I confess: I have no idea what's going on down there in TX. I do know: 1)Cheney is a monster 2)Gonzo is a liar 3)The American prison system is a horror and 4)It's a time-honored Republican tactic to muddy the waters and meddle with those seeking to prosecute them, by employing countering lawsuits and legal claims.

Anyway, this sounds like a carnival of corruption and anyone who knows more about this should chime in. Via Off the Kuff, and the local SCLM:

McALLEN — A South Texas grand jury has indicted Vice President Dick Cheney and former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on state charges related to the alleged abuse of prisoners in Willacy County's federal detention centers.

There are more links at Off the Kuff, and someone else suggested that it could be useful for bloggers to peruse the SEIU's Eye on Wackenhut for related background details.

[UPDATE Well, the site just ran into bandwidth limitations. Bad news, but good news.]

[WARNING: Give the site, say, thirty seconds or a minute for the movie to buffer (more time than the site says) Then it will play; I just tested it.]

Powerful. Worth it.

[I'm going to leave this sticky. A big story not covered by our famously free press? Incroyable! And you'd think they'd want to the story covered before the TX convention this week....]

[After I started this post, Wampum posted the El Paso incident reports,* a few of which this post puts on the record. And it took me too long to finish because of the all-to-typical sort of RL issues a DFH like me would have....]

Let me start with my own caucus experience. My caucus--perhaps I should say the caucus I attended--was held on a Sunday, in the afternoon, in a high school gym; I live near a college town, and I stood in line for an hour before I got in. Right off the bat, I could see that the caucus system discriminated: Although the line was full of college students -- many of them wearing Obama paraphernalia and working the line for votes -- there were (of course) no sick people and very few older people, and very few people with kids. In fact, the woman I was in line with, who had a hip replacement, wasn't able to stay through the vote. It was clear just by eyeballing the line that caucus attendance didn't represent the town -- and that's before we get to other people who can't attend: People without cars (there's no public transportation on Sunday), people who have to work (my friend with the bleeding feet, a Hillary supporter, works 7 days a week), as well as people with child- or elder-care issues, and people who had to be out of town that day, whether on business, vacation, or serving in the military.

The caucus itself was not especially abusive. We all sat in the bleachers to be counted off. The chair, an Obama supporter complete with sticker, did treat the initial caucus, that included Edwards and Kucinich supporters, in perfunctory "Let's get this over with" fashion, and did make the minority [not Obama] supporters walk down from the bleachers onto the floor both times, but that wasn't my prime takeway; rather, the sustained blast of rage and contempt I received from someone I had thought of as a friend, because I was voting for Hillary, was my takeaway. (I'm sure others have had similar experiences.) One advantage of the secret ballot is that it's, well, secret, so relationships don't get destroyed over politics.

* * *
Not only is the caucus system unrepresentative, it's open to abuse by anyone who wants to game it. Over at TalkLeft, one P. Cronin has a detailed comparison of the caucus system vs. true, secret ballot elections, and it's not a pretty sight [PDF, and please read and disseminate widely]. Here's the first comparison table, and boy, is it gruesome:

Why are we doing this? Why, in the Year of Our Lord Or Lady, If Any 2008, after election 2000 was stolen in FL, and election 2004 was pretty iffy in OH, are we relying on a system where the results are not transparent or auditable, and the results are not officially certified? Does this travesty of a caucus system make any sense?**

Which brings me to the TX caucuses.

Read this. And weep. Or scream. And keep watching this story, because this is the nut:

South Texas Chisme cries shame. PrairiePundit says that Reyes Sivestro Reyes insults our intelligence on intelligence.

Check out the local bloggers in your area.

If you are unhappy with the Democrats, you can email your concerns to info [at] dccc [dot] org
note - it is necessary to be polite - no flames

Dildo Freedom now available in Texas. Good on you kids for joining the 15th century. Check out that whole "no slaves" concept, it works up here. Anyway, enough of slamming TX, lots of good people down there and I'm glad they are all free to reach orgasm in the comfort of their own home. "People complained" about a woman selling sex toys (and lame, bougie ones, at that) but nevermind the strip clubs or adult magazine shops that are all over the place? Hmmm. But I'm glad I found this link to the older story about her arrest. Someone finally said plainly what this is all about:

Gloria Gillaspie, a pastor at Lighthouse Church in Burleson, said she has met and counseled some women who had talked to Webb about the products she sold.

"It was causing problems with their marriages," she said

Translation: some women had discovered how to orgasm, and their husbands didn't like that, because they were inadequate as husbands. And Jesus didn't seem to have much to say on the matter that was helpful. Thou Shall not Use a French Tickler?

My point: this is going on all over, from the Federal gov't to the MIC complex to diplomatic agencies. I'm posting these two pieces because it gives us a glimpse into a culture of corruption the SCLM rarely covers, but is everywhere. A str8 Republican! No, really!

ouston, Texas) The district attorney who defended the Texas law criminalizing homosexuality before the US Supreme Court is desperately trying to keep his job following the discovery of e-mails containing sexually explicit videos, racist jokes and what is described as torrid love notes to his executive secretary.

Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal (R) is facing a state investigation into the emails which were discovered on his office computer.

...

Rosenthal who argued before the US Supreme Court that the Texas law against sodomy was upholding the moral values of the state and was in place to protect families. The case was Lawrence v Texas.

 Read more…

I've mentioned before my friend in TX who is a business owner; many times we've had conversations about how difficult it can be to do business if you're not "in" with the right people (fundies). So I read this and also a comment from here and I got to thinking.