August 28, 2006
Why not Kinky

Clay Robison sums up the case against Kinky better than I can by simply quoting the man himself.

"It's politically correct these days to apologize to the Indians and apologize to the Hawaiians for taking their land, apologize to the African-Americans for dealing with them as slaves and on and on without end. It's a little late in the game to go around apologizing and thinking everything's going to be OK."


"I am going to see nondenominational prayer and the Ten Commandments put back in the schools," he told the Kilgore News Herald several weeks ago.

"If you don't love Jesus, go to hell," he added.

He also has called for repeal of the top 10 percent law, which many minorities value because it gives the best students from poor, mostly minority school districts an equal opportunity with more-privileged young people for admission to the best state-supported universities.

And Friedman talks a tougher line than Gov. Rick Perry on border security.

He told conservative TV commentator Bill O'Reilly last year that he would "seal the border" against illegal immigrants by bringing in the "National Guard, the Texas Rangers, the entire Polish Army, whatever it takes."

"Good fences make good neighbors," he added.

More recently, as quoted in the Dallas Morning News, Friedman said, "My immigration policy is 'Remember the Alamo.' "

Meanwhile, struggling Democratic nominee Chris Bell, who wishes more voters would remember him, isn't amused.

Bell's campaign, which has been collecting Kinky's quotes, believes the quipster's conservative viewpoints contradict those of his own strongest supporters.

An internal Bell campaign poll indicates Friedman's strongest base - a 51 percent favorable rating to 25 percent unfavorable - is among Anglo liberals, the type of people who normally would be expected to support Bell and who the Democrat desperately needs.

"He (Friedman) has stated contempt for a lot of the people who are supporting him," said Bell spokesman Jason Stanford.

To everyone who has a "K - The Governor" sticker on their car next to a Kerry/Edwards or KPFT sticker: You're not supporting some kind of freethinking progressive who shares your values. You're supporting Larry the Cable Guy. I'd say the joke's on you, but unfortunately the rest of us are collaterally damaged by it.

I've long thought that Kinky represented a bigger threat to Bell than Strayhorn did; at least, he's definitely a bigger threat than Bell has made him out to be relative to Strayhorn. And the latest Zogby Interactive poll suggests I just might be right about this.

Candidate Pct
Perry 34.8
Bell 23.1
Friedman 22.7
Strayhorn 9.6

Usual caveats: It's Zogby Interactive, it's just one data point, nothing means anything anymore since Pluto was deplanetized, etc etc etc. Still, Strayhorn has been drooping in all of the available polls - according to the Bell blog, Strayhorn has lost 11 points in the Zogby poll since January - and even Paul Burka says that the wind is shifting against her. It ain't easy being all things to everyone, especially when you used to be a whole lot of other things. If we can ever convince the Friedman Democrats to come home, look out. Rick Perry at 40% is almost surely unbeatable. Rick Perry at 35% is very much not.

Posted by Charles Kuffner on August 28, 2006 to Election 2006 | TrackBack

As one of the left-wing Kinky supporters, I think his support will remain strong thru election day - don't expect too many defections.

Also, I believe 35% is a winning number for Perry. We need to get it down to 30% to have a chance to beat him.

Posted by: jobsanger on August 28, 2006 4:10 PM

What an insanely important post. I'm emailing this to every anarchist I know that's in love with Kinky.

Larry the Cable Guy...priceless.

Posted by: Mark on August 28, 2006 4:25 PM

"since Pluto was deplantized"

Funniest thing I've read in awhile! Look out. I'm using it. People will think I came up with it all by myself.

Posted by: muse on August 28, 2006 9:15 PM

Because Bell would clearly be better than Perry? I think you're anti-Republican more than anything else based on the less-than-your-usual-quality of thought in this post. For starters, if nothing else, Friedman has better material and manages his image better.

Posted by: agm on August 29, 2006 4:44 AM

Because Bell would clearly be better than Perry?

Yes, by approximately the distance of Pluto to the sun.

For starters, if nothing else, Friedman has better material and manages his image better.

That's about all he does well. If all I cared about was image management, I'd vote for Rick Perry, who's a master at it.

Posted by: Charles Kuffner on August 29, 2006 5:43 AM

"Good fences make good neighbors"? He said that? He really said that?

Oh, god. Life has become a parody of The West Wing, without the noble liberal intellectuals who always win.

Posted by: KB on August 29, 2006 9:50 PM

Fair enough, we disagree about the importance of image management.

