***VERY IMPORTANT ARTICLE*** Finally! An article that explains why the incumbent in House District 10 did not seek re-election.....but he did field a replacement. You know what they say about birds of a feather. Its time to clean out the nest! After seven or eight minutes of grueling research apparently beyond the abilities of the utterly supine, groveling, risible Austin media, I had a few leads, and called the office of Representative Pitts, the chairman of the house ways and means committee of the Texas state house, who did most of the rest of the work for me, throwing a tantrum when I asked if he had sought special treatment for his son but not denying that he had. Almost immediately afterward, he announced that he would not be seeking reelection. I had underestimated the average Texas Republican’s capacity for stupidity. Mr. Hardin et al. still seem to believe that my source was Mr. Hall or one of his attorneys, when it was Google and Representative Pitts. On the subject of capacity estimates, one of the interesting details of the case is the fact that the law school expressly spelled out the reasons it could not admit Representative Pitts’s son, Ryan, and it suggested two possibly remedies — retaking the LSAT or enrolling for a year in a different law school and there proving his mettle — but young Ryan Pitts was nonetheless admitted with neither of those conditions having been satisfied. It was a disserve to all involved: Coming out of a law school with a 95 percent first-time passage rate on the state bar, he failed the exam repeatedly — Pitts and two other political scions had at last count taken the exam ten times among the three of them — another example of an affirmative-action case undone by having been promoted over his capacities.
Posted on: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:43:34 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015