The Texas Observer

by Josh Berthume

Drew Ryun surveys the hotel conference room and he can feel the dissatisfaction—anger, even—radiating from the 40 or so newly forged conservative activists seated in front of him.

“You are all here because you are upset about something,” says Ryun, the executive director of American Majority, whose mission is to train a national network of activists committed to limited government. “You want to know what you can do to turn the tide in this country.”

There are a few murmurs and a boisterous, “Yes!”

“We all share common values as conservatives. We all want to hold our elected officials accountable,” he says, pacing at the front of the room. “But here’s a test: Who here can name every member of your school board?”

Silence.

Ryun is practicing the ancient art of political organizing, a tradition once thought lost in the age of television campaigning. But after the Christian Right and the Obama Left reinvented personal politicking for the 21^st century, the old wizardry is making a comeback. After the Tea Parties are over and the Fox News van has skipped town, American Majority is training activists to organize their communities and win elections. When conservatives talk about taking back Congress, and eventually the White House, this is how they plan to do it.

At this Thursday night meeting in Dallas, Ryun uses the audience’s political ignorance as a teachable moment. He has demonstrated that angry chanting at Tea Parties or loud shouting at Town Hall Meetings does not an effective activist make. Like an Army drill sergeant, he’s tearing down these wannabes in order to build them back up as political warriors, with a full complement of weaponry.

“Okay. So what are you so pissed about? The people that make decisions are the ones that actually get elected to office,” Ryun says. “If you don’t know who the people are that are making  the decisions that most directly affect you, what are you so mad at?”

**********

Drew Ryun says he helped his twin brother Ned launch American Majority in January 2008. They are the sons of former Kansas congressman Jim Ryun, who the National Review ranked as the most conservative member of Congress in 2006. Ned, who serves as the president of American Majority, worked as a writer in the Bush administration. Drew previously ran the grassroots operation of the Republican National Committee.

American Majority’s staff includes many former Republican Party operatives and former elected officials. Nevertheless, the group claims to be non-partisan—a requirement to keep their non-profit status. American Majority’s non-partisan status is hard to accept, until Drew and Ned explain how they consider most elected conservatives to either be insufficiently conservative or, worse, falsely conservative.

American Majority intends not only to take back the government, but also to define what it means to be a conservative.

Drew Ryun says Republicans ruined the conservative brand and that’s why Democrats won in 2006 and 2008.

When I look at election losses, I see conservatives saying, ‘What’s the difference? What am I sending these guys to DC for anyways? They’re not doing anything,’” Ryun explains. “Some Republicans in DC will say, ‘Well, where else are conservatives gonna go? They have to vote for us.’ But they don’t. I think a lot of them have been staying home.”

Ryun sites a recent Gallup poll that says 40% of Americans identify themselves as conservative, and 20% consider themselves liberal or progressive. And in those numbers, he sees opportunity.

Thousands of people are attending American Majority training sessions, and so far progressives are failing to take them seriously. Progressives too often chuckle at the crazy signs they see in rally footage, and they label everyone in the opposition as Glenn Beck zealots, Birthers or Secessionists. That could turn out to be a big mistake.

Forget for a moment that the Tea Party message is a muddled mess. Likewise, forget your doubts that these activists are organized enough to do more than show up and get angry. Forget the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy–even if you believe it.

Instead consider these simple facts: American Majority has a field office in Dallas, and since it began operating in late May, the group has held 12 training sessions (half for activist trainings, half for candidates), with six more on the calendar before the end of the year. Ryan says American Majority’s goal for 2010 is to have a thousand new activists trained and engaged as well as 100 candidates running for office in Texas. At this rate they will make that goal and likely exceed it.

When asked to state American Majority’s end goal, Ryun says he will only be satisfied when American Majority candidates take over the city council in Berkeley, California. Sitting in on their training session, it becomes clear that these are not the “Crazy Uncles” you see on TV. Those in attendance are not the folks who think  Barack Obama is an Arab. These are the folks who work the call centers and block-walk. The conservative Ryun twins are savvy operatives, and they have embraced the new version of the old wizardry. They are actively rebuilding the conservative political machine from the ground up.

For more information about American Majority:

Ned Ryun at a Salina, Kansas rally

Rachel Maddow on American Majority

Ned Ryun’s Response to Rachel Maddow  

American Majority on YouTube

American Majority’s Twitter Activism guide  

Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is still the law of the land … for now. That is the gist of the U.S. Supreme Court decision today in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder, et al. The case challenged the provision of the Voting Rights Act requiring all or parts of 16 states with a history of racial discrimination, including Texas and most of the South, to receive federal approval prior to making any changes to voting procedures. (You can downloard the opinion here.)