I've been busy working on finishing up my MS, so though I know you like to cover races in the various districts at various levels of government, I'm not sure what your assessment of the candidates is based on (i.e., what criteria you are using to evaluate them). What, in your opinion, makes Friedman such a bad candidate? What makes Bell worth voting for, other than not being Perry and being better than Friedman?

Posted by: agm on August 30, 2006 3:08 AM

I was under the impression that Friedman was Jewish. If so, he can't really mean it when he says "If you don't love Jesus, go to hell," can he?

This is probably a stupid question, but could Friedman be conducting his campaign as a satirical performance?

Posted by: David F. on August 30, 2006 5:52 AM

What, in your opinion, makes Friedman such a bad candidate?

First and foremost, as I said in the post, he's not someone who shares my values. That's a dealbreaker right there.

His campaign has been almost exclusively about Kinky the personality and vey little about what a Governor Friedman would want to accomplish.

One of the few things he has articulated throughout the campaign is a desire to legalize casino gambling as a source of revenue for education. I think this is a bad idea on the merits, and as was the case with the lottery and dog/horse racing, will not be a stable source of revenue that will grow with the state's population and needs.

He's made it clear that he intends to appoint buddies of his to key positions in government. I've had enough cronyism with the current administration.

What makes Bell worth voting for, other than not being Perry and being better than Friedman?

He's a serious candidate with a good track record (check out the various issue scorecards from his term in Congress if you're into that sort of thing) who does share my values and who has put forth a number of worthwhile policy ideas for a Bell administration. He's addressed issues like standardized testing, air quality, budget priorities, the need for more ethics in government, and many more; I refer you to his website's issues page for more.

I am not going to vote for Chris Bell because of who he is not. I am voting for him because of who he is and what he stands for and what he wants to do as Governor.

Does that answer your question? I'll be happy to say more if you need me to. Thanks for the feedback!

Posted by: Charles Kuffner on August 30, 2006 5:54 AM

I was under the impression that Friedman was Jewish. If so, he can't really mean it when he says "If you don't love Jesus, go to hell," can he?

This is probably a stupid question, but could Friedman be conducting his campaign as a satirical performance?

Posted by: David F. on August 30, 2006 5:54 AM

I was under the impression that Friedman was Jewish. If so, he can't really mean it when he says "If you don't love Jesus, go to hell," can he?

Friedman has been on the record about supporting "non-denominational" prayer in oublic schools for a long time. As for his intent, well, whether he means it or not, this is another reason why I can't support him. I've had more than enough of governors who can't be believed.

This is probably a stupid question, but could Friedman be conducting his campaign as a satirical performance?

Again, he's been on record for a long time insisting that he's running for real. He's hired real campaign operatives, and his petition movement was very well done. I may believe he is a joke, but his candidacy is (sadly) not.

Posted by: Charles Kuffner on August 30, 2006 6:09 AM

I was under the impression that Friedman was Jewish. If so, he can't really mean it when he says "If you don't love Jesus, go to hell," can he?

This is probably a stupid question, but could Friedman be conducting his campaign as a satirical performance?

Posted by: David F. on August 30, 2006 6:24 AM

Apologies for the triple post. The server kept saying that the comment had failed to post and that, as an anti-spam measure, I'd have to try again later.

Posted by: David F. on August 30, 2006 2:24 PM

That's a great start, thanks. And it's quite a different impression that what I'd gotten from the post: the next-to-last block, about choosing to vote for Bell instead of against Perry, is exactly the opposite of what I took away from the post.

I'll try to look at the campaign site soon.

Posted by: agm on August 31, 2006 2:10 AM

Chris--Opener of the Big Can of Worms (GOP ethics probes) and, therefore, Opener of the Can of Whoopass (DeLay is Gone)--Bell's numbers will get better and better. Democrats will vote Bell, because we need good and brave people to help all of us solve big, serious problems now like dangerous weather events and Climate Change.

Kinky hired DeLay's lawyer Dick DeGuerin, which should tell you all you need to know about his real backers.

Kinky is in the front seat, happy and joking, between Thelma Bush and the Louise GOP, careening toward a cliff, and we have to put their brakes on.

Also, Kinky quotes Frost but misses Frost's whole point which was intended irony.

