Methinks that the “new” Harris County Democratic Party Chair Lane Lewis is much like the old HCDP chair – full of hot air and no substance. From KHOU 11 News’ Brad Woodard:

The Harris County Democratic Party apparently sees that as an endorsement and a violation of party rules.  It has announced that it will not be offering a nominee for the 2012 General Election for the Office of Harris County District Attorney.

So Lane Lewis doesn’t want an old heterosexual white dude on the ballot, eh? So much for this line on his website:

moving our party forward requires a unified effort from every Democrat in Harris County

Well, I guess that means every Democrat except heterosexual white males, eh Lane? Oh, the hypocrisy. But that is nothing new with Harris County Dems. No wonder they have become insignificant.

But what about the actual complaint and its validity? From the complaint:

I am writing formally to complain that Lloyd Oliver, a party officer of the Harris County Democratic Party, being its official candidate for the office of District Attorney on the November 6, 2012 General Election ballot, publically endorsed Pat Lykos, a non-Democratic candidate seeking the office of District Attorney of Harris County in an election in which a Democrat is seeking the same office.

Specifically, on May 30, 2012, Lloyd Oliver told the Houston Chronicle, a newspaper of general circulation in Harris County, knowing that such comments would be make public and publicized, that Republican Pat Lykos was such a good candidate for District Attorney, she “would have gotten my vote.” I attach hereto a copy of the Houston Chronicle article reporting this endorsement of Ms. Lykos.

On June 18,2012, Mr. Oliver repeated his endorsement of Republican Pat Lykos, stating publicly on KUHF radio that he so admired her that he “would have voted for her.”

How exactly do you “endorse” someone after the fact? BTW, note that Birnberg’s complaint is dated May 9, 2012 and he is referencing stuff that happened way after that. Time machine? Hmmm.

Let’s pretend that Mr. Oliver actually “endorsed” DA Lykos before the election. Aw, c’mon, let’s just do it. Take a look at the Texas Democratic Party’s rules about “endorsements”:

“Party Officer” is defined as follows:

Article II, Section C (Party Officers), Subsection 2 (page 5): “The Party Officers covered by this provision include precinct chair, county chair, SDEC representative, State Chair, convention delegates and alternates, and any other officer elected by a Party committee or convention.

Interesting. No way that Mr. Oliver meets that definition.

But let’s pretend again that he does meet that definition. What does the TDP say about removing someone for endorsing a Republican?

Article III, Section H (Removal from Office for Endorsing Opposing Party or Candidate), Subsection 1 (page 17): “A Party Officer shall be removed from office if during the currently term of office, such officer publicly supports or endorses an opposing party or nominee of an opposing party, a person seeking the nomination of an opposing party, or a non-Democratic candidate seeking an office in an election in which candidates may file by party affiliation and a Democrat is seeking the office in question.”

Article III, Section H-2 (page 17): “The terms ‘publicly supports’ and ‘endorses’ shall include, but not limited to, serving on a campaign committee; giving financial support, including contributing money or its equivalent such as equipment loans, services, or supplies; willingly and knowingly allowing the officer’s name to be used in any kind of letter, public endorsement, news release, or advertisement; or actively soliciting votes by making a public appearance or a door-to-door solicitation of votes.”

LOL, exactly what part of those rules did he violate? He certainly did not provide financial support, allow his name to be used in her campaign literature, nor did he actively solicit votes on her behalf.

Methinks I smell something fishie going on here. Me being me, I have to ask myself, self, would Lane Lewis and Gerry Birnberg have conspired to remove a duly elected nominee from the ballot if that nominee were…..oh, say, black? Or gay? Or Latino? Or female?

No, I don’t think so. Local Dems would do well to drop the lie that they believe in diversity and tolerance because clearly, they do not. Nor do they believe in free and fair elections and the will of the people, as we all know from their past experience.

Good luck in court Mr. Oliver.