In a narrowly tailored ruling that sidestepped dicey constitutional issues, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the lower court erred in holding that small entities such as the Northwest Austin MUD are not eligible to apply for an exemption (or bail out) from federal pre-clearance requirements. Since the Court was able to rule on these more narrow grounds, he wrote, it had an obligation to do so and avoid striking down the provision in its entirety. (You can read our feature story on the case here.)

His opinion spent some time pointing out “serious constitutional concerns” with Section 5, such as the way it treats states differently based on a coverage formula dating to 1972. He did note, however, that “Congress has amassed a sizable record in support of its decision to extend the pre-clearance requirements, a record the District Court determined ‘document[ed] contemporary racial discrimination in covered states.’” For now, the Court will not have to reconcile these two facts.

Already, many are pointing out the irony that Justice Clarence Thomas, the only African-American on the court, was also the sole opposing vote in the decision, writing that “lack of current evidence of intentional discrimination with respect to voting renders Section 5 unconstitutional,” and, “Punishment for long past sins is not a legitimate basis for imposing a forward-looking preventative measure that has already served its purpose.”

But, while Thomas may have been the only justice who wanted Section 5 killed today, all this decision has done is kick the eventual day of reckoning for the pre-clearance requirement a little farther down the road. When the next challenge comes — and it will, given the dedication and deep pockets of the conservative groups that bankrolled the Austin MUD case — the court may have no choice but to tackle the constitutionality of Section 5 head-on. And it is on that day that the real divisions on the court likely will be laid bare.

Today’s decision is probably the best-case outcome for Section 5 proponents (which may explain the four liberal justices’ conspicuous silence in the opinions). Justice Anthony Kennedy — a potential swing vote who had expressed concerns over the provision during oral arguments — could have sided with the four conservative justices to strike down Section 5. For now, his feelings on the subject will remain hidden.

The long-term impact of this decision is very much up in the air. A lot will be determined by how the Justice Department implements the court’s ruling and whether Congress revisits the Voting Rights Act to loosen the bailout provision or update the coverage formula. And although this case putatively opens the door for more political subdivisions, such as the Austin MUD, to apply for bailout, it will be interesting to see how many actually take the court up on the offer. Travis County, for instance was eligible to bail out even before the court’s decision — but in an amicus brief, it stated that it preferred the pre-clearance requirement because it helped ensure that any voting changes wouldn’t be snared in lawsuits after implementation.

This also means that the state of Texas — which has no realistic hope of qualifying for the bailout provision as it’s currently written — will continue to be required to seek pre-approval for any statewide changes to its voting laws. This is of particular concern, since in the absence of Section 5, controversial measures such as voter ID laws and proof-of-citizenship requirements would have been allowed to go into effect before they could be challenged in court.

Updated below

Just how crazy is the tea party movement? Crazy enough that elected GOP officials are now openly calling for the overthrow of the U.S. government because they don’t like Obama’s policies. Here’s an excerpt of a commentary by Daryl Fowler, the chairman of the DeWitt County (Texas) Republican Party. The commentary is currently posted on the main page of the DeWitt GOP website:

His [Obama’s] reign ends in less than four years, but the party could be over before then. If enough Americans stand up and reassert their God-given rights to institute governments and overturn those that are unjust. The movement in Texas and several other state legislatures regarding the 10th Amendment rights of the States is welcome on this page.

To put it as bluntly as possible: Republicans like Fowler don’t believe in democracy.

Update: Fowler responded to an email I sent him asking whether he was in fact advocating a government overthrow. He said (I think) that he wasn’t.

“I would say you are mistaken. The party may be over on November 2, 2010, but his term won’t end for another 1360 days.”

Fowler seems to be saying that he was just talking about the mid-term elections. Meanwhile, this whole 10th Amendment push, which Fowler welcomes, has taken on a reactionary, if not revolutionary tone. Just ask your friendly white supremacists over at Stormfront.

A well-known Austin activist fingered as an FBI informant has acknowledged that he provided information leading to the arrest and felony indictment of two Austin men who participated in protests last September at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, MN.

“The simple truth is that I have chosen to work with the Federal Bureau of investigation [sic],” Brandon Darby said in an open letter he sent this week to friends he has worked with since 2002.

Darby’s activist network stretches from Austin to New Orleans, where he co-founded Common Ground Relief, a grassroots reconstruction effort that drew thousands of volunteers from around the country. In 2004, he helped organize and was arrested during anti-Halliburton protests in Houston. His letter suggests that he disagreed with tactics some members of the Austin Area Affinity Group planned to use to disrupt the Republican Convention. Darby was a member of the group.

“When people act out of anger and hatred, and then claim that their actions were part of a movement or somehow tied into the struggle for social justice only after being caught, it’s damaging to the efforts of those who do give of themselves to better this world,” reads Darby’s letter.

