome “journalists” that passed this website around while snickering about it has ever heard of “Luv Ya Blue“.
Because if they had, they too would have stopped and said, nope, these guys are wrong. But hey, who cares, they’re attacking Patrick and they hate that Bible totin’ son of a gun.
So just when did Dan come to Texas? October, 1979. All they had to do was ask.
Lazy ass Texas political “journalists”. And no, I’m not going to link to the site.
Change is that what Dan Patrick is? Does it really matter when he came to Houston?
The NFL sued his establishment numerous times because he was showing games without payment. In my world that is stealing.
He made millions when they bought his radio stations but will not pay his debts, that is stealing in my world.
I test people and asked for assistance from his office on a matter and got a very nice response you don’t live in the district.
From Texas Monthly which I will reference;
“Trouble continued to plague him when he was assaulted at the bar by another local celebrity, an irascible, aptly named Houston Post gossip columnist, Paul Harasim. Harasim was charged with assault, and Patrick sued both the Post and Harasim for libel, claiming his reputation had been damaged by the fracas. (The man who would later champion tort reform sought $400,000 in actual damages and $1.2 million in punitive damages.) In the criminal trial, Patrick solidified his reputation as an overly emotional crackpot. “Are you in balance today?” Harasim’s lawyer, Richard “Racehorse” Haynes, asked him on the witness stand, and Patrick promptly turned red-faced and started screaming at him. The jury found Harasim not guilty. Patrick’s libel suit was dismissed with prejudice in 1993.” http://www.texasmonthly.com/story/here-comes-trouble
I am voting in the Republican Primary this year just to cast a vote against a person that does not belong in political office, TV yes, Radio yes, political office no.
I’d rather have a root canal than vote for Dan Patrick, but I try to keep my many criticisms of him factual. It’s easy.
It’s one thing to be against legalizing cannabis, but it’s quite another to refuse to have an honest, rational discussion about it. Dan’s argument against medical cannabis is unsubstantiated, and the rationale he offers flies in the face of all the facts I’ve seen on the matter.
In three consecutive legislative sessions, bills that would offer such a rational discussion over the issue have failed to reach the floor. For the thousands of Texas citizens (e.g., chemotherapy patients) who derive real and tangible benefit from the plant, it is a painful slap in the face for any politician to flatly refuse an honest discussion, backed up with real facts. Dan dismisses the issue out of hand, and offers no facts to back up his assertions.
If social conservative republicans like Dan Patrick continue to refuse to do their job, which involves discussing important issues openly, on the floor, there’s another party out there that will.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaFHlGN1FGY
Mr. Jennings, I have been a fan of yours for some time so your dismissive attitude surprises me. Linking to Dan Patrick’s website as evidence of when Patrick moved to Houston proves nothing. Dan is a known liar so any statement that he utters/publishes is questionable as to truthfulness. Very respectfully, if you do your research as a journalist, you’ll see that Texas public records – regardless if accurate – support 1982 as his move date – took me about 3 minutes to figure that fact out. 🙂
Laurie Lawrence,
I doubt that you have been a “fan”. Sorry to be so cynical but if you had been a fan, you would know that I would never accept a statement like this: regardless if accurate. Totally bizarre.
I don’t always get it right and when I don’t, I correct it, apologize, and move on. But we are talking about professionals that get paid thousands upon thousands of dollars. The very least they could do is get something so simple right. That tells me the website is probably run by a bunch of teens in their freshman year in college being paid to do oppo research.
The idea that a college kid can search a public database and get accurate information on when someone moved to Texas is ludicrous.
I guess you are no longer a fan. Oh well.
Dan Patrick should be a better politician given his displayed character but frankly, given his track record in the state senate, is he really someone we want to “fix what needs fixin'” as some state? In all the years he has been in office, what has he really done beside cater to any group vocal enough to grab his attention?
That said, any group can make a simple mistake regarding something such as residency. In Texas, residency is such a little concern that a great many politicians don’t even bother to live in the area they represent. Patrick originally ran for office before living in his senate district, moving in after announcing so taking someone to task regarding the topic seems trvial, yes?
The claims of Patrick being a thief who didn’t pay his taxes, stole broadcasts, cheated partners and all the other “dirt” his opponents have come up with could be overlooked if he wasn’t such a stickler for the character of his various opponents but when he so regularly wraps himself in the issue like he has superiority, it just makes him a bigger target. Ultimately, his inability to get anything of substance done is what kills the deal for those willing to overlook his many flaws, flaws far more serious than a disagreement over his residency in the Houston area.