Texas Leadership Vacuum: How many Flags Over Texas Again?

As the country attempts to unwind itself over the horrible killings that took place in a South Carolina church Texas is attempting, staggeringly, to find its way in this brave new world.


Texas Lawmakers ask Gov. Abbott to establish a task force on Confederate Monuments. Lauren McGaughy, Chron.com

Five prominent state lawmakers are asking Gov. Greg Abbott to convene a task force to decide whether to alter or remove any of the many Confederate memorials and monuments on the Capitol grounds in Austin.

In a letter to Abbott sent Monday, the five Democrats asked that the task force consider "whether the monuments are historically accurate, whether they are appropriately located on the Capitol grounds, and whether any changes are needed."
The letter was signed by Sen. Rodney Ellis, Reps. Senfronia Thompson and Sylvester Turner, all three of Houston, Sen. Royce West of Dallas and Sen. Judith Zaffirini of Laredo.

I'm currently a little bit concerned that the washing away entirely of Confederate history is nothing more than an attempt to throw things down the memory hole. As I've stated before, the public use of the Battle Flag of the Tennessee regiment should never be condoned.  This was a flag of aggression against the United States and (to be factual) really had no influence on Texas at the time.

What the "Starts and Bars" is NOT, is the Flag of the Confederacy.

Removing the Confederate Flag, image found here. is of cultural import to Texas, as it was, and forever will be, one of the "six" National flags that flew over Texas throughout it's history.  Here's the problem, if you begin to whittle away at history because you don't like it then you might not like what you'll find.

The Six, Five, Four, Three, Two One Flag over Texas.

The Flag of the Confederate States of America - Clearly, this one poses a problem because of the slavery and active rebellion against the current nation issues.  It also flew over Texas for a (relatively) limited period of time.  If any of the Big Six had to go this would be the obvious choice because 1) they lost the War between the States and 2) It offends some.

The Flag of Spain  - Who doesn't like Spain?  I mean, it's one of my favorite countries to visit. However, the Spanish ceded Texas to France. The Spanish also gave us Alberto Contador, who was Lance Armstrong's chief rival at the end of the latter's competitive racing days.  Also, what the Conquistadors did why they were conquering the New World was genocide right?  Gone.

The Flag of France - It's France.  And Texas is not only bigger than France but they have better food, tourism and culture than does Houston.  Now, you understand with Houston that any slight generates a raging inferiority complex among both the FoodBorg and members of the Texas Media. Besides, the Spanish defeated the French at the Battle of the Fort of LaSalle (Imagine that) and, as we've demonstrated with the flag of the Confederate States we don't want the flag of a loser flying over us do we?

The Flag of the Republic of Texas - This one seems like a no-brainer, I mean, it's the current flag of the State of Texas and the same flag when it was (briefly) the Republic of Texas. The problems here are two-fold. 1. The Republic of Texas was a near-broke, deep in debt dysfunctional mess. Almost from it's inception it seemed to have no clue what to do with freedom other than pleading to the United States for inclusion. Once it became a State it wasn't long before hot-heads booted out Sam Houston and made a dash for the Confederacy.  2. This flag offends, to a great degree, our friends from Mexico who have moved here and are now making a life.  One only need look at the outrage when the (now) Houston Dynamo briefly considered naming themselves Houston 1836 to see that the Lone Star flag is also an image of oppression and (in some eyes) theft of land rightfully belonging to others.

The Flag of the United States of America - As odd as it sounds, it's sort of hard to find anyone in Texas today that this flag doesn't offend.  The Black community is offended by slavery, the Mexican and South American communities are offended by America's overreach into their respective countries affairs, the Tea Party is now offended by Washington DC, and the progressives are offended that we have not fully transformed into a worker's paradise. As a matter of fact, if the goal is to NOT offend, maybe this should be the first flag to get removed from any and all historical monuments?


This leaves us with just one flag, a great flag of historic importance to Texas, New Mexico, parts of Arizona and California.  That's right.......


The Flag of Mexico - I can't really see anyone that this offends.  Except for Caucasian conservatives and they're the only group remaining that you can offend without facing any fear of repercussion. There's no history (in America at least) of dark skinned people being oppressed by the Mexican government, a growing minority-majority group of people were either born, or have direct ties to, there. Most of the Rio Grande Valley operates as an extension of the country anyway, and their drug cartels have pretty much overtaken the gray and black markets.  As time goes on this will only become more prevalent as the Texas Legislature continues to bury it's head in the sand regarding demographic realities (and the need to address the same in a manner that allows immigrants to incorporate themselves into the non-underground economy and civil society).


So after giving around 5 minutes thought, I think the only option is to strike out all mention of five of the six flags that flew over Texas and only celebrate the one left standing.  Hail! then to the One Flag Over Texas*. The Mexican Flag.  Long may it wave.









*Of course, these means that there is going to have to be a lot of revisions done in terms of history, textbooks and local yore, but anything is possible if you only dream big enough and refuse to take no for an answer when it comes to the politically correct revision of history. Oh, and there remains that little matter of changing the name of a certain theme park.  But I'm sure they'd be willing to part ways with their moniker if the tax abatements were large enough.  Maybe, tax free for 20 years?

Just a thought.

Wednesday Humor: While doing some research.

While doing some research on a local matter I ran across the following, rather humorous, Google search result:

Houston Democratic Blogs

The top two results are from the Houston Chronicle, and the next two are blogs that (on the surface) advertise themselves as either "Republican" or "Right of Center".  Only at numbers 4 & 5 do you find openly Democratic Party blogs. (Although I would argue two of those on the list do the work of the Democratic party, just not openly)

Of course, the next blog on the list was BlogHouston (To which I am an occasional contributor) so I'm guessing the problem lies in the search algorithms as much as anything.


