Quote of the Day
“Um, I don’t think I should answer that.”
— Ted Cruz’s wife on if she could envision herself as First Lady.
(Depressing) Photo of The Day
Come on, y’all, it ain’t even Halloween yet:
Christmas decorations for oil boom days on sale near Dallas’ Fair Park. pic.twitter.com/hM7UZENLBH
— Michael Li (@mcpli) October 23, 2013
Here’s To You, Ms. Teddy Cruz (Voters Love You More Than You Will Know) — Behind every “wacko bird” wearing ostrich-skin boots and railing for hours against Obamacare, there’s a shockingly normal woman. At least, that’s what the New York Times would have you believe. In its nice profile of Senator Ted Cruz’s wife, Heidi, the Gray Lady calls Ms. Cruz, “a complex study in contrasts to her husband.” Actually, the piece describes Ms. Cruz as “A vegetarian with a Harvard M.B.A. [and] a managing director at Goldman Sachs” … “just the sort of person the Tea Party supporters who celebrate her husband’s anti-establishment positions love to hate.” Apart from Ms. Cruz coming across as smart and self-aware, there ain’t a lot of surprises—Ms. Cruz describing herself as “less ideological than her husband” is like Martha Washington saying she’s not into killing Brits like George is.
Angry Voters ID’d — As early voting began Monday, so did the implementation of insanely strict voter identification requirements. One district justice has a summary judgment of the state’s new voter ID law: it sucks. Judge Sandra Watts, who “has voted in every election for the [past] 49 years,” was hassled by voting officials who made her sign a “voter’s affidavit” because the name on her registration card didn’t match exactly with the married name on her drivers license (once required by law). It’s the first time Judge Watts has ever had a problem while attempting to vote. While the new law is completely unnecessary, calling it part of the “war on women”—MSNBC, Rachel Maddow and the Nation did yesterday—is as questionable as the law’s ostensible aims. One thing is clear, though. Opponents of the law couldn’t have asked for a better expert witness than the spirited Judge Watts.
We’re Expecting, What? — Both pro-choice and pro-life adovocates are suffering all the unbearable anticipation of waiting on results. Closing arguments were made yesterday in Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit against the new abortion law, the due date of which is set for this coming Tuesday. Now it’s all up to U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel, who gave absolutely no indication which way he is leaning, perhaps because both sides didn’t have the greatest arguments. “The result is much more obvious to each side than it is to me,” said the judge yesterday, according to the Texas Tribune. In fact, neither side is feeling too confident. “What will happen and what won’t happen on Tuesday, I don’t know. And neither do they,” said one of the state’s deputy solicitor generals. A ruling is expected to have all the longterm weight of a Magic Eightball answer as the losing side will almost certainly approach a higher court.
After Further Review … — Well, the school “investigated” that father’s official bullying complaint after his son’s Fort Worth Western Hills football team lost to Aledo High School, 91-0. Upset of the year: they found “no grounds” to support the charge. In the report, the father had said there was “Unsportsmanlike conduct from 7:30[p.m.] – 10:00” and that witnesses to the bullying included “everyone in the football stadium.” By most accounts, the Bearcats and their coach weren’t thrilled about the lopsided victory that Friday night. The father, whose name—mercifully, for his progeny—has been redacted in the released report, said he “did not know what to say to my son on the ride home to explain the behavior.” As some of our fathers did, he could’ve just shrugged, “Welcome to life. Sorry.” Or he could have taken lessons from Texas Monthly‘s recent article about the state’s losingest high school football team. Either way, it’s not whether you win or lose, but how you survive the indiginity of high school.