My opponent has been accused of corruption by all three of her past opponents, and reprimanded by the Texas Ethics Commission.

Is she really corrupt? Maybe she is just misoriented! After all, she grew up in a patronage household and doing favors is what she knows.

Does it even matter which is true? No! Not when the result is the same!

Government doesn't really "invest"; it consumes, spends, wastes, and defends its own growth, all at the expense of the people. Most of the programs my opponent favors have long proven to be more profitably delivered by private charities. Just as they used to be: until government taxation and mandates bankrupted those charities, stole their functions, and forced people to give up their choice of whether to pay for them or some other charitable aim.

But my opponent has never seen that world, and it doesn't occur to her to look for it.

Private charity comes with embarassment and conditions, and so pulls and motivates people up to self-sufficiency. The socialist notion of government "entitlements" creates an atmosphere that leads to inadvertent long-term, even permanent, dependency.

Yet my opponent focuses on government as the fisherman rather than on teaching people to fish for themselves.