Still funny however.

Dear Conan, the biggest problem is that it wasn't that funny.

Here we go again Houston, another 'national' figure has made some disparaging remarks about our fair region (this time in Dallas) and, according to our triumvirate of media suck (The Chronicle, CultureMap Houston and Houstonia) this is something we need to get hot and bothered about because rivalry with Dallas...something, something. To their credit, so far as I can find, the Houston Press has deemed this to be the non-story that it is.

The biggest problem with Conan's ditty is that, much like his show over the last year, it wasn't very funny.  And I say this as one that liked Conan and used to be a semi-regular viewer of his show.  During the entire Leno affair I was on Conan's side. While he is certainly unorthodox he can also be, at times, very witty and bitingly funny. As is too often the case lately however, his jokes are falling flat.

The real offense here is that Conan took a huge swing at a city with a ton of comic potential, and missed badly.  To whit:

 - Houston is a city that is way too concerned about what others think of us. It's true. Human nature perhaps, but true nevertheless. If you want to anger a member of Houston's non-productive class try telling them that another city has something over us, that we don't have enough walkers, that we're sprawled out, that New York City has more public transportation, that Dallas is on TV more even. The smallest slight over the most insignificant thing is sure to bring hilarity.

 - Our political leaders have zero vision. Hell, we can't even procure funding for a New Year's Eve celebration. As local-small-time political star Carol Alvarado once said, we get "evented out". Can you imagine New York deciding they just didn't want to do the whole Times Square ball drop one year? Exactly.

 - We have under 20 miles of light rail. Let that sink in for a minute. Because considering what a petty amount we have it's certainly given an inordinate amount of attention by the non-productive and leadership set. What we have the potential for is a (pardon the phrase) world-class bus system but there's no political will to build it out because it's just not 'cool'.

 - The Houston Astros/Texans. 'Nuff said.

 - When you do hear about the Light Rail, it's typically in relation to cars/pedestrians/bicyclists slamming into it.

 - Metro's procurement history.

 - The Ike Dike is something being taken seriously.

 - People are actively lobbying for more to ride their bicycles to work, in August.

 - The Crossley family.

All of the above were target rich environments that Conan could have chosen to attack. Instead, he attacks our smog (which, is still better than the smog in LA, where Conan hails from) and our oil and gas industry which is, you know, actually creating jobs and wealth.  These are not things to get worked up over but they are reasons to point fingers at Conan and laugh our collective asses over.

For Conan, ratings are falling faster than Houston's reputation.  So, there's that as well.

You're either for Texas Monthly, or with the chili terrorists.

In the often absurd world of Texas political media it's sometimes hard to tell whether a news agency is seriously considering leading a meaningless charge or just trying, unsuccessfully, to use sarcasm and hyperbole to mock the Texas system. The Texas Monthly drive(?), led by diminishing political writer Paul Burka, to right the wrongs of the 77th legislature and replace chili with brisket as the official dish of Texas is one of those times. Maybe they're serious, maybe they're not? Any suggestion that they aren't is sure to draw a quick insult but no real clarification. That's the thing about these imported New Yorkers, they don't handle sarcasm well at all. (Obviously I could care less if people subscribe to them or not, and I obviously would not call for people to cancel their subscriptions over chili.)

Whatever the cause, there was reason enough for The Chili Appreciation Society, International (who knew?) to write to Burka telling him to go stick his head in a smoker. This resulted in Burka reaffirming the intention of Texas Monthly (another of the many fading Texas institutions) to push for an actual legislative change in 2015.

As for me, I like both chili and brisket. This is not an issue where one has to choose sides, as in the Gubernatorial election. Nor is it fair to call either names. While the Democrats and Republicans have given us Governor good hair and abortion Barbie, when it comes to chili there's no reason to go passed either "A Bowl of Red" or "wet" (as opposed to "dry"). Why we would need to tie up resources to change something this inconsequential is beyond me but, whatever floats your political boat.

On a positive note, if Burka is preoccupied during the next Legislative session with this issue, maybe he'll be too busy to provide us with his on again/off again anger at the inner workings of the chambers, and we can spend more of our time focusing on the devolution of the Texas Lock-Step Political Media into full-on News-ish mode? With Hearst Corp all but ceding Austin coverage to the Texas Tribune and the DMN, it will be interesting to see where the future of (sub-par) Texas political coverage settles. My bet is an increase in advocacy in place of journalism. No longer are young, idealistic, progressive reporters going to be satisfied reporting the news, when they've been told by older, idealistic, progressive editors (with out-sized egos and pretty impressive eyewear) that they should instead focus on driving the agenda, to make the news.

To conclude however I think it's best to take a strong, hard look at this chili/brisket issue. I note that this was silent until the revelation that New York City now considers itself a Bar-B-Q Mecca surpassing Texas. When your political reporting is driven by a longing for attention from New York and DC, it only makes sense that your political causes would reflect their current tastes.

Of course, at the end of the day none of this really matters, much like most reporting from Texas Lock-Step Political Media. After all, what we're all waiting for is the old white vote to die-off, thus ushering in a wave of Democrats so bent on fixing the Republican damage that they fail to realize what's actually been working. This reporting might speed things up however, chili being more nutritious of a meal than is fatty brisket.


Wait.....So they ARE trying to kill of Republicans..........

Detroit Lions New Logo?

Rolled out today.


Old: (image courtesy of AnthonyBryant.com)

New: (image courtesy of mlive.com)

The other finalist: (image courtesy of Real Clear Sports Blog)

Which of the three do you prefer?

Friday Sports Humor

From MLSNet.com...

Your Smile of the week....

Here at 3CB we have discovered the "before" shots.