I’m sure he’s out fundraising and shaking hands, I even saw some of his supporters at the Lake Highlands Fourth of July parade, but it seems to me Sheriff Valdez has given him some opportunities to get his name and positions out there, and he hasn’t taken the bait.

Take for example last week’s back-and-forth between Valdez and the county commissioners court. Valdez was going to let a crew from the Discovery Channel film inside Lew Sterrett for an episode of an upcoming program.

Valdez said the documentary would give the county an opportunity to show the jail in a positive light and highlight the improvements that have been made during her two-year term. The county commissioners took exception to the filming, and said it could open the jail up to potential liability lawsuits, eventually putting a stop to it.

So where’s Cannaday out there picking sides? Maybe he agrees with Valdez, and that’s why he didn’t say anything, but it just seems to me that he’d want to put some issues between himself and the sheriff, if for nothing else to get some press.

The show was supposed to show “day in the life of” vignettes of various jails, and the county jail popped up on Discovery’s radar because of it’s well-publicized five consecutive failed inspections, as well as the high percentage of female officers that staff the jail.

Campaigns like this don’t really get ramped up until a month or two before the election, but it just seems like a missed opportunity for Cannaday.

Now, when I say invite, I mean someone outside the company told me about the party, and I heckled an invitation out of the folks downstairs. But I digress.

All in all, it was a fun event. It was held at the Mansion, and was a virtual smorgasbord of who’s who in real estate in Dallas. Good times.

In the midst of all my schmoozing, I talked to a few real estate agents, and the topic of the President and Laura Bushes new home came up.

One agent theorized that they would forego a home, and instead buy a condo either on Turtle Creek, or maybe even Victory Park. This same agent suggested the Bushes wouldn’t want to live in the Park Cities, because they would want to maintain the image of living “in Dallas,” and limit their association to Park Cities big money.

All of this is obviously pure speculation, but an interesting theory nonetheless. Not sure if I agree with the condo idea, just because that seems like it would make security more difficult, but it would be interesting if the Bush Jr. moved into Ross Perot Jr.’s Victory Park development.

As for avoiding appearances by not living in the Park Cities, once you’re done being president, do you really care what people think about you? I know I wouldn’t.

Actually, you went further to call Mayor Seay “arrogant at best, snobby at worst.”  Again, I don’t know the man, so you could be right, but is there any doubt that you have engaged in name-calling rather than civil discourse?

Also, I’m glad that you are “capable of admitting mistakes,” like getting the mayor’s name wrong.  God knows I make mistakes all the time myself, especially with names.  But you point out that the “name callers” don’t do the same.  Which mistakes did they make?

It is interesting that we have entered the “hold my breath till I turn blue” phase of the political campaign so early in the year. We have the usual group of Hollywood stars threatening to leave the country and even some yellow dog Democrats threatening to vote Republican. Most people (with sensible parents) grow out of this phase about say - five years old? When I see them on TV or read about them, it makes me want to send them to their room and ground them until the end of November.

Why do so many people in the Park Cities support either Hillary or Obama? Both propose socialist ideals that would completely destroy the foundation of hard work equals success that the Park Cities is built on. While some in the Park Cities are so rich that they will be able to ride out the change, most will suffer under the tax and legislate equality programs that they propose.

Last October, HRC said:

“We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process. And we believe the DNC’s rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role. Thus, we will be signing the pledge to adhere to the DNC approved nominating calendar.”

Now, she says:

“I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan.”

Just wondering.

(But, in answer to the tag, “Just what we think of Merritt,” I think very highly of Merritt).

There is nothing inherently negative about the latter term, because “non-college-graduate, low-wage earners” are simply people like everyone else. Some are great people, some aren’t, some really do work hard, some don’t. Some are smart, some aren’t.

It’s actually the use of the euphemism “working-class voters” that is derogatory because the media is saying to them, “we don’t want to embarrass you by saying what we really mean.” Maybe the reporters would find these voters aren’t embarrassed by their status at all.