Posted by: Support Science to Reverse Global Warming, if still possible on August 31, 2006 8:16 PM

At my blog, we've had some discussion whether Kinky is a "liberal." I think the debate rises from the fact that Kinky often jokes that he's in favor of gay marriage because gays should be as miserable as the rest of us, but you have to take those joking comments in light of the fact that Kinky didn't vote against the amendment to the Texas Constitution which banned gay marriage. Anyway, here's my thoughts:

Let's be careful about how we use that word "liberal" here in Texas. I think you'd do Kinky less harm among Texas voters if you called Kinky a pedophile than if you called him a liberal. Texas is at least 60% Republican and if Kinky is going to win, he's going to have to do it with Republican votes (not by snipping off the pot-smoking fringe of the less-than-40%-of-voters Democratic Party because even if Kinky gets 33% of the Democrats -- which is unlikely -- that'd only get him about 13% of the vote).

Here is why I believe it is quite inaccurate to call Kinky a "liberal."

Watch this video clip. It is hilarious, it is true, and it is politically incorrect as hell. Liberal politicians are too politically correct to admit the truth that "negro is a charming word." Whatever Kinky is, he's NOT a liberal.

Next, read up on Kinky's get-tough illegal alien plan and his 5 Mexican generals plan. Kinky's common sense border security plan is the straight up "minuteman" approach, not Perry's namby-pamby "let's set up cameras" approach. Make no mistake, Kinky is the only candidate brave enough to say we need armed military generals on our southern border. This is not a liberal plan.

Now consider Kinky's party affiliation. Kinky has run for office in the past as a Republican and he voted for Bush/Cheney in 2004.

Here is an excerpt from Kinky's interview with Ruminator magazine confirms that he supported Bush's Middle East foreign policy:

Question: So does this idea of the honorable cowboy have anything to do with why you threw your support behind President Bush in this last election? You did, didn�t you?
Kinky: Yes. I did in this last election, but I didn�t vote for him the first time.
Question: Who did you vote for in 2000?
Kinky: I voted for Gore then. I was conflicted. . .but I was not for Bush that time. Since then, though, we�ve become friends. And that�s what�s changed things.
Question: So it�s your friendship with him that�s changed your mind about having him as president more than his specific political positions?
Kinky: Well, actually, I agree with most of his political positions overseas, his foreign policy. On domestic issues, I�m more in line with the Democrats. I basically think he played a poor hand well after September 11. What he�s been doing in the Near East and in the Middle East, he�s handling that well, I think.

Now maybe you are like me and you were worried that Kinky showed liberal tendencies by voting for a tree-hugger like Al Gore. Well, rest assured that Kinky was mistaken when he said that. Kinky's public voting records confirm he didn't vote for Al Gore in 2000 because Kinky didn't waste his vote on any candidate from 1994 to 2004 when he voted for Bush/Cheney.

Maybe you think Kinky's a liberal because he's a Jew. Rest assured, Kinky's views on religion are well to the right of Perry's. Kinky wants to take time during the school day for prayers in schools, and he wants to post the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms.

If you want to see a real liberal, just see who the Dimocrats are running against Kinky.

Look at Chris Bell's record.

Starting in Houston, Bell's two big issues were (1) political corruption and (2) ethics reform. Well, goshdarn it, who is in favor of corruption and bad ethics? No one. Bell might have just as well begun his career by being in favor of puppies and ice cream. So what if Bell is against lobbyist abuses -- isn't everyone?

You should see Bell's record in Congress: click here. Bell was not some mainstream Democrat. Bell was a liberal who

voted NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother�s life,

voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research,

voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage,

voted NO on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance,

voted NO on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects,

voted NO on limiting medical malpractice lawsuits to $250,000 damages,

voted NO on capping damages & setting time limits in medical lawsuits,

voted NO on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients,

voted NO on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment, and

was rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record,

rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record,

rated 93% by the AFL-CIO, indicating a pro-union voting record,

rated 8% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-family voting record, and

rated 0% by FAIR, indicating a voting record loosening immigration.

THAT is the record of a liberal and not a moderate.

Most importantly, Bell biggest claim to fame is being the whistleblower on Tom DeLay. Can you believe a grown man claiming that being a "tattle tale" is one of his biggest career accomplishments? Look at all the litigation that has resulted from the Bell-DeLay dispute: click here. Is litigation a good thing? Plus, I know some people don't think too highly of Tom DeLay, but no one can deny that he was a very strong leader for Texas and a leader in Congress who brought many valuable federal projects and jobs to Texas, and -- thanks to Bell -- we can kiss that goodbye.