Darby’s fellow activists say they identified him as “CHS 1” – confidential human source 1 – after reviewing an affidavit (PDF) by FBI agent Christopher Langert that was released in discovery in the case against David Guy McKay, 22, and Bradley Neal Crowder, 23. They say information described in the affidavit came from conversations between McKay and Darby.

The informant told Langert that McKay and Crowder fashioned protest shields made from cutting traffic barrels in half. After describing how police seized these items from a trailer the two helped drive from Austin to St. Paul, Langert refers to conversations gathered when the informant wore a wire to record McKay talking about how he and Crowder had made Molotov cocktails, using tampons soaked in lighter fluid for wicks.

The Molotov cocktails were among the items seized in a raid that led to felony indictments of McCay and Crowder, now known as the “Texas Two.” They were charged with possession of unregistered firearms (the cocktails). Information gathered by Darby may have contributed to broader charges against eight others from around the country for conspiracy to riot and conspiracy to damage property in the furtherance of terrorism.

Several of Darby’s friends initially defended him against accusations that he was an informant, but after they acquired additional court documents from sources close to the case against McCay and Crowder, they confronted him days before he went public.

“I don’t feel like I lost my credibility,” says longtime Austin-based activist Scott Crow. “But I staked my credibility defending him, and people backed me up.” Now that Darby has gone public, Crow is ready to go on the offensive.

“While it is not yet clear how long or to what extent Darby has been acting as an informant, the emerging truth about Darby’s malicious involvement in our communities is heart-breaking and utterly ground-shattering to some of us who were closest to him,” says Crow, who in 2005 co-founded Common Ground Relief with Darby.

Activists in St. Paul with the RNC Welcoming Committee posted a video in October 2007 that showed a tongue-in-cheek use of a Molotov cocktail to light a barbeque. Langert’s affidavit states that Darby had been working with the FBI since November 2007.

Crow and another member of the group claim the additional court documents – which the group has so far declined to make public - show Darby actively encouraged, enabled and provoked McKay and Croder to take illegal action. Crow asserts that Darby “hadn’t even met these guys yet” when he began reporting to the FBI. “How can you know they’re going to plan something,” he asks, “if you hadn’t met them yet?”

McCay’s father has previously argued that his son was naïve and gullible.

McCay and Crowder have been denied bail and remain in federal detention in St. Paul. Their trial date has been postponed indefinitely. They each face seven to 10 years in prison.

–Renee Feltz is a fellow at the Toni Stabile Center for Investigative Journalism and an intern with the investigative unit at The New York Times.

The full results of a much-discussed survey by the Republican firm Hill Research showing the weakening GOP brand in Texas have been released. The details are stunning. Take for example this slide:

Got that? In a head-to-head matchup today between a generic Democratic candidate for governor and a generic Republican, the Democrat starts out with a 13 percent advantage. In a state rep race, the Democratic advantage is 14 percent.

What is it about the Texas GOP that voters don’t like?

Voters think the Republicans are arrogant, racist, corrupt and angry. While they think Democrats are smart, innovative, reformers, fair, thoughtful and - perhaps most important - the party of the future. As Hill Research notes, “Long-term, this is simply untenable.”

What’s going on out there to produce such profound distaste with the Texas GOP? After all, this is the party that currently controls all statewide elective offices and both chambers of the Texas Legislature.

Even Texas voters are sick of Bush. That much is evident. But Republicans in time can overcome the Bush problem. More worrisome for the GOP in this state is that half of the voters surveyed cited a lack of appeal to young people and Hispanics, the most important demographic groups of the future.

Based on their survey results, Hill slices the voting population into five distinct segments: Enduring Republicans (21%), Emerging Republicans (10%), Critical Middle (25%), Emerging Democrats (17%), and Enduring Democrats (27%). It is the Critical Middle - those “not in either camp solidly - that Republicans must win to hold onto power. This group is heavily male, under age 50, self-described moderate and/or independent, focused on fiscal rather than social issues.

Hill warns in no uncertain terms that for GOP campaigns to succeed they must wrap up 80 percent of the Critical Middle. “This isn’t ‘optional’ - anything less means Republicans lose.” The Texas Republican Party, controlled in large part by religious conservatives, is going to have to make some serious changes to accommodate these folks. This group could not give a hoot about immigration (only 15% said it was the most important issue vs. 38% of the Enduring GOP). The Critical Middle also doesn’t care much for “traditional values” (8% said it was the most important vs. 16% of the Enduring GOP and 19% of the Emerging GOP). What they do rate as important are cutting property taxes (17% said it was the most important vs. 15% of the Enduring GOP), child healthcare (19% vs. 2%), and investing in education (20% vs. 9%).

Because this survey is meant as a wake-up call to complacent GOPers, Hill has some recommendations for strategists and politicians on how to reach that Critical Middle.

