OlDawg

Technically, they hold 53 seats. Plus Vance.

Yes. This is an interesting twist. While it’s perfectly legal for the Dems to quorum bust, if it’s found that an outside PAC/group (Beto and/or Soros are being discussed) influenced the walk out by promising to pay costs beforehand if the Dems walked out, it becomes a different legal matter.

Judge Stops Beto from Funding Fleeing Dems [Hidden Content]

Just got them. Thanks BG!

Did they finally get it populated? I checked yesterday and it wasn’t ready yet…

You wanna’ know the scary part? They’re the group that’s mainly populating AI. We need a lot more old farts posting on here to counteract them. Y’all go ahead and get started. 😂

Interesting how that works. Saul of Tarsus became Paul the Apostle. Imperfect messengers…

They need 12 Democrats to reach a quorum. Reps have 88. That shows how little Texas is actually gerrymandered—regardless of the BS press. There are 150 members in the Texas State House.

If they are vacated, no quorum could be reached. But, they would have to stay gone for about 3 months.

IF (Big IF) seats are vacated, they remain vacated until the next General Election in this case because of timing in an even numbered year. So, would still mean no quorum possible. Personally, I don’t see them being vacated. They have the ability to do this in the Texas Constitution—like it or not—and SCOTX doesn’t like to get involved in the politics of this stuff. They need to pass a House Rule designating a specific time of approved, physical non-attendance for future. Otherwise, the Dems can just say they were fulfilling their duties remotely.

My thoughts: 11-5A D1 - Reverse Friendswood & Crosby. Overall Crosby returners including QB & outstanding DL. Plus, I think they’re hungry again. 8-5A D2 - Reverse Huntsville & PN-G. Coaching for PN-G. 10-3A D1 - Reverse EC & Hardin. Hardin O was impressive & looks like they return a bunch. Those and $0.25 will buy you the stir stick for your coffee.

Put this in the census thread. But, I’ll drop it here as well. [Hidden Content]

Interesting way of looking at gerrymandering with actual numbers vs. hyperbole. According to this measurement method, Republicans should currently have 6 more seats. [Hidden Content]

The people that will elect him—if it happens—will be the ones that can’t afford to leave. That’s the audience (and brainwashed young people) he’s catering to… It’ll be the typical socialist/communist downward spiral that’s proven out through history everywhere it’s been tried. Of course, there’s always the idiots that believe it’ll be different for them.

Republicans would be wise—while they have the majority in both House & Senate—to pass a law that ties Federal funding to a census that only counts legal, permanent residents. Separate it from the decennial census. Funding isn’t mandated by the Constitution in Article 1.

How the decennial census affects funding. [Hidden Content]

This will be ruled unconstitutional as it's being described. The official decennial census is to count ALL people--except for Indians not paying taxes (which I don't think there are any nowadays). Asking if someone is a citizen, or permanent legal resident isn't illegal. SCOTUS just said the justification needs to be there. They never ruled it unconstitutional. Whether someone is here temporarily (illegal immigrant) for apportionment/monetary funding benefit will be a SCOTUS question that hasn't been addressed. Logically, temporary residents shouldn't be used for this purpose. This is actually how sanctuary cities receive a great deal of the funding to remain sanctuary cities. If they have to pay themselves, there's much less of an incentive to flout immigration laws. This is actually as big an issue as representation, and doesn't receive near the attention. The Feds dole out around $1.5-2 Trillion every year based on census numbers gathered. If temporary people (which illegal immigrants should be considered) are counted, it skews not only representation and creates under-representation for millions of citizens and legal residents, it also deprives them of funding. This is against their Constitutional rights of equal representation. This will be an interesting case, and will take a while to perculate.

Video

Liberal Reading Comprehension thread started by @5GallonBucket a few days ago. Obama’s interview about men’s lack of feelings. [Hidden Content]

I’ll get Barack to send you his personal trainer’s number. Probably has it on speed dial.

I STILL don’t have any feelings.

The stadium is very sweet. Waiting to see if the Dawgs can fulfill the hype. They’ve had the luxury of 3 very talented backs, and the loss of Barnes and Sandolph is no small loss. Simon is on another level. But, he’s going to be taking on a big load as the feature. The first 3 games are all tough in their own way. The Border Battle is always unpredictable, and Deer Park is usually a solid 6A PO team. If they didn’t always have to face NS in Bidistrict, they’d probably advance further. Kingwood is going to be stout again with quite a few returners. I expect them to be the 4th place team from 23-6A again behind NS, Atascocita, and Summer Creek, and make the 6A PO’s. In another district, they’d probably finish 1st or 2nd. PNG is tough with Coach Joseph, ranked #9, and expected to do well again. LP doesn’t shy away from solid, physical competition. I just hope they can stay relatively injury free—unlike last year. They didn’t get back to pretty much full strength until about halfway through district play.

There is a legal difference between civil disobedience & lawful protest in Texas. You should learn the difference. Simple enough for you to comprehend? This is a lawful protest—according to Texas Law—and can also be considered dereliction of duties under Texas House Rules. First Amendment rights are protected in a lawful protest in Texas, and breaking the quorum itself isn’t illegal. No Texas Penal Codes have been broken. Political rules are the quibble. That is the distinction. So, when asking everyone if they know what ‘civil disobedience is’, remember you’re discussing a legal term with a legal definition that can be different in different states. Civil Disobedience in Texas violates Penal Codes, and First Amendment rights aren’t guaranteed.