Skip to main content

Her Democratic opponent calls her a pornography writer -- but, who is this woman who writes steamy romance novels in spite of  the Texas GOP's super-Christian platform?

If anything could sway voters for a moment from laughing with Kinky Friedman, or any of the other three direct and indirect paths to re-electing Pretty-Hair Perry, it might be Susan Combs' bid to replace Grandma "Shake-em-Up" Strayhorn as state comptroller.

She wouldn't have a problem (and considering the blessed "R" behind her name, she may never) except that her opponent, Fred Head (the Democrat) keeps reminding future voters of Ms. Combs past accomplishments: writing steamy pulp-romance novels.

She and the gigantanormous romance lobby in Texas (according to inferences by the Houston Chronicle - they're not to be messed with). Ms. Combs says that may women here and abroad are "very angry at what they see as an attack on women."

To give her some credit, Mr. Head does go a little overboard by calling her a pornographic writer, but his criticism does point at some hypocricy in her campaign.

One also has to remember the context in which Ms. Combs seeks her office. She's running as a Republican, the same party of a Governor that defended Texas archaic sodomy laws as "protecting families;" a party whose platform for 2006 includes repealing a woman's right to reproductive freedom (not limiting - repealing), recriminalizing gay intimacy, repealing no-fault divorces, and stripping gay and lesbian parents the right of custody of their own natural children, or even unsupervised visitation of those same children by homosexual parents. This isn't fantasy; again, this is the official 2006 political Platform of the Texas Republican Party, a party that has completely and wholly merged itself with the radical evangelical movement in the party to the exclusion of those who would consider themselves moderate or tolerant.

Considering the righteous company she keeps, what is it exactly that Ms. Combs writes about?

*

    "I can't hold back any longer," he groanded and then was inside her, the heat and slickness of her welcoming body almost pushing him over the edge. Ross stiffened on his elbows and bent his head, searching for control.

    Emily surged up to meet him, sealing him tighter within her, and he began to move, his arms holding her tightly, his breath coming in great gasps.

*

With a party that governs by the principle of WWJD, we have to remember -- I guess -- that it only applies to WOPD (what other people do).

Hypocrisy indeed.

Originally posted to Queer Texan on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 06:50 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I for one (0+ / 0-)

    am embarrassed to have Fred Head on the Democratic ticket. Shut the fuck up already about the stupid book  and say something, ANYTHING else.

    Putz.

    "I believe that withdrawal is now the more prudent option." Kay Bailey Hutchinson - (1993)

    by George on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 06:57:13 PM PDT

  •  Give me a break. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bob Love, AUBoy2007, exmearden, PatsBard

    Romance novels are not "smut".

    I wouldn't vote for this person based on what she stands for, not for what she does. Some of the most liberal and pro-active people I know write romance novels.

    •  It's a matter of taste ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PDiddie

      ... I guess on what she writes, but the main point of what I was trying to say was that it's more about the hypocrisy of someone who writes about lusty sex who belongs in an anti-sex party.

      Personally, I could care less what she writes.  Apparently, the anti-sex rules of her own party only apply to people who aren't Republican.

  •  Had a Chemistry teacher in High School... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PDiddie, PatsBard

    write steamy novels while we did our work.  It was a game to see who could distract her so another student could read it on her computer screen.

    It's a shame that she can write that and not be for the liberalization of this nations arcaic views on sex and things like that.

    "No government has the right to tell its citizens whom to love. The only queer people are those who don't love anybody." - Rita Mae Brown (-4.75, -7.13)

    by AUBoy2007 on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 06:59:45 PM PDT

  •  Never underestimate the social conservatives... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PDiddie

    capacity to go to church, denounce Hollywood, then go home and read about "his massive yet tender fingers spiderwalked up her lush, though a little beefy, leg."  It probably helps her rather than hurts her.

  •  I believe this to be an ill-informed diary. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MsLibrarian

    Distasteful as it is for me to defend a Republican, I find a need to do so here.

    You state: "Mr. Head does go a little overboard by calling her a pornographic writer, but his criticism does point at some hypocricy (sp.) in her campaign."

    The romance industry is not a pornographic industry. If her book had pornographically suggestive scenes on every page or advocated something in the nature of child abuse or pedophilia or any of the other potentially "pornographic" topics we may or may not be able to define, then there may be some legitimacy in your post.

    In a quick read through the book, I detected less than 10 pages out of over 200 that I scanned that had any directly sexual, suggestive scene narrative or prose. Perhaps if she wrote graphic comic books, she would have been left alone on this, eh?

    Her positions, conservative as they are and opposite to progressive agenda, seem to be in contrast to her authorship. Her stance on gay rights is offensive to me.  But as an author, she is writing about characters who are apparently in a relationship and are adults.  How is this pornographic? I consider Head's one-dimensional attacks as an embarrassment for a candidate in the Democratic party.

    Her political credentials also seem intact - at least to my superficial glance - and Head's narrow distillation and dismissal of Combs as a pornographic writer are an insult. Not only to women, but to authors, and to any other political candidate who is defined by their opponent in a one-dimensional manner when they are clearly not one-dimensional individuals.

    Her background from the KLRU radio website:

    "...Combs is a graduate of Vassar College, where she majored in French and religion, and the University of Texas School of Law. Before entering politics, she prosecuted child abuse cases as an assistant district attorney in Dallas."

    Now, let's move on from this topic and this candidate and work to get honest Democrats elected.

