TexasCHLforum.com

http://quorumreport.com/quorum_report_d ... 23672.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Play the video. Wow.

Can you narrow down the time window please?

RoyGBiv wrote:Can you narrow down the time window please?

First 5-10 minutes are germaine

I heard about this and still don't get it.

Pickett rudely pulled Stickland into a gotcha moment that had zero to do with Stickland. Pickett then talks to him like a child, repeatedly. Stickland tries to defend himself and the folks that stayed around all day and night to testify on the bill.

I don't know where I fall on this, but anytime the establishment is upset, someone is doing something right.

This is likely fallout from Stickland's earlier antics. This legislative work is quite intense, and people who don't help the flow are not appreciated. Stickland's previous disruptive behavior is now coming back to haunt him. He steps up to the podium... "oh, no, it's him!"

RHenriksen wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:Can you narrow down the time window please?

First 5-10 minutes are germaine

Thanks. That was ugly.

Does he happen to remind anyone else of a brown haired Tommy Boy, or is only me?

You can't make that stuff up. That video should be entitled "How To Brutally Beat Someone With Poise". The phone call was classic. I'd have loved to see the look on Stickland's. Also loved how the chair kept misstatinging his name. Accident? Mind game? Dunno.

Ruark wrote:This is likely fallout from Stickland's earlier antics. This legislative work is quite intense, and people who don't help the flow are not appreciated. Stickland's previous disruptive behavior is now coming back to haunt him. He steps up to the podium... "oh, no, it's him!"

I don't see how any of his antics are productive. Stickland is correct that some strong accusations were made and he couldn't defend himself, but that's his fault. Even if he was to dream up the most brilliant thought, he's become tainted goods that no one trusts.

I have to admit, the only reason I watched was to see how bad he failed. But, is that the kind of stuff we want to see coming out of the Capitol?

Texsquatch wrote:

Ruark wrote:This is likely fallout from Stickland's earlier antics. This legislative work is quite intense, and people who don't help the flow are not appreciated. Stickland's previous disruptive behavior is now coming back to haunt him. He steps up to the podium... "oh, no, it's him!"

I don't see how any of his antics are productive. Stickland is correct that some strong accusations were made and he couldn't defend himself, but that's his fault. Even if he was to dream up the most brilliant thought, he's become tainted goods that no one trusts.

I have to admit, the only reason I watched was to see how bad he failed. But, is that the kind of stuff we want to see coming out of the Capitol?

Considering the companion SB is up for committee hearing as well, it didn't change any potential outcome of the legislation. It looked like Stickland's office made up some constituent testamony. If that's true, he should be charged with a crime.

No, we don't want that coming out of Austin. However, when you send people like Strickland to Austin that's what we get. He got slapped down again today. It's obvious he has lost all credibility and respect from the other members.

The crazy part is, I agree with many of his beliefs and what he says. It's his timing, tactics, methods, lack out integrity and lack of character that separate us. He's pathetic.

steveincowtown wrote:I heard about this and still don't get it.

Pickett rudely pulled Stickland into a gotcha moment that had zero to do with Stickland. Pickett then talks to him like a child, repeatedly. Stickland tries to defend himself and the folks that stayed around all day and night to testify on the bill.

I don't know where I fall on this, but anytime the establishment is upset, someone is doing something right.

From I've heard the implication is that Sticklands office did phone polls and registered those who responded favorably as witnesses in favor of the bill. This created a very long list of witnesses who were nowhere to be found because they weren't even in Austin.

And by making the calls from the dais during the committee meeting it is now on record. All Pickett did was expose Strickland and he had it coming.

Committing perjury is a serious deal. By claiming his staff may have done it is an attempt to claim plausible deniability. I ain't buying it.

jmra wrote:

steveincowtown wrote:I heard about this and still don't get it.

Pickett rudely pulled Stickland into a gotcha moment that had zero to do with Stickland. Pickett then talks to him like a child, repeatedly. Stickland tries to defend himself and the folks that stayed around all day and night to testify on the bill.

I don't know where I fall on this, but anytime the establishment is upset, someone is doing something right.

From I've heard the implication is that Sticklands office did phone polls and registered those who responded favorably as witnesses in favor of the bill. This created a very long list of witnesses who were nowhere to be found because they weren't even in Austin.

Then my question is why didn't Pickett call him out on the spot. Would have been simple enough for him to ask "Rep. Strikelawn ( ) did your office make calls today and ask people to sign as testifying "for" this bill."

Be transparent. If we can't do this in Texas there isn't a hope in the world for DC.

steveincowtown wrote:

jmra wrote:

steveincowtown wrote:I heard about this and still don't get it.

Pickett rudely pulled Stickland into a gotcha moment that had zero to do with Stickland. Pickett then talks to him like a child, repeatedly. Stickland tries to defend himself and the folks that stayed around all day and night to testify on the bill.

I don't know where I fall on this, but anytime the establishment is upset, someone is doing something right.

From I've heard the implication is that Sticklands office did phone polls and registered those who responded favorably as witnesses in favor of the bill. This created a very long list of witnesses who were nowhere to be found because they weren't even in Austin.

Then my question is why didn't Pickett call him out on the spot. Would have been simple enough for him to ask "Rep. Strikelawn ( ) did your office make calls today and ask people to sign as testifying "for" this bill."

Be transparent. If we can't do this in Texas there isn't a hope in the world for DC.

Time for one thing. I have no problem with the way Pickett handled it. Stickland needed a public spanking and that's what he got.