Finally, look at Bell's campaign. He's for making small businesses pay higher wages and making businesses suffer more regulations. I wish Bell would tell us how that is going to bring jobs to Texas!

Bell is a liberal. Kinky is a moderate except where it comes to immigration and separation of church and state, and Kinky's strong conservative activism on those two topics is completely appropriate.

Despite all of this, I have been fending off bed-wetting liberals who want to claim Kinky as one of their own.

I would show them that Kinky doesn't give a rat's a$$ about political correctness and that Kinky has run for office as a Republican and he's voted for Bush and he has immigration plans to satisfy the minutemen alongside school prayer plans to satisfy a Baptist minister, but still the liberals would not accept that Kinky is a dyed-in-the-wool conservative.

Even after I showed the liberals where Kinky said that the anti-war, anti-Lieberman wing of the Democratic Party is anti-American, those liberals still held fast to their misbelief that Kinky is a liberal.

Finally, we have an answer from Kinky Friedman himself:
"I'm not a liberal, believe me. I'm a compassionate redneck, far more conservative than I am liberal."

Posted by: Kinky is Awesome on September 1, 2006 5:27 PM

This week's The Economist wasn't impressed with Friedman, either, but didn't get into the reactionary side of his platform (unsurprisingly, they didn't like his plan to tax oil firms.)

That list from "Kinky is Awesome" would had convinced me to vote Bell if I still lived in Texas.

Posted by: whump on September 3, 2006 8:37 PM

Agreed, whump, "Kinky is Awesome"'s list has pretty much convinced me to vote for Bell.

Posted by: Vespasian on September 10, 2006 12:50 PM

Disagree Whump...Im a conservative Republican and after reading "Kinky is Awesome" I am seriously looking at Kinky for the next Texas Gov.!

Posted by: Aiko on September 15, 2006 1:28 PM

I always wondered why the GOP which has so many gays in charge at top posts, would teach others (fundamentalists, hate groups) to treat other gays so badly.

Self loathing? Political manipulation?

Then I thought, the GOP gays are against gay monogamy, legal monogamy (by marriage or partnership description) because they want more gays single and available for more dates.

How do monogamous gays threaten anybody else's marriage? They don't. Solitary gays would be more likely to ask you or a family member (if you act sort of gay) for a date than a gay committed to marriage and monogamy.

Fundamentalists...please think for yourselves and reject hate (dressed up for dates) in all its forms.

Posted by: Prove Our Democracy with Paper Ballots on September 16, 2006 4:45 PM

For me this isn't about Liberal or Conservative. I'm a friggin' 18 year card caryin' Libertarian and Kinky has my vote.... along with what money I've been able to afford his campaign.

Polls like Zogby's are not relevant in this election as they only look for "likely voters". This time, thankfully, it's about the unlikely voter that will shine this time out.

Bell, Strayhorn, and Werner(who I'd usally vote for) stand a chance against Governor Goodhair. Kinky, however, is a true humanitarian... an honestly good person... and a great middle finger. All of which the great state of Texas and the "two party" system need.

Proof enough is Bell's need to already bring negative politics into the fray. Obviously it's more important to get my vote by telling me now bad another candidate is rather than how valid you are.

Pathetic and why Kinky will/should win.

Posted by: Morgan on September 23, 2006 2:53 PM

Victims are never to be blamed.

But, with these GOP mean Queens (mean Kings) in charge you don't actually have to "act sort of gay" at all...everyone is considered prey....

This is a betrayal that will have bigger ripples across the board.

These Congressional Pages are the young kids of Republican supporters who were betrayed.

And, eventhough some were at the age of consent, the power imbalance, job dependency and the allowed illegal persuit causes lots of unwanted problems whether you are straight or gay. And, some were not at the age of consent and so persuing them was both illegal and immoral.

Absolute power corrupts absolutly.

Posted by: Prove Our Democracy with Paper Ballots on October 6, 2006 4:32 PM

I find it dissappointing that Kinky didn't win this election.

As politically incorrect as he might have been, he had some good ideas and displayed them well. He cared more about education and our schools than the other candidates. That topic should definitely be the most important, schools today affect the leaders of tomorrow.

Thanks for the quotes as well. I'm writing a debate case about freedom of expression vs. political correctness, and they went along perfectly.

Posted by: leannderthal on November 8, 2006 6:40 PM