    (Can't believe I just defended a Republican.)

    How we spend our days, of course, is how we spend our lives. - Annie Dillard
    Visit me at exme arden

    by exmearden on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 07:23:51 PM PDT

    •  Hmmm. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PDiddie

      First, you quoted me criticising Head's conclusions, ignored my comments on the hypocrisy, and used the remainings moments to yap about Mr. Head (which I never really bothered to do, except to mention his focus on her career).

      So, what is it exactly about my diary that's ill-informed?  I certainly couldn't find it in your response.

      I guess we should do as you suggest, though, and ignore the double standards of the GOP and the near-fascist comments of their party platform* and return to art of heavily nuanced political banter -- you know, the sort that helped John Kerry win the White House.

      I am personally shocked that a supposed Democrat could support or defend a member of a party that urges "the reversal of Roe V. Wade*" or "oppose(s) the legalization of sodomy*" over an obvious inexperienced candidate who's grasping for straws.  I'm sorry; but a slap at a hypocrit is less "offensive" to me than returning to a day where I could lose my professional license due the unconscionable crime of being intimate with my partner of 12 years.  Save the pretentious BS -- it doesn't work on anyone who's actually been affected by Righteous Hand of the GOP.

      "Perhaps if she wrote graphic comic books, she would have been left alone on this, eh?"

      Not if a candidate brought it up.  Other conservatives, particularly Bill O'Reilly, received a heap of liberal ridicule when his novel included scenes that one wouldn't find in anything bought a Christian bookstore.  Personally, I could care less if she wrote S&M novellas in the style of Anne Rice.  I do mind very HIGHLY that she feels that freedom and yet associates with a political party that seeks to deny my sexual freedom.  If she doesn't share those views, she certainly had the choice to run as a Democrat, or worse, as an independent.

      The Texas Republican Party is one of many reasons I will never stoop to voting for a Republican -- ever.  Even if a stink-bomb manages to get nominated as a Democrat, I still have the choice to not vote in that race, or write someone else in.

      The Republican Party of Texas is beneath my vote, my support, or my "defending" of any thing they say or do.

      *For those that don't believe the Texas GOP platform, check it out yourself by clicking this link http://www.texasgop.org/...
      or by going to texasgop.org, clicking on "what we believe (bottom right column)" and then clicking on "2006 Republican Party of Texas Platform."

      •  Yes, hmmm. (0+ / 0-)

        Every single one of the platforms of the Texas Republican party affects all of us who live our lives in direct opposition to their overall platform. I agree with you. I will never vote Republican, never have.

        The one critical item I pointed out in my comments in reference to what you wrote was my opinion (and it is that, an opinion) that you call out romance novelists as smut-writers. Romance writers, as all authors in all genres, range from the very good to the very bad, but it's poor to paint them all with the broad brush of "smut".

        I did not suggest that you were pretentious in your assertions that romance writers write smut. You are painting with a broad stroke and I find that ill-informed. I didn't call "Bullshit" on you or indicate that you are "yapping" on gay rights. I don't believe you are.

        I do see hypocracy: "Her positions, conservative as they are and opposite to progressive agenda, seem to be in contrast to her authorship."

        Never did I suggest that we ignore "the double standards of the GOP and the near-fascist comments of their party platform*".

        The following comment you make on Head is ill-informed. Head's "focus on her career" is not a focus on her career - looks to me like her writing is a sideline and not a "career" - and that was one of my minor points which I didn't state clearly. this is why I pasted a bit of her bio in my comment.

        You imply also that it may be that I've never been touched by the "Righteous Hand of the GOP", when in fact, every one of their platforms goes against many decisions I've made in my own life, though I'm not in Texas.

        I don't consider it high-brow to use legitimate attacks, rather than cheap and ill-informed shots when we go after hypocritical Republicans.

        How we spend our days, of course, is how we spend our lives. - Annie Dillard
        Visit me at exme arden

        by exmearden on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 08:42:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Seriously (0+ / 0-)

      Every other person writes smut these days (I don't, but I'm the other person).  It might have been something to write home about in the 1950s, but not today.  This kind of thing isn't significant to anybody, even polygamous bearded Anabaptists living in the Utah deserts to escape sinful town life.  Heck, they probably write smut too.  Christian smut, of course.

  •  I think this diary is right on point. (0+ / 0-)

    "I'm all for the First Amendment [but] this book is 180 degrees in the other direction from the Republican Party, which during their last state convention told the people of Texas that they were the party of God," Head said. "I think it's the hypocrisy -- that's what's relevant."

    Link.  Bold emphasis mine.

    Fred Head has fought corruption in Texas state government since at least 1971, when as one of the "Dirty Thirty" he revealed the dealings of Texas House speaker Gus Mutscher and what came to be known as the Sharpstown Scandal. As a result of Head's efforts in the Lege in 1972, the Deceptive Trade Practices Act -- one of the most powerful consumer protection statutes ever enacted -- was signed into law. Texas also has an Open Records Act and an Open Meetings Act because of Fred Head.

    Susan Combs is another GOP opportunist in the mold of Grandmaw Strayhorn.  She's hasn't done donkeysquat -- yeah, I said it -- as agriculture commissioner, and she's running for comptroller so that she can run for a higher office someday.

    And her book sucks, too. In more ways than one.

    "You can lead a horticulture, but you can't make her think." -- Dorothy Parker, who knew someone like Jeff Gannon

    by PDiddie on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 04:21:57 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site