The danger, of course, in appealing to the Critical Middle is pissing off the Loony Right, err… Enduring GOP. But, Hill emphasizes, not acknowledging and adapting to political realities will result in a Colorado-style meltdown for the party.

The Hill survey shows that Democrats have a golden opportunity to make major gains in Texas. But Texas Democrats - as was said of Yasser Arafat - have been known to never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

St. Paul’s Cathedral is one of the great buildings in Christendom. It is impossible to walk through it and not feel the presence and the glory of God. Its architect, Sir Christopher Wren, is buried there, and over his tomb is this inscription: Si monumentum requiris, circumspice: “If you seek his monument, look around you.”

The Texan departing the White House need not spend tens of millions on a monument to himself and his philosophy at SMU. If you want to see the monument to the conservative philosophy of governing – the philosophy followed so faithfully by George W. Bush — look around you. Men and women who followed the conservative philosophy of President Bush were the architects of so many of the crises we face. The Republican Party has controlled the White House for the last eight years, controlled the Congress for 12 of the last 14 years, and dominated our federal courts. So it is fair to ask folks to look around.

Look at the greed on Wall Street. It was fed by a Bush-conservative architecture of greed and de-regulation, of government siding with quick-buck artists that goes all the way back to the Savings & Loan crisis of the 80’s.

Look at our unemployment woes. Unemployment hit a low of 3.9 percent under President Clinton’s progressive economic policies. It is now 6.5 percent and climbing. Or look at our rising poverty rate, our record rate of home foreclosures, our skyrocketing numbers of bankruptcies.

Look at our pathetic dependence on dangerous and dirty foreign oil. It’s the result Bush-conservative energy policy that subsidized oil companies and de-funded the alternative energy sources that could have made us free.

Look at the debt and deficit. They have skyrocketed because of a Bush-conservative philosophy that rewarded those at the top of the economic pyramid while punishing those who were working hard to climb their way up.

Look at the millions of American families who have been turned down for health insurance, and the millions of small businesses who have been priced out of the market — all victims of a Bush-conservative philosophy that protects big insurance companies and hammers working families whose only sin is wanting to see a doctor when they’re sick.

And then look at what is infecting all of it: a culture of cronyism and corruption under conservatives that has given us government of the lobbyists, by the lobbyists and for the lobbyists.

Most tragically, look at the lives lost, the limbs severed, the families shattered because of this unjust, unwise, unwarranted war. Look at the military families struggling to stay together under the strain of deployments that are too frequent and last too long. Look at the unappreciated heroes battling traumatic brain injury or post-traumatic stress disorder. Look at the untold thousands of Iraqi families whose tears are never seen and whose cries are never heard.

This is the monument to Bush-style conservatives. They are its architects. Look around you. See what the Bush-conservative philosophy has done to the country we love. The sooner we take a wrecking ball to that monument the better.

It will take time, but I am convinced that President-elect Barack Obama is committed to building something new. Something beautiful and strong. Something that, like that great old cathedral in London, will welcome everyone in, raise their spirits, lift their sights and remind us all that - as President Kennedy said - “here on earth, God’s work must truly be our own.”

–Paul Begala

Photo by Dave McNeely

“You know,” she said after we met him. “That young man could be President some day.”

“What?” I said. “Are you crazy? Not in our lifetimes.” We both knew what I meant. After all, that young man was black. And she and I had both grown up white and liberal in a segregated Houston with “Colored” restrooms, “Whites Only” water fountains, and lily-white lunch counters. In the mid-1960s we had both worked on The Houston Chronicle, where there were a grand total of two black faces in the newsroom, and where we had to plead with and cajole our editors to let us do a long story on poverty in the city. There wasn’t much coverage of the black community back then that didn’t involve crime.

She was Molly Ivins, my dear friend of 45 years before she died in 2007, having had an illustrious career as a reporter, editor of The Texas Observer, and widely syndicated columnist.

“That young man” was Barack Obama. The occasion was the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston, where Obama had given the keynote address.

“Oh, ye of little faith,” Molly should have said to me.

We both saw stardom in that young man. But Molly saw more. Molly saw a time when the United States of America could put aside racial division and elect a black person President.

I fear I still saw those “Colored” and “Whites Only” signs, the fire hoses and police dogs, and Nixon’s “Southern strategy.”

Well, it did happen in my lifetime. Sadly, not in Molly’s.

Looking at this picture taken by our old friend Dave McNeely (the veteran reporter who was there with us in those Houston Chronicle days), I thought about that night in Boston a little over four years ago. I thought about Molly’s hopeful words.

How she would have loved last night. How she would have loved to hear: “President-Elect Barack Obama.”

Ken Bunting, another old friend who’s now associate publisher of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, said of Molly by email this morning, “I’m not much of a believer, but I think our friend is looking down and smiling right along with Barack’s grandma.”

You know, I think he is right.